Strickly online D/s relationships...discuss, share advise

[Mrtenant]

OMFG - it's NOT a partial version of myself - my physical presence is absolutely not guarantee that anyone is getting 'all' of me - what guarantees that is my decision to open up to someone to the point that they have that. You're not in a position to judge how complete that is for me or my partner - you're only able to say it wouldn't be complete for you.

Online/phone expression is not 'more limiting' unless you decide they're limitations. All the things that make physical sex 'complete' are present - intimacy, attention to your partner, thinking about how things feel for them and for you ... if those things aren't present, it's only by virtue of lack of imagination. Yes, there are some things which are absent, like (some) physical sensation, but they're replaced by other things, that create an encounter that is, in itself, complete.

"And I have not had pretend sex online ..." - this right here is where the problem is. What on earth makes online/phone sex 'pretend'? Only your commitment to the notion that there some 'real' sex against which all other interactions are judged as wanting.

Well said. No one can describe your experience better than you. Anyone tells you different, they weren't there. Many can relate one way or the other based on their own experiences. Still, you get to decide on what you want to takeaway from any experience. Far be it from me or anyone who had not shared in that experience to say otherwise.

Some might scoff and say, well based on what I know from my own experiences, blah blah blah

Or worse still, one who has never tried what you have done to try and discount your experience.

That's like saying I have never tried chocolate pie but I have tried vanilla ice cream. And because I have tried vanlla ice cream, I know that chocolate pie can't compare, even though I've never once tasted it.

 

[KimGordon67]

Now I really want to try chocolate pie (which I actually never have eaten).

Well said. No one can describe your experience better than you. Anyone tells you different, they weren't there. Many can relate one way or the other based on their own experiences. Still, you get to decide on what you want to takeaway from any experience. Far be it from me or anyone who had not shared in that experience to say otherwise.

Some might scoff and say, well based on what I know from my own experiences, blah blah blah

Or worse still, one who has never tried what you have done to try and discount your experience.

That's like saying I have never tried chocolate pie but I have tried vanilla ice cream. And because I have tried vanlla ice cream, I know that chocolate pie can't compare, even though I've never once tasted it.

 

[SilverBass]

OMFG - it's NOT a partial version of myself - my physical presence is absolutely not guarantee that anyone is getting 'all' of me - what guarantees that is my decision to open up to someone to the point that they have that. You're not in a position to judge how complete that is for me or my partner - you're only able to say it wouldn't be complete for you.

Online/phone expression is not 'more limiting' unless you decide they're limitations. All the things that make physical sex 'complete' are present - intimacy, attention to your partner, thinking about how things feel for them and for you ... if those things aren't present, it's only by virtue of lack of imagination. Yes, there are some things which are absent, like (some) physical sensation, but they're replaced by other things, that create an encounter that is, in itself, complete.

"And I have not had pretend sex online ..." - this right here is where the problem is. What on earth makes online/phone sex 'pretend'? Only your commitment to the notion that there some 'real' sex against which all other interactions are judged as wanting.

You continue to keep taking this the wrong way, and besides, I am speaking generally, not specifically about myself, nor you, nor anyone else. Just debating the subjects in general terms. If you view them differently then great!

And speaking of that "pie", I have tried it, so I know what it provides and does not provide. The lack of physical interaction may be called sex to some and not by others, I am one who does not consider that to be sex. Again, speaking in general terms, not saying nor have ever said how someone else should define it.

 

[Mrtenant]

Now I really want to try chocolate pie (which I actually never have eaten).

I happen to know of a pretty stellar recipe for one. I'll see if I can drag it out and post it.

 

[SilverBass]

I happen to know of a pretty stellar recipe for one. I'll see if I can drag it out and post it.

Kim does make a great chocolate chip cookie! Or so I've heard. Then again I've never tasted one of hers so I'll just need to use my imagination to see how great they really are.

 

[KimGordon67]

You continue to keep taking this the wrong way, and besides, I am speaking generally, not specifically about myself, nor you, nor anyone else. Just debating the subjects in general terms. If you view them differently then great!

And speaking of that "pie", I have tried it, so I know what it provides and does not provide. The lack of physical interaction may be called sex to some and not by others, I am one who does not consider that to be sex. Again, speaking in general terms, not saying nor have ever said how someone else should define it.

You didn't say 'what I consider to be pretend sex' - you just said 'pretend sex'. You didn't say 'what I would see as a fuller version' - you just said 'fuller version'. While you might have said 'I don't see one as better than the other', every other bit of language you've used says that you DO see one as better than the other, and that you think this is an objective fact. The ways in which people actually speak often reveal much more about what they think about something than their overt statements about the thing.

