Earn This!

[SubKekiLee]

<snip>Of course it all sounds fine. No one wants to misplace trust. But we all do that all the time. We trust the salesman. We trust our phone company to make our phone work when we need it. We trust other drivers to stop at the stop signs and red lights, and to stay in their lane. But of course we're often let down. The salesman lied. The phone drops the most important call at the worst possible moment and other drivers run stop signs just as we're passing in front.

No one wants to be let down. So when I see a submissive saying "earn this", well, I understand where they're coming from.

But hey. Wait a minute. What's the reality of this?

But to demand that something be "earned" is, of course, a demand. And the problem with that - in our little subculture - is that when the submissive demands..... then the submissive has turned the tables and has become the dominant.

I think that in many instances this immediately dooms the relationship they are both hoping to establish. I wonder if the submissive will ever really be happy with a dominant who will comply with demands.

Okay this isMY opinion.. I beleive that submission is a gift and trust is earned... It isnt a demand it is the begining of a relationship to request those things from a Dominant.. I never demanded my Sir to give me anything.. he took the time to get to know me and knew I needed to give my gift but I wouldnt just give it to anyone.... He earned it... He allowed me the time to figure out I wanted to give it to him, that he was trustworthy and that his word was as valid as it should be..I dont think it doomed my relationship in anyway possible.. I think it enhanced it cause he took his time and he wasnt in a hurry to jump into something.. he took his time I took my time and now 10 months later... Im a very lucky pet... YMMV .....

 

[madetotakeit]

Trust is earned through time and observation.

By comparison between words and deeds.

Does your partner DO what s/he says s/he will do? Does your partner treat other people with respect and civility? Do they meet their family and social obligations? Are they genuine in their interest or only playing games? Are they well educated about this lifestyle or learning about it, or are they paying it lip service?

Is your partner a person of integrity and character, are they honest? Honorable?

Are they worth trusting?

For someone to earn your trust you don't need to set up hoops, you just need to take time to learn who they are as a person.

Precisely, well said. I have said and will say again that my trust has to be earned. I don't set up games or tests. Observation is the name of the game. The more I trust someone the more control that person can have over me. Considering I like my limits pushed and my interests can lean to the edgier side, I better damn well know I can trust the person who holds the reins (flogger, knife, insert interest of the moment here.) I don't administer tests, set up a field of hoops, and I expect the same in return...at least in the getting to know you stage. Once that trust has been earned however, that may be a different story on the return.

 

[simply_subbie]

Are you rushing things? Gawd! BDSM does not by definition involve "putting your life into someone else's hands" any more than a vanilla affair. I mean, going home with someone is going home with someone. Inviting someone into your home is inviting someone into your home. A hotel room is a hotel room. I mean.... if you've got the Boston Strangler there, whether or not you're hoping for a spanking is immaterial.

okay this kinda got me a bit riled.

trust absolutely has to be earned, especially when the things you do could effectively end your life if done incorrectly or carelessly. im not talking about going home with someone who would intentionally try to kill you. im talking about being bound and blindfolded, have someone cut off your air supply and trust that they are paying attention and are completely in control.

if i told a PYL that they couldnt do something before earning more of my trust and they told me that i was making them "jump through hoops" and therefore trying to be dominant, they would lose whatever trust i had in them already.

 

[Netzach]

Meh. The problem I have is that there are plenty of people who MEAN well and are charming and sweet as all get out but incompetent, and have no skill and could kill you, and plenty of emotionally stunted assholes who are GREAT at bondage and bullwhipping and knifeplay, but who you don't want managing your life as a Master or Mistress. It's not cut and dried at all.

There's no substitute for observing and LISTENING to your red flag alarms as encountered.

I still want an example of the kind of "hoops" we're talking about. This is one of those basic compatibility things. I'm not suited for someone who needs to feel forced to do things and who is more about being out of control than being in service - there are plenty of people who have played with me and loved it because they're at the point where they have NO desire to have control, they want to banish control, they're apologizing for mistakes that haven't even happened yet, rather than trying to make sure I'll punish them. It's stylistic. Someone else's litmus tests are offensive to you when you have no way of meeting their needs - move on and buck up.

 

[RJMasters]

If someone were to tell me that they believe in the principle of a person taking the time to earn a person's trust in a relationship before doing some things, I would have no problem agreeing with that "principled position and would say that I too believe that to be a wise thing to practice and observe when building a relationship with someone.

