I know I will regret this..................

[@}-}rebecca----]

Now you are passing outside the realm of my personal experience. Perhaps if you give me tangible, non-sexual examples of the Dom's "desires" being served in this context it would help.

Ohh Alice why do you always ask the questions often most difficult for me to define. It can be doing things and also not doing things. The point is what you do when its feasible in reality to do so is 'mindful' to what you are aware will satisfy him at some level. From very simple right through to quite intricate. Small example might be you know he is returning home after a situation which has been stressful to him. There are a myriad of options of service that express devotion on his return. The point is you don't go with the cliche that says I am devoted and here to serve you (unless of course it is in fact the answer) you fight that urge and go with what to the best of your knowledge pleases him. Fussing favorite foods etc may not be the answer (rough example) it might be as simple being organised and sitting very quietly and listening to Him. Listening , really listening . It may be the act it self of just centering there. Every Dominant I have served have been quite different, each one loved that I could settle and listen or maybe that just because I shut up for a change...lol. Before others here start mentioning sexual pursuits as more immediate answers please remember the point of this is to look at the things that exist outside of that more obvious (yet delightful) realm.

 

[alice_underneath]

Ohh Alice why do you always ask the questions often most difficult for me to define. It can be doing things and also not doing things. The point is what you do when its feasible in reality to do so is 'mindful' to what you are aware will satisfy him at some level. From very simple right through to quite intricate. Small example might be you know he is returning home after a situation which has been stressful to him. There are a myriad of options of service that express devotion on his return. The point is you don't go with the cliche that says I am devoted and here to serve you (unless of course it is in fact the answer) you fight that urge and go with what to the best of your knowledge pleases him. Fussing favorite foods etc may not be the answer (rough example) it might be as simple being organised and sitting very quietly and listening to Him. Listening , really listening . It may be the act it self of just centering there. Every Dominant I have served have been quite different, each one loved that I could settle and listen or maybe that just because I shut up for a change...lol. Before others here start mentioning sexual pursuits as more immediate answers please remember the point of this is to look at the things that exist outside of that more obvious (yet delightful) realm.

Hi, Rebecca.

Thanks for the response.

So far, what you are describing does not seem too different from vanilla relationships. (I actually hate the term "vanilla", but it is less cumbersome than any alternatives I can come up with. * sigh * )

What I mean to say is that, in my personal range of experience, you are describing types of behavior that I not only recognize but have practiced repeatedly throughout my life. I am not saying that I am unusual here. Rather, I am saying that this sounds like the normal way for a loving and attentive SO to behave in the mainstream or non-D/s world.

Alice

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

If physical displays of intimacy ("sex", per the all-encompassing definition that we agreed to, above) were no longer possible (for whatever reason)... would that "void the relationship"?

My immediate and firm answer to the question above is no. Thinking back over the years and considering the possibility that displays of intimacy were no longer available would not have changed the core of feeling 'owned' there is no way in the World it would void a relationship to me either. Perhaps in a way it plays into a slightly masochistic side that in your submission that going without intimacy when you clearly desire it in sincere grace shows yet another devotion, I have experienced this first hand with Dominant companion of mine. . I have no wish to go into the specifics past this point and I know you will respect that. I would be a liar to say I still didn't crave our intimate life as it initially had been but I can assure you 100% the lack of it never voided our companionship.

 

[alice_underneath]

In this kind of thing, it's hard for me to conceive of a non-sexual relationship in the broad way that's been specified- the merest demand for obedience and the resulting compliance is sexual. While simple dominance and submission are not necessarily sexual, it seems to me that in the 'lifestyle' context, they are inherently sexualized, even if no physical contact or orgasms take place. When assertive and compliant become Dominance and Submission, I think there's something sexual going on.

These comments remind me of a post by RJMasters, on his thread "The Way to a Dominant's Heart":

Nothing gets "my attention" more than when a submissive submits.

There is nothing more "beautiful" than when a submissive submits.

Nothing "turns me on" more than when a submissive submits.

