Testing Their Submission

[P. B. Walker]

This is mostly a question for the Dom/mes, but please, everyone feel free to give your impressions/personal experiences.

Do you ever feel the need to test your subs submission? Ever reach that point when you feel unsure about them and what they would do or how they would react, so you give them a test to ease your fears or relieve any worries you have? Is this a sign of weakness or just reinforcing the sometimes fragile bond between Dom/me and sub? Or is it a sign that maybe the relationship is in trouble? Do you think it's proper to test someone's submission once they have given it to you freely? Could they not be construed as a sign of mistrust? Or do you think that tests are something that is necessary and in fact, healthy for the relationship and in some ways help it to grow and move to a higher level?

How do you go about testing someone's submission to you? Do you think this relates to all types of relationships or only to 24/7 relationships?

PBW

 

[Red Menace]

I know I'm not a Domme, but...

Sir and I have talked about this before and his personal philosophy is that everything he has me do has a purpose, and at no time has he ever felt that having a slave do something just to prove their submission, is a valid purpose for him.

 

[Ebonyfire]

This is mostly a question for the Dom/mes, but please, everyone feel free to give your impressions/personal experiences.

Do you ever feel the need to test your subs submission?

Nope.

Ever reach that point when you feel unsure about them and what they would do or how they would react, so you give them a test to ease your fears or relieve any worries you have?

If a sub caused me any worry, I would release them in a heartbeat.

If I had a 24/7 I would not test his submission. That is why you choose carefully so you do not have to play those kinds of games.

 

[Lancecastor]

Why yes, extending a sub's limits with pop tests is half the fun!

Not because you don't trust them....but because you like watching then squirm.

 

[Zaudika]

Why yes, extending a sub's limits with pop tests is half the fun!

Not because you don't trust them....but because you like watching then squirm.

Going off of this... to answer from a more submissive side of things.

I think that while these things may be important to a Dominant, that they're *very* important to some submissives.

Being tested, having challenges given, are both things that I feel that I need from time to time. In the beginning of a D/s relationship, its my personal opinion that these are things that are needed a great deal of the time. It keeps things interesting, helps you to continuely learn more about each other... etc.

Just a couple of quick thoughts... its late so I'm not running 100%, might post more thoughts later.

 

[Shadowsdream]

No...
I do not test submission but I do test obedience and endurance.
In My opinion testing submission may be splitting hairs and could really be testing obedience. Since I am a hair splitter I will explain vaguely why I don't test submission...
I only accept submissives to serve Me that I feel have a very deep need to bare the core of their submissive natures...submissive sexuality for Me is just one of the perks of the whole package. So sexuality and submission can be tested without questioning submission. Endurance of pain and humiliation are two more of the perks of Domination and submission that also are targets for My testing but still not the core of submission to Me. They do not question, prove or disprove (?) submission to Me.
Loyalty, honesty, integrity, obedience, endurance can have valid reasons for testing but I really think that when One begins to think they can test submission they begin to invalidate a persons core belief in themselves.
Questioning a submissives depth of need to submit happens long before they bend their knee for Me. Submission is a mind trip that traps the body and keeps it on its knees in joy and freedom.

 

[WillowPuss]

I am still unsure of what you mean by testing submission.

I am all for having my limits tested and pushed; all for being set assignments and tasks and having my obedience/memory for detail tested - but those things are not really submssion.

When I offer my submission to a Dom/me I am offering not only my body and mind, but my very 'soul'. I just do not understand how that can be 'tested' - it would be like the Dom/me were questioning the fact that I existed at all.

 

[lark sparrow]

This is mostly a question for the Dom/mes, but please, everyone feel free to give your impressions/personal experiences.

Do you ever feel the need to test your subs submission? Ever reach that point when you feel unsure about them and what they would do or how they would react, so you give them a test to ease your fears or relieve any worries you have? Is this a sign of weakness or just reinforcing the sometimes fragile bond between Dom/me and sub? Or is it a sign that maybe the relationship is in trouble? Do you think it's proper to test someone's submission once they have given it to you freely? Could they not be construed as a sign of mistrust? Or do you think that tests are something that is necessary and in fact, healthy for the relationship and in some ways help it to grow and move to a higher level?

How do you go about testing someone's submission to you? Do you think this relates to all types of relationships or only to 24/7 relationships?

PBW

An example of what you are talking about might be helpful.

I'm not sure I am on track to what you were asking but...

There can be degrees of submission within a relationship which may increase but it seems those higher levels are reached in the absence of excessive fear, worries, weakness, trouble and mistrust. There is a quandry in a way, when you say submission given freely, but tested, if testing is a forced situation specifically meant to prove or disprove - if that makes sense. Like, I say "I give you my friendship" and you immediately say "okay, well if you say you are a friend then lend me $50 right now and come over tomorrow and help me wash my car." Knowing that you don't need $50 and your car is not particularly dirty, but hey, a friend would do it, rather than letting the relationship develop.

