Doms and subs (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Polyamorous Lifestyles



Message

RiotGirl -> Doms and subs (6/11/2005 6:58:07 AM)

Or Masters and slaves, Mistresses and slave, Domme and Sub

i asked a similiar queestion in General about the differences between Men and women. As i've come to the conclusion that generally men are less involved emotionally when it comes to sex. But i was wondering, is it not just Men, but Dominant women as well? i ask this here, as it is poly in nature.

i for once, couldnt even imagine sleeping with another man other then Master. Meeting guys, and talking to them, those thoughts NEVER come into my head. Even if i "like" them, or find them attractive, or would like to date them. But it would be impossible for me to have a sexual relationship with them. Therefore, i established i am too emotionally involved in sex. Though i am wondering if its not because i am female, but submissive? (Though i know you are a BIG exception to the rule Emerald). And yes, i am more interested in those that are able to sleep around with more then one person because they are emotionally uninvolved. (Not the poly thing really where its you LOVE everyone, or some such)

i have explained this to myself, that it is because the one sleeping around is a man and unattached emotionally to sex, and there for is able to sleep around, while his s/o is unable to. Anyone else would like to help me figure out and understand this? i mean, is it just because he is poly? It is the poly mind frame? Is it just cos he's a man? A Dominant? WHY if he loves someone, is he able to love that person, yet go around sleeping around? Immaturity?

(though insults arent welcome, as its not jugdement call, it is something i would like to understand, so please keep the immaturity to yourselves)



EmeraldSlave2 -> RE: Doms and subs (6/11/2005 8:06:28 AM)

It really is just your preference.

I can sleep with anyone I have a chemistry with and feel up to fucking.

I also have deep deep emotional attachments to some people.

I think it's far too muddy waters to try and say it's a male/female or dom/sub thing. There's a lot of everyone in each category.



stormsfate -> RE: Doms and subs (6/11/2005 9:51:36 AM)

I have re-read your post several times trying to see exactly what you are getting it. It seems that you feel that you can only love one person at a time? (Question mark because I'm not sure that's what you are saying at all...lol). That's where poly differs from the mainstream because it acknowledges that in reality, people do have the capacity to love more than one person. We do it all the time whether or not there is a sexual relationship present or not.

As for me, I cannot imagine being with another man, but a large part of that is that I view myself as property and his to do with as he will and as such, the decision isn't mine to make. If he were less proprietary towards me and we had a relationship similar to Emerald's where he actually encouraged me to be with whomever I wished, then I very well may (and likely would) look at it differently. Its something I have little doubt that I would explore were I given the opportunity, based upon my tendency to like to explore all aspects of myself. Loving someone else doesn't take away from the love one has for their other partner(s) so I'm not grasping your point when you say that men aren't emotionally attached and so they can sleep with more than one person.

Its just hard to say what choices I would make in this regard because I've never had that freedom to explore and based upon past conversations with my owner and comments he has made, its unlikely that I will anytime soon. Because of the relationship I'm in, my sexuality is tied up in him. I explore areas as he dictates, but anyway....I don't think it has anything to do with being male or female, except that historically speaking its always been acceptable for men to play while women were ostracized for doing the same. From my small knowledge of history, a lot of that had to do with ensuring that one's heir was really their heir. I don't think it has anything to do with being dominant or submissive either, except that submissives often are not permitted to be with others. It all goes back to societal teachings on what is right and wrong, imo.


best regards,
fate




RiotGirl -> RE: Doms and subs (6/11/2005 12:01:18 PM)

High, thanks for trying to understand. Its not about loving more then one person. Which i did just put into perspective in the midst of trying to sleep last night. As i realised, Parents can love more then one kid, and people can love more then one friend. So i agree we are all capable of loving more then one person. (though i do think there are different depths of love)

