A Master's 'right' to play with others

[Etoile]

It's not necessarily sexual for some people, at least not in the "must get off now" kind of way.

Yup. Play is generally more about creating physical sensations and emotional reactions, not sex. It's a way of being intimate with someone, having fun, and maybe some sexual tension. Sex is not always at the center of BDSM.

 

[Black_Bunny]

It's not necessarily sexual for some people, at least not in the "must get off now" kind of way.

Hmm, fair enough. In my and my Dominant's case, it would be very sexual. So I guess that sort of thing wouldn't work for us, dammit.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Sometimes it's an emotional release...fucking might be the last thing on your mind afterwards!

I know, I couldn't fathom it either when I was a youngun.

 

[Etoile]

Hmm, fair enough. In my and my Dominant's case, it would be very sexual. So I guess that sort of thing wouldn't work for us, dammit.

That's because you guys are a couple. Not everybody who plays together is partnered with the other person; I have friends who play together but they are each in their own relationships.

 

[eastern sun]

Thanks for the links, I didn't realise people did those things with others without including sex...

The clubs and dungeons I've gone to don't allow sex. (I always assumed it was a zoning issue )


edit - and ditto on the experience of physical sensations and emotional release. I am rarely aroused when I'm lost in the physical sensations. I go to an entirely different place, even with my husband.

 

[Black_Bunny]

That's because you guys are a couple. Not everybody who plays together is partnered with the other person; I have friends who play together but they are each in their own relationships.

I was thinking more in the way that intothewoods mentioned, a monogamous couple that 'plays' with others (either in threesomes, foursomes or one partner playing with an extra, is the way I was thinking). I can't imagine myself playing with someone who's not my Dominant and it not being sexual, and vice versa.

I know, I couldn't fathom it either when I was a youngun.

LOL, ah well I have much to learn

 

[ownedsubgal]

DC TNG???? Ok, admittedly I haven't been in ages, but my impression of that group is a whole bunch of people who want to screw, and a heavy dollop of prodommes, since the group does stuff with a FDomme or Prodomme group in the area. I don't recall a lot of people who ID as M/s.

that's it, TNG. Daddy has a longtime group of acquaintances/friends (most well over 40, hilariously ) who frequent that munch, and he will sometimes go to associate with them, not so much meet a bunch of new people. the one time i went with him i did notice that it was basically split into two groups...the young play-focused folks on one side, and the older more relationship-focused folks wayyy on the other.

Anyway, I get that you're talking about more than that particular group. That's fine. I do know people locally who have power exchange relationships, but like I said, they're more private about those details and would prefer to chat about bdsm play.

And when my PYL and I go out to events, we really don't get into what our relationship is all about. I'm sure most of this is due to the fact that we know a few people already, and don't really talk to that many new people, but also my PYL is fairly private.

Daddy is very social, and always interested in meeting people with whom he can relate. and again, since we aren't into the bdsm play thing, that would never be a topic of discussion either of us would be involved in with these folks.

 

[ownedsubgal]

Yeppers, this is where I come from. And what I seeing here are a lot of people who, as ownedsubgal says;

That has to be incredibly frustrating to you when so few people live with the totally owned mindset that you do, and insist on misnaming themselves.

And there is nothing "merely" as someone above mentioned, about topping / bottoming in BDSM minus the D/s lifestyle.

That is insulting.

ETA: ownedsubgal has just corroborated my guess. I'm sorry sweetheart-- what you are is so incredibly rare.

eh i really don't think i'm all that rare, at least in the sense of having a submissive personality or even being in a very one-sided power dynamic. if you take the non-monogamous aspect of my sex life out of it, i could probably fit in very well in some orthodox religious community. but within the "lifestyle" relationships like mine do seem to be rare, which is kinda depressing as i originally sought out D/s as a place where i would finally belong.

and i agree with you that there is nothing "merely" about anyone's sexual or relationship identity. however you're wired, i think you should own it, accept it, embrace it.

 

[Homburg]

I can see why some would find T/b labels insulting if it was said to them with disdain, as in "you are JUST a bottom" or "you are ONLY a Top".

