D/s vs 'Daddy' fetish

[LordMhoram]

Let me open by saying I am rather ignorant of things BDSM or true Fetish. Yet I am ever curious about the human condition, and read a great deal about these things.

It has recently occurred to me that, while the mechanisms for realization or acting out are different, the psychology of both D/s and 'Daddy' fetishists appear to share a great deal in common.

To avoid confusion, I'll refer to the Dom/Daddy as Leader, and the sub/child as follower.

In both cases, there seems to be a transfer of responsibility from follower to Leader. The Leader assumes control, making decisions, setting guidelines, and taking responsibility for what occurs within their relationship.

The follower, in turn, appears to seek the comfort of having a Leader in control, removing decision making, and thus responsibility, from the follower. This appears to give the follower leave to enjoy various satisfying, (often but not necessarily sexual), behavior and activities.

I can see differences, to be sure, but it strikes as if it is the same activity, simply expressed or described each in their own language, then translated to a third language I can understand.

I would be interested to read this community's thoughts and insights if you care to share them.

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

I'd describe it as much the same as D/s, but with a more nurturing aspect.

And I think there's probably a more innocent, almost child like, tinge to my eagerness to please him, though generally I don't subscribe to the little girl half of the equation. I'm just me, and he's just him, only he's Daddy. And different things please him. Like, he gets really happy when I get good scores on my assignments and exams.

I'd probably not agree with the 'leave to enjoy various activities' part, but I'm not exactly sure why. Something in that doesn't sit well with me. I think because I enjoy various things anyway, and because there *is* responsibility in being the small letters partner, it's just a different sort of responsibility.

 

[seela]

I wrote a long post, but somehow it just didn't come out right. I might have a second try with formulating my thoughts later on, when I'm hopefully less clogged up with flue-y things, but in the meanwhile...

The idea of the pyl partner giving up responsibilities and just being the one enjoying the actions of PYL doesn't sit well with me either. I think both parties of any relationship are equally responsible for its success. I think both parties of a D/s relationship are equally responsible for handling with the outcome of decisions made. I think, in the end, everyone is responsible for their own happiness.

At least in my relationship, I still have a lot of decisions to make, even though I'm the submissive one. He doesn't have time, nor does he want to, hover over me and take care of every decision. He does have the final say, should he want to say something, but more often than not he trusts my decisions to be in line with what's best for us.

Being a PYL in a relationship, where they're the sole person responsible for everything, sounds very tedious and time consuming.

 

[YourCaptor]

It's like adjectives vs nouns.

 

[LordMhoram]

If I could find and quote the things I've read that spurred my current question, I would happily do so, but alas, at the time I was reading them I was merely absorbing viewpoints at face value, not intending to ask a difficult question about them.

Yet I think I have not made my intent clear. Let me see if I can clarify what I thought I understood.

I have probably grossly overstated the situation; a thought that grows more certain as I consider my OP in hindsight. The transference of control is a partial one, and not necessarily full time. Specifically, though, I got the impression that at least some of the time, or in an occasional, specific way, the submissive was able to partake of some pleasure, sexual or otherwise, that he/she would not feel comfortable doing were they on their own. Uncomfortable in the sense of embarrassed, or perhaps it is something they consider taboo but wanted to do. By the apparent mechanism of the behavior in question being done at the direction of the Dominant, the submissive was able to enjoy the desired activity without guilt or embarrassment (or with an intended embarrassment perhaps - humiliation?).

Am I simply a little displaced from a truth here, or have I completely misunderstood?

I just went hunting, and in a quick search, here is an example of what I think I am talking about

there is something rather wonderful about it isn't there? When he is in control and I get to be such a dirty little girl with no guilt (because daddy made me do it )it makes me cum so hardagain and again. Yes please daddy

I recognize there might be a somewhat playful and/or metaphorical intent there, then again it could be euphemistic, but it is a fair example of the nature of posts that, taken collectively, appear to suggest what I am asking about.

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

there is something rather wonderful about it isn't there? When he is in control and I get to be such a dirty little girl with no guilt (because daddy made me do it )it makes me cum so hardagain and again. Yes please daddy

I just went hunting, and in a quick search, here is an example of what I think I am talking about

I recognize there might be a somewhat playful and/or metaphorical intent there, then again it could be euphemistic, but it is a fair example of the nature of posts that, taken collectively, appear to suggest what I am asking about.

