a good sub?

[YourCaptor]

pure //we reach the question, perhaps differing in individual cases: does the master wish to see the 'pet's' will surrendered. or simply deployed in service. //

YourCOk, I’m having trouble deciphering.

Umm…

Are you asking, because it is Pats will to submit, Pat cannot truly submit because Pat is still doing what Pat wants?

pure: not exactly. i'm asking about pat's will; it seems pat does not assert it. does she have it, or just routinely 'cave' or yield to whoever, having authority, says, 'do this'?

if she's in a lineup for a bus, and the driver says, unfairly, 'move to the back of the line because others were here first' and this wasn't the case, she simply says, "yes sir."

of what does her "surrender" to the master consist: "on your knees"; "yes sir." same words, same type of behavior.

does the master have 'authority' over her? perhaps. but so did the bus driver. does she _give the master authority over her_? perhaps yes, but her parents, her teachers, the traffic cop, all get the same treatment. one might say, rather than 'give' authority, that she, unreflectively, gives way in the face of any authority that asserts itself.

consider this analogy: at the bustop a woman winks at you: you kiss her and she responds passionately. you think 'she's attracted to me; wants sex with me.' you step back. six different men come to the stop and receive the same treatment. clearly she's not attracted to you in particular. maybe to every man. we might even argue, she's not 'attracted' to anyone, maybe it's a game, or she's acting on a dare.

So you are wondering if Pats submission to everyone lessons Pats submission to the dominant?

Depends on the dominant involved, personally Pat is sounding really hot.

So… I am really curious now, who is Pat? and is Pat on the boards?

 

[BeachGurl2]

So you are wondering if Pats submission to everyone lessons Pats submission to the dominant?

Depends on the dominant involved, personally Pat is sounding really hot.

Really? I'm curious as to what it is that makes her sound hot to you. Not judging, seriously asking. Because it seems to me that while Pat may be 'submitting' (I'm personally reserving judgment on that as well), she isn't engaged in the interchange. And I'm not sure, based on the little that has been presented, that Pat's removal of herself and her children from a physically abusive situation is in any way anything more than a survival instinct. Especially considering the explanation of her own take on the situation. So I'm really very curious as to why someone who isn't actively engaged in her own submission would be seen as desireable.

[My use of the pronoun 'her' or 'she' is only because that is my world view, not because I view subs as only female. It saves from having to do all that s/he stuff that gets tedious. So no offense meant to anyone.]

 

[YourCaptor]

Really? I'm curious as to what it is that makes her sound hot to you. Not judging, seriously asking. Because it seems to me that while Pat may be 'submitting' (I'm personally reserving judgment on that as well), she isn't engaged in the interchange. And I'm not sure, based on the little that has been presented, that Pat's removal of herself and her children from a physically abusive situation is in any way anything more than a survival instinct. Especially considering the explanation of her own take on the situation. So I'm really very curious as to why someone who isn't actively engaged in her own submission would be seen as desireable.

[My use of the pronoun 'her' or 'she' is only because that is my world view, not because I view subs as only female. It saves from having to do all that s/he stuff that gets tedious. So no offense meant to anyone.]

Interchange? You mean that, the sub gives the master all the power stuff?

How is Pat not part of that?

 

[BiBunny]

Interchange? You mean that, the sub gives the master all the power stuff?

How is Pat not part of that?

'Cause she doesn't HAVE a Master. She's just reacting to her environment.

 

[YourCaptor]

'Cause she doesn't HAVE a Master. She's just reacting to her environment.

So Pat empowers everyone then, is that a problem?

Really? I'm curious as to what it is that makes her sound hot to you.

Pat sounds hot because submission is hot. The more submissiveness the hotter.

 

[Pure]

Y C

the first robotic sex dolls will soon be available. the *really* submissive, i.e. non moving, but fleshlike ones already are!

 

[YourCaptor]

the first robotic sex dolls will soon be available. the *really* submissive, i.e. non moving, but fleshlike ones already are!

Oh I know

real girls are cheaper though, and the dolls tend to lack personality. I saw asimo a little while ago, the guy needs a lot more work, I don’t think he can bend over yet. All he would be good for is running away. Robots also tend to short circuit when I make them cry all pretty, then again so do girls.

So, you gonna buy me a robot or tell me who Pat is?

 

[Sir Victor]

Interesting! Is this a test, or a trick question? LOL!

 

[velvet_crush]

So Pat empowers everyone then, is that a problem?


Pat sounds hot because submission is hot. The more submissiveness the hotter.