This drives me nuts. I call someone that bottoms for a "bottom" because it is the label they assume when they bottom. It's like getting in the driver's seat of a car and piloting that car makes you the driver. That's it. I don't consider it some sort of personality thing as it is a label based on deeds.

I tend to avoid "submissive" because of multiple reasons. First, I see it as more of a personality trait than a valid signifier for a person. Calling some a "submissive" is about as useful to me as calling a generally cheerful person a "happy". Second, the act of submission is valid only within its' dynamic, and has no effect on anyone else, or anywhen else. Third, it is one of the single most misapplied labels in the whole scene. The lingual drift this term has encountered due to the romanticism surrounding it makes it, in my eyes at least, basically useless.

And I only use the term "slave" relationally. It makes me itch when I see someone that is unowned call themselves a slave. I understand why many do it, as they are trying to identify in that manner so as to attract an owner, but I honestly see the term as only valid in relation to said owner. In short, "He is a slave," holds little meaning to me, but "He is Miss L's slave" is more meaningful. I do not consider this a particularly soft/friendly idea, and it may well not be popular. *shrug* I am just trying to explain my personal gut reaction to various words to perhaps provide a different perspective.

My take on the various PYL words is similar. "Top" is akin to "driver" much like bottom. "Dominant" is a personality trait, and has been so over-romanticised that it is basically useless to me as a label. And "master" only has meaning relationally. As before, it can be useful if someone seeks a slave-type to partner with, but I don't recognise it as some sort of title int he way it is commonly, and casually used.

The caveat to this is that I respect master and slave more as labels when leather folks are using them. Leatherfolk tend to not fuck around with those words, and, from my understanding, go through a lot to have the right to wear those labels within leather society.

--

My Homburg was a warm mouse grey... if that helps?

Labels mean things to people. And other people's assessments of those labels are very meaningful. Look at me, all bristly because some of you seem to be denigrating SM and physical play...

I'm thinking to myself; "yeah, she says she honors my choices, but I can tell she doesn't..."

And that on very little actual evidence, you understand.

We label ourselves, and woe betide the person what ain't impressed with our label.

Hold off a bit until you see the folks that say, "Online only BDSM is just as real!!1!" That's worth bristling over.

Honestly, part of my reaction to labels is in reaction to that attitude. If someone in an online-only LDR can call themselves a "Dominant Master" and sneer at me because what they do is as "real", I don't care much for the validity of those terms.

--

Thanks for the links, I didn't realise people did those things with others without including sex... I'm not sure I understand how it would work, doing those things with someone who's not your partner and then either having no sexual release, or leaving the poor third person alone to go fuck your partner?

Yes, you do basically that. I've played with many people at parties, at my home, at their home, etc, and no actual raw sexual contact was involved. And by that I mean that genitals and erogenous zones were not stimulated for the express purpose of sexual release. It didn't bother me then and does not bother me now. How many guys go the strip clubs? How many women ogle hot guys on the beach? How many people snog without fucking?

Best case scenario sees my play partner go home and fuck the ever-loving hell out of their partner. Worst case scenario, said partner has a whole lot of sexual energy for a really righteous bit of onanism.

Hell, I've had many a bottom admit that they were incredibly wound up and were going to masturbate themselves stupid when they got home. It was just not gonna happen there. Many, many, many times that play partner was someone else's wife, girlfriend, or other SO, and said partner was cool with it only so long as sex wasn't involved.

And, to be frank, there is enjoyment in producing that level of sexual need. One girl in particular was very memorable for just that. She was a good friend whose husband was out to sea. She hadn't had any intimate contact for about four months and wanted to be tied. Her husband, a very cool cat with no rope skills anyway, agreed to let her do it so long as there was no sex or orgasms. That poor girl was vibrating with lust and want in my ropes. She was all but crying for want of touch and her eyes were screaming at me to Just. Do. It. I didn't. Her husband trusted both myself and her and I wasn't about to breach that, and she was certainly not going to do it herself. Still, it was all kinds of edifying to see that beautiful little thing biting her lip, blushing, giving off heat like a furnace, and quivering with need in my ropes. You can't buy that kind of need.