This, I would definitely take as a playful thing. I've roleplayed it a bit on occasion, but it's not standard day-to-day fare for me. It definitely would be for some other people though. It reminds me of the ones that do 'omg I've been so bad, I need to be punished' and that I just don't get either, it does my head in.

I don't get into these kinds of relationships because I want to be absolved of all personal responsibility. It's quite the opposite actually, for me. It's empowering, and it's liberating. The freedom is in getting to be me, to be in a safe environment where I'm cared for, and everything in my environment for the most part is under control. It's my safe place.

 

[switchbitch]

If I could find and quote the things I've read that spurred my current question, I would happily do so, but alas, at the time I was reading them I was merely absorbing viewpoints at face value, not intending to ask a difficult question about them.

Yet I think I have not made my intent clear. Let me see if I can clarify what I thought I understood.

I have probably grossly overstated the situation; a thought that grows more certain as I consider my OP in hindsight. The transference of control is a partial one, and not necessarily full time. Specifically, though, I got the impression that at least some of the time, or in an occasional, specific way, the submissive was able to partake of some pleasure, sexual or otherwise, that he/she would not feel comfortable doing were they on their own. Uncomfortable in the sense of embarrassed, or perhaps it is something they consider taboo but wanted to do. By the apparent mechanism of the behavior in question being done at the direction of the Dominant, the submissive was able to enjoy the desired activity without guilt or embarrassment (or with an intended embarrassment perhaps - humiliation?).

Am I simply a little displaced from a truth here, or have I completely misunderstood?

I just went hunting, and in a quick search, here is an example of what I think I am talking about


I recognize there might be a somewhat playful and/or metaphorical intent there, then again it could be euphemistic, but it is a fair example of the nature of posts that, taken collectively, appear to suggest what I am asking about.

I believe you understand some of what is described but I also believe that you are trying to generalise too far. Sexuality and role-play changes from person to person, event to event and moment to moment. As I have said before every situation is different, even if your partner is the same partner every time. Daddy play carries different nuances for different people just as no two D/s relationships are the same. They may carry some similarities but trying to pigeonhole them as one category just doesn't work for me. Viva la difference!is not just about men and women but all things sexual. It is one of the nicest things about BDSM: the multiplicity of flavours that can also include the wonderful flavour of vanilla (particularly French vanilla)

 

[wicked woman]

While I'm not sure I can describe the different nuances, there must be some because I have a strong 'eeewww' response to Daddy/girl (for me) that I don't to D/s.

 

[LordMhoram]

While I'm not sure I can describe the different nuances, there must be some because I have a strong 'eeewww' response to Daddy/girl (for me) that I don't to D/s.

It seems I have stepped into a rather complex, gray area.

On the one hand, and I have noted this over a long period of time, not just this thread, that there is great variation within any given classification. This makes sense; why should a fetish or BDSM be ay different from any other human interaction in regard to variety.

But then it begs the question; why make a distinction between D/s and 'Daddy' fetish at all?

Or could it be said that 'Daddy' is really a special form of BDSM, perhaps with little if any 'SM' involved, and the Dominant being specifically in the style of a Father-figure?

Maybe the difference is no more complicated than which label a given couple feels most comfortable with. Forgive me if I use 'label' inappropriately.

I fear I am becoming more confused rather than enlightened.

I do appreciate the responses thus far though. Thank you.

 

[CutieMouse]

I consider "Daddy" to be a subset/interest within the umbrella of BDSM; just because there are commonalities, does not mean D/s and "Daddy" operate from the same perspective.

For example, my lover is [literally] old enough to be my father; I'm only a few years older than his oldest child. There is a power dynamic that runs through our relationship that is nurturing and mentoring/guiding; however, it has nothing to do with a "Daddy" thing. There is no "Daddy made me do it/naughty dirty little girl" stuff in our relationship, because it's just not how we operate.

 

[switchbitch]

It seems I have stepped into a rather complex, gray area.

On the one hand, and I have noted this over a long period of time, not just this thread, that there is great variation within any given classification. This makes sense; why should a fetish or BDSM be ay different from any other human interaction in regard to variety.

