What should a Dom do when His slut has sex without His permission?

[TaintedB]

Originally posted by AnelizeDarkEyes
Why ARE you asking us?

~anelize

Uh, read the first message in this thread? Her master ordered her to and she is simply obeying him. Maybe your question ought to be directed at him?

 

[TaintedB]

Originally posted by Betticus
There was a topic a long time ago about the worst punishment for a sub. The one Dom had something like this happen and he made his sub whip him bloody.

I think that may be more appropriate than any other punishment. Being fucked isn't against her nature so a gang bang while humiliating is out. This also breaches trust to an extent where he might just walk away from her but she also betrayed him so he is bound to be very hurt.

He might as well grind the point home as to how much she hurt/disappointed him with a very interactive visual demonstration like being made to see his pain on his flesh.

That might just reach beyond her willfulness and plant a message deep in her psyche that will condition her to feel terrible if this situation ever comes up again. To associate the cheating with being made to hurt her Dom.

This "punishment" is such a manipulative and vicious mindfuck to a deeply submissive woman, that it might very well serve to destroy the relationship completely if the cheating doesn't. Right now you've got a situation where one person's trust has been broken. So why not make it a situation where BOTH persons have their trust broken and perhaps now have engendered in your sub intense hurt and fear of you and maybe even hatred and a desire to get even with you for doing this to her? Ayup. Makes perrrfect sense to me! Whoopie!

This is more than just an eye for an eye dude, this is her eye, her arm and her leg for your eye, so don't be surprised if you do this and shortly thereafter there is no submissive around you to cheat on you or do anything else because she will no longer be able to bear your asinine and childishly vengeful presence. Doing something of this nature will really lower her respect for you. Of course, if you don't mind being seen as a vicious, petty vindicative 12-year-old who should never be trusted by your slave and submissive, then by all means, be my guest.

 

[Marquis]

You remind me so much of my ex it's terrifying.

 

[TaintedB]

Originally posted by s'lara
Kayte, however this works out, i hope you learned from your actions and don't carry it into your future service. Obedience is what we're expected to provide and i am quite sure this situation has made you question and reevaluate exactly what your place is in your current relationship.

i have to go on record and say that dismissal is what i would have expected had i done something similar.

lara

I don't know what you are, but let's look at this from the dominant's point of view for a minute. If you've committed to being someone's master for life (not saying this is the case here, as I don't know the couple, but I'm assuming their relationship was a bit more serious than the standard "We'll just do the bdsm thing until one of us finds it inconvenient" gig of the let's _play_ master and slave crowd), then how can you not look like a totally incomptent boob, to her and to everybody who knows you, if you act just like a vanilla person would and go storming out the door or even masterfully (heh!) "Dismiss" her with a dominant-yet-petulant wave of your hand.

You think your next submissive who may hear about this incident from others and not just hear your version is going to have any trust in your intelligence, forbearance, ability to work through problems, ability to guide her rather than act like a little child who needs guidance? If you do, you're living in some sort of dreamland. Sheesh! Why is immature, impatient, impulsive, destructive childish behavior not only expected from domiannts but fully supported? Is the myth true and a submissive's real role simply to be the mommy of an impatient and demanding little boy who never shows any strength of character or maturity on his own but does know how to yell, "DIS-missed!" very LOUDLY whenever things get a teensy bit rough?

Whatever happened to the concept of a master being the emotional leader and teacher of a submissive? Whatever happened to the idea that dominants should have strength of character, maturity, and not be such weak little pansy-pussies that the least bit of trouble (and yeah, I think cheating is a "little" deal in a deeply committed master-slave relationship) causes then to run away as fast as their little feeties can manage (but try to make it appear dominant by saying something dumb and hackneyed like "I dismiss you!") Is is so universally accepted in the bdsm communities these days that dominants are just impulsive and untrustworthy little brat-boys that we encourage them, as this person has done above, to take the easy and cowardly way out every time as a "masteful solution" to their relationship problems?

SHEESH! I say! SHEEESH!!!!