 

[Stella_Omega]

eh i really don't think i'm all that rare, at least in the sense of having a submissive personality or even being in a very one-sided power dynamic. if you take the non-monogamous aspect of my sex life out of it, i could probably fit in very well in some orthodox religious community. but within the "lifestyle" relationships like mine do seem to be rare, which is kinda depressing as i originally sought out D/s as a place where i would finally belong.

You're rare in D/s. Especially since you don't do pain...

and i agree with you that there is nothing "merely" about anyone's sexual or relationship identity. however you're wired, i think you should own it, accept it, embrace it.

And defend it.

 

[ownedsubgal]

I can see the problem of being unsure how others relationships work when getting to know people, I would think it wouldn't be all that difficult for the new party to explain themselves a bit with their introduction, of for you to ask a few questions in order to clarify.

you would think it would be that simple, huh? unfortunately it's far from it, as many people seem to find some special thrill out of not only assigning themselves a completely false label, but also passionately and graphically expressing relationship philosophies in which they don't even believe. i.e., they will call themselves a "master," and say how they would never permit a slave to speak without permission, to look them in the eyes, to stand or walk on two feet inside the home, etc. these people will nod their head in agreement with my Master when he describes his basic rules for me and the life we share together. but then there comes that moment when they realize that my Master is absolutely serious, that we REALLY live this way, and that it is not some kinky erotic fantasy we are roleplaying from time to time. and of course, the moment when we realize that we have just wasted a whoooole lot of time.

 

[Homburg]

edit - and ditto on the experience of physical sensations and emotional release. I am rarely aroused when I'm lost in the physical sensations. I go to an entirely different place, even with my husband.

I get this. I am usually in no way physically aroused when actively topping. My cock might as well be asleep. The brain and all senses are fully and vibrantly engaged, but there is no obvious signs of physical arousal, just a ferocious and all-encompassing focus.

--

eh i really don't think i'm all that rare, at least in the sense of having a submissive personality or even being in a very one-sided power dynamic. if you take the non-monogamous aspect of my sex life out of it, i could probably fit in very well in some orthodox religious community. but within the "lifestyle" relationships like mine do seem to be rare, which is kinda depressing as i originally sought out D/s as a place where i would finally belong.

and i agree with you that there is nothing "merely" about anyone's sexual or relationship identity. however you're wired, i think you should own it, accept it, embrace it.

Darlin, you aren't rare for being a submissive. You are rare for being so very self-aware and honest with yourself and others. You are rare for being in such an incredible dynamic. And, well, you are just rare in general.

You are the person I give credit to for my willingness to rid my dynamic of safewords. We butted heads on it when I first got here, but you showed me how it could work by example. In short, you taught me something that substantively altered a portion of my life. I would call that decidedly rare.

 

[ownedsubgal]

You're rare in D/s. Especially since you don't do pain...

who says i don't "do" pain? i suffer physical pain when i must, and accept it, it's just not at all eroticized.

And defend it.

absolutely. but that journey to self-acceptance can be a long and rocky one, heck it certainly was for me.

 

[Black_Bunny]

I call someone that bottoms for a "bottom" because it is the label they assume when they bottom. It's like getting in the driver's seat of a car and piloting that car makes you the driver. That's it. I don't consider it some sort of personality thing as it is a label based on deeds.

If I look at it that way, I am both a submissive and a bottom, in that here now while I'm separate from him I'm submissive to him and what he may demand of me, and once he gives me an order I 'get in the drivers seat' as it were and actually bottom him.

I've played with many people at parties, at my home, at their home, etc, and no actual raw sexual contact was involved. And by that I mean that genitals and erogenous zones were not stimulated for the express purpose of sexual release. It didn't bother me then and does not bother me now. How many guys go the strip clubs? How many women ogle hot guys on the beach? How many people snog without fucking?.... I've had many a bottom admit that they were incredibly wound up and were going to masturbate themselves stupid when they got home. It was just not gonna happen there.... And, to be frank, there is enjoyment in producing that level of sexual need.

