When is NO really NO?

[satindesire]

So what do you do, as a D?

What is the alternative, I mean?

You want something that she doesn't want to give. What happens next?

Sometimes, some D's are okay with not getting 100% of what they want.

ETA: Especially if what they want is at the cost of their Sub's emotional health.

Remember, if you break your toys, you can't play with them.

 

[JMohegan]

Sometimes, some D's are okay with not getting 100% of what they want.

As a matter of plain realism, all humans need to be "okay with not getting 100% of what they want" in a personal relationship.

I should think that would be obvious.

 

[ownedsubgal]

What do blinders have to do with it?

He has "certain purposes." To achieve those purposes, he deliberately manipulates your emotional state with bondage. How is that not manipulation?

obviously our concepts of manipulation differ. in human interaction, i view manipulation as the process of unfairly and deceptively influencing someone for one's own personal gain. this does not take place in my relationship. earlier in the thread you mentioned a process of planning, configuring and gradually "chipping away" in order to get what you want from a submissive. this does sound like manipulation in my mind.

i do not apply the mechanical/medical definition of manipulation (to move, arrange, operate or control by the hands or by mechanical means, esp. in a skillful manner) to human relationships.

 

[where]

That's an approach I hadn't thought of: replacing traumatic memories with new, pleasant ones. She needs to be receptive to that, though, which goes back to the problem in the OP about him needing to see this as more of a process than something to plow through.


.

it's not an approach that should be left to amateurs. if the Dom is a trained and experienced psychotherapist, fine. someone who has seen a few discovery channel programmes.. well I wouldn't trust my mental health to them.

of course. the very fact that it causes such trauma makes it effective for certain purposes he may have.

*shudders* for the life of me, I could not live within such a relationship.

Sometimes, some D's are okay with not getting 100% of what they want.

ETA: Especially if what they want is at the cost of their Sub's emotional health.

Remember, if you break your toys, you can't play with them.

quoted for truth. and it's worth remembering that psychological injuries are much much harder to heal than broken bones or punctured skin.

there is a world of difference, in my opinion, between manipulation, coercion, mind fucking and mental abuse.

 

[satindesire]

As a matter of plain realism, all humans need to be "okay with not getting 100% of what they want" in a personal relationship.

I should think that would be obvious.

I suppose you just answered your question then?

 

[ownedsubgal]

So what do you do, as a D?

What is the alternative, I mean?

You want something that she doesn't want to give. What happens next?

wouldn't an alternative to manipulation be simply stating that, as the Dominant or Master, this is your will and this is what will happen, period? why is there need for cunning or guile?

 

[where]

wouldn't an alternative to manipulation be simply stating that, as the Dominant or Master, this is your will and this is what will happen, period? why is there need for cunning or guile?

because some people enjoy the 'oh no! I can't possibly!... well if you put it like that..."

it's fun having barriers broken down. though I don't see me hitting a glory hole any time soon...

 

[satindesire]

wouldn't an alternative to manipulation be simply stating that, as the Dominant or Master, this is your will and this is what will happen, period? why is there need for cunning or guile?

IMHO:

Again, this raises the topic of the difference between a hard limit because of dislike and a hard limit because of abuse.

If the pyl states "I do not want to give you anal sex because I was raped anally by my family member when I was a little girl." That is a hard limit because of abuse, which in my opinion, would be dangerous to trifle with. A PYL's desire for anal sex must be tempered with restraint for the sake of valuing the pyl's mental health.

If the pyl states "I do not want to give you anal sex because I think it's gross." That is a hard limit due to dislike, and can and -should- be slowly encouraged out of the 'hard limit' status, in order to widen the sexual horizons of the pyl, as a learning tool.

 

[where]

IMHO:

Again, this raises the topic of the difference between a hard limit because of dislike and a hard limit because of abuse.