Now I think I shall exit this thread before the steam starts coming out of my ears and warps my hard drive.

 

[TaintedB]

Originally posted by Marquis
You remind me so much of my ex it's terrifying.

The one who slept around?

 

[Etoile]

masterfully (heh!) "Dismiss" her with a dominant-yet-petulant wave of your hand.

You refer to "you" quite a lot without clarifying who you're talking to. Could you clarify this for me?

I have never heard of anybody dismissing someone with a wave of their hand. It's quite a more serious undertaking than that; I would sincerely doubt anyone treats it as cavalierly as you suggest.

 

[AngelicAssassin]

This "punishment" is such a manipulative and vicious mindfuck to a deeply submissive woman, that it might very well serve to destroy the relationship completely if the cheating doesn't.

At first, i thought to ignore your replies since from this ...

I don't know what you are, but let's look at this from the dominant's point of view for a minute.

... it's obvious you couldn't be bothered to look up a profile, or do a quick search on the individual in question. She's a masochistic submissive by the way, and the forum's librarian.

Since you missed this ...

Trust me on this. i knew whom i had to discipline, and the transgression didn't involve cheating. When someone spontaneously vomits, you know you've reached visceral. She never approached wisp distance of that malodorous area again.

based on this statement

Whatever happened to the concept of a master being the emotional leader and teacher of a submissive? Whatever happened to the idea that dominants should have strength of character, maturity, and not be such weak little pansy-pussies ...

it's not difficult to see understand why you missed the point of the discipline.

As far as this

SHEESH! I say! SHEEESH!!!!

Now I think I shall exit this thread before the steam starts coming out of my ears and warps my hard drive.

is concerned, i could take the easy way out and tell you not to let thread's doorknob hit you in the ass on the way out, but i'd be more than glad to entertain any further questions you have.

 

[TaintedB]

Originally posted by Etoile
You refer to "you" quite a lot without clarifying who you're talking to. Could you clarify this for me?

I have never heard of anybody dismissing someone with a wave of their hand. It's quite a more serious undertaking than that; I would sincerely doubt anyone treats it as cavalierly as you suggest.

No "You's" in the piece you quoted from me so I'm not sure what you're referring to. Please clarify what you are confused about.

As for the wave of the hand, that's just me using a colorful visual expression for an actual emotional reality. These aren't meant to be taken literally, as in someone actually waving their hand when they "dismiss?" someone so I appreciate your asking about it when one confuses you.

I am talking about a serious emotional reality however. Maybe I am just privy to a lot of very sad stories, but I know of many cases where my friends were treated in a very emotionally cavaliear fashion by dominants they trusted, and if the dominant had waved his hand dramatically, it, it wouldn't have added much to the already established horror.

The fact that a dominant's "dismissal" of a submissive is a perfectly understood and accepted idea in some bdsm communities horrifies me even more. Just an old-fashioned girl, I guess, but when a group of people establishes the idea that a one-sided "dismissal" is Ok and SOP (standard operating procedure) in a certain kind of relationship, then you open the door to a lot of very irresponsible and hurtful behavior.

 

[TaintedB]

Originally posted by AngelicAssassin
At first, i thought to ignore your replies since from this ... ... it's obvious you couldn't be bothered to look up a profile, or do a quick search on the individual in question. She's a masochistic submissive by the way, and the forum's librarian.

Since you missed this ...based on this statementit's not difficult to see understand why you missed the point of the discipline.

As far as thisis concerned, i could take the easy way out and tell you not to let thread's doorknob hit you in the ass on the way out, but i'd be more than glad to entertain any further questions you have.

(Baffled laugh) I'm not following this at all, sorry AA. I don't understand what point you are making with all the unrelated quotes in this thread and what they have to do with Lara's statement, except it is clear that you are evidently pissed about something. This is not an insult, there is no hidden meaning in my words, simply the truth. I don't get your point.