I suppose I must be different then (which I don't mind, just still learning about myself) in that every guy I've kissed I have fucked, and a big problem I have when going to strip clubs is the huge amount of tension I start to feel, and before too long I feel like a jet plane wouldn't get me home fast enough!

But I like that you admit there is a very sexual aspect to it for the bottom, and that you've had the self-control to stop exactly at the 'line' that was agreed upon.

 

[Stella_Omega]

who says i don't "do" pain? i suffer physical pain when i must, and accept it, it's just not at all eroticized.

For me, pain is erotic. Giving it and receiving it.That's what I meant when I said "you don't do pain."

absolutely. but that journey to self-acceptance can be a long and rocky one, heck it certainly was for me.

No, I mean defend it from other people's prejudices and preconceptions.

 

[Black_Bunny]

you would think it would be that simple, huh? unfortunately it's far from it, as many people seem to find some special thrill out of not only assigning themselves a completely false label, but also passionately and graphically expressing relationship philosophies in which they don't even believe. i.e., they will call themselves a "master," and say how they would never permit a slave to speak without permission, to look them in the eyes, to stand or walk on two feet inside the home, etc. these people will nod their head in agreement with my Master when he describes his basic rules for me and the life we share together. but then there comes that moment when they realize that my Master is absolutely serious, that we REALLY live this way, and that it is not some kinky erotic fantasy we are roleplaying from time to time. and of course, the moment when we realize that we have just wasted a whoooole lot of time.

That is so... low of people. I know I'm too trustworthy, and I forget that people lie. I personally would go into a fair deal of explanation (or ensure my Dominant explained it) about how our relationship works, with no shyness or fear of scorn in saying how it really is. Otherwise you'd be starting a friendship based on a lie... I can see how this would be upsetting for you both

 

[ownedsubgal]

Darlin, you aren't rare for being a submissive. You are rare for being so very self-aware and honest with yourself and others. You are rare for being in such an incredible dynamic. And, well, you are just rare in general.

You are the person I give credit to for my willingness to rid my dynamic of safewords. We butted heads on it when I first got here, but you showed me how it could work by example. In short, you taught me something that substantively altered a portion of my life. I would call that decidedly rare.

omg...that is just sooo cool. and amazing! i remember that safeword debate very well too...

we all really do need to meet one of these days!

(oh, and if any damages are incurred as a result of the no-safeword thing, make sure to sue Daddy )

 

[ownedsubgal]

That is so... low of people. I know I'm too trustworthy, and I forget that people lie. I personally would go into a fair deal of explanation (or ensure my Dominant explained it) about how our relationship works, with no shyness or fear of scorn in saying how it really is. Otherwise you'd be starting a friendship based on a lie... I can see how this would be upsetting for you both

i don't know if it's lying or just getting carried away with a fantasy. either way, it's a pain in the bum.

 

[Homburg]

omg...that is just sooo cool. and amazing! i remember that safeword debate very well too...

we all really do need to meet one of these days!

(oh, and if any damages are incurred as a result of the no-safeword thing, make sure to sue Daddy )

*snort*, no, there's no worry there. I own my fuck-ups

And your Daddy is one of those people that could call himself a Master while single and I wouldn't bat an eye.

 

[ownedsubgal]

*snort*, no, there's no worry there. I own my fuck-ups

And your Daddy is one of those people that could call himself a Master while single and I wouldn't bat an eye.

He wouldn't. that whole "i'm a Master/slave" outside a relationship thing is major pet peeve of ours as well. the lone exception would be someone who has "mastered" a particular skill...take Bruce Lee...now that man was a Master!

 

[Homburg]

If I look at it that way, I am both a submissive and a bottom, in that here now while I'm separate from him I'm submissive to him and what he may demand of me, and once he gives me an order I 'get in the drivers seat' as it were and actually bottom him.

This is how I personally prefer to see it. Yes, it requires more words, but there is no real ambiguity. No, I don't think it is the only way one can express self-labeling, but it sure beats confusion in my book.

