RE: Under Protection???????? (Full Version)

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



Message


CelticPrince -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 3:39:51 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GeekFreak

To me it means: "I think you're stupid and won't realize this is a sneak attack into your pants"

quote:

To me it means: "I think you're stupid and won't realize this is a sneak attack into your pants"


Geek,

Agreed, and so many new bunnies fall for it.

CP




daintydimples -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 4:27:33 AM)

If you are mentoring a new sub, in my never humble opinion I think he/she would be far better served by being taught to say: "Yes, I am a submissive. No, I'm not YOUR submissive."

I see the under my protection crap as the "white knight" and the "damsel in distress" syndromes meshing in some surreal castle realm kinda way.

Personally, I find the white knight rushing in on his trusty steed to help poor little me out as....something less than endearing.









DomImus -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 6:08:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovingpet
Same as under consideration and let's not even get into THAT conversation again!


I don't see under consideration and under protection as the same thing. I get the under consideration thing as being somewhat like courting to see if there is potential. I know a submissive woman who was under the protection of a local dom/sub couple and I told her straight up that it made her appear unable to make her own decisions. She has since dropped the under protection schtick from her profile but I do not know if it is still generally in effect. If I was looking I would not woo another dominant just to explore possibilities with a submissive. Too many fish in the sea to waste time doing that.






allthatjaz -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 6:25:53 AM)

The first time I stepped into a BDSM club (many years ago) I was offered the hand of a straight couple. They told me what was what, who was who and introduced me to lots of people. They suggested I went off and did my own thing but if it all got too much then I knew where they would be. I consider they protected me on my first night out.
The times I feel very protective is if I am playing with a sub in a club. I feel it is my duty to make sure they are not getting mauled by unwanted hands.
I was once doing a needle performance with a sub female when a man jumped on the stage and tried desperately to get to her. It was my instinct and my duty to protect her from idiots like that.

So yes, I do believe that we need to protect at times. We may think we can protect ourselves but I for one have been yanked by the arm into a dark room full of men but fortunately there was someone around to protect me.




thishereboi -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 6:36:22 AM)

fr
To me it says the sub in question is so stupid she can't use common sense in finding a partner. So if she is really that stupid how does she know the protector is not someone bad? I am sure there are some out there who honestly are trying to shield the girl from wankers, but I think a lot of them are just playing a game.




Elousia -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 7:42:38 AM)

*blushing hard*

wow.  Thank you.  I feel incredibly favored.  I have what, seven posts?  I think this makes eight.

And I already have NZ points?  
Thank you!!!!




windchymes -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 7:49:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

fr
To me it says the sub in question is so stupid she can't use common sense in finding a partner. So if she is really that stupid how does she know the protector is not someone bad? I am sure there are some out there who honestly are trying to shield the girl from wankers, but I think a lot of them are just playing a game.


I agree with this.  There's nothing wrong with a little mentoring, offering advice, or offering support in case of trouble from unsavory characters that pop up, but that whole online "protection" thing fosters that "helpless subby-wubby lying in the gutter until someone swoops in and rescues the poor dear from those awful fakes and wannabes" image that so many seem to enjoy wallowing in.  And the idea that someone actually has the power or ability to "protect" someone from behind a computer keyboard is just plain idiotic.




DesFIP -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 7:55:24 AM)

Online, there's no need for it. If however you are brand new with zero exploration, not even wrists tied to the bedposts with a scarf, and afraid to go to a dungeon then I do see some sense in it. You get to look and learn without getting hit on as fresh meat.

But it ought to be something the newbie sub initiates. She makes friends with a sub at a munch, gets invited to a play party and then she asks the dom if he can play protector for the night if somebody comes on real hard and won't accept a no.




persephonee -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 8:11:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Daddysredhead

In my experience, when someone was under another's "protection," it was usually to serve as a buffer if some neanderthal tried to make unwanted advances on her at the club or a play party.  More of a big brother type thing than denoting any kind of budding relationship, kind of like having a bodyguard around if needed, just to keep the weirdos or those who don't understand "No thank you" when it's spoken to them, away.


i suppose this is true, but these are the exact instances where i whip out my *withering glance*...might be more fun for evilperse to get a Dom for protection, might be more fun....in the getting laid department....

In general, when a male dominant offers protection to a sub and she accepts, at some point, they will more than likely be bumping uglies...just sayin...[8D]




allthatjaz -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 8:20:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

fr
To me it says the sub in question is so stupid she can't use common sense in finding a partner. So if she is really that stupid how does she know the protector is not someone bad? I am sure there are some out there who honestly are trying to shield the girl from wankers, but I think a lot of them are just playing a game.


Not everyone wants a partner.
I have seen experienced subs at clubs and munches with newbies (they may of befriended online) under their wing. Why does it have to be a dominant doing the protecting? I see a protective sub as a very healthy option.
I have also seen newbie sub females being really hit on in clubs and they are not only hit on by would be Dominants but by submissive males who beg to worship them!! Whilst we may find that's amusing, its all a bit overwhelming for someone new to this.