If the pyl states "I do not want to give you anal sex because I was raped anally by my family member when I was a little girl." That is a hard limit because of abuse, which in my opinion, would be dangerous to trifle with. A PYL's desire for anal sex must be tempered with restraint for the sake of valuing the pyl's mental health.

If the pyl states "I do not want to give you anal sex because I think it's gross." That is a hard limit due to dislike, and can and -should- be slowly encouraged out of the 'hard limit' status, in order to widen the sexual horizons of the pyl, as a learning tool.

that's what i've been trying to say, but annoyingly, you have put it better

 

[JMohegan]

obviously our concepts of manipulation differ. in human interaction, i view manipulation as the process of unfairly and deceptively influencing someone for one's own personal gain. this does not take place in my relationship. earlier in the thread you mentioned a process of planning, configuring and gradually "chipping away" in order to get what you want from a submissive. this does sound like manipulation in my mind.

i do not apply the mechanical/medical definition of manipulation (to move, arrange, operate or control by the hands or by mechanical means, esp. in a skillful manner) to human relationships.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/manipulate

Some would say that traumatizing you, simply because he has "certain purposes," is unfair indeed. I know you don't see it that way, so I'll point out that "artful" is one of the choices mentioned above. Also, "manage or utilize skillfully."

I don't see what deception has to do with it per se, though of course that could definitely be an element of the insidious, should the manipulator choose to work that way.

 

[ownedsubgal]

because some people enjoy the 'oh no! I can't possibly!... well if you put it like that..."

it's fun having barriers broken down. though I don't see me hitting a glory hole any time soon...

hm, good point. it's foreign to my way of living or thinking, but i have read such sentiments from Dominants before...the thrill of seduction, of getting a submissive to moan and beg for something previously detested. still, it seems that there are so many ways to accomplish that without outright manipulation...but perhaps for those who engage, it is sweeter that way?

 

[ownedsubgal]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/manipulate

Some would say that traumatizing you, simply because he has "certain purposes," is unfair indeed. I know you don't see it that way, so I'll point out that "artful" is one of the choices mentioned above. Also, "manage or utilize skillfully."

I don't see what deception has to do with it per se, though of course that could definitely be an element of the insidious, should the manipulator choose to work that way.

thanks for linking me to a definition i have sitting before me, lol. i still believe that manipulation in human relationships connotes some sort of deception, guile or cunning. i am personally much more comfortable with open, honest, straight-forward approaches.

 

[eastern sun]

wouldn't an alternative to manipulation be simply stating that, as the Dominant or Master, this is your will and this is what will happen, period? why is there need for cunning or guile?

Because the cunning and guile are fun to plan and execute, and can be very effective in sexually arousing some submissives. If you're not wired for sexual arousal, it may not seem relevant or interesting.

The way I see it, there's a time for plainspeak. And a time for poetry.

 

[midwestyankee]

So what do you do, as a D?

What is the alternative, I mean?

You want something that she doesn't want to give. What happens next?

There are several alternatives and the best one for any given situation would depend on the people and context. How important is the hard-limited activity to the dominant? What's the basis for the submissive's hard limit? Is the relationship strong or weak; is it likely to be a long-term relationship?

One could:

• Accept the submissive's hard limit and focus on enjoying the remaining range of activities that float one's D boat.
• Accept the submissive's hard limit but openly work with the submissive to find ways to soften her feelings about the activity so that she might someday willingly try it.
• Accept the hard limit and work out an arrangement with the submissive to play with someone else in order to satisfy one's jones for the hard-limited activity.

My experience with D/s relationships is relatively limited and, frankly, this issue has not come up for me. I have yet to become so powerfully attached to a given activity that I can not imagine thriving in a relationship without it. With one exception: I need some degree of power exchange in the bedroom.

Which raises another question: would you apply this same manipulative energy to persuade a non-submissive partner into submitting to you?