And, yeah, I do think that they are separate enough to warrant mentioning both. I've known too many sadistic bottoms, maso tops, etc to not be of the opinion that the spectrum is not a one line thing.

I suppose I must be different then (which I don't mind, just still learning about myself) in that every guy I've kissed I have fucked, and a big problem I have when going to strip clubs is the huge amount of tension I start to feel, and before too long I feel like a jet plane wouldn't get me home fast enough!

I generally can't stand strip clubs. It boggles me that people will pay to be teased, especially when the show does very little for me. But, honestly, most of the dancers that I've known were pretty toppy chicks, and that just doesn't hit my buttons.

The fun part was that I was always the one out of my group of friends that the strippers would talk to after the set. I was there to play pool and be the designated driver, and very rarely tipped, but I have had some really interesting conversations while my buddies look on enviously. I guess the lack of drunken lusty worship in my eyes made me stand out.

But I like that you admit there is a very sexual aspect to it for the bottom, and that you've had the self-control to stop exactly at the 'line' that was agreed upon.

Oh the sexual aspect is huge and undeniable. Enormous. It is a sexual encounter, regardless of whether orgasms/penetration are involved or not.

And I have never crossed that line. I won't either. When I set that line, I stick to it, period. And, boy howdy, have I ever kicked myself for drawing those lines.

About two years ago I got to meet a particular female litster. I told her that it was just a casual thing with no play as I didn't want to make her nervous. I do that every time I meet someone for the first time unless said meeting is at a play party. It's a rule of mine. Well, we met and I kicked myself for saying that because, wow, yeah, I really wanted to bad things to her. She struck me as such a cool person and, dammit, I wanted to have her bottom for me. And, yes, she was hot to death, so that probably helped.

But, hey, rules are rules. If I don't respect my own rules, I don't respect myself. Can't have that.

 

[Homburg]

He wouldn't. that whole "i'm a Master/slave" outside a relationship thing is major pet peeve of ours as well. the lone exception would be someone who has "mastered" a particular skill...take Bruce Lee...now that man was a Master!

Yep, exactly my take on it. Master plumber, Master carpenter, Master brewer, etc all have huge meaning. "Lord Master McNastyboots"? Not so much.




"Lord Master McNastyboots" is a trademark of Rosco Rathbone Industries and is used without permission.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Yep, exactly my take on it. Master plumber, Master carpenter, Master brewer, etc all have huge meaning. "Lord Master McNastyboots"? Not so much.




"Lord Master McNastyboots" is a trademark of Rosco Rathbone Industries and is used without permission.

But that's exactly the sense I often use it. Evil Geoff is a master top.

To name one example.

 

[Homburg]

But that's exactly the sense I often use it. Evil Geoff is a master top.

To name one example.

And a really great guy to hang out with, as well as an engaging presenter.

But, yeah, I get your point. In that specific usage, it can make sense. I don't know that I'd go for it as being equivalent to the use of the term within the trades, but that is because topping doesn't have a ranking system, time in grade, etc. Well, unless you're talking leather; at which point I have no personal experience and can't say.

As an aside, I have been called a "rope master" before, and objected as politely as possible. I am no master of ropes under any definition of the phrase that I would accept and do not want people to classify me as such even as a compliment.

 

[Stella_Omega]

And a really great guy to hang out with, as well as an engaging presenter.

But, yeah, I get your point. In that specific usage, it can make sense. I don't know that I'd go for it as being equivalent to the use of the term within the trades, but that is because topping doesn't have a ranking system, time in grade, etc. Well, unless you're talking leather; at which point I have no personal experience and can't say.

Well, it's fairly subjective, but I think we all know of people whom we admire for their skills in the community? You get enough bottoms speaking admiringly of someone's whip hand, and the term "master" comes to mind fairly easily. it's a matter of consensus. And sometimes, of course, of someone's swollen ego.

As an aside, I have been called a "rope master" before, and objected as politely as possible. I am no master of ropes under any definition of the phrase that I would accept and do not want people to classify me as such even as a compliment.

Well like I said... You tie knots long enough, with enough heart and soul and passion, and at some point you will have to own your title...