Why do you cede or accept control outside the bedroom?

[alice_underneath]

Why do you cede or accept control outside the bedroom?

You are asking a very interesting question, about something that I don't see people discussing very often.

Please select the one poll option that best describes you as an individual.

I chose option one, although the statement "I have a need to be controlled outside the bedroom" is a little bit misleading in my case. One way to read it is to imply that my own self-control is somehow lacking, or that my behavior would otherwise be unacceptable to myself or to others, and I really don't think either of those statements is true.

What describes me best is just to say that I feel safe and happy with my husband in charge. I don't know why, and I don't really care why. I just do.

So, for me, it isn't so much a question of needing the control itself, as it is needing the feelings that the control produces. I hope that makes sense. As other people have said here, this is a very hard thing to put into words.

Alice

 

[babiesmiles]

What a beautiful post, Babiesmiles. Thank you so much for contributing it here.

I remember you saying on a different thread that your Dominant is the slow & steady kind, i.e. he takes his time developing the relationship. That's the way I am, too.

One of the benefits I see to the slow & steady approach is the opportunity to develop a closeness of the type you describe here, which as you say, has reciprocal benefits in & out of the bedroom.

Thank yoy JM both from Master and me

 

[Kajira Callista]

Nice to see you, anyway, KC.

What does fit, for you?

I don't really know until it is there in front of me. I guess i need to try it on to see what fits.

 

[Sprinkles22]

No. 2 is my pick. I seek His wisdom and maturity on matters beyond the bedroom, and I long for his comfort during 'every day' crisis .. not just after a scene.

We are more than D/s ... we are friends .... and as a friend, I need His counsel all of the time, not just some.

 

[BiBunny]

Ok, I think I've finally decided. While no one answer can really describe me, I'm going with No. 4. My service does not necessarily have to be simply following orders, but I picked it because I know I'll do anything to have Master pleased with me.

 

[JMohegan]

No. 2 is my pick. I seek His wisdom and maturity on matters beyond the bedroom, and I long for his comfort during 'every day' crisis .. not just after a scene.

We are more than D/s ... we are friends .... and as a friend, I need His counsel all of the time, not just some.

Ok, I think I've finally decided. While no one answer can really describe me, I'm going with No. 4. My service does not necessarily have to be simply following orders, but I picked it because I know I'll do anything to have Master pleased with me.

Thanks for responding, Sprinkles and BiBunny.

 

[JMohegan]

I don't really know until it is there in front of me. I guess i need to try it on to see what fits.

I agree that some wants and needs are impossible to determine unless or until you are in a specific relationship. These are, in essence, a reaction or response to an individual human being.

However, I believe that some wants and needs are independent of the person with whom you are interacting. Your response here seems to contradict that statement. Have I misunderstood your post?

 

[JMohegan]

I chose option one, although the statement "I have a need to be controlled outside the bedroom" is a little bit misleading in my case. One way to read it is to imply that my own self-control is somehow lacking, or that my behavior would otherwise be unacceptable to myself or to others, and I really don't think either of those statements is true.

What describes me best is just to say that I feel safe and happy with my husband in charge. I don't know why, and I don't really care why. I just do.

So, for me, it isn't so much a question of needing the control itself, as it is needing the feelings that the control produces. I hope that makes sense. As other people have said here, this is a very hard thing to put into words.

Yes, this makes sense to me.

In fact, like a hand in a comfortable glove, or two puzzle pieces that snap in place, this need is a wonderful match for my own.

The most cherished woman in my life used almost your exact words in describing her own needs in a relationship with me. Quite literally, start to finish, she said almost the exact same thing. Amazing.

Thank you so much, Alice, for writing this. I appreciate it very much.

 

[Kajira Callista]

I agree that some wants and needs are impossible to determine unless or until you are in a specific relationship. These are, in essence, a reaction or response to an individual human being.

However, I believe that some wants and needs are independent of the person with whom you are interacting. Your response here seems to contradict that statement. Have I misunderstood your post?

No... all I was trying to say is that I can't fit me into a general statement or choice.

 

[RJMasters]

No... all I was trying to say is that I can't fit me into a general statement or choice.

Drags KC by the hair and tries to stuff her in the general statement box.....

Jumps up and down on the lid trying to get it to close...admist her muffled ommffs and uugghhsss.

