A Master's 'right' to play with others

[00Syd]

Thank you, I've read about other book recommendations too, where do I go for these books? I'm guessing my local library is a little too close-minded for such things... and uh I'm on a tight budget here

I bought my copy at Barns and Nobel. It's actually a fairly "mainstream" book, that can be found in the "love and relationship" section of many book stores. It's in my Library, so it might be in yours *shrug* It shouldn't be too hard to find And worse comes to worse, you could always buy it on the 'net. You can probably find a super cheap used copy of the first edition, but I really recommend searching out the second edition.

 

[satindesire]

We're both poly-capable but here's the funny thing. Nor he or I believe that just because he's a PYL, that doesn't give him the "RIGHT" to do anything he pleases. His actions directly affect my well being in a very real way, and since I'm not willing to give up my emotional health just so he can fuck someone else (and neither is he) or etc, he doesn't do things that he knows will hurt me in a lasting and not-hot-BDSM-fun way.

The weird thing is, we really match each other well. We share the same hobbies, the same friends, the same value systems and we both satisfy each other sexually really well. We like the same movies, we like the same sports and we have similar tastes in food, fashion and just about everything else. I'm like a female version of him, really.

I sometimes kind of miss female companionship, but he does so well at giving me everything I need, it's always the fleeting thought of "Boy, I wish I had another girl here to share clothes with/do my hair/talk about fashion with." and that's about it.

A lot of people have said that "No one person can give you EVERYTHING you need." but honestly, when it comes to him, he does! I've never been in a relationship that's so open, fulfilling and happy. We don't even fight. It's amazing!

So, no, I don't think that just because a PYL is a PYL they can do whatever they want and damn the consequences. pyls are people, REAL people with real boundaries and emotions that PYLs should consider and value.

If you break your toys, you can't play with them anymore.

 

[ownedsubgal]

Really?? All I've read about are contracts and collars and slave training and being given away for training and playing at BDSM parties... that's why all this stuff about Masters having the right to play with others is on my mind... honestly the only stuff I've read about non-ownership relationships has been in Literotica! Where are the non-ownership accounts you speak of?!

have you ever been to collarme? while there are plenty of M/s folks there, they tend to get a hard time when discussing the so-called "extreme" aspects of their relationships, things which are very basic to slavery. and actually on most lifestyle-related websites i've come across, there is much passionate discussion about the supreme importance of establishing safewords, limits, rights, submissives not doing anything they don't truly want, etc. how no matter what you always have the right to say no, the right to leave, and any Dominant who claims otherwise is an abusive a-hat. and of course, there is the rather vocal school of thought that proclaims consensual slavery is just an elaborate game or kink, and nothing to be taken seriously whatsoever.

you also have to keep in mind that lifestyle language, particularly online, can be rather loose. people will say "slave," when what they really mean is casual bdsm play partner, the term "slave training," when what they really mean is teaching said casual bdsm play partner how to suck their cock, and don't even get me started on the thousand-and-one types of "collars!" lol...it can be very confusing for a newbie especially.

and, as far as BDSM goes, not all M/s couples are part of the BDSM lifestyle or engage in bdsm activities.

 

[the captians wench]

wenchie, thanks so much.

though i certainly don't view my life as "extreme," in fact compared to many of you folks i feel quite plain and dull...i mean, i don't even know what "subspace" is! lol. but in between all the cooking and laundry and other old-fashioned housewifey stuff, there are the big hard things too, things i recognize would not be bearable or acceptable to most people.

You are most welcome.

I don't think any of us view our relationship the way others do. I knew that you wouldn't consider your relationship as extreme, just as I don't view mine as "online" but some one looking at segments from the outside would consider it just that.

As to "subspace" from what I know of you, I don't think it's something you would enjoy. I think I'm going to try to revive the "subspace vs slavespace" thread, if I can find it, when I have time. You've made me think about that distinction and I'd like to get some new views on that subject again if we might.

 

[eastern sun]

So do I. Father left me, husband left me... how do you get around it??

I focus on my own strengths. And I figure, that given our inevitable deaths, I need to be able to thrive on my own (with or without him). Then, the time we share together is truly a blessing, rather than something I take for granted, or depend on for my self-esteem.

What really killed me was one period where he was giving his best to someone else, and then coming home and giving me his worst. I really didn't like that, and he couldn't see that it was happening. All he could see was the myriad number of ways I was failing him.

But I took that time to focus on improving my own life (which needed improving because I'd been so completely other-focussed for a long time), and figured that eventually she was going to get to experience his worst too. (and that I was actually lucky for the time he spent out of the house since he was so angry with me when he came home.)

