Join the best erotica focused adult social network now
Login
OldDom48
Over 90 days ago
Straight Male
0 miles · Joliet

Forum

I am seeking a submissive woman who knows her place and wants to serve, for an online relationship. If you think that might be you PM me.
@Liz,

This change does in fact, eliminate the error message, but I would prefer to go to my profile. So, I logged off, then back on, and changed that setting back to "profile" then again logged off then back on. And the error message was back. As @LafayetteMister says, in the end this is more of an annoyance, so I'll just leave it with you. If it gets fixed, great. If not, I'll live. Thanks for the help, though.
Hi @SimplyJohn,

I tried your suggestion twice. I did the logoff, then completely exited the Lush site, then came back and logged on, but I still have the same error message
There are lots of opinions about what a D/s relationship is. I am not much interested in getting into some debate about whether my point of view is any better than someone else's point of view. If you have a different opinion, it is fine with me.

If I approach a submissive woman about considering a D/s relationship with me, she will wonder what that relationship might be like, especially if she has heard some of the myriad opinions out there. This is what I offer her as a starting point.

I am a gentleman by nature, and that is clearly reflected in my style as a Dom. I expect for a sub to want to please me, to obey me, communicate with me about her wants and needs, what is working or not working, and in due time, to trust me. In return, I will treat her with respect, help her explore her sexuality by guiding, encouraging, sometimes challenging or pressing her to try the things she is curious about. I will lead her in that exploration by incrementally adding and experimenting with her, ensuring that the things we are trying are done safely and carefully, and are meeting both of our expectations. I will guide and mentor her in other aspects of her life to the extent that she may desire to have me do so, and I will care for her in all the ways necessary to make her feel safe and happy in our relationship.

I believe in some rituals, rules, assignments, and when necessary, punishments, but I do not like giving punishments, and will probably not keep a sub who must be punished frequently. What will the rituals, rules. etc., be? That remains to be seen. They will be developed between me and that prospective sub as we discuss whether we want try a relationship or not. Even after those negotiations, they will evolve as the relationship matures. The relationship will be an exploration and we will add things we both think add to the relationship, and eliminate those things that don't.

My comments above notwithstanding, I am not looking for a relationship that rigidly adheres to some long and arbitrary set of rules, rather, I want a relationship that is meaningful and enjoyable.
This is certainly a touching story of a couple in love, who have grown old together, and still feel that love for each other, even as their roles have been reversed. But I am at a loss to see how it speaks to what a D/s relationship is. Are you saying that in a true D/s relationship, Dom and sub will be in love with each other? Is it a D/s relationship because she has stayed by his side "through thick and thin"? Is it about D/s because they have put away the collars and whips? How is that any different than a couple who have danced together for years, but no longer can because of the inevitable problems aging brings? I am sure there are countless MILLIONS of vanilla relationships that would look from the outside exactly like this, where the man has taken a stronger role in the marriage and the woman deferred to him, but now she has had to begin doing the things he always did because he no longer can. That hardly makes them D/s relationships.

And your footnote - once again someone who wants to tell everyone what "true" D/s is. Is there a rule somewhere that grounds and supports your opinion? Of course there isn't. Do you have to be in love to be in that "true" D/s relationship? I think not. Can you have a "true" D/s relationship that is not 24/7/365 (what about Leap Year)? Of course you can. Can you have a "true" D/s relationship that is just for thrills? Why not?

It seems to me that labeling a relationship "D/s" implies some more or less explicit roles of "Dominant" and "submissive". Beyond that, each relationship will, wittingly or unwittingly, create its own definition of what D/s means to them. If your definition of D/s is really the "true" definition, then it follows that any different definition is invalid. I am certain that there are many people who consider themselves in D/s relationships who would unequivocally disagree with you.
You can't do really hot licks on an acoustic guitar - or can you?

