Wow I'm just full of questions today.

[bambina]

Okay quick question. Do you subs really buy into Doms setting you up for punishment? Like if he said he was going to punish you for being a dirty slut when HE was the one who told YOU to wear that tiny skirt and revealing top in the first place. I mean, something like that kind of bothers me. But I may just not be fully aware of how this lifestyle works. But is that 'Okay'? Or are there others here who raise their eyebrow at men who do that? It's just weird to me. Spanking me for cursing but then you turn around and call me a dirty mouthed fucking slut. Guys. Do you really think that's okay? And I'm not talking only about within relationships.

Sometimes I'll get these one liners 'telling' me (not asking me) that I've been a bad girl. And I have to ask how they could know such a thing. At this point, they don't know what to say. I guess they were expecting me to say "Ohhh yeah I need a spanking real bad". But, when I don't, then usually they go into the "Well you ARE on a BDSM site. Most people here are into that." Yea okay, a lot of subs are indeed into that kind of treatment. but whoever said that subs here wanted that kind of treatment from any and every Dom who came their way? There are submissive people here but not attention whores who will settle for anyone. Or maybe I'm wrong...

Sorry this is more of a rant than a question. But it bothers the hell out of me and I want to know why a lot of you guys seem to think that behavior is acceptable.

[Rachie]

I don't do the whole on line submission thing, so the one liners would get me laughing and have no effect on me at all. I rarely play outside a relationship, so I can't help you there. Just remember in the end,for most people, it's all about what gets you off (with a few exceptions), if it wasn't why would you do it?

However, set up to fail is a fun game when you know it's game. As for punished for being a dirty slut, go ahead punishing me is just going to make me hotter. You just have to get used to "bad" not necessarily meaning "bad".

[Willsubmit2]

I've had my moments where the Dom thought he was going to think he was going to tell me what to do before we got to know each other first...need some ground breaking first and activities that you enjoy, might enjoy and might tolerated that the Dom wants to give....you are never a "bad girl" off the bat...you need to let them know yourself that you've been a bad girl and need a little lesson for it...especially if it's all new...there is such a thing as a breakin in lesson...if I remember more, let you know...

[bambina]

What's a break in lesson?

[IAmCanadian]

Okay quick question. Do you subs really buy into Doms setting you up for punishment? Like if he said he was going to punish you for being a dirty slut when HE was the one who told YOU to wear that tiny skirt and revealing top in the first place.

A woman accepting obviously flawed reasoning for her punishment actually IS sexy to me. What shows more submission than a female throwing her (correct) conclusions out the window and saying "I will accept his way"?

That's just part of the game, as far as I'm concerned. For me, you can boil every action down to this exchange.

DOM: "What is 2+2?"
SUB: "4."
DOM: "From now on, 2+2 is 5."
SUB: "But 2+2 isn't 5..."
DOM: "Heed my words. From now on, 2+2 is 5."
SUB: "Yes, master."
DOM: "Good. Now, what is 2+2?"
SUB: "5!"
DOM: "Wrong. You stupid slut. The calculator shows it is 4. Now I must punish you."

I see no problem with this. The sub says that 2+2 is 5 because she *wants* to be punished. She's throwing away what she knows because that's what her master wishes, and because she wants to feel his firm hand. And that's submission.

- FS

PS: Here's the above conversation with the actual words of your example added in.

DOM: "How do you plan to dress?"
SUB: "Tastefully- subtly. Making the best use of all of my features..."
DOM: "That will never do. I want you to wear this miniskirt, with no panties. Slit it up the side. And no bra."
SUB: "But...that's not a proper way for me to dress in public!"
DOM: "Just do it. I desire it of you."
SUB (hesitant): "Very well, master."

(later)

DOM: "Have you dressed as I instructed?"
SUB: "Yes, master- a short skirt, no bra, no underwear..."
DOM: "What an indecent whore you are! You should be ashamed of yourself. I'm going to slap you around for this!"

[Daumon]

I guess alot of the confusion involves peoples expectations. One liners in general are pretty lame but work for some people. "you have been a bad girl" as an opening line rates with "Hi .. come here often?" Its my opinion you should talk with someone a little bit before you try anything little less one liners. No thye have no idea you have been bad but they are hoping you want to be. <WG>

So a Dom decides to dress a sub up as a 'dirty little slut' and punishing her for it afterwards. I would 'assume' before a Dom got to tell a sub how to dress he would know thats she does or does not like getting spanked. In such a situation I would assume its part of agreed on play. Again, we come back to the differnce between spanking a sub in a playful way or actually punishing her. So lets walk through it.