But then it begs the question; why make a distinction between D/s and 'Daddy' fetish at all?

Or could it be said that 'Daddy' is really a special form of BDSM, perhaps with little if any 'SM' involved, and the Dominant being specifically in the style of a Father-figure?

Maybe the difference is no more complicated than which label a given couple feels most comfortable with. Forgive me if I use 'label' inappropriately.

I fear I am becoming more confused rather than enlightened.

I do appreciate the responses thus far though. Thank you.

it seems to besomething that human beings just have to do: they love to name things, to set parameters for those named things. I mean the first thing explorers do when they enter a new area is name everything usually after themselves. Chuckle.
BDSM is no different than anything else, we do like to set parameters so that we can communicate our opinions of said parameters. It's just when it comes to things that involve the human psyche and sexual psyche it is difficult to pin down when there are so many variables. So the best we can do is hold to loose descriptions.

 

[wicked woman]

It seems I have stepped into a rather complex, gray area.

On the one hand, and I have noted this over a long period of time, not just this thread, that there is great variation within any given classification. This makes sense; why should a fetish or BDSM be ay different from any other human interaction in regard to variety.

But then it begs the question; why make a distinction between D/s and 'Daddy' fetish at all?

Or could it be said that 'Daddy' is really a special form of BDSM, perhaps with little if any 'SM' involved, and the Dominant being specifically in the style of a Father-figure?

Maybe the difference is no more complicated than which label a given couple feels most comfortable with. Forgive me if I use 'label' inappropriately.

I fear I am becoming more confused rather than enlightened.

I do appreciate the responses thus far though. Thank you.

I agree with CM that Daddy/girl is a subset of D/s, which is probably why you see commonalities in the first place.

You ask '...why make a distinction between D/s and 'Daddy' fetish at all?' Because they're not the same thing, despite their similarities. An apple, banana, strawberry, pineapple, peach, watermelon, orange, are all fruits but no one would say that one is the same as the other. You're the one drawing the common threads, which I don't disagree with, but to say there's no difference isn't the same thing as saying they have things in common. Perhaps put in this context makes sense to you.

*And while I love fruit, I dislike bananas...same thing with the difference between D/s and Daddy/girl for me.*

 

[LordMhoram]

Okay, I think I get the idea. The very fact that the responses I am getting differ on some things, agree on others, is a fact which answers my question rather well, I think.

In brief, there isn't an easy, tidy, all-encompassing answer.


If I may shift gears then and ask a more personal question...

'Bondage' seems to be very much about the art itself, and need not have anything to do with sex, at least that is the impression I get.

When I have used it, it has been about control; especially sexual, but more too. It has always been a simple thing, more about forcing the woman to remain in a given position (generally with a view to accessibility).

How would you classify that activity? Is that what you call 'Light Bondage', or is there another name for it? Not really bondage at all? Or is this another YMMV issue

 

[CutieMouse]

Bondage is bondage. Some bondage is artistic -shibari(sp?); some is practical - I don't want him/her to move; some is mental/psychological - don't move, this is going to hurt.

Regardless of what form it takes, it's all bondage (of a sort).

 

[wicked woman]

<snip>

How would you classify that activity? Is that what you call 'Light Bondage', or is there another name for it? Not really bondage at all? Or is this another YMMV issue

I'd ask why is it important for you to classify that activity.

In other discussions we've talked about a general dislike of labels but there being a need for a common language so we can talk to each other. We've also talked about how BDSM isn't one size fits all.

What does it matter if this is light bondage or not? What's light for one might be medium or heavy for another. I think it's more important to concentrate on understanding your partner's pain threshold and what both of you enjoy and don't enjoy than worry about detailed labels.

 

[wicked woman]

I'd ask why is it important for you to classify that activity.

In other discussions we've talked about a general dislike of labels but there being a need for a common language so we can talk to each other. We've also talked about how BDSM isn't one size fits all.

What does it matter if this is light bondage or not? What's light for one might be medium or heavy for another. I think it's more important to concentrate on understanding your partner's pain threshold and what both of you enjoy and don't enjoy than worry about detailed labels.

