New

[damon]

Hey there, I am new to being dominant and would like some advice to all of this.

[LadyArana]

You need to be more specific. "All of this" is too broad a term to really give advice on.

[damon]

Well I am pretty new to everything.

[LadyArana]

If you don't ask specific questions, We don't know which answers to give. In the mean time, try reading The Story of O and Screw the Roses, Send Me the Thorns.

[Austerus]

I'm not sure if O is the first story I would recommend, it provides a very specific view into BDSM. It's nice as fantasy but hardly a good guidebook for someone trying to find their sea legs.

damon...learning about SSC (Safe, Sane, and Consensual) is a good place to start. If you google SSC BDSM you'll find some resources. You might also look at some "slave contracts" and "kink questionnaires." They're in no way binding or even necessarily useful but I find they at least offer a window into the breadth and depth of what's out there.

Screw the Roses... is indeed a good resource, as are The New Topping Book and The New Bottoming Book. There are a ton of others, and if you have specific questions I'd be happy to help how I can.

[LadyArana]

I'm not sure if O is the first story I would recommend, it provides a very specific view into BDSM. It's nice as fantasy but hardly a good guidebook for someone trying to find their sea legs.

damon...learning about SSC (Safe, Sane, and Consensual) is a good place to start. If you google SSC BDSM you'll find some resources. You might also look at some "slave contracts" and "kink questionnaires." They're in no way binding or even necessarily useful but I find they at least offer a window into the breadth and depth of what's out there.

Screw the Roses... is indeed a good resource, as are The New Topping Book and The New Bottoming Book. There are a ton of others, and if you have specific questions I'd be happy to help how I can.

I must disagree with Your first statement. While The Story of O may be told from a submissive's perspective, it is important for a Dominant to understand what it is to BE a submissive before they can DOMINATE a submissive.

[Austerus]

My disagreement with you wasn't with the point that a dominant should understand the nature of submission and, more importantly, the nature of his (or her) particular sub. Rather my disagreement was with the idea that the Story of O provided a usefully universal view into the life or psychology of the submissive. I feel that it's very limited in its viewpoint and leans significantly more toward the realm of fantasy than reality in many particulars.

It's a lovely work of erotica, but it's hardly a reflection of real life or the participants therein.

[LadyArana]

I understand now. My apologies as it seems I jumped to conclusions.

[Ozme52]

I understand now. My apologies as it seems I jumped to conclusions.

Clearly a problem with your avatar!

[simplydesire]

Different Loving is also a good book.

[scarlet_85]

Lol Oz... you're too funny! *hugs*

[damon]

Thank you all, What does it take to be a good Dom?

[LadyArana]

I am a firm believer that, in order to be a good Dominant, One must first know what it is to be submissive. You can't possibly know how an action that you take as a Dominant might affect the submissive you're with at the time, unless you've BEEN the submissive before, and you can relate to how it made YOU feel. But that's just MY opinion.

[Ozme52]

And I totally disagree. It's a fallacy, imo, manufactured in an era of too many doms and not enough subs (who admitted they were submissive.) So "new" doms had to "work their way up the pecking order." Be submissive to the established dominants before they could play with their own new "submissives". Earn their chops. Certainly a solution to that particular problem. But is it necessary in today's age of information? Where submissives now supposedly outnumber dominants 10 to 1?

And let's look at the "logic" of the statement by inverting it. Does anyone think that submissives don't affect their dominants? That somehow we are emotionally immune? If by that statement one means physically, well who in the world doesn't understand physical pain. Whether a fall or a sunburn, a ropeburn or getting hit or spanked, we all understand the ills and dangers of the physical side. So we must be talking about the emotional impact of bdsm. In which case, how can someone possibly submit without first being dominant so they can relate how their actions make their doms feel?

Now in that context, the same argument suddenly seems silly for how can someone submit without first being dominant and they can't do that without first being submissive.