Not finding success I yank her out of that box and try to stuff her in the general choice box...

Puts my foot on her ass and shoves ..... Gets out paddle and tries to paddle her ass in to no avail.

Finally gives up puffing for breath....and she rolls out hair all a mess and in a heap of bruised flesh with this silly ass grin on her face.



I'll be damn she was right she just don't fit.

 

[JMohegan]

No... all I was trying to say is that I can't fit me into a general statement or choice.

Ahh, so I did misunderstand. Thanks for clarifying.

Several months ago, you listed some of your individual wants & needs on a different thread. Remember?

You also wrote: "I want to learn how to not feel guilty for having needs and wants. I need to learn how to stand up and say that this is the foundation that needs to be in place before I let that marble spin in the funnel."

Memory of that post explains my questions to you on this thread. And my response to you remains unchanged from what I wrote to you here.

 

[Kajira Callista]

Ahh, so I did misunderstand. Thanks for clarifying.

Several months ago, you listed some of your individual wants & needs on a different thread. Remember?

You also wrote: "I want to learn how to not feel guilty for having needs and wants. I need to learn how to stand up and say that this is the foundation that needs to be in place before I let that marble spin in the funnel."

Memory of that post explains my questions to you on this thread. And my response to you remains unchanged from what I wrote to you here.

I think that the foundation I was speaking of was a basic relationship-wise one. I dont remember though lol.
This prolly will get me a lot of rolly eyed smileys in reply but the one need i know i have is to feel safe and loved for all the things i am rather then in spite of.
I'm not a "play" type person and i do not like exposing my submissive self to just anyone.
So if safe and loved was a choice i would vote that and then about 5 other of your choices.

 

[Kajira Callista]

Drags KC by the hair and tries to stuff her in the general statement box.....

Jumps up and down on the lid trying to get it to close...admist her muffled ommffs and uugghhsss.

Not finding success I yank her out of that box and try to stuff her in the general choice box...

Puts my foot on her ass and shoves ..... Gets out paddle and tries to paddle her ass in to no avail.

Finally gives up puffing for breath....and she rolls out hair all a mess and in a heap of bruised flesh with this silly ass grin on her face.



I'll be damn she was right she just don't fit.

You are one silly Dom ya know

 

[alice_underneath]

Yes, this makes sense to me.

In fact, like a hand in a comfortable glove, or two puzzle pieces that snap in place, this need is a wonderful match for my own.

The most cherished woman in my life used almost your exact words in describing her own needs in a relationship with me. Quite literally, start to finish, she said almost the exact same thing. Amazing.

Thank you so much, Alice, for writing this. I appreciate it very much.

You're welcome, but... gracious, Mr. Mohegan. You certainly do know how to surprise a person.

Solipsistic.... I love that word. Reminds me of a quote from Zorba the Greek. I can't think of it off the top of my head, but I'll let you know if I find my copy of the book.

I pulled out my copy of the book, and found the quote that you might have been referring to in your post to SpectreT. Here you go.

"I don't believe in anything or anyone, only in Zorba. Not because Zorba is better than the others; not at all, not a little bit! He's a brute like the rest! But I believe in Zorba because he's the only being I have in my power, the only one I know. All the rest are ghosts. I see with these eyes, I hear with these ears, I digest with these guts. All the rest are ghosts, I tell you. When I die, everything'll die. The whole Zorbatic world will go to the bottom!"

- Nikos Kazantzakis
Zorba the Greek

 

[JMohegan]

I think that the foundation I was speaking of was a basic relationship-wise one. I dont remember though lol.
This prolly will get me a lot of rolly eyed smileys in reply but the one need i know i have is to feel safe and loved for all the things i am rather then in spite of.
I'm not a "play" type person and i do not like exposing my submissive self to just anyone.
So if safe and loved was a choice i would vote that and then about 5 other of your choices.

To refresh your memory, here is the post to which I was referring.

Thanks for taking the time to clarify your thoughts on this thread.

 

[JMohegan]

You're welcome, but... gracious, Mr. Mohegan. You certainly do know how to surprise a person.

I pulled out my copy of the book, and found the quote that you might have been referring to in your post to SpectreT. Here you go.

