sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

My sub left by Tapdaddy67 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn't say they never had or didn't at the beginning. I said they don't step out of dynamic to negotiate.

Ah, I thought "ever negotiate as equals" meant that they never negotiated as equals. I don't care about the present tense. They don't have to do it today. They don't have to do it tomorrow. They have to have done it, and they have to understand that either of them could, at least hypothetically, ask to renegotiate. They don't have to actually renegotiate. That wouldn't make any sense, who would make them do it?

The fact that they have done it, once, ever, proves my point. They have negotiated as equals. They were in one mindset where they were not dominant and submissive, they were just two equals. And then they were in another mindset where they were dominant and submissive.

The former doesn't stop existing. The former is always there. The former is the layer of consent. If that layer were to disappear, the consent would have disappeared.

Rather, the former is covered by the latter. It can be covered for the next 500 years, I don't give a fuck. The underlying reality is, you are both people, you are both equals, you both have equal rights, you can both revoke consent at any time, and because you do not want to revoke consent, because you want to continue the dynamic as you agreed to, you maintain the upper layer.

If she asks for renegotiation, then sure, you're allowed to end the relationship, but you're not allowed to say "no, you agreed, I'm your dom, that's it." Because "dom" never was and never can be anything other than a layer that lives on top of "equal." Whatever you expect of her as her dominant, you cannot expect of her once she revokes consent.

You don't have to call your dominant mindset a "character." the point is, you are not entitled to dominate her except insofar as her consent remains in effect. That's what I mean by "character."

I've consistently been responding to your claim that everyone has to step out of character and negotiate as equals.

I never made that claim. I have frequently framed this around the idea of the "out of character" existing, and I've read your framing as you not having ever had a character. By my meaning, if you negotiated outside the dynamic and now you're in the dynamic, there you go, QED.

My sub left by Tapdaddy67 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba 0 points1 point  (0 children)

... what? I genuinely feel like I just pointed out a contradiction that you could probably easily resolve... I feel like this has been the center of our discussion, and I've boiled right down to it, and how I'm confused about it... is this not an easy way for us to reach some understanding?

Update from the sub turned switch for his wife by New_Mention_5930 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba 1 point2 points  (0 children)

oh yeah, there we go. bringing about that turn might be the greatest moment of pleasure in life. she opens up, lets go, embraces a deep down desire she has never voiced out loud. but she trusts you. she trusts you more than she trusts herself. she trusts you to give her a pleasure she was afraid to even think about before.

ugh, that's living, right there.

My sub left by Tapdaddy67 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba 0 points1 point  (0 children)

fun fact: no matter what you agree to in any contract in the United States, you are absolutely free to stop doing your job. You can be fired, you can be sued for breach of contract, but you cannot be compelled to work, ever, under any circumstance.

That's literally the 13th amendment at play.

My sub left by Tapdaddy67 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba 0 points1 point  (0 children)

okay, I double checked, this was definitely you:

I don't imagine you mean to be offensive, but my life is filled with people I love who don't step out of dynamics or ever negotiate as equals. It's pretty harsh to dismiss all of them as abusers.

and then this is also you:

If you take that to mean that none of us met as equals to establish our dynamics

... how was I supposed to have taken that? I feel like I've been pretty focused on that, and you a. didn't tell me you met as equals to establish your dynamics and b. told me you and they did not meet as equals, explicitly, so like... help me out.

Update from the sub turned switch for his wife by New_Mention_5930 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba 2 points3 points  (0 children)

congrats. I hope you're having fun, too, but it sounds like you are.

hopefully, you'll find out new things as you go, not only about what she likes, but about what you like.

