LadyPact
Posts: 32566
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: NuevaVida I dunno, Jeff, calling people "Weekend Warriors" seems rather disparaging to me. But to each their own. In defense of Malkinius, I have reason to think that I understand completely why he used that particular term. It was the best descriptor to convey what happens in some long term situations over time. It's hard for some who say that they have always been <insert roll here> and that is the way that they interact with the person with whom they share intimacy to see how these things happen. All of us Dominant or submissive types, especially those who acknowledge the authority structure as a constant (24/7) in the relationship have a really tough time imagining that undercurrent not being present. Yet, anybody who has been around other people in an alternative lifestyles long enough can tell you that there is a percentage of folks that, over time, pretty much, all of the alternative part has disappeared. They may still have the same personality types, but the way that they interact with each other has changed significantly from where they started out. Rather than an imbalance of power, they end up being equal partners on the authority front. It's not a huge section of the D/s or M/s folks out there. Still, it does happen. If I had to take a stab at it, I'd say the culprit behind it is most often a combination of complacency and just regular adjusting to life changes. Kids come along, people are more successful in their career, or they just lose certain drives. The little things start slipping and before people know it, the power dynamic has eroded away. Ten years later, they look back and wonder where it went. These folks are most definitely still in love and have no intention of parting. Of those that I know, I'd call it about half and half. One half, both people are perfectly content with each other being vanilla. The other half, I'd say that one person wishes they had some kind of semblance of the authority structure, but they accept it because being in love and content on that front is good enough. (It's fair to mention here that there was one case specifically where the M of the house "found God" and the wife is in the latter category of wanting the M/s back, but she loves him.) The weekend warrior comment. From those people that I know where this has happened, the kinky sex was the last to go. It doesn't always go away completely, but that's what is left of the D/s component. quote:
I think property and love don't need to be separated though. What about loved property? Why couldn't that be the foundation, rather than one OR the other? Not everybody has to prioritize themselves in such a way. I think it's just that some of us recognize that there can only be one highest priority. It's just a matter of looking at the person on the other side and knowing the answer to which you would give up for the sake of what. If the "in love" was gone, could the authority and/or kink be something you would be willing to continue? If the authority and/or kink part was gone, would the "in love" part be enough? For My own perspective, the answer is different for Me depending on the individual. In MP's case, it's definitely the "in love" part. If I had to choose between the options, loving him, our marriage, and our life together would win. Any submissive that I have and it's the opposite. The authority comes first and if that is absent, the affection/love isn't enough.
_____________________________
The crowned Diva of Destruction. ~ ExT Beach Ball Sized Lady Nuts. ~ TWD Happily dating a new submissive. It's official. I've named him engie. Please do not send me email here. Unless I know you, I will delete the email unread
|