Who is yo daddy?

Farawyn said:

/girlcrushing

Click to expand...

I feel as dumb as a potato by comparison to CB now.

Hmmmm

I actually love using 'Daddy' and being 'Baby' or 'Baby girl' but I would not describe myself as a Little...

For me using Daddy took awhile to get my head around but once I did it came natural to me. In a way it's a sign of respect and acknowledgement that this is a person who cares for me, will teach me and show me and has authority over me. I'm happy to entrust myself to them.

It's important to me to be viewed as a sensual Woman though which is why I think I don't see myself as a Little.

I too probably need to think on it more and crystallise my thoughts. I like this thread though.

As Cascadia says it's a scale and you take as much or as little as you want and what's important is what works for you.

All of your posts and the information therein is simply amazing.

CB, I think I'm going to cry. A truly beautiful post. Arrggh.

KrescentWench said:

All of your posts and the information therein is simply amazing.

CB, I think I'm going to cry. A truly beautiful post. Arrggh.

Click to expand...

Kiss~hug~ squeeze
* thanks *

KrescentWench said:

All of your posts and the information therein is simply amazing.

CB, I think I'm going to cry. A truly beautiful post. Arrggh.

Click to expand...

For everyone's information, CB has a wonderful thread on the Playground, Daddy's Little Girl, http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1285088. The discussion, pictures, and writings there will really help you get the essence of this relationship.

JennyNo1 said:

For everyone's information, CB has a wonderful thread on the Playground, Daddy's Little Girl, http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1285088. The discussion, pictures, and writings there will really help you get the essence of this relationship.

Click to expand...

Honestly it is not "my" thread. I had a very small role in helping to host its current iteration in its opening pages.
I hesitate to suggest that any of us have "ownership" of threads around here - lol
Yes, there is some discussion there and more discussion would certainly be welcome.

You might also be interested in Someone to Watch Over Me thread
http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1289244
where I have done a lot of posting and I would welcome others to join me.

Another discussion thread on this topic in the BDSM cafe is this one:
The Allure of "Fuck me, Daddy" said by a girl in...
http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1231952

A related thread but not specifically DD/lg that might also be of interest is this one:
Reflections on Gentleman Doms
http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1083983
which has been rather limping along a bit but I have been attempting to moderate a bit of discussion there too
~ it seems to get a little action and then sit fallow for awhile.
Dunno. I suspect it is just a little like pulling teeth to get most of the Doms/Daddys to talk very much or for very long on an open thread.

cb

KrescentWench said:

Forgive me for butting in and also if I seem silly. I have zero experience in this area. Obviously.

There seems to be a dichotomy here. You note warmth, encouragement, and empathy, but then go on to mention that you are sadistic. You also clearly enjoy the umm punishment or correction side of such a relationship. I'm sorry. I'm confused. Is this always part of a D/s relationship? I understand the concept of wanting to please a man. Duh. LOL But I fear an impish nature would lead me to being "in trouble" all the time. And having been a model child, never in trouble, I don't know how playfulness would fit into a relationship like this. Arghh!

I'm doing a pitiful job of articulating here. I do not know how to frame what I am trying to say. Never mind. I'm going to go hide again.

Click to expand...

I think that perhaps sometimes the best strategy on Lit is to just wait, and eventually others will say more clearly what you intend. CB and Raingirl have done a fine job of fleshing out my stick figures.

The only way I can respond to your (valid) points is, "Because human variance." I can be quite an encouraging person, but I'm also sadistic and like to dispense humiliation. I don't know why, except that I'm a bundle of contradictions in lots of areas of my life, and this is no different.

As an aside, I would add that I could only view the article CB posted as one would a city in fresh snow. It's a beautiful, flowing narrative where even abandoned buildings and dumpsters shine crystalline in the moonlight. I see myself in some of those passages, but only a few. A rock? Oh sure, unless I'm depressed or anxious or passive aggressive or wildly jealous or whatever other toxins are bubbling up that day. Hell, can I have the Daddy described in that article?? Please??

So again, I can't answer your questions except to say that trying to pin down any sort of PYL or pyl is like trying to draw a definitive representation of a "tree." There is no tree. There are tens of thousands of varieties of trees, and some may bear no resemblance to your idea of a tree, or to each other.

Have I muddied the waters?

