A curiosity (Full Version)

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



Message

LadyPact -> A curiosity (7/17/2008 8:55:55 PM)

I was reading another thread, and I had to ask Myself a question that I'm honestly not sure of the answer to.  Please do understand that the other thread did end up being something of a bit of a drama spiral, but there was something in it that made Me wonder a bit.

Anyway, on the other thread, the subject of poaching came up. When I say poaching, I mean the idea of, at minimal, an attempt to steal away (for lack of a better term) another person's submissive.  I'm not saying the practice is a good thing, but I'm sure it does happen out there.

What got Me wondering was a situation that goes like this:

Let's say that Dominant X is a straight female Dominant.  She's been around a while, has her fair share of skills, yadda, yadda.

Now, let's say that there is also Dominant Y, who is a bisexual female Dominant..  Her way of doing things is different than Dominant X.  No one says that one is better than the other, just different.

Add that Dominant Y, has a bisexual female submissive, who is submissive z.

With the characters established, here's the question:

In the terms of poaching, would it be possible for Dominant X to poach submissive z?

I'm kind of wondering if it can be looked at both ways.  The first is that submissive z could possibly be poached if it had something to do with either the skills or different style between the two Dommes, or maybe submissive z were a service sub.  Lots of possible "what ifs".  I do happen to know there are some folks out there who have wonderful M/s dynamics where the orientation of the parties doesn't matter.

The other is that submissive z couldn't possibly be poached, because Dominant X and submissive z are not compatible by sexual orientation.  Neither would be happy with the arrangement by a sexual standard.  Even though submissive z might be a very nice girl, Dominant X  has no interest in female subs.

So, everybody put your thinking caps on, and please, stick to the content of the question.  I'm asking folks to put aside who Domme X, Domme Y, and sub z are for the sake of offering opinions *without* involving who the people are, or what you think of them.  Take the real people out and just go with your view on whether or not poaching is possible in your opinion.



darchChylde -> RE: A curiosity (7/17/2008 9:07:52 PM)

No quality submissive of a quality dominant can be poached, no matter orientation or kink.  The only times that poaching would be effective would be
:
a) the submissive is less than loyal
b) the dominant has not inspired loyalty

If it's the former, what does it matter; have fun until the submissive is poached from you.  If it's the latter, well that's something they'll eventually be forced to face.  If you've had three submissives and all three went to another dominant, perhaps it's not because you simply have bad taste in submissives.

In the end, if you're confident in your dominance and trust your submissive; i doubt you'll be worried.  But yes, i'd say that a straight female dominant could take a bisexual female from another dominant; who says that Ds has to have anything to do with sex, or even play for that matter?



Leatherist -> RE: A curiosity (7/17/2008 9:09:52 PM)

It's a catch 22 for me.

I could never trust anyone I could "poach"

And I could never expect to BE trusted for having done it.



angaothsi -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 12:30:20 AM)

I was never good at algebra.........LOL
No seriously, I think it all comes down to trust and honesty, if you don't have both, it would be better for some to "poach"



Vendaval -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 1:13:02 AM)

Poaching is bad manners.  My boys tell me if someone is out of line and I am very nasty when other D-types attempt to do so with one of mine. 



DominantJenny -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 5:07:57 AM)

I think you really answered your own question; put in the right variables (nonsexual play, matching styles) and it's possible. Probably not probable, but possible.



MsStarlett -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 5:19:39 AM)

Classic case of if a man (or woman) will leave their significant other for you - what makes you think they won't leave you for the next one that comes along?



LadyPact -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 5:32:07 AM)

I do think loyalty would be a factor, dc.  Some people, regardless of role aren't exactly the loyal type.  Others can be loyal to a fault.  Since that quality does vary from person to person, it's really difficult to know how that would factor in.

Yes, angaothsi, it does sound like a bit of an algebra question.  I'm sorry about that.  I thought it might be the easiest way to ask it in an abstract way, because I wouldn't want people to focus on who the personalities were, and instead consider the principle.

There have been a lot of threads regarding the importance, or lack of importance, of sexuality in a D/s or M/s dynamic.  What I'm wondering is, does a person's sexual orientation, tip the scales in some way?   