A Dom knows his sub likes dressing up and showing off her sexy body. so he ask her to dress up and lets her have fun being a hot little flirt. OR a Dom knows his sub is shy and gets humilated being dressed up thisway. So he does it to make her feel watched and hot all night. the humilation keeps her on endge all night and excited for being watched by 'all those men.' The dom enjoys getting to control her by making her dress up that way and probably teasing her all night in many ways.

So now we come to the end of the night and the Dom takes her home. He whispers on the ride home she has been a 'bad girl' dressing up like a slut and showing herself off all night. So the sub gets to think about an expected spanking on the trip home. the stage is set for some fun play at that point. The only way I couls see a Dom being really upset over such a situation would be the sub dressing up at an inappropriate time. Like dressing like a slutty little girl for a formal dinner.

So the best advise for a sub and Dom is to know your partner before you begin play. Make sure you both know the others likes and limits. So if you dont like being told to dress up for your Dom then makes sure they knows it.

From the examples you listed it sounds to me more like a respect issue. you dont like people assuming you are free and available to any silly one liner they toss out. The idea they want to excuse the disrespect by saying ' Well you ARE on a BDSM site. Most people here are into this ... ' does not settle well with you. My feeling is subs are not door mats. If you cannot take the time to ask questions and get to know the needs of another then you dont deserve the subs or Doms respect. So good for you not letting someone push you around.

[bambina]

See that's weird to me Flesh. But I guess that's because I feel punishment should be used as a form of rightful discipline. Like if I did poorly on an essay or test. Or if I arrived 20 minutes late because of poor planning. Or if I didn't do well on something that actually affected me socially or economically. If not, then punishment seems a waste. As if no matter how good I am, I'm still bad. And, at that point I rebel and lose respect for my Dom for not actually teaching me anything. He's just looking for a reason to get his own kicks.

[IAmCanadian]

See that's weird to me Flesh. But I guess that's because I feel punishment should be used as a form of rightful discipline. Like if I did poorly on an essay or test. Or if I arrived 20 minutes late because of poor planning. Or if I didn't do well on something that actually affected me socially or economically. If not, then punishment seems a waste. As if no matter how good I am, I'm still bad. And, at that point I rebel and lose respect for my Dom for not actually teaching me anything. He's just looking for a reason to get his own kicks.

GUY 1: "I gave her twenty hard whacks. Then I dripped candle wax all over her behind, slowly...really letting her anticipate each drop. Once that was over I made her get on all fours and serve as my footrest."

GUY 2: "Jesus, what did she do to deserve that?"

GUY 1: "She was...twenty minutes late!"

Is that any more intellectually honest? ^_^ In rightful discipline the punishment typically fits the crime. We need to remember that sexual punishment and discipline in BDSM isn't really punishment at all a lot of the time- it's a sensation the slave wants to feel. So using it as a consequence for actual failures it treads a dangerous road.

If someone does terribly on a test, I don't think a leading team of psychiatrists would recommend a riding crop as the first punitive measure. There are other ways to solve problems like chronic tardiness or poor work habits.

I'm no psychologist but I think it might invite danger. If you like getting punished for poor results in crucial life situations, it may subconciously encourage you to do less than your best.

Just my two cents.

- FS

[Kuskovian]

I see nothing out of keeping with the responses of the other dominants statements above on this issue and therefore need not comment except with the following:

A breaking in lesson or session, may involve any number of activities. Some interogation of the girls desires, experience level and needs are important; especially if it has not been accomplished earlier.

Also an example of what kind of punishment she will be able to expect for actual infractions is often introduced (sometimes with a physical demonstration so she fully knows the taste of the whip and can back out if need be before things become more intense); if not discussed, as well as a safe word to alliveiate some of the submissive's fears.

The use of "one liners" for picking up a girl is quite frankly not worth my mention.

[DowntownAmber]

Important diiference to note: there is "play" punishment and there is actual punishment.

In role play, you might find it fun to be "punished" for dressing in a slutty outfit, but the punishment administered is understood by both parties to be play and not a learning experience. It's simply a spicy way to lead into a cropping, spanking or humiliation play.

Actual punishment is not supposed to be an activity the one being punished enjoys. If you like spankings, then punishment would be more effective if it were something like getting denied play spankings for a few days or so. If you're late by 20 minutes, punishment might be waking up twenty minutes earlier than you're used to each morning to make your Dom coffee or bring him breakfast in bed etc. Something that makes you aware of your indiscretion and gets you to thinking about how you won't do it again.

[bambina]

Fortunately for me, FS, I'm not one to underachieve in order to get a smack here and there. In my honest opinion, everyone has the potential to do well in any and all things. So if someone doesn't do well on a test (which they had plenty of time to prepare for) then that's cause for them to be punished. But that's kinda only if they aren't sadists. I'm not. So a spanking would genuinely be punishment for me.

