Does/should motivation for a partner's kink matter?

[half_full]

Hello All,

I have a question about something that's been bothering me for a while and as I am still in the early stages of exploring this lifestyle, I would greatly appreciate the opinions and advice of some of the more experienced members of this forum.

I did introduce myself in the "New Faces..." thread so I'll not repost background info here, but it might be helpful to take a look at the earlier posts to help you understand where I'm coming from.

Dom(mes) - if you require a certain characteristic or kink in a sub, such as obedience, masochism, subjection to humiliation or objectification, etc., does it matter to you what his/her motivation is to oblige you? For example, if he/she is a masochist does it matter to you if his/her need for pain stems from past abuse, self hatred, erotic pleasure, or other? I'm looking for insight beyond the obvious. Of course you would not be inclined to inflict pain upon someone who as suffered previous abuse, or humiliate someone who suffers from low self esteem, right? Or no? Would you inflict pain if the primary motivation was service or obedience, even though the sub may have also experienced past abuse or self loathing? Is it more important to just match the kinks - you like to humiliate, sub likes to be humiliated, the rest is irrelevant as long as both partners needs are met?

I suppose the same question can be posed to subs. I stated in another thread that I wish I had a nickel for every time I read a post/blog/article where some sub (and occasionally Doms) mentioned that most/every/quite a few Doms they know have lingering 'issues' with women stemming from abusive maternal caregivers and feelings of emasculation. Could you submit to someone whose motivation for dominance was just this? What if he were also a sadist? Could/would you allow yourself to be humiliated by him? Once again, forget the obvious. I am not talking about a Dom who is also abusive, but it doesn't necessarily follow that every Dom who has at some time felt emasculated by a women becomes an abuser. I'm just curious to know whether the motivation for a kink matters to you.

I recognize that the answers may depend upon whether we are talking about casual play partners vs committed relationships.

Please try not to make this thread about abuse. It's been discussed many times, there are several threads, I've read them all, every post, and I get it.

I know this is alot, but I am just trying to understand, and I have questions...lots and lots of questions...

 

[BiBunny]

Depends on the person(s) involved, depends on the exact motivation, and depends on what I'm looking for.

I realize that sounds like a cop-out answer, but it's really not. There are a lot of factors to take into account. I will say, though, that I'm not going to take advantage of someone who's emotionally fragile, for whatever reason, and I'm not going to allow anyone to do it to me, either.

 

[rida]

From a (still early on her journey) sub prospective:

Personally, I could only submit to someone I trust. Whether casually or as a relationship. And to be able to trust, I need to be comfortable with their motivations.

Knowing that they have a history of past issues (unresolved conflicts, etc) that might have been the trigger for their dominance is not necessary a problem. But if I feel that they do not have a handle on those issues, that they do not want to face those issues, and that they are just trying to make things "even" by being Dominant, I do have a problem and would not let them Dom me.

 

[Netzach]

I am not a therapist, God, or Your Mom.

So I really only care to a point. One that preserves MY boundaries and sanity. I don't think anyone who's kinked as a garage sale hose can possibly be the perfect picture of standard mental health, but I don't think the perfect picture of standard mental health is necessarily the ideal thing to be.

I've never met a Dominant without "issues" around their parents, their past, their feelings about the gender they dominate or don't you name it. For me, a little admission and ownership goes a long long LONG way. It's the Dommes who "just love men, don't have any issues with men" that I wonder the most about.

Me? Do you think it's an accident that I like to have people who look like every boss I ever had kissing my ass?

That said, I like people. I like them a lot. I like them enough to believe that short of killing anyone, stomping puppies or molesting children, you should be able to meet compatible people to get your thang on in relative peace. AND I like my average ass-kisser enough to believe that he may be a little fucked-up, but he's a responsible and sane individual making his God-given choices in life. I do find other people's decisions to be a fairly sacrosanct thing.

I've always thought that the SM communities' eagerness to do the "we're NOT fucked up" dance is kind of pointless. I think we stand for the right to BE a little benignly fucked up.

 

[Homburg]

In retrospect, my mother was the Dominant party in my parents' marriage. She was more prominent in my socialisation than my father, as military duties kept him from being home as much. That said, I think my mom is a great person, and I don't really have resentment towards her. We butt heads a bit, but that is fairly normal when you have two headstrong, confrontational people. So, no, can't say that I have issues with my parents.