The first part you take umbrage to, where I tell Lara, "I don't know what you are" I can address, however. I can grasp how you misunderstood this, but it was actually meant as a statement of respect toward her in my mind. It meant, in essence, "I'm not going to assume you're dominant or submissive because I really can't tell that by looking at your avatar or name." Nothing more, nothing less.

I doubt that one out of 1000 people posting to this forum assiduously looks up the profiles of everybody whom they respond to in the thread. If you have the time to do that, more power to you, but quite honestly, I don't. In the few instances that I've looked up someone's profile, they've had nothing in it, no info except their screen name and that has discouraged me, quite frankly from doing it more often. It also seems obsessively curious to do that to a stranger whom I don't know, and almost as an affront to them, an invasion of their privacy, so I shy away from this sort of research you recommend.

If the person intersts me or I've had several conversations with them and find their ideas interesting, I will look them up, but like I just said, most times it turns up no information. Anyway, I think I have as much a right to not go trying to look up random people whom I quote in a thread and figure out who they are as others have the right to do to doing that research, don't you think?

 

[Etoile]

No "You's" in the piece you quoted from me so I'm not sure what you're referring to. Please clarify what you are confused about.

The rest of your same post, dude. Sorry that wasn't as bleedingly obvious to you as I thought it would be.

The fact that a dominant's "dismissal" of a submissive is a perfectly understood and accepted idea in some bdsm communities horrifies me even more. Just an old-fashioned girl, I guess, but when a group of people establishes the idea that a one-sided "dismissal" is Ok and SOP (standard operating procedure) in a certain kind of relationship, then you open the door to a lot of very irresponsible and hurtful behavior.

I'm detecting a sense of "holier than thou" here, probably due to your "just an old fashioned girl" comment, but also from what I've gleaned of you from the rest of your posts in this thread. You seem to insist that your way is the right way and the rest of us are wrong. I'm sorry your friends have had shitty partners in the past, but the overwhelming majority of dominants would not just wave their hand, literally or figuratively.

We aren't the ones who've established the idea of dismissal. I would venture a guess that it comes more from professional D/s interactions rather than most personal relationships. It does happen in personal relationships though.

It suddenly occurred to me that your problem might be with the word "dismissal" - perhaps if the word "breakup" had been used since the beginning in this thread, you'd have been more comfortable with that? I sure as hell would expect to get broken up with for sleeping around. Hell, I've (almost) been there myself. So does it make it clearer for you that it's an appropriate response to break up with someone for such an indiscretion rather than just to "dismiss" them?

 

[Netzach]

My slave isn't my high school girlfriend. No offense Etoile, "breaking up" just has that connotation for me.

Dismissal is a completely appropriate word to use in such a case, and it's my right to go about that process with as much or as little emotional hand wringing as I see fit.

Cheating, or going outside the parameters of the sexual agreement IS a "big deal" in a master/slave relationship.

The boundary was set, you don't like it so you say fuck it and do as you see fit?

I can't trust someone to stick to the small stuff, if they can't stick to the larger program. What am I supposed to do if not dimiss? Feed them bread and water for a month? Hold hands and go to counseling? Maybe, depends on the parameter of the relationship. If it was M, yes, I would in a moment. If it was my slave, no. I would not.

Making them whip me is not in my personal repetoire, as I don't like to play with the idea that my masochism upsets the balance of power. It never would. I would expect any submissive to whip me as hard, as long, and as well as I told them to without fuss or histrionics.

This may be the bottom line difference between M/f or F/f and M/m and F/m slavery. With male slaves, there's a precariousness. Harsh as it is...there a mentality of "there's zillions where you came, from, pal, so if you can't be wonderful, I don't have to put up with it." Gay Tops have the same ability to be picky and are as sought.

With female submissives we go on and on and on at length about the special irreplacable wonderful nature of the sub, almost creating little starry eyed immature ballerinas. Anyone who would expect obedience or tell them to move on is painted as a user. instead we should be using our masterful persuasive ju jitsu to enslave these flowers. I don't have time or inclincation for games, you submit or you walk.

But that's another beef of mine.

 

[Marquis]

The one who slept around?