[cadence]

I think that the punishments you are referring to are more of the roleplay type and only meant as such.
Instead of a Dominant saying, you were a bad girl, now lets do something you enjoy for being such a naughty slut, he or she uses that typical form of I am going to punish you now for your insolent behaviour, even though I told you to do it anyway.
It's not really a punishment, but more to set the tone to get both parties in tune with things.

A punishment, is not intended to be memorable or enjoyable, it's going to be something you dislike. If a Dominant uses punishments in that aspect that you state, he is not correcting the behaviour very well.

I have been punished in such a fashion, but he was testing my limits and seeing how far I would go with what was asked of me.
If I was given a task I couldn't do, I was "punished" with another task which was just as difficult.
I knew I wasn't really being punished, it wouldn't be really wise of him to punish me with something I couldn't do either.
He was testing limits, seeing how I would react and how far I would go with each task. It made finding my limits more enjoyable.

I have been punished once, and it was a punishment that was effective, and something I definately did not like.
It wasnt' something I enjoyed such as a spanking or some other form of play, it was geared to not be enjoyable on my part.

Punishments can be used as a form of play or when they are warranted are used to correct unacceptable behaviours.
I would think that when you are punished you will know it.

[SilvieA]

Me, personally, I think I would like that... a lot :-) Lol

[MacGuffin]

DOM: "What is 2+2?"
SUB: "4."
DOM: "From now on, 2+2 is 5."
SUB: "But 2+2 isn't 5..."
DOM: "Heed my words. From now on, 2+2 is 5."
SUB: "Yes, master."
DOM: "Good. Now, what is 2+2?"
SUB: "5!"
DOM: "Wrong. You stupid slut. The calculator shows it is 4. Now I must punish you."

I see no problem with this.

I see a problem with this, but it's not a big deal. It's fairly clear that a convo like this is just fooling around in play and the Dom wants to adminster some play punishment. No problem on that level.

The problem is that a Dom's should not fool about with instructions. The Dom said from now on 2+2=5 so it does not matter what the calculator says, the Dom's instructions take precedence.

It's bad leadership and (wo)man management to play around with instructions. The downside is if you make a habit of this when you give a real instruction the subbie can justifiably say "I thought you didn't mean it. I thought you were joking around like you did before". There's plenty of petty faults you can find to use as an excuse for punishment without messing about with instructions.

[annie]

A woman accepting obviously flawed reasoning for her punishment actually IS sexy to me. What shows more submission than a female throwing her (correct) conclusions out the window and saying "I will accept his way"?

That's just part of the game, as far as I'm concerned. For me, you can boil every action down to this exchange.

DOM: "What is 2+2?"
SUB: "4."
DOM: "From now on, 2+2 is 5."
SUB: "But 2+2 isn't 5..."
DOM: "Heed my words. From now on, 2+2 is 5."
SUB: "Yes, master."
DOM: "Good. Now, what is 2+2?"
SUB: "5!"
DOM: "Wrong. You stupid slut. The calculator shows it is 4. Now I must punish you."

I see no problem with this. The sub says that 2+2 is 5 because she *wants* to be punished. She's throwing away what she knows because that's what her master wishes, and because she wants to feel his firm hand. And that's submission.

- FS

PS: Here's the above conversation with the actual words of your example added in.

DOM: "How do you plan to dress?"
SUB: "Tastefully- subtly. Making the best use of all of my features..."
DOM: "That will never do. I want you to wear this miniskirt, with no panties. Slit it up the side. And no bra."
SUB: "But...that's not a proper way for me to dress in public!"
DOM: "Just do it. I desire it of you."
SUB (hesitant): "Very well, master."

(later)

DOM: "Have you dressed as I instructed?"
SUB: "Yes, master- a short skirt, no bra, no underwear..."
DOM: "What an indecent whore you are! You should be ashamed of yourself. I'm going to slap you around for this!"

I see a HUGE problem with this type of behavior and it ISN'T clear as far as I can tell that the Dom is just playing. The sub doesn't say 2+2=5 because she "wants" to be punished... she says it because she WANTS to please the dominate. Exactly how is a sub supposed to learn to trust you and your word if you are setting her up for failure and punishment. I don't care how the conversation is done this is just wrong wrong WRONG! She does it to please and then basically gets slapped for pleasing? That doesn't fly and will just cause confusion and doubt both in her submission and the dominant she is dealing with.

There is a difference between play and real punishment and that is a clear line that needs to be established. That line, imo, is crossed in the above. This is NOT a game and that type of action can cause hurt and confusion! I would much rather feel a firm hand as a reward then for some trumpet up "punishment" that is designed to trick and set me up for failure. In my mind... bottomline, this type of set up is abuse, pure and simple!

