Do you discuss prior relationships before you play with someone or get into a real relatonship?

Do you discuss prior relationships before you play with some

Ricccardio • Nov 12, 2020

I'm very new and just wanted to know if most Dominants try to understand a submissive's past relationship before heading into play. Also do submissives like to know about a Dominant's past relationship as well? Especially if this is a serious relationship or 24/7 /TPE?

Kara​(sub female){Dark Roast} • Nov 12, 2020

In my case, you better believe that I want to know about someone’s past before we get into a relationship. I want the details about their experiences so that I know that I am in good hands. I want to know about past relationships, why they failed, and if the person has learned from the experience and/or if they refuse to cast any blame on themselves. I want to know about the past five years of sexual history, last STD test, and length of time since last relationship.

In my case, I get clinical and think of things as a job interview. A Dominant who is honest and sincere isn’t going to conceal his past or get cagey when asked to show a resume of sorts. As a matter of fact, they’ll probably ask you for much the same sort of information and will probably verify independently the big details as you should theirs.

TheWhorelock​(dom male) • Nov 12, 2020

Yeah, I’d be worried for a submissive if a Dom didn’t try to get to know their past history first. Like... wtf? Why don’t you want to know where a persons head is at? That seems really irresponsible. Even in the case of super casual like, tastings you should still get a sense of what someone’s expectations and experience level are. Imho anyways.

As for subs getting to know me, I’ve never talked to one that didn’t. As they should, particularly since I tend to want more intense connections.

Bunnie • Nov 12, 2020

Your header says “before you *play* with someone” or “get into a real relationship?”

Both very different scenarios in my book.
When it comes to play... it’s all about negotiation.

If it’s play, on-line... then no, I don’t think it’s necessary to share your whole intimate history together, however, that may still need to be discussed and *negotiated* that there are *boundaries*.

If it’s play, in-person... then relationship discussion for me would be on a need-to-know basis. If it’s relevant to our *negotiations* (which for me includes STD testing), then yes, I would need to know... if not (although I would still vet the person), then no, I wouldn’t.

If it’s a relationship, I am in agreement with Kara.

Taramafor​(sub male) • Nov 12, 2020

I fail to see the difference considering relationships thrive on the same thing.

I don't need to know everything. But I MIGHT need to know how SOME engagements with others have happened. Normally I can read people well enough. But I'm not a mind reader. This depends on how direct and upfront someone is with me on initial contact. If they ALREADY give and make things happen, what's to worry about? My needs. I engage back. Good times. If that's lacking THEN you have to negotiate. Be it online or offline. Be it "play" or "relationship". Don't use "play and relationship" though. Be SPECIFIC. That is, discuss the interactions themselves.

Lately I got a sub to get firm and direct with me. Online roleplay. We talked about "post styles" and exchanged an example or two.

Next thing I know I'm playfully getting them to toy with me and begging them to tell me to cum. Which they playfully engaged back too. Had a blast.

Now, if I had went "tell me your entire history" that's going to put people off. Be it online or offline. People need space. Get "certain details". But be SPECIFIC. Direct, to the point. Short and clear as possible. Don't just go "How did your relationship with your past lover go". There are other ways to detect traits like "Does this person have doubt and fear and can they control it". It's better to talk about things like "Control, force, making the best from the worst, how to respond to situations more positively instead of being negative". etc, etc.

If I sense/detect someones past relationship then I ask about that relationship. They brought it up after all. The other topics can easily lead to this. But I'm not going to DEMAND to know about it. Nor will I AVOID them if they don't. Lies and secrets never go well, but some topics need time. And in that time you could be playing instead of worrying. So either flee in fear and curl under a rock or make the best of the situation and play with them (provided they play back) instead of going "Tell me before we do". Calling it as I see it. Want to be appreciated? Don't stall with showing it. Lead by example. It's that simple. If they don't engage back or speak up, move on. If they do, take things from there. Separates the weak from the chaff. Though sometimes the weak can become the chaff. Judgement call.

The biggest complication is that some people already know how to play more easily then others. This does affect relationships. Some people make the best from the worst more easily. Bounce back faster. Others slower. Trust me on this one. People that struggle feel bad. They can't just "play as well as you can." Situations like that can be difficult. Whatever you're looking for.