It has been said many times and in many ways by many men who aspire to dominance that the reason for a relationship’s failure was because the submissive refused to be led. That she was not a “good enough submissive.”

I’ve spent over a decade in the lifestyle now, and at this point I’ve learned enough that the phrase upsets my equilibrium. My frustration the product of an understanding of how deleterious the words can be, and how manipulative the act of uttering them is. That frustration or even perhaps that anger which arises in my soul is driven by an innate desire to protect. I know too well the pain that words can create has the potential to be paralyzing. They’re words that invalidate her effort, that belittle her fears, that arouse her anxiety.

And unconsciously or not, is that not the intent? When we’re disappointed in our child, do we not question why ever they would do such a thing? Do we not question their actions hoping to instill in them a sense of shame?

"How could they?"

The fundamental flaw in laying the blame at those we seek to lead is that tools such as shame and embarrassment do not lead us any closer to our objectives. When we shame those we ought to be inspiring by the quality of our words and actions, we lead them down a path of self-doubt. A submissive flower does not bloom in the darkness of failure, it’s petals spread for those that gently coax and nurture it’s growth, those that guide it to life. It sheds it’s shell and opens only for those that envelope them in the warmth and light of love and forgiveness.

There was a moment some years ago, back when I was a much younger and more foolish man than even I am now, when a moment of rare clarity struck me that these words were illogical. Laughably so. You see the inherent contradiction that exists here is that there can be no such thing as a “bad submissive.”

When we think of what any person is, we come to understand that they are the product of their circumstances. Their education, their upbringing, their experiences. I am thirty one years of experience, of education. Equal measures of blessings, curses, education, successes, and failures. A unique blend of genetics and synaptic conditioning that make has arranged my synaptic bridges to interact with my neurons in ways that make me, me.

Those synaptic responses are the results of the programming of our lives. The brilliant thing about the human mind of course is that we can be rewired, our human computer reprogrammed. We can be taught to react to stimuli in different ways. We learn, we grow, we evolve, and our specific species of animal does this better than any other. Almost any part of us can be altered. We can overcome our mental and emotional limitations, we can rise, strive, and conquer; ourselves, our worlds.

So when a dominant tells a submissive that she isn’t, “a good enough submissive,” my mind quavers at the concept. How ever could such a thing as a “bad submissive” exist? Is the submissive not the product of her dominant’s teachings? Is she not the woman that his hands, those that love and those that correct, have melded? Does an artist look down at his tapestry and belittle it for having laid the brushstrokes inadequately?

Is that not what I am, an artist that paints with love instead of oil? Has she not given herself to me, laid herself bare before me for my guidance and entrusted me with her growth? And in accepting this gift of life have I not also accepted responsibility for it’s cultivation? Does the farmer blame the crop that he sows?

No, there is no such thing as a bad canvas, nor a bad seed. There are however poor artists and poor farmers; those that lay their strokes without care, or growers who fail to water their plant. So why would we deign to blame the submissive when she is merely a product of his tutelage, his guidance, his love, his discipline?

When a dominant man says that she has been a “bad submissive,” is he not, in full disclosure, saying that he is a bad dominant? Has he not accepted full responsibility for the quality of his charge, and is he not admitting to negligence or ineffectiveness? In doing so is he not forsaking his duty, his ethics, his ethos?

Surely submissives will err, such is the nature of humanity. But when I wake, to whom will I bestow the obligation of accountability? To the one I’ve aspired to lead? It is a matter of fundamental import wherein I must make a full accounting of my desires. Do I wish to be the man who demurs and deflects? Or do I aspire to be the man to whom she can entrust her bared soul?

Could there ever be such a thing as a “bad submissive?” Are there not only ineffective dominants?


Ahhh, the dreamy, soft-focus fantasy of the perfect D/s relationship, snug in the arms of an omnipotent Dom! I find this quote specious, arrogant, and blatantly self-serving.

