Dom's that slip from Dom to an excuse to get a cock in...

[Caitlynne]

Truer words were never said, and this sums up a whole lotta shit.

Amen!

 

[Never]

Re: Re: Dom's that slip from Dom to an excuse to get a cock in...

EKVITKAR:
"Would someone take a stab at defining a "True Master"????"

Er, not me?
We poseurs need to get some too, you know.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Francisco said,

Look at it in this way; if you own a dog would you kick it every day just to make sure the dog knows who is the boss? If you do, you end up with a damaged dog. Dog trainers know that to achieve the best result you have to be stern, but also fair and compassionate, a dog will go to the end of the world for his master out of love not out of fear.

I don't believe I've suggested anything contrary to this. But I do have one little question? What does it mean to be 'fair' to a dog?
Do you share your steak 50-50?

That is a bit of a silly remark Pure. Steak is not good for a dog; a dog eats dogfood preferably dry food that has been specially made for its health.

Francisco.

 

[catalina_francisco]

I tried to stay out of this thread, basically ....... be ready to accept his decision on it.

~ cait

That is one hell of a good post.

Francisco.

 

[catalina_francisco]

I have been noticing Master lately has been slipping from being a true Master in the sense of practising BDSM into a slap her a couple times tie her up and get my cock in as soon as I can.
He's figured it out at last thank god, the other night when he came out of his selfish haze long enough to figure I was not enjoying myself at all. He is now aware and trying to fix it.

Why do Master's do that??? I suppose everyone must go thru stages where they want sex and not all the other stuff but what happened to asking the other party if that was ok??? Or is that too 'nilla for words?? Or should I just shutthefuckup and do as I'm told?

Ah, the problems of time restraints and altered memory when going back to make a hurried posting while passing the PC. Have to agree much with Cait on this in that it is about the Dominant, not about asking the sub what they want, once that commitment has been made. I am the first to admit I am fairly fortunate, but I did some careful selection processes first before committing, and even then, some of what goes for the norm in this relationship would suit very few on this board and likely bring about complaints of neglect or not being appreciated or used past the acceptable level....but it is what we like, and if something becomes a problem we discuss why both of us feel the way we do then go from there. Does not mean he changes the way he does something, but at least he is aware of how it initially made me feel, and I have a little more idea on why he is doing it that way. Talk, don't rely on ESP and luck, and realise that submission is a lot about self sacrifice, not having your needs met and the Dominant's actions set to accomodate those needs. You will get there, it just takes time.

Catalina

 

[RJMasters]

I have been noticing Master lately has been slipping from being a true Master in the sense of practising BDSM into a slap her a couple times tie her up and get my cock in as soon as I can.
He's figured it out at last thank god, the other night when he came out of his selfish haze long enough to figure I was not enjoying myself at all. He is now aware and trying to fix it.

Why do Master's do that??? I suppose everyone must go thru stages where they want sex and not all the other stuff but what happened to asking the other party if that was ok??? Or is that too 'nilla for words?? Or should I just shutthefuckup and do as I'm told?

It appears to me that the first paragraph is about s_l_p missing something from the relationship that was initially there. As I read it carefully, it appears that power exchange dynamic had been lost(on a temporary basis). Things which probably generated intense feeling of being dominated, became more like a ritual things to do. Basically, a going through the motions kinda of thing. At least that is how I read her post.

Your second paragraph s_l_p you ask the questions "why do Masters go through that?" The answer is simply because we are human, and all human to some extent can become creatures of habit. Simillar situations happen in vanilla relationship all the time and the reference is more about the lost of romance. Couple complain about the lost of fire. In a BDSM relationship I would say this translate to loss of power exchange.

There seems to be two thoughts about this.

One is, the Master does whatever they want and you need to get with the program.

Two is, just like in any other relationship, it requires both involved to put forth effort to show the other in the relationship the fire they have for the other person. This requires each to ever be creative and guard against becoming a creature of habit. In short never take the other in the relationship for granted.

In my experience, both of the above are right and often couples will bounce back and forth between the two over the peroid of a long relationship.

If I might suggest...you cannot change what you feel. Your feelings come from your thinking and your attitudes. These you can change. You can change how you think about something or your attitude towards something.

So instead of telling you, you should shut the fuck up...as this does not solve anything, rather I would suggest you adjust your attitude in accepting that you are your Master's and he can do as "He" pleases. The part where you said "whatever happened to asking the other person if it was ok?" is a good place to start. To me, this question or statement shows you have a chip on your shoulder. Whether you meant it this way or not, it comes across as you expect your Masters to check with you about the manner in which he wants to use for his pleasure.