[bambina]

I agree with you annie but you sound so bitter about it. It's a sucky system but I wouldn't get mad over it. It works for some people I suppose.

[DIXIE LASS]

[QUOTE=DowntownAmber;714762][SIZE="3"]Important diiference to note: there is "play" punishment and there is actual punishment.

In role play, you might find it fun to be "punished" for dressing in a slutty outfit, but the punishment administered is understood by both parties to be play and not a learning experience. It's simply a spicy way to lead into a cropping, spanking or humiliation play.

Bambino,
Maybe you simply aren't hard-wired to have the "play-punishment kink". I doubt anyone finds every kink erotic. If you don't find it particularly arousing, don't worry about it. It is probably one of the more common turn-ons but that doesn't mean you have to have it, too. This may be why you are questioning the logic of this activity. If it's play only......it's not supposed to be logical. Those who do like it are just looking for an excuse to play the game. They don't care if it is reasonable or fair. For goodness sakes, please don't believe you have to be like everyone else. If you don't like something, shout it to the rooftops. Be your own unitque self. Hope this helps.

Dixie

[sadiej]

i think what you may be experiencing is a confusion between what is play and what is true puishment.

my Master and i may play in many ways. knowing how to please him and what kind of games and thingshe finds arousing and enjoyable is important.

but true punishment is not about play. it is not fun and should not be. it is not somthing that the sub should be confused about. or wonder what she has done wrong. it is a specific tool to bring about discipline, obedience and a change of behavior to please the Master.

i do not find pleasure in punishment. and i see subs that deliberately disobey to be punshed as being manipulative and trying to control their Masters. when i am punished i know it is because i have made my Master unhappy. that is not something i enjoy. any physical pain that is imiparted to me during punishment is not pleasureable and hurts much less than the emotional pain of knowing that i have displeased him.

but if my Master wants to play, and asks me to be "bad". i am most happy to be a part of that and enjoy it with him. but the two are separate and specific times. play and punishment should not be confused.

[SubmissiveDoll]

I'm far too willful to relent to flawed arguments from my Master. I love him dearly, but I would never accept 2 + 2 being 5. I would argue that till I was blue in the face. Why? Because it's wrong. When I disagree with my Master, I'm respectful, but I don't change my opinions or thoughts.

However... Punishments... Yes I do occasionally crave them. I will behave in a less than respectable manner for his attention.

I think some subs want their punishment for their Doms reasons, some of us like to 'cause' them to happen, and others only want them when deserved. It's all in what you like. There is no right or wrong to this particular rant. It's all about preference.

[IAmCanadian]

I see a HUGE problem with this type of behavior and it ISN'T clear as far as I can tell that the Dom is just playing. The sub doesn't say 2+2=5 because she "wants" to be punished... she says it because she WANTS to please the dominate. Exactly how is a sub supposed to learn to trust you and your word if you are setting her up for failure and punishment. I don't care how the conversation is done this is just wrong wrong WRONG! She does it to please and then basically gets slapped for pleasing? That doesn't fly and will just cause confusion and doubt both in her submission and the dominant she is dealing with.

There is a difference between play and real punishment and that is a clear line that needs to be established. That line, imo, is crossed in the above. This is NOT a game and that type of action can cause hurt and confusion! I would much rather feel a firm hand as a reward then for some trumpet up "punishment" that is designed to trick and set me up for failure. In my mind... bottomline, this type of set up is abuse, pure and simple!

Well then don't worry. Obviously the dom is just be playing. Otherwise, he's just an idiot using his sub as a plaything, as you say- but why would a relationship like that ever work? And if the sub isn't fine with it, she should tell him that 2+2 IS in fact four, and to go fuck himself.

The only point I wanted to make is that a sub accepting a dom's incorrect conclusions as fact is a form of submission. The entire point of the post is that such play is intellectually dishonest bullshit, and both parties have to suspend disbelief in order to enjoy it. The dom knows he is wrong but wants to test the submissive's will. The submissive knows the dom is wrong but capitulates anyway. And all is right with the world.

- FS

EDIT: Also, just to make this clear- the 2 + 2 = 5 conversation is just a bare-bones representation of all similar play to show the construction of such a conversation. It is not a conversation I'd expect anyone to actually use. Though hell, I might try it now.

An even simpler example of the same concept:

DOM (in the heat of passion): "You're a little slut!" (NOT TRUE)
SUB (in the heat of passion): "God, yes I am!" (NOT TRUE)

None of this shit is actually true in any demonstrable sense. But I don't think that should serve as a comdemnation of their relationship.

