Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation

Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

Andalusite -> Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/20/2009 10:58:55 PM)
In Kia's recent thread, the subject of testing came up. Here are the relevant quotes that I'd like to respond to: quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael That said, "testing" people sucks. If I found out someone was testing me, I would "fail" them or at least make it clear that isn't a game I play. Testing isn't honest, you are in essense lying to them about what you are talking about. I don't know about this. In theory, I like the basis behind what you're saying...but in practice, we all effectively test our suitors. We test from the moment our eyes are upon them, the moment we start a date to determine quirks/idiosyncrasies we do want in a partner from those we don't. A "test" could be nothing more than starting a conversation on a personally important topic just to see if the other person has a personal view that meshes well. Tests aren't necessarily pifalls laid out to induce imminent failure. quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael If you do something or say something to see how someone reacts, you are testing them. Noticing that they stop and do something nice or are rude to waiters, or always have a nice thing/bad thing to say about people is a whole different thing. quote: ORIGINAL: Bella1965 Testing people is a cheap, dirty trick and it's not open communication. I very much do things to see how other people react, but it usually isn't a pass/fail or litmus test, and I'm very blunt about what I'm doing and why. If anything, it tends to frequently be more a test of my reactions to them than the other way around. For example, I don't tend to have any chemistry with someone until I play with them, at least a little biting, hairpulling, etc. I need someone who has a mix of passion and self-control, and need to develop trust over time, starting with smaller things (in terms of sex and to some extent BDSM). In the very initial stages of D/s, I need him to hurt me a little in ways I don't like in order for me to find out whether or not I react submissively, if he is dominant. If he's submissive, I'm going to need to have him do little things (maybe service, maybe play) and see how he and I react to each other. I'm not playing games, I genuinely have no clue whether or not I am attracted to someone or have any potential for D/s until I actually interact with them on that level. If I have questions about someone, I can ask directly, but the conversation tends to flow better if I start out sharing my own views/opinions first, then asking what they think about the subject at hand, and about my views. There are lots of things that aren't dealbreakers if they don't do, but which I strongly prefer, like opening doors and having a compatible sense of humour and such. Those take observation over time, usually, rather than the form of a direct question. Anyway, I'm curious what people see as the difference between exploring and getting to know one another, and finding out how we interact/react to each other, compared to "testing."

NihilusZero -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/20/2009 11:09:52 PM)
This is an interesting topic. The catch that kinda doesn't sit well with me is that to say you can't stand testing from another person is to presume that they should grant you a free pass on basic cynicism for reasons they probably don't know yet because they're still learning about you. Personally, I like earning the trust that is given to me (even if on rare occasions I monumentally fail to deserve it after the fact due to a mistake). The testing, even under the more covert methods, is intended to weed out the undesirables. Maybe if we were all built with infallible polygraph tests we could determine every time someone is telling us the truth on a topic we are directly asking...and that's even presuming they aren't either in denial of confusion about the answer themselves. Sure, ideally we'd all like to be able to ask certain questions ("are you honorable/trustworthy/sincere?") and get answers applicable in practice...but that's the whole point. You're asking people's answers in theory, not in practice. And plenty of people like to say they would do certain things in a certain situation when, at the moment of actually being confronted with such a situation, do something entirely different. Maybe part of me just doesn't understand why anyone without self-doubt or introspective concern would be bothered by being put in a position to live up to what they advertise about themselves when it comes to someone they're just getting to meet.

Andalusite -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/20/2009 11:23:50 PM)
Exactly, asking about general personality traits isn't nearly as useful as actually interacting with them. I'm very blunt and straightforward about it, or will share my perceptions and give them a chance to correct it if I made a mistake. A lot of the trust building and chemistry building is a matter of reactions with physical contact, and there just aren't any questions that can usefully substitute for that, in my experience.

Prinsexx -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 12:24:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Andalusite quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael That said, "testing" people sucks. If I found out someone was testing me, I would "fail" them or at least make it clear that isn't a game I play. Testing isn't honest, you are in essense lying to them about what you are talking about. quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael If you do something or say something to see how someone reacts, you are testing them. Noticing that they stop and do something nice or are rude to waiters, or always have a nice thing/bad thing to say about people is a whole different thing. Re above: i don't rise to the bait anymore. i have better things to do than responding to someone's huge projection onto the world. However in my humble opinion i do think Andalusite that you have raised an interesting topic. Gotto go to work so will respond to what's been thought through later.