Because of what you wrote in your first paragraph, it seems to me mostly that you are not feeling "dominated", this might also be an area where you might change your thinking or attitude, or as other have suggested, not and move on.

Sounds to me like your Master figured out that your relationship slip into kinky sex and lost some fo the power exchange which made it so satisfying for both of you. Anyone can tie someone up and slap them up a bit then fuck them, but that doesn't mean they are dominating them. Anyone can be tied up and allowed themselves to be slapped and then fucked, but that does not mean they are really submiting either.

So as he makes steps on changing things, look to your own self and see if any changes can be made about your own thinking and attitudes. Good luck to you.

 

[Pure]

Dear Francisco,
Is there any sense at all in speaking of being 'fair' to your dog?

Would it be fair to the sub to ask him/her

to give blowjobs to two of your male friends, or
to take meals on a plate on the floor, or
to masturbate near a window clearly visible from the next building?

 

[Netzach]

Dear Francisco,
Is there any sense at all in speaking of being 'fair' to your dog?

Would it be fair to the sub to ask him/her

to give blowjobs to two of your male friends, or
to take meals on a plate on the floor, or
to masturbate near a window clearly visible from the next building?

It would not be fair to hit your dog with a rolled up paper because it doesn't meow.

It would not be fair to make your cats run the ididerod. Nor effective.

So it is, in a ways, not fair to expect a hard painplayer to become vanilla with fluff on top.

 

[catalina_francisco]

It would not be fair to hit your dog with a rolled up paper because it doesn't meow.

It would not be fair to make your cats run the ididerod. Nor effective.

So it is, in a ways, not fair to expect a hard painplayer to become vanilla with fluff on top.

Oh so true!!

Catalina

 

[catalina_francisco]

Dear Francisco,
Is there any sense at all in speaking of being 'fair' to your dog?

Would it be fair to the sub to ask him/her

to give blowjobs to two of your male friends, or
to take meals on a plate on the floor, or
to masturbate near a window clearly visible from the next building?

LOL, well he is kinda busy right now but will likely answer you later. For my part I think you might be under some misconceptions if you think any of those tasks you listed above were in the extraordinary, out of bounds department of our relationship.....don't seem too out there or unfair at all IMO...except for the dog of course as one should always be fair and nice to man's best friend.

Catalina

 

[sunfox]

That is a bit of a silly remark Pure. Steak is not good for a dog; a dog eats dogfood preferably dry food that has been specially made for its health.

Francisco.

It is a silly remark, but in dog trainer/behaviorist mode, I will comment that yes, steak -is- good for a dog Just not necessarily cooked steak. Tripe is better, but let's not go there.

But in response to this comment by Pure, I'll say certainly you can be fair to a dog. I correct my dogs for misbehavior, and with the other hand, praise them for doing well and reward them accordingly. That is fair. I don't fail to praise them and reward them from time to time when they have earned it, because it makes for a happy dog who works well for me. If all I ever did was discipline them and punish, then ignore them otherwise... they may still work out of fear, but it would lack the amazing brilliance of a contented performance of their job (be it protection, obedience, herding, or minding the baby) done for love and respect... and yes, fair treatment.

And while personally, I'm not very offended by a comparison to a dog because I have and have known some fantastic dogs, I think I'll drop the analogy for now.

 

[sunfox]

While 'shuthefuckup' was proposed early on, later answers made the picture more nuanced. I think you're missing a key point.

I'm not missing any of the posts, or any of the remarks made, helpful and less helpful. What I am stating is that there seems to be a regrettable trend of applying the 'if you can't handle it, don't let the doorknob hit you where the good Lord split you' to every post someone makes regarding a difficulty. That seems singularly unhelpful, as even us subbies sometimes need to express our confusion or misunderstanding of something Dom/me-related. I know it's unbelievable that we don't always love -everything- the Dominants do to us. But them's the breaks of being human.

I did not 'apply the Catptain Hardass Dominant Solution to every submissive/slave....' Or even to s_l_p. I said, if he's your master, you do as directed. Several others said so, also. I continued, that if s_l_p wanted a romance between equals or even to take charge of someone, then by all means go for it. Further if she wants to be topped MWF and romanced TThSat and top him every Sunday after mass, that's fine too.

Perhaps I should reread my own post, but I'm fairly sure I never said "Damn you, Pure, you're being a big poopyhead." In which case, I fail to see why the personal outrage. I was speaking in a general 'you'.. not a Pure 'you'. I feel an urge to paraphrase... "You're so vain... you probably think this post is about you."

