quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

It's obvious that the game was more important to you, so you did the right thing. Domme's are a dime a dozen, but great video games come along so rarely.

If she releases you, meh, for another $250 you'll have a new Mistress.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElanSubdued
In my opinion, especially for a newbie, handing over all (or large areas of) decision making is a big deal and not something that is terribly realistic at the outset of a relationship.  Perhaps this was an overly lofty starting place, albeit I can see the logic and romance in it.  It requires one to trust someone else with their fiances and to trust that another person's judgment is better than our own... not at all a small thing and not something many people are used to doing.  It usually takes quite some time getting to know someone and observing and learning their actions before this kind of trust develops.  So... to MistressXbox and to lurch999, I think there are some things worth thinking about before jumping into a similar scenario (together or with other partners).

quote:

It might well be true in the case of the OP and his domme re his finances - but I wouldn't say it's true of dommes' versus subs' judgments in  general.  Dominants aren't special people who know better how to lead than submissives.  They just like leading (controlling, etc.), whereas submissives like to follow and be controlled.   As far as I'm concerned, anyway.  Though if that's to work in practice, an agreement needs to be adhered to, of course.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hmmm.  Interesting notion.  I tend to think of dominants as leaders and leaders are a special type of person.  Not everyone has the skills and temperament to be a leader, though I think many think they do. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElanSubdued
In my opinion, especially for a newbie, handing over all (or large areas of) decision making is a big deal and not something that is terribly realistic at the outset of a relationship.  Perhaps this was an overly lofty starting place, albeit I can see the logic and romance in it.  It requires one to trust someone else with their fiances and to trust that another person's judgment is better than our own... not at all a small thing and not something many people are used to doing.  It usually takes quite some time getting to know someone and observing and learning their actions before this kind of trust develops.  So... to MistressXbox and to lurch999, I think there are some things worth thinking about before jumping into a similar scenario (together or with other partners).

Those would be my general feelings, too.  Except the words  . . . It requires one to trust someone else with their fiances and to trust that another person's judgment is better than our own .  It might well be true in the case of the OP and his domme re his finances - but I wouldn't say it's true of dommes' versus subs' judgments in  general.

Dominants aren't special people who know better how to lead than submissives.  They just like leading (controlling, etc.), whereas submissives like to follow and be controlled.   As far as I'm concerned, anyway.  Though if that's to work in practice, an agreement needs to be adhered to, of course. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: AAkasha

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElanSubdued
In my opinion, especially for a newbie, handing over all (or large areas of) decision making is a big deal and not something that is terribly realistic at the outset of a relationship.  Perhaps this was an overly lofty starting place, albeit I can see the logic and romance in it.  It requires one to trust someone else with their fiances and to trust that another person's judgment is better than our own... not at all a small thing and not something many people are used to doing.  It usually takes quite some time getting to know someone and observing and learning their actions before this kind of trust develops.  So... to MistressXbox and to lurch999, I think there are some things worth thinking about before jumping into a similar scenario (together or with other partners).

Those would be my general feelings, too.  Except the words  . . . It requires one to trust someone else with their fiances and to trust that another person's judgment is better than our own .  It might well be true in the case of the OP and his domme re his finances - but I wouldn't say it's true of dommes' versus subs' judgments in  general.

Dominants aren't special people who know better how to lead than submissives.  They just like leading (controlling, etc.), whereas submissives like to follow and be controlled.   As far as I'm concerned, anyway.  Though if that's to work in practice, an agreement needs to be adhered to, of course. 

If the sub in question was "punished" in a manner he found acceptable or even erotic, this thread wouldn't exist.  Many submissives are very happy giving up all kinds of control so long as it fits their comfort zone and is basically making them following the rules (they want to follow) and enduring the "punishments" for not following the rules (as long as the punishments are erotic). 

Something as simple as giving up a video game console for a week (not forever) and all of a sudden, the S&M is unfair and the relationship is falling apart. If she had selected another "punishment" that he found more interesting and even exciting, he'd be lapping it up, I am sure.

I see vanilla men giving up a lot of things in an effort to be accommodating to a woman who is more controlling in their relationships.  The thing is, it doesn't come with all kinds of conditions, the kinds of conditions that many submissive men put on their submission.  Sometimes I think chivalrous gentlemen are, as a whole, more unconditionally submissive than so-called submissive men, who have a very structured fantasy in their head of what submission looks, feels and tastes like.

Akasha

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyHibiscus

Did I mention that I really like you, Peon? ;)

quote:

If the sub in question was "punished" in a manner he found acceptable or even erotic, this thread wouldn't exist.  Many submissives are very happy giving up all kinds of control so long as it fits their comfort zone and is basically making them following the rules (they want to follow) and enduring the "punishments" for not following the rules (as long as the punishments are erotic).

quote:

Something as simple as giving up a video game console for a week (not forever) and all of a sudden, the S&M is unfair and the relationship is falling apart.  If she had selected another "punishment" that he found more interesting and even exciting, he'd be lapping it up, I am sure.

quote:

I see vanilla men giving up a lot of things in an effort to be accommodating to a woman who is more controlling in their relationships.  The thing is, it doesn't come with all kinds of conditions, the kinds of conditions that many submissive men put on their submission.  Sometimes I think chivalrous gentlemen are, as a whole, more unconditionally submissive than so-called submissive men, who have a very structured fantasy in their head of what submission looks, feels and tastes like.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElanSubdued

Hmmm.  Perhaps.  If I may say this respectfully, I think your statements paint with too wide a brush, although I can understand why you feel this way.  There are vanilla men who are accommodating and those who aren't, just as there are submissive men in both camps.  I've met dominants (female and male) who have the most horrible top's disease affliction, but this doesn't mean all dominants are this way.  I find little value in generalizations of this sort and prefer just to deal with people as individuals.  Ones compatibility with a partner and ability to work through issues with that partner often define the quality perceived and value gained from that individual.  This, in my opinion, transcends groupings like submissives, dominants, vanilla men, etc. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

... [His] history of disobedience is the start.  This wasn't a one time thing due to a dentist trip.  I might have seen the issue otherwise if it was one incident over stress.  (Though, I have trouble with that considering the phone call was made.  No answer should mean the submissive follows the instructions given, not hope for the permission.)

I don't punish often.  If some situation has grown to that point (continued disobedience over a course of time) where I am going to punish someone, the last thing that someone should consider a bright idea is to argue with Me about it.  The punishment that was outlined was appropriate for the situation.  Refusing such a punishment would have meant the end of the dynamic, since obviously, I'm not the one in authority.

Yes, both people contribute to a dynamic including the highs and lows of such.  However, I'm an honest believer of the premise that there are certain things being a signal of the end of a dynamic.  I wouldn't tolerate a history of disobedience anymore than I think it's acceptable for a Dominant to be abusive.  If you keep making exceptions over and over for someone not to obey, you don't have a dynamic.  Instead you have a situation where a sub can do whatever they want, as long as they have an excuse.

quote:

I'd never get seriously involved with someone who wasted his time playing computer games. I try to use my spare time productively, and am most compatible with someone who does the same.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SweetDommes