[bambina]

Dixie that is great advice. So many people like to play. I was starting to believe I wasn't a true participant of the BDSM practice. That this lifestyle wasn't for me. I was kind of thinking that play was something you HAD to be into, just like you HAD to enjoy some sort of fetish. Discipline is hot but only when it's deserved. Many already know I have a rape fantasy. I want a man to forcefully pleasure and Dominate me, even against my will and force me to enjoy it (even if I don't want to) and punish me by inflicting pain whenever I don't listen. Like if I was yelping while he penetrated me and he pinched my nipples (which REALLY hurts people) and he told me that, if I don't be quiet, he'll pinch them harder. This forces me to shut up even when I'm in pain. Brilliant. Using pain to make me submit. Who came up with that? :)

[gypsiecowboy]

d-l
once again I enjoy your words. I enjoy your viewpoint. I enjoy you.

thank you for being

now tell, how do you suggest that people learning each other clue each other in about where they understand play and real to begin and end... when push becomes shove and therefore causes rejection...???

GypsieCowboy

[yummysubmummy]

I don't know about the 2+2 = 5 scenario (and wouldn't be wasting my time with one-liners from ranDoms) but I have never had a problem differentiating between 'play punishment' and 'real'. His disappointment is enough punishment for me so that I will remember not to do it again. Him withholding his attention from me or the words 'you disappoint me' would hurt more than any physical punishment he would want to inflict on me anyway.

[Polaris]

Well then don't worry. Obviously the dom is just be playing. Otherwise, he's just an idiot using his sub as a plaything, as you say- but why would a relationship like that ever work? And if the sub isn't fine with it, she should tell him that 2+2 IS in fact four, and to go fuck himself.

The only point I wanted to make is that a sub accepting a dom's incorrect conclusions as fact is a form of submission. The entire point of the post is that such play is intellectually dishonest bullshit, and both parties have to suspend disbelief in order to enjoy it. The dom knows he is wrong but wants to test the submissive's will. The submissive knows the dom is wrong but capitulates anyway. And all is right with the world.


That's simply not how the submissive mindset works, at least mine doesn't work that way. Firstly, I would NEVER tell him to go fuck himself under ANY circumstances. How respectless is that? So if I don't want to get punished I just tell my dom/master/whatever term you prefer to go fuck himself?? That doesn't make any sense to me, sorry.

If he says 2+2=5 then 2+2 is 5 until he tells me differently. He gets to test my will, I submit, all is right in the world.

Now, if he asks me "what is 2+2" it is 5, simple as that. If it's suddenly 4 again, how am I supposed to know? Why do I get punished for doing what has been established as having to be done before? This, to me, is playing mind-games and it would confuse and devastate me. I would try to figure out where I missed that one vital clue, where I failed to please, where I managed to mess up without even realising it. To me, such a scenerio would unsettle me, upset me, damage me. If this is something you and your partner agree on and find arousing, fine. But -- as others said before -- it is in no way a kind of thing that works for all submissives. It is, in fact, at least potentially harmful and that should be kept in mind.

As far as the other example is concerned:


An even simpler example of the same concept:

DOM (in the heat of passion): "You're a little slut!" (NOT TRUE)
SUB (in the heat of passion): "God, yes I am!" (NOT TRUE)


This is not the same concept. The same concept would be something like that:

DOM: You're a little slut!
SUB: I'm not a little slut! Why would you say so?
DOM: You're a little slut. What are you?
SUB: I'm a little slut.
DOM: No, you aren't. I'll have to punish you for that.

The problem here is not the acceptance of a more or less obviously faulty statement. The problem is the contradiction. To me, this is like being punished for submitting -- and that's nothing I would want in a BDSM oriented relationship. And now I've rambled long enough I think :)

[IAmCanadian]

That's simply not how the submissive mindset works, at least mine doesn't work that way. Firstly, I would NEVER tell him to go fuck himself under ANY circumstances. How respectless is that? So if I don't want to get punished I just tell my dom/master/whatever term you prefer to go fuck himself?? That doesn't make any sense to me, sorry.

Relax, I was joking. Replace "go fuck yourself" with whatever objection you want. The point is that the sub would certainly not allow herself to be subjected to such nonsense.




If he says 2+2=5 then 2+2 is 5 until he tells me differently. He gets to test my will, I submit, all is right in the world.

Now, if he asks me "what is 2+2" it is 5, simple as that. If it's suddenly 4 again, how am I supposed to know? Why do I get punished for doing what has been established as having to be done before?


For the same reason that a master might punish a slave for sluttiness even if he was the one who told her to dress that way. Because it's part of an elaborate pretense, the goal of which is to set the stage for discipline as pleasure.