No one's giving unconditional advice around here, if you get past the slogan. Several, though, are saying, "If you want to be on the football team, don't complain about the coach making you wear lots of equipment and run laps."

I think there'd be no complaints if her 'coach' was asking her to bear lots of bondage and D/s... the issue is that the 'coach' has her on the football team, but is leaving her on the bench, or worse, expecting her to play soccer while kitted up for football. And that is irresponsible and ultimately, if it continues, makes a mockery of what she believed she was becoming a part of.

Clear as mud now?

 

[sunfox]

Oh yeah, one more post. Boy, I'm chatty today.

Thank you, rosco and Caitlynne.

 

[rosco rathbone]

s-u-u-unn-ny

 

[sunfox]

s-u-u-unn-ny

rosco, you old rascal.

 

[Slut_loves_pain]

hoooooooookay

I never expected such a big debate.
Yes you're right RR, it was written on a PMS day and I was feeling pissed off and a little bratty. Not my usual persona however so please, give me a chance lol. Plus I'm young. My posts on the net can sometimes reflect my lack of life experience.
Pretty much what RJ Masters said. Mine is a relationship first and a D/s second, so its not like I can just go ok see ya you're a bad Dom can I???
He had started to slip. I had started to get pissed off. He thank god had figured it out and has been more attentive to my needs lately. I'm a pain slut, and to be denied it was torture. He certainly wasnt doing it intentionally, in fact it had more to do with working every day over Xmas and I should have figured that out.
Its all sorted now anyway, and was an interesting learning experience, both being in it and reading all your responses!!!!
I have an exceptionally strong personality. Its not in me to shutthefuckup and as I delve more into BDSM and let my sub side out more its kind of hard to figure where to draw lines in the sand regarding communication.

 

[Caitlynne]

Re: hoooooooookay

Its not in me to shutthefuckup and as I delve more into BDSM and let my sub side out more its kind of hard to figure where to draw lines in the sand regarding communication.

I'm glad to hear this is all sorted out.

The above statement caught my eye. I'm not suggesting that you take this as anything more than my experience. The rules of your relationship regarding communication are yours.

But....... (oh come on now, you knew it was coming) I don't think it is about drawing a line in the sand about what you can talk about with your Master, I think it is all about HOW you communicate to him.

Your concerns are your concerns, and no one is suggesting you (or anyone else) dismiss them as irrelevant. It's all in how, when and where you discuss your concerns, not IF it is OK to discuss them.

Just didn't want you to think I was in the 'shut the fuck up' brigade. I'm in the 'there's a time, place & manner and then accept his decision' brigade.

~ cait

 

[catalina_francisco]

My dearest Pure,

I am not going to go into speaking of being 'fair' to your dog, sunfox has answered that question better than I ever could.

But yes it is fair to talk about being fair to your pyl and it is fair to ask your pyl to perform any action which is between the agreed boundaries. To me BDSM is still about fulfilling needs, fulfilling needs of both parties, and sometimes the need of one has preference above the other but both must have their needs answered to have a happy and fulfilled relationship.

I also think communication is important, negotiation in the beginning of the relationship and if one of the parties decides to change the boundaries and structure of the relationship without speaking first to the other, then yes I feel it is to be expected that it will have repercussions.

But I stress again communication is the essence of a good relationship and to forbid your pyl to communicate is to me a big NO NO, however if a PYL finds a pyl that finds that kind of behaviour acceptable, all power to them. I would not like to be in a relationship where I would have no feedback and communication with my slave, that would be extremely boring and non-challenging.

Francisco.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Re: hoooooooookay

I never expected such a big debate.
Yes you're right RR, it was written on a PMS day and I was feeling pissed off and a little bratty. Not my usual persona however so please, give me a chance lol. Plus I'm young. My posts on the net can sometimes reflect my lack of life experience.
Pretty much what RJ Masters said. Mine is a relationship first and a D/s second, so its not like I can just go ok see ya you're a bad Dom can I???
He had started to slip. I had started to get pissed off. He thank god had figured it out and has been more attentive to my needs lately. I'm a pain slut, and to be denied it was torture. He certainly wasnt doing it intentionally, in fact it had more to do with working every day over Xmas and I should have figured that out.
Its all sorted now anyway, and was an interesting learning experience, both being in it and reading all your responses!!!!
I have an exceptionally strong personality. Its not in me to shutthefuckup and as I delve more into BDSM and let my sub side out more its kind of hard to figure where to draw lines in the sand regarding communication.

