RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style?

RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master

Message

shiftyw -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (1/28/2014 10:36:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MAINEiacMISTRESS Not all D/s involves romance. In fact for many of us long-term D/s is quite NON-sexual...and yes, it works for us. In answer to your question, I love My close vanilla friends, and I've become pretty close friends with My subs, so yes, as friends we have love for each other, just not in the romantic relationship way. quote: ORIGINAL: Blueswordsman Is love a necessary part of a long term D/s relationship or is the craving to dominate or be dominated enough to keep a couple a couple? I have to agree with this, I don't think lack of love=top and love=dom. There are countless arrangements- service subs? pros? etc. All in all to really answer the OP "Yes or no, whatever works for you and yours"

FieryOpal -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (1/28/2014 1:11:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shiftyw quote: ORIGINAL: Blueswordsman Is love a necessary part of a long term D/s relationship or is the craving to dominate or be dominated enough to keep a couple a couple? I have to agree with this, I don't think lack of love=top and love=dom. There are countless arrangements- service subs? pros? etc. All in all to really answer the OP "Yes or no, whatever works for you and yours" But would you consider your (non-sexual) footslave or houseboy and yourself a COUPLE? Certainly there are service arrangements which can turn into LONG-TERM friendships. Close, loving friendships even. I am not, however, intimate with my friends, and nobody would regard me and a companion-friend as a COUPLE. Realistically speaking, being a COUPLE has the connotation of intimacy and constant belongingness (regardless of actual proximity). Keeping things platonic is possible, and there are many marriages where spouses share intimacy and have love for one another, but for whatever reason have stopped having sexual relations. Not commonly a situation one would choose for oneself, though. Can you be FWBs with or without love? Some people can. Personally, I can't do that whether on a casual or longer-term basis. It is not possible for me to be in a D/s relationship with anyone without love. Neither is it possible for me to become part of a couple and remain a couple without love.

shiftyw -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (1/28/2014 2:47:40 PM)
Well...I see couple as partnership, and I would consider a footslave and a Domme a couple/partnership. I'm more defensive over it because I am intimate with my some of my friends? I also think love doesn't imply sex. I don't even think intimacy implies sex. I have casual sex and loving sex. I have a man right now who I am monogomous with but I call him my top cause were bedroom only. In my more poly or open relationships I certainly didn't love everyone with the same amount of love, yet I was still happy enough to let those friends dominate me. Its a question with a lot of grey areas. For me, love/romance isn't a requirement, in a partnership. As with all these discussions everyone has different views of what D/s is...and its ok that some can have love and others don't.

Arturas -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (1/28/2014 3:29:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Blueswordsman Is love a necessary part of a long term D/s relationship or is the craving to dominate or be dominated enough to keep a couple a couple? I've not seen any long term D/s relationship not bonded by love. Perhaps it is not necessary but we will never know if it is possible since it never happens. How can it be any other way since a long term D/s and M/s relationship is as intimate as a relationship gets and ongoing intimacy with a woman always leads to love unless...unless she is broken...and uses a non-intimate D/s relationship to fill that empty place in a way that does not remind her of that which is broken.

SorceressJ -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (1/28/2014 3:36:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Blueswordsman Is love a necessary part of a long term D/s relationship or is the craving to dominate or be dominated enough to keep a couple a couple? For me, love is absolutely essential for D/s or for that matter, intimacy in general. Not necessarily twue picking-out-curtains wuv, but there must be a connection of some depth, or no dice. I would have zero interest in being down with anyone I didn't know and care about. I've had plenty of casual dalliances in my life, and keeping morality and similar BS out of it, it always left me cold and unsatisfied. So, here at the midpoint of my incarnation, I have firmly decided Love Or Nothing for me. And I'm happy to say that I don't do without. [;)]