In some ways, that period did create some distance between us, but I'm going to suggest that that isn't necessarily a bad thing. We aren't always hurt by the things we are frightened of.

 

[FloggingMolly]

For me/us, there is no PYL right to play outside the marriage. When push comes to shove, he is husband first, then Dom. Sex/relationships with others is a hard limit done seperate, and at the moment a soft limit again (we've done it in the past but I strongly dont want to at present) for playing together. He has no right as my Dom to do anything that would be seriously damaging to my emotional and marital health.
This was agreed before I'd wear his collar, and has also been a long standing rule of our vanilla relationship.
We were virgins when we slept together, and neither has had penetrative sex with anyone else, so perhaps this is why we are the way we are?

 

[Homburg]

Rights? Pfft, the only rights your PYL has are those guaranteed to him by whatever government you live under. There is no PYL/pyl Bill of Rights out there. You each set boundaries by communication and negotiation.

 

[Black_Bunny]

If you break your toys, you can't play with them anymore.

I love this

have you ever been to collarme? while there are plenty of M/s folks there, they tend to get a hard time when discussing the so-called "extreme" aspects of their relationships, things which are very basic to slavery. and actually on most lifestyle-related websites i've come across, there is much passionate discussion about the supreme importance of establishing safewords, limits, rights, submissives not doing anything they don't truly want, etc. how no matter what you always have the right to say no, the right to leave, and any Dominant who claims otherwise is an abusive a-hat. and of course, there is the rather vocal school of thought that proclaims consensual slavery is just an elaborate game or kink, and nothing to be taken seriously whatsoever.

I haven't been reading other forums, so it's not discussion as such. More like, general info on 24/7 BDSM relationships, what dungeons/parties/harems are around in my area, what's the proper etiquette and so on. It's that sort of 'general information' that I can't seem to find about non-ownership relationships.

 

[satindesire]

I love this

I don't take credit for it babe, it's a common but incredibly apt phrase used around this forum.

 

[fuckmeat]

I am a little like osg in that it feels wrong to me to impose restrictions and limits on someone I have trusted to submit to. If you choose your partner carefully, that person knows what you can and can't handle. There are obviously things that I would never be able to tolerate (e.g. scat) and so I would not submit to someone with an interest in those things. People's tastes and kinks change over time but my Mistress knows that certain things would traumatise and damage me, leaving me as a less secure and useful slave.

I basically see casual play or polyamory as my dom's prerogative. I'm not an particularly jealous person, providing I feel secure and not that I am being replaced in some way. I'm also genuinely bisexual (by which I mean to imply that interacting sexually with another woman solely because a guy thinks it's hot is not bisexuality, it's being an attention slut) which makes a big difference. I would like to have my opinion sought about any possible addition but again, it's not something I would feel able to insist upon or complain about if it didn't happen.

If there was a huge clash of personality between me and another sub, I would do my best to work around that out of devotion to my Mistress. It would not be my place to decide that a new dynamic was untenable.

JMO

By the way, can anyone tell me what PYL means?

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

By the way, can anyone tell me what PYL means?

PYL = Pick Your Label = Top/Master/Mistress/Dom/Domme etc

pyl = the other half

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

I am a little like osg in that it feels wrong to me to impose restrictions and limits on someone I have trusted to submit to. If you choose your partner carefully, that person knows what you can and can't handle. There are obviously things that I would never be able to tolerate (e.g. scat) and so I would not submit to someone with an interest in those things. People's tastes and kinks change over time but my Mistress knows that certain things would traumatise and damage me, leaving me as a less secure and useful slave.

I basically see casual play or polyamory as my dom's prerogative. I'm not an particularly jealous person, providing I feel secure and not that I am being replaced in some way. I'm also genuinely bisexual (by which I mean to imply that interacting sexually with another woman solely because a guy thinks it's hot is not bisexuality, it's being an attention slut) which makes a big difference. I would like to have my opinion sought about any possible addition but again, it's not something I would feel able to insist upon or complain about if it didn't happen.

If there was a huge clash of personality between me and another sub, I would do my best to work around that out of devotion to my Mistress. It would not be my place to decide that a new dynamic was untenable.

JMO

By the way, can anyone tell me what PYL means?

We're both poly-capable but here's the funny thing. Nor he or I believe that just because he's a PYL, that doesn't give him the "RIGHT" to do anything he pleases. His actions directly affect my well being in a very real way, and since I'm not willing to give up my emotional health just so he can fuck someone else (and neither is he) or etc, he doesn't do things that he knows will hurt me in a lasting and not-hot-BDSM-fun way.