I've never submitted in the context of bdsm. No one who knows me in person, (v. on the net,) would be likely to say I am anything but a good dom. Some would say I'm a great dominant. (I can get references if need be. )

My answer to the question, "what does it take to be a good dom?" is this. Be open to criticism. Be open to advice. Be open to education. Be open to introspection. Watch, listen, learn. Take your cues from those around you, whether dominant or submissive, whether male or female. Don't be dismissive, be accepting. Don't do more than you can control, (i.e., don't do dangerous activities with people who put themselves and their safety in your hands.) Take your time to learn and approach these things in a slow stepwise manner. (No one packs their own parachute, for the first time, and goes base jumping, for the first time, without instruction and supervision, and if you do... you'll always be a dangerous dominant too.)

What I thought I knew years ago was fine then, but doesn't compare to what I know now. What I know now probably will pale against what I will come to know. But all along the way, I've been a good, perhaps even a great dom because I never acted like my way was the one right way, that I knew all I needed to know, or that every submissive should or would be responsive to my style of domination.

One more thing... if all I've said doesn't work for you, then be tolerant.

[LadyArana]

And I totally disagree. It's a fallacy, imo, manufactured in an era of too many doms and not enough subs (who admitted they were submissive.) So "new" doms had to "work their way up the pecking order." Be submissive to the established dominants before they could play with their own new "submissives". Earn their chops. Certainly a solution to that particular problem. But is it necessary in today's age of information? Where submissives now supposedly outnumber dominants 10 to 1?

Isn't that what's referred to as "Old BDSM"? If I had a submissive for every time I heard someone say that they wished "Old BDSM" would come back, I'd have a veritable harem of boys and girls.

And let's look at the "logic" of the statement by inverting it. Does anyone think that submissives don't affect their dominants? That somehow we are emotionally immune? If by that statement one means physically, well who in the world doesn't understand physical pain. Whether a fall or a sunburn, a ropeburn or getting hit or spanked, we all understand the ills and dangers of the physical side. So we must be talking about the emotional impact of bdsm. In which case, how can someone possibly submit without first being dominant so they can relate how their actions make their doms feel?

Now in that context, the same argument suddenly seems silly for how can someone submit without first being dominant and they can't do that without first being submissive.

I can see your point here, as it becomes now a chicken and egg argument.

I've never submitted in the context of bdsm. No one who knows me in person, (v. on the net,) would be likely to say I am anything but a good dom. Some would say I'm a great dominant. (I can get references if need be. )

I'm quite sure you are a good dominant. Many around the site speak highly of you. No other references needed.

My answer to the question, "what does it take to be a good dom?" is this. Be open to criticism. Be open to advice. Be open to education. Be open to introspection. Watch, listen, learn. Take your cues from those around you, whether dominant or submissive, whether male or female. Don't be dismissive, be accepting. Don't do more than you can control, (i.e., don't do dangerous activities with people who put themselves and their safety in your hands.) Take your time to learn and approach these things in a slow stepwise manner. (No one packs their own parachute, for the first time, and goes base jumping, for the first time, without instruction and supervision, and if you do... you'll always be a dangerous dominant too.)

What I thought I knew years ago was fine then, but doesn't compare to what I know now. What I know now probably will pale against what I will come to know. But all along the way, I've been a good, perhaps even a great dom because I never acted like my way was the one right way, that I knew all I needed to know, or that every submissive should or would be responsive to my style of domination.

One more thing... if all I've said doesn't work for you, then be tolerant.

Sound advice indeed.

[Ozme52]

Thanx!!

Yes to your first comment/question. "Old Guard" or "Leather Family" style BDSM, but it's long survived into the present day. "They" to a great extent dispise the Internet because it's opened up the lifestyle to everyone who is interested and greatly fred people up to find their own way and their own place, outside of the (old) Leather communities.

Those who can adapt continue to thrive. Those who don't continue to complain. LOL