PYL knows best?

[Stella_Omega]

But I have a relationship. There are dominant and submissive aspects to every relationship. Maybe I have a cat in the fight. Or an anchovy.

I think it's more of a switch relationship, really. There are times when he will unquestioningly defer to me and the reverse is also true.

Um, no... That's not how D/s relationships are supposed to work...

Don't get me wrong, I don't do D/s in relationshippy ways. I'm a sadomasochist. But I know plenty people who consider themselves partners in a specifically D/s way, and that way that doesn't include switching.

Not switching is the point. It's pretty important to D/s types. You have to at least respect the fact that it's important-- even if you have reservations about the feasibility of such relationships.

 

[Recidiva]

However you define your relationship is fine with me.

I say that without a trace of snark, or disagreement.

My control issues can't deal with a relationship like yours, but so what? I'm not in your relationship, so it really doesn't matter.

And however you define yours is fine with me too. This is really more about comparing symbols.

You're in a relationship where you've both decided that you decide.

I'm in a relationship where we've both decided we both decide.

As long as you both are happy with the decisions, as long as it's consensual, it's all about that.

You had a starting point to all things where you both used egalitarian consent to determine the rest of the relationship.

I have a continuing starting point where we both determine who is dominant and who is submissive on each issue.

 

[Recidiva]

Um, no... That's not how D/s relationships are supposed to work...

Don't get me wrong, I don't do D/s in relationshippy ways. I'm a sadomasochist. But I know plenty people who consider themselves partners in a specifically D/s way, and that way that doesn't include switching.

Not switching is the point. It's pretty important to D/s types. You have to at least respect the fact that it's important-- even if you have reservations about the feasibility of such relationships.

D/s relationships are as different as the D's and the s's involved. Just like regular relationships.

It works the way they say it works, or it doesn't work even though they've decided it should.

I get what you're saying, but in practice, it's like saying "That's not what a Christian thinks" when there are any number of ways to take faith literally or loosely or discard it all together and call it something else.

I do respect the difference. I don't actually have reservations about those relationships. I've seen several work like a charm. I've even been in some. I've also seen those relationships toss out with both hands, lots of the conventions that don't work for them. Or, the ability to make their own rules and defend 'em to the death.

JMohegan's going to be entirely different in practice than Nezatch, but I wouldn't consider either of them disqualified if they do or don't have switch holidays or exceptions or prohibitions.

I consider aspects of my own relationship to be much more lawless and less comforting. It's not going to proceed as planned, as there's no plan yet.

A D/s contract can be a very comforting thing. It can also be a very restrictive thing when what's required is flexibility. A vanilla contract can be very open-ended and negotiable, but can also have real pitfalls where nobody takes responsibility for something that desperately needs someone in charge.

So whatever works, GOOD.

 

[Netzach]

At least for me, I think that means you're more in charge. I respect the smartness. I respect those that respect the smartness.

What makes being the decider more powerful than being the one with the good idea or the capacity to execute the idea?

But what the hell, I'm vanilla.

I've made a Type-B Dominant thread somewhere in the years I've been here. We're not very well represented mostly because we're busy not sweating it.

 

[Netzach]

I agree. I don't think it should be redefined for that reason.

My control issues are rather, shall we say, pronounced! But that doesn't mean I never agree with a suggestion, acknowledge a reasonable request, or even defer to a partner's judgment when doing so makes sense. That's just silly.

Yep. But that never stopped the D/s community much.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I've made a Type-B Dominant thread somewhere in the years I've been here. We're not very well represented mostly because we're busy not sweating it.

If I were to be a Dom, I'd have to be a type-B Dom.

 

[midwestyankee]

I've made a Type-B Dominant thread somewhere in the years I've been here. We're not very well represented mostly because we're busy not sweating it.

[pulls the fading memory card]

Could we get a quickie definition of Type B Dominant? [/card]

 

[Netzach]

If I were to be a Dom, I'd have to be a type-B Dom.

My relationship looks suspiciously vanilla with arguing and nagging and concessions right up to the point where something non-negotiably completely MATTERS to me and then it goes how I want and this allows me to be OK in it.