MarcEsadrian -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (1/28/2014 5:08:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Blueswordsman Is love a necessary part of a long term D/s relationship or is the craving to dominate or be dominated enough to keep a couple a couple? No. Love is not necessary, though this is not to say it must be avoided at all costs, either. Further, the use of the word "couple" or "partner" is rife with socially diffused subtext. One must always be aware of the tendency for casual readers to inadvertently draw foregone conclusions simply form the use of these common terms that are often employed romantically by default, confusing the conversation at times. As with most things among humans, it's a mixed bag: some need love and some do not. There is no hard and fast rule where love or the lack of it is concerned. I, personally, tend to steer clear of the "must have love reciprocated" types, not because I'm an adversary to love, but because I think there is some degree of confusion about love and its true meaning to begin with, especially when idealized in D/s. Also, many, it would seem, are looking more for a traditional romantic relationship in the ephemeral skin of D/s. I reach for something that still honors the practice of submission and dominance and doesn't just use it as a means to another end.

FieryOpal -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (1/28/2014 6:43:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MarcEsadrian I think there is some degree of confusion about love and its true meaning to begin with, especially when idealized in D/s. Also, many, it would seem, are looking more for a traditional romantic relationship in the ephemeral skin of D/s. I reach for something that still honors the practice of submission and dominance and doesn't just use it as a means to another end. Perhaps "Love" is not on your Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, but for some of us it is essential. This does not make such a person weaker or less than as an entity, instead it makes us less detached in our interpersonal relationships. We recognize the value of synergy, that the sum of both parts is greater than each individual part on its own. Until you have experienced such an exalted state, you will not be able to fully comprehend it or fully grasp this palpable concept. This is the other end that can be reached via romantic love. It would seem to me that anyone seeking a (non-platonic) D/s relationship dynamic without love is the one who is using D/s "as a means to another end" which is primarily self-serving. Anyone who has ever been "in love" and is not afraid to reach out for that state of being again knows the difference. As an aside to shiftyw, whatever works for you relationship-wise shouldn't make you feel defensive. You seem to be very self-aware and can distinguish between choosing to be a bottom and not being true to yourself by trying to mold yourself into a submissive when that is not what you want from your current relationship. Then there is no misunderstanding as to where you and your partner stand with one another, so you are taking an honest approach.

MarcEsadrian -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (1/28/2014 7:23:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal Perhaps "Love" is not on your Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, but for some of us it is essential. This was recognized previously as saying "there is no hard and fast rule" here. quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal This does not make such a person weaker or less than as an entity, instead it makes us less detached in our interpersonal relationships. We recognize the value of synergy, that the sum of both parts is greater than each individual part on its own. Love=weakness was never asserted or even inferred, and synergy, I might add, can still thrive without love. Recognizing that the sum of two parts is greater than the individual does not require love, either. quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal It would seem to me that anyone seeking a (non-platonic) D/s relationship dynamic without love is the one who is using D/s "as a means to another end" which is primarily self-serving. And how does this deviate onto the road of another end if dominance and submission is being fiercely observed and honored? To be served is to be served—to enforce and nurture submission to one's dominance is staying, literally, within the bounds of the short-hand that is "D/s," reciprocated love present or not. Love can exist in this wide fulcrum or it can be absent, and there's nothing to say that your preference for love being present in D/s makes your experience any more sacred than one who loves in her servitude without requite. There's also nothing wrong with being primarily self-serving in your dominance. In many ways, dominance, especially seen on the far end of the sliding scale, requires elements of that drive. The key for my preference is in finding one who is fulfilled in serving and pleasing another. Both win and are fulfilled in this "exalted state," too, believe it or not.

shiftyw -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (1/28/2014 7:27:48 PM)
I don't think either person is using it as a means to another end. They are just doing what feels right for them. Neither should be made to feel badly. Unless you are lying, cheating, or being otherwise shitty and deceitful towards someone.