And you keep contradicting yourself - much earlier in this thread you implied you'd had vanilla, but not BDSM sex online, just above you said you'd not had online sex, how you're saying you have eaten that particular 'pie'. You really need to get your story straight.

And, just to set the record straight, quite a bit of what you've said has been about your specific experiences, or your assumptions about my specific experiences - those are NOT general statements.

 

[SilverBass]

You didn't say 'what I consider to be pretend sex' - you just said 'pretend sex'. You didn't say 'what I would see as a fuller version' - you just said 'fuller version'. While you might have said 'I don't see one as better than the other', every other bit of language you've used says that you DO see one as better than the other, and that you think this is an objective fact. The ways in which people actually speak often reveal much more about what they think about something than their overt statements about the thing.

And you keep contradicting yourself - much earlier in this thread you implied you'd had vanilla, but not BDSM sex online, just above you said you'd not had online sex, how you're saying you have eaten that particular 'pie'. You really need to get your story straight.

And, just to set the record straight, quite a bit of what you've said has been about your specific experiences, or your assumptions about my specific experiences - those are NOT general statements.

I do not engage in any kind of online or cyber sex, but yes I have tried it. But no it is not something I do on a regular or even irregular basis. Tried it, thought it was kind of fun and erotic, but not necessarily something I desired to keep going back to. And of course I am speaking about my personal experiences, as well as how I view this topic in general. True I have not always qualified each statement with "what I consider..." or "what I see as..." but I really didn't think that was necessary. If you tell me your opinion about any given topic or act or situation, I am going to assume you are talking about it from your point of view, not that you are speaking for everyone.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[KimGordon67]

If someone offers statements without any sort of qualifier, I tend to assume they're offering them as a 'truth'.

You're basically shifting your argument all the time, along with your version of your experience with these things - you quite categorically said earlier you had NOT had 'pretend' online sex, now you're saying you have. My position is pretty clear, and consistent, and I have nothing more to add. I'm really am out of this debate, and unsubbing the thread.

Sorry IAS - this got pretty hijacked. I do apologise. I'm far too irritable sometimes.

I do not engage in any kind of online or cyber sex, but yes I have tried it. But no it is not something I do on a regular or even irregular basis. Tried it, thought it was kind of fun and erotic, but not necessarily something I desired to keep going back to. And of course I am speaking about my personal experiences, as well as how I view this topic in general. True I have not always qualified each statement with "what I consider..." or "what I see as..." but I really didn't think that was necessary. If you tell me your opinion about any given topic or act or situation, I am going to assume you are talking about it from your point of view, not that you are speaking for everyone.

 

[KimGordon67]

I'm going to respond to this ... I'm not sure about the non-monogamous thing, but I think some people are more prone to 'non-traditional' versions of relationships/sex than others. I'm not making a judgement about that one way or the other - maybe all my 'non-trad' stuff will bite me in the arse eventually, and it does make life a bit more complicated sometimes, so again, it's just a different way of doing things.

I think less about 'Kim's personal experience' and not being there, it seems to me very different approaches in mindset are being discussed.

I went out last night and was with a group of people to whom I presented a very edited version of myself. Some realities are inevitably there ; I am the stout middle aged woman that I am in physicality. I 'edited' that appropriately with clothing , make up and the 'presense' Thst was appropriate for me in that situation; some one with the same body entirely would have edited differently; the results would me different before we had even opened our mouths. Later I spoke to my partner on the phone and we were not physically in the same room but I was not editing my facade so much.

Incidentally, re 'pretend sex' ...is is still pretend sex if it's phone sex with a partner you know physically?

While I am convinced an online thing is not for me, Kim posting here ( sorry Kim) furthers something I was wondering, if openness to experience ( or indeed finding similarity in non traditional presentation of affection) is something that is easier for some people of non monogamous ( other not standard in our society too maybe? ) leaning?

 

[SilverBass]

If someone offers statements without any sort of qualifier, I tend to assume they're offering them as a 'truth'.

You're basically shifting your argument all the time, along with your version of your experience with these things - you quite categorically said earlier you had NOT had 'pretend' online sex, now you're saying you have. My position is pretty clear, and consistent, and I have nothing more to add. I'm really am out of this debate, and unsubbing the thread.

Sorry IAS - this got pretty hijacked. I do apologise. I'm far too irritable sometimes.