 

[Recidiva]

I've made a Type-B Dominant thread somewhere in the years I've been here. We're not very well represented mostly because we're busy not sweating it.

Heh. Yeah. Pick your battles in representation. There's a point that if it's only your partner who agrees with what you're into, who the hell cares beyond that.

Could you explain Type-B? I'm assuming that it's a Type A personality and Type B personality thing, but I don't want to be wrong about that if there's a specific usage here I don't know.

As usual I'm split on the A's and B's myself. I'm type A if it comes to the pronounciation of the word "nuclear" and type B on whether or not Pluto is really a planet..

 

[Netzach]

[pulls the fading memory card]

Could we get a quickie definition of Type B Dominant? [/card]

Type B personality. Go with flow, ohmmmm, que sera sera. Let other people manage the details while you're a visionary dammit, with ideas. Good ones. I can eat mac and cheese from a box or grass fed from 20.21 and both are outta sight in their own ways. When asked "what do you want" will 90 percent of the time ask "what do you want" not out of deference but out of recognition that most people care more than you do about the small stuff.

Basically I have really wide parameters for "acceptable behavior" from others, but when toes are stepped on watch out.

 

[Stella_Omega]

If my partner really does or doesn't want to do something I tend to let them make that choice.

That's why I don't call myself a dominant.

On the other hand, if I'm bottoming you had damn well better respect my choices-- which is why I don't call myself a sub, either.

 

[Recidiva]

If my partner really does or doesn't want to do something I tend to let them make that choice.

That's why I don't call myself a dominant.

On the other hand, if I'm bottoming you had damn well better respect my choices-- which is why I don't call myself a sub, either.

Yeah, depending on my mood, I never know if I'm going to spit out a "meh, okay" or rain down wrathful fire.

It's a capricious and unpredictable sort of thing. I think that's why my system depends on unpredictability and capriciousness being okay.

I also tend to pick up interests with obsessive fervor and then drop them like leftover cold potatoes weeks or months later and never want to speak of it again. Husband and I share that trait, actually. So we can sorta sympathize when someone absolutely MUST learn how to shoot a gun, make cheese, make mead, get a motorcycle...just to name a few recent obsessions. If we're lucky, someone's in a meh mood when someone else is in a wrathful obsessive mood and it works out okay.

 

[midwestyankee]

Type B personality. Go with flow, ohmmmm, que sera sera. Let other people manage the details while you're a visionary dammit, with ideas. Good ones. I can eat mac and cheese from a box or grass fed from 20.21 and both are outta sight in their own ways. When asked "what do you want" will 90 percent of the time ask "what do you want" not out of deference but out of recognition that most people care more than you do about the small stuff.

Basically I have really wide parameters for "acceptable behavior" from others, but when toes are stepped on watch out.

Thanks. I'm much more a que syrah, syrah; whatever chablis, chablis kind of guy I guess.

Until I'm in my space with her and then my word is the burning bush.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Yeah, depending on my mood, I never know if I'm going to spit out a "meh, okay" or rain down wrathful fire.

It's a capricious and unpredictable sort of thing. I think that's why my system depends on unpredictability and capriciousness being okay.

I also tend to pick up interests with obsessive fervor and then drop them like leftover cold potatoes weeks or months later and never want to speak of it again. Husband and I share that trait, actually. So we can sorta sympathize when someone absolutely MUST learn how to shoot a gun, make cheese, make mead, get a motorcycle...just to name a few recent obsessions.

Someone said I have whims of steel, so i get that

If we're lucky, someone's in a meh mood when someone else is in a wrathful obsessive mood and it works out okay.

This is why you are not in a D/s place. Subs will tell you that they are always in the meh place, in all circumstances. That's why they call themselves "subs."

 

[Recidiva]

Someone said I have whims of steel, so i get that This is why you are not in a D/s place. Subs will tell you that they are always in the meh place, in all circumstances. That's why they call themselves "subs."

I get the whims of steel thing.

I can't really do the subbier than thou thing. However someone wants to define themselves is cool. Just don't set someone else's definition. If someone is 98% sub and 2% Dom, are they disqualified? Is anybody who sets a hard limit disqualified? My definitions just range further, I guess. And I apply them situationally as well instead of globally.

