RE: Love & Authority?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Love & Authority?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Love & Authority?

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Love & Authority? - 5/1/2012 12:20:34 PM

Bhruic

Posts: 985
Joined: 4/11/2012
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

So not wanting to derail another thread I'm starting this one. Yes, I know this isn't the first time it's come up but there was a fascinating statement made... or at least interesting to me.

quote:

...if the relationship is all about love and romance with a bit of kink it is going to end up the bedroom only, weekend warrior type of relationship, not something very deep on the kink or submission side.

Opinions? Is this so in your experience? Clearly, you can't add "love" into the equation without it changing things dramatically, but are those changes so simple to predict?

(and yes, the regulars know that I fit squarely into the "all about love & romance" category and no, I don't care whether that makes me a "weekend warrior type".)

I'm in a relationship with plenty of love and romance, and it started as bedroom kink... and eventually progressed to 24/7 D/s... so there is at least one example that refutes the comment. I don't think love and romance are the enemy of kink. In fact, I think love and romance are essential components to building the kind of trust and understanding that makes a full time D/s relationship possible, and lasting.

Furthermore, I think a D/s relationship that doesn't have those elements is more likely to be sporadic, opportunistic and finite.

That said... not everyone is interested in 24/7, love and romance notwithstanding.

[ED] Once again, not reading every post has me repeating the thoughts of others... but its a good topic.

< Message edited by Bhruic -- 5/1/2012 12:24:31 PM >

(in reply to JeffBC)

Profile

Post #: 81

RE: Love & Authority? - 5/1/2012 2:03:16 PM

LadyPact

Posts: 32566
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC
*laughs*... tough times for those of us without the kinky sex part at all. No wait.. as I think on it, we seem to be going the other way... more kinky sex over time.

Honestly, whatever Malkinius might have meant (and I don't think he's a bad guy, I think I took one statement he said out of context because it was interesting to me), to me this question has come down to a question of selfishness/selflessness on the part of the master. I think I had a mistaken impression of some people's relationships here. That's why I think I need to get out and see more real life M/s couples.

I'm not exactly sure why it strikes you that way. Since I tend to believe that you look a bit past the stereotype and beyond the surface that says service based dynamics are only beneficial to the M type, I'm curious about this.

quote:

I also agree with Des's comment. Sure, for people who have chosen dynamics complacency is always the enemy. But the fact that a dynamic isn't readily visible to an outsider can be very deceptive in a long-term relationship.

I didn't make the observation from the outside looking in. It's based on information from the parties involved. The most recent of which is one of the poly families where I live now. They had been Head of Household/switch/sub. In the past year, the HOH and switch removed the D/s between them and choose equal partnership. The only D/s now is between the latter two.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to JeffBC)

Profile

Post #: 82

RE: Love & Authority? - 5/1/2012 2:11:16 PM

JeffBC

Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact
I'm not exactly sure why it strikes you that way. Since I tend to believe that you look a bit past the stereotype and beyond the surface that says service based dynamics are only beneficial to the M type, I'm curious about this.

That's why I said I needed to look into this question further in the real world. Here online it's easy to read posts and get an impression of things which isn't accurate to reality. Mercnbeth is a great example of that. I think there are good reasons for that which have nothing to do with any intention to mislead. But online I have heard any number of times, "it's all about the master". I have never heard that offline in someone's living room.

That being said, I'm not the only one who struggles finding the right balance point between selfishness and selflessness. Merc himself one time posted "Let's face it, you have to be selfish in order to be dominant". Now given that I've actually experienced the texture of their relationship in person I'd have to say that calling him "selfish" in regards beth is utter lunacy. He dotes on the woman for crying out loud :) In person it's easy to see that. Online... especially in the earlier parts of their relationship... it wasn't that easy.

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to LadyPact)

Profile

Post #: 83

RE: Love & Authority? - 5/1/2012 8:00:35 PM

NuevaVida

Posts: 6707
Joined: 8/5/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact
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.

I won't argue that there is a percentage of folks for whom this happens. But the comment quoted in the OP came across as an absolute, that this WILL happen, in any long term M/s or D/s dynamic.

For me personally, I can't readily say what will happen long term. I know I just automatically submit to him, and whenever our interactions begin to creep close to the outskirts of that M/s line, I feel ridiculously uncomfortable. I only know, offline, one other couple who has been together...hmm...15 years or more, that being Bita and Himself, and I haven't seen any evidence of day-to-day M/s - in all areas - being blurred. Not to say this doesn't happen with some, but I think it would be inaccurate to express this as an absolute eventual course of a loving M/s relationship.

quote:

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.