DeepGreenEyes said:

As an aside, I would add that I could only view the article CB posted as one would a city in fresh snow. It's a beautiful, flowing narrative where even abandoned buildings and dumpsters shine crystalline in the moonlight. I see some of myself in those passages, but only a few. A rock? Oh sure, unless I'm depressed or anxious or passive aggressive or whatever other toxins are bubbling up that day. Hell, can I have the Daddy described in that article?? Please??

Click to expand...

I think this is an excellent point, and also brings to the surface why I've always had a bit of an issue with the DD/lg dynamic.

The daddies are almost always presented as completely infallible and perfect people. If they have weaknesses, they always know how to deal with them and they never struggle with their own emotions for example. The DD/lg dynamic never seems to be discussed from the point of view that even the D might have (has) issues.

So DGE's comparison of the article to a city in fresh snow is to me maybe the most astute thing I've ever read regarding DD/lg. People like described in the article are like a city in fresh snow; only snow melts, it turns brown at places, while remains pristine, white and fluffy in others and it can turn everything into a big hot mess too. The fresh snow only stays for a while.

It's refreshing to see DGE point out he's not perfect.

DeepGreenEyes said:

I think that perhaps sometimes the best strategy on Lit is to just wait, and eventually others will say more clearly what you intend. CB and Raingirl have done a fine job of fleshing out my stick figures.

The only way I can respond to your (valid) points is, "Because human variance." I can be quite an encouraging person, but I'm also sadistic and like to dispense humiliation. I don't know why, except that I'm a bundle of contradictions in lots of areas of my life, and this is no different.

As an aside, I would add that I could only view the article CB posted as one would a city in fresh snow. It's a beautiful, flowing narrative where even abandoned buildings and dumpsters shine crystalline in the moonlight. I see myself in some of those passages, but only a few. A rock? Oh sure, unless I'm depressed or anxious or passive aggressive or wildly jealous or whatever other toxins are bubbling up that day. Hell, can I have the Daddy described in that article?? Please??

So again, I can't answer your questions except to say that trying to pin down any sort of PYL or pyl is like trying to draw a definitive representation of a "tree." There is no tree. There are tens of thousands of varieties of trees, and some may bear no resemblance to your idea of a tree, or to each other.

Have I muddied the waters?

Click to expand...

Not at all. This is the human condition.

In the same way that daddies and doms are at times a mess, so are the littles. Maybe moreso. One might argue that daddy wants the mess, because he's kind of the fixer. He wants to come in and make you feel better. But, in the role of little, I really worry about my mess . I feel like if I'm too much work, take too much of his attention and time away from other aspects of his life, it will prove too much; because he IS human. He has his good days and bad days, and I as much have to listen and watch and pick him up when he needs it.

Nor am I a 'traditional' little. I don't wear ears and tails. Or bobby socks and pigtails. I'm a grown woman in charge of most aspects of my life, very independent, who needs a space where I'm supported emotionally and can be as lost and vulnerable as I feel most of the time. I've enjoyed reading other little's posts that seem to say the same.

Perhaps I haven't fully embraced being little. I've been big for too long! But I know in those moments that I can surrender all those things fully, I find the most peace.

DeepGreenEyes has illustrated a very good point though. DD/lg is still a relationship. Two way street, and those involved have to support each other for it to work.

DeepGreenEyes said:

I think that perhaps sometimes the best strategy on Lit is to just wait, and eventually others will say more clearly what you intend. CB and Raingirl have done a fine job of fleshing out my stick figures.

The only way I can respond to your (valid) points is, "Because human variance." I can be quite an encouraging person, but I'm also sadistic and like to dispense humiliation. I don't know why, except that I'm a bundle of contradictions in lots of areas of my life, and this is no different.

As an aside, I would add that I could only view the article CB posted as one would a city in fresh snow. It's a beautiful, flowing narrative where even abandoned buildings and dumpsters shine crystalline in the moonlight. I see myself in some of those passages, but only a few. A rock? Oh sure, unless I'm depressed or anxious or passive aggressive or wildly jealous or whatever other toxins are bubbling up that day. Hell, can I have the Daddy described in that article?? Please??

So again, I can't answer your questions except to say that trying to pin down any sort of PYL or pyl is like trying to draw a definitive representation of a "tree." There is no tree. There are tens of thousands of varieties of trees, and some may bear no resemblance to your idea of a tree, or to each other.

Have I muddied the waters?