As to the gender I dominate, well, I am going to say that I do love women. I've also stated before that I am not averse to the idea of topping a man, and can think of a few men that I actively would likely enjoy topping. I'm socially dominant, and not un-successful in business, and I work in a field where I am largely independent of my employers, so no resentment towards work.

In short, I'm not really in this to compensate for any issues. Yep, that's right, I'm in it just because I'm a little bit fucked up. No reason. I just flat like tying people up and hitting them. My wife was the one the brought me into the lifestyle, and it just fits. So, either I'm compensating for issues to deep for me to recognise, or, and this is the mostly likely explanation, my wiring is just a bit fucked. I'm fine with either explanation really.

So I guess I'm your basic, normal guy that just gets off on hitting people and does so for no discernible historical reason. I should worry about that, but, meh.

--

To address the initial question, motivation matters QUITE a bit to me. Does it matter in the sense that it will cause a person to get down-checked as a possible partner? Not likely, but possible if the motivation is particularly specious. But it does matter a lot once that decision is made, as their motivation will greatly determine the tack I take in a given application of kink. Someone that likes to be humiliated because she has issues with her catholic upbringing should be treated differently than someone who likes to be humiliated because she comes from a background of priviledge and is turned on by the contrast from her normal treatment.

With casual play partners, I don't worry as much. I'm not going to go deep into the head of someone that I might scene with once or twice. Return on investment becomes a concern.

 

[half_full]

Depends on the person(s) involved, depends on the exact motivation, and depends on what I'm looking for.

Yes, I can see that. I expect that everyone can say this with confidence, but I'm looking for a little more, perhaps.

I realize that sounds like a cop-out answer, but it's really not. There are a lot of factors to take into account. I will say, though, that I'm not going to take advantage of someone who's emotionally fragile, for whatever reason, and I'm not going to allow anyone to do it to me, either.

"Emotionally fragile" That's a bit vague. Most people are susceptible to periods of emotional upheaval at some point or another. I'm referring more to the 'darker demons' many in the lifestyle face. Do you consisder any to be dealbreakers? For your partners or for yourself? If so, how do you go about ferreting out this information? It would seem rude to me to ask someone to divulge such personal information early on in a relationship, but do you feel comfortable 'playing' without it? I'm not trying to be dense here, but I am, for all practicle purposes, as vanilla as the day is long so I am trying to understand this lifestyle by relating it to what I already know:

[A typical first date]
"So how old are you, really?...
Been married twice? Once for me...
Any pets? Yeah, me either...
So you like to be in control?...
Oh, and you want to wear my panties while you flog me bloody while forcing me to sing showtunes?...hmmm...that's nice"

Of course I'm being a little fascitious, but you do get my point, right?

 

[CutieMouse]

*****

 

[rosco rathbone]

I am not a therapist, God, or Your Mom.

So I really only care to a point. One that preserves MY boundaries and sanity. I don't think anyone who's kinked as a garage sale hose can possibly be the perfect picture of standard mental health, but I don't think the perfect picture of standard mental health is necessarily the ideal thing to be.

I've never met a Dominant without "issues" around their parents, their past, their feelings about the gender they dominate or don't you name it. For me, a little admission and ownership goes a long long LONG way. It's the Dommes who "just love men, don't have any issues with men" that I wonder the most about.

Me? Do you think it's an accident that I like to have people who look like every boss I ever had kissing my ass?

That said, I like people. I like them a lot. I like them enough to believe that short of killing anyone, stomping puppies or molesting children, you should be able to meet compatible people to get your thang on in relative peace. AND I like my average ass-kisser enough to believe that he may be a little fucked-up, but he's a responsible and sane individual making his God-given choices in life. I do find other people's decisions to be a fairly sacrosanct thing.

I've always thought that the SM communities' eagerness to do the "we're NOT fucked up" dance is kind of pointless. I think we stand for the right to BE a little benignly fucked up.

Hah, you rock.

I'm fucked up. I do it out of sexual rage. There, I admitted it!

 

[CutieMouse]

*****

 

[half_full]

Hah, you rock.

I'm fucked up. I do it out of sexual rage. There, I admitted it!

