Collarchat.com

Join Our Community		 Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular )


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 1/14/2004 2:56:32 PM   
SirChameleon


Posts: 4
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline 		I have been wondering about this for some time. Is there a basic ideology in the BDSM chat world that we all might agree upon?
lets start with the obvious (( common sense )) do we all have it, i say yes .. do we all use it .. i say no. Lets face it .. we can all be who we want to be on here... I want to be tall and broad shouldered and have blue eyes that make women weak in the knees, but it is not in the cards for me. Use the noodle on your head, cause if you are lying it will come out eventually.

Then this idea of ((Switch)), what is that? All that tells me is that you are confused, about who you really are. You are either a Dominant person or you are a submissive person. Does not mean that a Dom. cant be nice just means that in the relationship realm He/She is Dominant and knows it. A true Dominant would never submit to a sub in real life, so get to know yourself and then make a decision. (( I know i will get some flack for this one.))

Here is a simple one when(( choosing a NAME )) for online chat, the Dominants should start with a Capital letter and the submissives should not. ((if you are confused about this see on line chat ref# 100897-34 ))

Oh here is a touchy one.. IMing ( instant messages ) when to do it. If you are a sub. don’t do it with out asking first, male or female it does not matter. If you are Dom. be polite and don’t do it with out asking. A little passage i like .. don't do un to thy sub as you would want dun unto you. so if you want IM's all day long from every one then do as ya please. Most R/L'ers know better and they carry over their etiquette to the cyber world.

((Sceneing in a public room))... I am not sure what the standard is or should be here. I prefer that it be left to private rooms. just makes it to difficult to keep a normal chat going with a scene happening. Not to mention cyber to me is a big ol waste of time. I will eagerly accept ideas on this one.

((The Hard head cases)) ... the ones just looking for a fight ... i say take their names down and send them to the help or suggestions line .. with a copy of the chat. maybe something will come of it ..maybe not.. (( lets not abuse this though ..just cause you disagree with someone does not mean you head off and get them banned . what i mean is that particular someone that comes in just to fight and that is it .. that is not being polite or respectful. )) I love to argue so i am sure i will be the first to get banned if this is possible.

((Pictures on your profile.)) MEN .. Dom or sub .. we don’t need to see your Mr. Happy. if the person you are seeking wants to see the wares they will ask ... personally if i was looking for a guy .. that would be the first one i delete. Women ... i like pictures they tell a million words, but i will say i am quick to ignore the ones that look too good, that look fake, that look like they came off of the web. be real, be honest, be creative. (( we know you are into BDSM, you don’t have to show a pic of you doing it. show me what else you are into tease us get us interested then see what happens))

well that is it for now, thanks for all the posts and sorry for any grammatical errors.

Sir Chameleon




Attachment (1)
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 1/15/2004 6:16:48 PM   
SherriA


Posts: 544
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
quote:



I have been wondering about this for some time. Is there a basic ideology in the BDSM chat world that we all might agree upon?


I doubt it. *shrug*

quote:


Then this idea of ((Switch)), what is that? All that tells me is that you are confused, about who you really are. You are either a Dominant person or you are a submissive person. Does not mean that a Dom. cant be nice just means that in the relationship realm He/She is Dominant and knows it. A true Dominant would never submit to a sub in real life, so get to know yourself and then make a decision. (( I know i will get some flack for this one.))


Yes, I'm sure you will get some flack, by trying to invalidate what appears to be the largest segment of the SM community. Being a "switch" (I prefer sadomasochist, personally), doesn't mean I can't or haven't made a decision. For me, it means I've tried both sides (in a lot of different variations over almost 20 years), and enjoy them both. So why should I have to limit my pleasures just because someone like you (generic you, but this certainly applies to Chameleon) is too closed minded to understand it? Just because blood oranges might be my favourite fruit doesn't mean that I can't enjoy bananas on occasion too. I'm a multi-faceted individual with diverse interests in pretty much every aspect my my life. Why should this one be any different?

quote:


Here is a simple one when(( choosing a NAME )) for online chat, the Dominants should start with a Capital letter and the submissives should not. ((if you are confused about this see on line chat ref# 100897-34 ))


You'll never get me to sign on for this one. Someone's role is irrelevant to me unless I have an interest in playing with that person. And if that's the case, I'm quite capable of asking what their role preferences are. I don't need (or even want) to know random strangers personal preferences in this regard. It makes no difference to me. I treat eveyone the same, regardless of whether they self-identify as dominant, submissive, top, bottom, or pink chair.