No problem if you don't mind that Pat submits to the bus driver, too. If this is your vision of the relationship you have with your sub, then it isn't a problem.

I liked what Caitlynn stated earlier:

I answered no, she can't give up any meaningful power, but it's a bit more complicated than this IMO.

But maybe that's my perspective? I like to think that what I'm giving Him has some meaning?? As I type this, is Pat's submission any less meaningful because she submits easily to everyone?

 

[Pure]

we could put is this way:

she does not *go onto her knees* before her master.

she is for a long time, always and routinely on her knees before all authorities. it's not an issue she reflects about, or even makes a choice regarding.

who's to say what *any* master might want? is there a typical answer from doms? from dommes?

here's one guess about the results. most all those saying 'yes' she'd make, or likely make, a good sub are males--perhaps 'doms' according to their self-description. (note this is not a claim that among the 'no's' there aren't several doms.)

 

[Sir Victor]

You seem to be casting "Pat's" behaviour as abnormal or uncommon, when in reality it was fairly normal to have "good" compliant behaviour 20 or 30 years ago. Whereas lately few have respect for others and there is a largely F you attitude by the growing number of rebels in society. The US seems to be generally ahead in this shift. Authorities by definition are supposed to be obeyed, why do you view it as abnormal to do so? Rebels were, and are viewed as slightly unstable as I see it. Tell off your boss and it is most often viewed as insubordination, even if he's technically wrong, obviously not if the offense is misconduct of some kind.

Perhaps Pat recognizes authority and does not sweat the small things which would be a waste of time and disruptive. She did leave the husband when things got "crazy" which is a very difficult thing to do even for more assertive people. I have a feeling that you'd probably see another side of Pat if she or her children were seriously threatened or even perhaps insulted.

Childhood environment and upbringing are profoundly powerful conditioning factors. While many people may rebel when they leave the nest, they often come back to what is comfortable and "normal" for them. You have to take into consideration that Pat would be making a decision for her children also which I don't think should be subjected to such an environment. Based on what you've told so far, I believe that a strict, level headed, wise and kind Dom who keeps the D/s aspect out of view of the children would be very good for Pat. This Dom should help Pat become more assertive when it is appropriate so that she is not just a doormat, however I'm not sure that she is based on what you've told so far. It is said, and I agree, that the best head of household is a benevolent dictator even in the vanilla world. In fact rethinking this, I believe that she would be good if she is turned on by the domination, and punishment, otherwise she just needs an old fashioned strict gentleman as a husband. She might not even know and should try some D/s play if she's curious.

You seem to be hinting at the question regarding if a sub/slave should express her real feelings and resist any training that is uncomfortable for her. I do expect a sub to express her real feelings most of the time in order to keep the situation real, since much of the enjoyment is in molding her to be a good sub and pet. This is simply what I prefer for a long term relationship, and I certainly understand that it is just my way. A good Dom, IMO, will have her read, write, and perhaps practice in areas where he wants to change her way of thinking. You use the term Slave so I assume no limits, or she respects/trusts her Dom's limits, otherwise I'd expect a sub to have a limits check list.

 

[BeachGurl2]

'Cause she doesn't HAVE a Master. She's just reacting to her environment.

Exactly. She's just reacting. There is no power exchange because Pat submits equally to everyone.

So Pat empowers everyone then, is that a problem?

Pat sounds hot because submission is hot. The more submissiveness the hotter.

That isn't a problem if that's the kind of submission that you desire.

the first robotic sex dolls will soon be available. the *really* submissive, i.e. non moving, but fleshlike ones already are!

There ya go.

 

[Pure]

note to sir v

those are excellent points. routine compliance IS a feature of some societies. i'll forbear citing some european countries by name, but a friend of mine cut ahead in a supermarket lineup, by accident ,and got publically scolded for 'not following the rules.'

You seem to be hinting at the question regarding if a sub/slave should express her real feelings and resist any training that is uncomfortable for her. I do expect a sub to express her real feelings most of the time in order to keep the situation real, since much of the enjoyment is in molding her to be a good sub and pet.

I agree, yes, express feelings; it's a part of a relationship. That should be the 'default' as it were. If the master wants her to keep them to herself for a time, that's a special--but entirely proper-- situation.

you say, however, [pure wants the sub to] resist any training that is uncomfortable for her


you misread me. i want the pet, whose surrender is meaningful to be CAPABLE of resisting; even to think about it, or sometimes feel the difficulties of obedience. BUT, if the relationship is on track, and she has pledged to obey, then she would avoid showing or *give up* resistance. so to say (assuming her life is not in danger, etc), she would grit her teeth and do as she's vowed to.

needless to say, the *normal* pattern, i.e the best, is for her, to give up graciously. that's her chosen station, where she is happy. but, being human, the odd time, giving up 'self will' may be hard... but still done.

the problem with pat, as i see it, is that it's hard to give content to any particular "giving up of self will," if she's never shown any.