OK, so if I am guilty of leaving out qualifiers then that is my mistake, though I speak the same way here as everywhere else and there has not been such confusion. I post on a lot of different forums and usually when not using qualifiers, people still understand the point of view I am coming from. And the same as I read what others have to say.

Considering the topic of this thread, no I have not had "pretend sex", "cyber sex", "phone sex", or any other kind of non-sex sex to any degree that I would assume many have here. Yes I have tried it, various kinds of it, but it was never a regular occurrence for me as the lack of flesh against flesh, though a turn on for a bit, just ended up feeling quite empty to me, so I really wouldn't call my limited experience with it as having had it compared to many here with much more experience. But yes I have sampled it to understand the gist of it. And again, that is just me. Great for others who enjoy it, I have nothing against it, but for me it is a hugely incomplete experience.

Just like for me any serious and intimate though non-cyber-sexual online experience also feels incomplete when compared to face to face. Now I have much experience with this. I definitely know how this kind of intimacy and sharing feels, and really THIS is what I have been talking about mostly this whole time, not the cyber sex which is really just a tiny part of any comments I have made here outside of these last few posts. And don't get me wrong, communicating in any of the various ways people do online or on the phone can be a very rewarding thing. I grew up talking on the phone my whole life, which really is part of what we are talking about here, just talking or typing (plus the addition of visuals at times). Of, course I see something in that, and of course there are going to be some differences, and even some favorable differences to that kind of communication.

Still though, when it comes to serious relationships, especially when they become sexually intimate, there is no way in hell that I would ever compare virtual with RL. One is a MUCH more complete experience. And again, this is JUST MY OPINION. I do not judge others who see this differently, and I realize some view this the opposite way than I do and that is great. We are just talking here and all opinions are valid.

 

[The_gladiator]

I see what you are trying to say but Kim's point of you needing to be careful of using words like pretend sex is valid, because calling it that for example presents a judgement that suggests you see it as lesser and when you ouple that without a qualifier of in my opinion etc. others are going to take you literally. To some cyber sex can be just as rewarding or in some cases moreso. I myself have had cyber sessions or phone sex sessions that are far better than some in person sexual experiences, mostly because of the depth of emotion or arousal involved. Physically being present to fuck does not by necessity mean its good, In my opinion.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[Iamsubmissive]

Well, personally My opinion is that I am Not sure even that's right. Silver bass can see it as pretend sex, and put in words that it's so; it's a free world. And it can further communication to discuss differing points, and it's often easier to explore these ideas like this than in thought experiment solo, because others see different areas to further discuss and counter.

But consider this is a bdsm forum where how some of us enjoy sex and connection is different and NOT loving to others. Is BDSM pretend because where it's 'violent' it's violent in consentual boundaries, so pretend violence? Likewise humiliation, pet play and so on? Is that pretend?

Indeed, is marriage, collaring etc pretend because nothing changes or cannot be undone. Are marriages where one works away, say in the military, less real because the partner is absent as much as there? ( or more away than there in many ldrs) ?

The idea of what is real and not is, I submit a rather vast one which if you follow through can change how you question and see the world in all ways .

I feel that if my lover and I get romantic on the phone it's 'real' ( I personally am not a cyber person it doesn't suit my sexuality whatsoever. But friendship, communication I know li feel very free to persue online as well as in real life. If my sexuality were different, if I were more sapiosexusal for example, I can see a way cyber with a regular partner whom I loved would be satisfying and real for a me like that.



Reality . An interesting thing to ponder again today. Or maybe a day I am less tired.

Good opinion...and good examples of how things can be viewed differently by different people.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[Iamsubmissive]

WOW! Looks like some heated debate went on while I was sleeping...

Honestly, I can see both sides of this coin. And to me, every different opinion is valid. Many people look at cyber-sex as not real sex. The title alone differentiates it from the common definition of sex. So I guess it's a type of sex like oral sex, anal sex. Some people don't look at that as 'sex'. If you never had vaginal sex, but have given and received oral sex are you still a virgin? Would you consider it accurate to say to someone, "I've never had sex before?" What makes it sex? Penetration? Male and female intercourse? An orgasm? To some, masterbation is considered having sex with yourself...is it still sex if you didn't come? Or would that just be considered 'touching yourself'? If you read an erotic story and had an orgasm during the sex scene, did you just have literary sex with the author? I'm sure there are a ton of different opinions on these types of sex and the definition of what you consider sex.

