New Discussion: What's an internet sub for?

I am an online sub, and am still relatively new to the whole thing.
I have not had any bad experiences, but have had many difficulties with the whole concept of being an online sub.
I do have an online Master but, he is not a Dom in the sense that I need him to be. Without getting into the hows and whys of things, for now we offer each other what we need, and are satisfied with that.

I can go into a chat room and call anyone at that moment in time Master or Sir, but in retrospect, it is only for that moment, sometimes I get the need to play and that satiates whatever itch I am having.
To be able to be an online sub for anyone, I would need to get to know the other person on a much more personal level, and for me that takes awhile to do.

I have tried the Dom/sub relationship online, but cannot seem to connect with anyone.
I have had many Dom's task me first and offer to be my Master without ever getting to know me or understand how I click. Then again I may misconstrue myself and I could be just a very complicated person in general.

So to sum up my thoughts, to have or to be an online sub, you need the connection, and communication to achieve what you want, and as Sir_Russell stated you need to have limits and conditions discussed beforehand.

You had a negative experience, but you can learn from that and move on to more positive ones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

May I say how impressed I am with your thoughtful replies, and illustrations of how you live them. Thank-you all.

But are there no bad experiences? Is mine really the worst (I only suffered damaged pride ... on a very low level)?

---

Oh yes I think almost everyone has bad experiences my first master decided because I wouldn't turn real life I was not what he wanted and he dropped me in a single day. I'd allowed myself to invest way to much in a man I'd never met. But now that it's been six months and I'm over the grieving I know I'd would probably do it again.

I'd just be a bit more careful in my inital discussions about my need to stay cyber to protect my marriage. I went into the second very clear about my limits and when it ended (because of my need to work exclusivly on my vanilla writing) it ended peacefully. A parting in M/s but still friends.

I'd suggest Sir Russell's questions to anyone thinking about going into a relationship. The more you know about each other the better you can mesh as M/s.

Sbbe

You really need to get to know the person 1st before you enter any kind of relationship...online or Realtime.

Benz and I have been speaking online now for nearly 3 years, for 2 of those years we sat and talked with one another via msn and email and a different chatroom and occassionally via cam.
Last year we went 1 step further.....our love efor each other just increased 10 fold and in Aug I offered the greatest gift one can ever do..my submission which he accepted. My collar arrived in the post in time for my birthday...and via confernce call i placed the collar round my neck...but was Benz hands that was there....if you know what i mean.
Benz flew to England for christmas and new year and the trip just totally confirmed what we already knew....smiles. In fact made us stronger and more determinded.

We talked every single day via conferenace and vidio call...by telephone and by text message. not a day goes by without any form of voice communication. And when Benz is away..... we can talk 4-5 times a day every day..when he is at home....lmao the cams are never off...he sees what i am doing at all times....as if he is actually here.

Come end of the year though...things are changing. Myself and my children will be emigrating to Australia to be with him...and so I can rightfully take myself at his left side

cg

Hmmmmmmm - wonderful ceegee.

Big big smiles.

cariad

smiles ty carid

the way I look at it is that he is away from home...and is work related that is how I cope.
I am lucky that I was born into the navy and one gets used to their men/women being away for long periods of time....my father ex navy now...kids father is navy....is the only life I have ever known. So I have the added advantage of knowing how to cope and how to deal with long distance. Altho saying that....it is still hard. Benz goes to work...i go to bed and vice versa.... chuckles is like he works the night shift while i sleeping lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceegee{Benz}

You really need to get to know the person 1st before you enter any kind of relationship...online or Realtime.

---

I'm not really into the on-line scene and I don't judge at all. I did some Internet dating for a while and found a couple of problems with it. It's not a very good way to get to know a person, is it? I personally, suck at assesing a persons character without looking into their eyes when they say it. I mean, up close and in person. Just reading somebodies opinion really doesn't tell me their relationship with the opinion.

I spoke to a girl for about a year. I wasn't really pursuing her. Mostly just some on-line flirting. We seemed to like each other and had a lot in common. She had some pictures up and she looked really good in them. I'm a physical kind of guy. I need physical attration for it to work for me. Quite by chance I met her at a party....jeeez she was aestheticaly challenged. Which is another problem.

Not to mention stories I've heard of people out-right lying.