Damn, I feel bad if this is how I've painted her. She is an amazing person in many ways, but there were many issues on both sides.

However, you did remind me of her just then.

 

[rosco rathbone]

giggle

 

[TaintedB]

Originally posted by Etoile
The rest of your same post, dude. Sorry that wasn't as bleedingly obvious to you as I thought it would be.

Dude? Do you call all your female acquaintances that? Bleedingly obvious? I think you need to try to get a handle on your hostility and also, if you wish an answer about the you's try to answer my original question because it really is not clear at all what you don't understand by my pronoun usage. If there is something you don't understand about it, once again, I ask you to please point it out more specifically. What do you mean about my use of "You's?" being unclear? To me that usage is clear or I wouldn't have written it that way.

I'm detecting a sense of "holier than thou" here, probably due to your "just an old fashioned girl" comment, but also from what I've gleaned of you from the rest of your posts in this thread. You seem to insist that your way is the right way and the rest of us are wrong. I'm sorry your friends have had shitty partners in the past, but the overwhelming majority of dominants would not just wave their hand, literally or figuratively..[/B]

"Old-fashioned girl" was self-depreciatory, an attempt to soften what is, as I knew, and you also pointed out, simply my opinion but a strongly stated opinion. Interesting that you could read it as the opposite of the way you meant, but I think you are doing so because you are pissed off with my points in general, so you assume that because you don't like those points that my tone in making them must be nasty as well? Anyway, you're reading things in what I'm saying that aren't there. I'm most definitely not insisting my way is the right way, and I challenge you to quote or point out where I say that anywhere. When somebody expresses an opinion that you (as in any reader) doesn't share, there a strong tendency to imagine that person is saying their opinion is the only right one, simply because the opinion itself is irritating. It's the shoot the messenger syndrome. I do it myself to others and I think it's what's going on here.

While I do not think my opinions are the only right ones, I _do_ stand up for my right to state my opinion clearly and strongly, even if it is a minority view, just as everybody else does here. If you believe I shouldn't have the same rights as any other poster here, I'd be interested in knowing why.

We aren't the ones who've established the idea of dismissal. I would venture a guess that it comes more from professional D/s interactions rather than most personal relationships. It does happen in personal relationships though.

The idea of dismissal has been floating around the scene for the last 20 years, and steadily gaining popularity. That I do know. Professionals, in my experience (and I know a few) do not "dismiss" paying clients. They may refuse to see them for various reasons, but they don't usually, at least not that I have observed, feel a need to structure the end of a commerical relationship in stagey almost dramatic bdsm terms. But again, I know my professionals and you know yours, so we could have a difference of opinion here, as well.

It suddenly occurred to me that your problem might be with the word "dismissal" - perhaps if the word "breakup" had been used since the beginning in this thread, you'd have been more comfortable with that? I sure as hell would expect to get broken up with for sleeping around. Hell, I've (almost) been there myself. So does it make it clearer for you that it's an appropriate response to break up with someone for such an indiscretion rather than just to "dismiss" them? [/B]

I don't think I'm the one with the problem here, lol, but let's address it in your terms. My "problem," if that is what it is--I'd rather think of it as a critique, is with the reality represented behind the word "dismissal" or the phrase "dismissing a submissive." Again, I am an old fashioned girl in the sense that I believe the old idea that words actually mean specific things and that different words mean different things--I am not trying to be insulting here but a good half of the people I talk to online do not hold to this concept so it's worth being explicit about it. Dismissal, to me, represents a reality radically different from that of breaking up and in my opinion the two cannot honestly be equated or seen as synonyms for the same actions.

Etoile, if you're going to continue in this unwarrented and, I feel, undeserved, hostile tone with me I am going to have to place you on ignore. I am not here to engage in wars with anybody over matters of opinion this minor, it's stupid and totally fruitless--at least for me--to do so and not how I'd rather spend my time here.

 

[TaintedB]

Originally posted by Marquis
Damn, I feel bad if this is how I've painted her. She is an amazing person in many ways, but there were many issues on both sides.

