A Master's 'right' to play with others

[satindesire]

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 )

Aww, yay! *smooch!* That's so great sweetie!!

 

[fuckmeat]

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".

Yeah, I now what you mean. Also, even if you do give him that freedom, he still has a responsibility to use discretion. If he chose to play with others at a time when your own dynamic wasn't that great, it would be a very poor way to handle things. Similarly, he might at some time decide to look for another play partner but that shouldn't be among your close friends and family. Opening a relationship up to others is something that must be done with care, consideration and respect for all involved. It's not as though you'd be giving him carte blanche to pack the trunk with condoms and go on a slutathon.

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 )

Sounds to me like a man who likes what he has very much and sees the value in preserving that. I'm glad you're so sinfully happy.

Plus, dominants don't always think poly through. It might be hot to have 3 willing women attending to your every whim but he'd also have 3 x the expense, 3 x the PMT and 3 mother in laws!

 

[Homburg]

Plus, dominants don't always think poly through. It might be hot to have 3 willing women attending to your every whim but he'd also have 3 x the expense, 3 x the PMT and 3 mother in laws!

I think far too many don't get to this step in the reasoning. And the math works differently. It's more like "Two times the women equals four times the trouble."

And, for the record, it is just as accurate when you put "men" in place of "women" according to a very good friend of mine who is in a quad with three men. Personally, I think men would be more trouble, but I bow to her greater experience.

 

[ownedsubgal]

I'm guessing that Dom/sub relationships always mean ownership, since D/s is all about mindfucking.

actually very few D/s relationships involve ownership..most are based around a power dynamic within boundaries established by both parties. so i'm curious Stella what has given you that opinion about D/s?

 

[Black_Bunny]

actually very few D/s relationships involve ownership..most are based around a power dynamic within boundaries established by both parties.

In my opinion the word 'ownership' can have different meanings, or go to different extremes. For example, my Dom has ownership over all my sexual activity, and my non-sexual activity when I'm around him, but not over my work life or my friends. I would call our relationship as having more than just a 'power dynamic', I would apply that term to a couple that practices D/s in the bedroom only

 

[satindesire]

This is just another perfect example of how many words can mean many different things to many people.

 

[Etoile]

by agreeing to become his slave, i accepted all that may come.

And that, right there, is the essence of it all.

One should never enter a D/s relationship with someone who doesn't share your values. If you meet somebody and they're really super awesome, and you have great kinky sex, that's fantastic. But before any ownership comes into it, you must make sure you're suited to each other.

It's just like a vanilla couple in that regard. If a girl starts dating a guy and they want to get serious, I would expect them to discuss poly as part of their relationship. Is it something they both want? If so, move forward. If only one of them wants it, and the other is totally not okay with it, then don't get serious.

Never give yourself to someone with things still left unsaid.

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

And me, I tend to interpret it as "I belong to him" but not "he owns me"

Hmm.

 

[ownedsubgal]

In my opinion the word 'ownership' can have different meanings, or go to different extremes. For example, my Dom has ownership over all my sexual activity, and my non-sexual activity when I'm around him, but not over my work life or my friends. I would call our relationship as having more than just a 'power dynamic', I would apply that term to a couple that practices D/s in the bedroom only

very interesting! sd is right, the meaning and connotation of certain terms varies so greatly between different individuals...one of the primary things that can make "lifestyle" discussion so difficult at times.

when i use the word ownership in a lifestyle context, i am referring specifically to ownership of another person, another life. to make it less confusing i should probably just stick to "slavery" to describe that.

as for "power dynamic," i use it because i hate the "exchange" bit of the term power exchange. but i use it to describe a relationship where one person has some degree of authority over the other, where it is understood that there is an imbalance of power. basically, a D/s relationship. those whose expression of dominance or submission is limited to sex only, i would not describe as being in any sort of D/s relationship or as having any kind of imbalanced power dynamic.

