To set the record straight

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir Lanceloth

I dont agree completely with that, after all its not all subs who desires to have their will broken. I believe it is possible to teach a sub without having to break them. The way i imagine doing that is by communication, when the sub does something wrong the punishment works better (in my view) if the sub has been convinced that what she/he did was wrong. I dont see that as taming or breaking the sub, but perhaps im wrong? After all i am not sure of all the terms flying around this place :)

---

Communication is so very important Sir Lanceloth! Glad to hear some of you Doms feel that way!

Thanks!
~ltp~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ruby

Musing on TG's post:

LTP:

You'll get no apologies from my. Only an "it sucks" that it didn't work out.

Aside from TG's unedited comment, I agree with other posts. The right dom will come along.

Word of advice - let them do the chasing. For me, being collared is like being engaged/married. Take your time. If you wouldn't accept the ring of someone you've dated less than a month, then you don't have to accept a collar, either.

---

Thanks for those words of wisdom Ruby. You're right ..we both moved much too fast..I don't know why he did, but for me I guess it was lack of experience in this lifestyle. I never associated accepting a ring with accepting a collar! Makes perfect sense now of course! Ain't hindsight 20/20?? :p Oh well...one more lesson learned, and thank you sug for your continuing education course! :) It is much appreciated!

Hugs and Kisses
~ltp~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alura

People with low self esteem always say things about others to put them down. It makes them feel better; makes them feel justified in their actions. The fact that Sirkin posted an AVATAR and claimed it was really him instead of telling the truth is proof of that. If he had said 'no it is not me but I am not comfortable sharing my pictures at this time' that at least would have been honest. He lied from the start. Any relationship built on lies isn't worth it. What is it that they say about a house built upon the sand? It's not about YOU, LTP! It's about him. He's the loser in this whole situation; not you. He was stupid enough to lose a gem like you because he was too busy building a little nest full of lies, then, when he got caught, like most liars try to do, he blamed you instead of himself. Liars aren't worth the skin they're wearing to walk around in. Count yourself VERY lucky and know that you are a very rare and special, talented, beautiful, amazing woman and someday your (as I like to call it) 'Vibrating Prince' will come!

---

Thanks for the encouragement and love Alura! :) You are one of a kind and one that I wouldn't know how to do without! Love ya sweetie! I'll keep my eyes open for that "Vibrating Prince!" ....or maybe I should just listen out for him??? LOL! Thanks for making me smile hun!

Hugs and kisses
~ltp~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by learningtopleez

So why have you changed your mind? Or do you feel that a sub should serve and obey someone who lies to her/him? Just curious here, as I am trying to learn. Thanks.

~ltp~

---

I haven't changed my mind. I made no mention at all about honesty. I dislike dishonesty in most forms.

What I did say was that I didn't feel a submissive should have to be tamed or broken. Meaning that they should either have the desire to submit or they should not categorize themselves as submissives. What is submissive about someone who resists submitting? What is submissive about disobedience?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDSM_Tourguide

I haven't changed my mind. I made no mention at all about honesty. I dislike dishonesty in most forms.

What I did say was that I didn't feel a submissive should have to be tamed or broken. Meaning that they should either have the desire to submit or they should not categorize themselves as submissives. What is submissive about someone who resists submitting? What is submissive about disobedience?

---

So are you saying that I was disobedient in this situation? Or that I resisted submitting to sirken? I was very willing and eager to submit and to please, and did so many times before and after finding out that he may have lied to me in the beginning of our short little affair. It was after the second lie he told me that I went to him first as he had asked me to, only to find that he was still upset that I even questioned him. Yes, I do consider myself submissive. No, I don't have a hell of alot of experience in this lifestyle. But I do feel that a sub has the right to ask questions of her Dom or Master. How else is one supposed to know anything? He even told me himself that I should ask questions if I was unsure of something. Besides, if a sub is never disobedient, how does the punishment come into play? Just because?? And I stand corrected TG, you didn't mention honesty. I did.

I am probably about to get into a bad place with you, TG, but that's okay. D/s is all about disagreement and finding your agreement.
To me, submitting and dominating are all shades of grey. And because of that, so are relationtionships, and the defintions thereof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDSM_Tourguide

I haven't changed my mind. I made no mention at all about honesty. I dislike dishonesty in most forms.

What I did say was that I didn't feel a submissive should have to be tamed or broken. Meaning that they should either have the desire to submit or they should not categorize themselves as submissives. What is submissive about someone who resists submitting? What is submissive about disobedience?

---

Where is Sirken???

His av has dissoed and he's registered as guest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caitlin

Never leave a woman to speculate about anything :). It can be damn right dangerous.
caitlin

---

Well, I did warn him. :dunno:

Caitlin :D :D :D :D :D :D

Well if he's honest this time, that's all that matters to me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caitlin

Where is Sirken???