The thing is that I would never invest time to build an on-line relationship if I hadn't allready met the person. We know we are compatible, ie we've allready had sex at least once. Sex is like that. I don't think I'm unique. Talking about it, just doesn't cut it. I think we can all agree that sex is important. Unless we've experienced each other sexually we just haven't got a clue about so many things.

Unless the plan is to keep it in fantasy land off-course...but that's not my thing. The on-line flirting would for me just be step one. A step I'd prefer to keep as short as possible.

What I'm trying to say is that I don't really get it. Even after reading the posts made here, I still don't get why keeping it going for years without meeting? Isn't that the goal?

edit: ...and even if both people told only the truth, are really soul mates, find each other phsically attractive doesn't mean in the least that they will stand each others company for any length of time. Our annoying qualities need to be experienced in person.

Thank-you, Tom:

"What I'm trying to say is that I don't really get it. Even after reading the posts made here, I'm still none the wiser what it's for." I think I am a bit wiser now. Online is yet another way to develop a relationship, whether it blossom or wither in time. If it withers, it was likely to have done so in real life too. Just like any other relationship it will stand or fall on its own merits. I accept that.

But Tom made another point, only once referred to by anyone else (Warbaby), and then only in passing: the sex. (OK, I think for Sir Russell, sex is so obvious, it's a given!) This is a BDSM site, so doesn't sex come into it? Control <--> sex <--> submission.

For Tom, sex is fundamental and I can see that too. This was an unformed thought that partly prompted my original post - if the sex isn't real, then it's just masturbation: if the control isn't real, then there isn't really any true submission. For people like Tom, then, an online sub can never be ideal.

Sir Russell disagrees. Or rather, he differs from Tom, and disagrees with me. He is happy with RL and OL. He says his OL control is real, and I infer the sex is satisfactory too. (Is there a delicate way to say that? I mean no offence.) And this is achieved by hard vetting so that only suitable subs who are totally honest and whom he trusts are accepted.

I think I am coming to the view that OL relationships can be good - wonderful even - but are always less than RL Ceegee, for example, will fulfil her relationship when she at last reaches Oz. Sbbe and cadence use OL to fill gaps in RL (I hope I understood that right).

But OL does something that RL doesn't do - at least, not nearly so easily. It allows people to gain experiences denied to them elsewhere. There's no way, for example that I can have a real life BDSM experience, but I can look for it here. Thus, like sbbe and cadence, I have a gap in my real life that OL may satisfy, and, clearly, that is what an online sub is for.

smiles....for part our S&m relationship boils down to powerful mind control....the Dominance over another thru the mind. altho I DO miss the physical interaction (and is something this lilone really needs)...but that will to wait for now. But one has to also remember that I am still my Master's slave....regardless where I am in the world and everything I do OL or RT still reflects on him

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceegee{Benz}

smiles....for part our S&m relationship boils down to powerful mind control....the Dominance over another thru the mind. altho I DO miss the physical interaction (and is something this lilone really needs)...but that will to wait for now. But one has to also remember that I am still my Master's slave....regardless where I am in the world and everything I do OL or RT still reflects on him

---

I'm sorry if I seemed judgemental. I'm not really. I just want to understand. If I understand your situation correctly, OL isn't and wasn't your first choice. It's simply down to it not being practicly doable for you to meet the love in your life at all any other way, right? So it's not a question of you prefering OL, but simply down to available options. Which is a completly different bag of tricks. You have met Benz in reality right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warbaby1943

First off even though on line it is still real life.

---

Perfect, perfecter and more perfectly stated, Warbaby.

I live with my husband, so aside from the advice and counsel (and a smidge of fun, flirty chat) that I get online, I am living my D/s experience up close and personal, which is more complicated than I could have imagined. My husband would say it's even more so than that.

I realize my next comment isn't exactly the answer sought, but I'm gonna go ahead and say that meeting my new friends here online has been a very real experience for me. That these new relationships aren't face-to-face ('cept for Red 'cause we live kinda close (love that girl!), doesn't take away that I have been influenced and touched in no other way than real and personal and meaningful. But I can also understand why it's difficult to understand just how that can be.