Click to expand...

Totally agree with you, again! I too felt the article about Dom Daddies was a bit sugar coated, and like you said, recognized some components of my Daddy, but in other parts not so much. I know posters in this thread have been heavily toward the "DDlg has nothing to do with incest/taboo fetish" and that article said that Daddies and their girls "detest" parallels to incest.. but I'll be honest, my Dom Daddy and I really enjoy the taboo of playing Daddy/daughter..true, he doesn't call me 'daughter,' it's always "baby girl," but he'll tell me "Shhh, be quiet baby girl, we can't let Mommy hear," and I'll respond in kind, with dirty talk that plays at that kind of taboo.. And no, neither of us condone real life incest, and we would both be disgusted/horrified by a real life father/daughter incest situation. But we do both get off on taboos and the dirtier the better.

I have an online account at a kinky dating or hook-up site elsewhere. Been on it for years (met my husband there!) I've noticed the rise in desire to have a Daddy / babygirl or littlegirl dynamic.

In many of the women's profiles, I see this magnified sense of wanting to find the One who will see in to their souls. A protector and mentor, someone who will ride in on the white unicorn and save the day. Cherish me! Discipline me! Love me for who I truly am! In return for this sense of safety and commitment, the babygirl will be loyal and loving. Who doesn't want that!? Somehow, calling it Daddy/little girl gives us permission to be more romantic? More playful? For some, does that mean less submissive? There are a lot of princesses and kittens in profile names.

I like the Daddy/girl dynamic but I've gotten to this place without my rose colored glasses. I was in a Master/slave relationship that left me wanting something more. I like rules, structure, having someone be the boss of me. But I like the idea that I can bring a more joyful sense of submission in to the relationship.

I've posted in the Daddy's little girl thread in the playground. There are a ton of memes dedicated to this mindset. I'm careful what I post - as a 54 year old whose feet are planted firmly in the real world of my messy, chaotic life - seeing young, slim girls wrapped in daddy's arms gets a little old. I love the sentiment, I find it erotic but I also know the pitfall of longing for someone to shield me from the world. I have days I wish that could be true!

As always, these labels are just that... a starting point to have a conversation, a way to think about a relationship. In the end, it doesn't matter what you call it as long as you keep the lines of communication open and agree on the expectations.

Gianbattista said:

It's not the age play issue, but certainly the care, the dependability, the safety, the reliability, the love that feels pretty unconditional, and makes me want to do my best to be the partner he deserves, the encouragement and support.....aspects that might also have been found in 'traditional' marriages, or many 'equal', 'vanilla' ones too.

Click to expand...

Yup, I think the safety issue is big. Feeling safe enough to express these desires, whether in play or within the entire dynamic.

cookiecat said:

I have an online account at a kinky dating or hook-up site elsewhere. Been on it for years (met my husband there!) I've noticed the rise in desire to have a Daddy / babygirl or littlegirl dynamic.

In many of the women's profiles, I see this magnified sense of wanting to find the One who will see in to their souls. A protector and mentor, someone who will ride in on the white unicorn and save the day. Cherish me! Discipline me! Love me for who I truly am! In return for this sense of safety and commitment, the babygirl will be loyal and loving. Who doesn't want that!? Somehow, calling it Daddy/little girl gives us permission to be more romantic? More playful? For some, does that mean less submissive? There are a lot of princesses and kittens in profile names.

I like the Daddy/girl dynamic but I've gotten to this place without my rose colored glasses. I was in a Master/slave relationship that left me wanting something more. I like rules, structure, having someone be the boss of me. But I like the idea that I can bring a more joyful sense of submission in to the relationship.

I've posted in the Daddy's little girl thread in the playground. There are a ton of memes dedicated to this mindset. I'm careful what I post - as a 54 year old whose feet are planted firmly in the real world of my messy, chaotic life - seeing young, slim girls wrapped in daddy's arms gets a little old. I love the sentiment, I find it erotic but I also know the pitfall of longing for someone to shield me from the world. I have days I wish that could be true!

As always, these labels are just that... a starting point to have a conversation, a way to think about a relationship. In the end, it doesn't matter what you call it as long as you keep the lines of communication open and agree on the expectations.

Click to expand...

Lurking, but I have to say I wish there was a like button. Or a love button.
Thank you, this post helped me clear some stuff up in my own mind.

seela said:

I think this is an excellent point, and also brings to the surface why I've always had a bit of an issue with the DD/lg dynamic.

