RE: M/s but not forever (Full Version)

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



Message


ClassAct2006 -> RE: M/s but not forever (5/1/2006 2:31:50 PM)

I'm submissive, not a slave but am  into long term relationships and when I married it was ostensibly forever which turned out to be nearly 20 years. Yes, should be with the intention of forever unless you're just playing around but with everyone realising if you're in the US/UK or a jurisdiction which allows divorce/ free movement for women to leave relationships, then it may not be forever... which is why I think women should work, protect their financial interests.

Separately I'm not against dependency. I think all close couples of any persuasion have an element of dependency on each other which is rather good and it's a shame we have such individualism in the US/UK.




LadiesBladewing -> RE: M/s but not forever (5/1/2006 3:20:38 PM)

I have to disagree with this conceptualization -- not because I don't think that people need to put direction and intention into the things that they want, but because I think, for many, it isn't intention that is the real deciding factor, but a willingness to experiment, give a -real- trial to things that challenge them, and have a clear picture of what they want, and know what they can and can't compromise on -before- they enter into a relationship. I also think that people don't relate in ways that are beneficial to them in the long-run in most cases... they dismiss possible relationships where they could learn a lot, simply because the relationship doesn't come with enough 'strings' for them. I think this puts too much pressure on the relationship from the start, and starts to strangle the potential before it has even been experienced.

I go into relationships with the intent to enjoy the relationship, grow through it, and work with the people that I'm involved with to make the relationship as positive as it can be for all of us. There is no time intention. There is the possibility of great things that could happen, but we are not so tied to possibilities that we try to twist the relationship into something it isn't and was never meant to be.

With that philosophy, my co-matriarch and I have been together for a decade. We've gone from two couples to a fully integrated quad household, to a training home with anywhere from 5 to 30 individuals participating, to a collective household with its own abbey. We've weathered communions of spirit, and the deaths of those closest to us. We've raised communal human seedlings, argued, set personal and partnership goals, moved from a dynamic where one of us was solely in charge and the other solely in service to a cooperative matriarchy... and even today, there is no implication that we are tied to one another forever, and our intent is only to make -today- as joyful and fulfilling for one another and those we come in contact with as possible. The people with whom we share communal philosophy have watched their relationships last anywhere from 2 years to 35 (just in our immediate circle) using the same philosophy.

I don't think there is -any- requirement of an intention to be together forever to make a relationship successful for 10, 50 or a hundred years.

Lady Zephyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: Takethiswaltz

I have seen much beauty in the depth of vanilla relationships that have lasted 50 years.
Why is this not possible for D/s as well?
Some may answer, " we never said it was not possible".
But it isn't really, if you don't go into with the intent to make it possible.




LadiesBladewing -> RE: M/s but not forever (5/1/2006 3:24:34 PM)

Which may be the perfectly appropriate choice for you. That doesn't mean that it is the only perfect choice, though... for someone else, hearing that there is a position open for a year, in which they can train and learn to serve, and learn to yield themselves fully to the circumstance of service may be the ideal opportunity for them to open up completely, and explore the concepts of service in a way that works best for them.

This is why choices are so broad, and opportunities so diverse... so that everyone can find what fits best for them.

Lady Zephyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: genvieve

While i can certainly understand your view-point and even agree with it.  What i was actually, refering to was the ability to see the endpoint of the relationship.  i do not believe that a Master/Mistress-submissive relationship should be entered at all when an endpoint can be seen.
 
Certainly, there are unforseeable circumstances that occur.  "O/our lives go seperate ways", etc... but i'm talking about the relationship, as it stands now... do i see an endpoint?  If i see one... i'm not likely to accept the collar.




mons -> RE: M/s but not forever (5/1/2006 6:01:15 PM)

GREETINGS TO ALL

WHEN I FIRST SAW THIS I THOUGHT (OH HELL NO ) THEN I THOUGHT
WAIT NOTHING IS FOREVER BUT IF THAT MASTER WERE TO SAW STAY ONE
WEEK AND THEN YOU MUST GO I WOULD THEN SAY (HELL NO) OTHER THEN THAT
YOU MUST THINK OF WHAT YOU WISH FOR, NOT WHAT MATTERS TO HIM, THINK OF
YOU FIRST, SLAVE DOES NOT MEAN WALK ALL OVER ME. YOUR PERSON, A HUMAN! PICK
THE RIGHT MASTER OR YOU WILL BE IN SUCH A BAD WAY. THE FIRST ONE WHO SAYS
HE IS A MASTER CHECK AND RECHECK, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO SAY NO TO ANYONE AND
YES TO WHOM YOU CHOOSE .GOOD LUCK

BEST WISHES

MONS/JANE




mechbot972007 -> RE: M/s but not forever (5/1/2006 8:50:30 PM)

is the question play vs lifestyle....i mean its hard to find someone that shares the same energy about life.....its even harder to find someone that you could love and hopefully they love you....but the toughest would be to find someone that encompass all the above while living a bdsm life....untill all three rules/boundaries/limits were met all collars should be velcro...is it not the same as in the vanilla word? with out the whips and chains....every date is a chance to hone your skills for the one your looking for?...are not all sexual relationships to include boyfriends/girlfriends just practice for when you met the one your looking for? why should it be any different in the bdsm lifestyle?  i mean the whips and chains make us different...without us having to go and change the rules on where we finally end up (with the One)
Respectfully
chris




servantbitch -> RE: M/s but not forever (5/2/2006 12:30:18 AM)

Reasonable
quote:


Free maidservice.[&:]


This how I am feeling right now, and permenance isn't even an issue....

sb




Takethiswaltz -> RE: M/s but not forever (5/2/2006 10:12:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadiesBladewing


I don't think there is -any- requirement of an intention to be together forever to make a relationship successful for 10, 50 or a hundred years.

Lady Zephyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: Takethiswaltz

I have seen much beauty in the depth of vanilla relationships that have lasted 50 years.
Why is this not possible for D/s as well?
Some may answer, " we never said it was not possible".
But it isn't really, if you don't go into with the intent to make it possible.




Ah, but there is a real difference between "the requirement of an intention to be together forever"
and "the intent to make it possible."
We are talking apples and oranges here. 





Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 5 [6]

Valid CSS!




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