Not Dom, not sub...

[Ebonyfire]

I actually have to agree with you. For me it never makes sense when Dominants claim their slave/submissives are inferior, while they are superior...in essence it means (or seems to say) that though they view themselves as better, they have some issues to deal with in that they feel they only deserve inferior subs, not the best or better, or quality. If I were going to own or be served by a slave/submissive, as in most things, I would demand quality and someone who was going to be able to satisfy my needs and make me proud to own or be served by.

Catalina

Yep. I think I have posted this before. How valuable is the dominance of a person who only dominates inferiors? And how valuable is the submission of an inferior person?

Eb

 

[catalina_francisco]

Yep. I think I have posted this before. How valuable is the dominance of a person who only dominates inferiors? And how valuable is the submission of an inferior person?

Eb

And some argue it is not in keeping with the whole image, and refer back to days of slavery or servitude...to my knowledge, in both situations, those in charge were not looking for the dregs, but those who could do as they required, well, someone who could be an asset instead of a burden.

Catalina

 

[Ebonyfire]

And some argue it is not in keeping with the whole image, and refer back to days of slavery or servitude...

And I say fuck 'em cause there is a whole lot of difference between kidnapping people and forcing them into slavery than in consentual slavery.

Fuck 'em

Eb

 

[sunandshadow]

For the time we were together once she'd "polarized", she gave to me that control that she didn't want; gave me trust and respect. In return, I gave her the benefit of my imagination and creativity, and gave her my trust and respect.

I'd like to build on this a little. Philosophically there are two kinds of freedom: 'freedom from', and 'freedom to'. As I understand it the sub gives the dom freedom to (give orders and make judgements for example), and the dom gives the sub freedom from (responsibility and self-criticism for example). So in this sense the two must be equal, because one can only take what the other can give. And in any long term relationship it is important that the two people respect each other - the sub has to believe the dom will make good decisions and is worthy to be obeyed in order to relax and enjoy being dominated. The dom has to feel that the sub is worth their management and not think the sub is whiny or cowardly or whatever in order to be satisfied with devoting their attention and effort to the sub. (This excludes psychopathic sadism and self-destructive masochism because those are geared toward destruction, which is the opposite of constructing a relationship.)

 

[Ebonyfire]

I'd like to build on this a little. Philosophically there are two kinds of freedom: 'freedom from', and 'freedom to'. As I understand it the sub gives the dom freedom to (give orders and make judgements for example), and the dom gives the sub freedom from (responsibility and self-criticism for example). So in this sense the two must be equal, because one can only take what the other can give. And in any long term relationship it is important that the two people respect each other - the sub has to believe the dom will make good decisions and is worthy to be obeyed in order to relax and enjoy being dominated. The dom has to feel that the sub is worth their management and not think the sub is whiny or cowardly or whatever in order to be satisfied with devoting their attention and effort to the sub. (This excludes psychopathic sadism and self-destructive masochism because those are geared toward destruction, which is the opposite of constructing a relationship.)

Well put.

Eb.

 

[Hester]

Yep. I think I have posted this before. How valuable is the dominance of a person who only dominates inferiors? And how valuable is the submission of an inferior person?

Eb

exactly.

 

[catalina_francisco]

And I say fuck 'em cause there is a whole lot of difference between kidnapping people and forcing them into slavery than in consentual slavery.

Fuck 'em

Eb

And yet some still persist in such thoughts....funny though, they seem to have a sanitised version of what it would be like, seem to see it as a bit of a lark, and yet stike me as the type who would least be able to surviie such an event well outside of roleplay and fantasy.

Catalina

 

[SpectreT]

Cat, Eb... Thanks. In essence you were arguing my point for me. "superior" and "inferior" are not labels I like to use, they're just handy comparitives. As soon as I find something better, I'll use it.

sunandshadow:

Excellent points, but I have to take issue with the implications of freedom from responsibility being part of submission. If anything, a submissive is adding another party to be responsible to when they accept a dominant.

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

Excellent points, but I have to take issue with the implications of freedom from responsibility being part of submission. If anything, a submissive is adding another party to be responsible to when they accept a dominant.

Agreed,I think submission as I see it as a huge all encompassing responsibility. Its very intricate , takes immense focus and honesty. I think the real 'freedom' takes place where honesty ranks higher than being seen to 'get it right' or to modify yourself as you 'percieve' you should be in order to submit with sincerity. After all its you the Dominant has accepted submission from not some parody or illusion. Thats sort of clarity shared between a D/s partnership and the directed by the Dominant is the stuff to aspire to in my books.

 

[Pure]

ok, the ins and outs of dom sub relations, power, contracts, etc. have plenty of threads. who gives what to whom, power, what is exchanged etc. are standard topics, as are the multitude of variants found among happy pairs. i'm sure all is fine in dom-sub land.

it is my mistake to open the topic, here.

moving past that fabled land and on to other realms....

 

[sunandshadow]

Well put.

Eb.

Thank you. I'm glad to have people who have experience with dominance and submission confirm my theoretical knowledge of it, because while I'm not personally into it I have a pair of characters in my novel who have a D/s romance going on, and I want to make sure I enderstand them so I can portray them well.

spectre T and rebecca, thank you for the clarification. That makes sense really - I'm the one who longs for freedom from responsibility, my submissive character instead longs to be given orders by the leader he admires, and to get approval for carrying out those orders well. So it's maybe a freedom from making decisions, but actually seeking responsibility instead of escaping it. How interesting...