Cyber-sex isn't physical sex. Can that statement be disputed? Probably, in theory but not by definition. Can cyber be intimate? Absolutely. Are you sharing the experience of sex with each other? Basically, yes. Can it be fulfilling or better than in-person sex? Sure. Is the physical part mutual masterbation? (Insert opinion here) Is the orgasm real? Of course. If the person on the other end gets too rough, says things you didn't consent to, or keeps going after you said stop...is it rape? No.

Here's another scenario...once upon a time, an ex and I had a bet that he could make me cum without even touching me. We were both fully dressed. His body was close to mine...almost touching. Using just his words...volume, tone, suggestive language, dirty words, even pauses to build anticipation and the heat in his eyes...without physically touching me in any way (or touching myself), I had one of the most intense orgasms in my life. Did we have sex? If we had been on the phone instead of the same room, would that have been phone-sex? (Anytime I've told that story, I've never referred to it as sex, or even considered it sex.)

Things that make you go Hmm...

So, aside from the sex bit...are online relationships real? They can be. Can the emotional connection be real? Definitely. Are they better than some RL relationships? For some people, not everyone. It's not really a debatable subject...it's a matter of personal preference and opinion.

 

[IslandStyle_44]

Passionate debate is good. Lessons to be learned. Two things to note:

https://g.co/kgs/lpE6B9

Blame IamS, as she put it in my mind which may ruin my day. Why can't useless data be erased from cold storage. I am not fond of this style of music yet it is still found in my database (had to google as I couldn't recall the band. Still, totally forgettable).

Second, there was mention of a chocolate pie recipe. Strictly for science.

I'm enjoying this thread and the views expressed. I've had a couple of memorable/meaningful virtual D/s relationships. Oddly enough, never with the initial intent of starting something nor the D/s subtext. IMO, the sex is real as are the emotions. In fact, the absence of connection may be the reason some find phone/cyber as "pretend". Both are crap without it, frankly.

Quite complex range of thoughts and emotions for a more simple medium. In the last 2-3 pages, a few different contributors and OP have described these complexities quite well.

 

[IslandStyle_44]

It's my opinion you meant that in your opinion mine was good .... Yes, difference and similarity: where they rest it's interesting to me.

You, I like. Witty and thought provoking. Don't worry, not hunting for a submissive. Just an observation.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[Primalex]

And keep in mind I am not saying one is better than the other

Your discussion with Kim reads like a discussion about how to compare a meal with and without a steak.

Your arguing revolves around the facts that vegetarian dishes
- lack the taste of meat.
- do not necessarily provide essential nutrients that are easier covered with meat.
...
while omitting or questioning any benefits.

And you end with:"Oh...I'm not saying that a vegetarian dish is bad or a non-vegetarian dish is better." and even though you didn't write it down, we can all read the:"(but we all know a meal without meat is not a real meal)", although, according to your definition, such subtle nuances can't be transmitted online.

 

[Iamsubmissive]

In fact, the absence of connection may be the reason some find phone/cyber as "pretend". Both are crap without it, frankly.

I think that's a good point...without a connection, it's just words on a screen.

But what if it was good for the other person? Did they have sex and you didnt? More things to make you go Hmmm...LOL (That was a hit song back in the day, I think...and the title of a TV show?)

*I am also interested in this chocolate pie recipe mentioned...you know, for tangible proof it actually exists

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[Iamsubmissive]

I too like thAt point of islands style's.

But, I tiptoe in and say that the same could be said of a meaningless one night stand, ( I am poignantly thinking of a situation in my close acquaintance here..so this time IAms I am making a perhaps for my thought only- direct comparison. I am unable to put details here as it involves another and would be a breech of trust).

Ooooh...even more to ponder. I think a one night stand definitely qualifies as sex...whether it's good sex I guess would depend on the intent or expectations? Maybe? There still could be 'some' type of connection in a one night stand. Or maybe it's all just physical attraction and what feels good. It could also be a disappointment. I've had sex with someone I loved that didn't involve any emotions at the time...just satisfying a physical need. And the sex was good.

 

[IslandStyle_44]

More things to make you go Hmmm...LOL (That was a hit song back in the day, I think...and the title of a TV show?)

*I am also interested in this chocolate pie recipe mentioned...you know, for tangible proof it actually exists

First, it saddens me that you didn't appreciate my link to the aforementioned C+C Music Factory music video. I spent all of 20 seconds googling and cut/paste into my response. By the way, I had to listen to quite a bit of music earlier to rip that tune from my short term memory. A spanking may be in order. I'm too far away to deliver it so you're on your own there .

Second, you've made up for it by re-emphasizing this mythical chocolate pie that was mentioned previously.