This is not the same concept.

It is the same concept, it has different construction. What you did was change the construction back to the original, making it non-sensical.

- FS

[IAmCanadian]

The problem is that a Dom's should not fool about with instructions. The Dom said from now on 2+2=5 so it does not matter what the calculator says, the Dom's instructions take precedence.


The calculator represents the accepted norm in this scenario. It works exactly like the acceptable dress standards by which the dom in the very first post in this thread judges his sub to be a slut. The accepted standard of female dress suggests that the sub is dressed like a slattern or common whore. So she's a "bad girl" even though it was her dom who wanted her to dress this way.

I see the problem, though. It is easily fixed. Replace "The calculator says it is four" with "The calculator says it SHOULD BE four." Then it works almost exactly the same way. That said, the
2 + 2 = 5 example was never meant to be reasonable. It was meant to show that the dom is intentionally unreasonable...and it doesn't matter because it's all a pretext to
initiate some hot fucking. Subs who say they would object to a Dom doing this are free to find a Dom who doesn't like this sort of play.

- FS

[annie]

Relax, I was joking. Replace "go fuck yourself" with whatever objection you want. The point is that the sub would certainly not allow herself to be subjected to such nonsense.

It is incorrect to assume that a sub would not allow herself to be subjected to such nonsense. Someone who is new, has little to no experience, and has been told to "submit" in any form, who hasn't had time to grow into her submission, who has read assorted fantasies and doesn't know the realities, etc. or someone with low self esteem would/could easily fall into this trap. At that point they could be turned off entirely by the entire concept of submission due to the confusion and mistrust created by such a scenario.


For the same reason that a master might punish a slave for sluttiness even if he was the one who told her to dress that way. Because it's part of an elaborate pretense, the goal of which is to set the stage for discipline as pleasure.

As stated before there is a different between being disciplined for a wrong and punished in play. And as stated before that is a fine line that has to be made very clear. That seems to be part of the equation that is being missed. None of this is a pretense for some. If that works for others that is fine, as long as BOTH parties are aware of the rules and how the "game" or roleplay at that point is to be played out. Otherwise, actions such as this can and does cause harm to many a good sub.

[annie]

Concept 1:


PS: Here's the above conversation with the actual words of your example added in.

DOM: "How do you plan to dress?"
SUB: "Tastefully- subtly. Making the best use of all of my features..."
DOM: "That will never do. I want you to wear this miniskirt, with no panties. Slit it up the side. And no bra."
SUB: "But...that's not a proper way for me to dress in public!"
DOM: "Just do it. I desire it of you."
SUB (hesitant): "Very well, master."

(later)

DOM: "Have you dressed as I instructed?"
SUB: "Yes, master- a short skirt, no bra, no underwear..."
DOM: "What an indecent whore you are! You should be ashamed of yourself. I'm going to slap you around for this!"

Concept 2:


An even simpler example of the same concept:

DOM (in the heat of passion): "You're a little slut!" (NOT TRUE)
SUB (in the heat of passion): "God, yes I am!" (NOT TRUE)


Concept 3:


As far as the other example is concerned:

This is not the same concept. The same concept would be something like that:
DOM: You're a little slut!
SUB: I'm not a little slut! Why would you say so?
DOM: You're a little slut. What are you?
SUB: I'm a little slut.
DOM: No, you aren't. I'll have to punish you for that.




It is the same concept, it has different construction. What you did was change the construction back to the original, making it non-sensical.
- FS

Concept 1 and 3 are the same. Which was exactly Polaris' point. Both concepts are punishing the sub for agreeing or doing as instructed by the Dominate without the previous set up that it is in play or fun. Hence, punishing/disciplining a sub for following orders. Which, as all ready stated, does and will harm a submissive.

Concept 2 is different, based on the timing of when and how it happens. And in the concept, be it true or not, the sub is agreeing completely with the dominate, in the heat of her submission, and not being punished for that agreement.

Some may not see the difference but to many (and probably most) a submissive there is a HUGE difference.

And FS... you're two examples do not have the same construction for the reasons stated above. And if they supposedly do then, by your own admission, Polaris did nothing more then restate your first example now making the concept nonsensical? That is the point that has been trying to be made. Punishing a sub, in anything other then clearly defined play, for following orders is nonsense, period.

[IAmCanadian]

Concept 1 and 3 are the same.

Concept 1 ends with the subject being punished for abnormal behaviour. Concept 3 ends with the subject being punished for normal behaviour.
Maybe the difficulty here is the use of the word "concept" and "construction". By sharing a concept, I mean that the example illustrates the same point as the former, even if it is in a different way.