I don't see it as imposing restrictions. I didn't flat out say no. We just negotiated the new activity on terms that I could cope with emotionally. Like satin's Mr, as she mentioned here, mine has no interest in doing things that make me feel bad, and because this was new to our relationship, we had to sort it out, discuss it and see what would or wouldn't make me feel bad.

There's no way to know everything about someone's emotional state and how they'll react to your changing tastes and desires unless you talk about it, I think, no matter how carefully you choose your partner.

Duh. Unless of course, you had a preconceived relationship before introducing the M/s aspects and knew each other well, which seems to be the case for the examples here. I'm viewing it from the 'evolution of the personal relationship along with the D/s relationship at the same time' side of things.

 

[fuckmeat]

I don't see it as imposing restrictions. I didn't flat out say no. We just negotiated the new activity on terms that I could cope with emotionally. Like satin's Mr, as she mentioned here, mine has no interest in doing things that make me feel bad, and because this was new to our relationship, we had to sort it out, discuss it and see what would or wouldn't make me feel bad.

There's no way to know everything about someone's emotional state and how they'll react to your changing tastes and desires unless you talk about it, I think, no matter how carefully you choose your partner.

Duh. Unless of course, you had a preconceived relationship before introducing the M/s aspects and knew each other well, which seems to be the case for the examples here. I'm viewing it from the 'evolution of the personal relationship along with the D/s relationship at the same time' side of things.

G and I have always been D/s to one degree or another but only as that dynamic has deepened with time have we developed formal notions of what our 'rights' are. I also think that truly 'casual' play in BDSM is usually a bad idea. There has to be some acquaintance or friendship in order for there to be the trust required for casual BDSM play to take place. Maybe not in a more public scene or setting that's externally monitored and/or regulated but certainly when it comes to opening up your home and personal dynamic. Plus, I don't think it's as black and white as carving a line between significant others, friends and casual play partners. It's fun and healthy when someone can be more than a no strings encounter.

If I was the sort of person who would be hurt by the possibility or actuality of an open relationship, G would never have settled down with me. I would be like you and choose someone who did not want or need me to be intimate with others or allow a PYL that freedom. I completely understand your viewpoint. Also, I know satin has a child, whereas I don't, nor do I have a male SO. G is lesbian (whereas I'm bi) so no men will be introduced by her, making my pregnancy risk zero. I don't need to consider the implications for a child of opening up a hetero marriage, nor do I need to trouble myself with the worry about how their parents' BDSM dynamic and open relationship might affect junior as he/she matures. If I was a mother, I have no doubt that I'd be very possessive about the father of my child and view anything other than monogamy as a threat to that child's future stability. There's nothing wrong with that at all and I'd be the last person to criticise anyone else's choices about their submission. I'm not trying to be all 'subbier than thou' here, I was just talking about the dynamic G and I currently share.

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

G and I have always been D/s to one degree or another but only as that dynamic has deepened with time have we developed formal notions of what our 'rights' are. I also think that truly 'casual' play in BDSM is usually a bad idea. There has to be some acquaintance or friendship in order for there to be the trust required for casual BDSM play to take place. Maybe not in a more public scene or setting that's externally monitored and/or regulated but certainly when it comes to opening up your home and personal dynamic. Plus, I don't think it's as black and white as carving a line between significant others, friends and casual play partners. It's fun and healthy when someone can be more than a no strings encounter.

If I was the sort of person who would be hurt by the possibility or actuality of an open relationship, G would never have settled down with me. I would be like you and choose someone who did not want or need me to be intimate with others or allow a PYL that freedom. I completely understand your viewpoint. Also, I know satin has a child, whereas I don't, nor do I have a male SO. I don't need to consider the implications for that child of opening up a hetero marriage, nor do I need to trouble myself with the worry about how their parents' BDSM dynamic and open relationship might affect him/her as he/she matures. If I was a mother, I have no doubt that I'd be very possessive about the father of my child and view anything other than monogamy as a threat to that child's future stability. There's nothing wrong with that at all and I'd be the last person to criticise anyone else's choices about their submission. I'm not trying to be all 'subbier than thou' here, I was just talking about the dynamic G and I currently share.

I never thought you were playing 'subbier than thou' I'm truly intrigued by those that are in deeper M/s relationships, and while I might appear at times to not value a point of view, that will usually be more due to my clumsy expression of my non-understanding.

I enjoy learning about other dynamics. It helps me define for myself what I'd like, and upon reflection, it'd be pretty damned close to what satin has.

