RE: why subs think that they shouldn't have consent in relationship?

RE: why subs think that they shouldn't have consent in relationship? (Full Version)

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

Message

SuaveGentleman -> RE: why subs think that they shouldn't have consent in relationship? (2/14/2016 3:01:51 AM)
Because they have only lived this lifestyle in their heads. NO relationship works without consent. If they think being a submissive means being a doormat they need to go back and re-read the basics. A slight twist - I have talked to slaves who feel that way. This can be legitimate because such a statement comes out of deep trust and complete surrender of self, which slaves feel comfortable in doing BUT only with the right person. This level of connection and faith takes years to build and a lot of experience. People who make such statements without understanding the depth of emotions that go behind them are worse than novices in my books.

LilJuly76 -> RE: why subs think that they shouldn't have consent in relationship? (2/14/2016 5:12:54 AM)
my sentiments exactly

Kaliko -> RE: why subs think that they shouldn't have consent in relationship? (2/14/2016 5:37:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SuaveGentleman NO relationship works without consent. If they think being a submissive means being a doormat they need to go back and re-read the basics. I'm hesitatant to say that this one qualifier is the end all be all for whether a relationship works. First of all, what do we mean when we say "consent." (Did I miss this already in the thread? Sorry if I did.) Do I have to give verbal affirmation? Or, is the fact that I don't leave consent enough? I don't recall ever saying something like "This is okay to do" He knew I liked it, he knew I was looking for it, he knew I responded positively to it, but he didn't ask me anything and I didn't permit him anything. Did I give consent? Or, am I just "doormat" enough to let a lot of things go that other women, in a different kind of relationship, wouldn't accept? And then, let's say this was a vanilla relationship. The very same thing could, and does, apply. Someone doesn't give their consent to be controlled. And yet, they find themselves married to a controlling bit o'bastard. She stays, even though she doesn't like or want everything about the relationship. Is that consent? She could be well strong enough to leave, but maybe the bad doesn't outweigh the good, so she remains just "doormat" enough to let a lot of things go that other women, in a different kind of relationship, wouldn't accept. In general, I certainly agree that advertising oneself online as not being able to give consent in a relationship is the stuff of fantasy. What they're looking for is for someone to affirm for them that they are submissive because it makes them feel good and aroused. That's fine. I suspect when it comes down to it, they might push back more when not giving consent is no longer just about sex on their schedule. But in real life, I do think relationships happen all the time in which one partner is more controlling than the other, even in ways that others might consider abusive, with no express consent given, but everyone involved is fine with it and the relationship works.

SuaveGentleman -> RE: why subs think that they shouldn't have consent in relationship? (2/14/2016 6:41:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kaliko I'm hesitatant to say that this one qualifier is the end all be all for whether a relationship works. First of all, what do we mean when we say "consent." (Did I miss this already in the thread? Sorry if I did.) Do I have to give verbal affirmation? Or, is the fact that I don't leave consent enough? I don't recall ever saying something like "This is okay to do" He knew I liked it, he knew I was looking for it, he knew I responded positively to it, but he didn't ask me anything and I didn't permit him anything. Did I give consent? Or, am I just "doormat" enough to let a lot of things go that other women, in a different kind of relationship, wouldn't accept? What you are speaking of here, I believe, is trust that has built over a period of time. Trust that allows you to believe that even if you do not explicitly say the yay and nay, he knows you well enough to choose where to stop pushing. This sort of connection is beautiful and only comes with time and mutual experience. Would you do the same with a new person you met off the bat? Probably not. quote: ORIGINAL: Kaliko And then, let's say this was a vanilla relationship. The very same thing could, and does, apply. Someone doesn't give their consent to be controlled. And yet, they find themselves married to a controlling bit o'bastard. She stays, even though she doesn't like or want everything about the relationship. Is that consent? She could be well strong enough to leave, but maybe the bad doesn't outweigh the good, so she remains just "doormat" enough to let a lot of things go that other women, in a different kind of relationship, wouldn't accept. My apologies for strongly disagreeing here. This is indeed a doormat situation, and it leads to an unhealthy and toxic relationship that fill up, in due course of time, with bitterness and regrets and blaming. Am I saying people who choose to stay in a relationship because "good outweighs bad" are being stupid? Absolutely not. But this needs to follow a clear conversation that delineates the fact that "I am not into XYZ really, but I love you and I want to make you happy. I shall try what I can, please be understanding." Been through that, tried to make it work in the most transparent fashion. quote: ORIGINAL: Kaliko What they're looking for is for someone to affirm for them that they are submissive because it makes them feel good and aroused. That's a beautiful statement, one that I have seen work out in reality. People choose to behave as doormats since they believe that being infinitely malleable and pliable to their owners / dominants will reciprocate a sense of self-worth that they are missing otherwise. While not wrong, it needs to be handled with tender loving care and not allowed to descend into abuse. A fine line, that one.