The daddies are almost always presented as completely infallible and perfect people. If they have weaknesses, they always know how to deal with them and they never struggle with their own emotions for example. The DD/lg dynamic never seems to be discussed from the point of view that even the D might have (has) issues.

So DGE's comparison of the article to a city in fresh snow is to me maybe the most astute thing I've ever read regarding DD/lg. People like described in the article are like a city in fresh snow; only snow melts, it turns brown at places, while remains pristine, white and fluffy in others and it can turn everything into a big hot mess too. The fresh snow only stays for a while.

Click to expand...

Thank you.

And then you carried my metaphor further, with what happens when the inevitable melting occurs. Together we are the Fantastic MetaFour. Except, like, two.

seela said:

It's refreshing to see DGE point out he's not perfect.

Click to expand...

OK, this made me laugh.

(And on a weekend I have not been laugh-prone. So thanks.)

FelicityJohns said:

Perhaps I haven't fully embraced being [PYL/pyl]. I've been [daily demands that society and your circumstances place upon you that being a PYL/pyl relieves] for too long! But I know in those moments that I can surrender all those things fully, I find the most peace.

Click to expand...

I hope you don't mind, but you stated this so well about yourself that I adapted it because I believe it's a more widely experienced concept you've expressed.

Raingirl85 said:

Totally agree with you, again! I too felt the article about Dom Daddies was a bit sugar coated, and like you said, recognized some components of my Daddy, but in other parts not so much. I know posters in this thread have been heavily toward the "DDlg has nothing to do with incest/taboo fetish" and that article said that Daddies and their girls "detest" parallels to incest.. but I'll be honest, my Dom Daddy and I really enjoy the taboo of playing Daddy/daughter..true, he doesn't call me 'daughter,' it's always "baby girl," but he'll tell me "Shhh, be quiet baby girl, we can't let Mommy hear," and I'll respond in kind, with dirty talk that plays at that kind of taboo.. And no, neither of us condone real life incest, and we would both be disgusted/horrified by a real life father/daughter incest situation. But we do both get off on taboos and the dirtier the better.

Click to expand...

I bet you have a lot of company.

And some of the hotness you describe, and of much of D/s as a whole, comes from the human need for a safe place to experience real places in the human psyche that are deemed off-limits.

Cushioned transgression.

We love Halloween as a concept - or haunted houses or scary movies - because they are ritualized ways of experiencing and enacting fears, as well as our needs to give over in a safe way to threatening energies we know swim beneath the surface of our daily lives. Also, Reese's cups.

I personally don't need a "Daddy Dom", more as I need someone to accept me for me - being a Little. I'm about to turn 25 and I act and be have like a spoiled rotten princess. I cry and need cuddles and love and attention and I need to be babied. It's something that I struggled with before I knew I identified as a Little. Men and guys I dated in high school and college could handle my baby-ness and my neediness. I, personally, don't really need a Daddy Dom to control me or to take care of my sexual needs.

I have a boyfriend who knows how I identify and knows about Daddy Doms, but doesn't personally identify that way himself. Do I pressure him to? No. He accepts me and I accept him. Happiness.

I have been reading all of you with great interest and thinking about when to jump back in with my own thoughts.
I knew when I posted that bit of writing that it was as DGE describes it - utterly unattainable. Like a job description a committee I once served on wrote and when we were done the wiser among us realized that Jesus himself would never measure up to what we thought we wanted in a potential candidate. Utter nonsense. However ~ like a disney film or a perfectly lit erotic image it fires our imagination for what we think we might hope to attain in some part of our personal lives. But we kid ourselves if we think to hold any person against such a standard and expect them to withstand the scrutiny.

I know I would wither against a similar article describing the seven (more or less) characteristics of a Little or a Baby girl or a Submissive or pyl. I, like any person I might choose to be in relationship with am a mere human - I will never reach such standards of perfection and if I demand them in my play partner of my life partner we will both be sorely disappointed.

There have been times when I have been in conversation with men here who were sure that because they were not kinky enough or Dom enough or Daddy Dom enough or something - whatever "not enough" that I would not be interested in who they were as people. I would simply move along because they did not match the ideal they assumed that I must be seeking because I identify as a sub. I find this silly. I am generally interested in people as people. I am most interested in people who are working to be authentically themselves. Have some confidence in this and yet are not afraid to doubt. To question. To wonder. To change their minds. To be interested in the "becoming" ~ of whatever is supposed to be next.