 

[Sir Victor]

you say, however, [pure wants the sub to] resist any training that is uncomfortable for her


you misread me. i want the pet, whose surrender is meaningful to be CAPABLE of resisting; even to think about it, or sometimes feel the difficulties of obedience. BUT, if the relationship is on track, and she has pledged to obey, then she would avoid showing or *give up* resistance. so to say (assuming her life is not in danger, etc), she would grit her teeth and do as she's vowed to.

needless to say, the *normal* pattern, i.e the best, is for her, to give up graciously. that's her chosen station, where she is happy. but, being human, the odd time, giving up 'self will' may be hard... but still done.

the problem with pat, as i see it, is that it's hard to give content to any particular "giving up of self will," if she's never shown any.

When I mentioned your question I did not intend to suggest which side you took and actually I didn't go back to re-read your position. This was not what I meant to suggest, only that you raised the question:
"you say, however, [pure wants the sub to] resist any training that is uncomfortable for her"

I actually agree with you, she has chosen to obey and should obey graciously, most of the time as you say. However, lets say that she's new to deep throat and dislikes it for example, we are about to start a lesson, some begging to put it off but giving in anyway adds to the thrill. However, it is a fine line, and constant complaining is a complete turn off; I would question if she is really a sub. I would expect her to overcome her fear and eagerly seek to learn to be the best at such a task.

I believe that your examples are not extreme enough to demonstrate her lack of will one way or the other. If you said her crazy husband brought 5 men home to use her one night and she just complied when previously stating that monogamy was important to her, then I'd say she was perhaps without will. It would depend on the situation, perhaps she intensely fears him, or worries that he will leave and she needs him for financial reasons. Or perhaps it is one of her fantasies and likes it as play even though she is basically monogamous. Relationships are complex as I'm sure you know. Other extreme examples might be for him to demand that she get tats or piercings knowning she didn't want them, how would she react?

Yes, the queue thing in Europe is well known as is your story.

Interesting discussion Pure.

 

[YourCaptor]

we could put is this way:

she does not *go onto her knees* before her master.

she is for a long time, always and routinely on her knees before all authorities. it's not an issue she reflects about, or even makes a choice regarding.

I don't understand

That isn't a problem if that's the kind of submission that you desire.

I don't really see different kinds of submission. Their are degrees, but kinds?

I do encourage any subs I have a relationship with to express their submissive nature more in their every day lives.

I don't think it detracts from their submission at all. In fact it in my experience the sub will feel more free, and be happier all around. Sort of ironic that by taking a sub as mine I free them at the same time. Thats D/s for ya and really what I like to do too.

 

[Pure]

note to YC

YCI don't really see different kinds of submission. There are degrees, but kinds?

I do encourage any subs I have a relationship with to express their submissive nature more in their every day lives.

I don't think it detracts from their submission at all. In fact it in my experience the sub will feel more free, and be happier all around. Sort of ironic that by taking a sub as mine I free them at the same time. Thats D/s for ya and really what I like to do too.

---
Good points. Kind of common sense. Suppose pat finds an 'owner' and has a relationship with him or her. We picture that owner telling pat to do something; pat does it without a question or thought of resisting. Presumably this would include some difficult things, like say peeing in front of the master; never touching her panties for a whole day, whatever.

However as to your sentence.//In fact it in my experience the sub will feel more free, and be happier all around.//

I'm not sure about this. pat already does have a kind of all round "freedom": when she encounters authorities, she does what they say. and, assuming they're not monsters, this 'frees' her for other concerns. many if not most people in the world live this way; under strong authority. indeed this is ancient. IMO, allegedy 'primitive' tribes, aboriginal grouping have strong authority; no one questions, say, the rules about contacts with menstruating women. young men do not say "i think i'll pass on the 'initiation into manhood.'"

so the change for pat is rather opposite. if she's now freer, it's in the bedroom, or sexually. although before she yielded to a tradition minded husband, who might have, say, insisted on fucking every second night, she now has a master with many more options. so we picture her "freely" complying with non-ordinary sexual demands, say for example having sex with a woman.

i don't think you've made me change my mind [option #1, 'no'], but i'm having some new thoughts on the matter! your approach is not shared with the one owner whom i know best. she'd rather the pet appear strong, even intractable, in interacting with others. that makes the "object" something special to her.