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=295268&page=1&pp=25

 

[alice_underneath]

I have no wish to go into the specifics past this point and I know you will respect that. I would be a liar to say I still didn't crave our intimate life as it initially had been but I can assure you 100% the lack of it never voided our companionship.

Thank you, Rebecca, for offering an explanation that I am certain was difficult to write.

Once again, I would say that the exact same dynamic holds true in a loving vanilla relationship. The physical intimacy would be mourned on both sides, but the companionship - the emotional intimacy - would not be voided.

Alice

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

Hi, Rebecca.

Thanks for the response.

So far, what you are describing does not seem too different from vanilla relationships. (I actually hate the term "vanilla", but it is less cumbersome than any alternatives I can come up with. * sigh * )

What I mean to say is that, in my personal range of experience, you are describing types of behavior that I not only recognize but have practiced repeatedly throughout my life. I am not saying that I am unusual here. Rather, I am saying that this sounds like the normal way for a loving and attentive SO to behave in the mainstream or non-D/s world.

Alice

Think you are correct Miss Alice. There is definitely a degree of submissive dynamic in 'vanilla' relationships on the part of most woman. Therefore what I have described is not magical Ds formula just a simple truth really. This of course can vary......lol. I have friends that love their husbands but at the same time might say ' he needs to get the hell over it, my day sucked and was ...................' . Perhaps Miss Alice that's just not your 'style' huh . *coughssubmissive. Where the difference comes into it is that the relationship is between a submissive and a Dominant. There is a certain finesse to the balance . We are human, there will be times when a submissive can really struggle to be whats best and even fail completely BUT in my experience 'advising' ones Dominant your 'off duty' to their needs because you think 'your day sucked worse and he needs to get over it' is not in my repertoire........grins.

BTW I hear you in regards to the term 'vanilla' Miss Alice. The angriest I have ever been in my life with a Dominant was a few years back. We were having a conversation and I challenged a particular fetish he was discussing as being freaky or something equally disparaging. He then commented that was a particularly 'vanilla' thing to say. I was seething with offence...lol...refused to speak to him for awhile. He had to coax me to talk to him again , I am happy I did, we remain friends and I learnt a little something about myself that day.

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

However, this is a neat trick to narrow the participants to those that have slogged through the original topic and continue to find something interesting going on, so I have no complaints.

Purple Sage first may I say happy to see your still 'onboard' here . I will however refute that the evolution of this thread has been a preempted 'trick'. I rarely think that far in advance and its more manipulative in its context than I can take credit for. When I first read your comment I took it as a compliment in hindsite its one I cannot 'own'.

The Thread now has become comforting and my intentions are to keep it welcoming to ALL and with Madama's assitence throw out the occasional question when things become 'quiet'. Hopefully others here at the BB will find it find it enjoyable as much as I have.

 

[alice_underneath]

*coughssubmissive.

Flattery will get you everywhere with me, Miss Rebecca.

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

I've been in a 'training' relationship with a sub before, which was significantly more emotional and experiential than the typical 'mentoring' relationship. In this kind of thing, it's hard for me to conceive of a non-sexual relationship in the broad way that's been specified- the merest demand for obedience and the resulting compliance is sexual.

Purple Sage I note you say the 'training' relationship was 'experiental' .Are you saying there was sexual training within the "Mentoring' relationship ?

While simple dominance and submission are not necessarily sexual, it seems to me that in the 'lifestyle' context, they are inherently sexualized, even if no physical contact or orgasms take place. When assertive and compliant become Dominance and Submission, I think there's something sexual going on.

Thank you for expressing this the way you have. I have really struggled on this topic to articulate the 'sexualized' dynamics . Its a very strong current that flows back and forth in my opinion and direct experience. Not sure I am correct but I read another submissives words on another thread where she was trying to articulate the same with varying degrees of sucess. Her frustration was almost tangible to me.

The Exception
Alice asked this above and I was getting to it though as we are on topic here........ I have one Ds relationship currently that does not encompass any form of sexuality . My formal Mentorship by Lady Kouka . I do submit to Her, I respect Her but I can assure you there is absolutely no sexual or even 'sexualized' context to our relationship. So the fact remains some Lifestyle orientated Ds relationships can and do exist without sex.