I agree. Complacency happens in all sorts of relationship dynamics. And that's the accountability of those within that relationship. But as you have said here, it's not a huge section of D/s or M/s folks. I agree with that, which makes the statement quoted in the OP incorrect.

quote:

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.

To me, "weekend warrior" is a condescending term, used to describe those who don't take D/s or M/s dynamics seriously (by whomever's definition of what serious is supposed to mean). I see it as a disparaging remark which is said without a positive intention. That's my only issue with it. I don't take personal offense to it, but I've just never seen it used in a positive light.

quote:

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.

Yeah, this is definitely dependent on the people involved in each relationship, which will differ from relationship to relationship. That's why the "absolutism" of the original statement is so inaccurate. In some cases it's one over the other. In some cases it's both.

_____________________________

Live Simply. Love Generously. Care Deeply. Speak Kindly.

(in reply to LadyPact)

Profile

Post #: 84

RE: Love & Authority? - 5/1/2012 8:04:07 PM

NuevaVida

Posts: 6707
Joined: 8/5/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

That being said, I'm not the only one who struggles finding the right balance point between selfishness and selflessness. Merc himself one time posted "Let's face it, you have to be selfish in order to be dominant". Now given that I've actually experienced the texture of their relationship in person I'd have to say that calling him "selfish" in regards beth is utter lunacy. He dotes on the woman for crying out loud :) In person it's easy to see that. Online... especially in the earlier parts of their relationship... it wasn't that easy.

I think there can be both selfishness and dotingness (is that a word?), and the trick is balancing the two. Most outsiders would think the Mister totally dotes on me, and, at times, he does. Yet he wants what he wants, and he makes sure he's going to get what he wants - - within the context of a loving, authoritarian relationship.

_____________________________

Live Simply. Love Generously. Care Deeply. Speak Kindly.

(in reply to JeffBC)

Profile

Post #: 85

RE: Love & Authority? - 5/1/2012 8:43:35 PM

Karmastic

Posts: 1650
Joined: 4/5/2012
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NuevaVida
I think there can be both selfishness and dotingness (is that a word?), and the trick is balancing the two. Most outsiders would think the Mister totally dotes on me, and, at times, he does. Yet he wants what he wants, and he makes sure he's going to get what he wants - - within the context of a loving, authoritarian relationship.

agree, always need balance, in everything.

IMHO, there's other ways to look at it, and some concepts are generally being confused in this thread. being selfish is an entirely different concept than doting, as well as being a dom. and plenty of contradictions.

examples:
a dom who only plays that role to please his sub wife. is he being selfish? no, just the opposite.

doting - one can dote on their wife, and yet be a totally selfish asshole

what i'm saying is, these are all very different concepts, and not all mutually exclusive.

so to jeff - yes, you are selfish, own it. so am i. that doesn't contradict you loving her tenderly, and doting over her sometimes. you do that selfishly, because it pleases you to please her (and cus you're a married man, and no fool). her giving herself to you is filling her "selfish" desire to please you - that meets her needs, and you meet hers.

_____________________________

[Awaiting Approval]

If my experience level makes you feel superior, that is your problem, not mine.

(in reply to NuevaVida)

Profile

Post #: 86

RE: Love & Authority? - 5/1/2012 9:46:51 PM

NuevaVida

Posts: 6707
Joined: 8/5/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karmastic

what i'm saying is, these are all very different concepts, and not all mutually exclusive.

Absolutely, and an outsider really can't always know what the reality is.

Here's a recent example from my world. I did a 2 hour Zumba-thon last Saturday. He drove me there, early, so I could register. He hung out while I met up with a couple friends there, and he hung out the entire 2+ hours I danced. I had suggested he hang out at home, or go cruise around town and come back later to get me, but he wanted to stay.

He was there to hand me water when I needed it, or my towel when I needed that. He bought raffle tickets (and won me a prize!), which supported the cause (it was a charity event). He took pictures and video of me, and enjoyed watching me. After we got home and I showered, my foot really hurt, and he rubbed the knot out of it. He BBQ'd the entire dinner (steak, veggies, potatoes) and poured the wine for dinner.

Totally doting, right? Or was it investing in the relationship because of the foundation he's trying to build, and what he wants down the line? Maybe a bit of both? Maybe he liked the eye candy at the Zumba-thon. I mean really - 200 women dancing around in tank tops? Whatever his reasons, there was love there, and whatever his reasons, I think back on Saturday full of gratitude for him, and wanting to be the best everything possible to him, and wanting to give him more than ever.

And he'll use that gratitude and devotion in me, and he'll get whatever he wants. Selfish - yes. Doting - yes. Does it work for us? You bet.