FieryOpal -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (1/28/2014 7:55:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MarcEsadrian [a.] Love=weakness was never asserted or even inferred, and synergy, I might add, can still thrive without love. Recognizing that the sum of two parts is greater than the individual does not require love, either. quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal It would seem to me that anyone seeking a (non-platonic) D/s relationship dynamic without love is the one who is using D/s "as a means to another end" which is primarily self-serving. [b.] And how does this deviate onto the road of another end if dominance and submission is being fiercely observed and honored? To be served is to be served—to enforce and nurture submission to one's dominance is staying, literally, within the bounds of the short-hand that is "D/s," reciprocated love present or not.... Re (a) I was making a statement that did not reflect on any kind of insinuation made by you. Nor am I now lumping you in with those cynics I have met who scoff at romantic love and at those who would seek it out as if this were a weakness. There is a chasm which can not easily be bridged between those who consider themselves realists and those who are idealists. (For all I know, you may very well be an idealist. Anything's possible.) While there are plenty of platonic partnerships which operate on a synergistic model, most notably corporations and conglomerates, I don't view my personal, intimate relationships as a business partnership (not saying you do either, necessarily). I was specifically speaking about romantic love. Re (b) Just as there are differing styles of D/s, no two Dominants are alike. Your style of Domination must be working for you. My style of Domination works for me. Love is a pre-requisite for mine, but not for yours. We can agree to disagree/differ in that respect.

N0m4d -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (1/29/2014 9:46:25 AM)
If you can't love your submissive, how can you ever REALLY take care of her? I think love is involved in every d/s relationship, though to different degrees. Personally, I think it takes an incredible about of love and affection to properly guide and care for a submissive. Obviously, if people are just in it for the sex, I don't think the relationship will ever reach it's full potential. And besides, why would you want to entrust your body, your mind, your submission to someone who didn't care about you?

WorldsWorstMan -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (1/30/2014 2:40:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant quote: ORIGINAL: WorldsWorstMan I didnt understand the link between lesbian footwear and enjoying women without love. Is it a point about living up to stereotypes ?. I trust you are aware of where you are... a kink site. If we were to tweak the topic to "Is love part of the T/b lifestyle?" we would see a resounding "Fuck No". D/s is indicative of depth, meaning, and most important of all, TRUST. quote: WorldsWorstMan Im sure love is a part of it, for some.. Not so much for me. Its not hard to enjoy a woman, even if you dont love her. The above is Topish, and that's fine, but it's not contributing to the OP. So let's revisit the OP: Do you, WorldsWorstMan, when in a D/s dynamic, not T/b casual, become emotionally invested in your /s, or do you just accept her trust without emotional investment, and if so, how do you earn that trust? Exiled There are other emotions than love to accept that trust with. To be honest I think lust is the main one for me, and after that curiosity. But there is more, some care and some feelings its hard to name. As to why they should trust me, I really dont know. Its hard to know why people trust eachother at all. Its one of those things that just happen. Its probably better to ask subs who enter loveless relationships why they do it Im very glad they find a reason..

ExiledTyrant -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (1/31/2014 9:10:41 AM)
~FR because it isn't pointed at anyone in particular, but relevant to all. Trust begins logically, and finally rests in the realm of emotion. Mince words and play semantics all you want, it does not diminish this fact. Logical trust (the beginning of trust): We agreed on fidelity, then s/he fucked someone else. I'm glad I figured that out before I became (emotionally) invested. Emotional trust (where it ends up): How could s/he fuck some fucking stranger!?!? I trusted him/her completely! Pass the haagan daz and the hand gun! Trust is discerned logically at first, then it roots in emotion. Logically you can trust that D to tie you up and dog waffle the shit out of you because his/her reputation, the negotiation, experience, and/or confidence allows for that. If the dynamic moves beyond play, becomes friendship, service D/s M/s, the bond of trust will strengthen and temper like so much steel. If at any point he/she says, I'll only play with you, you trust him/her to only play with you. If that trust is violated on a logical level, you walk away with the sharp sting of betrayal. If your trust is violated on an emotional level, you're crushed, need to heal, and logically that violation will taint future trust. Jus sayin Exiled

TemplarOne -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (2/4/2014 3:45:50 PM)
Love - the cruelest four letter word in the English dictionary... Ds does not require love to exist - however, in any relationship there is always a need to progress and grow as a couple...to explore new things together.... emotional attachments are easily forged if the two people in the Ds relationship are right for one another... The same can be said of vanilla relationships... Do you have to be in love to have a Ds relationship (not necessarily sex) with someone? In my opinion you don't need love for that but love does make the Ds (or vanilla) that much more special...

quietandintense -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (2/18/2014 1:14:34 PM)
enjoying all the responses. It points to how different we all really are and why a meaningful relationship takes effort to appreciate what combination of things makes the other person unique....good stuff..