Bunnie • Nov 12, 2020

“Quote: When it comes to play... it’s all about negotiation.
I fail to see the difference considering relationships thrive on the same thing.”

For me the difference is that when it comes to relationships, it’s all about compatibility (not to be confused with similarity). When I play with someone, yes there does need to be a degree of compatibility in relation to our specific negotiated scene, of course... however, I don’t dive too deeply with someone I am only there to play with. It is still always about connection for me... but not always about intimacy.

For me, it’s a matter of compartmentalisation (“immediate” gratification in a way I feel emotionally safe) vs absolute vulnerability and transparency (“long-term” surrender in a way I feel emotionally safe).

If I am compartmentalising (play), I see it as much like a business arrangement... all about negotiation.
If I am “all-in” (relationship), then it’s about much, much more. The negotiation of course is a part of it... but it’s not the end of it... for even the possibility of a relationship, I require compatibility (again... not to be confused with similarity) before negotiation even becomes a contemplation.

LordofPain56 • Nov 13, 2020

If she wanted to know about past relationships during the courtship phase, I would tell her and allow her to ask questions and voice any concerns. I never particularly cared about other peoples past relationships enough to ask about them. To me, what the focus should be upon during the courtship phase, is getting to know each other as much as possible prior to getting into a committed relationship.
In my book, every topic should be on the table during courtship so there are no nightmare surprizes by the time it is decided to go to the next level.
Topics include:
personal characteristics and habits, both good and bad.
employment both his and hers and any anticipated change (or desired change) after a committed relationship is formed.
financial status of both partners including outstanding debts, lawsuits, credit problems and bill payment habits.
location of partners and feasability of either relocating to the other for a committed relationship. They should discuss their ultimate goals on location (city, country, small town, coastline, lakeside, etc).
Family stuff, like kids from a previous marriage or if they want more kids. Also, involvement or interference of relatives in anything having to do with moving to a committed relationship.
Generally how the two intend to treat each other in a relationship and discussion about their desired lifestyle.
sexual proclivities including a comparison of kinks between each other and compatibility thereof.
Any "deal-breakers" discovered in any of the above topics should warn that a relationship should not be persued unless one partner agrees to compromise.

Taramafor​(sub male) • Nov 13, 2020

@Bunnie: See, here's the thing Bunnie. I treat play like I treat relationships. I take EVERYONE seriously. Even if they pretend they don't want to be taken seriously (that said I'll also be casual and "mess around", but please value yourself). If you came up to me and went "My needs and it HAS to be similar", I wouldn't play with you. But if you made it about ME, I'd see to your every need and then some. Similar or not. People that play DON'T play. Because they get so selfish they can't find people to play with even though others play. But if they made it more about each other they'd play more. Some people do play more when making it about each other.

Sure, you CAN have a one night stand. But what if that could quickly and easily be a CONSISTENT stand? With a minimal of effort and negotiation? It's nice when someone isn't being difficult with no good reason and instead just gets right into it.


Even if you don't start compatible you can become so. And QUICKLY if the other person can work with you. Here's the thing. You can do this with play. Which makes BOTH more "playful". Some peoples doubts (and this could be you) sometimes hold you back with engaging with others because you assume you can't "mesh". I repeat, "assume". If someone is "giving but seems too different" then go with it. See what happens. You might be surprised. As I have been. Considering you once stated exploring outside of your own box leads to happiness I'm surprised you didn't touch on that. Guessing you're still adapting. So you're kind of giving me mixed messages here. Maybe you mean "Making compatibility happen" in relationships? But relationship or not that should be the focus anyway IMO. It leads to more instant (and consistent) gratification as well. So it's a win on both accounts.


Let me give you an idea of how I play on F-chat. An area revolving around instant gratification. And you tell me Bunnie if what I do is like your "relationship".

When someone plays that easily and plays with me that well... what did they suffer through? Do they know my pain? But it won't be a concern. Because they just... Play. With only the tiniest tiny tiny amount of negation. Few minor details worked out to get the ball rolling. And then they just... Give. And kept giving. As did I. They do things. I do things. I didn't go "Similar". Nor did they. I go with "their flow". They go with "my flow". Anything they stated or told, done. Anything I did with them, done. No stalling. No hesitation. One event. The next. No questioning. Just obedience. Leading to enjoyment. Even through suffering (no "not looking" for it excuses. You WILL hurt each other somehow. It's actually safer when it's controlled and intended). That is surrender.