_____________________________

Live Simply. Love Generously. Care Deeply. Speak Kindly.

(in reply to Karmastic)

Profile

Post #: 87

RE: Love & Authority? - 5/2/2012 12:12:42 AM

Karmastic

Posts: 1650
Joined: 4/5/2012
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

oh hell yes, love your post, great end to long day.

two things...

1 - he's REALLY into you (good for you)

2 - Feck yes I'd would have stayed and gawked, uh, i mean, stayed there to support you

_____________________________

[Awaiting Approval]

If my experience level makes you feel superior, that is your problem, not mine.

(in reply to NuevaVida)

Profile

Post #: 88

RE: Love & Authority? - 5/2/2012 2:06:56 AM

JeffBC

Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karmastic
so to jeff - yes, you are selfish, own it. so am i. that doesn't contradict you loving her tenderly, and doting over her sometimes. you do that selfishly, because it pleases you to please her (and cus you're a married man, and no fool). her giving herself to you is filling her "selfish" desire to please you - that meets her needs, and you meet hers.

... probably some good wisdom in there... I'll ponder that. I'm fairly certain that I'm not selfish enough... at least sexually (still work getting done to heal old wounds). You are correct that there's nothing wrong with me being more selfish... especially in a marriage like ours where everyone's cup is overflowing. It's not exactly like she would begrudge me some additional bit of happiness. Hell, that's the whole reason she wears the collar in the first place.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nueva
And he'll use that gratitude and devotion in me, and he'll get whatever he wants. Selfish - yes. Doting - yes. Does it work for us? You bet.

Well yeah but there's a reason I like your relationship so well. I resonate with your relationship. As you noted, within the context of a loving, authoritarian relationship I do demand a great deal of her. As I've read this thread I think at least one thing I'm figuring out is that the context is going to be different for each couple. Some things I do not demand of Carol would seem trivial to most every sub here. Other things I do would seem horrific. That, I suspect, is just the nature of things... each couple finding some sort of loving, authoritarian context which works.

In general... man, I'm surprised at how useful this thread has become. Honestly when I made the original post it was just a bit of curiosity about the statement and how others perceived it. I didn't really think it would turn into something worthwhile and useful. Thanks to all who are contributing.

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to Karmastic)

Profile

Post #: 89

RE: Love & Authority? - 5/2/2012 8:37:01 PM

KnightofMists

Posts: 7149
Joined: 7/29/2005
Status: offline

quote:

But online I have heard any number of times, "it's all about the master". I have never heard that offline in someone's living room.

Jeff I think you need to get out more. It does happen in people's living rooms too. And maybe alot more common than people think. Hell, I even heard it stated in class by a well known speaker in the national community. Interestly though... I have yet to see those relationships thrive in the long term. Shooting stars most of them... But there is always exceptions

quote:

That being said, I'm not the only one who struggles finding the right balance point between selfishness and selflessness. Merc himself one time posted "Let's face it, you have to be selfish in order to be dominant". Now given that I've actually experienced the texture of their relationship in person I'd have to say that calling him "selfish" in regards beth is utter lunacy. He dotes on the woman for crying out loud :) In person it's easy to see that. Online... especially in the earlier parts of their relationship... it wasn't that easy.

I think this whole selish and unselfish stuff is a chicken and egg thing. What one might see as doting might be selfish action to care and enhance the relationship. Because the relationship's happiness is what is selfishly wanted because that is what is going to make oneself happy and improve ones odds to get what one wants. I don't waste my energy thinking or trying to balance between selfishly take from those I love to unselfishly give to those I love. I only ask one question... What is best for the relationship and do that. It might be chicken, might be egg... Either way in the bigger picture they are both the same to me as it feeds the relationship which in turn feeds me which further motivates me to give to the relationship. It's a cycle that enriches and enhances both the individuals and the relationship.

_____________________________

Knight of Mists

An Optimal relationship is achieved when the individuals do what is best for themselves and their relationship.

(in reply to JeffBC)

Profile

Post #: 90

RE: Love & Authority? - 5/10/2012 1:53:35 PM

Hisfungrl

Posts: 15
Joined: 5/10/2012
Status: offline

The D/s dynamic fosters deeper feelings and bonds than traditional vanilla due directly to the power exchange in my experience and feelings. The trust levels required in this type of relationship are higher and allow U/us to tap into O/ourselves in different ways. Personally i think love and romance enhances this style of relationship...creating new levels of control. Love and romance isn't an issue with a true submissive, it only accentuates a subs eagerness to please and desire to serve their Dom.

(in reply to DesFIP)

Profile

Post #: 91