What are the points the writer is trying to make? I see several: that it is wrong for a Dom to blame the failure of his D/s relationship on the submissive; that blaming a submissive for a relationship’s failure will harm her; that there are no bad submissives, only bad Doms; and, by implication, that a good Dom can train any submissive so their relationship is a successful one.

Let’s “cut to the chase”. The writer says that a good Dominant will take responsibility for his actions, that he will not try to blame his sub for whatever his shortcomings may have turned out to be. I don’t particularly object to the writer saying so in a lengthy and flowery commentary, but isn’t this a given? Are not all of us responsible for our own actions? Is it ever appropriate to shift the blame for our mistakes or inabilities to someone else? Is anyone confused about this point of view? Well, no, not really, but it gives the writer an opportunity to segue into his “... decade in the lifestyle...”, to vent his “... frustration or perhaps even anger ...”, to tell us how inappropriate it is for bad Doms to invoke shame in their subs. Wait! Do you mean that it is inappropriate for a Dom to talk to his sub in ways that “... invalidate her effort, that belittle her fears, that arouse her anxiety.”? Of course it is, does it need to be said? As a side point, is the bad Dom even making those comments to the submissive, or to some outsider, to explain why the relationship he was just bragging about has suddenly gone bad?

From here the writer steps off into full-blown misogyny. His language and commentary demonstrate his apparent conviction that submissives are helpless waifs. I love this gratuitous line he offers in his conclusion: “Surely submissives will err, such is the nature of humanity.” Those poor innocent dears! What does he mean, that they will forget to take out the trash, that they will put on the pink socks instead of the white ones, or that they will forget to call him Lord God Almighty? The comment implies that subs are incapable of considering the qualities and capabilities that separate good Doms from bad ones; that subs will only commit errors that just require a well-placed slap on the ass from that all-knowing Dom. Are any women his intellectual equal? Not to hear him tell it. Every relationship is different, and there are plenty of Doms who flaunt their misogynous attitudes, with plenty of submissives eager to serve them. Perhaps the writer’s comments reflect a choice on his part, of submissives who meet his description. But there are plenty of submissives who would see him wearing a fox tail butt plug before they would submit to being treated as he suggests.

And what of his other analogies? Does a good craftsman never blame his tools? Decide for yourself, but what do you think the chances are that the best craftsmen have experienced bad tools and refuse to use them? A good craftsman does not blame his tools because he takes a humble attitude that says, “I selected a bad tool for this project and could not make the thing I hoped for, not because the tool was bad, but because I had the hubris to think I could somehow make the tool do things it was incapable of,” after which, that particular tool goes in the trash bin where it belongs, and the craftsman replaces it with a better tool. And you can bet that a good farmer, if he sees a section of his crop growing worse from the rest, will soon have the seed supplier out to explain why there is a difference. Bad canvases are easy to find, where they have been stretched improperly, where the thread has twisted or kinked ...

So are there any “bad submissives”? If we ranked all of the salesmen in the world, wouldn’t the ranking end up in some kind of distribution like the infamous Bell curve, good salesmen to the right, bad salesmen to the left, great salesmen on the extreme right, and really bad salesmen on the extreme left of the curve? Are there no bad sales, only bad salesmen who couldn't close the deal? Would similar curves apply to teacher rankings, to manager rankings, to production workers and farmers and artists? Here is a list of some character traits: pettiness, jealousy, arrogance, selfishness, indifference, manipulation, dishonesty, add some of your own. If any of these were blatantly obvious in a Dom, would he be likely to be considered a “bad” Dom? Now apply each characteristic to a theoretical submissive and see if perhaps she should get the “bad” label as well. Could a good Dom somehow correct these character flaws in a submissive? Maybe, but I suspect that many good Doms would just say, thanks, but no thanks.