Pointing out I do the same in relationships. But you don't START at relationship. Not the kind you're talking about at least. How can you be trusted to surrender if you can't even do it in play? Because you're "well guarded" and fear being taken advantage of? I'm not afraid. I'll let it happen easily. Not carelessly. But it can come quickly on initial contact. Your own fear may well be why you don't have a relationship. Because you fear doing that in play.


Have you considered that you can negotiate about how to be compatible? And yes, you can make it happen. Naturally you don't know WHAT to negotiate due to not meeting the next person. But you've still met other people. You got to have something to work with. You know those conversations are coming. You HAVE to contemplate them if you want your way as well as theirs. How can you contemplate this in PLAY yet NOT in a relationship? I'm actually seeing this as a red flag. On the one hand you know how too because of play. So maybe you're not worrying about it when it comes to relaitonships. But if you don't be considerate in a relationship... Hmm... Maybe you make relationships about "give and give" like I do? Some people "just give". Or you can get them too. Looking after each other 100% both ways. Some people say that's unrealistic. Which, frankly, is bullshit considering there's people that make it happen. Unrealistic FOR THEM maybe. Btw, I trust you not to speak for others when making statements even if not using "for me". Just letting you know that.


Affection. Appreciation. Fucking and jizzing. Mutual understanding. As a few examples. What IS intimacy, hm? Person A might want "Candlelit dinners". Person B might want "Quit stalling and fuck me already." I see it like this. To be compatible you have to BOTH get what you want. Even if you both want different things. This happens in PLAY as much as relationships. This does of course have to happen in a timely manner without "stalling". So when you play do you both get what you want? Because if you both get what you want when you play then isn't that about compatibility? And if someone offers "different " in play and it's not similar are you then saying you won't engage with them even if they go "Let's see to your needs and then some"?


Agreed. nothing has caused more harm and suffering then "nightmare surprizes". PLEASANT surprises can be another matter. So I don't have to know everything right away. But if I'm sensing danger I'm going "I need to know and you know my warnings have always been accurate". At some point you have to trust my judgement. I did warn someone about their play mate not being the "nice guy" they thought they were. I know uncontrolled anger when I see it. Pointed it out more for my sake. I don't stand for bullying and abuse either.

Miki • Nov 13, 2020

There is a positive side to exploring the past relationships of either side of the dynamic so long as "exploring" doesn't lead to "comparing" ---physical attributes, styles of "play" and so on.
Then either one side gets to resenting that a predecessor may have been better and this-and-that, or the other starts expecting New Partner to duplicate certain things the one(s) before him or her might have done in rough sex BDSM play.
If New Partner wants to express him or herself in a different way, well, the Devil's in the details. Digging too deep or personal can lead to getting a proverbial pitchfork shoved up one's ass.

Taramafor​(sub male) • Nov 14, 2020

I just had an epiphany. A giant whopping epiphany.

There's one important detail we're overlooking here.

Being. Direct.

Maybe you don't consider yourself a direct person. But all the stalling and hesitating and time wasting? It just gets in the way of fun. As does doubt and assumptions.

By being direct and making things happen quicker without stalling, you have more fun (which of course is going to improve play) and improve your relationship. Provided you can get your partner to be direct with you.

Now, normally I say to each their own. But I'm honestly coming to the realisation that being direct "just works." Misunderstanding? Clear them up! Want to get instant gratification? State as such. Want to make it about the other person? Get right to that too. And it even works with sex itself.

For example, someone told me they weren't "currently horny". Then we did things. They got into it. I know how to push their buttons. ACTIONS make the mood. Taking ACTION makes things happen. Both in play, relationships and even none relationships.

The complication of course is that we're not mind readers and peoples fear, shyness, anxiety or whatever holds them back. Which comes down to communication and talking about "not assuming".

It's a very simple thing. But damn, even I overlooked it. The fact that's is "so obvious" is WHY it was overlooked. And now it's not. I came to this conclusion because in all honesty, I need to be a little more direct myself. So I'm making sure of it. People appreciate it more. Causes less stalling with me too. It's a win on both accounts. Make good shit happen faster. Bad too of course, but at least you an move on to good again quicker.

And if someone is silent with you... Be direct there most of all.