DemonKia -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 3:35:39 AM)
What's that thing you do, Nihilus? The point thing? 100 points for this posting, you did such a better job of laying this out as compared to my clumsy bumblings about on this in the other thread -- thank you . . .. . . So, Andalusite? What he said, hehehe . . .. . (& I'm glad to see this thread up, good topic . .. . I look forward to seeing other thoughts on this . . . . .) quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero This is an interesting topic. The catch that kinda doesn't sit well with me is that to say you can't stand testing from another person is to presume that they should grant you a free pass on basic cynicism for reasons they probably don't know yet because they're still learning about you. Personally, I like earning the trust that is given to me (even if on rare occasions I monumentally fail to deserve it after the fact due to a mistake). The testing, even under the more covert methods, is intended to weed out the undesirables. Maybe if we were all built with infallible polygraph tests we could determine every time someone is telling us the truth on a topic we are directly asking...and that's even presuming they aren't either in denial of confusion about the answer themselves. Sure, ideally we'd all like to be able to ask certain questions ("are you honorable/trustworthy/sincere?") and get answers applicable in practice...but that's the whole point. You're asking people's answers in theory, not in practice. And plenty of people like to say they would do certain things in a certain situation when, at the moment of actually being confronted with such a situation, do something entirely different. Maybe part of me just doesn't understand why anyone without self-doubt or introspective concern would be bothered by being put in a position to live up to what they advertise about themselves when it comes to someone they're just getting to meet.

DesFIP -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 3:41:24 AM)
I think it is normal and natural to want to see if someone really is the way they portray themselves as opposed to self delusion or deliberate lying. My big trigger is rage or inappropriate anger. Since this rarely comes up while you're having a cup of coffee, I did ask questions about the last time he got angry, why he left/lost his last job etc. But it was hard to accept his words as truth because very few people will be candid enough to say that they took a tire iron to their ex's car after the breakup. Most people know the right things to say. So yeah, doing a little testing in the very beginning to see his response allowed me to know more about him quickly. It allowed me to see him in action. And answered the questions I needed answered. The same way as him asking me for stuff allowed him to see what I was like in actuality. Once those all important questions were answered, that I knew he would respond in a manner that worked for me, there was no need to keep doing it.

agirl -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 4:16:34 AM)
When I am getting to know someone, no matter who it is, I rely on observation far more than conversation. That means I don't get to know someone unless I spend a lot of time with them over a long period of time. There's no way anyone could get to know ME unless they did the same. There's no short route as far as I'm concerned. The only thing I know after a few dates is that I'm enjoying being with them thus far and would like to continue to spend time together. Time and life itself offers testing , I've never felt the need or desire to create it. I've never spent time with anyone with the idea that I'm a potential anything, other then a potentialfriend or nice person to know. If someone appears interesting and fun then I'm prompted to get to know more about them but not with any idea that they might be someone I'd get into a relationship with. I've never wanted to get to know someone with the idea that they might be a potential partner and I find it off-putting if I think I'm being considered as one. As far as I'm concerned it loads the whole thing with an agenda beyond simply getting to know you and I've never been interested in that. agirl

Fitznicely -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 4:41:42 AM)
When we met, my girl was 16. She'd been brought up to think that all men were after one thing, the most ambition for a woman was four kids and a council flat and you should take everyone for all you could get. She also had a great line in emotional blackmail, having a wobbly bottom lip that she'd previously used to great effect to get exactly what she wanted. She would use this technique blatantly and gleefully at any opportunity. When we met, I was only 23, but I've always been told I have an older head on my shoulders. I'd been played before and frankly didn't have the tolerance to stand for it again. So i took her aside and told her point blank she was not to play emotional games with me ever again. She tried. I countered it with a stark refusal to be drawn. After a few weeks, she got the message. It's not particularly relevant, here, but I did the same for her nailbiting, her shitty attitude and, well, loads of things. This is all before we formally got "into" M/s...tho I'll acknowledge I wasn't particularly passive about the ways I wanted her to change... I won't be tested. It's a character trait (I'm not gonna call it a flaw[:)]). I hate having to perform the monkey tests they get you to do for job interviews, I resent having to prove my worth and knowledge by jumping through somebody's hoops. Find out about me by getting to know me, watching me work, or just dropping your agenda and making conversation. Come to me with an agenda and you'll find I'll start playing with your head, deliberately misleading you or just walking off - unless I'm feeling extremely nice that day, or just don't have the energy to mindfuck your results that day.