Take for the example of me and Master. He is poly and i've no true knowledge of what i am. Its up in the air as i've never tried poly (other then playing guys) For the sake we'll say mono. So he is poly and i am mono. He is dominant and i am submissive. We have an open relationship, on his end. One major reason on my end is the fact that i can NOT FATHOM sleeping with another man. Maybe another girl, but heck no another guy. i am just not capable of it. Even if he'd like me too. Which we tested once, i ended up in the bathroom in tears because i just couldnt. Playing a drinking game with other vanilla's where there are rules and it gets more and more sexual each round. Looking at the rules and what is to be done, i just looked at Master and told him quietly, if another penis goes in my mouth, i will bite it. So i am incapable emotionally to sleep with another man. i am literally not capable of feeling one wit sexual towards another man, and frankly i find it offensive to have their penises, or talk of their penises, or anything about their sexual nature (espcially inregards to me) AROUND me. Seriously i find it insulting, and i'm liable to bite your head off and if you're a friend, i'm liable to not speak to you anymore. LOL i hope i explained enough. i am NOT emotionally capable.

Yet Master is capable to sleep with other women. He wants a poly, its open on his end, ect ect ect. i know he loves me just as much as i love him. i just dont understand why HE is capable and I AM not. Has nothing to do with rights or whatever. It comes to capability. <tongue in cheek> And frankly i find it HIGHLY unfair that he has the capability and i dont. Seriously though. i just dont understand it. i dont get what the differene is.

So is it simply that he's poly? Or is simply that he's a Dom, or a man? Or what?



EmeraldSlave2 -> RE: Doms and subs (6/11/2005 12:36:23 PM)

It's who you are, it's your perspective on what love and intimacy entails, it's an ability to distinguish between enjoying an activity and enjoying a connection.

Neither is better or worse, they just work in very different ways.



RiotGirl -> RE: Doms and subs (6/11/2005 7:23:29 PM)

quote:

Neither is better or worse, they just work in very different ways.


Not asking for better or worse, as i dont see it that way. Personally i think its all of the above. i think it has to do with the fact that he's a man (though i know its the same in women), that he is Dom (able to own more then one possession), and that he is poly.

i am just looking for other's explanations. What YOU all think. Why do YOU think one is capable and one isnt? Different upbringings, different experience levels? i mean there is Definetly a reason why he is capable and i am not.

You, are just saying its just because of who we are? Well that i am sure, but i want a different answer. What part of who we are, makes it so?



RandBcouple -> RE: Doms and subs (6/11/2005 9:32:52 PM)

riotgirl,

i totally "get" your question here. i have wondered the very same thing many times. i tend to believe, tho i don't necessarily want to, that it's a male thing. That men view sex as just sex, and they don't make that connection between sex and love as we do. i am not saying ALL men are that way, or that ALL women are that way, and i am not putting either sex down or anything, just my opinion on this matter. Men, for the most part, seem to be much more physical and women tend to be ruled by their emotions more....again, not ALL women....but IMO, most.

For me, sex is very intimate and i have to be inlove inorder to truly enjoy it. If Master were to have me "serve" another man or woman i'd probably enjoy it simply because i am doing it for Him, for His pleasure, so it comes back to Him, the man i love. i have absolutely no desire to sleep around because i am 100% satisfied at home, so why look elsewhere? This is why i don't fully understand poly relationships....i try to, but i just don't get it. The way i see it is, if the (primary) couple needs or wants to include others in their life, 24/7, doesn't that really mean that one or both aren't satisfied by their mate? Again, i'm not trying to dis poly's or anything, to each their own, and more power to ya, i just wish i could grasp this concept better.

As to your question, RG, i don't necessarily believe it's a Dom or sub thing, and i don't even believe it's always a male thing, there are plenty of exceptions....but i do believe that men tend to be less emotionally connected with sex than women. JMHO.

Good thread btw!