 

[MadamaMiniTopic]

Ohiyo lovely people its good to see you all talking and playing 'nicely'.Hope you all have prosperous day .

~ bows ~​

 

[alice_underneath]

Purple Sage I note you say the 'training' relationship was 'experiental' .Are you saying there was sexual training within the "Mentoring' relationship ?

Thank you for expressing this the way you have. I have really struggled on this topic to articulate the 'sexualized' dynamics . Its a very strong current that flows back and forth in my opinion and direct experience. Not sure I am correct but I read another submissives words on another thread where she was trying to articulate the same with varying degrees of sucess. Her frustration was almost tangible to me.

The Exception
Alice asked this above and I was getting to it though as we are on topic here........ I have one Ds relationship currently that does not encompass any form of sexuality . My formal Mentorship by Lady Kouka . I do submit to Her, I respect Her but I can assure you there is absolutely no sexual or even 'sexualized' context to our relationship. So the fact remains some Lifestyle orientated Ds relationships can and do exist without sex.

This response raises still more questions in my mind, Miss Rebecca! You have been so kind in responding to so many of the things I ask, and I am reluctant to impose on you yet again.

Let me therefore begin by saying that I offer these questions primarily as a means of continuing the flow of a conversation. Please do not feel compelled to answer promptly, or even at all. [And as a side note, I will mention that I am on the way out the door at the moment and will not be back until much later tonight or perhaps tomorrow.]

My new questions may be divided into two categories.


#1. If I understand your comments correctly, Rebecca, you are currently submitting BOTH to a male Dominant and to a female Mentor at the same time. This idea confuses me to a very considerable degree.

Is there a hierarchy involved in this type of situation? Does one person's instructions trump the other's? Do you view yourself as relinquishing your will in part to one and in part to the other?

I have been viewing the idea of personal submission as an extremely intimate one-on-one concept. To tell you the truth, the idea of submitting to two people at once makes me realize (even more than usual ) that I have no idea about what's really going on!

LOL - the good news is that I enjoy laughing at myself, and am doing so now!


#2. You seem to be answering Madama's question by saying that a Mentor/mentee relationship can be a D/s relationship without sex, but a Dom/sub relationship is one in which a strong sexual current is present - even if, for whatever reason, no sexual contact is possible. (If I got that wrong, please let me know.)

I find myself wondering, however, if the sexual current would be absent from your Mentor relationship if Lady Kouka were a guy and your current Dom did not exist. That is to say, without an outlet for your sexual energy in a Dom/sub relationship, don't you think it's possible that your submission to a Mentor figure could involve sexual urges as well?

Thank you again, Rebecca, for taking the time to answer so many of my questions. I appreciate it very much, and am enjoying the discussion a great deal.

Alice

 

[FurryFury]

I know I'm going to regret saying this but, to me, a mentor relationship doesn't have to involve actual physical sex.

*sighs*

That was hard.

I think I'll go rest now.

Fury

 

[alice_underneath]

I know I'm going to regret saying this but, to me, a mentor relationship doesn't have to involve actual physical sex.

*sighs*

That was hard.

I think I'll go rest now.

Fury

LOL! Hi, Fury.

I am late and need to dash off, but I wanted to clarify first that, for the purpose of this discussion, we have defined "sex" as:

sexual contact of any kind - i.e., everything from light kisses to full penetration - including virtual, phone, or 3-D versions of the same.

Further, my inital point on this subject was essentially that the absence of sex (even as broadly defined here) does not necessarily mean the absence of sexual urges. Rebecca made reference to a sexual "current" which seems to me to be a good word for it.

Just wanted to make sure we are all on the same page....

Alice

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

I know I'm going to regret saying this but, to me, a mentor relationship doesn't have to involve actual physical sex.

*sighs*

That was hard.

I think I'll go rest now.

Fury

awwwww hugs Miss Fury

Good for you for saying it !!!! Happens I agree However if I didn't it would be a mere opinion and one that I would hope would grow by continued conversation with you and others.