Rethinking my response in light of your disclosure in the OP that you're ignorant about BDSM. Might I suggest that you get a few basic books about BDSM (or whichever of those initials interest you) and read them? Your questions seem to be more about semantics than the core of BDSM. It's not an exact science...in fact not a science at all. It's not one size fits all and I, for one, love that it isn't.

Please don't interpret this as an attempt to have you stop asking questions, that's not my intent. It's just that I'm not hearing anything in your questions suggesting ignorance...more that you're being analytical and looking at the semantics of it. Semantics isn't going to lead to an easy, or necessary, answer.

 

[midwestyankee]

It's really tempting to create a Grand Unified Theory of BDSM but there's a cautionary tale to bear in mind: even Einstein failed to create a grand unified theory in his own field and he was probably more accomplished in his field that any of us are in bdsm.

 

[eastern sun]

Sex is a primal drive. Like eating. Yet we have incredible variations in the foods we eat, the effort we put into its preparation, and the aesthetics we use (or don't use) in the presentation.

What makes one person choose one food over another? Why does one person spend a lifetime learning to cook, while another just eats what's prepared for them?

Here we are learning all about new foods, new recipes, a smorgasbord of inventive, creative possibilities. Offerings for all tastes.

And underlying it all there's some basic drive for the survival of the species.

I know this has may have nothing to do with the questions you're asking, but you might have an easier time thinking it all through if you use the food metaphor, and the way we categorize/think about eating.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I would say the difference between "Light bondage" and "heavy bondage" lies in how tightly the knots are tied and how strictly the limbs are immobilised.

yeah?

 

[StrayKat]

I would say the difference between "Light bondage" and "heavy bondage" lies in how tightly the knots are tied and how strictly the limbs are immobilised.

yeah?

No idea but I am impressed with simplicity of your solution.

Or maybe just looking for excuse to hit on you

 

[Stella_Omega]

*an un-gentlemanly giggle*

 

[HottieMama]

"Light bondage" = duct tape
"Heavy Bondage" = barbed wire...





(Just kidding....)

 

[FurryFury]

I don't see either as a transfer of responsibility. I'm always responsible for myself. I don't seek to be irresponsible.

What I enjoy is giving over control to someone I trust. Control that, if I wanted, I could take back. I don't want to though.

I see Daddy's as slightly more nurturing but no less into "hard play activities" than Doms. Probably that's because it's want I'd like.

I don't play "I'm a naughty little girl and need to be spanked" games though. That's not my thing.

I love being naughty as directed and in good ways.

I love being spanked.

I want it to be because we both want it.

FF

Let me open by saying I am rather ignorant of things BDSM or true Fetish. Yet I am ever curious about the human condition, and read a great deal about these things.

It has recently occurred to me that, while the mechanisms for realization or acting out are different, the psychology of both D/s and 'Daddy' fetishists appear to share a great deal in common.

To avoid confusion, I'll refer to the Dom/Daddy as Leader, and the sub/child as follower.

In both cases, there seems to be a transfer of responsibility from follower to Leader. The Leader assumes control, making decisions, setting guidelines, and taking responsibility for what occurs within their relationship.

The follower, in turn, appears to seek the comfort of having a Leader in control, removing decision making, and thus responsibility, from the follower. This appears to give the follower leave to enjoy various satisfying, (often but not necessarily sexual), behavior and activities.

I can see differences, to be sure, but it strikes as if it is the same activity, simply expressed or described each in their own language, then translated to a third language I can understand.

I would be interested to read this community's thoughts and insights if you care to share them.

 

[FurryFury]

Exactly.

Bondage is very rarely "my thing".

I've personally found the art of rope work along with the trust of the pyl and caring of the PYL to be extremely hot and beautiful. There can be such a strong D/s vibe going on there.

I tend to prefer the mental / psychological aspects, as well as the power exchange aspects best in any kink activity.

I've had to learn how to keep one from getting loose and/or moving because that's what he wants but it's not my turn on.

Bondage is bondage. Some bondage is artistic -shibari(sp?); some is practical - I don't want him/her to move; some is mental/psychological - don't move, this is going to hurt.

Regardless of what form it takes, it's all bondage (of a sort).

 

[eastern sun]

I've always understood "light bondage" to mean scarves, neckties, handcuffs, silky ropes on a bed, etc. while "heavy bondage" meant rope or cable suspension, chains, cages, that sort of thing.