If I was at a club negotiating with someone to play with them and I state whips will be involved or bondage will be involved, I would not become offended if someone said, "sorry, I do not know you well enough to trust in your skills for that kind of play with you yet."

However, if someone I was in a relationship said to me directly, "You have to earn my trust." that would be an entirely different matter and it would be one that would not have a positive outcome.

 

[RJMasters]

D/S is extremely personal for me. When I take on somebody as a submissive, it isn't because I want "a sub;" it's because I want that particular person. On the rare occasions when I feel like subbing (I'm a switch), it's because one particular person has brought out that part of me.

I never go looking for a submissive or for a dominant -- I go looking for friends in the BDSM community. Some of those friends will turn into play partners, some into lovers, and some will stay friends. But by making friends first, we're creating a foundation of trust and caring and getting to know one another. And if nothing ever happens but friendship, well, friends are good, too.

I can do sensation play relatively casually, with people I think of as acquaintances, but for me, D/S is intensely personal, and I'm not moved to do it -- either end of it -- except with someone I trust and care for. It doesn't have to be "true love," but I do have to have the sense that my partner and I matter to one another.

I reallly liked this post and point of view. Thanks for sharing.

 

[VelvetDarkness]

Meh. The problem I have is that there are plenty of people who MEAN well and are charming and sweet as all get out but incompetent, and have no skill and could kill you, and plenty of emotionally stunted assholes who are GREAT at bondage and bullwhipping and knifeplay, but who you don't want managing your life as a Master or Mistress. It's not cut and dried at all.

I agree with this very much. I trained as a nurse and in medicine for example, there are extremely dedicated staff who are just naturally incompetent and there are hardened practitioners who have lost all their sympathy and empathy but have textbook technical skills and clinical judgement. I know who I want treating me if I get dragged in unconscious after a seizure.

Trust in BDSM, unless (and even if) you know someone very well, is an educated guess. There has to be a certain level of trust and respect before any kind of play occurs but there simply is no way of being certain that somebody is going to respect agreed limits and safewords until you give them the opportunity to say 'fuck it' and rape you every which way.

Even if a PYL plays by the rules, they can still harm you. Trust is not just a consent issue. If someone binds me, I have to trust their bondage skills. If they gag me, I have to trust their ability to read nonverbal responses. Everything requires trust.

Then, as other people have touched on, there is the reciprocal trust. If I have a safeword, a PYL must trust that I will use it appropriately. Trust must be reciprocal and equally balanced in order to function with any degree of usefulness.

 

[intothewoods]

I still want an example of the kind of "hoops" we're talking about. This is one of those basic compatibility things. I'm not suited for someone who needs to feel forced to do things and who is more about being out of control than being in service - there are plenty of people who have played with me and loved it because they're at the point where they have NO desire to have control, they want to banish control, they're apologizing for mistakes that haven't even happened yet, rather than trying to make sure I'll punish them. It's stylistic. Someone else's litmus tests are offensive to you when you have no way of meeting their needs - move on and buck up.

"Hoops" - depends on how you phrase it, I'm guessing.

I need to be held after every scene!
I need discipline - I will act up if I don't know you'll punish me!
We have to do a bdsm checklist.
When will I get a collar?

But I dunno, all of the above could be communicated in a way that's not setting out a bunch of demands on a PYL.

 

[the_mgp]

*************

 

[SinfulSailor]

I'm going to go with this:

If someone were to tell me that they believe in the principle of a person taking the time to earn a person's trust in a relationship before doing some things, I would have no problem agreeing with that "principled position and would say that I too believe that to be a wise thing to practice and observe when building a relationship with someone.

..snip..

However, if someone I was in a relationship said to me directly, "You have to earn my trust." that would be an entirely different matter and it would be one that would not have a positive outcome.

And this:

"Hoops" - depends on how you phrase it, I'm guessing.

I need to be held after every scene!
I need discipline - I will act up if I don't know you'll punish me!
We have to do a bdsm checklist.
When will I get a collar?

But I dunno, all of the above could be communicated in a way that's not setting out a bunch of demands on a PYL.

And this:

To be short and sweet about it: in my little world, it's something I can give to certain people if I choose, it's not something I could ask them to earn.

Those writers make sense to me.