HeavansKeeper -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 6:14:46 AM)

In another thread not long ago I said:

"I use the 'keep your kill' theory.  If she can be woo'd from under me, I wasn't doing my job.  Assassins keep this king sharp."

And I believe it, still. I've told My Pet many times that I want the best for her.  That includes being with the best man possible.  I'm not trying to shelf her off onto anyone else... I want her, but I'm willing to let her go if I am not in her best interests.  (It's important to note how easy it is to say that when she wants me, though.)

I firmly believe that whatever the dynamic, the bottom creature has one freedom: the freedom to leave.  z* can always leave X for Y.  It's her one and only right.  I come from the school of thought were secretly, deep down, after many twists and turns, behind locked doors, through a labyrinth, the dominant is serving the submissive.  (If we want to start a new thread, I'd love to talk about it, but that's a hijack right there).  As such, X needs to be a good fit for z, as good a fit as can be made.  Sometimes people meet, and they simply should only be together for so long.

I have no experience with D/s (or M/s) couplings in which the genders are not inline with the sexual orientations.  (But that won't shut me up!).  I considered having a male house boy I wasn't going to have any sex with.  I felt as if the connection couldn't ever be as strong as with a female house boy =P with all other respects being the same.  That sexual connection, even if we weren't having sex, adds a little bit more, and 1.025 > 1.

I could treat a male house boy as an employee, but not a female, simply because of my orientation.

How does a submissive feel about it?  Does their orientation bind them harder to a certain gendered dominant?

*While in another post I boasted about my immunity to capitalization indifferences, I'll shorten "submissive Z" to just "z" while dominants X and Y remain capitalized, respectively.

Edit: A few extra s's... Comes from being a gamer, methinks.  Also, I editted "I comes from the school..."



LadyPact -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 6:33:41 AM)

HK, I believe I think of it very much the way you do.  In My theory, X would never be a fit for z, and therefore couldn't possibly be poached.  In the premise, z could never possibly be fulfilled to certain standards.



LadyHibiscus -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 6:40:22 AM)

I've seen my share of subs ignore their sexual orientation in favor of following a dominant they admired.  I don't consider that the highest criterion for selection.

I don't approach those that are in relationships with anything but friendship in mind, even if I wish that person were mine.  It's just bad form.  Even if I am interested in friendship, I approach BOTH parties, so it's all out in the open. 

In the Ideal Universe, we wouldn't be able to poach anyone, because all submissives would be faithful!  [:D]   Why would any of us want someone who saw their attachment to their partner as so tenuous that any interesting Other Person could draw their attention?  I value loyalty more than anything. 

(apologies for the lack of cohesiveness)



MaamJay -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 9:16:20 AM)

Funny, I actually mused along these lines at the end of the drama spiral LOL! However, keeping to the algebraic case in point here (I'll bypass discussions of loyalty since that's been covered):

sub z COULD jump ship if:
(a) Domme X's style in other things appeals to her more than Domme Y's (or she has got bored with how Y does things)
(b) the sex with Y has lost its zing anyway
(c) she thinks she's so gorgeous that she could seduce X eventually (not only men think that every woman is latent bi LOL!)
(d) she asks X if She would allow z to have an outside vanilla gf to get her sexual needs met
(e) there is a man in the situation (maybe X's hubby, Master or other sub) who might meet z's sexual needs (as she is bi)

So there's 5 possible scenarios in which z might be willing to jump. Now, the question is ... would X be willing to broaden Her horizons to consider having a female instead of a male? In My own case, I did try that situation out reasoning that a tongue is a tongue is a tongue ... and does it really matter who does the dishes as long as it's not Me?? [;)] To Me, personality is much more important than orientation ... I have considered a bi male sub also and as Master is straight, I would be prepared for him to have a vanilla bf of My approving (that's if I didn't keep him sufficiently worn out!). I would instead doubt that X would be a good match with z considering z has been trained by Y who has very different ways ... all that undoing can be painful!

