Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right?

Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

SirDiscipliner69 -> Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 7:10:33 AM)
Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? Ross

SirDominic -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 7:12:16 AM)
Right.

Celeste43 -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 7:12:57 AM)
Depends on how you define emotions. If you mean can people have a D/s relationship without romantic overtones, some people can. For others it is a hard limit. But I think that when I feel submissive, I am experiencing an emotion or several mixed together.

asassylilslave -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 7:13:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SirDiscipliner69 Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? Ross technically speaking; no, it does not need emotional attatchments.

LycanHorde -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 7:27:11 AM)
If you mean, SirDiscipliner, having no emotional attachment to the one you're excercising control over, well you still have the pleasure of doing something you enjoy, the pleasure of living in your skin so to speak, allowing who you truly are an outlet, an avenue of expression. So, yeah, you could do without it - but why would you want to? It would be like listening to a favorite song but limitting yourself to hearing only half the notes. On the other hand if you mean dominating another without any emotional charge whatsoever in it for you, the only place I could see that working would be with money slavery; that seems pretty cut and dry.

CrazyC -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 7:29:48 AM)
No. domination is just that domination. But Domination in a relationship, i would want some emotional connection. i personally would worry if someone wanted to Dom me and didn't have an emotional connection, no matter how mild.

agirl -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 7:33:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SirDiscipliner69 Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? Ross Agreed.

BlindDescent -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 7:34:32 AM)
Emotional attachment...hmmm; are you speaking of the dominant's emotional attachment? If so , then if one looks at one's submissive as a tool; perhaps one might make a parallel to the attachments men make to their cars or hammers or whips. Things we cannot do without and have a very specific function in our lives, are thing we establish a different type of bond with. Things that are performed and/or created through the use of one's tools do create an emotional change; either in the participants, or the viewers. So from that perspective; yes I have had emotional attachments with every submissive I have ever been fortunate to have spent time with regardless of format. From a submissive's or "tool's" perspective; if the tool knows what was going to transpire at the hands of its owner, then I would think that it would be rather excited to perform and create those things that make its owner and its recipients so happy. Good outcomes equals closer relationship equals positive attachment equals emotional attachment. Then again...if the craftsman sucks, or drives recklessly and takes no time to maintain his tools...then that is another story entirely. It is all in the relationship and foundation that evolves. I prefer attachment. It is the extra spark of belonging that makes it far more than an emotionless event. Then again; consuming without clear purpose or intent is never a prudent thing to pursue.

Hissltviolet -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 7:58:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BlindDescent Emotional attachment...hmmm; are you speaking of the dominant's emotional attachment? If so , then if one looks at one's submissive as a tool; perhaps one might make a parallel to the attachments men make to their cars or hammers or whips. Things we cannot do without and have a very specific function in our lives, are thing we establish a different type of bond with. Things that are performed and/or created through the use of one's tools do create an emotional change; either in the participants, or the viewers. So from that perspective; yes I have had emotional attachments with every submissive I have ever been fortunate to have spent time with regardless of format. From a submissive's or "tool's" perspective; if the tool knows what was going to transpire at the hands of its owner, then I would think that it would be rather excited to perform and create those things that make its owner and its recipients so happy. Good outcomes equals closer relationship equals positive attachment equals emotional attachment. Then again...if the craftsman sucks, or drives recklessly and takes no time to maintain his tools...then that is another story entirely. It is all in the relationship and foundation that evolves. I prefer attachment. It is the extra spark of belonging that makes it far more than an emotionless event. Then again; consuming without clear purpose or intent is never a prudent thing to pursue. ...very nicely put...

Archer -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 8:02:36 AM)
Dispassionatly speaking emotional connection is not required however I would contend that over time it will almost invarriably result from it. Think back to any examples you may recall of the levels of platonic love that develop between people in the workplace. The love and dedication of a Boss for their employees. The love and dedication of employees to their Boss. The butler or housekeeper who is invited to all the family weddings and funerals. The times domestic staff has been included in wills, and spoken of fondly due to years of service. Close living and service and the appreciation of that service develops it's own form of love.

BlindUnknown -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 8:10:19 AM)
Different strokes for different folks. However, this should not be confused with that being the ONLY domination. i personally don't grasp the concept of how it can be done. But then again...how can you claim to be -fully- dominating someone if they do not surrender emotionally?