breatheasone -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 4:59:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fitznicely When we met, my girl was 16. She'd been brought up to think that all men were after one thing, the most ambition for a woman was four kids and a council flat and you should take everyone for all you could get. She also had a great line in emotional blackmail, having a wobbly bottom lip that she'd previously used to great effect to get exactly what she wanted. She would use this technique blatantly and gleefully at any opportunity. When we met, I was only 23, but I've always been told I have an older head on my shoulders. I'd been played before and frankly didn't have the tolerance to stand for it again. So i took her aside and told her point blank she was not to play emotional games with me ever again. She tried. I countered it with a stark refusal to be drawn. After a few weeks, she got the message. It's not particularly relevant, here, but I did the same for her nailbiting, her shitty attitude and, well, loads of things. This is all before we formally got "into" M/s...tho I'll acknowledge I wasn't particularly passive about the ways I wanted her to change... I won't be tested. It's a character trait (I'm not gonna call it a flaw[:)]). I hate having to perform the monkey tests they get you to do for job interviews, I resent having to prove my worth and knowledge by jumping through somebody's hoops. Find out about me by getting to know me, watching me work, or just dropping your agenda and making conversation. Come to me with an agenda and you'll find I'll start playing with your head, deliberately misleading you or just walking off - unless I'm feeling extremely nice that day, or just don't have the energy to mindfuck your results that day. Apparently, some "D" types would have dismissed this girl.... From what i understand there are zero tolerance "D" types and disobedience isnt an option. i'm glad she had you, and you didn't give up on her. i bet she's happy you didn't TOO! [;)]

Fitznicely -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 5:05:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: breatheasone Apparently, some "D" types would have dismissed this girl.... From what i understand there are zero tolerance "D" types and disobedience isnt an option. i'm glad she had you, and you didn't give up on her. i bet she's happy you didn't TOO! [;)] Actually, a lot of it was quite funny. She'd get the wobbly lip syndrome and give the ol puppydog eyes and I'd just be there saying "No, nope, ain't gonna work". Then she'd call me a bastard and slap me while I was laughing at her... And we're both bloody glad I persevered with her [:D]

Drakontos -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 5:09:48 AM)
zaphira tried with Master, before she begged his collar. It was not something that he put up with. At one point, he left and refused to acknowledge zaphira at all. Now, if zaphira tried to test her owner; she would lose her collar in no time. It is not something that she looks to accomplish. With all that aside though; testing the bounds of a new relationship is often done; openly or subtly. zaphira believes that this is done so that a person can understand the one that they choose to spend their time with. She does not see it as a totally bad or wrong behavior; just one that is instinctive to many of us. We need to know that the person who we are with is dependable, trustworthy, and stable. zaphira also believes though that when it is done continuously over a long period of time; that it is a struggle for authority. It may be conscious, it may be unconscious; but in this case, it is not healthy for a developing, or already established relationship.

breatheasone -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 5:15:56 AM)
Hmmm i'm sorry that your friend Zaphira was ignored to the point she "wasn't even acknowledged" my this master she had. It never fails to AMAZE me how some can believe ignoring someone, and not TALKING can be better than good, open communication, just wow. Have you considered talking to your friend about getting herself an acct on collarme? She may really enjoy it.