However, you did remind me of her just then.

Ok, sorry to bring up bad memories, even if it was inadvertently. You didn't paint her that badly, that was just my way of phrasing it, but you did paint your own anger at her pretty intensely. I just wasn't sure when you said your ex if you meant the same person you mentioned earlier in the thread or some other woman. I'm sorry she hurt you.

 

[CutieMouse]

Just sneaking in to say TaintedB- yes, I use the term "dude" regardless of gender. But that's me.

And I have to agree with Etoile- I was confused as to who exactly the "you" in your posts was. "You" in general? "You" in terms of the specific Master? "You" in reference to particular poster's opinions? You (TaintedB) completely lost me, but I did get the jist of what you were saying. So I'm going to go back to being quiet again

 

[Marquis]

Ok, sorry to bring up bad memories, even if it was inadvertently. You didn't paint her that badly, that was just my way of phrasing it, but you did paint your own anger at her pretty intensely. I just wasn't sure when you said your ex if you meant the same person you mentioned earlier in the thread or some other woman. I'm sorry she hurt you.

No big deal.

 

[rosco rathbone]

[B

With female submissives we go on and on and on at length about the special irreplacable wonderful nature of the sub, almost creating little starry eyed immature ballerinas. Anyone who would expect obedience or tell them to move on is painted as a user. instead we should be using our masterful persuasive ju jitsu to enslave these flowers. I don't have time or inclincation for games, you submit or you walk.


[/B]

mhm

 

[TaintedB]

Originally posted by CutieMouse
Just sneaking in to say TaintedB- yes, I use the term "dude" regardless of gender. But that's me.

And I have to agree with Etoile- I was confused as to who exactly the "you" in your posts was. "You" in general? "You" in terms of the specific Master? "You" in reference to particular poster's opinions? You (TaintedB) completely lost me, but I did get the jist of what you were saying. So I'm going to go back to being quiet again

I didn't know girls were dudes these days (see what I mean about old-fashioned? I've got it in spades :/).

OK thanks, that helps clear up the "you" business. No, I wasn't referring to that specific guy who was the thread-starter's master. But I also didn't mean "you" as in absolutely everybody reading the the thread. Yeah, I am beginning to see how this was confusing.

At the begining where I said "I don't know who you are" I meant in that one sentence for the "You" to refer to the person I quoted, Lara I think her name was. But after that beginning sentence, right after where I say, "let's look at this from a dominant's pespective," I meant the you's to mean "a general dominant, any dominant, not a specific dominant and definitely not a sub or a vanilla." I can see where the sudden switch in pronoun object would be confusing.

Hmm, I wonder if I should try third-person next post? Might save me a little trouble!

 

[Marquis]

My slave isn't my high school girlfriend. No offense Etoile, "breaking up" just has that connotation for me.

Dismissal is a completely appropriate word to use in such a case, and it's my right to go about that process with as much or as little emotional hand wringing as I see fit.

Cheating, or going outside the parameters of the sexual agreement IS a "big deal" in a master/slave relationship.

The boundary was set, you don't like it so you say fuck it and do as you see fit?

I can't trust someone to stick to the small stuff, if they can't stick to the larger program. What am I supposed to do if not dimiss? Feed them bread and water for a month? Hold hands and go to counseling? Maybe, depends on the parameter of the relationship. If it was M, yes, I would in a moment. If it was my slave, no. I would not.

Making them whip me is not in my personal repetoire, as I don't like to play with the idea that my masochism upsets the balance of power. It never would. I would expect any submissive to whip me as hard, as long, and as well as I told them to without fuss or histrionics.

This may be the bottom line difference between M/f or F/f and M/m and F/m slavery. With male slaves, there's a precariousness. Harsh as it is...there a mentality of "there's zillions where you came, from, pal, so if you can't be wonderful, I don't have to put up with it." Gay Tops have the same ability to be picky and are as sought.