The writer’s assertion that there are only good submissives is absurd. Bad Doms are bad because of all sorts of human character flaws. But everyone faces the same character flaws; the differences between good or bad are determined by our personal values and our respective abilities to live up to them. This applies to submissives, too, and the character flaws that someone might point to in a bad Dom may just as easily be found in an equally bad submissive. Can a good Dom always train away these bad character traits from a sub? Another absurdity. Do all submissives come to a D/s relationship as nothing more than a lump of moldable clay? Gratefully, no, they do not!
Yes, but it is not the easiest site to use. I have seen some great posts there, though
A Matter of Choice.

subbyhillygirl:

From time to time, I read posts about submission. Many of them written by Dominants who say, “you have no choice,” and I have to admit, it really bothers me. Isn’t choice the foundation of a happy, functional D/s relationship? Isn’t this a pre-agreed-upon mutual power exchange? Aren’t you supposed to keep her, and care for her, and make sure that no [true] harm comes to her?

When I see Dominants writing nonsense about submissives having no choice, it makes me question their motives. I wonder, for them, is D/s nothing more than an opportunity to abuse someone and call it kink?

When a submissive chooses to defer to her Dominant, she is making the choice to place her Dominant’s needs and desires above her own immediate comfort. She needs more than anything to please her partner, so she must rely upon his good judgment and caring to know when enough is enough. The truth is that we will rarely say “uncle.” Even when we fear things will go too far, we believe in your good judgment and your desire to keep us safe. We put our faith in you, and give of ourselves everything we are and have.

A good Dominant surrenders his ego in an effort to do what is in the best interest of his submissive and of their relationship. She may not always want a spanking; He may not always be in the mood to give it - but he does so to maintain the balance, and to help her feel secure in the structure of their lives together.

So when I read posts under some generic black and white image of a girl kneeling in front of some dude in a suit, it frustrates and upsets me to see, “You have no choice, girl.” Because, yes - she most certainly fucking does.


Since I use a profile picture that is surely one you will find offensive, I feel compelled to respond.

It is not a very bright Dom who says, "You have no choice", and I completely agree with you about the positive attributes of a D/s relationship. I fully understand that a submissive always has a choice about to whom she will submit, as well as what limits she willl set on what her submission will look like. And every responsible Dom must always have his sub's best interests in mind. That said, there seem to be many subs who find the images you hate so much to be very compelling. Several women have commented postively about my profile picture, while I have never received any negative comments about it (though I suppose that will soon change!). Many Doms and subs are delighted to play in ways that would result in very similar pictures if someone happened to be photographing them. So what I object to about your post is the gross generalization that all such images somehow denote that the pictured Dom is a bad one. NOTHING about these images precludes the relationship represented by them from having each and every one of the positive attributes you list in your post.

Shall we assume, based on this picture I have posted from your Tumblr blog, that you and every other sub with a spanked ass are in abusive relationships?




"... One man's pleasure is another man's pain ..." The Athenian Oracle: Being an Entire Collection of all the Valuable Questions and Answers in the Old Athenian Mercuries via http://english.stackexchange.com/
MORE ON COLLARS

There are some other, generally less-significant collars used at times.

An "Everyday" collar may be a necklace, bracelet, or other item that a sub may wear every day. The everyday collar has significance to the couple, without inviting the notice of the wider vanilla community. An everyday collar may serve as a formal collar in some relationships. In others it may only be worn when the formal collar might not be as acceptable.

A "Play" collar may be worn during a scene or other BDSM event for the duration of the event. It may also feature additional D-rings, or other components to facilitate the type of scene during which it is being used. It generally does not denote more than to identify the "bottom" during the scene, and does not signify a relationship with the "Top" in the scene, or with any other Dominant in attendence.