 

[Black_Bunny]

Mmm, I get you. I love how we can freely express our opinions of terms and get an understanding of each other here

How do you feel about a Master or Dominant saying to his slave or submissive, "I want you to have freedom of choice in this and that area"?

 

[Etoile]

I love how we can freely express our opinions of terms and get an understanding of each other here

QFT!!

 

[CutieMouse]

Mmm, I get you. I love how we can freely express our opinions of terms and get an understanding of each other here

How do you feel about a Master or Dominant saying to his slave or submissive, "I want you to have freedom of choice in this and that area"?

I'm not OSG, but I always viewed that as a PYL utilizing the strengths of his or her pyl to the best of everyone's ability... but I also freely admit I don't do well with micro-managers, so my opinion may be a bit biased. LOL

 

[Etoile]

I'm not OSG, but I always viewed that as a PYL utilizing the strengths of his or her pyl to the best of everyone's ability... but I also freely admit I don't do well with micro-managers, so my opinion may be a bit biased. LOL

I feel the same way. And frankly, delegating is sometimes best for both. I have no head for numbers and I am impulsive with my money, if I were a Domme I'd want my sub to do the budgeting for me.

 

[Black_Bunny]

QFT!!

Umm what does this mean? It's not in my precious list of chat abbreviations in the 'How To' section...

 

[satindesire]

Umm what does this mean? It's not in my precious list of chat abbreviations in the 'How To' section...

It's "Quoted For Truth"

 

[Stella_Omega]

actually very few D/s relationships involve ownership..most are based around a power dynamic within boundaries established by both parties. so i'm curious Stella what has given you that opinion about D/s?

Perhaps I should have said "to you, BB, D/s is always about ownership," but since I was responding to the bolded words in her comment. I didn't think it necessary.


Since I've been here I have seen so much discussion of these dynamics as if they implied all-encompassing ownership-- I'm not actually talking about you, osg, because you really know who and where you are-- but about how so many new people show up here making that assumption, and how many people simply go on assuming that way. Such as;

How do you feel about a Master or Dominant saying to his slave or submissive, "I want you to have freedom of choice in this and that area"?

That sounds to me like a whole lot of assumption. After all, if the slavery is only in the bedroom that doesn't give a lot of area for actual choices. Unless you mean... "I want you to have freedom of choice" regarding some sexual practice?

Because then we have Etoile talking about accounting... And damn, it would be SO worth it to me, to Dom someone who could do accounting!

 

[Etoile]

That sounds to me like a whole lot of assumption. After all, if the slavery is only in the bedroom that doesn't give a lot of area for actual choices. Unless you mean... "I want you to have freedom of choice" regarding some sexual practice?

BDSM is sexual and sensual. Most people who do it, do it because they enjoy being a top or bottom. If you don't like Ye Olde Whippes and Chainnes on any level at all then you're probably not getting into this kind of thing.

So if you are into kink, then shouldn't the place where the dominant has the most control be in the bedroom? IMO, saying "no anal" as a hard limit is like...damn, you just took out 99% of the fun. If you get off on kinky sex, you probably get off on being forced to do things you don't like. If you're putting limits on sexual practices, then it's just topping and bottoming in my book...no D/s or M/s involved whatsoever.

Because then we have Etoile talking about accounting... And damn, it would be SO worth it to me, to Dom someone who could do accounting!

LOL, leave it to me to come up with totally non-pervy things like that. But really, I see that as very submissive. If my sub is telling me "Mistress, please don't buy that, you don't need it, you need to save your money for xyz" then that is serving me. That is keeping my best interests in mind. That is saying that my financial well-being, and by extension my overall happiness, matters to you.

Now, I wouldn't expect someone who doesn't have these issues to come up with something like this. But in the case where a dominant person identifies a personal weakness, they should certainly be able to look to the sub for help. Unless, of course, you are both shopping-crazy, and then you probably have a really really big sex toy collection.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Etoile, yeah to all of that but...