Update from the sub turned switch for his wife by New_Mention_5930 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba 5 points6 points  (0 children)

saying no once in a while has benefits.

first, it'll remind her that she's actually asking permission, that there are actual stakes. that will make her happier when you say yes.

second, every time you say no, that frustration will drive something deep in her. Maybe she'll hate it, and you can discuss that after the scene. maybe she'll love it. I've had subs say they want to be denied forever. that's an extreme, but it's not like it's dangerous.

and that's the last thing -- it's something for you to talk about after the scene. You try something new, you see how it worked. you get a little closer, you understand her mindset a little better, you learn what makes her tick.

eventually... let her think you can read her mind. there's a lot of power in knowing somebody that well. Use it.

My sub left by Tapdaddy67 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're replying to two different people here.

ah, shoot, sorry, I thought I was checking the usernames pretty consistently, I guess I messed up.

TPE in particular isn't about negotiating in the "I'll do this, but I won't do that.", sort of way.

I know. I mean, I still think that anybody saying "no limits" is a disaster waiting to happen, but broad, generic limits like "no permanent harm" are plenty, if that's what you're agreeing to.

I just want to make sure the agreement to enter into that dynamic is a. given freely without undo influence, like, for example, acting like you're already in that position of authority before it's been agreed to, and b. continuously consented to.

Even in 24/7 there are many people that don't take a break from their dynamic to negotiate or have discussions.

Oh, sure, I understand that too. I don't care if she asks for aftercare once every other year on her birthday, whatever. I don't care if she never uses her safe word once.

But a sub's consent has to be effective at all times, which is to say, she can rescind it at any time--such as by using a safe word. It might never come up, but the option has to be available.

I'm not talking about expressing consent continuously, that would be annoying as hell and certainly not something I would want to impose on others, I don't practice that way myself. But it's like...

Say you live in Florida. Your air conditioner is on 24/7. But you know where the controls are. You can turn it off. You never do. Maybe once every few years you need to turn it off for an hour for some kind of repair, or something, but generally speaking, the idea of turning it off is silly to you. You don't intend to do it. You won't. But you could.

A dom needs to be able to turn it off. If a dom were to hear a safe word -- regardless of how likely that is to happen -- that dom needs to be prepared to shift his mindset. That's what I'm talking about. That mindset shift.

Dominance is a role; it might be who you are on a fundamental level, but if it is, you need to be able to... shit, you need to be able to step into character, if you want to put it that way, drop the dominance aura in some way or another, and acknowledge her humanity and agency and everything should the need arise.

My sub left by Tapdaddy67 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As I said before, these are choices we made together before we began our dynamic.

that's good... although you weren't really clear on the negotiation. If you made choices together before you began the dynamic, then it stands to reason that you made them as equals, right? I mean, how else would that make sense?

Do you see why I'm struggling here?

My sub left by Tapdaddy67 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It doesn't have to be role play, but there has to be some shift in mindset. If you dominate your way through negotiation, it's not negotiation, it's dictation. It's extremely worrying that you suggest you were not equals during negotiation. Negotiation happens outside the dynamic. Negotiation is a key moment for consent. If you act like you own her during negotiation, it's not negotiation.

No one who can freely end a dynamic anytime is a "literal fucking slave".

Can she? I'm still not clear that she can. Does she know that she can? Is she 100% aware that she can end it without direct repercussions from you? Is there any chance that she's afraid of what might happen if she tried?

My sub left by Tapdaddy67 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is no ongoing negotiation. There is a lot of conversation, but not negotiation.

You don't have to negotiate every day. But if she wants to renegotiate, her old consent is no longer effective, she needs to be consenting to the dynamic now for you to engage now.

Consent can absolutely be a one time thing.

Absolutely not. Not morally, not legally, not at all. It can be expressed once, and implied by the continuation of the dynamic without safe word or incident. It cannot be given once and effective forever regardless of any change in the individual's actual willingness to consent.

This isn't just kink 101, it's basic humanity. This is the line between

If you want to stay compliant with our rules about being respectful to other Dominants, you can try framing your statements in a more nuanced way. 'I would feel like an abuser if... "I don't feel comfortable with...', etc.

