quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

and where "submission" means "I do what the Top says only when I approve, agree and don't think it's a dumb ass rule", then be my guest, but that doesn't mean that it suddenly magically becomes true in the English language.

And yet that is EXACTLY how it works in real life, as what you have described is in fact the whole process of negotiation.

quote:

I can assure you, that is not (necessarily) how it works. I've been known to disagree with even his most sensible rule, never mind the ones I might mutter about. And yet, I still find myself responsible for adhering to them, no matter how much I may not want to at the time.

quote:

Rinse and repeat until both parties feel comfortable.

quote:

Virtually non of them where discussed or negotiated with her beforehand.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

Virtually non of them where discussed or negotiated with her beforehand.

And yet the fact that she was to be issued inane and meaningless micromanaging orders such as those you listed was negotiated, was it not?

quote:

Nope. It wasn't negotiated at all.

What was negotiated that she would obey

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

Nope. It wasn't negotiated at all.

What was negotiated that she would obey

LOL
You just contradicted yourself.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

Virtually non of them where discussed or negotiated with her beforehand.

And yet the fact that she was to be issued inane and meaningless micromanaging orders such as those you listed was negotiated, was it not?

quote:

Yeah... not quite.

quote:

You asked if the fact that "inane and meaningless micromanaging orders" would be given was negotiated.

quote:

What was negotiated was the fact that she'd have to obey

quote:

The fact that this included what you call "inane and meaningless micromanaging orders" came as quite a surprise to her

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

The fact that this included what you call "inane and meaningless micromanaging orders" came as quite a surprise to her

So you misled her. Go you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

I can assure you, that is not (necessarily) how it works. I've been known to disagree with even his most sensible rule, never mind the ones I might mutter about. And yet, I still find myself responsible for adhering to them, no matter how much I may not want to at the time.

I can assure you that thatis how it works, because you have already negotiated that degree of obedience, yes?

quote:

Regardless, my impression of what you were saying was that it was relative to individual rules popping up throughout the relationship

quote:

ORIGINAL: Reinertsslave75
What types of punishments do you dish out for when your slave disobeys and plays with herself.

Gender doesn't matter in this case. What were the stipulations of the dynamic? If the other person is in control of the s-types orgasms, why is this any different than anything else the other person wasn't supposed to do? If we're talking about willful disobedience, it really shouldn't matter. Consequences tend to depend more about the situation, than the infraction. If the person is disobeying with the intent of doing so, what do I care if the infraction is about rubbing one out, or she ate the snicker's bar she wasn't supposed to be sneaking behind my back?

quote:

Also how would you discipline them if they backtalked you, called you Sir when you told them it's Master not Sir.

Again, what were the circumstances? Somebody who has been in a dynamic for seven days isn't going to be dealt with the same way as somebody who has had the rules for seven years. I tend to be harsher if there's been a period of longevity. Is the person, specifically, attempting to be less than pleasing. Intent matters.

---

The rest of this is more interesting than the original.

Allow me to say first that I'm not Gorean in any way, though, every once in a while, I see similarities between leather folks and Goreans. One of those similarities does tend to be that we don't always look at the M/s thing the way other people do. There are very specific examples of where M/s isn't this touchy, feely thing that a lot of people base their dynamics on. M/s isn't necessarily based on being "in love' or the stuff that a lot of people find to be the priority in their interactions. (By the way, there is nothing wrong with anybody saying they could not be an s-type without the emotional attachment being the priority. If it's not for you, don't do it.)

At the same time, there are dynamics where authority/obedience take precedence. It's very much like employer/employee interactions. My job is to be in authority. Your job is to obey. It's not a negotiation thing. I have X position available. If you fit into position X, service, obedience, etc, that's what is expected of you. If you f^ck that sh^t up, I'm going to let you go just as fast as any other employer would, which is *exactly* what you should expect.

I get told all of the time that people dislike my D/s and/or M/s comparisons to a job. However, how many folks in their employment got to "negotiate" their responsibilities? Is it what you want or what your boss wants?

quote:

What types of punishments do you dish out for when your slave disobeys and plays with herself. Also how would you discipline them if they backtalked you, called you Sir when you told them it's Master not Sir.

quote:

If it's not for you, don't do it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick
Yeah, that's kinda the point, despite what some others have said.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

I am pretty sure you knew exactly what sort of rules you intended to put in place, and yet you did not make that clear