Spellbound Wytch{Mr. Parker}
|
2 years ago •
Jan 14, 2022
Extreme snip for focus:
creidsinn wrote: I think that sometimes we lump little and baby girls together. To me little deal in age regression, whereas baby girls deal with more of a role play. In short, you can be and feel however you wish. Also, and a big YAY!, there’s a dominant for every submissive. Just be honest about what you want and you’ll find it….eventually. I’m a masochist slave with a lot of babygirl in me and thought I’d never find anyone comparable with that. I'm curious about this. How do you, personally, differentiate between a "little" vs a "baby girl" and age regression versus "simple" role play? This is a damnable quagmire isn't it? As for me? I refuse to label myself as anything other than a masochist who has the potential to be a submissive with the exact "right man". I love being nurtured and babied in the context of aftercare or when I'm depressed or emotionally overwrought but can't imagine using any one descriptive label to present to the rest of the world.
Whether we like it or not, and whether or not we think it's right or even fair, we can be our own worst enemies when it comes to pigeon holing ourselves and then falling into the trap of complaining about being misunderstood. |
|
|
Online now
| lasumisa |
2 years ago •
Jan 15, 2022
Thanks Creidsinn
|
|
|
tallslenderguy(other male)
|
2 years ago •
Jan 15, 2022
WytchyWoman wrote: Extreme snip for focus:
creidsinn wrote: I think that sometimes we lump little and baby girls together. To me little deal in age regression, whereas baby girls deal with more of a role play. In short, you can be and feel however you wish. Also, and a big YAY!, there’s a dominant for every submissive. Just be honest about what you want and you’ll find it….eventually. I’m a masochist slave with a lot of babygirl in me and thought I’d never find anyone comparable with that. I'm curious about this. How do you, personally, differentiate between a "little" vs a "baby girl" and age regression versus "simple" role play? This is a damnable quagmire isn't it? As for me? I refuse to label myself as anything other than a masochist who has the potential to be a submissive with the exact "right man". I love being nurtured and babied in the context of aftercare or when I'm depressed or emotionally overwrought but can't imagine using any one descriptive label to present to the rest of the world.
Whether we like it or not, and whether or not we think it's right or even fair, we can be our own worst enemies when it comes to pigeon holing ourselves and then falling into the trap of complaining about being misunderstood. Appreciating your open thoughts on this. i think the "pigeon hole" phenomena derives from the notion that we can ever find a label that is a perfect descriptor. To me that is like trying to define the current state of a flowing river (pun intended), We cannot nail fluid down, yet we all seem to have something in us that wants to try? i think part of what adds to the notion, and subsequent error/confusion, is some things move more slowly than others. Glass is in a fluid state, but it moves to slowly to be discerned by the naked eye. Still, we can find ways to expose and experience that reality. i see those 'ways' as similar to the "exact right man." It seems to me that, depending on the speed of the fluid, that that could be further qualified to:" the exact right Man doing the exact right thing in the exact right moment." Which seems daunting, and is prolly impossible, if we are approaching interaction from a standpoint of static knowledge, or our memorized idea of who/what that person is. Seeing interaction as a dance helps me. It may be choreographed, the steps memorized, but there is still a lead and a follower, and the motion of the dance is individual, personalized, by the dancers. |
|
|
|
Spellbound Wytch{Mr. Parker}
|
2 years ago •
Jan 16, 2022
Snipped for focus:
tallslenderguy wrote: It seems to me that, depending on the speed of the fluid, that that could be further qualified to:" the exact right Man doing the exact right thing in the exact right moment." Which seems daunting, and is prolly impossible, if we are approaching interaction from a standpoint of static knowledge, or our memorized idea of who/what that person is. Seeing interaction as a dance helps me. It may be choreographed, the steps memorized, but there is still a lead and a follower, and the motion of the dance is individual, personalized, by the dancers. But when I said "right man" it was in quotation marks as I'm aware of all the qualifiers that the phrase carries. I was more interested in how the other poster distinguishes "littles" from "baby girls" and "age regression" versus "role playing". There's a point where all of this seems like splitting hairs for me and I'm interested in how others perceive what can frequently seem to be minutiae to me when all the words are woven and packaged away. Thanks, as always, for your response since you're always very eloquent and thought provoking. I'm left still not understanding how some people see the difference between littles and baby girls, and age regression versus role playing that was introduced previously. 🤗
|
|
|
|
tallslenderguy(other male)
|
2 years ago •
Jan 16, 2022
WytchyWoman wrote: Snipped for focus:
tallslenderguy wrote: It seems to me that, depending on the speed of the fluid, that that could be further qualified to:" the exact right Man doing the exact right thing in the exact right moment." Which seems daunting, and is prolly impossible, if we are approaching interaction from a standpoint of static knowledge, or our memorized idea of who/what that person is. Seeing interaction as a dance helps me. It may be choreographed, the steps memorized, but there is still a lead and a follower, and the motion of the dance is individual, personalized, by the dancers. But when I said "right man" it was in quotation marks as I'm aware of all the qualifiers that the phrase carries. I was more interested in how the other poster distinguishes "littles" from "baby girls" and "age regression" versus "role playing". There's a point where all of this seems like splitting hairs for me and I'm interested in how others perceive what can frequently seem to be minutiae to me when all the words are woven and packaged away. Thanks, as always, for your response since you're always very eloquent and thought provoking. I'm left still not understanding how some people see the difference between littles and baby girls, and age regression versus role playing that was introduced previously. 