Most people end up in sub places and Dom places throughout their life and it's about how they choose to present and express that. I'm thrilled for people who make it work together.

 

[eastern sun]

Subs will tell you that they are always in the meh place, in all circumstances. That's why they call themselves "subs."

Is this really true? I know a fair amount of submissives who are quite obsessive themselves.

Like me, for instance. The only thing is I've agreed to put whatever is my current obsession down when called upon to do/think about something else by my partner. And often, the mere fact that I'm obsessed earns me a switch in focus.

It isn't that I'm in the meh place in all circumstances; it's that I take all that obsessive energy and then turn it in the direction he wants me to look.

Or I'm just meh and it bores him as much as it bores me.

 

[Keroin]

Is this really true? I know a fair amount of submissives who are quite obsessive themselves.

Like me, for instance. The only thing is I've agreed to put whatever is my current obsession down when called upon to do/think about something else by my partner. And often, the mere fact that I'm obsessed earns me a switch in focus.

It isn't that I'm in the meh place in all circumstances; it's that I take all that obsessive energy and then turn it in the direction he wants me to look.

Or I'm just meh and it bores him as much as it bores me.

Hey, ES, I have a question...

*And I have to say that I'm more than a bit gun-shy about asking questions of individuals in M/s relationships anymore since more than once my questions have been considered offensive or 'attacking'. So if you find that is the case, you have my apologies in advance*

Anyway, you agreed with OSG's statement earlier but you directed your husband in a play. And even if that was at his behest, you were still guiding (directing him) in that capacity. If memory serves, you talked about how you tried one style of directing that caused him to basically shut down/rebel, so you tried another style and that brought out a good performance.

So, didn't you guide him, in that instance, in order to help him achieve his goal? To help him be his best?

Again if this question is way out of line, ignore it. I'm about at my limit for being the bad guy these days.

 

[graceanne]

K relies in me for my cooler head. I make most phone calls to utility companies and the like because I'm less likely to tell them to go fuck themselves. I do all of his editing and most of his research because I'm more literate and better with google. I'm also less likely to fall for get rich quick schemes because I'm naturally skeptical and understand the small print.

Beyond that, I make almost all the decisions when it comes to the kids. I have more experience as a parent, and I have very good instincts.

If you ask him he'll say I taught him about grace and forgiveness. He also loves that I keep him involved with the community and in out reaches to help people. He says that without me, he'd just sit at home and not have a clue about what's going on in people's lives. I think that's the nicest thing anyone has ever said, especially since I wouldn't consider myself a crusader or anything like that. lol

 

[Stella_Omega]

Is this really true? I know a fair amount of submissives who are quite obsessive themselves.

Like me, for instance. The only thing is I've agreed to put whatever is my current obsession down when called upon to do/think about something else by my partner. And often, the mere fact that I'm obsessed earns me a switch in focus.

It isn't that I'm in the meh place in all circumstances; it's that I take all that obsessive energy and then turn it in the direction he wants me to look.

Or I'm just meh and it bores him as much as it bores me.

I thought the "obsess/meh" dynamic was in relation to what the dominant person wanted, in which case, it seems to me to still hold true?

 

[Recidiva]

I thought the "obsess/meh" dynamic was in relation to what the dominant person wanted, in which case, it seems to me to still hold true?

Obsess/meh is my thing. It's my temperament. It's also my husband's, it wasn't really intended to describe a D/s dynamic.

It means it'd be hard for me to provide an absolute ironclad "this is what your day will be like" because I just don't know. Anyone who is going to go along with me for the ride is going to have to expect that I'm going to swerve from video games to gourmet food to junk food to obsessively researching something entirely trivial with a passionate focus to learning how to make tortillas. Probably in a single day. I also won't really give much of a damn what someone else does while I'm gathering my obsession as long as they don't distract me much, which will make me cranky.

Obsessions are, for me, solitary things. My husband and I do not generally get obsessed about the same thing, although I learned how to shoot when he did, and he wanted to start brewing when I wanted to make essential oils in a still. Stuff like that.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Indeed, Recidiva-- and you aren't a submissive.