 

[where]

hm, good point. it's foreign to my way of living or thinking, but i have read such sentiments from Dominants before...the thrill of seduction, of getting a submissive to moan and beg for something previously detested. still, it seems that there are so many ways to accomplish that without outright manipulation...but perhaps for those who engage, it is sweeter that way?

well I like it, and my Dom likes it too. he likes the fact I'm not a 'sub' because he has every intention of making me one and we are both enjoying the game so far...

I'll let you know if I ever end up begging for the glory hole

 

[JMohegan]

wouldn't an alternative to manipulation be simply stating that, as the Dominant or Master, this is your will and this is what will happen, period? why is there need for cunning or guile?

I don't accept "no, I'm not in the mood" or "no, that makes me mildly nervous" or "no, I consider that beneath me."

But as a matter of practical fact, I have to accept the fact that there are some aversions, so genuine and strong, that artlessly pushing to overcome them would piss off someone to the point of leaving, or traumatize her to the point of personal detriment.

 

[where]

Because the cunning and guile are fun to plan and execute, and can be very effective in sexually arousing some submissives. If you're not wired for sexual arousal, it may not seem relevant or interesting.

The way I see it, there's a time for plainspeak. And a time for poetry.

yes, yes, YES!

There are several alternatives and the best one for any given situation would depend on the people and context. How important is the hard-limited activity to the dominant? What's the basis for the submissive's hard limit? Is the relationship strong or weak; is it likely to be a long-term relationship?

One could:

• Accept the submissive's hard limit and focus on enjoying the remaining range of activities that float one's D boat.
• Accept the submissive's hard limit but openly work with the submissive to find ways to soften her feelings about the activity so that she might someday willingly try it.
• Accept the hard limit and work out an arrangement with the submissive to play with someone else in order to satisfy one's jones for the hard-limited activity.

My experience with D/s relationships is relatively limited and, frankly, this issue has not come up for me. I have yet to become so powerfully attached to a given activity that I can not imagine thriving in a relationship without it. With one exception: I need some degree of power exchange in the bedroom.

Which raises another question: would you apply this same manipulative energy to persuade a non-submissive partner into submitting to you?

I'm technically speaking a non-submissive partner and my Dom uses seduction, manipulation, and punishment.

One day I ~may~ submit, but it's more fun at the moment for us to have me still only half-broken so to speak..

 

[intothewoods]

I guess perhaps we're at an impasse. In your view, manipulation appears to be a normal part of a relationship and I just can't see it that way. I see relationships as partnerships wherein honesty is a paramount virtue. My understanding of manipulation, particularly intentional manipulation, is that it's inherently dishonest.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/manipulate

Some would say that traumatizing you, simply because he has "certain purposes," is unfair indeed. I know you don't see it that way, so I'll point out that "artful" is one of the choices mentioned above. Also, "manage or utilize skillfully."

I don't see what deception has to do with it per se, though of course that could definitely be an element of the insidious, should the manipulator choose to work that way.

I was going to suggest that there is just a difference in definitions going on here. Some people see manipulative as a sinister or, at least, negative trait, when there are other definitions. Kind of reminds me of when people get up in arms about using the term "manipulative" for babies. Babies aren't evil geniuses, except on Family Guy, but normal newborns do learn, hey, crying gets me your attention, so I'm going to cry when I need something, etc. They are learning if I do a, it gets you do give me b. Nothing evil about it, but manipulative isn't inaccurate.

 

[BiBunny]

yes it does, or, maybe it just means that you have been fortunate enough to go through life without ever experiencing serious emotional trauma.

Well, that settles it. I'm just a bitch, then, as the second part of that statement is awfully naive of you.

 

[midwestyankee]

yes, yes, YES!




I'm technically speaking a non-submissive partner and my Dom uses seduction, manipulation, and punishment.

One day I ~may~ submit, but it's more fun at the moment for us to have me still only half-broken so to speak..