OK. A self aware man. I can respect that. Do you care to define 'sexual rage' for me? Are you angry ar her? Angry at yourself? Angry at your 7th grade teacher who spurned your advances? Seriously, I'd like to know. I hear that alot but don't know what to make of it.

 

[BiBunny]

Yes, I can see that. I expect that everyone can say this with confidence, but I'm looking for a little more, perhaps.



"Emotionally fragile" That's a bit vague. Most people are susceptible to periods of emotional upheaval at some point or another. I'm referring more to the 'darker demons' many in the lifestyle face. Do you consisder any to be dealbreakers? For your partners or for yourself? If so, how do you go about ferreting out this information? It would seem rude to me to ask someone to divulge such personal information early on in a relationship, but do you feel comfortable 'playing' without it? I'm not trying to be dense here, but I am, for all practicle purposes, as vanilla as the day is long so I am trying to understand this lifestyle by relating it to what I already know:

[A typical first date]
"So how old are you, really?...
Been married twice? Once for me...
Any pets? Yeah, me either...
So you like to be in control?...
Oh, and you want to wear my panties while you flog me bloody while forcing me to sing showtunes?...hmmm...that's nice"

Of course I'm being a little fascitious, but you do get my point, right?

The occasional bad night and the truly fucked up are two totally different things. Anybody with half a brain can look at that and tell the difference. The problem is the gray area in between, and there's a LOT of gray area.

You're obviously not going to ask anybody if they're fucked up the first time you meet them. Well, if you do, you're probably more fucked up than they are. I don't have any specific deal-breakers, but the other person has to be somewhat sound of mind. Like Netz said, I'm neither God nor therapist, and I don't want to be.

I've found that the kinds of people I don't like to associate with (sexually or platonically) are the kinds of people who'll generally spill all their problems to anyone who'll listen. So basically, I don't have to hang around long to know if I want to become involved with this person.

I don't know if that answered your question(s) or not....I tried.

 

[half_full]

I am not a therapist, God, or Your Mom.

Not looking for either. I will accept 'teachers', though. I'm just here to learn.

I've never met a Dominant without "issues" around their parents, their past, their feelings about the gender they dominate or don't you name it. For me, a little admission and ownership goes a long long LONG way. It's the Dommes who "just love men, don't have any issues with men" that I wonder the most about.

The thing is, I think there are very few people in general who don't have issues like you described above. The part I'm struggling with, is that an issue that manifests itself in a vanilla way, can be a big red flag in the BDSM realm. Admission and ownership can certainly go a long way, but I don't know if that will always be enough, at least for me. I need to think about this one some more.

That said, I like people. I like them a lot. I like them enough to believe that short of killing anyone, stomping puppies or molesting children, you should be able to meet compatible people to get your thang on in relative peace. AND I like my average ass-kisser enough to believe that he may be a little fucked-up, but he's a responsible and sane individual making his God-given choices in life. I do find other people's decisions to be a fairly sacrosanct thing.

So this addresses what I was trying to get at in the OP. You admit that your pyl's kink makes him a little fucked-up, he probably admits he's a little fucked-up - does it matter to you why? Is it important to you to know what motivates him to be an ass-kisser or do you just accept him as he presents himself because ass-kissing is what you want?

I've always thought that the SM communities' eagerness to do the "we're NOT fucked up" dance is kind of pointless. I think we stand for the right to BE a little benignly fucked up.

I couldn't agree more and thanks for stating it. I'm past the point of debating whether or not some of the activities practiced within the lifestyle are normal. I am however, still trying to figure out whether the motivations for such activities are acceptable to me, and that includes my own.

Thanks a million for the response.

 

[rosco rathbone]

OK. A self aware man. I can respect that. Do you care to define 'sexual rage' for me? Are you angry ar her? Angry at yourself? Angry at your 7th grade teacher who spurned your advances? Seriously, I'd like to know. I hear that alot but don't know what to make of it.

I've been writing about it for years in this forum. That was just a kind of nod to Netz, paying my respects.