~hugs~
Ruffneck's babygirl



ScooterTrash -> RE: Doms and subs (6/12/2005 6:25:00 AM)

quote:

i have explained this to myself, that it is because the one sleeping around is a man and unattached emotionally to sex, and there for is able to sleep around, while his s/o is unable to.
OK..I am sure someone else will point this out...but, sleeping around is not poly.
quote:

One major reason on my end is the fact that i can NOT FATHOM sleeping with another man. Maybe another girl, but heck no another guy.
This is interesting...what would be the difference here? Why would it be OK for you (emotionally) to be able to have relations with another female and not a male? What it sounds like is that you would be capable of "Poly", or perhaps sleeping around (hmmm) if the right circumstances were there. Of course capability of doing either and actually being poly are two totally different things. Sort of like you "could" eat a particular food, but it's not your preference.
quote:

i am just looking for other's explanations. What YOU all think. Why do YOU think one is capable and one isnt?
I am pretty sure I know where you are coming from here. It all goes back to what you are comfortable with, or even more so, what makes you happy. I could be OK in a mono relationship perhaps, but it's more of a sharing thing that drives the desire to be in a poly relationship and sharing is a two way street. At times I believe it's a means to an end, to be able to fulfill all your needs (and theirs) may require more than one life partner. In my particular case, being married to a Domme does restrict carrying out certain "scene" interactions. I actually need additional partners for the purpose of play, sort of hard to be a Dominant over a Dominant when neither is willing to submit to the other.
quote:

Original- RandBcouple; The way i see it is, if the (primary) couple needs or wants to include others in their life, 24/7, doesn't that really mean that one or both aren't satisfied by their mate?
Satisfied is a touchy way to put this. I am totally satisfied with my mate emotionally, the dynamic of our situation simply limits particular interaction that we both are interested in. So I have to wholeheartedly disagree with this. If it was a simple as that, I have to feel they simply have the wrong partner, poly won't fix what's broken.

In a nutshell, referring back to the OPs original question, as I understand it. NO, I don't think it has anything to do with whether you are Male or Female, or Dom or Sub...I simply think it has to do with what you desire. That is providing you are really talking about poly, or if you sincerely have this aspect of a relationship confused with, as you termed, sleeping around. As stated in other threads, it is simply how you are wired. It's no different than the feeling you get (I am having to assume here) from submitting, it is that satisfying feeling. It really is a two way street, the Dominant who is really into poly, derives satisfaction in making everyone's (ALL involved) dreams and aspirations come true...so NO, it's not all about sex, it's so much more than that.



RiotGirl -> RE: Doms and subs (6/12/2005 8:21:55 AM)

Thanks all for answering with your input. "sleeping around" was just an easy way for me to put it. It is poly. i could go further into detail, but i think it would be inappropriate here.

So its just the wiring? LOLOL i dont like that answer. That answer, i cant fully and completely understand. .... what kind of wiring... why does one have different wiring... hows it come to be... errr i suppose if you could go and explain, specifically, what you mean about "wiring"? Cos i can understand just being "male" or being a "dom" or being "poly" BUT wiring? Heck i know what it is. Wiring is a big word that encompasses alot of things, it hasnt really a specific. For me.

BUT i can use it in a sentence LOLOL "Mono people are wired different then Poly people"

So its a satisfaction thing? They arent satsified with only one partenr? i can understand being satsified.

Interesting? hmmm. The difference between sleeping with a man or a woman? Non really, but i've worked on convincing myself that a woman is okay. Though it will be no easy feat. Emotionally, it is a long history of the way i have been treated by guys. i usually have a 3 foot space issue and they better not touch me. Unless i know the guy really well, i hate to touch them or have them touch me. Yeah that means occasional elbows bumping or them sitting next to me is nt cool. Though luckily for me while being with Master, i've relaxed on it abit. It comes from losing my virginity to rape, around 8 rape attempt in my lifetime (mostly by people i knew), being sexually abused at 15, and then something else that happened at 18. AND then, on top of that, to be with another man is just so incredibly wrong to me. It goes againts everything i believe in and think. To me, its dead wrong. And its not a wrong, that i just "think" its one i feel, deep inside.

And Master once thought to have alittle get togeher, with a friend he trusted. Unfortunetly (and i do feel bad) i was incapable of doing so and ended up in the bathroom crying because i just couldnt. Oh and sleeping with another woman makes me nervous as heck too. (goes back to something at 15) But i content myself that if it were to ever happen, Master would be there right by my side and everything would be okay. As well, i am bi curious so i am interested in exploring it.

i am capable of everything. LOLOL Which is why i said "emotionally" i made the distinction. i have done alot of things in my life, with the attitude of just "doing it" no thought, no emotions, nothing, just doing it. i've always been able to shut down my emotions to get a task done. Unfortunetly even though i could physically do something, i wasnt emotionally capable of handling it. (they come back to bite me later)

But then again it goes against my sense of right and wrong. Which would probably make you wonder about how i am able to accept it with others. My right and wrong is only for me. It is my own code. Just because i feel something, doesnt make it so for others. It only makes it so for me.

