Ulterior Motives

back

D/s Play

From a blog called Alenz Eyes...

The best description of Dominant/Submissive relationships I've read.....

"I think it’s great when I get friends asking me questions, and I go into some detail to answer their question, and what happens? I get a blog post from it!

Question: regarding your ‘Dominant/submission’ interest, why do you feel the need to control women?

Answer: I don’t feel the need to control women. That’s not what ‘dominance’ is about. Instead, I feel the need to just be the dominant partner in a relationship.

I might need to explain the difference between dominance and control… The difference between a dominant man and a controlling man is whether or not he cares about consent. Consent to dominance must be given by the submissive. She must want to be dominated by him as much as he wants her to submit to him.

Control does not require consent, and a controlling partner is likely to be an abusive partner, while a dominant partner is more likely to be a loving partner.

Being the dominant part of a Dominant/submissive (D/s) relationship carries significant responsibility. If you’re the Dom, your submissive partner is giving themselves to you, and you choose to become responsible for their mental and physical wellbeing within the dynamics of the relationship that you both agree to participate in. Rules and behaviours expected from each member are established through extensive communication, and the responsibility of mutual care is far more important than most ‘vanilla’ (non-BDSM) relationships.

A Dominant (Dom) partner agrees and commits to the responsibility their submissive partner gives to them. They have as much ‘control’ as the sub lets them have, but the sub wants the Dom to push their limits, to be challenged. The dynamics of such D/s relationships are concerned with growth and mutual happiness, but attains this with methods that are usually completely different to ‘vanilla’ relationships.

Even in the so-called ‘vanilla’ relationships, people always practice dominance and submission. Two people having sex can not be on top at the same time. One is on top, one is on the bottom. One is dominating the experience, the other is submitting, and occasionally (or often) they switch places. (These terms are also common within BDSM: tops, bottoms and switches.)

Most vanilla relationships establish some form of dominance/submission pattern within the bedroom, while either engaging in equality outside the bedroom, or even being the opposite of who they are in the bedroom. For example, one partner might be submissive in the bedroom, but is the dominant member of the household (think about who ‘wears the pants’ in your relationship, and they’re the dominant partner). Or they’re submissive to their partner in the bedroom, while being the CEO of a large company.

Dominance and submission is a natural part of life. The BDSM lifestyle takes what many ‘vanilla’ people hide and keep secret, and instead lives it openly. Where most people are embarrassed to say “I’m dominant” or “I’m submissive” because of social taboos about dominance and submission, people in the BDSM lifestyle say “Frack you, I’ll be whatever the hell I want to be!”

What’s really interesting for me is that I’ve always been saying to people they should live their own life, do what they want to do, follow their heart, stop listening to others, and stop listening to what society tells them they should do. And yet I’ve been choosing to get involved in relationships that are what society tells me they should be. My practices have been inconsistent with my teachings.

When people start following their heart, they start moving away from the restrictions of a taboo-based society, and more into the path of what their true nature really is. When they listen to their heart, their authentic life starts to become available to them.

There is freedom in living how you feel is most natural for you, and there is slavery in allowing a society to dictate who you should be, and what you should be doing.

Consider exploring how you can follow your heart. I can guarantee you that it will change your life."

BACK

Dostoevsky Memorial Footnote

Probably my obsession with cuckolding comes from reading Dostoevsky's The Eternal Husband this week. The following is part of a chilling scene were the possibly murderous cuckold is taunting his dead wife's former lover:

And all at once, quite unexpectedly, Pavel Pavlovitch put up his two fingers like two horns on his bald forehead and went off into a low, prolonged chuckle. He sat like that, chuckling, for a full half-minute, staring into Velchaninov's face in a frenzy of malignant insolence. The latter was petrified as though at the sight of some ghost. But his stupefaction lasted but one brief instant; a sarcastic and insolently composed smile came slowly upon his lips.

Nope -- not feeling any metaphoric horns with other women.

Chuckle, chuckle.

VPILE

VPILF is, of course (for the acronymically challenged) Vice President I'd Like to Eat. A shameless spin (hey this IS politics, after all) on the MILF acronym.

Now, when I say 'eat' let me be clear....

Okay....back to the point.

The "Right" to Appeal

One of the eternal difficulties in legal theory is crafting a judicial system that provides consistent results and predictability while allowing for the greatest amount of liberty and the least amount of harm. The easiest resolution to this problem is to grant judges wide discretion to make decisions. The downside to judicial flexibility is lack of predictable outcomes and the possibility of an unjust judge. Fundamental concepts of justice are used to temper the ability of a judge to run amok – due process, habeas corpus, and jury trials. If all of that fails, you have the right to appeal.

So translated into a relationship context for a traditional relationship:

"Do" Process: "Honey, would you do this for me."

Habeas Corpus: Let her know where your body is at -- at all times.

Jury Trials: It really does matter what her friends think about you.

Right to Appeal: She is your Circut Court of Appeals and your Supreme Court.

Sometimes, I just aggravate myself for writing drivel that sounds like stuff someone would mass email around the globe and yes, I feel the dumber for having succumbed and even dumber for having posted this.

Vice

Other than Vice, of course.

Back to Reading.

Ten From the Big Guy 2.0

The obvious example of the stone written code of conduct is of course the 10 Commandments, of which the Pentateuch gives us two or three versions (Exodus 34:10-26; Exodus 20:2:17 and Deuteronomy 5:6-21) and which if the story is to be believed, Moses scrapped the Commandments Version 1.0 dashing them on a rock and we are left with Commandments Version 2.0.