His av has dissoed and he's registered as guest.



Well, I did warn him. :dunno:

Caitlin :D :D :D :D :D :D

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by learningtopleez

So are you saying that I was disobedient in this situation? Or that I resisted submitting to sirken?

---

No. I think you were right to get out of the relationship. Something smelled bad about it from the beginning and you probably did better by not having a relationship with him in the first place. This statement and sequence has nothing to do with your relationship to SirKen. The sequence of events leading up to my statement about submissives not having to be tamed are as follows:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by learningtopleez

He once told me that several Doms on this site told him they felt I could never be tamed.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SirW

Any real Dom would not wish to "tame" or "break" a submissive.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDSM_Tourguide

I believe a real dominant shouldn't have to tame or break a submissive.

---

As you can see, I was never mentioning your relationship specifically, but I was referring to the fact that people seemed to think you could never be tamed. My opinion has always been that a submissive will submit because she enjoys to submit, not because she needs someone to tame her spirit or whatever. I don't know if that's true of you or not, because I don't really know you very well, or at all really. It is just my opinion. In fact, it's an opinion that has been stated in my seven types of internet submissive bit that I wrote a few months back.

As for your relationship specifically: I don't think anyone should have to be subjected to internet phonies. They give the net the reputation it already has, and I think that's a bad thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caitlin

Where is Sirken???

His av has dissoed and he's registered as guest.

---

He must have requested that his user account be deleted. Or he did it himself. Can you do it yourself? Hmm...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alura

I am probably about to get into a bad place with you, TG, but that's okay. D/s is all about disagreement and finding your agreement.
To me, submitting and dominating are all shades of grey. And because of that, so are relationtionships, and the defintions thereof.

---

You're not getting anywhere with me. I don't have any expectations of you in any way.

Every person's relationship is different. Diversity is what makes things interesting. However, certain relationships are categorized by certain terms. A lesbian relationship is a relationship between two women. Would a lesbian relationship still be a lesbian relationship if one of the women wanted to date men? In the same vein, a DS relationship is between a dominant and a submissive. Would it still be a DS relationship if the submissive didn't want to submit?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by learningtopleez

Besides, if a sub is never disobedient, how does the punishment come into play?

---

You mean I have to be "naughty" to be punished? I'm always "naughty". :p

Seriously, LTP this is a relationship question. There are many forms of play punishment where you get the pleasure of being punished for being "a bad girl" when you've done nothing at all wrong. For example, a play spanking can be soft or hard depending on your preference.

Look at FF's pictures when TG is done with her lovely backside. To them, that might be fun. To me, that would be a hard punishment way past my limits. To each their own.

There are the doms/subs who incorporate punishments into their lifestyle and use them as real punishments. If the sub is a pain slut, she probably won't receive the pain she wants as a punishment, cause to her, pain is a reward. She might have to write....essays!!!!! :eek:
or do some other task that she doesn't find pleasure in.
That's why its called punishment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by learningtopleez

Besides, if a sub is never disobedient, how does the punishment come into play?

---

I felt that this deserved comment as well. I just couldn't decide how to put it into words until just now.

During the "training" phase of a relationship, a submissive may be disciplined or punished for forgetting a chore, not completing an assignment on time, or a variety of other things. It's not necessarily that they are disobedient. It could just be that they forgot their deadline or got busy with other things and didn't complete what was assigned her. That's what the training phase of the relationship is for; to recognize and correct these behaviors early.

And it is possible for a submissive to be disobedient and still be a submissive. That goes along with that not having to tame or break them. Not many dominants want a completely cowed, docile submissive that just says "Yes Sir" whenever they are spoken to. Most dominants want people that can carry on conversations, have their own opinions, etc. If a dominant gives an order or makes a request of his submissive and she says something like "I don't feel like it right now" then yes, that is disobedience, but there might also be a reason for the refusal of the request, too. Maybe the submissive is sick and doesn't even feel like getting out of bed. Maybe she's having her period and any sexual tasks are really uncomfortable and inconvenient for her. The mark of a good dominant is not just to say "You have disobeyed me; you will be punished." A good dominant will ask why the submissive is refusing to obey his requests. Most good submissives will have a reasonable answer handy (ie "I'm on my period," "My dad died," or "I cut off my foot and had to have it sown back on.") However, when a submissive is disobedient because she "just didn't feel like" doing the chore, or she "wants her master to punish her" isn't really being submissive. It's a more subtle form of topping from the bottom. The submissive is telling her dominant that either she doesn't respect his wishes, doesn't want to carry our his instructions for inconsequential reasons, or just wants to manipulate her dominant into giving her a spanking.