Maam Jay aka violet[A]



CallaFirestormBW -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 9:22:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact



In the terms of poaching, would it be possible for Dominant X to poach submissive z?




I have issue with the whole concept of poaching -- whether BDSM or Vanilla. Here's how I see it... it is -impossible- to "poach" or "steal" someone who doesn't want to be stolen. If conversation starts between two people, one of whom is already in a relationship, and they end up together because the person in the relationship left the first relationship to start a new relationship, REGARDLESS of who started the conversation, it isn't "stealing" or "poaching"... it is a grown adult making a choice about who xhe wants to be with.

Here's a corollary question -- would you want to stay in a relationship with someone who didn't want to be in that relationship with you?

I say "if you want to look elsewhere, look... if you see something you like better than being here, go... no guilt, no recriminations... and don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out."

I'd rather be alone than be with someone that I had to trap and coerce and prevent from conversing outside of our relationship to keep them.

Calla Firestorm



ElanSubdued -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 11:23:38 AM)

LadyPact,

I am the S...;  feel the S... flowing through me;  come with me and we'll rule the galaxy together!

Oh.  Darn.  That slipped out.  Blame Pixel.  Lord Pixel *obviously* gave me tainted popcorn!

It's coincidental you ask this question because LadyHibiscus and I had a similar discussion last night.  To me, it comes down to the following.  (Please excuse my rather blunt language - possibly a remnant of Pixel's popcorn :-).  If your partner decides to fuck someone else, they will.  Period.  By "fuck", I mean connect emotionally, engage in play, have intercourse, have a casual encounter, whatever.  Nothing you can do will stop this.  You can place rules around them.  You can read their email.  You can limit their communication with others.  And you know what?  If they're not committed to you, they'll find a way to get what they want anyway.

I find the entire notion of controlling a partner so that they won't stray, whether in the vanilla world or the BDSM world, entirely ridiculous.  And I'll underline something else.  I'm not the staying type, but I will re-evaluate whether I wish to remain in a relationship.  One thing that would cause such a "re-evaluation" is a partner who attempts to control my communication with others.  Why?  Because this is an indication they don't trust me.  I don't believe it's possible to build and maintain a relationship without trust.

I've not addressed the scenario you posed in the OP.  Truly though, I don't think sexual orientations and BDSM leanings have much impact on your question.  People are attracted to other people for a variety of reasons.  When you're in a relationship, you don't stop noticing others who are attractive to you in addition to your partner.  (Add an "s" to partner, please, for those who are polyamorous.)  The question is whether one acts on this or not.  For myself, I've always chosen not to act because I value my partner, the relationship I have with my partner, and my sense of honesty and loyalty in far greater proportion to flings (which I don't value at all).  In other words, no matter how hard they tried, someone couldn't "poach" me.  Still, I'll repeat again, if someone decides to stray or is prone to straying, it's likely they will, no matter how many walls you build around them.  The question for the other partner (then) is do they want to be in a relationship with this kind of person?  It's my opinion that the energy used to build containment walls is misguided and wasted, and is perhaps far better used deciding to accept the straying partner as-is or to end the relationship and find a more compatible partner.

I had a partner who cheated on me.  She owned up to it, we talked about it and understood why it happened, and we both, at the time, decided to stay in the relationship.  At any rate, I don't want to derail your thread so I'll leave this discussion here.

May the Force be with You.  Always.

Elan.



LadyPact -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 1:26:56 PM)

Thank you for your response, Ma'am Jay (and violet, too).  I saw that you noticed this very subject on the other thread in your response there.  I was glad of that because, since the idea came from so far out of left field for Me, I started wondering if I was in the bleachers.  (Sorry for the baseball analogy.)  All five of the possibilities you listed do make sense to Me.  The one about possibility "c" is actually something My husband has wished for years, along with a few girls that I know.

CallaFirestormBW, I have to agree with you.  I don't think it's possible to *steal* a person.  This is why I do a double take any time the subject of poaching comes up.

