True Doms Vs Play Doms

[DowntownAmber]

LOL Amber... not at ya... just amused with my thoughts as I read your post.

The semantics are so subtle. Everything you said sounds good... and yet... my sub understands that everything we do is indeed for me... her submission gives her pleasure in doing... for me.

She gets by giving. Ask her though, and I have no doubt she'd tell you I was attentive to her needs and very attuned to her.

Yes. The semantics are indeed subtle.

Is is subtle, though I'm not sure it's a subtle "difference" so much as a slightly different way of saying the same thing? I agree wholeheartedly that giving pleasure is the most complete way to get pleasure. There is obviously (for a sub) great satisfaction in the doing, the serving of the Dom. Whether it be something sexual, or simply making Master dinner and bringing it to him and watching him enjoy it, I find deep fufilment in doing for him.

For this to be as satisfying as it can be, however, I feel that the both of us are responsible to be "attentive and attuned" to the other.

Thoughts? (I love the semantic back and forth, btw, as a relative newbie it forces me into considering all I think and say from completely new angles and perspectives.)

[Ozme52]

Is is subtle, though I'm not sure it's a subtle "difference" so much as a slightly different way of saying the same thing? I agree wholeheartedly that giving pleasure is the most complete way to get pleasure. There is obviously (for a sub) great satisfaction in the doing, the serving of the Dom. Whether it be something sexual, or simply making Master dinner and bringing it to him and watching him enjoy it, I find deep fufilment in doing for him.

For this to be as satisfying as it can be, however, I feel that the both of us are responsible to be "attentive and attuned" to the other.

Thoughts? (I love the semantic back and forth, btw, as a relative newbie it forces me into considering all I think and say from completely new angles and perspectives.)

Well, that would be nearly my exact definition of semantics. Exactly the same thing but a different way of saying it... but all too many discussions can get hung up on the definitions of the words.

My semantic hang-up in this conversation would be that I insist on the perspective that the D/s relationship revolves around the needs of the Dom/me. That may be because I see the pendulum swung too far the other way in all too many online-only pairings.

I guess it depends whether you think words can only describe thoughts... or if you think they can perhaps drive thoughts.

[DowntownAmber]

My semantic hang-up in this conversation would be that I insist on the perspective that the D/s relationship revolves around the needs of the Dom/me. That may be because I see the pendulum swung too far the other way in all too many online-only pairings.

I guess it depends whether you think words can only describe thoughts... or if you think they can perhaps drive thoughts.

We're on the same page as far as "semantics" go now, but I will ply you with another question if you don't mind humoring me? (I am a curious girl, which I think is half the reason one of Sir's first purchases for me was a gag... ) How do you mean, "because I see the pendulum swung too far the other way in all too many online-only pairings?" Is it just online, or do you see that in the real life relationships of others as well?

Oh, and I think words can describe AND drive.