JeffBC -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (2/18/2014 6:34:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Blueswordsman Is love a necessary part of a long term D/s relationship or is the craving to dominate or be dominated enough to keep a couple a couple? No, love is not necessary for a long-term relationship, D/s or otherwise. Love just happens to be a strong binding agent. What is required is some sort of something which provides a common focus and unites two individuals into a team. It'd be easy for me to see how a sufficiently dynamic leader could do this simply by taking the sub on the proverbial ride of his or her lifetime. That all being said, love is going to work better than most things. We're sort of wired that way.

LadyPact -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (2/18/2014 6:55:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant I love and adore women. They're quite special to me, and up to the point we reach the panty ritual, they're never fuck meat. I absolutely adore FemD's, the ones that are certain who they are, like LP (yep, that's me lovin on ya babe). We can enjoy each other in earnest and there is never dick measuring (forgive the analogy, but I'm sure you know what I mean). Exiled Oh, damn. I got loved on and didn't even see it for weeks! Right back at you, hon. Addressing the original, I'm all good with those who say if there is no love, there is no dynamic. However, it doesn't work that way for everybody. I posted on these boards for the entire length of My last dynamic and I've got a good number of posts out there that stated, quite frankly, that it was a service based dynamic and it wasn't love based at all. One of the most memorable (for Me) was a comment that undergroundsea wrote in either 2008 or 2009 after we had met him at SELF when he has said we looked very much "in love" and I told him that his view was off because there was no romantic element included in the dynamic in the slightest. I've probably got a thousand posts out there with the same theme, so if anybody tries to shovel bullshit about how it never happens or nobody's ever seen it, please go back to any prior post that I made on the subject from that five year period and you will see that, absolutely, it exists. (Five years long term enough for y'all? Works for Me either way.) The dynamic that I have now does include a love element and it is not service based. That doesn't imply that there is no service involved. It just means that the love comes first. That's why you guys have seen Me acting like somebody who got the golden ticket out of a Willie Wonka bar for these last few months. Since the sexual aspect came up, I'll address that, too. Personally, I kind of suck at sport fucking. I can, from a certain standpoint, do ok from an ownership rights standpoint or hook it into My sadism. Before anybody even goes there, yes, these are ridiculously selfish and I admit that freely. (Frankly, if I was a male Dominant and copped to that, I'd probably get My head served on a plate.) It is different in My view because of the way I'm wired. Some of which I can't really explain because it's hard to convey the two different states of mind and the responses physically. Edited to add a forgotten 's'.

Domnotlooking -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (2/19/2014 11:48:12 AM)
My kink partner HAS to be my love partner. I only have so many hours in the day to do stuff like laundry and plus, The Real Housewives of New York is starting a new series soon. If I had deal with the complications of outsourcing to a person on the side to spank, or I had to have a lovey-lame vanilla partner and just suck it up -well, what's my reason for getting up in the morning again in these crappy scenarios?

Blonderfluff -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (2/19/2014 1:43:19 PM)
I've only had both kink and love in the same relationship once. It was amazing. At this point, my life is pretty great. It is the perfect time for me to pick and choose, look and meet. I've got all the time in the world, and if and when the right D comes along, it WILL be the dynamic I need, which encompasses love as well.

DesFIP -> RE: Is Love part of the D/s life style? (2/19/2014 3:28:44 PM)
I find it amusing that those who insist love isn't necessary are all unattached. While those of us in long term relationships know that it is. So far I haven't even seen one person say they've been in a d/s or m/s relationship for over ten years and they don't love their partner at all.

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

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

1.505859