Honestly, it couldn't matter less. The only point I have been trying to make, this entire time, is that truth is not a hard and fast rule when discipline is to be handed down. Often, an intellectually dishonest sequence of statements or orders is a pretense for play.


Concept 2 is different.

In each case the dom is making an untrue statement to which the sub capitulates for the purposes of sexual enjoyment. That's all I've ever been concerned with, because that was the only point I was making.


Punishing a sub, in anything other then clearly defined play, for following orders is nonsense, period.

I 100% agree, and have agreed with that from the beginning. In fact, I never argued against it. The entire point of my very first post in this thread was that it WAS nonsense, but in the context of play it was harmless nonsense.


It is incorrect to assume that a sub would not allow herself to be subjected to such nonsense. Someone who is new, has little to no experience, and has been told to "submit" in any form, who hasn't had time to grow into her submission, who has read assorted fantasies and doesn't know the realities, etc. or someone with low self esteem would/could easily fall into this trap. At that point they could be turned off entirely by the entire concept of submission due to the confusion and mistrust created by such a scenario.

I know. But I'm not going to qualify every statement I make, in every post, with: "Unless the sub is inexperienced or disagrees, in which case the Dom should do something different that she would like." The caveat "unless the sub is inexperienced, or doesn't like that sort of thing" should be understood.


As stated before there is a different between being disciplined for a wrong and punished in play. And as stated before that is a fine line that has to be made very clear. That seems to be part of the equation that is being missed.

I understand that, and have always understood. I never said anything to the contrary. The first post of this thread was someone asking why Doms might do a certain thing. I offered a rationalization: "For the purposes of play." My views are as simple as that. If you want to point out that the 2+2=5 construction holds true only for play, be my guest. I don't see why you have to reply to my posts to do it, though, since I agree with you wholeheartedly.

- FS

[Polaris]

I don't mean to be a pain, and I don't mean to attack anyone...but I have some serious trouble wrapping my brain about these concepts (or constructions)...


Concept 1 ends with the subject being punished for abnormal behaviour. Concept 3 ends with the subject being punished for normal behaviour.
Maybe the difficulty here is the use of the word "concept" and "construction". By sharing a concept, I mean that the example illustrates the same point as the former, even if it is in a different way.

So, umm, dressing the way your dominant demands/desires of you is abnormal behaviour? Agreeing that you are a slut if your dominant demands/desires is normal behaviour?



Honestly, it couldn't matter less. The only point I have been trying to make, this entire time, is that truth is not a hard and fast rule when discipline is to be handed down. Often, an intellectually dishonest sequence of statements or orders is a pretense for play.

Again, if this is what works for you that's fine -- as long as everybody involved knows the rules to play the game, as annie so eloquently put it. And again -- are we talking about discipline or play punishments? I'm personally not a big fan of play punishments, simply because he can do this if he chooses to do it simply because he wants to...but I can see why it is fun for others. I would be very careful, however, as far as 'real' punishments are concerned. Don't punish your sub for things she/he didn't do wrong. If you do I'll guarantee that sooner or later you'll get responses that are, indeed, non-sensical and definitely undesired. So, it matters. A lot. At least to some of us, apparently.

I agree that truth is not a hard and fast rule. Still, there is a big difference between what you call a 'dishonest sequence of statements or orders' as a 'pretense for play' and being punished for reacting to this dishonest sequence in a logical, reasonable way. It is not the 'you're a little slut' part that bothers me here. It is the 'I'm going to punish you for agreeing with me' part that gets to me. I'm afraid I can't put it any better than I already did, so I'll just stop my ramblings....for now! :d

[IAmCanadian]

So, umm, dressing the way your dominant demands/desires of you is abnormal behaviour? Agreeing that you are a slut if your dominant demands/desires is normal behaviour?

Dressing like a slut is abnormal for the bulk of society. Not referring to oneself as a slut is in line with normal society. That was the only point of those two statements. It was not a commentary on the behaviour of subs, or their relationships with their masters.


Again, if this is what works for you that's fine -- as long as everybody involved knows the rules to play the game, as annie so eloquently put it. And again -- are we talking about discipline or play punishments?

*I* am talking about faux punishments for imagined infractions for the fake purposes of setting a scene. I explained that the Dom's desire to participate in these was likely the reason for the sorts of whispers/messages the original poster was receiving.

Since then, people keep responding to my posts as if I'm making blanket statements about all discipline, and then proceeding to reiterate again that there is a difference between play punishment and real discipline, as if I didn't understand it.



I agree that truth is not a hard and fast rule. Still, there is a big difference between what you call a 'dishonest sequence of statements or orders' as a 'pretense for play' and being punished for reacting to this dishonest sequence in a logical, reasonable way.

There it is again. I agree with this and have agreed with it since I first posted.