 

[Pure]

hi sun

sun So in this sense the two must be equal, because one can only take what the other can give. And in any long term relationship it is important that the two people respect each other - the sub has to believe the dom will make good decisions and is worthy to be obeyed in order to relax and enjoy being dominated. The dom has to feel that the sub is worth their management and not think the sub is whiny or cowardly or whatever in order to be satisfied with devoting their attention and effort to the sub. (This excludes psychopathic sadism and self-destructive masochism because those are geared toward destruction, which is the opposite of constructing a relationship.)

P: this is one world, for sure, and it's where some people live or try to.

leaving aside DS, i think many sexual deviations undercut long term relationships [as idealized, above]. no doubt you would apply the labels 'psychopathic' and 'self destructive' to many persons so constituted. and that invokes one of the questions of this thread, about psychic health.

 

[sunandshadow]

leaving aside DS, i think many sexual deviations undercut long term relationships [as idealized, above]. no doubt you would apply the labels 'psychopathic' and 'self destructive' to many persons so constituted. and that invokes one of the questions of this thread, about psychic health.

I can't really think of any other sexual deviations which are destructive in the same way as sadism and masochism. Actually it makes sense that there wouldn't be any, because any sexual deviation involving wanting to harm someone would be classified as sadism, and involving wanting to be harmed would be classified as masochism, so anything that is destructive is covered by these two categories, nothing destructive is left outside them.

I guess here are some non-destructive fetishes that are incompatible with relationships though: only wanting to have sex with virgins for example, since you can't have a relationship with someone if they become boring as soon as you screw them. Pedophilia of course - ethhical considerations aside, children grow up fast enough that a long term relationship can't occur. Bestiality is arguable - some people seem to truly fall in love with a particular animal, and some animals such as dogs are capable of feeling great affection for a person, but can it really be a relationship if the animal can't talk? Other unusual objects d'affection such as sleeping/unconscious/dead people, cars and other machinery, high heels, etc. are incapable of being part of a relationship.

Going in the opposite direction, extreme feederism where the goal is to make the feedee grow until they are immoble and helpless is a fairly destructive fetish, but not inherently incompatible with a long term relationship, so I guess it could be considered as being on the same level with mild S&M. The desire to keep a woman barefoot and pregnant, or keep someone as a pet secluded from the rest of the world, and the complementary desire to be kept in such a state, could probably also be classed here.

 

[MechaBlade]

Jesus Christ, people. I meant vanilla "equal" as in we both have the same say and amount of control in the sexual activity, not that I only dominate retarded/crazy/ugly girls and only find somone my intellectual/emotional/physical/whatever-you-thought equal for vanilla hookups.

 

[saw_man1]

You did not offend me. Honest. I spent about 2 hours talking to a submissive once because we got hung up on superior vs. supreme. I have found that superior is a term that has been used to infer "better than" rather than "dominant over".

Eb

On one level, the relationship between a PYL and their pyl can be compared to the interactions that exist within any organization with a structured hierarchy. In the military the Sergeant obeys the Captain because those are the rules. That obedience has nothing to do with the value and worth of either person. It’s simply a matter of rank.

Of course this does not take into account the impact that love and or affection can have.

 

[Ebonyfire]

It’s simply a matter of rank.

Yep.

Of course this does not take into account the impact that love and or affection can have.

It can. It is all in how you look at things. It has been said that some Femdom D/s relationships can become vanilla in about three years. Some women can sustain the D/s relationship only until they love their submissive, and then they go back to vanilla behavior. This can cause strife in the relationship, which can lead to a breakup.

What brought the couple together was the D/s, when that is gone, love may not save it if the submissive wants the power exchange. he may even leave his Mistress even if he loves her if that component is absent.

In my case no amount of love and/or affection would keep me happy without the power exchange. I have affection for all my submissives, but that does not mean I will not hesitate to do what needs to be done to preserve the D/s. After all, It is my job as the dominant to do so. If there is no D/s, there is no relationship.

Eb

 

[catalina_francisco]

It can. It is all in how you look at things. It has been said that some Femdom D/s relationships can become vanilla in about three years. Some women can sustain the D/s relationship only until they love their submissive, and then they go back to vanilla behavior. This can cause strife in the relationship, which can lead to a breakup.

What brought the couple together was the D/s, when that is gone, love may not save it if the submissive wants the power exchange. he may even leave his Mistress even if he loves her if that component is absent.

In my case no amount of love and/or affection would keep me happy without the power exchange. I have affection for all my submissives, but that does not mean I will not hesitate to do what needs to be done to preserve the D/s. After all, It is my job as the dominant to do so. If there is no D/s, there is no relationship.

Eb

A message many do not get or remember when love comes into play...it is sad when that happens.

Catalina

 

[Ebonyfire]

A message many do not get or remember when love comes into play...it is sad when that happens.

Catalina

It is indeed.

There is an old saying: "Dance with the one that brung ya".

D/s is what brought Me and slave together. Without our power exchange, we have nothing. If he had wanted a vanilla relationship, he would have pursued one. If I have wanted a vanilla relationship, I would still be with My vanilla. But both of us want to live within the bounds of a power exchange relationship, and that is our focus. I am the dominant, so it is on Me to see that we stay the course. It is on Me to keep boredom away.

Eb