I know the way of conceptualizing this concept as I introduced it in this thread runs against the grain of popular bdsm theory and philosophy. As such it may not even have any value at all. That's for each person to decide individually.

Or, even if the concept I introduced does have value, because it is heretical to accepted bdsm relationship philosophy then it will be met with some degree of resistance. Ok.

If at the same time it helps me and others to a better understanding of ourselves and our relationships, if it helps even one person, even a little tiny bit, to be more successful in creating a great relationship.... then I'm a very happy camper.

 

[Netzach]

Like I said, I don't do hoops. I'm very uninterested, for example, in the Law of Mandatory Aftercare snuggles (orelseIfallapart)

but you know what?

Those people STILL get to set their own limits, dictate their own needs, no matter now dumb I may think their needs are. Some of mine are pretty stupid. Some of yours too, because we're all human beings with phobias and foibles and preferences that are laughable to someone else.

If my submissive is telling me "I want to do checklists" then either we didn't do them (I actually LIKE them, call me crazy) they think it would be fun to do them again (oh noes!) or I didn't somehow cover some of the things they might expect to do with me, they're not actually my submissive and they think they are - because honestly, this is info that I can't imagine going into a relationship (rather than a single exchange) without KNOWING about one another. Checklists don't have to be the format, it's true, most people find that stupid, but I *like* lists. It could be a conversation, a phone call, a written manual, a contract, whatever. If they're going to insist it's a format I don't want, then this isn't quite working correctly either and I'd want to know what's up their ass about it.

But that last possibility, them not KNOWING anything about my interests, my experiences, and my intent, is a tremendous fuckup on someone's part, and in that case it would be mine mostly. Saying "no no, you can know nothing about my desires, interest or fantasy Little One" and expecting someone to sit there happily is Sir Stephen BS that deserves laughter.

I see a lot of all powerful Doms sobbing in their beers like 19 year old girls over this one all the time. It's not that it goes against some code in which the sub controls everything it's that I, too, value someone who steps up to the plate and WANTS a relationship in which they accept any and all outcomes from me as their owner. I get it.

But....dude.... Why on earth would that NOT be the needle in the haystack?

It runs counter to all logic and all human self-preservation to be that way and to need that stuff.

Why on earth would that NOT lie in wait for me till I was maybe, MAYBE almost mature enough to deal with it, skilled enough to deliver it, and bummed out that I'm still often not organized enough to perfect it?

Boo hoo, I had to look for years to find H. Because people who want that are a small minority of a small minority. Of all the men begging to "be my slave" I met two that could actually do it, and one creeped me the fuck out to no end and might still be stalking me.

Get over it, they still get to determine their needs. Every human being has that right, no matter who you think you are. So you think they're less submissive because of it. No one put you in charge of that committee. Spend more time on the lid for your pot and less time bitching about all the do-me subs (to be fair, I know a lot of Dommes in this camp. If I put that much screaming and offendedness into ever jerkoff email I get, I'd never get anything done with my life, I just hit delete and get on with it.)

Because the nature of this question is basically "why does anyone I want to submit to me get to turn me off with demands I don't like without me countering that by saying they're not really a submissive and the laws of essem backing me up?"

 

[Netzach]

If someone were to tell me that they believe in the principle of a person taking the time to earn a person's trust in a relationship before doing some things, I would have no problem agreeing with that "principled position and would say that I too believe that to be a wise thing to practice and observe when building a relationship with someone.

If I was at a club negotiating with someone to play with them and I state whips will be involved or bondage will be involved, I would not become offended if someone said, "sorry, I do not know you well enough to trust in your skills for that kind of play with you yet."

However, if someone I was in a relationship said to me directly, "You have to earn my trust." that would be an entirely different matter and it would be one that would not have a positive outcome.

What about "I'm a little gunshy right now about that because of thisthingthathappened so, I'm sorry but no."

I've found myself in this position with submissives at times. The trust fuckup can happen in either direction and it takes a lot of trust to do things to someone, push them, challenge them, and when things go badly the human tendency is to say "well, not doin' that again."

 

[intothewoods]

This is another one of those reasons that I hate bdsm protocol and the tendency to turn basic relationship issues into quests for bdsm truth.

To each his own, of course. Plenty of people disagree with me and some more think I'm a giant bitch who doesn't kiss enough ass. I still think that everyone has needs and everyone is responsible for learning how to communicate those needs like a grown-up. I still feel like Mister Man is responsible for using is words and not being passive agressive, and so am I.