In best practice a Mentor has no more place incorporating sex into the relationship anymore than any other 'Teacher' would. Its just not done.
There is an abuse of power going on within the dynamic when a Teacher interacts with a student in that manner.

I have asked Lady Kouka to comment on her opinions of Mentorship. She said she will. I will defer any further comment in this regard to her.

Ohhh and Miss Fury how did the honeymoon cottage go and is that why you need to rest huh all those 's . I sincerely hope so.

 

[FurryFury]

When I had an online Dom, I actually considered him in a way, my BDSM mentor because he was teaching me so much. I really, really loved it while it lasted.

Things went very well at the honeymoon cottage. Thanks for asking Rebecca! Going to that place has been a long time (at least 20 years in the making) dream of mine. That is most certainly part of why I feel so drained and tired. I'm a very happy little girl. *grins*

The roses were to my eye, rather "virginally" pink. I love the delicious irony of the pain that could be and was inflicted with them. *winks*

Fury

 

[Purple Sage]

Purple Sage I note you say the 'training' relationship was 'experiental' .Are you saying there was sexual training within the "Mentoring' relationship ?





Thank you for expressing this the way you have. I have really struggled on this topic to articulate the 'sexualized' dynamics . Its a very strong current that flows back and forth in my opinion and direct experience. Not sure I am correct but I read another submissives words on another thread where she was trying to articulate the same with varying degrees of sucess. Her frustration was almost tangible to me.

The Exception
Alice asked this above and I was getting to it though as we are on topic here........ I have one Ds relationship currently that does not encompass any form of sexuality . My formal Mentorship by Lady Kouka . I do submit to Her, I respect Her but I can assure you there is absolutely no sexual or even 'sexualized' context to our relationship. So the fact remains some Lifestyle orientated Ds relationships can and do exist without sex.

I intentionally refrained from calling it a 'mentoring' relationship. I, and from what I've observed, most people, see mentoring as a hands-off, advice and insight giving kind of operation. Training is altogether different. It's about instilling habits and patterns of perception and response. It's inherently action oriented.
Though of course YMMV, I would not consider 'submission' to be an aspect of a mentoring relationship. It is, however, inherent in a training relationship, even though within sharply delineated bounds. What I was getting at in my earlier post, though, was that whatever those bounds are, if the dynamic of dominance and submission is actually in play, and the people involved are actually dominant and submissive in nature, I believe it is inescapably sexualized. People can go through the motions without engendering any of the emotions of dominance or submission, but I would suggest that this is acting, not training. It might be educational, but education and training are rather different things also.

I don't know what you refer to as 'submitting' to Lady Kouka consists of, so I can't offer an opinion on whether it's what I would think of as submission, myself. That doesn't, of course, place any limits on what you're free to think of as submission, but I suspect our different views on the original (?) question hinge on this.

 

[Purple Sage]

I know I'm going to regret saying this but, to me, a mentor relationship doesn't have to involve actual physical sex.

*sighs*

That was hard.

I think I'll go rest now.

Fury

I'd suggest that they usually don't. In fact, many people regard mentor-with-sex relationships as exploitive.

 

[Purple Sage]

double post... oops.

 

[Purple Sage]

I have been viewing the idea of personal submission as an extremely intimate one-on-one concept. To tell you the truth, the idea of submitting to two people at once makes me realize (even more than usual ) that I have no idea about what's really going on!

Alice

D/s comes in many flavors. If you look at Gor, for example, there are quite a few 'houses' that treat slaves in a very commoditized way- they are used communally, traded, etc. It's not a 'romantic' relationship pepped up with submission, it's a relationship of it's own kind.
The model you seem to have assumed is more of a romantic one, in fact, one could see it as romance taken to an extreme. In that sense, it's not all that different from the romantic model of vanilla relationships- unless the sex is kinkier. If you do a little research you'll find D/s relationships modelled on all kinds of different images- Leave-it-to-Beaver 50's households, traditional Biblical marriage, BDSM lit like Story of O or The Marketplace, owners and pets, Daddy/little girl, and on and on. In some the paraphilia is vastly more important than the individuals involved, in others not so much.