chamberqueen -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 5:31:12 AM)
Testing can begin with very early conversations, such as asking for their real first name. I don't want a play partner who isn't willing to give me their first and last name and general location so someone who refuses even a first name is someone who I feel has something to hide. I don't consider myself a brat but I might test a new Dom I'm talking to by purposely leaving out "Sir" in a chat to see if he is going to come down hard on me for it, gently remind me, or let it pass. It is my way of testing how important protocol is to them, or following things to the letter rather than the spirit. Even once a relationship is established I do some testing. I might be silent for a while during a sexual session to see if it makes a difference to the amount of enjoyment the Dom is getting, or ask for help when there is something I could really do on my own or for advice when I really don't need it just to see if he is willing to be helpful. I might try something creative when in a position that I feel I can freely touch him to see if he enjoys that creativity or simply wants me following commands. I do think of it as experimentation, trying to get to know someone beyond what conversation alone could tell me, and the intent is not malicious at all. It is common for Doms/Masters to test their subs, to see how far they are willing to go, whether they will allow a limit to be pushed, etc. To me it seems only right that the sub/slave gets to test in return. Does this person truly care about me or do I just come in handy? If I was hurt or sick would they care? Are they more worried about little details or the big picture? Are they happier when I am showing signs of fulfillment? If I am lonely in between visits will they want to make me feel better or are they happy being oblivious to my wants and needs? So I test to find out.

eyesopened -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 5:57:51 AM)
Here's my opinion of "testing" and no, not everyone does it. All of us have had experience at one time or another with school or workplace fire drills. They tell you up front that this is going to happen and everyone behaves exactly as they have been told. This is a totally artificial test and not a test of how people would react in an actual fire. You could just pull the fire alarm at random to see (test) how everyone would react, and that is illegal for good reason. But even then, it is an artificial test as there is no actual fire. The only real "test" would be an actual situation of a real fire. Only during real, actual events of stressful nature have we seen how people will honestly react. The amount of heroism and support during times of actual disaster is amazing. Therefore, being willing to invest the time to get to know someone, allowing them to be themselves in the variety of situations that arise during the normal course of one's life is really the only true and honest measure of a person. No "test" is going to be accurate, whether it is sprung on them without their knowledge or discussed ahead of time.

oceanwinds -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 6:05:18 AM)
I do test in certain areas. I have many friends, but very few that reach beyond the surface. In all types of relationships, one thing wont work for me- the white knight syndrome. i watch with a bird's eye on that, for i not here to walk another's ideal. It is fine to walk beside me, but don't try to save me. Because of this i do throw out bait to see what a person will do. If they come through with oh this way is a must you need to try it, then my ears go deaf. Even with Sir or anyone that has held my heart, they have been tested. i will not be molded into a clay model of their desires, if it is not already within me. i am bendable like a willow tree, yet have a strong oak within. Few are able to past my tests, and those who have offer to walk beside me. How does this fit in to Ds? We are two spirits expressing through human form and honoring each aspect of each other. This life with the abilites given to me, i will be more of a willow tree, but the oak must be honored within me. i'm a mutt perhaps:) i ask no one to follow my truths or my ideals, and if they do the same with me then we have a nice path to share.

SlyStone -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 6:12:13 AM)
The problem with testing is that it is very simple to set someone up for failure and or success, depending on our initial impression. How questions or ideas are posed has a great influence on the outcome/answer. So there is a good chance that rather than achieve in learning what you need to know in the long term you will instead find a way to get what you want in the short run. Far better I think to say upfront that you have certain issues that are important to you and would like to have an honest discussion to see if there is common ground. Let people take the lead, they will tell you all you need to know without need for manipulation.

missturbation -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 7:16:59 AM)
quote: She also had a great line in emotional blackmail, having a wobbly bottom lip that she'd previously used to great effect to get exactly what she wanted. She would use this technique blatantly and gleefully at any opportunity. I will openly admit i've used this technique, test once or twice. I've been around long enough to know that if it works and the Dom gives in, 99% of the time that person is not strong enough to handle me. It's been pretty much a fail proof test for me. The problem is most people do not like to feel, think, know they are being tested. In reality we are tested all the time throughout our lives. Kindergarten / nursery we are tested on our development with play, first school we are tested on our growing skills at reading and writing, secondary school we are quite openly tested by exams. If we go on to college / university we are tested there with a levels, degrees etc. On leaving school we send out our cv's / job applications, a test in themself. Can you put together a good cv? Can you coherently and with reasonable literacy fill in an application? The interview itself, a test all round. Once in the job we are appraised reasonably often whether we know it or not, even tested on occasion. Relationship wise we all do things which could be read or seen as a test. I myself have done it and openly admit it. The test i spoke of above i have found useful, reasonably accurate and no harm is done by it. I'm not saying that there is a pass / fail on it, you fail i'm out of the relationship, you pass i'm staying but it usually ends up that where they have 'failed' the relationship does not work out in the long run. It amuses me when people get irate about being tested or the thought of it. Whether we like it or not we are tested in some way every day.

