|
|
|  | |  | |  | |  | |  | | |  | |
|
|
|
merrywench
|
|
|
|
rennie
|
|
|
|
kittengirl8
|
|
|
|
tessadbg
|
|
|
|
harmoni
|
|
|
|
lilprincess71
|
|
|
|
xurbabygirl
|
|
|
|
lyrehc
|
|
|
|
likeuthis
|
|
|
|
newslang
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Im a nurturing and playful Dominant, like a father figure in how I deal with my authority.In other parts of my life, I tend to be interested in history, computers, cooking, sometimes hockey, and have recently started wine tasting. I work in IT in the past that has included a couple universities. Right now I work for an online service. Im also a dog owner. I used to mainly have big dogs, but something about dachshunds has managed to capture my attention. I also like cats, but thats something new (within the last 3 years).
If youd like to know anything more about me, just ask. I promise that I dont confuse Dom with Jerk. I have better manners than that. And, if it surprises you to get a mannered email from a Dominant, dont mistake manners for submission, either. Theres a time and a place for everything.
|
|
|
|
|
So, after 6.5 years, my little and I called it quits a month ago. We're still good friends (she still lives with me; we make good housemates), and it was fairly mutual. We just realized the "couple" part of our relationship (both kinky and vanilla) had been over for a while. The least drama-filled breakup I've ever been through.
I'm not posting this as a "poor me", just an update in my state-of-things. Like I said, the relationship had been over for a while, I actually "got over it" a while back. This was just us both finally acknowledging it. |
|
|
|
|
"It’s not perfection of outcome of the task, it's being present in the moment of service with full devotion." |
|
|
|
|
I was just reading someone's profile, and saw this:
Tell me what you are looking for, in all the messages I have gotten so
far, everyone seems interested in what I want? Im not here looking for
someone to allow me to top from the bottom, because my personality
certainly will do that if allowed to.
That sort of sets off a pet peeve of mine. Communication is NOT "topping from the bottom". It's informing your Dominant/Owner of your internal state. It's fully yielding to, and opening up to, your Dominant.
It's valuable for training: Positive reinforcement is much more effective than either punishment or
negative reinforcement. If the Dom knows your likes, then they can much
better reinforce your good behaviors by giving you something you like
... or withhold that thing you like to get you to avoid bad behaviors
... or bestow upon you things you don't like to get you to avoid bad
behaviors.
And, again, in order for that to work, they have to know what your likes and dislikes are.
It's also valuable in the larger scope of relationship compatibility. In order for _ANY_ long term relationship to work, vanilla or BDSM,
both people have to have some compatibility. If you're looking for
Gorean, and they're a Daddy Dom, then what you like is significant to
the success of your slavery. If you want a heavily sadistic pain Dom,
because you're a total pain slut, then ending up with a sensual Dom
probably wont put you into a relationship you're going to want to stick
with.
At some point, both you and the Dom have to state what it
is you want. It doesn't have to be exact, and you are certainly welcome
to give up a lot of your own preference in your service (maybe that's
what you want to have your desires quashed -- not a rare thing for a
slave), but you two at least have to be on the same page, and headed in
the same direction, in order for it to work.
So, if you don't
want your desires to matter, put that directly in your profile: If you
really want or need to know what I want, I want my desires to be
ignored. I want to be so thoroughly a slave that my desires don't
matter. You will certainly get responses from a certain subset of Doms. But even that is "you stating what you want", and is thus a valid question for a Dom to ask.
But,
like I said, the question itself isn't about topping from the bottom.
It's about being sure that the owned and the owner are on the same
page, and are headed in a similar direction.
Even without that: if you're truly a slave (as she claims to be), then ANY question your Dominant asks you is a valid question, and your only valid answer is to answer truthfully. Doing anything else is you holding out on your Owner. The only "out" here is that these people aren't yet your owner. But once someone is your owner, having them ask what you want isn't them letting you "top from the bottom". Its them giving you an opportunity to fully submit to them by being fully open about what's in your mind.
|
|
|
|
|
so, since I wrote my last entry about my little, she's been out to visit two more times. She was even out here for Folsom St. Faire (first time for both of us).
Tomorrow, I fly to her. She has already packed up the bulk of her stuff, and had it taken away by movers. We'll get the last tid bits into a rental car, and drive back. Then she'll be a live-in little, instead of a long distance little.
:-)
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/weird/SM-Whips-Couples-Into-Shape-Study.html
Gist: S&M leads to tighter "bonds" (no pun intended) between partners, and lower stess levels in the relationship.
