Hey Femdoms, do you ever worry your sub will "snap" one day?

[JMohegan]

I don't make that distinction in the situation mentioned. If I am at a party, and someone is serving drinks while naked, I'm going to accept the service or not, not wonder if they're doing it because "I want" vs "Mistress wants". In a casual social situation, there is no meaningful need to differentiate. Service is service.

There's never a need to differentiate, if the one doing the serving is not claiming to do so at your direction.

 

[chy_girl]

The view from the Top is not the same as the view from the bottom. And, in my admittedly limited experience and observation, very rarely are the specific motivators the same despite the parallels.

The likelihood of "snapping" isn't factored because of a male/female dynamic because the greater component is a Dominant/submissive\Master/slave thing.

That's just my opinion and experience though.

I don't make that distinction in the situation mentioned. If I am at a party, and someone is serving drinks while naked, I'm going to accept the service or not, not wonder if they're doing it because "I want" vs "Mistress wants". In a casual social situation, there is no meaningful need to differentiate. Service is service.

Except to the service-sub. Then there is a very meaningful difference.

Again, the view from the Top is not the same as the view from the bottom.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I don't make that distinction in the situation mentioned. If I am at a party, and someone is serving drinks while naked, I'm going to accept the service or not, not wonder if they're doing it because "I want" vs "Mistress wants". In a casual social situation, there is no meaningful need to differentiate. Service is service.

It only matters to the server, and possibly their partner/s. Bystanders are bystanders.

I am still wondering what the line of thought was, from OP that brought this question on. I can imagine him indulging in some wankage... naked and handsome, standing proud, carrying a cup of tea of a fine lady and waiting for her to finish weighing his goolies in her elegant hand. Yum!

Then that darned brain takes a left turn, his dreamlady give the jewels a vicious yank-- and blood and dismemberment fill his fantasy room. Because, dammit, that hurt! And because his fantasy woman had stopped following his orders regarding what orders to give him.

Something like that?

 

[JMohegan]

It only matters to the server, and possibly their partner/s. Bystanders are bystanders.

I am still wondering what the line of thought was, from OP that brought this question on. I can imagine him indulging in some wankage... naked and handsome, standing proud, carrying a cup of tea of a fine lady and waiting for her to finish weighing his goolies in her elegant hand. Yum!

Then that darned brain takes a left turn, his dreamlady give the jewels a vicious yank-- and blood and dismemberment fill his fantasy room. Because, dammit, that hurt! And because his fantasy woman had stopped following his orders regarding what orders to give him.

Something like that?

That's definitely how I interpret the post quoted below.

Though I'm guessing he'd also pack up and leave if she told him to put some pants on and go do the dishes. Perhaps without the blood and dismemberment, but still - fantasy over.

Wow, you actually know me well enough to know my motivations for the questions I ask? Impressive.

So it sounds like most Dommes don't worry about that happening in their male subs. Well that's good.

I was just curious because even though I'm a dom I can see it being enjoyable to serve food and drinks to women at a tea party, mostly likely while naked, and obeying their commands. I could also see though that if they went too far I'd instantly snap out of my submissive mode, put my clothes back on and be done with it. That just got me wondering if there is a snapping point to a sub where he'd turn violent against his domme. If there is it seems no one is worried about it.

 

[Stella_Omega]

That's definitely how I interpret the post quoted below.

Though I'm guessing he'd also pack up and leave if she told him to put some pants on and go do the dishes. Perhaps without the blood and dismemberment, but still - fantasy over.

Dunno if you remember an atrocious movie called "Exit from Eden" (the making of it was totally neglected by Anne Rice while she drooled over Tom Cruise and I guess we can't totally blame her for that)

There was a scene with Cathy Bates as a fairly reluctant Domme, where her more experienced sub tells her; I'll do anything you ask," and she says "Fine, paint my house."

She does let him give her a massage, but as I recall nothing much more, because she isn't a hottie and movie rules say no hottie no sex.

And there's a voice-over codicil, saying that after the vacation, he showed up with a crew and painted her house. Because that's why women really go on sex vacations. Yeppers.

Even Anne Rice, the hussy!

 

[chy_girl]

It only matters to the server, and possibly their partner/s. Bystanders are bystanders.

I am still wondering what the line of thought was, from OP that brought this question on. I can imagine him indulging in some wankage... naked and handsome, standing proud, carrying a cup of tea of a fine lady and waiting for her to finish weighing his goolies in her elegant hand. Yum!

Then that darned brain takes a left turn, his dreamlady give the jewels a vicious yank-- and blood and dismemberment fill his fantasy room. Because, dammit, that hurt! And because his fantasy woman had stopped following his orders regarding what orders to give him.

Something like that?

Funny, because I always thought that if Mistress had me serving at a dinner party and neither of my People rewarded me with something excruciatingly painful it would be a bad thing.