Once, it was my absolute preference that we didn't engage in play with others, but I deferred to his decision to go ahead, once I felt safe knowing that he'd taken my emotional needs into consideration. It was godawfully difficult, but I got there. It still is very hard for me at times, in certain situations, such as meeting another couple one on one, whereas I find others, like swingers clubs, to be great fun.

I think that has a lot to do with how I am within a relationship, D/s status notwithstanding. The fact that I myself do see things very black and white is because I'm very all or nothing with my emotions. If I love someone I do so totally. I have a hard time opening myself to that person, and when I do, it's impossible for me to share it with someone else, and shattering to feel as if that effort isn't valued by my partner because they're sharing themself emotionally with someone else.

I'd say I'm clearly not poly inclined.

 

[satindesire]

Also, I know satin has a child, whereas I don't, nor do I have a male SO. G is lesbian (whereas I'm bi) so no men will be introduced by her, making my pregnancy risk zero. I don't need to consider the implications for a child of opening up a hetero marriage, nor do I need to trouble myself with the worry about how their parents' BDSM dynamic and open relationship might affect junior as he/she matures. If I was a mother, I have no doubt that I'd be very possessive about the father of my child and view anything other than monogamy as a threat to that child's future stability. There's nothing wrong with that at all and I'd be the last person to criticise anyone else's choices about their submission. I'm not trying to be all 'subbier than thou' here, I was just talking about the dynamic G and I currently share.

Very few people here act "subbier than thou" sweetie, and no one was implying that you were. We're all just sharing our own personal journeys through our lifestyles in BDSM.

We (meaning Mister and I) certainly do have to take into consideration the fact that as parents, we have understand that our choices now don't just affect us, but also affect our daughter. She didn't ask to be brought into this world, we chose to bring her into existence by our actions, and to not think about her and consider her future and her emotions as she grows up with us would be selfish at best, and negligent parenting deserving of NOT being parents anymore at worst.

I never thought you were playing 'subbier than thou' I'm truly intrigued by those that are in deeper M/s relationships, and while I might appear at times to not value a point of view, that will usually be more due to my clumsy expression of my non-understanding.

I really don't think what you have in your life is any less "Deep" as anyone else, sweetheart. The special brand of D/s that everyone shares is just as deep and meaningful to them as the next person and worthy of the same amount of respect by the community at large.

I enjoy learning about other dynamics. It helps me define for myself what I'd like, and upon reflection, it'd be pretty damned close to what satin has.

I am fully aware of just how blessed I am, and my hopes are that everyone has the chance to share the kind of deep personal satisfaction that a truly happy and well-matched relationship can bring.

 

[ownedsubgal]

it is certainly true that if you break your toys, you can no longer play with them...but my personal feeling about that has always been, "i am his to break." but that is because i am a slave and i try to operate from a mindset that i am property first. before even being his life partner or the love of his life, i am property. now i should say that if you asked him he probably would not prioritize it that way, and i wouldn't have if i had considered this question two years ago. but the difficult times we have gone through have reminded me quite bluntly of my place, and to once again attain my own sense of balance (and heck, peace) i have to function from a "first, you are slave" mindset. and with that firmly in mind, i can go through life a bit more calmly and accept the tough things just a bit easier.

 

[CutieMouse]

The Ethical Slut is a classic in terms of polyamory (and a very good read), but there's a new book out also called Opening Up by Tristan Taormino. It's been years since I've read TES, so I my memory might be faulty, but Opening Up felt like a more mature approach to the subject [to me].

 

[rida]

The Ethical Slut is a classic in terms of polyamory (and a very good read), but there's a new book out also called Opening Up by Tristan Taormino. It's been years since I've read TES, so I my memory might be faulty, but Opening Up felt like a more mature approach to the subject [to me].

Agreed on the above. I read The Ethical Slut, but it left me luke-warm as I did not find anything new or groundbreaking for me, and it felt a bit preachy at times. I'm now reading Opening Up and I'm finding it a much better read, in term of contents and overall tone.

As for the OP subject: I'm in an open marriage, open both to sex buddies and emotional relationships; the Sadist and I are also in an open relationship. It has nothing to do with them being the PYL, but it is simply because I am not monogamous so do not expect them to be either. However, as they are the PYLs, it is not my place to veto their other partners. Keeping in mind though that with Hubby, due to the fact that we share a life, I know my opinion will be listened to. He has however veto power on my other partners.

 

[seela]

For me this seems to be reversed in comparison to many other people. I'm fine with him having emotional bonds with the people he encages in some sort of sexual activity with, but I'm less ok with him having just casual fuckbuddies.

I don't get anything out of his casual fuckbuddies and sometimes I have found myself comparing myself to them in terms of sexual performance: "He's simply having sex with them, so the sex must be really awesome - am I a bad lay or something because he needs all that extra sex without the emotional bond?" I have felt pretty miserable when he has played with other people.