(which, I am sure, is not really news to many of you) |
|
|
|
|
Some idiot out there (something about being Ova someone's knee) sent a message saying:
You've "collared" someone who lives in another state? LOL I LOVE how "doms" throw the word around.Thanks for the laugh.
And then blocked me before I could reply with:
I collared her when she came out to visit. I put an actual collar around her neck. Just because it's long distance doesn't make it any less real/sincere. We're also discussing when she's going to move out here.
Thanks for showing that you're the ill mannered ignorant sort. No wonder you're Daddy-less. |
|
|
|
|
As of Feb 15th, I've collared xurbabygirl. |
|
|
|
|
Over the summer I had been a regular in one of the chatrooms (one of the bigger ones), but as the school year started (as I'm staff at a University), I got a little busy. I recently came back to find a bit of drama going on.
It seems that there's this childish idea that you can't be a member of multiple rooms, and contribute to all of them fully, and genuinely. That jingoist idea that if you're "with them", then you're "against us". So, let me just be frank:
That's complete BS. It's an idea that comes from small, insecure, petty minds. It's the high school/secondary school clique mentality that everyone was supposed to leave behind when they became adults. Banning people over it? The height of adolescent behavior. Grow up. Get lives. They're just chat rooms.
To take it further by requiring an _oath_ in order to get un-banned? That's just beyond bizarre obsessive megalomaniacal behavior. That's not "being a DaddyDom", that's being a controlling insecure child.
These days, you'll find me in #DaddysDen if you want to chat (esp. if you're one of my older chat friends). I wont be asking to be let back into the old room ... if they invite me back, that's their choice, but I'm not going to seek out being under the thumb of a petty dictator nor his conniving little side-kick.
My happiness in life and my self image don't depend upon chat rooms. Neither should yours. |
|
|
|
|
Just had to post this, had me laughing quite a bit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grGrN_nuWg8
(watch the whole video)
|
|
|
|
|
Someone recently asked me about my interest/thoughts/etc. in the ageplay/Daddy-girl part of BDSM. Here's what I explained to her:
I see 4 sort of elements/sub-groups in the ageplay community.
First
is the people who are just looking for a different tone of BDSM. Sort
of like the "pet play", "medical play", and "military play" types, only
instead of a military mindset, where it's about rank and orders ...
instead it's about the _type_ of relationship a daughter has with her
father, or a son has with his mother, etc. This is actually the
category I'm in -- I am not all bossy, all dark, etc. I am nurturing,
sometimes soft and loving, sometimes authoritarian, sometimes
disciplinarian. Just like a father might be. When I've been with a girl
who was in college, I get interested in what she's taking, how her
grades are going, things like that.
Second is "adult
babies/little girls/boys". This is where the sub is playing out some
part of their inner child that they feel they need to express. Some of
my subs have been in this category (though, not the "baby" category
...). I've seen that with some, it's about how some part of their
childhood wasn't allowed to be resolved, so they hold on to this one
part of themselves ... and they find the ability to act that age out as
being therapeutic. For example, I had one sub whose father had had a
huge accident when she was 12. It caused her to have to grow up a lot
sooner than she should have, so a lot of her young-adolescence was
never really lived out. So, with me, she would sort of go to a
young-teen kind of tone and attitude. For me, I don't need my sub to be
an adult little ... it can be somewhat fun and playful, but beyond
that, it's not necessary for me. My "little girl" can act as a full
adult and I'll still be interested. I don't get into those who act like
babies (esp. not the diaper wearing group), nor very young children.
That starts to seem too much like virtual pedophilia (which I'll
mention later).
Third is virtual incest fetish ... people who
are pretending to have sex with a
daughter/son/father/mother/uncle/aunt/etc. Even though it uses the same
names as the first group, the first group isn't necessarily playing out
incest fantasies. I certainly don't have any incest fantasies ... I
don't have a real daughter, but the idea of having sex with my supposed
biological daughter is kinda squicky to me. But I did know a girl who
seriously had an Oedipal complex ... for her, calling me Daddy, when we
played, was a much more literal thing (like when a girl might fantasize
that her boyfriend is some sexy actor, instead of being her actual
boyfriend). She had issues, though... far beyond incest fantasies.