DeepGreenEyes said:

the article CB posted ...is like... a beautiful, flowing narrative where even abandoned buildings and dumpsters shine crystalline in the moonlight.

Hell, can I have the Daddy described in that article?? Please??

Click to expand...

I think all of us crave such a Daddy ~ and deserve such a daddy in our lives. For myself - I think part of the attraction of this kink is that my own father was so far from this ideal that any kind of back- filling in the roles that I missed is like food for my soul.

DeepGreenEyes said:

So again, I can't answer your questions except to say that trying to pin down any sort of PYL or pyl is like trying to draw a definitive representation of a "tree." There is no tree. There are tens of thousands of varieties of trees, and some may bear no resemblance to your idea of a tree, or to each other.

Click to expand...

bold added by me for emphasis. Again - just as there is no such thing as a Twue Dom and my idea of what I seek in a PYL does not match what you seek or who you are - there is also no such thing as a Twue sub - and the way I function in one relationship may be entirely different from how I will function in another as these are all about the way in which dyads feed one another and resonate in ways that cannot be predicted.

seela said:

The daddies are almost always presented as completely infallible and perfect people. If they have weaknesses, they always know how to deal with them and they never struggle with their own emotions for example. The DD/lg dynamic never seems to be discussed from the point of view that even the D might have (has) issues.

Click to expand...

We are all constantly fed a bill of goods about what our relationships "should" look like. I concur that the memes and images of DD/lg can be particularly cliche' - but the same problem occurs in other versions of pornography, D/s, idealized bodies, media portrayals of relationships etc.
I may have been born at night, but I was not born last night ~ adulting is a hell of a lot of work and I am rather good at it, if I may say so myself. The fantasy of being able to give that up to someone else even for a little bit of time is delicious. However, real life is such that it seems utterly unfair to me to have an adult partner always have to be the grown up and me abdicate all to him - he would never get a break. I am a co-equal partner in so many things. Our lives would never work if I did not share responsibilities and if I did not care for him too - provide support, care and encouragement to him. Does this make me less of a sub? I don't think so.

FelicityJohns said:

Nor am I a 'traditional' little. I don't wear ears and tails. Or bobby socks and pigtails. I'm a grown woman in charge of most aspects of my life, very independent, who needs a space where I'm supported emotionally and can be as lost and vulnerable as I feel most of the time. I've enjoyed reading other little's posts that seem to say the same.

Perhaps I haven't fully embraced being little. I've been big for too long! But I know in those moments that I can surrender all those things fully, I find the most peace.

DeepGreenEyes has illustrated a very good point though. DD/lg is still a relationship. Two way street, and those involved have to support each other for it to work.

Click to expand...

Felicity - once again I find you a soul sister. I am only a bit of a "little" I have been a grown up for too long and the idea of wearing little girl clothing and watching disney movies and being a brat is not my style. And I have left in the bit and bolded again for emphasis the bit above about mutual support.

Gianbattista said:

The article... was missing maybe some necessary truths of fibre and reality. I find this a lot with memes or pieces like this meant to sum things up. It doesn't make them lesser, it just means they are part of a whole.

Click to expand...

Yes Elle - a big calorie laden piece of cake that is enjoyable and then when you read it the 5th time over you find more and more empty calories in it -

cookiecat said:

In many of the women's profiles, I see this magnified sense of wanting to find the One who will see in to their souls. A protector and mentor, someone who will ride in on the white unicorn and save the day. Cherish me! Discipline me! Love me for who I truly am! In return for this sense of safety and commitment, the babygirl will be loyal and loving. Who doesn't want that!? Somehow, calling it Daddy/little girl gives us permission to be more romantic? More playful? For some, does that mean less submissive? There are a lot of princesses and kittens in profile names.

Click to expand...

Cookiecat - I think think these are really astute observations. And I think that often these women are looking for a Prince Charming that does not exist and are bound to be disappointed by the reality of men who can never measure up to the lists of what a "perfect" Daddy Dom should be

cookiecat said:

I like the Daddy/girl dynamic but I've gotten to this place without my rose colored glasses.... I like rules, structure, having someone be the boss of me. But I like the idea that I can bring a more joyful sense of submission in to the relationship.