With female submissives we go on and on and on at length about the special irreplacable wonderful nature of the sub, almost creating little starry eyed immature ballerinas. Anyone who would expect obedience or tell them to move on is painted as a user. instead we should be using our masterful persuasive ju jitsu to enslave these flowers. I don't have time or inclincation for games, you submit or you walk.

But that's another beef of mine.

I guess it takes a pussy to talk like that without getting jeered. Regardless, it is an inspiring post.

I like to think I have enough clout to be picky, even though I am certainly in the least desirable sexual category, the straight male.

 

[Never]

Etoile
" You refer to "you" quite a lot without clarifying who you're talking to. Could you clarify this for me?"

I'm not TaintedB but this is a habit I sometimes slip into when I'm speaking so perhaps she does it for the same reason? The English language doesn't have a satisfying second person plural so sometimes I'll say 'you' to mean a group I've specified earlier when in writing I'd use the third person plural

I don't believe she's addressing anyone in particular. Rather the group that was created in paragraph one (incompetent, boob Dom/mes who petulantly dismiss subs):
" If you've committed to being someone's master for life <snip>, then how can you not look like a totally incomptent boob, to her and to everybody who knows you, if you act just like a vanilla person would and go storming out the door or even masterfully (heh!) "Dismiss" her with a dominant-yet-petulant wave of your hand. "

Are the 'you' in the next paragraph.
"You think your next submissive who may hear about this incident from others and not just hear your version is going to have any trust in your intelligence, forbearance, ability to work through problems, ability to guide her rather than act like a little child who needs guidance? If you do, you're living in some sort of dreamland."

Err, helpful, not helpful?




TaintedB:
" Etoile, if you're going to continue in this unwarrented and, I feel, undeserved, hostile tone with me I am going to have to place you on ignore. I am not here to engage in wars with anybody over matters of opinion this minor, it's stupid and totally fruitless--at least for me--to do so and not how I'd rather spend my time here."

Interesting. I didn't read Etoile's post as being hostile and I didn't read your original post as being condescending. Is it possible that both of you are misreading one another? You might not believe it now but the board would be a poorer place with Etoile on ignore. I don't always agree with her myself but I believe she's a valuable part of the community.

 

[AngelicAssassin]

(Baffled laugh) I'm not following this at all, sorry AA ... Anyway, I think I have as much a right to not go trying to look up random people whom I quote in a thread and figure out who they are as others have the right to do to doing that research, don't you think?

You've got the right to say whatever you choose, just as i have the right to comment on your posting approach, or put you on ignore. As for the misunderstanding, i rolled back through the entire thread before commenting and picked out specific points to address. i don't dismiss anyone's point of view for shits and grins, but do hold a healthy skepticism for what they say until they prove otherwise.

i don't mind a strong opinion. If nothing else, such an opinion can create a lively swap of ideas. Since i'm still curious about your post, i'd like to hear the difference between dismissal and breaking up. Call me old-fashioned, but i like to be on the same sheet of music before i debate anyone on a topic.

 

[niteshade]

Good evening everyone.

Thank you for your time in posting on this thread.

Since He has not given me permission to respond to your questions, I cannot.

I think that any input anyone gives without knowing the whole situation would be biased by the fact that we have only our imaginations to consult. And IMO, the fact that he "made" you post here and potentially humiliate yourself in front of an online community that you have been a long standing part of, apparently limiting what information you are allowed to give that may actually exonerate you, is a punishment in itself.

Edited cause I decided I gave one opinion too many.

 

[TaintedB]

Originally posted by Netzach
Cheating, or going outside the parameters of the sexual agreement IS a "big deal" in a master/slave relationship.

The boundary was set, you don't like it so you say fuck it and do as you see fit?

Cheating isn't a big deal in every master/slave relationship. It really does depend a lot on the individuals and how they view that activity. Sure, it is a boundary that is set, but in some relationships, because it pushes no emotional buttons in the dom, it is seen as a boundary similar in nature and in scope to that of a rule, say, to do the dishes every night. Rules are prioritized as bigger, in some bdsm relationships, in direct relation to their ability to hurt the individual breaking the rule.