MMI, you are impressed by all these thoughtful replies? Stick around for a few and you'll see that this is just the way it is here. It's so great! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomOfSweden

I'm sorry if I seemed judgemental. I'm not really. I just want to understand. If I understand your situation correctly, OL isn't and wasn't your first choice. It's simply down to it not being practicly doable for you to meet the love in your life at all any other way, right? So it's not a question of you prefering OL, but simply down to available options. Which is a completly different bag of tricks. You have met Benz in reality right?

---

yes we have met in RT...this xmas just gone he flew over for a whole month

Don't you just love the no b.s. incites Warbaby brings to these discussions?

As someone who has been in the scene for many years, and who has been married to someone who I love more every day, it really has become a balancing act. My wife knew of my lifestyle when she married me, and she agreed that she would not object to me playing with another sub, as long as she knew about it. No sneaking around! That means in r/l or on the internet.

Like Warbaby said, even if it is on-line, a relationship is still real. The internet allows us to have a relationship with someone on another continent, but it's all really a mind game. Since the mind is the most devious of sex organs, it allows us to do just about anything.

But we must be careful. A breakup can be devastating as SBBE has stated. With that in mind, yes I like to role play as evidenced by the two I'm involved with now. However, I am not going to risk my marriage by getting involved in a serious D/s relationship with anyone, either in r/l or in cyber.

I've EVERY intention of sticking around, tessa, and to meeting you all eventually.

:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

Thank-you, Tom:

"What I'm trying to say is that I don't really get it. Even after reading the posts made here, I'm still none the wiser what it's for." I think I am a bit wiser now. Online is yet another way to develop a relationship, whether it blossom or wither in time. If it withers, it was likely to have done so in real life too. Just like any other relationship it will stand or fall on its own merits. I accept that.

But Tom made another point, only once referred to by anyone else (Warbaby), and then only in passing: the sex. (OK, I think for Sir Russell, sex is so obvious, it's a given!) This is a BDSM site, so doesn't sex come into it? Control <--> sex <--> submission.

For Tom, sex is fundamental and I can see that too. This was an unformed thought that partly prompted my original post - if the sex isn't real, then it's just masturbation: if the control isn't real, then there isn't really any true submission. For people like Tom, then, an online sub can never be ideal.

Sir Russell disagrees. Or rather, he differs from Tom, and disagrees with me. He is happy with RL and OL. He says his OL control is real, and I infer the sex is satisfactory too. (Is there a delicate way to say that? I mean no offence.) And this is achieved by hard vetting so that only suitable subs who are totally honest and whom he trusts are accepted.

I think I am coming to the view that OL relationships can be good - wonderful even - but are always less than RL Ceegee, for example, will fulfil her relationship when she at last reaches Oz. Sbbe and cadence use OL to fill gaps in RL (I hope I understood that right).

But OL does something that RL doesn't do - at least, not nearly so easily. It allows people to gain experiences denied to them elsewhere. There's no way, for example that I can have a real life BDSM experience, but I can look for it here. Thus, like sbbe and cadence, I have a gap in my real life that OL may satisfy, and, clearly, that is what an online sub is for.

---

For some, and I don't think I am alone, BDSM does not have to involve sex. It can be more about submission and control then sex. If it s all about sex for some then that is all well and good for them. It doesn't make it wrong for others where no actual sex is involved. We are all different remember.

Some still don't seem to get the concept that on line is still happening in your real life. Your not dreaming it and looking at it from afar, you are living it. Every single minute of it is real. The emotions, the feelings, the submissions, the control, and especially the love are all very real and happening in real life.

You asked for reasons for on line relationships. I and others have tried to point out some. Though you may not agree with the reasons given, they are valid to those offering them.

Hey wait a minute. The expression RL as in "Real Life" is just a joke phrase that has entered common word usage on the Internet. It just means anything that isn't on-line. It doesn't in the least imply that life on-line isn't real. That's part of the joke.

Taking jokes litteraly is um....a bit special...Or maybe someone got a humour tumour.

I'm sure nobody thinks that the people posting aren't real people. I promise you all that I am very much a real person, and anything I do is really real. For real.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomOfSweden

Hey wait a minute. The expression RL as in "Real Life" is just a joke phrase that has entered common word usage on the Internet. It just means anything that isn't on-line. It doesn't in the least imply that life on-line isn't real. That's part of the joke.