I think this particular convention simply feeds into the frustrating misconception that people can/should be treated differently simply because of their chosen role. I've seen way too many so called "dominants" who are arrogant and rude to people simply because they think that person is submissive. Being submissive doesn't mean someone submits to any/everyone who calls themselves dominant, just as identifying as dominant doesn't mean that you're necessarily dominant over everyone around. And none of that should have any bearing on how you treat others in regular interactions if you haven't negotiated something in that regard.

I'm a lazy typist. I refuse to use honourifics with ANYONE, especially online, and I'm quite likely to leave the capitals off of names simply because it's one less keystroke. People who are going to get their knickers in a knot over something so insignificant aren't worth my time and effort to placate anyway.

This also ties too closely into the online X/x conventions for my personal tastes. Who's ego is so in need of bolstering that they need to have all pronouns referring to them capitalized? Besides being terrible grammar, it's also simply annoying as hell. And how do you say Y/you anyway? Do you have to stutter or what? It's cyberplay, and I refuse to engage in it. Insisting that I do is simply an attempt to manipulate me into your scene and I'm not going there.

quote:


((Pictures on your profile.)) MEN .. Dom or sub .. we don’t need to see your Mr. Happy.


This one I'll agree with. Frankly, if a cock is the person's best selling point, I feel sorry for him.

-- Sherri

_____________________________

-- Sherri

Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity.

(in reply to SirChameleon)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 1/15/2004 7:02:26 PM   
MizSuz


Posts: 1881
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline 		HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Oh my GAWD! I'm probably laughing too hard to make any coherent sense here...but I'll give it a shot...

Thems that wants it is welcome to it...in ALL aspects of the above referenced 'protocols.'

I do a LOT of business typing and I simply have no time nor inclination to attempt to reteach myself an entire new set of rules for ONE aspect of my life (and while I may often spend a considerable amount of time online it is still only one aspect of my life). Most people have a difficult enough time with english grammar. I'd be happy if we all learned to use the existing rules of grammar. It would certainly make attempting to communicate easier and personally I'm in it for the communication. If I want my endorphins to start running I'll step into the dungeon or go snowboarding or go climb a sheer rock cliff or assume a semi-lotus to contemplate my bellybutton or any assortment of other activities that are sure to give me a substantially higher return on my energy.

I'm not going to address the validity or lack thereof of "switch" beyond saying that not everyone who tops AND bottoms identifies with dominant and/or submissive. Sherri is a good example, she really doesn't care for D/s at all...and there are a LOT of people who partake that have no interest in D/s, just like a lot of people who are ONLY interested in D/s really don't care much for S/m. Perhaps if we agreed to use my above referenced rules of english grammar communicating would be easier or more clear, but I doubt it. One example is that I had to create a profile to sign up here on collarme. Now, I HAD to chose if I was straight, homo or bi. Frankly, as far as I'm concerned none of them apply! I am a heteroFLEXIBLE, sado-masochistic dominant woman who happens to prefer to pay more attention to what's inside the person (and the way we may be able to dance together) than I am interested in the package. If I had to choose a label in that regard it would be "non-gender specific." Besides, are you homo, het or bi if you are with a pre-op trans sexual? Kind of boggles the mind. Why bother to be boggled over something so insignificant? I feel the same way about "switches." The REAL question is...does it make you smile?