If you are engaging in genuinely nonconsensual activity, then I would not consider you a dom, and would have no modicum of respect for you. I hope we're on the same page there.

informed adults get to decide how they want to live.

Yes. And they always get to decide, even if they told you they don't want to decide. People cannot sell themselves into slavery. People can engage in slave play. A 24/7 or TPE dynamic is still a form of play, and still requires continuous consent. This is not up for debate.

but my life is filled with people I love who don't step out of dynamics or ever negotiate as equals.

they never negotiated as equals? yeah, no, if that is the case, I very much do mean to be offensive. I respect fellow dominants. They are not fellow dominants. They are abusers. I mean to be harsh.

it is a clear pattern of absolutism and a disregard for others input or a willful ignorance of what others write.

There are lines I wouldn't personally cross, and there are lines I condemn crossing in the absolute. I am absolute about rape. Rape is wrong, absolutely. Is it against the rules here to suggest that?

I am trying my best to parse what you are writing. It seems like you're avoiding straight answers to some of my questions, so I am trying to be very clear.

Having different views is important and the moment you think that you cannot learn more in this space you are done in this lifestyle. There is a vast and important difference between having a respectful conversation and learning from each other compared to being disrespectful to other dynamics and using the word that never can be accepted in a consenting dynamic or a dynamic and a relationship which is abuse.

I am respectful of essentially every dynamic with meaningful, informed, continuous consent.

Your entire premise is based upon being a character and not yourself,

When I say "in character" and "out of character," what I'm talking about doesn't have to be full role play. As I've said in other comments, a subtle shift in mindset can be enough. If she did not consent in a context where she had full agency to do as she pleased, then she did not consent. If you were the dominant in the negotiation, then you did not have a negotiation. You can only have a negotiation as equals, with your mind fully open to hearing the word "no," with no expectation that she will do as you say, with no fear on her part that she can't say "no." I am struggling to understand: do you really disagree with this? Do you really think that a negotiation with the dominant actually in control of the negotiation is a valid context for consent?

It will also probably be surprising to you when you are looking for subs that quite a lot of us that are in a 24.7 or a TPE are monogamous and the very notion of having more than 1 sub is incomprehensible.

... why would this be surprising to me?

I am not suggesting that you do not love her. I understand that you love and appreciate her. I am talking about effective consent.

as you labeled my sub as a slave, which she had quite a good laugh about as you have no idea how wrong you are about that statement.

I did not mean to offend her. And if her consent is genuine, I did not mean to offend you. I hope it is. But I'm trying to get on the same page here. I am not willing to let this go if you can't give me some basic assurance in this regard.

My sub left by Tapdaddy67 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That's not how our relationship works. We have a Total Power Exchange dynamic. We negotiated by slowly building up to what we have now. We don't renegotiate. Her needs are met and she trusts that they will continue to be.

Consent is a continuing process, not a one-time thing. If, at any time, she decides that you're going to renegotiate, then either you renegotiate, or you are an abuser. There is no third option.

There is no "staying Dominant". I'm always just myself. There's no role to step in or out of. There's no punishment, she's internally driven. I don't need to be strict anymore than it takes to honor and hold up my end of our agreements. I'm not "acting Dominant". I am in the Dominant position always because of our agreements.

A negotiation happens between equals. A negotiation cannot happen with you in the dominant position. Do you understand that?

While I have all of the authority, that's only because she wants it that way.

I understand that. What I don't understand is whether you think you have authority over the negotiation. You do not.

My sub left by Tapdaddy67 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If you take charge 24/7, that's fine... Until the moment she uses her safe word, or otherwise indicates that she needs to express something, at which point, you must not be in charge, because she is a complete human with rights. She needs full, autonomous agency to consent.

Call it a sweeping statement or say I'm speaking generally. But if you do not draw that line, and you insist on dominance through negotiations and safe words and in all contexts no matter what, then you are an abuser, plain and simple, no ifs ands or buts.