Taking jokes litteraly is um....a bit special...Or maybe someone got a humour tumour.

I'm sure nobody thinks that the people posting aren't real people. I promise you all that I am very much a real person, and anything I do is really real. For real.

---

I don't see Real Life or on line life as being a joking matter which ever you want to use. Nor do I see the joke of using it to define anything. I do see a definite destination between real life meaning to have D/s 24/7 or even casual and on line life meaning by some that it is less than real life experience.

I always thought I was fairly good at getting jokes but if this is a joke it may need explaining to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warbaby1943

BDSM does not have to involve sex. It can be more about submission and control then sex. If it s all about sex for some then that is all well and good for them.

---

Now it's down to semantics. I will argue that BDSM is always and only about sex. It may just be that I have a wider definition of sex. It can be sex even though private parts aren't deposited into fleshy cavities. Sex for me happens first and fore most in the head. I do think that a slave submitting is in every way a sexual act, on- or off-line.

My problem is the reciept. How do I know the communication is working. It's hard enough even with two people in the same room. I had comunication issues with my ex-wife even after six and a half years of marriage. It may be that I have some serious inadequesies in comunication....but yeah...you know... to continue using the expression.... Maybe I'm not unique.

Me personally, over the net I tend to project a lot. Fill in the blanks with wishfull thinking. Since I know I have this tendancy, I fight it. But I often notice it sneaking in.

Comunication is always extremly hard in any setting. Why make it any more difficult?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warbaby1943

I don't see Real Life or on line life as being a joking matter which ever you want to use. Nor do I see the joke of using it to define anything. I do see a definite destination between real life meaning to have D/s 24/7 or even casual and on line life meaning by some that it is less than real life experience.

I always thought I was fairly good at getting jokes but if this is a joke it may need explaining to me.

---

It comes from the very old pre-Internet expression of "not having a life", which the computer nerds of old where accused of not having. It is based on a joke whether you like it or not. Here's the wiki.

I promise that the expression doesn't imply that people with on-line romances aren't having real romances.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomOfSweden

It comes from the very old pre-Internet expression of "not having a life", which the computer nerds of old where accused of not having. It is based on a joke whether you like it or not. Here's the wiki.

I promise that the expression doesn't imply that people with on-line romances aren't having real romances.

---

Followed the link and still fail to see the joke or any reference to a joke. I guess we all have different senses of humor, not to mention opinions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warbaby1943

Followed the link and still fail to see the joke or any reference to a joke. I guess we all have different senses of humor, not to mention opinions.

---

I didn't say it was my humour. I just happen to know how the expression came to be, even though it isn't covered in the wiki. The wiki aptly explains it's usages

Quote:

---

Online

The abbreviation RL stands for "real life", with the meaning "not on the Internet." For example, one can speak of meeting in RL someone whom one has met in chat or on an Internet forum, or of an inability to use the Internet for a time due to "RL problems".

---

See? It doesn't imply anything other than that RL is not on the Internet. There's no implicit judgement made about people using the Internet.

it just feels right, and cuz i dont think i could ever find... any person like my sir.. near!. and i couldnt imagine.. what would i do if i didnt had him!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomOfSweden

I didn't say it was my humour. I just happen to know how the expression came to be, even though it isn't covered in the wiki. The wiki aptly explains it's usages



See? It doesn't imply anything other than that RL is not on the Internet. There's no implicit judgement made about using the Internet.

---

I read it already from your link. You implied or out right said it was joke. I still don't see the joke whether it is your humor or not, I see no joke even implied in these definitions.

Since we are well off topic talking about a "joke," or lack of one, I won't bother with any more replies unless I feel it address the subject at hand which is "What's An Internet Sub For?" To me my sub is part of my real life and fills a gap of what is missing in my off line life. And she fills it nicely with love and submission that makes us both happy. Bottom line, that is all that is important, being happy with your circumstances.

I agree with you both Warbaby and Tom, a while ago a bright sub said she objected to the term RL and suggested F2F which can be taken as either face to face or flesh to flesh.

There are those that meet only to play (Tops and bottoms) little exchange of themselves and not much of a comitment involved. To me that is fantasy and actually a lot less of life then on the internet between 2 people that care about each and live the life through tasks. Allowing the Dom to assist in the sub growth and the sub finding the joy of being controlled.