Fourth
is virtual pedophilia ... also not something I'm in to. It's sort of
like the incest one, only it's more about the idea of age, just like
the adult baby group. And it's sort of the flip-side of the adult
little girl group. Some Daddy-types are specifically using an "adult
little girl" as way to legally play out molestation fantasies. Some of
them are healthy people with a fetish, some of them are ... pedophiles
who are managing their disease (sometimes merely for legal reasons,
sometimes for more enlightened reasons -- like they know the real thin
would inflict trauma).
For me, it's really that I don't see
myself being a leather Dom type. Nor a military Dom. Nor a Gorean type,
nor a nazi Dom. Those just aren't me. I found that when I played with
girls who liked to call me Daddy, it struck a cord with me just as
deeply as when I first starting playing with submissive girls. So I
went with it, learned about which parts I liked or didn't like ... and
that's where I am.
I certainly don't think about actual little
girls, nor my younger relatives, when I am playing with any of the subs
I've had Daddy/girl relationships with. I can just as truly own my girl
as if I was a Slave Master and she was a slave. Only, the words,
attitudes, expressions, etc. are all oriented more around Daddy and
daughter than around some other motif.
|
|
|
|
|
Every so often I see some comment
about "I know it's not normal/usual/acceptable for a sub to contact a
Dom first", and I wonder where that comes from. So I thought I'd air my
thoughts on it:
1) I don't live in someone else's protocol, I live my own life. I believe in a more organic interaction between people ... in a sense, I believe in descriptive grammars over proscriptive grammars. And, I care more that my sub be sincere to me in her submission and feelings, than whether or not she fits a bullet item of behaviors (which can be met without sincerity). Part of what being a Dominant means to me is that I make my rules, not some other person (or persons) who says they're a Dom/Master. I not only don't submit to you, I don't submit to them. If you need to take comfort in every Dom/Master being the same, adhering to the same protocol and behaviors, then I'm not the Dom for you. If you just depend upon protocol because you need to know that I'll be consistent and fair, then I do try to have that elementin my life (but I'm certainly not perfect), you'll just have to get to know me to find out what my consistent behaviors might be. 2) Whether a Dominant should pursue a sub, and thus contact the sub first ... or a sub/slave should be the one doing the "work" to earn her place at her Dom/Master's feet, and thus contact him first, is entirely a situational matter, a matter of personal interpretation. It depends upon the two people involved. Because we aren't having a first meeting in person, but a first meeting online, you can't very well politely stand off to the side of me waiting for me to notice you, and/or trying to figure out which behavior set matches me. If you're really worried that I don't want to be contacted first, say "I'm sorry I might be breaking the rules here, but I want to say hi/get to know you/find you interesting/etc.".
3) In terms of polite behavior, I find it FAR more rude to have you not reply to a sincere message (yes, even if its a one liner) than to have you contact me first. If you're worried about manners, then, as I said above, just be sure that your messages to me are polite and sincere.
4) Just because I'm A DaddyDom, doesn't mean I'm YOUR Dom. You hear subs say their version of that all the time, but it cuts both ways. I'm not YOUR Dom. I'm just some guy, who happens to be a Dom, who you happen to be bumping in to on a BDSM web site. Just as I don't get to be your Dom until I earn that place in your life, you don't get to be my sub until you earn that place in my life. Until then, treat me like a human being, not like some god up on a pedastal. If you want to have contact with me, then do it. For all you know, it may be the first step I expect you to take in earning your spot in my life. And even if it's not that, you're going to have to be my friend first, so start out with that mindset when deciding if you want to get to know me.
That doesn't mean you have to approach me in a voice of equality -- be submissive in tone/capitalization/etc. with me if you're more comfortable with that. Just don't expect me to respond on that level until I decide that I want that to be our level of interaction.
So, in summary: if you want to get to know me, send me a message. Even if you're contacting me first. If you're worried about the protocol of who should contact whom first, then here: I'm ordering you to contact me first; be polite, but don't just sit there waiting for me to say hi first.
|
|
|
|
|
You can read a couple of stories I've written, and things like that, over at my livejournal ( http://john_in_scruz.livejournal.com ). Make sure you look at my profile there, too.
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed someone tried to send me a chat request on here earlier. I use yahoo, aol, google-talk, and/or msn for chatting. If you want to contact me there, feel free to ask for my screen names. I may sometimes show up on the chats here, but I probably wont respond to chat requests (this includes the private chat rooms) -- I don't mean to be rude, I just barely noticed the one I had tonight, and it was gone before I could respond.
If you want my SN for any of those chat systems, just ask. Friends or more, I'm always open to meeting new people. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| Age: 23 |
| Sydney,
Australia |
|
|
|
| | |