"I don't believe in anything or anyone, only in Zorba. Not because Zorba is better than the others; not at all, not a little bit! He's a brute like the rest! But I believe in Zorba because he's the only being I have in my power, the only one I know. All the rest are ghosts. I see with these eyes, I hear with these ears, I digest with these guts. All the rest are ghosts, I tell you. When I die, everything'll die. The whole Zorbatic world will go to the bottom!"

- Nikos Kazantzakis
Zorba the Greek

That's the one! Thank you, Alice. What a nice thing for you to do.

I am curious about something, but you should obviously feel free to decline answering the question below.

Why did my response surprise you?

 

[SpectreT]

<snip>

I pulled out my copy of the book, and found the quote that you might have been referring to in your post to SpectreT. Here you go.

"I don't believe in anything or anyone, only in Zorba. Not because Zorba is better than the others; not at all, not a little bit! He's a brute like the rest! But I believe in Zorba because he's the only being I have in my power, the only one I know. All the rest are ghosts. I see with these eyes, I hear with these ears, I digest with these guts. All the rest are ghosts, I tell you. When I die, everything'll die. The whole Zorbatic world will go to the bottom!"

- Nikos Kazantzakis
Zorba the Greek

... and a prettier way to sum up solipsism, you'll never find. A more succinct one was from several of Robert A. Heinlein's stories: "Sometimes she goes away, but I'm always right here." I don't recall if it was Lapis Lazuli Long or Lorelei Lee Long who dropped that nugget first, though.

And not to gripe, but I've yet to discover what thoughts, if any my clarification attempts in posts #27 and #33 of this thread may have prompted. Maybe because I edited #27 to include the clarification rather than putting it in a new post? (Yes, I'm fishing. )

 

[catalina_francisco]

I have glanced at this thread since its beginning, though have not participated due to a very busy schedule at the moment and a need to have time to consider my answer. On reflection, my initial response remains the same now in that the poll options do not remotely cover or come close to why I chose to seek a relationship where I would surrender all power and control on a 24/7 basis, and permanently.

Catalina

 

[JMohegan]

... and a prettier way to sum up solipsism, you'll never find. A more succinct one was from several of Robert A. Heinlein's stories: "Sometimes she goes away, but I'm always right here." I don't recall if it was Lapis Lazuli Long or Lorelei Lee Long who dropped that nugget first, though.

Hi, SpectreT.

Glad you liked the Kazantzakis, and lol @ Heinlein & Long.

And not to gripe, but I've yet to discover what thoughts, if any my clarification attempts in posts #27 and #33 of this thread may have prompted. Maybe because I edited #27 to include the clarification rather than putting it in a new post? (Yes, I'm fishing. )

Fish away. I'm happy to explain.

It can be quite difficult to have a meaningful conversation with people without even the most basic idea of where they are coming from. I've done a little bit of backreading on a few threads, but not nearly enough to put me on the same page as those who have been here for years.

The initial purpose of the thread, therefore, was not to debate but rather to learn about the different perspectives represented on this board. What is most fascinating to me is the wide range of interpretations of even the most commonly used words in the lifestyle lexicon. "Control" is a perfect example.

Given the purpose of the thread, I have been reluctant to comment on the different interpretations beyond giving various versions of: "Thanks for contributing". However, your latest post offers a useful segue to comparing and discussing the different meanings of "control".

Hang on, and I'll respond to your earlier posts next.

 

[JMohegan]

I know myself, and how I react to certain kinds of authority, which is to say badly. This is especially true in overt situations. Knee-jerk reaction is to tell someone where they can stick it, and whether or not it needs to go in sideways. And that doesn’t fit with a D/S dynamic.

I can relate to this part of your post. I react very, very poorly to being told what to do in a personal relationship. And if something is important to me, I don't even want to negotiate.

This is why I "accept control" in some areas outside the bedroom. Because otherwise I am pissed off, unhappy, and not likely to stick around longer than it takes to find the front door.

Am I capable of hanging that up, from a submissive standpoint? Sure. But I prefer such things be discussed long in advance, and anyone springing a surprise on me is likely to get a pretty big, unpleasant surprise themselves. (I’m a stereotypical Taurus; we’re cool as long as you stay frosty - push the bull, and you get the horns, sunshine. )

Also, the simple fact of being in even a Vanilla relationship means one or both partners cede authority in such things. It’s called compromise, and I can work that, no problem.

