Online now
Online now

What is it really...

↑ ↓
Taramafor​(sub male)
1 week ago • 11/21/2020 10:02 pm
Taramafor​(sub male) • 11/21/2020 10:02 pm
Quote: No one touches me when I am out and about in real life, fella.

Then perhaps you'd care to explain how you interact with anyone at all if they not a part of real life. The truth is you do let people touch you when there is communication established and a desire to engage with them. They are real people. In life. Can you disagree with that statement? And if so, why?

And yes. "Out and about". But as I said. Strangers. Or as close as makes little difference. That is what you meant by out and about, right?

And if you do know people that want to engage with you, that could make you melt if you let them, then this leaves the question of why you wouldn't let them if you know you'll enjoy yourself. Melt means "Making you feel appreciated and seeing to your masochist needs". In your case.

Quote: A sub wants direction, a dom feels the need to give it.

Of course. But in order to make one happen the other needs to be established too. Not just with others, but also ourselves. You also have to take into account that either can have a bad day and needs support from the "other area". If a sub can't give direction to a dom when they need it, then they can't support the dom. If a dom can't trust in a subs "flow" then they don't trust in their direction. Or otherwise don't know how to go with that flow. That's a possibility too.
Schatzi​(switch female){Yes}
1 week ago • 11/22/2020 8:55 am
Schatzi​(switch female){Yes} • 11/22/2020 8:55 am
DrWakko wrote:
I don’t think this is as simple as one gives order and one takes orders. It’s not about yes sir or no sir.

A dominant is a cave. There to shelter someone from the storm. There to protect. Yes it might crumble but it always remains sturdy.

A submissive finds shelter in that cave. It knows it’s safe and protected. When the cave crumbles a little the submissive is there to pick up those pieces and reassure the cave is going to be ok.

I absolutely LOVE this. Best description I've read.
SubtleHush​(sub female)
1 week ago • 11/22/2020 4:30 pm
SubtleHush​(sub female) • 11/22/2020 4:30 pm
Miki​: "Both strike me as a more visible form of codependence."

(You can take any dynamic and make it into something unhealthy. Codependence is a big thing and there are many who are attracted to a power exchange realm for all the wrong reasons. There are even some who want their partner dependent on them to unhealthy proportions.)

"Those that live "the lifestyle" full time vs couples who enjoy a symbiotic relationship at home but go about daily work-a-day life rather independently."

(Symbiosis is a good way of looking at how close and seamless these relationships can be if done well. That takes time and many miss that part. They think they can fabricate it at hello. No such thing as doing anything in life perfectly at hello.)

"Sure each partner has something to say about certain decisions or moves related to a career path, but once out of the house and in the world, they function as individuals."

(More so it is a thread. They are tied to each other. They each function societally as is appropriate, but like any other couple, their minds are on their partners and they reach out during the day and want to be, even at their jobs, a person their partner could be proud of.)

"The full-timers center their purpose around their dynamic."

(That is not my experience. I center my purpose around my Dominant. That is a full-time mentality. But if we are a committed couple, and he lost his ability to Dominante me, it wouldn't change my mental center around him. I've been in a full-time, 24/7 relationship and you still have a job, and a home to clean, and responsibilities that responsible adults handle with or without control. I don't get TPE at all. So I can't speak for those who have every aspect of their lives controlled or those who can turn off their own existences to control another to that degree.)

"None of this is meant to diss "the lifestyle", but describe it as I see it and why I am absolutely not a "real" sub. I'll never give up my r. l. independence for anything. The masochist side is strictly a function of my sexuality and when the clothes come back on, the masochist aspect gets set aside, put away like night clothing, if you will."

(There is nothing wrong with topping or bottoming to get your masochistic needs met. But that is an in the moment thing. Power exchange in a relationship is a current that runs through the people. And I am this lifestyle, with a partner, single, living with him or living on my own. The 'lifestyle' is more about a population of like-minded people who invest in their beliefs. It's more than the play. It's friendships, and learning opportunities, and shared core beliefs.)

(My former Sir lived 3 hours away. We each commuted to the other every other week. I was driving down to him and the catalytic converter cover on my car came off. I got off the road, the police came and guided me into a rest stop so the mechanic there could check it. I immediately called my Sir and updated him. I was going to be late at best or not be able to come down at the worst. He would worry. So I called him and left a message telling him what happened. THAT to me is service to him. As his submissive, part of my job is to make his life better.)

(I didn't need to be told to get out of the fast lane and off the road.
I didn't need to be told to get into the rest stop and have a mechanic look at the car.
I didn't even need to be told to call him and update him. In my role as his sub, I already know to notify him.
It was an independent action. Borne out of service to him. And you might argue that I would do that in a vanilla relationship
as well, and I would. However, I am NOT vanilla. I am a sub. And my natural way of being in a relationship is to consider his needs
and wants, and that told me what to do. I didn't need guidance.)

(There have been issues in relationships that I knew where the Dom who was bad with money decided he would control his sub or slaves money. That was a no go. And it was a bumpy time but in the end, her being realistic with him about his own shortcomings was more important than feeding his ego and letting him ruin her financial status. So is it true when someone who is not concerned with high-powered jobs hooks up with someone who has a high-powered job. You can't tell someone who has invested decades into their work and education to walk away. Talk, discuss, support... sure. But tell them to walk away? Not fair or appropriate. To someone like me, it's a question of compatibility. So I don't venture into things with prospective Dominants who don't share my value systems just to have someone. It's just too hard to be a couple that way.)