As always, these labels are just that... a starting point to have a conversation, a way to think about a relationship. In the end, it doesn't matter what you call it as long as you keep the lines of communication open and agree on the expectations.

Click to expand...

For me, I like the idea of being appreciated, being coddled a bit more than everyday life affords when I am the bossy one, the tough one, the idea that I can just let go and have someone else be sweet to me and give me rules and boss me around. But I am no little girl and I do not want to be treated as "less than" even as I am called "baby girl" or darlin' *smirk*
we are such complicated creatures aren't we?

And again - it boils down to communication. What I think I want - what I think I need - what I see in you: what you see in me - what you think you want - what you think you need - and where these things can intersect and become yet another thing altogether.

DeepGreenEyes said:

And some of the hotness you describe, and of much of D/s as a whole, comes from the human need for a safe place to experience real places in the human psyche that are deemed off-limits.

Cushioned transgression.

We love Halloween as a concept - or haunted houses or scary movies - because they are ritualized ways of experiencing and enacting fears, as well as our needs to give over in a safe way to threatening energies we know swim beneath the surface of our daily lives. Also, Reese's cups.

Click to expand...

Yum -Reese's cups.... (you got some peanut butter in my chocolate - No~ you got some chocolate in MY peanut butter - lol)

Yes - control, transgression, enacting our fears, trusting, exploring things that are taboo or seem scary or push our limits.
there is a swirl of so many things that while we consider what our desires are, we can only begin to really understand them in the context of a relationship ~ because as humans we are not meant to be alone. We are designed to be working these things out TOGETHER.
though this means it is complicated, and messy and confusing and sometimes deeply painful....
at the best moments it reveals our best selves, we find comfort and joy and love in and with one another.

And what can possibly be better than that?

cb

This is an awesome thread. Love what everyone has had to say, and the fact that all have been respectful and it's drama free. This is why I like lit vs other online communities.

Deleted

DsMhousewife said:

So many folks are dressing it up (which it deserves) but the difference is nothing dressy. Its age play. Its pretending to be a child or exhibiting childlike qualities. Examples: dressing young, wearing diapers, using pacifiers, bedtimes, story times, pouting, tantrums. A Dominant/submissive and Daddy Dom/little girl relationship actually share many of the same traits. Examples: control, spankings, power exchange, authority, submission, sex, emotion, trust. The difference is in the "age" of the submissive. Thats pretty much it. Of course it can be elaborated on and the are many twists and turns and kinks in each individual relationship which most define between the two parties and can get very intricate. Hope that helps. Its only the tip of the iceburg.

Click to expand...

I take exception to the tone of authority in which this post is written.

Some people may engage in age play with DD/lg - however in my experience and in my opinion, DD/lg dynamic may occur without any of these trappings whatsoever. I at least in part identify as a little, however I do NOT engage in age play of any kind including the above list of "dressing young, wearing diapers", allowing or wanting someone else to wipe me or clean me before or after toileting, "pacifers, bedtimes, story time, pouting, tantrums", stuffies or etc.

I would not mind having my hair brushed from time to time. Or being pampered a bit. Or having an owie affectionately kissed. Otherwise, I am the age I am - NOT A CHILD - nor do I pretend to be a child.
The rest is negotiated dynamics and language and various levels of D/s, control, spankings, rules, etc.
But - as with all things BDSM -
each of us get to DEFINE THIS FOR OURSELVES.
I refuse to be told how it MUST BE for me. thank you very much.

Deleted

It is, IMO, such 'general statements' that encourage misunderstanding of these dynamics across the board.

Everything you mentioned is what DOESN'T appeal to me about DD/lg, or to my partner.

We need to speak carefully and respectfully, with the understanding that one size doesn't fit all.

Mr2Apprentice said:

I have noticed over the past 5 years in increase in the number of submissive women looking for a "daddy dom".

Please help me understand what makes a daddy dom dynamic different from a traditional dom/sub dynamic.

Looking forward to hearing from you all...

J

Click to expand...

Note:
He did not actually ask about D/s in which the sub is sexualized as young as I excerpted above. This thread has been discussing in particular the variation of the DD/lg dynamic vs the traditional Dom/sub dynamic.

I have no issue with having a different understanding than another here. I believe we all do best when we speak for ourselves.
My apologies if I took a tone, DsMhousewife.
cb

Deleted