"just" topping and bottoming? In my world, topping means forcing my sex partner into things. I certainly dominate in the bedroom-- or submit, as the case may be. I just don't think about dominance and submission as if they were a picket-fence marriage. It's really striking to me how many people here do.

And I am fucking cranky because I did not get the spanking I wanted-- too many kids in the house.

That's what marriage is.

 

[Etoile]

"just" topping and bottoming? In my world, topping means forcing my sex partner into things.

Really? I've only ever seen T/b used as "person doing the spanking" and "person being spanked" etc. (demo dolly, what have you)

 

[satindesire]

That's why I love this place, because everyone who practices has such a different flavor of D/s!

I personally couldn't be with someone who wanted to go outside my hard limits. I have very few, but they're integral to my emotional health, so anyone who wanted to go past that would really damage me as a person. I'm against all forms of beastiality, so if my PYL wanted me to blow a dog, I'd have no choice but to leave the relationship in order to preserve my sanity.

I don't think that makes me less of a submissive than person x, I think that just makes me different.

 

[FurryFury]

I was talking with my girl the other night about this. How to her monogamy makes no sense and that's understandable IMO. However, don't you want to be the most cherished one at least? The Alpha of the partners?

In her case it seems all the girls want to be her alpha but her gen is mostly saying they are polyamorous not to mention Bi. I suspect that will change with maturity. When they really do want a commitment from the other person and aren't as scared to make one!

 

[Stella_Omega]

Really? I've only ever seen T/b used as "person doing the spanking" and "person being spanked" etc. (demo dolly, what have you)

depends on what the activity is, I guess. That's where this wonderful PYL/pyl designation comes in handy...

That's why I love this place, because everyone who practices has such a different flavor of D/s!

I personally couldn't be with someone who wanted to go outside my hard limits. I have very few, but they're integral to my emotional health, so anyone who wanted to go past that would really damage me as a person. I'm against all forms of beastiality, so if my PYL wanted me to blow a dog, I'd have no choice but to leave the relationship in order to preserve my sanity.

I don't think that makes me less of a submissive than person x, I think that just makes me different.

Whereas, I could imagine being persuaded to do that... and I am not a sub!

 

[satindesire]

...Whereas, I could imagine being persuaded to do that... and I am not a sub!

Limits are limits in people for different reasons, which is absolutely fascinating to me. I'll do just about anything as long as it won't hurt my emotional and mental health, so anything else is fair game. I guess that's more than a hard limit, that's like a relationship ender.

 

[Seurat]

I have very few, but they're integral to my emotional health

I think it works both ways. The trick in situations (and can be very tricky) is to lay out the hard limits for both the dom and the sub. I've known subs who were into being shared as part of the experience, but who were associated with doms that were looking for a one to one setup.

Depending on how inportant is is for either partner, it is definitely a deal breaker.

 

[fuckmeat]

How do you feel about a Master or Dominant saying to his slave or submissive, "I want you to have freedom of choice in this and that area"?

I've always had a lot of freedom, which might sound odd coming from someone who self-identifies as a slave. G has never had any interest in micro-managing any aspect of my life. She sees that as tiresome and backwards-assed service, like the tail wagging the dog. Similarly, she has never wanted me to be dependent on her in any way, as some slaves are who don't work or handle finances etc. She would see that as giving her a burden of responsibility and having to do things for me that I'm perfectly capable of handling alone. If anything, it'll be me who does the mundane stuff like paying the bills and making sure our finances are ok. Now that she's in very poor health, our roles have evolved a little because sometimes my judgement is better than hers and she needs to defer to me.

The basic principle we have is that whatever I do, I try my very best to do things as she would wish for them to be done. I also make sure that wherever appropriate, she is always a priority. It's almost like a religious person who tries to keep in mind that God sees everything they do and they'll be judged on it later. It's a learning curve to start with but now I rarely manage to totally misjudge a decision or situation.

So when you talk about freedom of choice, I do have that but I am expected to act in a way that I believe she would approve of. It's always worked for us because it keeps things fluid and saves us both the hassle of me consulting her about things every five minutes.