My own working definition of sexual rage goes something like this: In modern society, where we are not allowed to rape and possess women as they did back in the good old days, and still do in some unenlightened corners of the globe, sexually aggressive and high-testosterone men like me feel deprived-pent up-frustrated-tense!-and full of angst. I don't want to watch that teenybopper go sashaying by, averting my eyes so as not to seem like a creep. I want to put her husband, father and brothers to the sword, so their fields with salt and transport her to bondage, there to fetch, carry, and work the loom. A lifetime of choking this emotion down causes sexual rage.

 

[rosco rathbone]

..and I'd be a lying sonofabitch if I denied having mom issues as well. She and I get along pretty well these days, though.

 

[half_full]

I've been writing about it for years in this forum. That was just a kind of nod to Netz, paying my respects.

My own working definition of sexual rage goes something like this: In modern society, where we are not allowed to rape and possess women as they did back in the good old days, and still do in some unenlightened corners of the globe, sexually aggressive and high-testosterone men like me feel deprived-pent up-frustrated-tense!-and full of angst. I don't want to watch that teenybopper go sashaying by, averting my eyes so as not to seem like a creep. I want to put her husband, father and brothers to the sword, so their fields with salt and transport her to bondage, there to fetch, carry, and work the loom. A lifetime of choking this emotion down causes sexual rage.

Yeah, OK. I completely buy that. Unbridaled male lust is a formidable thing. It is primal and passionate and consumes without mercy or apology.

And I do recall reading many of your previous posts regarding this issue.

 

[half_full]

In short, I'm not really in this to compensate for any issues. Yep, that's right, I'm in it just because I'm a little bit fucked up. No reason. I just flat like tying people up and hitting them. My wife was the one the brought me into the lifestyle, and it just fits. So, either I'm compensating for issues to deep for me to recognise, or, and this is the mostly likely explanation, my wiring is just a bit fucked. I'm fine with either explanation really.

So I guess I'm your basic, normal guy that just gets off on hitting people and does so for no discernible historical reason. I should worry about that, but, meh.

I have to admit I'm a little alarmed by this, but it is honest.

--

To address the initial question, motivation matters QUITE a bit to me. Does it matter in the sense that it will cause a person to get down-checked as a possible partner? Not likely, but possible if the motivation is particularly specious. But it does matter a lot once that decision is made, as their motivation will greatly determine the tack I take in a given application of kink. Someone that likes to be humiliated because she has issues with her catholic upbringing should be treated differently than someone who likes to be humiliated because she comes from a background of priviledge and is turned on by the contrast from her normal treatment.

OK, alot of what you said here I rather expected and it makes sense to me. Understanding someone's motivation can be as much about meeting their needs as it is about determining your own comfort level.

 

[Netzach]

So this addresses what I was trying to get at in the OP. You admit that your pyl's kink makes him a little fucked-up, he probably admits he's a little fucked-up - does it matter to you why? Is it important to you to know what motivates him to be an ass-kisser or do you just accept him as he presents himself because ass-kissing is what you want?

You are welcome in general, but as to this part of your post, see line one.

I'm not his therapist, God, or his Mom. I don't know. I don't need to know. I probably can't totally know because I bet you he doesn't. I think people with fetishes do enough miserable self-questioning, I think the kindness of someone who finally does not have any questions to ask is underrated.

 

[CutieMouse]

*****

 

[half_full]

I am not a therapist, God, or Your Mom.

So I really only care to a point. One that preserves MY boundaries and sanity. I don't think anyone who's kinked as a garage sale hose can possibly be the perfect picture of standard mental health, but I don't think the perfect picture of standard mental health is necessarily the ideal thing to be.

I've never met a Dominant without "issues" around their parents, their past, their feelings about the gender they dominate or don't you name it. For me, a little admission and ownership goes a long long LONG way. It's the Dommes who "just love men, don't have any issues with men" that I wonder the most about.

Me? Do you think it's an accident that I like to have people who look like every boss I ever had kissing my ass?

That said, I like people. I like them a lot. I like them enough to believe that short of killing anyone, stomping puppies or molesting children, you should be able to meet compatible people to get your thang on in relative peace. AND I like my average ass-kisser enough to believe that he may be a little fucked-up, but he's a responsible and sane individual making his God-given choices in life. I do find other people's decisions to be a fairly sacrosanct thing.

I've always thought that the SM communities' eagerness to do the "we're NOT fucked up" dance is kind of pointless. I think we stand for the right to BE a little benignly fucked up.

