I've had partners who were very dominant but only occasionally interested in engaging in BDSM/fetish play. I still enjoyed following their commands and serving them, but they couldn't fully engage in play. I've had partners who were very into certain BDSM fetishes and had fun playing those out with them, but they didn't bring about the dominance I craved. They weren't doing anything wrong (nor, I, necessarily). That's just who they were. I don't think you can *teach* dominance. Maybe dominance can be learned by someone who wants to--or maybe it eventually develops through their life experiences--but it's not a quick or formulatable process. Just my thoughts.
Agreed, I don't think you can teach dominance as a personality trait. You can get people - especially men - to emulate it. The English public (which actually means private) school system is partly a machine for churning out squared jawed manly blokes who speak up for themselves. It doesn't necessarily make them happy or... long term... effective.
However, I think most people have at least a little dominance - in some versions of the Big 5 personality system, it's hiding as a facet of Extroversion, so it's a parameter not a switch. I also think a lot of vanilla people mask it.
It's true that we have to take people - or be taken by them ;) - as they are. However, for long term relationships, I think it's reasonable to do some horse trading, and also decline to give away submission "for free". A big issue with a lot of malesubs in vanilla marriages is that they stealth submit so extensively that they have nothing left to trade with.
So for example,
> I've had partners who were very dominant but only occasionally interested in engaging in BDSM/fetish play. I still enjoyed following their commands and serving them, but they couldn't fully engage in play.
I think, in a long term relationship, it would be reasonable to specify, "I'm happy to obey you, but only as long as I'm wearing my collar." And then maybe weave in some actual discipline.
Ya, I mean, as for that particular relationship, there were other issues that made it not work. Were it on solid ground in the first place, the play dynamic could probably have been negotiated as needed--and indeed was for as long as it was maintained. Luckily, for now, I have found a partner who is dominant and kinky and also matches with me in so many other ways.
That's all very good here. Particularly appreciate getting the rough sex part out of the way without dismissing it.
But the comment is mostly to say that this:
>_Finally, don’t necessarily expect any “after care”. That can feel far too much like a tax or a penance. That’s especially true if you’re the one who introduced kink to the relationship. It may be a long time before she stops feeling guilty and at the same time that on some level she’s doing you a favour._
...is particularly important. Obviously I don't mean aftercare in the sense of allowing a person to get a rest and mental resent or not preventing them from accessing ice pack to reduce swelling / bruises. But in in the sense you really already cover earlier, some kind of reciprocal "exchange" here.
Because if what's driving you on some level is the deep fantasy of delivering a desperately desired experience, better find yourself a submissive.
In my experience this is a hurdle on which much of d/s dynamic falls, whether casual or more involved. "I just want you to do exactly what you want and nothing you don't want" turns into something not quite that.
And the "feeling guilty yet also feeling a bit used and pandering" is very much a thing for women, even kinky women into the fetish stuff. So, being super careful about this is probably a key. And in most situations it won't work but if you can get this right, minimising the "tax" (or price, or penance), you're already doing better than almost anyone trying to negotiate this. She might still turn out not to be into this, but it's a great step in the right direction.
Also, you'll get disowned by Ethical Youth for even suggesting aftercare might be at best optional 😂
I've had partners who were very dominant but only occasionally interested in engaging in BDSM/fetish play. I still enjoyed following their commands and serving them, but they couldn't fully engage in play. I've had partners who were very into certain BDSM fetishes and had fun playing those out with them, but they didn't bring about the dominance I craved. They weren't doing anything wrong (nor, I, necessarily). That's just who they were. I don't think you can *teach* dominance. Maybe dominance can be learned by someone who wants to--or maybe it eventually develops through their life experiences--but it's not a quick or formulatable process. Just my thoughts.
Agreed, I don't think you can teach dominance as a personality trait. You can get people - especially men - to emulate it. The English public (which actually means private) school system is partly a machine for churning out squared jawed manly blokes who speak up for themselves. It doesn't necessarily make them happy or... long term... effective.
However, I think most people have at least a little dominance - in some versions of the Big 5 personality system, it's hiding as a facet of Extroversion, so it's a parameter not a switch. I also think a lot of vanilla people mask it.
It's true that we have to take people - or be taken by them ;) - as they are. However, for long term relationships, I think it's reasonable to do some horse trading, and also decline to give away submission "for free". A big issue with a lot of malesubs in vanilla marriages is that they stealth submit so extensively that they have nothing left to trade with.
So for example,
> I've had partners who were very dominant but only occasionally interested in engaging in BDSM/fetish play. I still enjoyed following their commands and serving them, but they couldn't fully engage in play.
I think, in a long term relationship, it would be reasonable to specify, "I'm happy to obey you, but only as long as I'm wearing my collar." And then maybe weave in some actual discipline.
Ya, I mean, as for that particular relationship, there were other issues that made it not work. Were it on solid ground in the first place, the play dynamic could probably have been negotiated as needed--and indeed was for as long as it was maintained. Luckily, for now, I have found a partner who is dominant and kinky and also matches with me in so many other ways.
That's all very good here. Particularly appreciate getting the rough sex part out of the way without dismissing it.
But the comment is mostly to say that this:
>_Finally, don’t necessarily expect any “after care”. That can feel far too much like a tax or a penance. That’s especially true if you’re the one who introduced kink to the relationship. It may be a long time before she stops feeling guilty and at the same time that on some level she’s doing you a favour._
...is particularly important. Obviously I don't mean aftercare in the sense of allowing a person to get a rest and mental resent or not preventing them from accessing ice pack to reduce swelling / bruises. But in in the sense you really already cover earlier, some kind of reciprocal "exchange" here.
Because if what's driving you on some level is the deep fantasy of delivering a desperately desired experience, better find yourself a submissive.
In my experience this is a hurdle on which much of d/s dynamic falls, whether casual or more involved. "I just want you to do exactly what you want and nothing you don't want" turns into something not quite that.
And the "feeling guilty yet also feeling a bit used and pandering" is very much a thing for women, even kinky women into the fetish stuff. So, being super careful about this is probably a key. And in most situations it won't work but if you can get this right, minimising the "tax" (or price, or penance), you're already doing better than almost anyone trying to negotiate this. She might still turn out not to be into this, but it's a great step in the right direction.
Also, you'll get disowned by Ethical Youth for even suggesting aftercare might be at best optional 😂
Ethical Youth seem mostly to be having rough M/f sex and gentle F/m sex, both laundered as kink...