Archer -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 8:16:57 AM)
Hmmm I thouht we were in genera agreement? Just comming at it from opposite sides of the tree. I'm saying that almost invariable an emotional attachment will form as a result of the relationship. You seem to be saying the same thing, and we both are assuming both parties are acting in "good faith". Or was that ment for someone else and the reply thing got me confused?

BlindUnknown -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 8:21:06 AM)
Nah i always use the quick reply box at the bottom ^_^

juliaoceania -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 8:38:28 AM)
I have not read any other posts, but I will respond with my opinion and my views based upon my own experiences. I believe that domination requires at least two people, the dom and the sub. As a sub there is no way that I could be dominated without an emotional connection, without the emotions in place that connect us, there is no power exchange. I am sure there are some that can submit without a connection to the dominant that they have given their power to, but I would venture to take a wild guess and state that this would not be very common. If someone engaged in BDSM activities with me without the connection, they would be merely topping me, because I would not be submitting to THEM, I would only be doing an act... .. But my experience is not universal and I am not arrogant enough to think that it is or should be

felicitousdove -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 9:23:50 AM)
I think this coems down to: Does one need love to have a successful Ds relationship? Age old question. Love can and is what spurs some relationships to work harder, and be the best they can be. Love also can and is something that gets inthe way of a stricter styled Ms or Ds lifestyle. Whatever works for you!

GentlehandSTL -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 9:30:06 AM)
I can dominate someone w/o the emotion. Mostly I choose not to.

juliaoceania -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 9:42:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: felicitousdove I think this coems down to: Does one need love to have a successful Ds relationship? Age old question. Love can and is what spurs some relationships to work harder, and be the best they can be. Love also can and is something that gets inthe way of a stricter styled Ms or Ds lifestyle. Whatever works for you! Like Tina said, "what's love got to do with it?". I do not equate all emotions with romantic love, there are lots of differing types of love in the world either way. I can say I was not in love with my Daddy the first time he dominated me, but there was a lot of emotional charge there anyways. Feelings to me are very closely associated to what happens within me as a sink into subspace, it causes wonderful emotions within me, and it just wouldn't without the charge I see on his face which is emotion based too... it creates a connection in my mind, but it does not mean " love"

griffn -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 10:16:53 AM)
Not in my experience but it does help to create a deeper level of trust etc. I think that with out trying there is a emotional component to scening that just happens automatically whether I want it or not.

amayos -> Emotion and dominance (1/30/2007 11:01:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SirDiscipliner69 Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? On its surface, this comment seems correct—until of course one considers the consciousness one requires to dominate well. Emotion is a necessary engine in the human animal to make good decisions, based upon the volume of constantly shifting input life inevitably brings—therefore it is impossible for us to escape emotion if we are to be good, thinking animals, true to our feelings and instincts. Additionally, considerable empathetic abilities are often required in human domination, and those who dominate well are in touch with those abilities. These processes are not to be considered interchangeable with the popular notion of romantic love, however. Dominance can and does exist without love, but good dominance at its base does involve a suitable degree of empathy and human understanding, even if simply to know how to dominate better.

SirKenin -> RE: Domination does not need emotion attached to be domination right? (1/30/2007 11:08:23 AM)
Anybody that tells you that there is no emotional attachment whatsoever does not know what they are talking about or they are a stone. Mind you, you can make the claim that you are a dominant that lacks emotion, but you will be an unattached dominant unless you are a psychopath and your charge buys into that MO. There has to be SOME form of attachment there to form some type of bond necessary to be a power exchange. It could be as simplistic as a friendship bond, or as complex as a lover, but there must be a bond of some sort in a D/s dynamic. You have to be able to care for your charge and help them to blossom. This requires a form of attachment or you are going to be one seriously piss poor dominant. I guess that is why I laugh at the profiles of dominants that try to come across as the big tough guy or gal (especially the ones that are hanging out of their PVC all over the place while holding a crop or whip. They are the worst). They generally have the most to hide. Now, if you are talking about strictly have a scene at a party or something, and you are beating a pain slut, then no emotion is necessary. But in any relationship, vanilla, BDSM or otherwise, an emotional bond is a mandatory requirement.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875