🤗i felt like i went on a hair splitting ramble with that one and left out something which may or may not have meaning for you or others. i have never thought of myself as a "little, baby, or age regressed." Then i spent time with a Man. There were no labels or identifiers used between us, i've written about the experience in other posts, but the result was, He regressed me. i wasn't looking for it, we hadn't discussed it, i suspect He was just being Himself, but i do not honestly know if He was purposefully trying to regress me. It was not till after that i realized what had happened and put words to it. But while we were together He kept affirming me and identifying me as a "good boy, " telling me how "proud He was of me, etc.." At one point, i was there, i was a good boy and feeling proud of myself, even blushing when He praised me as such. i'm pretty analytical, so i have looked at the experience a lot since then. i can only speak for myself, but i don't identify as a little, baby or "boy," but i think there is a part of me that can be evoked and surfaced that is a "boy." For me, It was real, i was not playing a role. i speculate that, for me, it's because there were parts of me that were closeted during that age and maybe in some sexual/relationship ways i didn't develop (thinking Erik Erikson psychological development system) because as a kinky gay boy there was no cultural context for me to grow up in. So a part of me, not all of me is still there. i wonder if evoked is more accurate than regressed though? i think part of the conflict we feel accepting these labels some times is we try to make them all or nothing, when it may just be a part of us? |
|
|
|
Spellbound Wytch{Mr. Parker}
|
2 years ago •
Jan 16, 2022
Extreme snip for focus:
tallslenderguy wrote: i have never thought of myself as a "little, baby, or age regressed." Then i spent time with a Man. There were no labels or identifiers used between us, i've written about the experience in other posts, but the result was, He regressed me. i wasn't looking for it, we hadn't discussed it, i suspect He was just being Himself, but i do not honestly know if He was purposefully trying to regress me.
It was not till after that i realized what had happened and put words to it. But while we were together He kept affirming me and identifying me as a "good boy, " telling me how "proud He was of me, etc.." At one point, i was there, i was a good boy and feeling proud of myself, even blushing when He praised me as such. i'm pretty analytical, so i have looked at the experience a lot since then. i can only speak for myself, but i don't identify as a little, baby or "boy," but i think there is a part of me that can be evoked and surfaced that is a "boy." For me, It was real, i was not playing a role. i wonder if evoked is more accurate than regressed though? i think part of the conflict we feel accepting these labels some times is we try to make them all or nothing, when it may just be a part of us? Yes, exactly. Which, once again, is why I - personally - do not go for the traditional micro-labels. They're more constricting, and oftentimes more damaging, than they are helpful. Some people are quick to adopt a label for themselves - even knowing the label they choose has negative connotations attached to it - but then go on to to get all het up, heated and angry about being misunderstood. I move easily and frequently between various headspaces all within a matter of hours (sometimes minutes) and again it's largely dependent on the individual person I'm connecting with. I find it baffling that so often the hairs get split to such a degree that no one has any idea what someone else even means and rather than being an attribute it only causes more confusion. I've learned that while individualism is a wonderful thing, it's really helpful to have a few easily identified standard definitions just for the sake of clarity when interacting outside of your own personal dynamic. For *me* I'd rather present as an open book rather than a single chapter. Let the reader discover what lies within my pages without being prejudiced by the cover. 😉 |
|
|
|
No Body(dom male)
|
2 years ago •
Jan 16, 2022
To be that Dom that grabs you tosses you on the bed and has his way and makes you so happy you are not only a sub but his sub. After he has turned your body into a soft painful blob of sweet hot mess he starts at your toes and kisses his way to your nose then lets you know the bath is ready. He steps in then helps you slide into his arms and the warm water. Gentle washing and much neck nibbling he reminds you why you chose him.
|
|
|
|
Spellbound Wytch{Mr. Parker}
|
2 years ago •
Jan 16, 2022
No Body wrote: To be that Dom that grabs you tosses you on the bed and has his way and makes you so happy you are not only a sub but his sub. After he has turned your body into a soft painful blob of sweet hot mess he starts at your toes and kisses his way to your nose then lets you know the bath is ready. He steps in then helps you slide into his arms and the warm water. Gentle washing and much neck nibbling he reminds you why you chose him.
A man after my own heart. And for me there never has to be any mention of the word "daddy" despite the demonstrated behavior being that of a nurturing and caring partner. |
|
|
TwoRingsOneChain
|
2 years ago •
Jan 18, 2022
Re: Is there something halfway between Dd/lg & D/s? lasumisa wrote: I ask because the idea of a nurturing, protective, caring Dom with that steely dominant core really appeals to me but being treated as a little doesn’t.
Does that make any sense? Yes it does to me. And it seems hard to find that perfect mix so to speak of a master that has a little bit of that sadistic side and also the nurturing side but not a daddy ( or at least what I think a Daddy might be) |
|
|
plumppet(sub female)
|
2 years ago •
Jan 18, 2022
My daytime career is as a kink friendly therapist and I can tell you that the number one advice I would give to someone new is to know what you want now, communicate it and revisit what you want regularly when you are NOT horny. Horny can be the enemy of good choices.
To your specific question about labels, rather than worrying about which boxes fit you correctly, find a partner who can hang in with who you are and what you enjoy. If you do decide to use labels like dd/lg, talk to each other about what those roles mean to you both. Sometimes they can be vastly different experiences! What does it mean to be a daddy? a sub? a friend? whatever...  You can even come up with terms specific to your dynamic if it suits you better.
Open communication will keep you from having to pay me someday but i have a feeling that you'll be just fine. |
|
|