I've pissed off a few Tops because they assumed I was up for x, y and z without asking me, and they refused to have a direct talk about what we'd be doing. Could I have been more clear? Yes. Could they have said, hey, I thought you were up for this - what gives? Yes! It takes two to tango, baby.

It also takes a certain amount of panache to pull off expressing your limits while still enticing someone for a play date. Because "look I'm not going to sleep with you" isn't always the best opener, it turns out. I have to bring something to the table besides just being the cute girl, and I have to get my limits in there or there may be a misunderstanding. I can say, it's the Top's reponsibility to ask - but it doesn't end up working like that. And that's fine. I crashed and burned a little in the scene in the beginning, but I'm doing okay, more or less, now.

 

[JMohegan]

Guys with control issues (like me) want to steer the course of the relationship from the first hello. Not in the micromanagement sense, but in the big picture sense - absolutely.

That doesn't mean I expect (or even want) an immediate commitment or instant submission. There's a getting-to-know you process, one goal of which is for trust to be established on both sides. I acknowledge the importance of the process, but I do want to control it's pace, flow, and direction.

*Of course* she has needs, strengths, weaknesses, fears, triggers, and such. So do I. *Of course* she expects to get to know someone, and trust that person, before making any relationship commitments. So do I. *Of course* there's such a thing as pushing too fast, overstepping bounds, and so on. I get that. (In fact, showing that I "get that", through effective management of the getting-to-know-you process, is one way I establish trust.)

If I meet an attractive woman, ask her to dinner, and over the course of the evening's discussion learn that her attitude is: "I've got this precious gift of submission, and you've got to earn the right to receive it" - that's a non-starter as far as I'm concerned, because the attitude is reflective of a relationship philosophy that I won't buy into. I'm not gonna say she's not submissive. The truth is I don't care if she's submissive or not, because she's simply not an appropriate match for a guy like me.

If I meet an attractive woman, ask her to dinner, and she hands me a written summary of her views on BDSM and asks me to read it and get back to her with a response, I'm gonna hand it right back to her. No way would I submit to a demand like that. Not because I feel that some rule in the BDSM Handbook has been violated, and not because I think I'm Sir Stephen Spectacular, but simply because I have control issues and I just don't work like that.

 

[JMohegan]

If someone were to tell me that they believe in the principle of a person taking the time to earn a person's trust in a relationship before doing some things, I would have no problem agreeing with that "principled position and would say that I too believe that to be a wise thing to practice and observe when building a relationship with someone.

RJ! Nice to see you, man. Hope the hands are healing well.

 

[Netzach]

If I meet an attractive woman, ask her to dinner, and she hands me a written summary of her views on BDSM and asks me to read it and get back to her with a response, I'm gonna hand it right back to her. No way would I submit to a demand like that. Not because I feel that some rule in the BDSM Handbook has been violated, and not because I think I'm Sir Stephen Spectacular, but simply because I have control issues and I just don't work like that.

So is she a controller? A NON SUB? Or just a freak for bringing something like that to a first date?

I've been handed things on paper, most of which are like, OMG. Every once in a while something utterly charming and thought out makes its way into my hands though. I like to let the world give me good shit on the off chance, so I read.

What if she said "I have a small list of questions for you because writing things down makes me more comfortable at this point than discussing them and I organize my thoughts better that way. If you don't mind reading them I'd appreciate that a lot." Is that insanely controlling?

I personally could never trust the veracity of communication that I alone dictate the terms of. Never. But that's me. This could be a gender/dating thing. We tend to operate on "lips are moving they are lying" till otherwise known, so the more the lips move the more you get as they run out of story.

The truth is I don't care if she's submissive or not, because she's simply not an appropriate match for a guy like me.

Exactly. That's my point.

 

[JMohegan]

So is she a controller? A NON SUB? Or just a freak for bringing something like that to a first date?

I don't know. It's a turnoff, more than anything else.

What if she said "I have a small list of questions for you because writing things down makes me more comfortable at this point than discussing them and I organize my thoughts better that way. If you don't mind reading them I'd appreciate that a lot." Is that insanely controlling?

Maybe not insanely controlling, but to me that would definitely be weird.