I have a few other questions for you, Netzach, if you don't mind. I know this may be a little loaded, so if you can't/don't want to answer it, I understand. You have been very open in this thread and in others about acknowledging that unresolved issues is a major underlying motivation for what drives alot of the kinky activity in the SM community. In another recent thread there was a discussion going on about Type A and Type B pain. You stated then (and I'm paraphrasing here) that "pain cures what the couch couldn't." Hypothetically speaking, if there could ever be a 'magic' couch or pill, that would instantly wipe the emotional slate clean - as clean as the day you were born - would you choose this lifestyle? If you could have a Cliff and Claire Huxtable kind of marriage, would you want it? Is there something this lifestyle offers that goes beyond transference of our issues? Do think someone who is the 'picture of perfect mental health" would find any enjoyment or fullfillment in this lifestyle?

Any other responders are welcome.

 

[BiBunny]

I beg to differ that the majority of people in this lifestyle have major emotional issues. Everyone has some emotional issues, kinked or otherwise. "Major" seems to suggest more of a severe mental illness. People try to psychoanalyze kinksters all the time, but I don't think we're any more predisposed to fucked-up-ness than any other portion of the population.

 

[catalina_francisco]

I beg to differ that the majority of people in this lifestyle have major emotional issues. Everyone has some emotional issues, kinked or otherwise. "Major" seems to suggest more of a severe mental illness. People try to psychoanalyze kinksters all the time, but I don't think we're any more predisposed to fucked-up-ness than any other portion of the population.

Have to agree with you...and who can possibly be classified as 'normal' these days anyway. If you don't want to be in a relationship you are commitment phobic, if you do you are co-dependent...seems there is a negative term for every trait and aspect of a person's personality regardless of whether they actuall have a problem or not. I do think some people who are drawn to the lifestyle also like to play up the 'mentally fucked up' claim though as for some reason they seem to feel it makes them seem more edgy, or out of the ordinary, or who knows what. If we were the way we are because we are fucked mentally from life's travels etc.,, how does that account for those of us who have had our fantasies of SM and D/s as far back as toddler and pre-school years and came from fairly average, middle class backgrounds?

Catalina

 

[BiBunny]

Have to agree with you...and who can possibly be classified as 'normal' these days anyway. If you don't want to be in a relationship you are commitment phobic, if you do you are co-dependent...seems there is a negative term for every trait and aspect of a person's personality regardless of whether they actuall have a problem or not. I do think some people who are drawn to the lifestyle also like to play up the 'mentally fucked up' claim though as for some reason they seem to feel it makes them seem more edgy, or out of the ordinary, or who knows what. If we were the way we are because we are fucked mentally from life's travels etc.,, how does that account for those of us who have had our fantasies of SM and D/s as far back as toddler and pre-school years and came from fairly average, middle class backgrounds?

Catalina

Ditto, especially the bolded part. Though I suppose one could argue that folks like you and me were born a bit off in the head.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Ditto, especially the bolded part. Though I suppose one could argue that folks like you and me were born a bit off in the head.

LOL, well my mother did tell me I rolled off the kitchen table when I was a baby and didn't even cry when I hit the floor!!

Catalina

 

[BiBunny]

LOL, well my mother did tell me I rolled off the kitchen table when I was a baby and didn't even cry when I hit the floor!!

Catalina

As a part of a psych evaluation once, I was asked if my mother had any problems delivering me. (Um, how am I supposed to know? Should I remember it?) I suppose that since my mother had a hard time conceiving (I'm an only child), there must be something wrong with my brain chemistry.

That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it.

 

[rosco rathbone]

I for one certainly wasn't born dom. I was born an eager-to-please, strong-willed, extremely prideful, affectionate, mother-focused son to a stubborn, angry, very intelligent, somewhat confused young mother. Some of my first memories are of our battles royale...trying to kill her favorite cat with a shovel, age 4, and her dislocating my wrist as she grabbed me. Feelings of enormous rage and powerlessness. I hated her and wanted to please her. Was it all mom's fault? I only blame her for half of it, the rest is society, hardwiring, and all kinds of other shit-even pure chance. I wasn't aware that I was a dom until a more aware, and self-aware female, who'd observed my passive-aggressive and homewrecking acting-out activities, hipped me.