Which is a fairly good segue to "NO...I haven't asked for a pic of your dick and YES, if it's your best feature then I'm not interested." I'm thinking stubbing my toe would be more fun than trying to carry on an interaction with someone who thinks a pic of their (name your genitalia here) is a real statement of who they are.

As for IMing without asking - if you IM me to ask me to chat you have effectively stepped into my living room to knock on the front door. Be advised, I own a gun and I'm territorial - and I don't feel compelled to be polite with someone who hasn't afforded me the same courtesy.

Scening in a public chat room just bores the hell out of me, but then I have a well stocked dungeon. I suppose for people who only get their kink online it's something, but I'm most likely to leave a room that has too much cybersoup going on. That, like feeding the cyber smegma that come in looking for discontent, is not on my agenda.

Screw the protocols.

_____________________________

“The more you love, the more you can love—and the more intensely you love. Nor is there any limit on how many you can love. If a person had time enough, he could love all of that majority who are decent and just.”
- Robert Heinlein

(in reply to SherriA)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 1/15/2004 8:21:31 PM   
EStrict


Posts: 729
Joined: 1/11/2004
Status: offline 		I am with Sheri. Odds of everyone agreeing to them are slim to none. For one thing, they require everyone agreeing on things. And if everyone agreed to everything,,, well,, then it would be to boring to be there anway :)

Plus, I don't do lower case stuff. Having a lower case letter starting my name does not make me who are what I am. Anymore than someone *calling* themselves a master or mistress makes them that. People are who and what they are. Plus I'm with Sheri in the fact that I'm the chat. My personal beliefs and life are not going to change or become less relevant because I am slave talking to a dominant. I am not there to play.

And of course, just because they are dominant in their environment, it doesn't make them necessarily dominant to me.

Sandy

(in reply to SirChameleon)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 1/15/2004 11:59:58 PM   
SirChameleon


Posts: 4
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline 		I knew I was going to get some flack and that was fine but when you speak of what you do not know about ME is not flack it is a personal attack. ( the part about me being generic. I did not come from a Dom cookie cutter so don’t judge what you don’t know. thanks ) I find that rude and uncalled for Sherri. I was simply asking some questions and thought it might have some meaning to who ever might want to have some sort of structure to a site but hey I am for all the chaos that it brings with vague generalities and the lack of basic information with in the chat room.

I was just seeking some clarification on the switch person, and you are right you can be what ever you want to be when ever and however to whomever. I was not saying you could not or should not do it just in my ever so bland opinion that it was a confusing point and if I was switch I would be confused of my position. Have I thought about being a switch? Nope. Have I thought about being a sub? Sure. Only to be in her shoes to better understand her and why and what she wants and needs. Does this make me less Dom cause I won’t switch I think not it just makes me plain Dom Vanilla.

I don’t like to drive while blind, i read the signs look ahead and see what is interesting and what might be a problem. Same as in a chat room if one where to have there name capitalized then it would be easier to show the respect to the appropriate person instead of not knowing at all.

but what do i know? I’m just a bland Dom here with no personality at all.
I thank you for the flame and the reply's it was rather insightful.
Sir oops .. Bland Chameleon

_____________________________

Bad things lurk in the shadows, sinful things roam the mind.

(in reply to SherriA)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 1/16/2004 11:15:06 AM   
Erusvi


Posts: 49
Joined: 1/1/2004
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
quote:

This also ties too closely into the online X/x conventions for my personal tastes. Who's ego is so in need of bolstering that they need to have all pronouns referring to them capitalized? Besides being terrible grammar, it's also simply annoying as hell. And how do you say Y/you anyway? Do you have to stutter or what? It's cyberplay, and I refuse to engage in it. Insisting that I do is simply an attempt to manipulate me into your scene and I'm not going there.


quote:

Most people have a difficult enough time with english grammar. I'd be happy if we all learned to use the existing rules of grammar.


Sherri and Suz are quickly becoming my favorite people on this message board.

