RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms?

RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress

Message

angelicbitch -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:05:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: christine1 well, i'll just grab me a popcorn and a beer...i haven't seen jealousy here in these parts for some time now...could prove quite interesting. can I come sit with y ou Christine??? I will bring the cooler :)

christine1 -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:05:55 PM)
smexy? woot! i'm smexy! ok, i'm jealous of your flat tummy.

darchChylde -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:07:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: angelicbitch quote: ORIGINAL: christine1 well, i'll just grab me a popcorn and a beer...i haven't seen jealousy here in these parts for some time now...could prove quite interesting. can I come sit with y ou Christine??? I will bring the cooler :) Could i join you two? i give good cuddle, swear to be a complete gentleman and promise that jaundice isn't catchy.

christine1 -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:07:15 PM)
have a seat angelic! (got any pork rinds on ya?)

MsFay -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:07:59 PM)
Clearly, you are a sad little man and an attention whore. Anyone with a reasonable IQ can see that wasn't a complaint. It was a question--and as I stated, I have no preference for either a bottom or a sub. But there are many who are clearly bottoms that state they are subs when they clearly aren't. I could care less at the end, as if either are hot, I am game. In fact, I think potentially sub types are a bit more clingy and defensive and easily perturbed at time. Now, if you take what was originally posted as a complaint, then that's your psychosis at work buddy. The only one that opened with his vitriolic, assumptive posts is you. And good luck with all that clear baggage you are dealing with love. You already look a lot older than you are, maybe it's time to let the pain go.

christine1 -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:08:34 PM)
oh hell darch, i'll just wear my rose colored glasses to ward of the jaundice ok? and have a seat inbetween us...it'll be so fun!

Lynnxz -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:09:15 PM)
I'll bring a new liver for Darch! Edit Only awesome people make long angry posts about things they don't care about

angelicbitch -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:09:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: christine1 have a seat angelic! (got any pork rinds on ya?) ~scoots by Christine...grabs pork rinds ~ .... Dark are you SURE they yellow stuff isnt catchy lol .... pull up a seat... :) and thanks Christine

ModeratorEleven -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:12:34 PM)
Ok kids, enough. XI

DiurnalVampire -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:13:23 PM)
To the OP: Perhaps in your definition of what a true sub is and a bottom is this might be true. In my definition, I have met a great many submissives who were very good at submitting. I have no cookie cutter mold to fit all the subs I have had into. They do not all have the same functions, do not all play the same way when we play, and every boy or girl has their own definition of serving. I am fairly sure you would define my slave Angel as nothing more than a bottom in your eyes. And thats fine, you define him as youd like, I will define him as I want to since he is MY collared slave. He doesnt serve me the way Fox does, and I wouldnt really want him to. There are no one size fits all definitions. DV Oh, and by the way, name calling and getting catty with people who express opinions other than your own, snarky or not, is not putting you in a very good light. You might not like what some have to say, but making personal digs at them doesnt make you look like a "better person" nor does it make you look intelligent or witty. It simply makes you look like you do not believe your argument or topic can stand on its own against opposition and you need to attack rather than defend. IMHO of course

MissIsis -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:15:22 PM)
I am not sure that I would go so far as to say whether anyone is a true anything. However, that being said, when I get emails or messages from submissives, saying they are looking for a women to submit to, & then give me a list of the kinky things they have always desired & are looking for a dominant women to do to them, it kind of sets off red flags for me. I get that feeling especially, when they tell me they have desired to be submissive for years, but their wife doesn't have any interest. Generally, I feel if I take on that kind of submissive, I would simply be servicing them. I could very well be reading them wrong, but reading between the lines, it appears that they really aren't interested in serving. If they were, they would serve their wife, & do all they can to make her life easier & better. I regard it as kind of selfish of them, & unsublike if they are looking to have demands met outside their relationship. It reminds me of a child stomping off & rebelling to get their own way. It is their kink they want fulfilled. There is nothing wrong with that, but generally, if I can going to do anything to my submissives in regard to fulfilling those kinds of desires, it is as a reward for their exceptional service to me, & it will be on my own time & at my own discretion.