I've known some very mature daddy types (one of whom I met quite recently, in fact) whose biggest concern, if their sub were to have sex with someone else behind their backs, would be for that submissive's emotional and physical safety. They just don't have a button about being cheated on. I think this is because as a daddy, they view their submissives as children and children and not always in control of everything they do. While you can characterize submissive women as starry-eyed little princess ballerinas that must be sucked up to, seeing them as childlike and often impulsively childish is a bit more realistic, IMO, because so many of them are exactly that: people whose emotional development has been arrested, for one reason or another, at various stages short of maturity. Obviously, there are plenty of non-submissives walking around with bad cases of emotional arrestment, but submissives respond to this immaturity in specific ways that non-submissives do not, such as seeking out a relationship with somebody whom they can be emotionally dependent on and rely on to help them make the sorts of decisions which, while they can and do make on their own, are often difficult to make or not good ones.

(Boy am I stepping into mined ground now, as there is a very powerful "Submissives are alwaysstrong mature adults" myth circulating in the circles. (Shrug) What else can I do though except state it as I see it. Oh yeah, I could lie about my opinions on this and not step on anyones toes. Now that would be helpful! Riiiggght!)

Back for a minute to the mature daddies who love taking responsibilty, thrive on it, in fact. Most of the ones I've known--used to be I could only count them on the fingers of one hand, now I'm up to two hands--try to find a sub that attracts them so much that they want to spend a lifetime with him or her. Finding a person who is rewarding enough and compatible enough withe their own personalities to warrent such a commitment takes awhile, often years, but once they've decided upon one that's it--their commitment to that person is absolute and all-ecompassing. In other words, they take vows, to themselves and to their slaves, things like, "I have certain things I want you to do or not do, certain basic rules I want you to obey, but my love for you is incredibly strong and completely unconditional and it will not end if you disobey me--in fact, there is _nothing_ short of killing me (and perhaps not even that), that will end my ongoing commitment to your well-being. My commitment to you is permanent: I will strive always to keep you safe and happy and fulfilled for the rest of your life no matter what may happen to us." This level of commitment can sound strange if you've not encountered much of it before in people, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I've seen it, up close and personal in half a dozen relationships so far. It's not common, granted, but it's defintely out there on one of the more obscure limbs of bdsm. A dominant's personality, particularly the part in him that must do things in certain ways or become ashamed to be alive, demands this sort of commitment from him. His sub doesn't force him into it, no matter how big and demanding a SAP (Submissive-American Princess) she may be. It's just how the dom's, a few doms' personalities operate.

If that's the commitment that you, the dominant, are giving to your submissive, then I think cheating takes a fairly minor role in the big scheme of life and your relationship with your slave. Of much more concern are issues that really threaten the relationship, things like death.

What if you (Netzach) set a boundary that the slave was to do the dishes every night, I mean here a slave that you love and have been with for several years and who is really important to you, and they didn't do them one night, or maybe even five nights in a row? Would you consider dismissing them for that or try talking to them to get to the bottom of the dish issue? A few dominants view cheating as pretty much on the same level of emotional seriousness as not doing the dishes for a few days--an important issue to deal with, most certainly, but not one that you'd respond by throwing away the relationship you'd worked so hard on for so many years. I'm not saying your way of doing things isn't right for you and your relationships, just suggesting that in some bdsm relationships cheating doesn't have the same intense emotional stake or value that it does for many people, because the priorities are juggled a little differently. Does such tolerance (which probably appears excessive if you are not used to it) mean that the dominant exercising it must therefore see his submissive as this delicate-flower-porcelain-statue-breakable-if-breathed-on creature? Not ususually, people capable of the control needed to practice something like this are usually not stupid. Such tolerance is an indication of the dominant's broad internal landscape and the demands he places upon himself, not in order to "serve" some special precious brat, but in order that he can regard himself as a man rather than a subhuman piece of slime. When such dominants have explained how they could sustain what always seem like incredible or impossible commitments, those are the words they use, words that relate to their own high perception of themselves and what they must do to live up to that perception.