Its about loyalty as well. i have a very very strong sense of loyalty. i am loyal to the bone and i will hang on being loyal come heaven or hell, until a person has been deemed undeserving. (and it takes ALOT to get to that point, when its alreayd been given)

Those are some of the many reasons why emotionally i am uncapable. And i suppose i do wonder why its not so for others, i mean, i'm not special, not on my own island. So why does it only hold true for me? Why does it only violate my morals, ethics, loyalty and sense of right?i'm sure it violates alot more, but LOLOL cant think of it right now.

i think this is a multi complex question with a very complex answer. As its not just simply one thing. Though i would like it to be = ) Heh, i'll just sum it ALL up in my mind with what babgirl said. = ) Its all about the emotional connectedness. Even though i know in most poly relationships its about being emotionall connected to all. (i'll ignore that fact and go back to the emotional connectedness, tyvm)




EmeraldSlave2 -> RE: Doms and subs (6/12/2005 10:25:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RiotGirl
So its a satisfaction thing? They arent satsified with only one partenr? i can understand being satsified.

The same way that a homosexual male would not be satisfied with a female. It's not due to any lacking on the partner's part, other than orientations aren't compatible.



RiotGirl -> RE: Doms and subs (6/12/2005 5:31:04 PM)

quote:

The same way that a homosexual male would not be satisfied with a female. It's not due to any lacking on the partner's part, other than orientations aren't compatible.


Sweet, now that i can completely comphrened! i do know it has nothing to do with lacking. But was at a bit of loss what it did have to do with. Thanks.



Leonidas -> RE: Doms and subs (6/14/2005 6:41:05 AM)

Hello RiotGirl,

It's not because you are submissive, it is because you are female. The female of our species has been rewarded (in the evolutionary sense) by attracting and keeping a larger, stronger male to provide for her and protect her when she might be vulnerable to predation (especially when she is pregnant and caring for a baby). This fact has shaped how you view men when it comes to sex. As unfair as it may seem in this age of supposed equality, you bear most of the reproductive cost and risk. You can only bear a relatively limited number of children in your lifetime. There is no advantage for you (again, in the evolutionary sense) to being "slutty". In most cases its actually a disadvantage except when you might entice a man of higher status than you can normally attract to have sex with you, though he won't be willing to form more lasting realtions with you. Even today, women still do that very thing suprisingly frequently. That exception aside, as a woman, you are most likely to have a natural predisposition toward seeking out *one* man for sex.

Boys and girls are different. Men get rewarded (in the evolutionary sense) for very different behavior. A man can physically father far more children in his lifetime than you could ever bear. In short, they are rewarded in the evolutionary sense for seeking out multiple sex partners. There are two basic drives that men have in this regard. One is the drive to possess one or more women and assert their hegemony over them. This is how marriage (both monogamous and polygynous) came to be, and why you'll read in classical literature like the Illiad how men were astonishingly preoccupied with who got what slave girl to take home as a prize. The other drive is the drive to "freeload". To seek out sex with women that they have no social connection to or responsibility for. Of course, the men who have estabilished territory don't like other men freeloading. Which is why we came to such a dim view of adultry. The fact is that the only one who can be sure that a baby is theirs is the woman. At an instinctive level, men know this, and it drives a territorial imparitive in them that can turn nasty quickly.

Our evolution has shaped how we see the world to a greater degree than we like to admit anymore. In fact, in the last century, it was popular and "enlightened" thinking to believe that babies were born a tabula rasa (blank slate) and what they became was purely a function of their socialization. More and more, behavioral scientists are proving that this just isn't so. In the end, we're probably going to have to come to grips with what kind of animal we really are in order to live healthier, happier lives.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Collarchat.com is a member of the Free Speech Coalition
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
3.515625E-02