I just walked up, introduced myself, chatted for a bit, asked her to dinner, and she's got a list of questions that she can't bring herself to articulate? Doesn't that seem odd to you? It's just dinner, not an invitation to a dungeon or fuckfest.

I personally could never trust the veracity of communication that I alone dictate the terms of.

Neither could I.

This could be a gender/dating thing.

Or it could be an "I'm 50 and the purpose of a first date is to talk about where we work, where we grew up, where we travelled this summer" vs. "whatever you crazy kids are doing these days" type of thing.

 

[ataxia.girl]

Those people STILL get to set their own limits, dictate their own needs, no matter now dumb I may think their needs are.

Get over it, they still get to determine their needs. Every human being has that right, no matter who you think you are. So you think they're less submissive because of it. No one put you in charge of that committee.

Because the nature of this question is basically "why does anyone I want to submit to me get to turn me off with demands I don't like without me countering that by saying they're not really a submissive and the laws of essem backing me up?"

i get told i'm not submissive all the time because whatever it is they did to me didn't work the way they thought and the stuff i keep telling them i need which will work they don't wanna do just because i said i need it. Is stupid.

Its possible i might know myself better than the D i just met and the "hoops" are actually just useful information about how i work as a sub.

 

[Netzach]

I don't know. It's a turnoff, more than anything else.

Maybe not insanely controlling, but to me that would definitely be weird.

I just walked up, introduced myself, chatted for a bit, asked her to dinner, and she's got a list of questions that she can't bring herself to articulate? Doesn't that seem odd to you? It's just dinner, not an invitation to a dungeon or fuckfest.

Neither could I.

Or it could be an "I'm 50 and the purpose of a first date is to talk about where we work, where we grew up, where we travelled this summer" vs. "whatever you crazy kids are doing these days" type of thing.

Yeah, no I'm with you there completely. See my rant about how if a guy has any charm, seduction capital, or personality there's this secret code that you're supposed to turn it OFF the moment you find out she's a Dom and act like a caricature, have lists, do things in super bizzaro perv world not how you normally would. wth?

I was just trying to go on the supposition that that's not totally weird, but it is, I admit it, just tried slicing it differently and it's still nutty.

 

[CutieMouse]

Or it could be an "I'm 50 and the purpose of a first date is to talk about where we work, where we grew up, where we travelled this summer" vs. "whatever you crazy kids are doing these days" type of thing.

I'm not 50, and that's essentially my "first date" protocol, too.

To be short and sweet about it: in my little world, it's something I can give to certain people if I choose, it's not something I could ask them to earn.

You said that so much better than I usually do (and with way fewer words).

 

[RJMasters]

What about "I'm a little gunshy right now about that because of thisthingthathappened so, I'm sorry but no."

If one is engaged in the relationship, then these things are taken in stride and worked out. Sometimes I get my way, sometimes its a comprimise and sometimes I have empathy when such situations arise.

saying: "I'm sorry but no"

is different than saying: "You got to earn my trust."

The former is more like stating a soft limit of sorts and gives a reason for it. The later is ultimatum-ish and litmus sounding.

If your point is that a state of trust between two people is always in flux, then I would agree to that and have no problem recognising that does happen and as I said you deal with things like that in stride.

 

[RJMasters]

RJ! Nice to see you, man. Hope the hands are healing well.

Hey JM,

Yes the hands and face are healing nicely. Thanks. And nice to see you as well.

I have to say that my views on this topic match with yours and what you shared.

 

[nh23]

To be short and sweet about it: in my little world, it's something I can give to certain people if I choose, it's not something I could ask them to earn.

*ding,ding,ding* Pretty much sums up my views. Same reason I don't buy into the whole submission is a gift thing.

 

[Netzach]

What about "I'm a little gunshy right now about that because of thisthingthathappened so, I'm sorry but no."

If one is engaged in the relationship, then these things are taken in stride and worked out. Sometimes I get my way, sometimes its a comprimise and sometimes I have empathy when such situations arise.

saying: "I'm sorry but no"

is different than saying: "You got to earn my trust."

The former is more like stating a soft limit of sorts and gives a reason for it. The later is ultimatum-ish and litmus sounding.

If your point is that a state of trust between two people is always in flux, then I would agree to that and have no problem recognising that does happen and as I said you deal with things like that in stride.

Makes sense, thanks for elaborating.

 

[bigbill92690]

You have made my point... Onlky one demands or it will not work