Here's where I have a different point of view, not just in relation to my personal preferences, but also with regard to the concept of ceding authority.

To me, ceding authority means giving up the right to negotiate or compromise. When I say I accept control over certain aspects of a relationship, that means that what I say goes. Sure, I'll listen to respectfully addressed opinions from a partner. But listening and compromising are very different things in my book.

We are talking semantics here (not right or wrong). But per my definition, a "Vanilla relationship" involves no ceding or accepting of control, either outside the bedroom or within it. That's why, indeed the only reason why, those relationships are non-D/s.

When I mentioned “springing a surprise on me”, I’m discussing a purely hypothetical situation, where, for example, “in the bedroom”, I’m perfectly fine with getting dressed up in a silly french maid costume, tied up and buttfucked silly. Then they expect me to do their windows as long as I'm dressed like that, even though nobody discussed domestic duties beforehand. That’s when they’d be informed they could get bent. (and a clear example of why I don’t believe in “implied consent” - heck, I’m in a maid costume, doesn’t that imply maid duties?)

This is an excellent example of the challenges involved in a relationship that is D/s in some areas, but not in others. The lines can blur easily, and one partner can easily overstep the bounds perceived by the other, without even intending to.

There are more layers of course, like maybe I need a “friendly reminder” to clean up the office or my workbench. That’s something I’d be cool with, even suggest it as an extension of other D/S. (Back to the maid costume... did someone push my “sissy” button when I wasn’t looking?)

Again, as a matter of semantics, I'll say that friendly reminders do not equate to control per my definition.... unless "friendly reminder" to you means that obedience is being demanded in response.

On the dominant side, I’m just not down with micromanaging. Kind of an extension of the “Golden Rule”, I suppose - I don’t react well to that sort of thing being pulled on me, why would I expect others to? I might suggest that a particular outfit isn’t going to work, say that “come fuck me” dress to meet the parents, but that’s about as controlling “outside the bedroom” as I’m comfortable with, generally speaking.

I do not micromanage a partner's attire, but I do have a few specific rules, such as - no turtlenecks or scarves, and nothing but an occasional, very thin & delicate, necklace worn in my presence.

These are not suggestions. They are rules that I expect to be obeyed. Failure to follow the rules is a sign of overt disobedience and disrespect, and therefore would place the entire D/s dynamic (and relationship) in jeopardy.

That's what "control" means to me.

 

[JMohegan]

To clarify my own position somewhat; There is some kind of threshold past which one role or the other feels confining, becomes an exhausting or onerous duty instead of a joyful expression of self. It's a kind of three dimensional model, if you can imagine it, with a finite volume in terms of the amount of power exchanged and amount of time it's exchanged over (x and y axes, being "in the bedroom" and "out of the bedroom", respectively, and z axis, being time in one role. God, I hope that made sense). If there's more power exchanged (area grows on x and y), the time available before it becomes a problem grows shorter (less area available on z), though even short term, for my purposes, is somewhere in the realm of a year. So, if it's confined to "bedroom only", as per the purposes of this discussion, I can stay on one end or the other of the power spectrum for longer than that amount of time; expand the role beyond "playtime", and my tolerance grows shorter.

I do not identify as a switch, so it is difficult for me to construct a meaningful response to this post. But I found this description fascinating.

 

[JMohegan]

I have glanced at this thread since its beginning, though have not participated due to a very busy schedule at the moment and a need to have time to consider my answer. On reflection, my initial response remains the same now in that the poll options do not remotely cover or come close to why I chose to seek a relationship where I would surrender all power and control on a 24/7 basis, and permanently.

Hi, Catalina.

If you put all the relationships in the world on a line with markings representing the amount of power exchanged (or control ceded/accepted) outside the bedroom, I am fairly certain that my position on that line would fall much closer to non-D/s relationships than to Master/slave relationships of the type you embrace.

For this reason, it does not surprise me in the slightest that I failed to include an option that even comes close to describing your needs in my poll.

If you have the time and interest in drafting one, I would be most interested to read a response in which you explain why you surrendered "all power and control on a 24/7 basis, and permanently".

 

[SpectreT]

I can relate to this part of your post. I react very, very poorly to being told what to do in a personal relationship. And if something is important to me, I don't even want to negotiate.