A collar of "Protection" may be worn by an unattached sub to denote that she is under the temporary protection of one or more of the Dominants in a club or at an event. The purpose is to keep the unattached sub from being hassled by others who might not give that sub the respect she deserves during the event. It also does not signify a relationship with a Dominant beyond the protection being offered, nor does it imply some quid pro quo owed to the Dominant giving it from the sub accepting it.
REVIEW: 62Q - Sixty-two Questions For Your Dominant
Michael Makai
ASIN: B00P6OA3J8
200 pages
Publication Date: November 2, 2014
smashwords.com: $6.95 in various electronic formats
amazon.com: $6.95 Kindle Edition; $12.81 Paperback

This book is intended to provide submissives with questions to ask when interviewing prospective Dominants as they evaluate starting a D/s relationship. The focus is on real-life relationships, and has little to say about online relationships. In that context, some questions are not relevant, but many others would convey useful information about a prospective Dominant for an online one.

Chapter One offers guidance about how to interview a Dominant in general - being tactful, showing genuine interest, asking open-ended questions, etc., then suggests a nominal scoring system for the answers received from the Dom being interviewed (red flag, yellow flag, green flag). He lists some stupid questions he has been asked in the past by inquiring subs:

Q: What's your favorite safeword?
Me: "More."

Q: If I told you I'd do anything to serve you, what would you have me do?
Me: Mow and edge my lawn. You got a weedeater?

Makai is serious about his subject, but his "snarky" humor (his word), like in his answers to the questions above, runs throughout the book.

Makai sees the interview process as an on-going one. In Chapter Two he talks a bit about how the questions are organized against the timeline of a progressing relationship, from first interactions, all the way through, and even after, accepting a Dom's collar and embarking on a 24/7 relationship. The chapter includes a worthwhile comment about the pitfalls of "New Relationship Energy", which he defines as "... that wonderful, giddy feeling you get in the initial phases of any budding relationship."

The questions begin in Chapter Two as well. All of the questions are posed in the same format:
Question: The main point being considered
Follow-up questions: Additional questions a sub might ask to expand the answer to the main question
Why it's important: How the question helps the sub decide if the Dom will suit her/him or not
How to interpret the answer: Possible explanations or hidden meanings in the answers received, but also explanations for why an apparently negative answer may not necessarily be so.
What you should do about it: What the sub should do with the information received, or how she might want to respond to it
My Two Cents: Anecdotes from Makai's own experiences, usually humorous, some hilarious, but all of them explaining how the question did, or might have, prevented difficulties for the sub.

The questions themselves cover a Dominant's attitudes and beliefs about D/s relationships, experience in the lifestyle, typical expectations he has of sub activities, accountability, punishment, and duties that might be imposed, personal information about the Dom, where he lives, what kind of job he has, if he is financially secure, whether he has any medical or other issues the sub will have to deal with at some time in the future, what he does for fun outside of D/s and BDSM activities.

Chapter Three lists questions a sub might ask as the relationship progresses, but before a collar is accepted. These questions include whether the sub is what the Dom expected her to be, if there is any "Prime Directive" rule that supercedes all others, what the limits of the Dom's authority are regarding the sub's finances, child discipline, future career choices, etc.

In Chapter Four, the four of the remaining questions cover the sub's status as the Dom's property, whether she must keep a journal for him to review, what the sub may disclose to others about the relationship, and more specificity about the commitment symbolized by the collar. The final question asks where the relationship will go after the collaring: what is the next phase of our relationship, how will we get there, how long will it take, and how will it make us happier.

In the Epilogue, Makai encourages the prospective sub to get into the local BDSM community to develop a network of friends and others who can offer her insights about potential Doms, and to cut her losses when the questions indicate that a particular Dom will not be a good fit for her.

Throughout the book, Makai emphasizes that most of the questions cannot really inform a sub, until she understands her own expectations about what the question means to her. He stresses, over and over, that a sub has a responsibility to be informed, too. He also makes the point that the questions are a screening process to help the sub find a candidate Dom that is compatible. It is not a measure of whether a Dom is necessarily good or bad, but whether he is Mr. Right or Mr. Wrong. That said, the first group of questions may also ferret out posers and others who may not have the sub's best interests at heart.