My dear elan, first of all, no more popcorn for you.  Secondly, I had to wonder if the attraction factor would come into it, because, in a case where there wouldn't be a sexual attraction by at least one of the parties, that whole part of the appeal would be gone.  There's another thread bouncing around here somewhere that asks a similar question of, can a person become sexually attractive to you (the Dom or sub in your life as applies) over time.  However, as it's discussed there, the idea is debated on the premise that the two people involved are of the opposite gender.  I think this is different than the improbable, if not impossible, sexual attraction of a bisexual female to a straight Domme.

LadyH, while I agree with you that sexual attraction isn't the highest criteria in a dynamic, or for the quality of a Domme (or sub for that matter), I think most of us agree that some sort of sexual expression is something all of us would hope for.  Knowing those hopes would be dashed at the onset, makes the question something to ponder.

Had I thought of it when I wrote the OP, I would have asked something similar of the males here.  Does even the remotest thought of poaching come up when a male sub is contacted by a Dom who is straight?



darchChylde -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 1:36:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact
I would have asked something similar of the males here.  Does even the remotest thought of poaching come up when a male sub is contacted by a Dom who is straight?



When it's someone i don't know here on the boards or elsewhere, the thought does tend to cross my mind.  But then i read the message and i tend to take what they say at face value.  It has been pointed out at me several times that i tend to be naive and overly trusting of others intents.  With those few women here who have specified a desire to continue a relationship of any sort outside of collarme mail, LP as you know; my defensive walls slam up and then that woman (i am especially careful in dealing with dominant women, more for the sake of the appearance of impropriety than anything else) must go through Ma'am and get Her approval before i can continue correspondance.

No, i am not afraid of being "poached", as i am very happy in my relationship and very loyal to Ma'am and our Family; but as the flirty little chylde that i am, i must be very careful to not lead anyone on to believe that the possibility exists.



MissEnchanted -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 2:20:31 PM)

Interesting subject.

A sub is always free to leave; we want to believe and experience deep loyalty from both sides.

I have had situations come up and I contact the Domme in question  Service submission can have nothing to do with sex or gender.

The word poaching indicates that someone stole someone else. I don't believe in stealing, however if two people find they are 'much, much better suited for each other' then open communication between all three would be indicated
I think. Kind of hard without knowing the personalities involved.

In a situation I had: I emailed the other Domme right away and waited for her reply before making any plans, but they were still at the friend stage and hadn't played together yet. The sub told me this, so I waited to hear from the other Domme for a green light.

Because I believe in the value of honesty and open communication and want what might be best for everyone involved. Whatever that looks like.

ME




subtee -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 2:39:30 PM)

...carry the one...

~bangs head on keyboard~



DiurnalVampire -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 2:56:34 PM)

I tend to agree with MissE. No one can really be poached. You cannot be forcibly stolen away online.
Fox gets several of these inapropriate emails on a regular basis. Some from straight female dominants, some from bi or straight male ones. Sexually speaking he would be compatible with some, and not with others. However, he isnt interested in any of them, compatible or not.
It is completely possible for a Dominant to contact a submissive without the contact being about poaching attempts too. Fox talks to other dominants and I never worry. LP has never tried to steal him, even though they have exchanged emails. He has some dominants that speak to him and not me, and has several switch friends who converse with him with barely a hello to me. They get along better with him, and thats fine.
sub z can only be stolen if she is already interested in leaving, or at least willing to entertain the idea. Assumeing she is, it realy wouldnt matter who came along when she was ready to go, the dominant who gets her is just a prop for her choice most of the time when someone is "poached". The secondary relationship doesnt last long, it was just an excuse to get out of the first one. If they are sexually incompatible, and yet the sub goes, then she is either looking to expand herself into a nonsexual realm, or she is setting it up to fail so she can be free without haing to be the one to break things off.

My 2 cents
DV



MissEnchanted -> RE: A curiosity (7/18/2008 3:18:52 PM)

DiurnalVampire,

I agree that friends are grand and we all need healthy friendships. And there is nothing as beautiful in this world as a loyal, honest sub who sits at my feet with that look in their eyes.

I was going to write more however:
I get so tempted to share more personal info here on the open forums, then I catch myself! lol

have fun out there...I know you do!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

subtee: why are you banging your head on the keyboard?

ME







Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.2460938