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

I intentionally refrained from calling it a 'mentoring' relationship. I, and from what I've observed, most people, see mentoring as a hands-off, advice and insight giving kind of operation. Training is altogether different. It's about instilling habits and patterns of perception and response. It's inherently action oriented.
Though of course YMMV, I would not consider 'submission' to be an aspect of a mentoring relationship. It is, however, inherent in a training relationship, even though within sharply delineated bounds. What I was getting at in my earlier post, though, was that whatever those bounds are, if the dynamic of dominance and submission is actually in play, and the people involved are actually dominant and submissive in nature, I believe it is inescapably sexualized. People can go through the motions without engendering any of the emotions of dominance or submission, but I would suggest that this is acting, not training. It might be educational, but education and training are rather different things also.

Thank You Purple Sage for clarifying the point for me . I do understand 'Mentoring' first hand but as far as 'Training' is concerned my experiences of such are by the Masters/Dominants/Companions I have served directly. I have read of 'Trainers' in both fiction and non fiction. I have remained curious to what might be entailed. Have you trained for another Dominant to their personal specifications or do you see a level of service standard in submissives that can be enhanced generally. I also wonder whats in it for you. That question sounds perhaps affronting but I relish to hear first hand your opinion on the subject. If you detect a slight tone of hazard with me its there on this topic. Twice as a submissive 'taking a break' while I continued my general education I have been approached by 'Dominant Trainers' offering me the opportunity to be interviewed by a panel for placement in very hush hush secretive Institutions . I remained polite but declined thinking perhaps the only reality of such places would in fact be for people gullible enough to really consider an Instituion .......smiles. There was initally excessive flattery as to why I was so unique and how that had been observed etc etc. Alarm bells went off. Reminds me of why you warn children not to get in the car with the stranger that offers candy.

Will reply in regards to submission within Mentorship when I return later. Have a dinner date in the city with my Dad. No its not a Daddy Dom......lol..its my father. Be well @}-}rebecca----

 

[FurryFury]

I'd suggest that they usually don't. In fact, many people regard mentor-with-sex relationships as exploitive.

Then, if that is so, to the right person I'd say, please exploit me!

The relationship I spoke of earlier was a D/s one but because he was teaching me so much, training me so well and giving me great hope, I sometimes thought of him as my BDSM mentor or guide. I didn't tell him that. At least I don't think that I did.

There were in fact, sexual aspects involved for me. I simply loved every aspect of it until he went away.

Fury

 

[Purple Sage]

Thank You Purple Sage for clarifying the point for me . I do understand 'Mentoring' first hand but as far as 'Training' is concerned my experiences of such are by the Masters/Dominants/Companions I have served directly. I have read of 'Trainers' in both fiction and non fiction. I have remained curious to what might be entailed. Have you trained for another Dominant to their personal specifications or do you see a level of service standard in submissives that can be enhanced generally. I also wonder whats in it for you. That question sounds perhaps affronting but I relish to hear first hand your opinion on the subject. If you detect a slight tone of hazard with me its there on this topic. Twice as a submissive 'taking a break' while I continued my general education I have been approached by 'Dominant Trainers' offering me the opportunity to be interviewed by a panel for placement in very hush hush secretive Institutions . I remained polite but declined thinking perhaps the only reality of such places would in fact be for people gullible enough to really consider an Instituion .......smiles. There was initally excessive flattery as to why I was so unique and how that had been observed etc etc. Alarm bells went off. Reminds me of why you warn children not to get in the car with the stranger that offers candy.

Will reply in regards to submission within Mentorship when I return later. Have a dinner date in the city with my Dad. No its not a Daddy Dom......lol..its my father. Be well @}-}rebecca----

Well, there's all sorts of crap going around under a lot of different names. I don't belong to a group with a chateau in France or anything- I simply met someone interested in D/s/BDSM with whom I didn't wish to pursue a bonded relationship, but who desired an experiential introduction into BDSM. We talked about what her interests were, I gave her my views, we sketched out some general parameters and spent a few months in this educational pursuit. It wasn't a matter of pursuing a particular skill, as 'training' is often used in the vanilla world, but of experiencing the process of training itself- of having some habits and perceptions altered in a domination/submission process. Some of these were about sexuality in a direct sense, others about manners, others about lifestyle issues (not lifestyle in the BDSM sense).
What was in it for me: it's a process I enjoy, I liked the girl, it refined my own skills and understandings, we had fun together. It was helpful to me to have the experience without the baggage of a strong emotional attachment, as it allowed me to observe the process more objectively.