Just imagining her waiting till I leaned in to reach for something only to suddenly drag me into place by my hair and bite a nipple or breast until I screamed and begged while everyone sitting around the table watched...
*clears throat and straightens her clothes*
Mmmm, well. There's something to consider for the day.


*wanders off to make a note about asking Mistress what her current thoughts are on hosting a dinner party*

 

[Homburg]

Except to the service-sub. Then there is a very meaningful difference.

Again, the view from the Top is not the same as the view from the bottom.

I can understand that, but were you in the situation proferred as an observer would you be wondering whether or not the server was doing it for the "right" reason?

I can't think of a time when I looked at a bottom/server in a party situation and wondered what their motivations were. By the same token, I've not looked at a top in a party situation and wondered why they were doing what they were doing. If it is not directed at me, or at my behest, I just can't be arsed.

Again, in a standing dynamic, the rules change. I am much more interested in the why's and wherefore's at that point.

--

It only matters to the server, and possibly their partner/s. Bystanders are bystanders.

I am still wondering what the line of thought was, from OP that brought this question on. I can imagine him indulging in some wankage... naked and handsome, standing proud, carrying a cup of tea of a fine lady and waiting for her to finish weighing his goolies in her elegant hand. Yum!

Then that darned brain takes a left turn, his dreamlady give the jewels a vicious yank-- and blood and dismemberment fill his fantasy room. Because, dammit, that hurt! And because his fantasy woman had stopped following his orders regarding what orders to give him.

Something like that?

I think wankage is the assumption, yeah, and likely the reason for the hostility in the thread overall.

Eh, I guess I don't have so much trouble 'getting' the other person. I have a fair amount of experience with fsubs, and see no horrendous paradigm shift in putting an "m" in place of the "f" and inserting the term into the same overall concepts, situations, and motivation. I just don't see power and power exchange as gender-specific. Maybe I'm weird.

 

[Stella_Omega]

...I think wankage is the assumption, yeah, and likely the reason for the hostility in the thread overall.

Eh, I guess I don't have so much trouble 'getting' the other person. I have a fair amount of experience with fsubs, and see no horrendous paradigm shift in putting an "m" in place of the "f" and inserting the term into the same overall concepts, situations, and motivation. I just don't see power and power exchange as gender-specific. Maybe I'm weird.

OP surely does. I really dislike dealing with reflexively "gender-roled" hetero men. And to a lesser extent, women.

 

[chy_girl]

I can understand that, but were you in the situation proferred as an observer would you be wondering whether or not the server was doing it for the "right" reason?

I can't think of a time when I looked at a bottom/server in a party situation and wondered what their motivations were. By the same token, I've not looked at a top in a party situation and wondered why they were doing what they were doing. If it is not directed at me, or at my behest, I just can't be arsed.

Again, in a standing dynamic, the rules change. I am much more interested in the why's and wherefore's at that point.

As a service-oriented submissive I would assume that they were doing it to please their PYL and that the pleasure the pyl derived from such a task was derived from pleasing the PYL.

For me and a lot of other sub/slave type people that I've spoken to the why boils down to one thing; to please our PYL's. That drive to please and satisfy our PYL is also the one thing that makes the idea of a sub going off on their Dom(me) such a far fetched concept for me. It would greatly displease my People if I were to hit them.

I may walk away, I may run away, I may safeword, I may push past, yell, scream, or cry... Hell, I might even grab the hand holding the impact toy or slap at the hand restraining me if there is a bad subspace trip with the appropriate triggers. But become physically violent in the way the OP is suggesting? No. Because at my core I know they would never intentionally harm me and even when they push my limits to the breaking point they are with me every step of the way. They are in control. I trust them to bring me safely back from wherever we go. That is, for me, a natural and intrinsic part of submission. It's my view from the bottom.

 

[satindesire]

If you just don't get submissiveness, you just don't get it. *shrug*

 

[Keroin]

It's not the "snap" I worry about, it's the "crackle and pop"...now that's scary.


/smartass

 

[chy_girl]

It's not the "snap" I worry about, it's the "crackle and pop"...now that's scary.


/smartass

But the "crackle and pop" are the most fun.

 

[JMohegan]

Dunno if you remember an atrocious movie called "Exit from Eden" (the making of it was totally neglected by Anne Rice while she drooled over Tom Cruise and I guess we can't totally blame her for that)

There was a scene with Cathy Bates as a fairly reluctant Domme, where her more experienced sub tells her; I'll do anything you ask," and she says "Fine, paint my house."

She does let him give her a massage, but as I recall nothing much more, because she isn't a hottie and movie rules say no hottie no sex.

And there's a voice-over codicil, saying that after the vacation, he showed up with a crew and painted her house. Because that's why women really go on sex vacations. Yeppers.

Even Anne Rice, the hussy!

Haven't seen the film, but "paint my house" is an outstanding line!