(And in the end, Ds and Ms are about coupling successfully. It's just done with a different list of parameters.)
1 week ago • 11/22/2020 5:22 pm
wildbabe • 11/22/2020 5:22 pm
I personally don't think a Dom and sub are that different in their core and I also don't believe that a sub is the one that needs guidance and direction only. A Dom can get lost as well, like Dr.Wakko explained with the cave analogy, the sub is there to make sure the cave does not crumble beyond repair. A Dom is only as strong as the sub he owns. Their very innate needs differ by nature, but that doesn't make them that different. The perfect dynamic is a scale that's not always in balance but does balance both sides, like yin and yang.
Taramafor​(sub male)
1 week ago • 11/26/2020 6:13 pm
Taramafor​(sub male) • 11/26/2020 6:13 pm
Actually got into a group talk about this today.

If you could define D/s in one word, what would it be?

At first I thought control. But that's not quite it. How do you use a gun? Or a tool?

You can know someone for 2 years and still not know.

There's a trick to being upfront and direct. To not stall which leads to miscommunication.

Some people "just play" and don't even bother to really know you. Blah. I'd never do that. Don't feel safe if I don't know enough about you.

So if I picked a word for D/s it would be "understanding".

It's how I get people to engage with me. I cut past excuses. I get straight answers. Make sure they do the same with me. And we make good shit happen.
1 week ago • 11/26/2020 10:20 pm
DrKrall • 11/26/2020 10:20 pm
What is it really... that defines a Dominant from a submissive?
I would say the Dominant is attracted to submissives and the submissive is attracted to Dominants. That is the difference.
Taramafor​(sub male)
1 week ago • 11/27/2020 5:05 pm
Taramafor​(sub male) • 11/27/2020 5:05 pm
Quote: I would say the Dominant is attracted to submissives and the submissive is attracted to Dominants.

I don't think it's that simple. Doms and subs are still people after all. You may as well say "Lovers love each other". The question is "why". Some things are attractive across the board, others aren't.

Today I met a stranger. Impressed them with how observant I am about them. They didn't need to tell me. I simply detected the "flags".

After that someone I kind of know but don't met me. And for once, after the back and forth convo, they picked up on what I'M like. This is actually very rare. Actually, this is a first. They actually pinpointed that I know psychology. Just like that. It's nice to be noticed quickly for once. Normally it's me that's doing that.

In both cases a QUICK and effective sense of understanding was achieved. Which lead to better interactions. There was even talk of getting the whips and chains out with the later. But the FORMER displayed more clear signs of self control. However, I also trust the later due to clearly being observant.

Observant=awareness. Awareness=safety. Or at least accepted danger with a choice. This in turn is attractive. Right?

The only key difference I can detect between a dom and a sub is that a dom informs/tells while a sub obeys and does as they're told. Although getting a sub to be obedient is dependent on the sub letting a dom know how too as well. This doesn't mean a sub has to "explain". But they do have to at least "show" it. For example, I asked "Is it ok to come over or do you want me to stay?" The evidence speaks for itself. "giving a choice". Pretty sure it's a big factor in regards to being attractive to others. It actually gained a response of "do as you please doggo". Which gave ME a choice. It was neither a "Join me" or "stay". It's an instruction/order but left up to me. So in regards to choice I find this fascinating. It may as well have been a "join me" though.

I'm observant. But even I'm forced to ponder "Do as you please" after offering. This is a good thing at times. But sometimes it might also backfire if a sub isn't sure of what they want and feels "trapped". It's not as simple as attractive. You have to be there when things become unattractive too. Which is why aftercare is stressed. You don't just ditch someone the moment things get rough.
6 days ago • 11/27/2020 9:18 pm
DrKrall • 11/27/2020 9:18 pm
I don't think it's that complicated.
Taramafor​(sub male)
6 days ago • 11/28/2020 3:49 pm
Taramafor​(sub male) • 11/28/2020 3:49 pm
Quote: I don't think it's that complicated.

You failed to say why.

Back up your claims. Don't just say you're right for the sake of being right.

And if I'm wrong then tell me why. Unless you can't. If it's not that complicated then PROVE it.

Also, it's complicated to you. Simple for me. Though to you it's likely more overwhelming since things aren't broken down. So I'll break something down for you.

Mainly, the focus is on this part.

Quote: The only key difference I can detect between a dom and a sub is that a dom informs/tells while a sub obeys and does as they're told. Although getting a sub to be obedient is dependent on the sub letting a dom know how too as well. This doesn't mean a sub has to "explain". But they do have to at least "show" it.

That's pretty simple, right?
6 days ago • 11/28/2020 4:25 pm
DrKrall • 11/28/2020 4:25 pm
Taramafor wrote:
You failed to say why.

I don't have to say why I don't think it's that complicated. But Ok. I think you overthink things and add a lot of unrelated things instead of stripping things down to basics.
Taramafor wrote:
Back up your claims. Don't just say you're right for the sake of being right.

It wasn't a claim. It was an expression of my opinion.
If I was stating a fact I agree i should have backed it up, but I wasn't, I was merely expressing my opinion.