It is not the 'you're a little slut' part that bothers me here. It is the 'I'm going to punish you for agreeing with me' part that gets to me. I'm afraid I can't put it any better than I already did, so I'll just stop my ramblings....for now! :d

Yes. Legitimately punishing a sub for agreeing with him is stupid behaviour on the part of the dom, and a sub should look into leaving him if he continues to do it despite her objections. It is cruel, dishonest mental trickery. I continue to agree with this.

And people continue to reply to my posts to say it.

I have to take a very hard look at how I am communicating here to find where what I am saying is breaking down. Maybe my use of the word "punishment" is wrong. When *I* say punishment in this thread, I mean the sort of "punishment" a sub would find orgasmic, titillating, a positive experience. Positive reinforcement. The opposite of an actual, legitimate punishment. A sex act masquerading as a punishment. I'm sorry if I've just been confusing everyone this entire time. I thought I was being really clear, but I guess I've overestimated my ability to communicate, not knowing the full implications of some terminology.

- FS

[Polaris]

Thanks for clarifying, FS. It was not my intention to put you in any drawer at all, and I apologise if this is the impression I left. I believe we've been talking cross-purposes a little bit. No harm (or judgement) intended, though! :) :wave:

[Ozme52]

See that's weird to me Flesh. But I guess that's because I feel punishment should be used as a form of rightful discipline. Like if I did poorly on an essay or test. Or if I arrived 20 minutes late because of poor planning. Or if I didn't do well on something that actually affected me socially or economically. If not, then punishment seems a waste. As if no matter how good I am, I'm still bad. And, at that point I rebel and lose respect for my Dom for not actually teaching me anything. He's just looking for a reason to get his own kicks.


Well that's the problem that we (often me too) use the one word for both the need to deal with serious lapses and offenses... and for play.

Most of the above examples are about playing... and are therefore acceptable excuses for "punishment".

[MacGuffin]

It is not the 'you're a little slut' part that bothers me here. It is the 'I'm going to punish you for agreeing with me' part that gets to me. I'm afraid I can't put it any better than I already did, so I'll just stop my ramblings....for now! :d

I agree with you. The Dom should be encouraging and rewarding obedience and the sub in the 2+2=5 case obeyed the Dom's command. In my view there are some basic principles - laws if you will - you should not play around with to get your jollies. There is no need to, the Dom could quite easily have said "you answered too slow" or anything that did not compromise the integrety of instructions and obedience, the cornerstones of Ds.

I would have caught the sub by handing her a calculator and asking her to calculate 1852279*2 and give me back the calcultator. Then I hold the calculator upside down and when I find the numbers seems to spell the word "ASShOLE" I go ballistic and accuse her of insulting me. Other "magical" numbers that looks like words are:

83507 LOSER
558.618 BIg.ASS
5318008 BOOBIES

Do all of them on her and she's got to give up. I mean one insult you can forgive but four in a row, no way can the Dom stand for that.

[denuseri]

It is rather dificult to read some statements made with text alone and corectly interpet them. As the human mind in normal everyday conversation (when in person) allows for the reading of body posture, facial expression and voice inflection we are not recieveing all the information.

Which makes it all to easy for us to assume someone is saying one thing when they are in fact saying another, or take offence at the wording of any given statement.

I would hope we all can keep that in mind, especially when "grilling" a new member. Anyone thats posted in the forums a lot knows we all have typed something others misunderstood and had our day on the duck pond being shot at.

Such examples of testing a submissives willingness to suspend disbelief are a common form of both play and training used by many dominants. Not only in the word of bdsm but also in the training of our own troops (at least according to my owner)for one example.

The main difference being that when in training, one isnt punished for suspending her disbelief but is instead rewarded for doing so. (unless the purpose of the training is being mixed in with the play) which is fine so long as the submissive knows this on an intelectual level, or it has been discussed beforehand. A dominant can indeed mess a submisive up if he isnt careful enough to make sure she isnt misunderstanding what is going on. Just becuase they didnt say that they are taking such care in thier post doesnt mean they dont.

Infantry forces for instance must be taught to "reverse" the teachings of both thier church (if they have one) and or common societal conseptions conserning physical violence towards the individual, so that when in actual combat they can "Kill" the enemy as opposed to freezing up.

Submissives sometimes must also learn to reverse thier own thinking in reguards to what is and is not acceptale. Society tells us our whole lives we are a slut or worse if we do or even think certian things. For some of us to really thrive in our submission (which the vast majority of society frowns upon) we too must be able to suspend disbelief, we sometimes must be able to take a word like slut and turn it around on itself.

There are many many paths to submission. Some steeper than others, just as some are more rewarding.