Russell

OK ... I agree the past few posts drifted off topic a bit - but heigh-ho - we in this site should never worry about a little deviation, should we? And I wanted to provoke debate.

I agree with Tom, sex is prime when it comes to BDSM, but the form it takes might not be obvious. Sex is a GOOD thing and is prime in ordinary life too. It's just that in BDSM, sex has a broader range. And yes, it is mostly mental. Sex without the psychological aspect, even in real life, is animal lust. Possibly, BDSM without a sexual or a caring attitude is simply torture/humiliation.

So which is cyber sex? Is it just obtaining basic relief by wanking to an erotic picture or scene or by having some sub talk dirty ... or by making the sub masturbate him/herself? Or is it something else, fulfilling. arousing and completely free of any need to exchange body fluids, or do anything else with them?

Warbaby, I do agree with your sentiments. I simply feel that BDSM is sex focused. Even making a sub wear specific clothes ... the "whoelsome swimsuits" mentioned elsewhere, for example ... can be sexual, by deliberately making her (in that case) suppress her sexuality. I could be turned on by making someone do that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfs_lilgirl

it just feels right, and cuz i dont think i could ever find... any person like my sir.. near!. and i couldnt imagine.. what would i do if i didnt had him!

---

Smiles... that is as it should be.

I've said on other threads ... one's perception and how they interpret things makes it become reality. It's not for others to judge.

If we were to judge for example.. I've seen some relationships on this board and have wondered how they can glue together is beyond me. so my perception doesn't influece that one.

If trust is an issue to being a workable online.. then you first must trust yourself before you can place trust in another. Then you start with what they have said is reality until you learn or are shown otherwise.
If we doubted everyone and everything we come across what would actually be accomplished on any day ?

Be content in the knowledge that what the Dom says is being done, carried out, proof if she is willing and let her respond appropriately.....
Is a trust given.. not trust earned. Is a courtesy we extend to others until such time as we are shown it is draining or negative.

ALL My opinons and how i do things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warbaby1943

Bottom line, that is all that is important, being happy with your circumstances.

---

I'll drink to that.

I did some more thinking, and I've distilled my question a smidgeon.

To me chosing slavery in the BDSM world is a very serious and deep comitment based on love. From your earlier posts Warbaby, I'm guessing that you have the same view.

Maybe I'm a superficial crud now, but how do you know it's love without ever meeting? Isn't love a to a large extent a very physical thing?

I had a discussion with my slave about this and she is a self-proffesed "expert of Internet dating". She's done it a lot, way more than me. And she said, (which I whole-heartedly agree with) "No matter how much and long you've talked to somebody on-line. Finally meeting them IRL is like meeting a new person".

This is the whole essance of what I've been trying to say. How can two people have that level of commitment, trust and love without knowing how they will be physically. Words is only one of many human ways of comunicating.

I'm hoping that this is just one more thing I need to learn, that I can blame my naive youth for not understanding. I am a nosey bastard aren't I...?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

So which is cyber sex? Is it just obtaining basic relief by wanking to an erotic picture or scene or by having some sub talk dirty ... or by making the sub masturbate him/herself? Or is it something else, fulfilling. arousing and completely free of any need to exchange body fluids, or do anything else with them?

Warbaby, I do agree with your sentiments. I simply feel that BDSM is sex focused. Even making a sub wear specific clothes ... the "whoelsome swimsuits" mentioned elsewhere, for example ... can be sexual, by deliberately making her (in that case) suppress her sexuality. I could be turned on by making someone do that.

---

I'm not going to try to answer which or what cyber sex is. That could be a whole new topic.

I want to make it clear that I am not saying that BDSM is not sexual or, as you say, sex focused. I have always known, felt and believed that to be true. I am saying that even though it is on line and no actual sex is involved between the two partners does not make the submission, control, or BDSM activities any less real. I just don't know how to say it any clearer.

That's fine, Warbaby. And I think it's an ideal note to end on.

Thanks everyone ...

<How do you close this thread???>

ask one of the mods to lock it

MMI, I am not going to close this thread, that is a tool which we use as little as possible, since it disempowers members. It is possible that other members may have other thoughts they wish to add to it, either now or in the future, and if not it will just start to sink.

Thanks for starting an interesting thread...

cariad