Much respect,

'6' ;o)

_____________________________

Schno
ErusVI
Los Angeles
Owner of dahanala
www.esenem.net
[image]http://www.esenem.net/Gallery/albums/2005_08_Savage/SM_1.thumb.jpg[/image]

(in reply to SirChameleon)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 1/16/2004 3:26:42 PM   
SherriA


Posts: 544
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SirChameleon

the part about me being generic. I did not come from a Dom cookie cutter so don’t judge what you don’t know. thanks ) I find that rude and uncalled for Sherri.



You misunderstood. When I say "generic you", it means that I'm not speaking to/of the person I'm responding to specifically, but rather all those of similar ilk. Reread what I said with that in mind, and perhaps you'll see what I meant.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SirChameleon
I was just seeking some clarification on the switch person, and you are right you can be what ever you want to be when ever and however to whomever. I was not saying you could not or should not do it just in my ever so bland opinion that it was a confusing point and if I was switch I would be confused of my position.


Perhaps that's what you meant, but it's not what you said. You made judgements about "switches", stating that someone is either dominant or submissive, and that people who choose both roles are confused about why they are. If your intent was to get clarificaiton, then hopefully I helped, but you're more likely to receive informative answers when you refrain from judging the people you're asking for help. imnsho, of course.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SirChameleon
if one where to have there name capitalized then it would be easier to show the respect to the appropriate person instead of not knowing at all.


You seem to be saying that some people deserve "respect" simply because of the role they choose to identify with. I simply don't agree with that. I respect PEOPLE, not roles, and it matters not to me if someone self-identifies as dominant, submissive, sadist, masochist, or pink chair. I'm going to treat everyone in the same manner unless and until they give me reason to do otherwise. So, again, I see no need for the cap/lowercase differentiation based on roles. Your comments simply support my assertion that these sorts of conventions encourage people to show a LACK of respect based not on actions or personality, but simply on role of choice. I'm really not ok with that at all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SirChameleon
I thank you for the flame


*chuckle* There was no flame. Trust me, if I flamed you, it would be blatantly obvious. Unfortunately, a good flame is a work of art, and I'm simply not that good at it.

-- Sherri

< Message edited by SherriA -- 1/16/2004 6:28:22 PM >

_____________________________

-- Sherri

Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity.

(in reply to SirChameleon)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 1/16/2004 5:58:37 PM   
MizSuz


Posts: 1881
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline 		SIIIIIIIIXXXXX!!!!!

(We like you, too.)

_____________________________

“The more you love, the more you can love—and the more intensely you love. Nor is there any limit on how many you can love. If a person had time enough, he could love all of that majority who are decent and just.”
- Robert Heinlein

(in reply to Erusvi)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 1/17/2004 7:24:45 PM   
masokissed


Posts: 21
Joined: 1/16/2004
From: Magick and then some
Status: offline 		As if we need to create more issues... Good lord... whatever happened to worrying about your own back yard before preaching to your neighbor about his?

< Message edited by masokissed -- 1/17/2004 7:25:29 PM >

_____________________________

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BDSMTraditionalist
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/positivechoices

"All men desire a woman true to her devotion,
strong in her beliefs and grounded in her honor,
but few are worthy of her.-"

(in reply to MizSuz)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 1/18/2004 1:17:07 AM   
MizSuz


Posts: 1881
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: masokissed

... whatever happened to worrying about your own back yard before preaching to your neighbor about his?



I'm afraid I have little control over whether there are people with the skills to live this philosophy in a public forum such as this.

<smile> I do, however, have a considerable amount of control over how much of it makes it's way into my life.

Truly, though, I didn't get a sense that Chameleon was suggesting this was how it 'should be' as much as saying "wouldn't it be nice if..."

I may not agree with him on all points, but I can damned sure relate to the 'wouldn't it be nice if' space.

_____________________________

“The more you love, the more you can love—and the more intensely you love. Nor is there any limit on how many you can love. If a person had time enough, he could love all of that majority who are decent and just.”
- Robert Heinlein

(in reply to masokissed)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 1/18/2004 4:32:18 AM   
Wolfspet


Posts: 143
Joined: 1/11/2004
Status: offline 		Thank the Creator others feel the same about these suggestions.