I think most will admit to occasions where responses and reactions are not perfect like they are portrayed in the fantasy material....it is part of being human. Being sub does not mean you do not have real feelings or bad days, it just means you are likely more aware of them over time, struggle to find appropriate ways of managing and/or controlling them, and accept the direction of another whom you have given the right to dominate you. It takes time, and even when you feel you have reached a point which you can be proud of, there may be days when you feel you are right back where you started.

Catalina

 

[Pure]

Some notes to my esteemed discussants

Sunfox said,

SFBut in response to this comment by Pure, I'll say certainly you can be fair to a dog. I correct my dogs for misbehavior, and with the other hand, praise them for doing well and reward them accordingly. That is fair. I don't fail to praise them and reward them from time to time when they have earned it, because it makes for a happy dog who works well for me. If all I ever did was discipline them and punish, then ignore them otherwise... they may still work out of fear, but it would lack the amazing brilliance of a contented performance of their job (be it protection, obedience, herding, or minding the baby) done for love and respect... and yes, fair treatment.

We're not talking about the same thing, here, for of course there are more or less effective trainers. Likewise those who care for dogs look to their needs, food, etc., medical. I don't call any of this, 'fairness'. "Humane treatment" is the usual term.

------
Francisco said, But yes it is fair to talk about being fair to your pyl and it is fair to ask your pyl to perform any action which is between the agreed boundaries. To me BDSM is still about fulfilling needs, fulfilling needs of both parties, and sometimes the need of one has preference above the other but both must have their needs answered to have a happy and fulfilled relationship.

With respect, there is no one 'BDSM'. Taking Sadism, however, in some varieties, I fail to see how it's about both sides equally meeting needs.

Netzach said,



It would not be fair to hit your dog with a rolled up paper because it doesn't meow.

It would not be fair to make your cats run the ididerod. Nor effective.

So it is, in a ways, not fair to expect a hard painplayer to become vanilla with fluff on top.


These are absurd, or unrealistic expectations. I would be absurd to insist that that 'slave' jump 10 feet into the air and sing the star spangled banner before landing.

OTOH, to give a subordinate a virtually impossible task, and then give consequences, seems quite proper, though in the usual sense, unfair. In an ordinary relationship, if one partner sleeps in the bed, and the other on the floor, we'd say it is unfair. Not necessarily so, in an SM setting.

One occasionally lets a child opine as to what's fair. More often, one just says, "Your setting the table while I sit, may seem unfair, but that's life."

Looking at the military case, subordinates have some say as to 'fair,' i.e., being fed. OTOH, when company A is told to rush the machine gun emplacement, and company B is told to hold steady, the question of 'unfair' cannot be raised.

It's also noted that to settle the question of authority, sometimes arbitrary measures are used. One subordinate is singled out for punishment; other let off. This is IMO, proper, though arguably 'unfair' in the usual sense. In some SM setting, the practice of an arbitrary whipping-- for no particular reason-- might be carried out. Again, in the usual sense 'unfair.'

 

[sunfox]

Re: Some notes to my esteemed discussants

We're not talking about the same thing, here, for of course there are more or less effective trainers. Likewise those who care for dogs look to their needs, food, etc., medical. I don't call any of this, 'fairness'. "Humane treatment" is the usual term.

Humane treatment is fair and equitable treatment. It's not overindulgence or underindulgence, it's simply fair. That isn't apples and oranges.. it's apples and more apples.

 

[TaintedB]

Originally posted by Caitlynne
Sweetie, some of this stuff should have been sorted out before you submitted. And if his behavior is a problem for you, then you need to solve it in terms of YOUR submission, NOT in terms of whether or not the PLY is right or wrong. It's NOT his behavior that is in question, it is your ability to submit to it.

If a Dominant repeatedly taking you (sexually) unceremoniously is a problem for you to submit to, then it is *your* problem. I'd explore it in those terms if I were you.

Perhaps a period of discovery would have been appropriate prior to complete submission. You might have discovered then, that he would pretty much take his property whenever and however he chose. And if this was something that made you unhappy, you'd have discovered it prior to accepting a collar.