Your view of male subs is very different from mine, but except for a small handful and the leathermen, of course, the majorty of male subs I've known over the years have been paying clients of one dominant friend or another. These paying clients didn't have much of the admirable quality of regarding genuinely good dominants as the rare and precious people that they are. Perhaps a commerical transaction precludes such humble thought? Also, who is to say that living with an attitude of terror of not obtaining extremely scarce resources is a good one. I think this attitude, which you praise, has the potential to warp a submissive's personality in some pretty bad ways over the long run. Resentment that he must work so very, very hard to get his simple needs for attention, love, or appreciation, met, bitterness at the dominants who have used this need of his in casual and selfish ways to get what they want from the relationship and then discaded him, a deep abiding sadness that no one ever in his life has regarded him as so precious and wonderful that they would do whatever it took to keep him in their lives? I don't know, I don't really know the male mind and am just projecting what I would possibly feel if faced with the male submissive expereince over a period of years.

If people on this board assume submissives as delicate starry-eyed ballerina-flowers (I like that image, lol, perhaps a Lladro version? - http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=1242&item=3775566755&rd=1 ), I'll probably be pissing off a lot more of you in the days to come without even realizing it.

There is, of course, a huge difference between viewing and treating submissives realistically (as human beings with widely varying strengths and weaknesses as well as a few shared traits in common) and sitting back on your plump dominant heine and expecting them to do all the submitting for both of you and if they don't, well, you certainly can't be bothered to lift a single finger in a ju- let alone a jitzo, so since you (the lazy dominant in general) have an elevated view of your own importance vis-a-vis these worthless and numerous lowbies.

I would think that people with the termerity to call themselves dominant would really relish their control and enjoy exercising it, I mean, why else be dominant, right? But so many of the dominants I or my friends have met seem to prefer to go to the extreme of kicking out the people who love them and are dependant on them, rather than face the difficulties and challenges that controlling another human being always poses.
It isn't easy controlling another person, and people who try hard to do this honestly sometimes come face to face with some uncomfortable facts about themselves. But is hiding from such facts worth causing needless suffering in a submissive partner whom you reject because you don't want to deal with your own inability to control or master them?

It works both ways, Netzach. Obviously I am highly sympathetic toward the submissive side of things (perhaps that has something to do with the fact that I am a submissive?), but I recognize that there are equally as many shitty submissives out there as there are shitty doms. I do believe, however, that there are ways that people with strong submissive personalities typically behave, and that these ways of behaving or personality traits are quite freqently mis-read, particularly by people who are not dominant but imagine themselves to be, as bad bratty, self-indulgent, behavior that the submissive could control "if only she wanted to." This is a big beef of mine, that some natural aspects of submissive behavior, stuff we cannot help and also stuff that the mature daddy types absolutely love us for, get such bad press in mainstream bdsm circles. To be accepted by the average scene dominant, a submissive often has to repress huge parts of her personality, because such traits are seen as a big hassle and something of a threat to somebody who cannot dominate to begin with.

Blah, this is getting way too long. I'll say in closing that I think all people have the right (and the responsibility to themselves) to hold out for what they really need and what will make them personally the happiest. If I personally had to surpress or hide huge parts of my personality in order not to threaten or anger the dominant I was with, I'd be living a life of constant stress and misery. Actually, since I know for a fact that there is something better out there, I wouldn't ever allow myself to live that kind of horrific and sad lie: I'd choose lonliness, hard as that is to deal with, and the long wait for what I need, rather than waste even a single precious year living the life of a fake. The tradeoff would be more than worth it to me.

 

[TaintedB]

Originally posted by AngelicAssassin

i don't mind a strong opinion. If nothing else, such an opinion can create a lively swap of ideas. Since i'm still curious about your post, i'd like to hear the difference between dismissal and breaking up. Call me old-fashioned, but i like to be on the same sheet of music before i debate anyone on a topic.

Hmm. Did I not answer that adequately above in my latest response to Etolie? If not, I'll be happy to clarify.