When I first read this post, I thought they were meant as guidelines for the chats, rather than suggestions..

I have to agree with Erusvi Ms.Suz & Sherri rock!

(in reply to MizSuz)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 1/18/2004 8:59:55 AM   
MizSuz


Posts: 1881
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wolfspet

Thank the Creator others feel the same about these suggestions.

When I first read this post, I thought they were meant as guidelines for the chats, rather than suggestions..

I have to agree with Erusvi Ms.Suz & Sherri rock!


Naaaaa...public forums have to have some tolerance for differences in preference and style (to my mind, anyway). Otherwise they either wouldn't be "public" or they would probably die of natural causes.

As for the compliment, so very kind of you to say! Thank you.

<feelin' kind warm and fuzzy...thanks again!>

_____________________________

“The more you love, the more you can love—and the more intensely you love. Nor is there any limit on how many you can love. If a person had time enough, he could love all of that majority who are decent and just.”
- Robert Heinlein

(in reply to Wolfspet)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 1/19/2004 4:02:19 PM   
SirChameleon


Posts: 4
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline 		Reread what I posted and yes i agree maybe i guided my fingertips to the wrong letters about Switch, BUT it still seems rather confusing to me as a Dom.

I do not give respect just cause the name is Capped, they must earn it same as a sub does, just would help to define the role, just as if you were at a party and one was holding a paddle or one being paddled. No mistake of identity there ( well unless they were switch it might but in my perfect world it would make sense)

With so many fakes about it is hard to filter through them and if i peruse a through the name list and see, Oh.. capped no need for that one they are switch or top and then go to the next.

anyways Sherri .. i was a little sensitive that day and i realize i was not flamed i just took it personal. Thus a good flame is an art piece thus glad i am not part of that art.

Thanks and Enjoy

Sir Chameleon

_____________________________

Bad things lurk in the shadows, sinful things roam the mind.

(in reply to SirChameleon)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 1/19/2004 6:13:19 PM   
SherriA


Posts: 544
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
quote:


just would help to define the role, just as if you were at a party and one was holding a paddle or one being paddled. No mistake of identity there ( well unless they were switch it might but in my perfect world it would make sense)


I don't know how many play parties you've been to, but imx when I go to parties the bulk of the people aren't obviously one role or the other, unless they're playing. And most people I've seen spend at least as much time socializing as they do playing, if not significantly more. So what do you do in those situations?

I still don't think it's necessary to know what someone's orientation is simply to have a conversation with them. Unless you're going to play with someone, the role is irrelevant.

quote:


With so many fakes about it is hard to filter through them and if i peruse a through the name list and see, Oh.. capped no need for that one they are switch or top and then go to the next.


I don't see how this is relevant, personally. There are "fakes" in every role.

From what i've seen in my limited time here, most people go into the chat rooms to talk to folks, not to troll for partners. The search functions are set up to help you find people with complimentary interests, and the email system allows you to contact them. People in the chat room are just folks hanging out talking, so role isn't relevant.

-- Sherri

_____________________________

-- Sherri

Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity.

(in reply to SirChameleon)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 2/7/2004 12:15:54 PM   
alyra


Posts: 6
Joined: 2/2/2004
Status: offline
quote:


Sherri and Suz are quickly becoming my favorite people on this message board.


If I said "ditto", making this a very clear "me too" post would it be held against me? :)



Be well,
-A

(in reply to Erusvi)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 2/12/2004 4:52:38 AM   
MistressDREAD