leadership527 -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 7:41:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: agirl Time and life itself offers testing , I've never felt the need or desire to create it. I've never spent time with anyone with the idea that I'm a potential anything, other then a potentialfriend or nice person to know. OK great, now if I could just get you to add to your signature, "There is a 98% chance that leadership527 agrees what whatever I just wrote" then it'd save me a lot of time. What bothers me about this thing called 'testing' is it's covert nature. In general, I am highly suspect of any action that I am unable or unwilling to disclose fully to Carol. As you say, with patience, life offers up plenty of opportunities and they are not going to be contrived examples. By it's very nature, testing seems adversarial to me. Here, let me setup this little game and we'll see how you score. Most significantly though, I just plain don't find this need I suspect largely because of the rather languid pace at which I build relationships.

Drakontos -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 7:46:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: breatheasone Hmmm i'm sorry that your friend Zaphira was ignored to the point she "wasn't even acknowledged" my this master she had. It never fails to AMAZE me how some can believe ignoring someone, and not TALKING can be better than good, open communication, just wow. Have you considered talking to your friend about getting herself an acct on collarme? She may really enjoy it. Breatheasone; it was not this slave's intention to cause confusion. This is zaphira speaking. When zaphira first met Master, she tried to test his authority; to manipulate him. This was not something that Master was going to put up with. His response to her attempts were to simply walk away. zaphira knew, when she first approached him, that Master would never put up with such behavior. He made it very clear to her. She chose to ignore what was said and instead attempted to control and manipulate him. Since begging his collar, she has never again, attempted to test or manipulate Master. If she were to try, this time, she would lose her collar and there would not be another chance for her. She accepts this as part of the conditions that were laid before her. zaphira understands that not everyone could live and be content in such a way; but for this slave, it was and continues to be by choice.

Andalusite -> RE: Non-destructive testing, exploration, and experimentation (5/21/2009 8:05:57 AM)
I've tried to make it very clear that I don't manipulate anyone, or set them up to fail. Before I can get into a sexual or BDSM or D/s relationship, I need to take small steps to explore/develop chemistry, trust, and whether or not I react to them on that basis. Most people are just neutral to me, until we interact in those ways. Asking what he feels is topping from the bottom can be useful, but it tends to be more abstract. If I pounce him (after getting permission in general first), initiate something, or make a polite, respectful, non-pushy request, does he accuse me of topping from the bottom, enjoy my taking the initiative and being honest/direct with him, take in the information and act on it when he feels like it, or what? Can he read my body language when we're just doing very light play? If I tell him that something is a hard or soft limit, how does he respond (telling me how he plans to push the limit, actually pushing it, leaving me plenty of room in that area so I don't get uncomfortable, etc.). Is he good at reading my body language in non-play situations? Other things aren't about BDSM or D/s or sex at all. For example, just asking "How do you react around small and large groups of strangers" isn't going to tell me much about how he'll get along with my friends. For that matter, he might have lots of interests in common with one group, and have plenty to contribute to the conversation, but feel more shy, awkward, or just have less to say in a different group of my friends. I don't think of it as testing him, and if one of my friends doesn't like him, it's not a dealbreaker (if all of them dislike him, though, that would definitely be a red flag). Agirl, most of this stuff is interaction/getting to know someone, but I can't just walk in as friends or with no expectations, and switch to romantic mode without a very clear "we're dating now" kind of conversation and becoming a bit sexual. If someone's in "friends mode," they just don't show up on my radar that way. I have dated guys after becoming friends through our vanilla interests. However, they had to actually ask me out and we had to mess around a bit before I had any idea of whether or not we could have any chemistry, and were compatible romantically, even if I'd known them for a year or something at that point. Breatheasone, zaphira is referring to herself in the third person, like Bob Dole.[;)] She already has an account here, and is using it to talk with us.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0546875