The book also includes a Glossary of BDSM terms.

The book asks good, reasonable questions, even as it reminds a sub that a Dom with all "green flag answers still may not be the right one, and "red flag" answers do not necessarily automatically rule out a potential Dom. The sub still must take her time with the decisions about a possible relationship, and listen to her friends and her own intuition.

As I Dom, I found myself trying with each question, to see how I measure up, so it was a worthwhile read for me.
Review: Making Online Submission Work For You
lunaKM and jessica elizabeth
www.submissiveguide.com (I have no affiliation with this web site or the authors)
ASIN:B0058OCTXY
22 pages
Publication Date: June 28, 2011

I am an online Dom, so my review is written from that perspective. I originally bought copies of the book for myself and for a sub who was curious about D/s relationships, but had never been in one. I bought the Kindle version of this book for $0.99, but it is available for free on the web site shown above as a PDF file. Though a "recommended" price is $5.00, you may pay whatever you think the book is worth. The author first began exploring BDSM through online relationships, ultimately moving to a full-time real-life relationship.

The "Introduction" discusses why people seek online relationships, and how the relationships typically work.

The next section of the book was the most useful to me: "Can Online Training Work?" This section explains that a D/s relationship will include tasks for a submissive to perform, then offers several good ideas about punishments. The author mentions a number of typical "tasks" for a submissive. Since some of these tasks will be time-consuming, they may be harder for some submissives to do if they are working or going to school full-time, or still living at home or are in a real-life relationship. The author made what I think is an important point about punishments: "... punishment is not to be enjoyed by either party in order for it to work correctly. It is difficult for sex to be a good punishment because of this." The punishments suggested generally meet this criterion. Since they will be unpleasant to do, they should be more meaningful to the sub and her Dom. The section also goes into ways to provide proof that a punishment has been done. The author states that training and punishment depend on good communication, and must be subject to discussion and negotiation.

"The Dangers of Blind Faith" section of the book explains how to be cautious when seeking an online Dom and offers some tips about how to decide if a Dom has your best interests at heart or not.

"Staying Safe Online" goes over the things that a submissive should NOT reveal, or be required to reveal. These seemed obvious to me, but may not be so obvious to a young sub. It also includes some comments about "Keep[ing] Your Heart Protected", urging caution about falling in love online.

In "Real Life vs. Online", the author discusses her transition from an online relationship to a full-time real life relationship, making the obvious point that the two relationships are not the same.

The book closes with "When Online Isn't Enough", which suggests some ways to get connected with the real life BDSM community.

This book is a great resource, especially considering its $0.99 price. For people interested in what an online relationship might be like, either Dom or sub, it has lots of good introductory information packed into its 22 pages.
I am sure that many Lush members read more widely than just here on Lush, and among members interested in the BDSM lifestyle, many of us have read some of the many self-help books on the subject. I am interested in continually expanding my own knowledge of the lifestyle, but it is hard to tell from the typical blurb about a book that appears with the book's listing on some website whether the book will be worth my time or not. I am hopeful that interested readers will share reviews of the books they have read, giving us all a bit more information about books we may be considering.


Two greats for the price of one! Jazz isn't to everyone's taste, but Di Meola and Pastorius are as good as they come on guitar and bass.
I set my settings to have chat requests automatically open. They do, but they always open multiple instances of the window, usually three, but once five were opened. I have since turned off the auto-open fuction, but I wonder if there is something else I should be doing. I only visit Lush in Chrome Incognito mode, so no cookies get saved. I don't know if that has anything to do with it or not.
I, too, am willing to proofread, and to a lesser extent, edit stories. PM me if you are interested.
I am willing to proofread, and to a lesser extent, edit stories. I am not a published author on Lush, but before retiring, technical writing was a core part of the work I did. PM me if interested.
I already paid. I cannot find many other places where I can have so much fun for a mere $20. For me, it was a no-brainer!