I should probably put this disclaimer on the table: I've been married for over 30 years and this summer I came very close to filing for divorce. The main cause of the disintegration of our marriage—which we uncovered in numerous long discussions over a period of several weeks—was a long history of manipulative behaviors on both our parts. This fall we committed ourselves to being fully honest with one another and to speak plainly about our wants and needs rather than to try to achieve them through manipulation.

It's working.

This said, I still enjoy the thrill of seduction but I refuse to use manipulation to carry it out.

 

[JMohegan]

There are several alternatives and the best one for any given situation would depend on the people and context. How important is the hard-limited activity to the dominant? What's the basis for the submissive's hard limit? Is the relationship strong or weak; is it likely to be a long-term relationship?

One could:

• Accept the submissive's hard limit and focus on enjoying the remaining range of activities that float one's D boat.
• Accept the submissive's hard limit but openly work with the submissive to find ways to soften her feelings about the activity so that she might someday willingly try it.
• Accept the hard limit and work out an arrangement with the submissive to play with someone else in order to satisfy one's jones for the hard-limited activity.

My experience with D/s relationships is relatively limited and, frankly, this issue has not come up for me. I have yet to become so powerfully attached to a given activity that I can not imagine thriving in a relationship without it. With one exception: I need some degree of power exchange in the bedroom.

Which raises another question: would you apply this same manipulative energy to persuade a non-submissive partner into submitting to you?

The bit in bold could explain your perspective, in large measure.

Once you overcome resistance, you know that it's possible. And once you know it's possible, you want to do it again. And again. And again.

Why? Partly because you want the activity, but partly because the process itself is so gratifying. As I said earlier, to me this is a perfectly natural, male urge for sexual conquest, thing.

As for your question at the end, that sounds extraordinarily counter-productive. Why on earth would anyone expect deference from someone whom they did not believe was wired for it?

 

[JMohegan]

I should probably put this disclaimer on the table: I've been married for over 30 years and this summer I came very close to filing for divorce. The main cause of the disintegration of our marriage—which we uncovered in numerous long discussions over a period of several weeks—was a long history of manipulative behaviors on both our parts. This fall we committed ourselves to being fully honest with one another and to speak plainly about our wants and needs rather than to try to achieve them through manipulation.

It's working.

This said, I still enjoy the thrill of seduction but I refuse to use manipulation to carry it out.

I'm glad things are getting better for you, MWY.

Clearly, this was very bad manipulation - the kind that doesn't get you what you want, with the added detriment of building resentment over time.

And yeah, I can see how 30 years of very bad manipulation experience, and none of the alternative, would turn me off too.

 

[where]

I should probably put this disclaimer on the table: I've been married for over 30 years and this summer I came very close to filing for divorce. The main cause of the disintegration of our marriage—which we uncovered in numerous long discussions over a period of several weeks—was a long history of manipulative behaviors on both our parts. This fall we committed ourselves to being fully honest with one another and to speak plainly about our wants and needs rather than to try to achieve them through manipulation.

It's working.

This said, I still enjoy the thrill of seduction but I refuse to use manipulation to carry it out.

heh... ok... shall we differentiate between good manipulation and bad?

I fear we may all end up our own arses here!

 

[midwestyankee]

The bit in bold could explain your perspective, in large measure.

Once you overcome resistance, you know that it's possible. And once you know it's possible, you want to do it again. And again. And again.

Why? Partly because you want the activity, but partly because the process itself is so gratifying. As I said earlier, to me this is a perfectly natural, male urge for sexual conquest, thing.

As for your question at the end, that sounds extraordinarily counter-productive. Why on earth would anyone expect deference from someone whom they did not believe was wired for it?

When a woman tells you that she is not submissive and your experience with her confirms it to be the case, is that not simply a hard limit that a D would want to break down over time?

 

[midwestyankee]

heh... ok... shall we differentiate between good manipulation and bad?

I fear we may all end up our own arses here!

Please show me what you mean by "good manipulation."