Posts: 2943
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline 		Unless the chat room is a generic one, say like the Lobby on Collarme, They are personally created and as such are the Homes of those whom created them hence what ever rules that Home has should be accepted and adheared to by those whom enter into anothers Home/Chat, and if you are sumone whom does not like the proticals of The Lifestyle need not enter into those chats to tempt to turn them into what YOU desire them to be not being YOUR created chat home. Our Lifestyle no matter what anyone of the New Guard thinks has old time set proticals in them and those of Us from the days of old still follow those and they make sence in OUR Culture, ohhh yes and by the way many of the Munches I attend and speak to across this Country and the world, DO have hankie proticals to show everyone in there what they are and what they seek, and it is only the newer Younger Groups of Lifestylers whom have not adheared to proticals that have been long in place and have turned what Munches use to be ( gathering of the experianced teaching others with less experiance and showing experiances and meeting for the purpose of finding scening partners) into social gatherings of chatters that could for the most part be found at any vanilla function. ~My Opinion~

(in reply to alyra)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 2/24/2004 7:18:25 AM   
belongtoyou


Posts: 168
Joined: 1/21/2004
Status: offline 		Wow, this was a fascinating thread to read!

First i'd like to say hurrah for Sherri and Suz...

The main thing i'll comment on is this: b/c i'm so new to this lifestyle...well, i was "taught" to use Caps for Doms, and lower case for subs...so now...it just happens.

The main problem i have, is that when i'm charting notes at work (i'm in social work) i tend to do the same thing, and it takes me FOREVER to finish typing!

ok, it's not really a problem, just an inconvience...but i'd have difficulty returning to "normal" (vanilla) spelling at this point.

One last thing, to each their own, whatever makes you happy...well, that's what matters!

keep on keeping on........

~rain~

(in reply to MistressDREAD)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 3/13/2004 1:56:31 PM   
DomOfThunder


Posts: 2
Joined: 3/13/2004
Status: offline 		Hmm....sounds to me like someone would prefer to have everything nice and easy, so that they would not have to use their precious brain cell to determine if they want to speak with someone...after all, a "true" *cough* Dominant could *never* understand a switch, much less learn anything from anyone with a capped nick, since they already know it all...

/sarcasm

John

(in reply to belongtoyou)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 3/14/2004 8:38:02 PM   
MistressKiss


Posts: 295
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Then this idea of ((Switch)), what is that? All that tells me is that you are confused, about who you really are. You are either a Dominant person or you are a submissive person. Does not mean that a Dom. cant be nice just means that in the relationship realm He/She is Dominant and knows it. A true Dominant would never submit to a sub in real life, so get to know yourself and then make a decision. (( I know i will get some flack for this one.))


Yep, you're due some flack. I'm going to add a little. A "true Domiant" does what the hell he or she WANTS to do that PLEASES him or her. If that means that he or she submits for the pleasure of it, so be it. It's not a matter of making a decision. The decision is already made...the switch likes the variety and spice of having their cake and eating it too...of having it both ways, not being limited to one...of knowing both sides of the coin and probably being better at both because of it. It's great fun.

I will say, it can still be conflicting...but that makes it all the more interesting. I know that I like a challenge and working through my Dominant vs. submissive feelings about a certain matter is challenging and rewarding.

Don't knock it till you try it!

(in reply to SirChameleon)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) - 3/26/2004 7:13:06 PM   
topcat


Posts: 1675
Joined: 1/31/2004
From: Tidewater, VA
Status: offline
quote:

A true Dominant would never submit to a sub in real life, so get to know yourself and then make a decision. (( I know i will get some flack for this one.))



ahhh, hell. I MUST be a true Dominant, because I can not resist beating something- even if it is a dead horse<g>.

I really need some help here. I mean, for twenty five years, I thought I was a dominant (actually, I don't think I heard it used as desciption of what I was till I was twentytwo or three, but at that point i'd been tying up my girlfriends since I was sixteen. Whatever.), but now I see I am not in fact a true dominant.

I always submit to my girl on Dec. 26th (boxing day, and traditonaly, 'turnabout' day in the UK), and I have been spanked for my birthday by dominants and submissives on a few occasions. I have also, for education purposes, been on the recieving end of almost every tool I've used, at the hands of male and female, dominants and submissives.

so what am I then?

Stay warm,
Lawrence

(in reply to SirChameleon)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Basic Ideology for chat rooms ( BDSM in paticular ) Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.074