 

[Purple Sage]

Then, if that is so, to the right person I'd say, please exploit me!

The relationship I spoke of earlier was a D/s one but because he was teaching me so much, training me so well and giving me great hope, I sometimes thought of him as my BDSM mentor or guide. I didn't tell him that. At least I don't think that I did.

There were in fact, sexual aspects involved for me. I simply loved every aspect of it until he went away.

Fury

I'm not sure I understand the character of this relationship- was it an affective BDSM relationship that included teaching, training and guidance, or a primarily educational relationship that included sex and spankings? I'm not judging either way, as long as it worked for you, I'm just unclear.

 

[alice_underneath]

I have been viewing the idea of personal submission as an extremely intimate one-on-one concept.

The model you seem to have assumed is more of a romantic one, in fact, one could see it as romance taken to an extreme. In that sense, it's not all that different from the romantic model of vanilla relationships- unless the sex is kinkier.

For a heterosexual submissive woman, the difference between being in a vanilla relationship and a D/s one is the absence (or presence) of a Dominant male. The entire dynamic is profoundly different, in many ways that have absolutely nothing to do with kinky sex.

A woman can be eager to please, willing to serve, yearning for direction, etc. But if her partner does not have the desire or ability to direct, guide, control, et al, every single aspect of their relationship will differ from the D/s type.

As for the idea that "submission as an extremely intimate one-on-one concept" implies "romance taken to an extreme" - well, in a way I suppose you are right. Sexuality is, for me, intensely private. I would not offer my body to a man if I did not respect, trust, and - yes - love him. The same is true (for me) for submission in the D/s sense. I am not talking about submitting because it sounds hot to be tied up and spanked. I am talking about a profoundly meaningful and intense connection with another human being. The freedom to explore my own sexuality under his direction is just one piece of the entire dynamic.

In a BDSM culture that celebrates play parties, elaborate public scenes, and pyls who want to be used in any way their Master sees fit (including being used by others), I realize that what I am saying does sound like it is on the "extreme" end of the spectrum of sexuality. I also realize that this type of attitude would inspire few (if any) votes in a "Most Desirable Sub" contest. But I can't change the way I am simply because the prevailing culture finds something else more desirable.

If you do a little research you'll find D/s relationships modelled on all kinds of different images- Leave-it-to-Beaver 50's households, traditional Biblical marriage, BDSM lit like Story of O or The Marketplace, owners and pets, Daddy/little girl, and on and on. In some the paraphilia is vastly more important than the individuals involved, in others not so much.

Perhaps this is not what you meant to imply, but I am not interested in role play. That is to say, I think role play could be fun within the confines of an intimate relationship, but the relationship itself would not be described that way.

Alice

 

[PathFinder17]

Please excuse me for asking what is surely a very basic question.

Terminology is frequently confusing to me - possibly because many people seem to employ different definitions or concepts, but mostly because I have no experience and access to very little information other than what I read on this board.

My question is: what do you mean when you refer to "a Ds Lifestyle"? I understand from your earlier comments that your particular flavor of dominance involves the urge to direct, guide, and nurture your submissive. But does the "lifestyle" label indicate anything else?
Alice

Alice,

Terminology can be confusing, just as words to convey feelings or concepts (which are inherently abstract) always fix something to a concrete thing, which is usually why differences occur. My view of what "lifestyle" means is how it is for me personally, I'm not saying it's in any way "better" that any other way people incorporate D/s, it's really just my view.

By D/s lifestyle, I refer to the part that D/s has in my life. I would say that D/s for me is not a pursuit or an occassional thing, it is an inherent part of myself which pervades me and to some degree my life. It is a constant thing, not a distinct and somehow discrete behaviour of mine.