Then again, sometimes misunderstandings or unspoken worries, etc. are cleared up through some sort of conflict (though perhaps better through simple communication), but will one test be enough? Is the relationship based on trust or mistrust? If basic trust is established and given, time and the nature of the relationship will flush out any lack of, or encourage more, surrender naturally.

 

[MissTaken]

I wonder if testing submission is the issue or testing the degree to which she is willing to entrust her safety and submit is is the issue?

In general terms, isn't testing "submission" comparable to testing love, testing loyalty,. testing trust?

The underlying factor here is challenging a promise.

In those other situations, I would be very hurt and angry if I was with someone who found it necessary to test those intangible feelings that I offer willingly. It would indicate a lack of trust to me.

Now, test my limits and watch me moan!

 

[Ebonyfire]

Re: I know I'm not a Domme, but...

[B<snip> and at no time has he ever felt that having a slave do something just to prove their submission, is a valid purpose for him. [/B]

I definitely agree with your Sir, Red Menace.


To me a man is submissive or he is not. Tests or other games serve no purpose.

Eb

 

[~ Emmeline ~]

If your testing someone's submission to satisfy your own insecurities, something is wrong... somewhere.

 

[P. B. Walker]

I tend to agree with all the statements everyone has made. When I thought about this question, I initially thought of it in a negative way, i.e., testing someone's submission is a bad thing. But I tried to phrase it in a neutral way in case there was a legitimate reason for testing one's submission.

I guess an addendum to this would be that this should be a red flag if you see it happening to you.

PBW

 

[Zaudika]

I do agree with what everyone else has posted about the negativity of "testing" .. I think if anything that the wrong word was just used in the beginning, to no fault of anyone of course.

 

[exiledmaster]

Now if we were talking about exploring someone's sexuality, and the submission within which it manifests itself, that might be a less negative phrase...
And me?
I love to explore...
But if the sub doesn't enjoy, or get their needs fulfilled, I wonder what is the point?

 

[Ebonyfire]

But if the sub doesn't enjoy, or get their needs fulfilled, I wonder what is the point?

That is subjective. It often cannot be seen outside of the relationship.

I am asked that all the time, and I cannot answer. It just seems that people have a hard time understanding the motivations of those who have kinks that differ from their own.

 

[psiberzerker]

The question you need to ask yourself is weather you're testing their submission, or your dominance. As a Dom/me, you have to take at least some responsability for your scene. This is the difference between dominating someone, and just playing the part.
OTOH, you subbies need to take some of the onus off of your
"Mastress". This can be a game, or it can be as real as YOU can handle. Any Topper worth hes salt will be able to handle anything you want done to you. That's their job. You need to be able to handle what you ask for.
As for testing your partner, that's just silly. It's the kind of technique that get's feelings, and worse hurt. Test yourself, then look at the other side of the bonds. If you can say irrevocably and honestly that it's no fault of your own, then you can start pointing fingers.
Untill then, you are simply washing your hands in a pontious denial. Once we all start being honest with ourselves, then we can start doing this without all the real horror, and pain we are starting to emulate. Lie to yourself, and you are fools.

 

[Ebonyfire]

Testing Dominance

Since I have been posting in this forum, I have seen more submissives testing their Dominant than vice versa.

I will not name names, but I bet there are lots of folks here who can think of a few names, LOL.

 

[psiberzerker]

The only bonds a sub needs to be testing is the real physical ones. Testing your mastress isn't submission, it's manipulation.

 

[Ebonyfire]

The only bonds a sub needs to be testing is the real physical ones. Testing your mastress isn't submission, it's manipulation.

Precisely.

 

[WillowPuss]

Re: Testing Dominance

Since I have been posting in this forum, I have seen more submissives testing their Dominant than vice versa.

I will not name names, but I bet there are lots of folks here who can think of a few names, LOL.

Ohhhhh don't! It will give me nightmares for a week!

 

[Ebonyfire]

Re: Re: Testing Dominance

Ohhhhh don't! It will give me nightmares for a week!

 

[Goddess Helena]

Re: Re: Testing Dominance

Ohhhhh don't! It will give me nightmares for a week!

And nasty flashbacks!


I believe in testing/pushing the limits of a pet. I do not doubt the devotion or submission of a boy who serves Me. In becoming Mine, he must prove himself. Once that is done, I do not doubt him unless something happens.


Helena

 

[Ebonyfire]

Re: Re: Re: Testing Dominance

I believe in testing/pushing the limits of a pet. Helena

I smell a good thread here. I will start it if folks with discuss it.