 

[intothewoods]

This person sounds like he or she is suffering from post traumatic stress disorder or something. It's so extreme. I don't know how to take it seriously.

Generally speaking, I dislike the idea of encouraging submissive behavior to "everyone" or in the non-intimate parts of a pyl's life, at least in any way that might draw a lot of attention to the pyl. It's one thing to say, I'd like you to dress modestly when you go to work. It's quite another to say, okay, show up to the office in a dress that just barely covers your ass. It seems, first of all, frivolous and childish. Like D/s is a party trick. It also seems like the PYL has no respect for the pyl. The pyl's job, and how he or she is viewed there is irrelevant.

 

[intothewoods]

i'd like to invite those in this thread to participate in the related poll and thread 'a good sub,' which i started: velvet, inthewoods, sweet erika, desdemona, sir winston, bibunny and others.

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=592491

in particular, i'd ask, is the 'type A' sub the opposite to 'pat'?

I know some people disagree with this (it's been argued here before), but I think there's a difference between your sexual orientation, and what you respond to in an intimate relationship, and how you conduct yourself at work or in daily public life. So Type A may be the opposite of pat in public life, but as to their submissiveness, there's no negative or positive correlation.

 

[YourCaptor]

she'd rather the pet appear strong, even intractable, in interacting with others. that makes the "object" something special to her.

Personally I like the cute type, the shy type, and my domination is not what gives value to the relationship, I could dominate anyone.

The way I see it, you can control people with

1. respect
2. fear
3. love

Each is more powerful then the last.

If you set a bird free, and it comes back to you on its own accord every time you call it, that is power.

So in my BDSM relationships it is love that makes it more special. I make my partner love sick to the point where they would do anything for me. Why do I want to make them do that, because submissiveness is hot.

To me the vanilla equivalent of Pat is a women with huge boobs.

Generally speaking, I dislike the idea of encouraging submissive behavior to "everyone" or in the non-intimate parts of a pyl's life, at least in any way that might draw a lot of attention to the pyl. It's one thing to say, I'd like you to dress modestly when you go to work. It's quite another to say, okay, show up to the office in a dress that just barely covers your ass. It seems, first of all, frivolous and childish. Like D/s is a party trick. It also seems like the PYL has no respect for the pyl. The pyl's job, and how he or she is viewed there is irrelevant.

Ach, that’s not even what I do, unless I seriously wanted to humiliate her. I encourage things like being courteous at all times, helping other as much as possible, being hospitable as to make people feel comfortable, etc, etc.

As for type A subs and pat, at the core they are the same, just different beliefs.

Thats my opinion.

 

[Primalex]

The way I see it, you can control people with

1. respect
2. fear
3. love

Each is more powerful then the last.

You got the order wrong. Fear is of course the most powerful. A person in love will sacrifice oneself. A person in fear will sacrifice anyone else, too.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Ach, that’s not even what I do, unless I seriously wanted to humiliate her. I encourage things like being courteous at all times, helping other as much as possible, being hospitable as to make people feel comfortable, etc, etc.

To me this is also a bit like role playing for want of a better term. If the sub is not usually likely to treat others courteously, help out when possible, be hospitable, to then 'encourage' or order/ask that they adopt such behaviour IMO is asking them to be someone they are not and to some extent, fake and/or acting or playing a role. If I were a PYL who admired and wanted these traits in their submissive, I would select a sub who already exhibited and had these qualities before ever meeting me. Makes more sense if I want the relationship to work and be honest than to hope to change someone into being the type person I would like them to be by teaching them how to act like it as opposed to being like that as a person....good recipe for disaster otherwise IMHO.

Catalina

 

[YourCaptor]

You got the order wrong. Fear is of course the most powerful. A person in love will sacrifice oneself. A person in fear will sacrifice anyone else, too.

What makes you think love wont do that?

To me this is also a bit like role playing for want of a better term. If the sub is not usually likely to treat others courteously, help out when possible, be hospitable, to then 'encourage' or order/ask that they adopt such behaviour IMO is asking them to be someone they are not and to some extent, fake and/or acting or playing a role. If I were a PYL who admired and wanted these traits in their submissive, I would select a sub who already exhibited and had these qualities before ever meeting me. Makes more sense if I want the relationship to work and be honest than to hope to change someone into being the type person I would like them to be by teaching them how to act like it as opposed to being like that as a person....good recipe for disaster otherwise IMHO.