OsideGirl -> RE: why subs think that they shouldn't have consent in relationship? (2/16/2016 12:39:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Joannerabbit If I set limits then I am not being submissive but instead I am in control, when the very thing I yearn for is not to be in control and to be used. Yet, as you say, I don't want to be beaten to a pulp - so I have to find someone who wants to do the things to me that I like and not the things that I don't like, without me articulating this as some form of ground rule setting. You clearly do have limits and you are in control, because you'll only submit when it's something you like. Honestly, submission is easy when it's the things you like. Real submission happens when you get to the things you don't like. quote: For me, the real turn on is the surrender of control - because then, the bad things I do are not down to me; someone else takes responsibility and I can still think of myself as "good" That's a cop out and I find it amazingly distasteful that you think it's good to give up responsibility for your own actions.

theHouseofAvalon -> RE: why subs think that they shouldn't have consent in relationship? (2/16/2016 11:41:27 PM)
FR Some women do not enjoy giving consent. The same can be said for those not using "safe words". I learned that for some women, once she silently and almost instantly surrenders then she crosses a line and wants to stay on that side of that line. This is what submissive women mean when they indicate they don't expect to be asked for "consent". I think they are right. I also think they represent more submissive women than one might imagine in that belief and practice and I don't think they are stupid or foolish when doing so. Instead, I think they are women and one cannot second guess women or why they are so amazing in your arms or under your whip. The Master of The House

HisForLife71 -> RE: why subs think that they shouldn't have consent in relationship? (3/5/2016 10:26:19 AM)
Consent came at the start. And it goes within the perimeters of hard limits. I give him complete control, with no need to ask or tell me first, but only because I trust him, and know him well enough to not strip me naked and throw me out into the street to humiliate me, lol.

DesFIP -> RE: why subs think that they shouldn't have consent in relationship? (3/9/2016 11:43:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl quote: For me, the real turn on is the surrender of control - because then, the bad things I do are not down to me; someone else takes responsibility and I can still think of myself as "good" That's a cop out and I find it amazingly distasteful that you think it's good to give up responsibility for your own actions. I don't think she's talking about bank robbing. This sounds more like the results of a fundamentalist religious upbringing. That having sex with the lights on is inherently bad, and that as long as she's not the person in charge, she doesn't have to think of herself as bad or slutty for doing it What it says to me is that she needs to talk to a professional to get over her sexual hang ups.

WilliamWizer -> RE: why subs think that they shouldn't have consent in relationship? (3/12/2016 5:53:21 AM)
as far as I know consent and trust are a must no matter what. let me explain why. if at some point the sub decides to not consent to anything and she's forced to do it. isn't that some form of rape? (and I don't mean rape play. I mean real rape) what if a sub finds at a later time that she has a hard limit she didn't knew about it? crossing a hard limit is always abusive and wrong. it's the absolute basic rule of the lifestyle. I understand that some slaves claim to have no limits or absolute trust or that they will consent to anything or things like that but, from what I know, that's because they didn't truly though about the literal meaning of what they are saying. they mean something on the lines of "I'm sure Master wouldn't do anything bad so I will never question his decisions". but in truth even doormats have doubts and against some actions won't consent. as much as a masochist may enjoy pain I seriously doubt somebody sane would agree to be killed for somebody else's pleasure. I already find demented that somebody could agree to have arms/legs amputated but I'm not one to judge those things. after all one of my believes is that anything consensual is fine (and nothing non-consensual is)

dreamofdaddy -> RE: why subs think that they shouldn't have consent in relationship? (4/8/2016 11:08:57 PM)
Consent is the basis it starts from. Otherwise its abuse. I have to say from day one "I give you consent to do......whatever" (not necassarily in those direct words".

Palomama -> RE: why subs think that they shouldn't have consent in relationship? (4/9/2016 6:10:32 PM)
Because if the sub has consent, then exactly who is the sub submitting to?

dreamofdaddy -> RE: why subs think that they shouldn't have consent in relationship? (4/10/2016 1:11:17 AM)
There is a huge difference between submission and abuse. The difference between those two things is that word....consent.

binap -> RE: why subs think that they shouldn't have consent in relationship? (4/10/2016 5:28:29 AM)
I would agree with some of what is posted. Everyone's desires and views are unique to some extent. I do believe in giving up all rights, including the need for consent, if I become an owned slave. However, that is really me giving my consent.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875