It is, in my opinion, the ultimate desire of every good dominant to not have to punish his submissive. It reflects much better on the dominant and the submissive if she can tell others "Sure, I had a rough time at first, but once I learned the rules and understood the chore schedule, I really didn't need to be disciplined anymore." In cases like that, the dominant has trained the submissive to his expectations and she is performing well.

Also, many people confuse spankings, whippings, or other kind of pain torments for punishments. Those might be great punishments for submissives that don't care for pain much. A swift, hard spanking at the moment a task is forgotten or an assignment not done is a good behavioral deterent against future slips. However, many submissive are also masochists, and they get pleasure from pain. In this kind of circumstance, I would never, ever use a pain punishment to discipline that kind of submissive. I would do the exact opposite. I would very likely tie her and put her in a closet alone for a few hours, or make her write lines, or design a punishment specific to the offense that was comitted. Punishments are not supposed to be fun. They are supposed to be instances of negative reinforcement designed to deter bad behaviors. Giving a masochist a spanking as a punishment is kind of like giving a child a piece of candy for breaking a lamp. It will only encourage poor behavior. Giving a masochist a time-out in an empty closet, though, is more like giving a child a time-out. It makes a more lasting impression and will hopefully deter the poor behavior in the future.

One other thing I feel worth mentioning about punishments is that I don't believe they should ever be sexual in nature. I have not always thought this way, but several conversations between myself and FF have made that a little more clear to me. A punishment is not supposed to be an enjoyable act, and quite often sex is very enjoyable for both parties. Therefore, it's usually not a good behavior deterent. Plus, I think that using sex, or even certain sexual acts, as punishments may send the wrong message to the submissive. Implanting the idea in her head that "you're fucking me because I'm bad" just doesn't seem right to me. I can see how that would be easily confusing.

Anyway, I hope this helps to explain a little better. I hope I haven't thoroughly hijacked the thread. If so, then I'm sorry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDSM_Tourguide

No. I think you were right to get out of the relationship. Something smelled bad about it from the beginning and you probably did better by not having a relationship with him in the first place. This statement and sequence has nothing to do with your relationship to SirKen. The sequence of events leading up to my statement about submissives not having to be tamed are as follows:





As you can see, I was never mentioning your relationship specifically, but I was referring to the fact that people seemed to think you could never be tamed. My opinion has always been that a submissive will submit because she enjoys to submit, not because she needs someone to tame her spirit or whatever. I don't know if that's true of you or not, because I don't really know you very well, or at all really. It is just my opinion. In fact, it's an opinion that has been stated in my seven types of internet submissive bit that I wrote a few months back.

As for your relationship specifically: I don't think anyone should have to be subjected to internet phonies. They give the net the reputation it already has, and I think that's a bad thing.

---

Thank you TG for making your statements more clear to me! Please excuse the bitchiness of my last post in which I responded to you. I really felt that you were saying I had no desire to submit, which is so very untrue! I realize we don't know each other that well, at least in that way. I truly appreciate your thoughts on my relationship specifically and promise to go read up on the types of internet submissives! :D

~ltp~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ruby

You mean I have to be "naughty" to be punished? I'm always "naughty". :p

She might have to write....essays!!!!! :eek:
or do some other task that she doesn't find pleasure in.
That's why its called punishment.

---

ESSAYS???? :eek: OMG!!!! Well I'm gonna be a good little subbie then :) , cause I have had my fill of freakin' essays in my English college class! Now don't any of you Doms out there get any ideas for punishment for LTP!! ;)

I agree TG. Sex is not a good way to punish. Punishment is for , well, punishment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDSM_Tourguide

A good dominant will ask why the submissive is refusing to obey his requests. Most good submissives will have a reasonable answer handy (ie "I'm on my period," "My dad died," or "I cut off my foot and had to have it sown back on.")
Anyway, I hope this helps to explain a little better. I hope I haven't thoroughly hijacked the thread. If so, then I'm sorry.

---

I don't think you hijacked the thread at all as you had some very important things to say and things I wasn't aware of...so thanks! But I just have to say to ya TG...when I read the line above about the reasons a sub might have for disobeying...I thought i would laugh my ass off!! Really funny stuff there! :D

~ltp~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDSM_Tourguide

So do I. I corrected the error in my post. Of course, it probably could have been inferred anyway by reading my post in the context of the quoted material.

---

my mistake, ups sorry about that.

That was pretty funny, TG....the foot thing STILL has me laughing my ass off.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BDSM_Tourguide
A good dominant will ask why the submissive is refusing to obey his requests. Most good submissives will have a reasonable answer handy (ie "I'm on my period," "My dad died," or "I cut off my foot and had to have it sown back on.")
Anyway, I hope this helps to explain a little better. I hope I haven't thoroughly hijacked the thread. If so, then I'm sorry.