The one time he has had a romantic emotional bond with another person besides myself I felt a lot less insecure. I thought it would be the other way around; that I would be ok with casual sex and would fall apart even by the thought of him loving another woman. But I ended up getting a lot by extension from his other relationship. I, too, got to experience the new relationship energy emerge, he was a lot more energetic and eventually I gained a new friend. When the relationship ended, it was a hard hit on both of us, even though I didn't have a romantic relationship with the other woman.

We discussed him having other women besides me when we first entered the relationship. Then I thought I would be ok with casual sex, but as I told, it turned out to be a nightmare. I tried, we tried, on several occasions to see if there's something that would make me feel ok about it, but it turned out that the thing that made it ok for me was a romantic bond between him and the woman. Who knew.

At the moment we're strictly mono. He doesn't even have any interest in playing with anybody else after the previous relationship turning south. I'm probably more inclined towards polyamory than I have lead myself to believe.

 

[Daddy2mylilgirl]

Rights? Pfft, the only rights your PYL has are those guaranteed to him by whatever government you live under. There is no PYL/pyl Bill of Rights out there. You each set boundaries by communication and negotiation.

Shhhhhh. You don't want a pyl revolt, do you?

Then who will give us blowjobs and make us a sammich afterwards?

 

[Homburg]

Shhhhhh. You don't want a pyl revolt, do you?

Then who will give us blowjobs and make us a sammich afterwards?

Our slaves, of course.

 

[BiBunny]

If you're a slave, then he can do anything he damn well pleases. He may or may not choose to do so, but it's well within his "rights" if that's what he wants to do.

Since you're not a slave, it's not as cut-and-dried as that.

I don't identify as a slave. I don't even know WTF I am anymore. But my Owners play with whoever without my "permission" and usually without my knowing until after the fact. It doesn't bother me.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I love this


I haven't been reading other forums, so it's not discussion as such. More like, general info on 24/7 BDSM relationships, what dungeons/parties/harems are around in my area, what's the proper etiquette and so on. It's that sort of 'general information' that I can't seem to find about non-ownership relationships.

I'm guessing that Dom/sub relationships always mean ownership, since D/s is all about mindfucking. Maybe you're looking for an S/M relationship, more physical? You do not have to be owned to enjoy being the bottom sexually, or bondage-wise. You don't have to be owned full-time to "submit" for an evening, or weekend, or month. You can play under a short-term, time limited contract.

You can experiment. You should experiment. BDSM is not intrinsically a marriage-- you can play within a marriage, but you don't have to.

 

[ninser]

Gosh that is a hard question.


It seems like it should be his right ( in a perfect world )

Rationally I would think yeah its his right but in reality I would HATE it so much.

I have had a relationship ( vanilla ) where the guy has done whatever the hell he chooses whenever and with whoever and that was very very difficult for me

 

[Black_Bunny]

I bought my copy at Barns and Nobel. It's actually a fairly "mainstream" book, that can be found in the "love and relationship" section of many book stores. It's in my Library, so it might be in yours *shrug* It shouldn't be too hard to find And worse comes to worse, you could always buy it on the 'net. You can probably find a super cheap used copy of the first edition, but I really recommend searching out the second edition.

Thanks, I will have a look in my library then

I'm guessing that Dom/sub relationships always mean ownership, since D/s is all about mindfucking. Maybe you're looking for an S/M relationship, more physical? You do not have to be owned to enjoy being the bottom sexually, or bondage-wise. You don't have to be owned full-time to "submit" for an evening, or weekend, or month. You can play under a short-term, time limited contract.

Sorry, I'm not up to speed with all the abbreviations - what do you mean by an "S/M relationship"? I appreciate the need to experiment, and I will, but I do know that I want more than a purely physical thing, to submit only on occasion. I definitely enjoy and get a kick out of it being 24/7.

I am a little like osg in that it feels wrong to me to impose restrictions and limits on someone I have trusted to submit to. If you choose your partner carefully, that person knows what you can and can't handle.

I agree, it's not that I think he's busting to go screw someone else, I don't think he would even if I 'gave' him that freedom, I just feel weird for me to be saying "you can do this" and "you can't do that".

I asked him today what his view on this was, and he replied that he believes it should be something consented to by both parties, and he prefers a submissive with a say in matters than a slave who is more like property, but even if it was agreed that outside sex was ok, generally in his experience (he's been a Dominant before in previous relationships), one Dom to one sub is what works best for him.

(ahhhh... cue warm squishy feelings )