angelicbitch -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:21:45 PM)
If you come here looking for, wanting, or whatever advice and you bite the people who are giving it to you .... then why come here at all. This is not a one-size-fits-all lifestyle. What you might precieve as something someone else might not. Just like Diurnal said ..... Not everything is seen how you see it... life would be really boring if everyone thought and felt the same way!!!! Not a good thing to come on here and belittle someone because you don't like what they have to say .... its an opinion.... take it or leave it.. its what they think and its how they feel. Wheither you agree or disagree... you asked for info/advice... and that is what Dark and the others were doing ... GIVING ADVICE peace Angelic

Lynnxz -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:23:08 PM)
On a side note, why the questions about the pro thing?

undergroundsea -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:25:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MsFay My personal belief is that the most out there are bottoms that just like being dominated and really not interest in being a sub so much as the feeling of being submissive. A sub to me is someone that really is about the other person's needs and reconciles himself with that whereas a bottom is inherently self-centered in that his needs are the motivating factor. In my opinion, a bottom is someone who enjoys being at the receiving end of an activity (usually some form of physical play)without exchanging power. The gratification here usually comes from the body's physical response to the physical activity versus a psychological exhiliration of being in a submissive role. Thus, one can speak of a dominant bottom. A bottom may be selfish and focused on his needs alone, or he may be compassionate and take interest in needs of his topping partner. I define a sub to be someone who enjoys feelings of submission to whatever degree. I don't think there is a dichotomy of either sub or not sub, but rather a continuum that defines degrees of submission. I think a person who enjoys the feeling of being submissive but is self-centered and focused on his needs only is a selfish sub, not a bottom. As I ponder this topic, I am wondering if a desire to please is essential to being submissive. While it is commonly thought to be, I am not convinced it is a necessary component of submission. For instance, a prisoner may be in a submissive role to a prison guard but does not necessarily have a desire to please the prison guard. Similarly, it's conceivable that there is a sub whose submission comes from a place of emotional masochism (it's not the same as bottoming) and has little to do with pleasing. Cheers, Sea

jim64 -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:32:20 PM)
Read this thread because i thought the subject was interesting. WOW, not what i thought at all. Was a great read, thanks to many! Subject might make for a good topic, but i am sure it has been done before. Much fun reading!!!

aidan -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:34:22 PM)
I dunno, that sounds like me (wanting to be Robin to Poison Ivy or Catwoman, or Nightcrawler to Jean Grey), and I'm pretty damn submissive. At least that's what Mistress tells me.

BKSir -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:38:54 PM)
Undergroundsea: I think I have to agree with you on this to a degree. It sort of goes into the "What makes a 'sub' a 'sub'?" question, I believe. The apparent answer, "He just is." It's really no different from the other side of the coin, I suppose. Are there any true 'Masters', or just tops? Or, "What makes a 'Master' a 'Master'?" He just is. Plain and simple. To say that there are "No xxxxxx", or "Only xxxxxx", is placing absolutes where it is impossible to do so. Just my 18 cents worth... Damned inflation.

Leatherist -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:42:26 PM)
I wish people would quit seeing bottoms in some sort of stereotypical role. They can be every bit as useful and fun as partners as any "twue sub" Especially when they approach life from the point of egalitarian and responsible adults-rather than micromanaged children in adult bodies.

BKSir -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:48:21 PM)
I apologize if it sounded as though I were doing such a thing, Leatherist. Such was not my intention. I am a 'top' and I am also a 'Dom'. In my mind, they are two very different things, and serve two different purposes. I 'top' my partners, but would NEVER try to dominate them as I would my pet. Nor do I look down upon 'bottoms' or 'subs' or anyone for that matter, for what they are. As it is simply that, they are what they are. And every person, top, bottom, sub, dom, dishwasher, lawyer (well, okay, maybe not lawyer, I'm not sure they're people), doctor, ditch digger, monkey wrangler, has their role in life, and it is a necessary role. Roles also change, and I respect and admire that as well.

TennesseeRain -> RE: Are they true subs or only bottoms? (7/9/2008 9:57:21 PM)
We are all just people...each with our own desires, needs and definitions. All as varied as the individuals. When we are fortunate enough to find one that meets our needs and we theirs, there is no need for labels or definitions.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875