I agree wholeheartedly with your point about taking care with who you wind up with before you wind up with them. But there is a very real and sad phenomenon "out there" (by out there I mean other subs I know tell me about their experiences with it, but I havn't had to face it myself, thank goodness) that I think of as the "Going Vanilla Disease." It's a situation where sometime after the bdsm couple shacks up together the dominant genuinely loses any interest in controlling his submissive and reverts not just to the occasional vanilla fuck but 100% vanilla behavior in terms of controlling her. (A vanilla fuck, by a dominant person, by the way, tends to feel extremely kinky to a submissive and not like normal vanilla sex at all, which is one of the things that concerns me about the thread poster's situation.) When that happens, it usually means the "dominant" wasn't really that dom to begin with, it was just something he was playing around with, exploring in himself, but unfortunately he made this premature commitment to his parter to be her master for life because he imagined it was a real and permanent part of his personality, and now she's as kinky as ever but stuck with Mr. Straight. In this specific situation, telling a submissive to dominate herself (which is how I read a statement like "solving the problem in terms of your own submission") is not too helpful.

I honestly don't know which position the thread starter is in: just frustrated with an occasional vanilla sex episode in an otherwise dominant partner and unable to see the dominance of it, or despairing because all the control has gone out of the relationship and this is yet another example of it in a long line of incidents. I got the feeling she thought it was progressing fairly rapidly toward the latter state.

If it is the latter, more helpful I think is to propose the idea that if a formerly dominant or dominant-appearing person who committed to being your controlling master goes vanilla on you in all ways (not just the occasional straightfuk, but the whole emotional-mental shebang) then this man is no longer your dominant whom you must obey at all costs because he is not keeping his end of the commitment, he is not dominating you.

Practically speaking, I know of no submissive who has the extreme emotional willpower and obsessiveness that is required to keep up a pretense of submitting to a completely vanilla partner who refuses to exert any control over her whatsoever. That isn't to say submissives are generically weak, but we aren't built to function in a control vacuum, for pete's sake! What if the tables were turned and a dominant man found himself stuck in a relationship with a totally vanilla woman who initially thought she was kinky but who now abhored any kind of S&M sex and laughed at any attempts to control her and threatened to get him jailed if he attempted any force, even a spanking? Would you expect him to see this as a "problem with his dominance" to be solved within the relationship, even though she's made it clear to him that she will never, ever submit to him, and if forced to, will take legal action against him? Sometimes I think we are a lot harsher on submissives than we are on dominants!

But back to the submitting in a vacuum point. Oh man, If I could submit without anybody else needing to also control me and take that submission, I know for a fact that I'd avoid all sorts of messy and unpleasant emotional entanglments with men who claim to be dominant but have no clue as to what that means or what they want and... submit myself totally to my favorite butt plug! And then if anyone was cracked enough to try to approach me as a dominant, I'd say, "I'm very sorry but I am the owned and collared slave of Master Butty and you must talk to him before I can have any words with you. Ok, you want to talk to him? Er, it'll be just a second (reaching behind me), he needs to be disinfected first! "

Do you see my point? Claiming to be the devoted submissive of a vanilla man makes just about as much sense as claiming to be able to enslave yourself to a buttplug. And if you turn the tables around, a dom might get more gratification topping a blowup doll than he does a vanilla partner. At least the blowup doll never says, "Eww, get that away from me, or I'll mace you!"

 

[rosco rathbone]

yay tainted B is back!

dance, gnomes, dance! and bring more wine!

la la la la la

 

[TaintedB]

Originally posted by rosco rathbone
yay tainted B is back!

dance, gnomes, dance! and bring more wine!

la la la la la

Grrr! Just don't let those filthy little creepoids dance on me or I'll kick 'em where their little suns don't shine!

Edit PS: I listened to that Johnny Cash song you recommended in some other thread. Good song, but I just cannot imagine you singing that one, although I guess that sort of makes sense, given I've never heard you sing.

 

[graceanne]

Practically speaking, I know of no submissive who has the extreme emotional willpower and obsessiveness that is required to keep up a pretense of submitting to a completely vanilla partner who refuses to exert any control over her whatsoever. That isn't to say submissives are generically weak, but we aren't built to function in a control vacuum, for pete's sake! What if the tables were turned and a dominant man found himself stuck in a relationship with a totally vanilla woman who initially thought she was kinky but who now abhored any kind of S&M sex and laughed at any attempts to control her and threatened to get him jailed if he attempted any force, even a spanking? Would you expect him to see this as a "problem with his dominance" to be solved within the relationship, even though she's made it clear to him that she will never, ever submit to him, and if forced to, will take legal action against him? Sometimes I think we are a lot harsher on submissives than we are on dominants!

Thank you. That's what I was trying to say, I just didn't say it as well.