I'm very wary of self-identified s-types who think submission = tie me up, tease me, make me suck your cock, fuck me hard, make me come.

 

[chy_girl]

Haven't seen the film, but "paint my house" is an outstanding line!

I'm very wary of self-identified s-types who think submission = tie me up, tease me, make me suck your cock, fuck me hard, make me come.

I thought that part was just kinky sex?

 

[chy_girl]

Haven't seen the film, but "paint my house" is an outstanding line!

I'm very wary of self-identified s-types who think submission = tie me up, tease me, make me suck your cock, fuck me hard, make me come.

I thought that part was just kinky sex?

 

[Stella_Omega]

I thought that part was just kinky sex?

Yes-- twice.

 

[chy_girl]

Yes-- twice.

Lit's been fucking with me in a not so fun way today.

 

[ImWrite]

people suddenly "snapping" out of their current ways and lifestyle isn't uncommon. Therefore I believe it's entirely possible a submissive man could snap out of his desire to be submissive (some will chose to think that then I'm implying women won't...I'm not, I'm only focusing on the male sub/female dom in this thread).

Again, I'm glad to see that this isn't much of a concern for dommes.

 

[Stella_Omega]

people suddenly "snapping" out of their current ways and lifestyle isn't uncommon. Therefore I believe it's entirely possible a submissive man could snap out of his desire to be submissive (some will chose to think that then I'm implying women won't...I'm not, I'm only focusing on the male sub/female dom in this thread).

Again, I'm glad to see that this isn't much of a concern for dommes.

I'm still wondering what your train of thought was that brought this question on!

 

[DirtyPet]

people suddenly "snapping" out of their current ways and lifestyle isn't uncommon. Therefore I believe it's entirely possible a submissive man could snap out of his desire to be submissive (some will chose to think that then I'm implying women won't...I'm not, I'm only focusing on the male sub/female dom in this thread).

Again, I'm glad to see that this isn't much of a concern for dommes.

Ok I've only been into BDSM for a year now and all of it has been online..so I'd really like to know if its possible for a sub to lose the desire to sub? I believed it was a Need..not something you Do but something you Are.

 

[Herefornow]

Ok I've only been into BDSM for a year now and all of it has been online..so I'd really like to know if its possible for a sub to lose the desire to sub? I believed it was a Need..not something you Do but something you Are.

I believe you are correct for the TRUE submissive however I am quite sure that there are many that say they are submissive just to scratch that horny itch they have when in reality they could not submit 24/7 in real life.

 

[JMohegan]

Ok I've only been into BDSM for a year now and all of it has been online..so I'd really like to know if its possible for a sub to lose the desire to sub? I believed it was a Need..not something you Do but something you Are.

Let's assume that sub DP is genuinely fulfilled by serving at the direction of others and deferring to the control of a mate, and that's a fundamental part of sub DP's sexual wiring.

Sub DP still has preferences with regard to the personality of a partner, physical and emotional limits on what can be tolerated, and personal needs to be fulfilled.

So it is not only conceivable, but would be very healthy, for sub DP to "snap out of submissive mode" with a particular partner - if it becomes clear to sub DP that the needs of both parties are not being met, the character of the partner is not what it was once perceived to be, and/or the treatment of sub DP has, for whatever reason, become intolerable.

 

[the captians wench]

I have only played with 2 guys who claimed subbiness.

One, would just not show up to a play date if I said I was interested in doing something he wasn't in the mood for.

The other would over power me, shove his cock down my throat and continue to really hot sex.

The second was hot, but I lost interest in both as my needs weren't being met.

Now I don't particularly care to top. I can when asked, and once in a blue moon I get a desire to, but when I do, I expect to get what i want. When that doesn't happen, I loose focas and revert to subbie mode. *shrug*

I haven't really interacted with too many male sub types, but the ones I have had experience with were total pillow princesses.

 

[DirtyPet]

Let's assume that sub DP is genuinely fulfilled by serving at the direction of others and deferring to the control of a mate, and that's a fundamental part of sub DP's sexual wiring.

Sub DP still has preferences with regard to the personality of a partner, physical and emotional limits on what can be tolerated, and personal needs to be fulfilled.

So it is not only conceivable, but would be very healthy, for sub DP to "snap out of submissive mode" with a particular partner - if it becomes clear to sub DP that the needs of both parties are not being met, the character of the partner is not what it was once perceived to be, and/or the treatment of sub DP has, for whatever reason, become intolerable.

Ok once you put in the "submissive mode" it makes sense..thank you!

 

[DirtyPet]

I believe you are correct for the TRUE submissive however I am quite sure that there are many that say they are submissive just to scratch that horny itch they have when in reality they could not submit 24/7 in real life.

I couldnt submit like that either but I'm not a true submissive and I have met guys that hid behind the name "Dom" to validate their violence..that was actually the first kind of Dom I met and was very off putting..luckily I found Literotica because I was ready to give up on BDSM..