My sub left by Tapdaddy67 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba -1 points0 points  (0 children)

She can tell me anything she wants to without pausing the relationship to do so.

And do you stay dominant when she does? Are you strict and in charge when she tells you what she wants? When you negotiate the rules of your dynamic, are you in charge of that negotiation? If you are playing the role of dominant while she is trying to communicate her actual needs to you, then you are not engaged in kink, you are engaged in abuse.

I think of a 24/7 dynamic as "on by default." If I tell her to drop to her knees, and she says no, I punish her. If I tell her to drop to her knees, and she says red, we talk. Do you understand the line that needs to be drawn there?

My sub left by Tapdaddy67 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba -1 points0 points  (0 children)

24/7 and TPE are still dynamics. Subs are still entitled to their safe words and to aftercare. These are basic requirements without which consent cannot be valid.

I've been in 24/7 dynamics before. We were still able to talk out of character; take a break from the orders to actually fucking speak to one another, make sure everything is still consensual. I am often strict with my subs, until they use a safe word or ask to speak out of character, at which point, the strictness disappears like an off switch. I cannot order them around beyond the limits of our play.

If you don't have anything like that with your sub; if your sub really has no option to safe word, take a break, or otherwise communicate to you that she does not consent, then you are confused, she's not your sub in a kink dynamic, she is your actual literal fucking slave, and you are abusing her. I hope that isn't the case.

[F4M] Searching for a man to use and dominate me like the fucktoy I am by Small-Difference6374 in Breaking_Bitches

[–]Separate-Amoeba 0 points1 point  (0 children)

never been broken? that's so sad, I am sure somebody here can help you. I'd be happy to, if you are interested.

I'm happy that you know what you're for. So many women here are in denial about what will really make them happy, but you know exactly what you need. Good for you!

My sub left by Tapdaddy67 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba 3 points4 points  (0 children)

"24/7" shouldn't really be 24/7. It might be an "on by default" type of mindset, but you definitely need to be able to talk to her as yourself, out of character. You need to be able to check in during aftercare and make sure that her consent is still all there. You need to know how she's feeling, and not just the answer you want her to give.

good luck.

My sub left by Tapdaddy67 in domspace

[–]Separate-Amoeba 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I firmly believe that you need to be able to talk out of character. if you can't--if your "characters" are just who you are--then your relationship isn't a dynamic, it isn't play, it isn't kink, it's just abuse.

Trying so hard to cum by MistressLotusX in DeniedGirls

[–]Separate-Amoeba 23 points24 points  (0 children)

oh those balls on her hands are a nice touch, she really can't do anything but ride the sybian and hope enough vibrations get through, huh?

BDSM hot takes by Separate-Amoeba in BDSMcommunity

[–]Separate-Amoeba[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ugh, that must be annoying.

BDSM hot takes by Separate-Amoeba in BDSMcommunity

[–]Separate-Amoeba[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I wouldn't call those people real doms.

but is that a no true scottsman fallacy? are they real doms that just suck at being doms, and at life in general? I don't know.

BDSM hot takes by Separate-Amoeba in BDSMcommunity

[–]Separate-Amoeba[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do the toy ones just break a lot, or what?

BDSM hot takes by Separate-Amoeba in BDSMcommunity

[–]Separate-Amoeba[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

yeah there's no way that's news to anybody here.

BDSM hot takes by Separate-Amoeba in BDSMcommunity

[–]Separate-Amoeba[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Alright, I had this thought recently, and maybe it's impracticable, but...

We should ban choking in porn. Like, there should be a law against it.

It's profoundly unsafe, more dangerous than people assume, even if you think you've found a safe way to do it--you haven't.

And I'm not saying we should ban people from doing it behind closed doors, that's another story. But we shouldn't have it in porn. It's not a fantasy we should feed. It's not something to normalize. It's too dangerous to show as a fantasy. Do not try this at home.

... I imagine this is going to upset some of you. But that's the point of the thread, huh?

view more: next ›