Catalina

I disagree, it may be role playing at first, until they realize they fit into that role better then the one they had before. Why not change people? They do it themselves all the time anyway. Human beings are not very consistent, as long as they want the change its usually fairly easy too as long as the motivation is constant. Everyone wants to better themselves.

 

[intothewoods]

I disagree, it may be role playing at first, until they realize they fit into that role better then the one they had before. Why not change people? They do it themselves all the time anyway. Human beings are not very consistent, as long as they want the change its usually fairly easy too as long as the motivation is constant. Everyone wants to better themselves.

I totally disagree, and agree with cat. Human beings may be inconsistent, but they are consistently so. Ok, in all seriousness, people do not change who they are at their core. Everyone may want to better themselves, but most people don't. A person may promise and do all sorts of things in the short term to please their partner, and that goes for vanilla or kink-centric. But to really behave in a way that does not come naturally to you all the time, for a long time? Nah. Not gonna stick. Now, if the pyl wants and requests their PYL's help in achieving some sort of behavior modification, like quitting smoking, or improving their foreign language skills, becoming more organized, etc., that is a scenario that might have more success. Both have to be committed, in other words.

Personally I like the cute type, the shy type, and my domination is not what gives value to the relationship, I could dominate anyone.

Oh, I'm a little weary of the natural dominant and His amazing ability to dominate the phone book.

Ach, that’s not even what I do, unless I seriously wanted to humiliate her. I encourage things like being courteous at all times, helping other as much as possible, being hospitable as to make people feel comfortable, etc, etc.

As for type A subs and pat, at the core they are the same, just different beliefs.

Thats my opinion.

Being hospitable and courteous are basic good manners. Do you mean subserviance or servant-like behavior? Might be fun for a while, but someone who gets no thrill from service will eventually get tired of the "act." Just my opinion.

 

[BiBunny]

I totally disagree, and agree with cat. Human beings may be inconsistent, but they are consistently so. Ok, in all seriousness, people do not change who they are at their core. Everyone may want to better themselves, but most people don't. A person may promise and do all sorts of things in the short term to please their partner, and that goes for vanilla or kink-centric. But to really behave in a way that does not come naturally to you all the time, for a long time? Nah. Not gonna stick. Now, if the pyl wants and requests their PYL's help in achieving some sort of behavior modification, like quitting smoking, or improving their foreign language skills, becoming more organized, etc., that is a scenario that might have more success. Both have to be committed, in other words.

Thank you for saying what I was thinking. I was too damned lazy to type it out myself.

Oh, I'm a little weary of the natural dominant and His amazing ability to dominate the phone book.

Ain't that the truth? Lemme tell you something. I was a directory assistance (411) operator for about a year. A more hellacious job I cannot imagine.

The truth is, nobody, but NOBODY dominates the phone book. We are all slaves to it, asshole that it is.

Being hospitable and courteous are basic good manners. Do you mean subserviance or servant-like behavior? Might be fun for a while, but someone who gets no thrill from service will eventually get tired of the "act." Just my opinion.

I you.

 

[BeachGurl2]

I encourage things like being courteous at all times, helping other as much as possible, being hospitable as to make people feel comfortable, etc, etc.

As for type A subs and pat, at the core they are the same, just different beliefs.

Thats my opinion.

But this isn't exactly what Pat is doing. She is obeying everyone blindly. She isn't taking into account that there are times she needs to stand up for herself - in public, I mean, not with her Dom. There's a difference between being courteous and a nurturer (which I am by nature, btw) and being a doormat. And that's what I'm not sure we're agreeing on. I am submissive in my personality, which means in most instances, it's fairly obvious that I am submissive if you're paying attention. I tend to 'serve' in most situations. However, I'm standing up for myself if someone cuts me in line, the way it was described earlier with Pat. I'm not going to just say, "oh, okay, I'll go all the way to the back of the line" when that isn't where I belong. The way the description of Pat was laid it, it sounds like she's the kind of person who doesn't speak up when the waitress charges her for food she didn't order. That's not submissive, in my opinion, that's having no will of her own.

I guess I'm just wondering why you wouldn't want your submissive to stand up for herself when you weren't there to do it for her? If your sub were told to go to the back of the line for no reason, would you expect her to just do that? If she received the wrong order at lunch with friends, would you expect her to just eat what's put in front of her or would it be okay for her to ask the waitress to fix the error? I'm not trying to argue with you about it, I'm truly curious as to where you draw the line, if you do draw the line, in her public behavior.