This is why I "accept control" in some areas outside the bedroom. Because otherwise I am pissed off, unhappy, and not likely to stick around longer than it takes to find the front door.

Different sheets of music, same composer, possibly even the same concerto, to drag the musical metaphor out.

Here's where I have a different point of view, not just in relation to my personal preferences, but also with regard to the concept of ceding authority.

To me, ceding authority means giving up the right to negotiate or compromise. When I say I accept control over certain aspects of a relationship, that means that what I say goes. Sure, I'll listen to respectfully addressed opinions from a partner. But listening and compromising are very different things in my book.

We are talking semantics here (not right or wrong). But per my definition, a "Vanilla relationship" involves no ceding or accepting of control, either outside the bedroom or within it. That's why, indeed the only reason why, those relationships are non-D/s.

And to me, all relationships I've ever seen have some elements of dominance and submission in them, even vanilla ones. Each partner finds their strength in the relationship, and that's what they do. The difference between what you're discussing and what I'm discussing is that negotiation or compromise take place before a particular facet of life is affected (and not ever revisited after that, kind of like any D/S negotiations before the fact - to some extent) - which can be subconsciously, or formally discussed. From my point of view, what makes one D/S and another Vanilla is that one is conscious of the dynamic from a certain point of view, the other isn't aware of it (the dynamic) at all.

A friend of mine is awful with money, for one example, so his wife handles the finances. She's got the first and last word on the money. He picks their furniture and vacation spots, because he's got the skills there. I consider that as much a case of "ceding or accepting control" as any overtly BDSM relationship, though if I talked about their relationship in terms of D/S dynamics to them, they'd both look at me like I'd slipped a cog. So we've got a difference of either opinion or experience and observation there. That's cool.

This is an excellent example of the challenges involved in a relationship that is D/s in some areas, but not in others. The lines can blur easily, and one partner can easily overstep the bounds perceived by the other, without even intending to.

It was also delivered with a dash of self-deprecating humor, which I've now balanced with this slightly egotistical comment.

Again, as a matter of semantics, I'll say that friendly reminders do not equate to control per my definition.... unless "friendly reminder" to you means that obedience is being demanded in response.

Hence the quotes around "friendly reminder". As in... "issued a friendly reminder with a two by four upside the head."

I do not micromanage a partner's attire, but I do have a few specific rules, such as - no turtlenecks or scarves, and nothing but an occasional, very thin & delicate, necklace worn in my presence.

These are not suggestions. They are rules that I expect to be obeyed. Failure to follow the rules is a sign of overt disobedience and disrespect, and therefore would place the entire D/s dynamic (and relationship) in jeopardy.

That's what "control" means to me.

The attire was a specific example, but not the be-all, end-all of my intent there. If I have one "dealbreaker" rule (and I think it's only one; potentially, anything else is negotiable - and I'm a stubborn negotiator), it's "Don't be an ass." As in rude, disrespectful... inappropriate... er, I think I'm communicating the idea.

 

[SpectreT]

I do not identify as a switch, so it is difficult for me to construct a meaningful response to this post. But I found this description fascinating.

It's also a clear example I spend too much time in my own head, and not out among people, taking chances, maybe building a life and finding and building a relationship...

 

[JMohegan]

From my point of view, what makes one D/S and another Vanilla is that one is conscious of the dynamic from a certain point of view, the other isn't aware of it (the dynamic) at all.

Now this is fascinating. (I don't mean that in a condescending or negative way. My comment was straight up.)

I need to run at the moment, but I'll think about this and respond more fully later on.

I've heard people say there is no such thing as non-BDSM sex, and I can definitely see the argument for that. But outside the bedroom is different. Again, fascinating. Thanks for giving me something to think about.

If I have one "dealbreaker" rule (and I think it's only one; potentially, anything else is negotiable - and I'm a stubborn negotiator), it's "Don't be an ass." As in rude, disrespectful... inappropriate... er, I think I'm communicating the idea.

Yes, I get the idea, and that's a dealbreaker for me, too. In fact, that is the essence of my example relating to control over attire.

I care about seeing her neck; that's why those attire rules are in place.

But if the rule is broken, the view of the neck becomes superficial and meaningless.

It's not the obstructed view, but the disobedience and disrespect for clear instructions that kills the deal.