 

[KoPilot]

Obsess/meh is my thing. It's my temperament. It's also my husband's, it wasn't really intended to describe a D/s dynamic.

It means it'd be hard for me to provide an absolute ironclad "this is what your day will be like" because I just don't know. Anyone who is going to go along with me for the ride is going to have to expect that I'm going to swerve from video games to gourmet food to junk food to obsessively researching something entirely trivial with a passionate focus to learning how to make tortillas. Probably in a single day. I also won't really give much of a damn what someone else does while I'm gathering my obsession as long as they don't distract me much, which will make me cranky.

Obsessions are, for me, solitary things. My husband and I do not generally get obsessed about the same thing, although I learned how to shoot when he did, and he wanted to start brewing when I wanted to make essential oils in a still. Stuff like that.

I feel you somewhat. Except for me, it's this feeling that "Well, there's no way that anyone could totally and completely own me, no matter how much I wanted them to, because art's had first dibs since day 1."

 

[YourCaptor]

You know lots of subs just have their ways. Like for instance if I hear someone collects quotes it instantly makes my subdar go crazy. They just look elsewhere for strength, guidance, etc. It's a personality trait, I forget the exact terminology at the moment.

Anyway, point is it's just a different method, so likely the way a sub will guide, or aid a dom is also different. You could compare it to culture I suppose. One culture solves eating with forks, another with chopsticks.

For someone like me that generally draws from internal strength, quotes and such just gives me more to ponder on and nothing gets done. What I really need is someone to just believe I can do it.

Like if I went for a job interview and was nervous, "the great whoever once said/did/whatever", don't do jack, "you look pro", that will do it.

 

[Recidiva]

Indeed, Recidiva-- and you aren't a submissive.

Again, if we do this situationally and not globally, the hell I'm not. I won't qualify for someone's 100% definition of all life situations. But there's no way I don't qualify in some arenas, and in particular, to some people.

I've certainly been more globally submissive in the past in many relationships. I enjoy it. I revel in the circumstance of what I call "hamster brain." When I've bred hamsters in the past, I learned you can't put a male in with a female when she's not in heat. They'll tear each other to shreds. When she's in heat, she presents and takes anything he dishes out. She's not globally submissive, but she's naturally situationally submissive, no contract or agreement needed. It just is.

So that's me. I have no problem with the dynamic, I think it's awesome. It's just that what gets me into hamster brain mode has nothing to do with what's predictable. It isn't a time of the month and it isn't a particular thing that does it. It's hitting on the EXACT thing I need at that moment that does it, and if someone else figures that out, that's bloody awesome.

And I don't have to pretend it diminishes me or that I'm not really that way or anything. It's me, I love it, let's roll with that.

I'm certainly more prone to sexual submission than I am dominance. Hamster brain is great.

I don't get sexual Godzilla brain, I get "out of bed" Godzilla brain. If a relationship violates some of my core ideals or ideologies (i.e., let's go kick some puppies today) I'm out, regardless of any hamster brain potential.

 

[Recidiva]

I feel you somewhat. Except for me, it's this feeling that "Well, there's no way that anyone could totally and completely own me, no matter how much I wanted them to, because art's had first dibs since day 1."

Well, also for me, I love debate and I love smart people. Having someone win a debate is a turn on, having someone concede that I win is also a turn on. It's win-win. Removing the debate removes a lot of turn ons.

I am a typical Pisces. I don't believe astrology applies globally to all people, but in this case it was dead on true for me. I read in a book somewhere all the "break up methods" for the star signs. "If you want to break up with a Scorpio, enter the witness protection program." For a Pisces it's "If you want to break up with a Pisces, slip into conversation casually that you just don't really care for kittens."

My main core isn't my interests, it's my ideals. So they're my ultimate master. My obsessions are how I keep my brain busy on external events and burn up all the energy I have without spinning my wheels into the ground. A bored me is a destructive me. Keep my brain from expending all its spare energy into a focused task and suddenly...you're IT and the full focus of a bored brain (like the Death Star) is now on YOU.