I agree that we get predatory offers of protection. I know a few well known characters that look out for anyone new, young and pretty. None of the ones I know (that do this) will do anything more than perhaps overly protect their new waif and they get to boost there own egos!!
This thread got me thinking about who I know that have a tendency to collect a harem under the heading of 'protector/mentor and the ones I came up with (that do this successfully) are all well known Dominants on the scene.




CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 8:40:10 AM)

We've never gone into the whole thing of announcing a 'protection collar', though we -have- helped out a couple of individuals who were going through a hard time by bringing them under the protection of the House.

For us, this meant that they weren't under consideration as HB servants, nor were they under contract to us. However, a HB Keeper would be available to accompany them to events, or they could join HB servants at events either until they found someone that they were interested in to enter into a relationship with, or until the individual who had been causing them difficulty (in all cases, abusive/violent former lovers or dominants) was dealt with. In these cases, without someone else to basically 'have their back', they would have been too afraid to go out to anyplace where they might encounter the "ex-ass" without backup. In at least one case, being under House protection saved the woman's life, as her ex-dominant showed up at an event, armed (knife), grabbed her and tried to haul her off with the intention of getting her by herself and forcing her to return with him (his perception was that, once he collared her, she was his to do whatever he wanted with and could never leave... it sounded good at the time, I guess). In any case, two of our beloveds took her, along with a few of our servants, to a national event, and her ex showed up there -- were it not for one of our gentlemen leaving to find the cops, and the other one basically silver-tonguing the heck out of the situation to delay things, we might never have gotten this asshole off the streets (he ended up being convicted of aggravated assault, and assault with a deadly weapon). I do need to qualify this and say that this was before my time in the House, so I didn't -see- any of this... but I -did- meet the woman in question, as she still occasionally attended events with us while I was a relatively newbie in the House.

I think part of the reason that these kinds of questions come up is because people use the -concept- for purposes other than what it is truly intended for. Mentorship, trial or consideration periods, and protection from known entities all have their place, just like they do in mainstream society. After all, what do you think apprenticeship, engagement, and an active police force -are-? However, these ideas have gotten a bad rap in the BDSM aspect, just like polyamory has, because they are, essentially, used in ways that confuse their aspect with other aspects that are often considered "undesirable" or even downright dishonest. There is nothing wrong with the -concept-, per se, or with those who choose to use it, but it has been so watered down or twisted that one is often hard-pressed to find any of the original essence still present in the permutation.

Dame Calla




BlackHatter -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 1:26:51 PM)

Under Consideration under protection. Is just a cope out.
From a person that can not or maybe never has stood on their own feet.

Not a person you would want to bring into your life.




NihilusZero -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 2:39:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlackHatter

Under Consideration under protection. Is just a cope out.
From a person that can not or maybe never has stood on their own feet.

Incredible! You gleaned all that from just two words?




VanityFix -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 2:43:29 PM)

i used "under protection" to protect young newly out gay men i took under my wing to ward of sexual preditors, then oh you know seduced them and broke their hearts.. [:D]




DarkSteven -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 3:06:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlackHatter

Under Consideration under protection. Is just a cope out.
From a person that can not or maybe never has stood on their own feet.

Not a person you would want to bring into your life.



Um, if they're under consideration, then of course you don't want to bring them into your life.  They're not available.  (Do you know what "under consideration" means?)

If they're under protection, that just means another step to take.  I have played with a sub who was under protection - I just asked the Dom who was protecting her.




mc1234 -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 4:28:30 PM)

I don't like the term myself and wouldn't be under anyone's protection.  If I'm not in a relationship I'm the independent type and don't want to have to run things by someone else.  I'm a smart woman and can handle making my own mistakes and getting past them.  Besides, if I can choose who to be under protection by, I can choose who I wish to submit to ... no?




CelticPrince -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 5:13:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Padriag

quote:

ORIGINAL: CelticPrince

What does it mean to you?

Not much [8D] 


Padriag,

Now that is concise!

CP




CelticPrince -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 5:21:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

that he has a harem of on line women who arent smart enough to realize they are the option while he is the priority

]

tazzygirl, if the truth were known!

CP




tazzygirl -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 5:26:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CelticPrince


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

that he has a harem of on line women who arent smart enough to realize they are the option while he is the priority

]

tazzygirl, if the truth were known!

CP


~pretends a swoon~

oh someone, please, help me? i simply cant protect myself!

~bats the scarlette o'hara lashes and waits~




peachgirl -> RE: Under Protection???????? (8/1/2009 5:45:13 PM)

I have to cast my vote in with the less harsh of the group.  I've never been "under protection", but I'm also learning that maybe I'm not as good as a judge of character than I thought I was.  I tend to think the best of everyone I meet.  I do have a decent amount of common sense and listen well to my instincts.  sometimes trying to get to know another person and my curiosity will override some of that.  so, for people like me, having someone knowledgeable and protective is a good thing.

I agree with DesFIP tho, if it's an online "relationship"/chatroom type of thing it's not necessary.  to me, that is more roleplaying than anything else.




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

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125