|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've been into BDSM since I was in my teens, and have had a couple of long-term relationships of a BDSM nature. I've realized that vanilla is simply not enough for me.
I am looking to find a long-term dynamic/relationship that involves submission more than just in the bedroom. I'd like some level of constant submission -- somewhere between just being deferential and full-on TPE. However, I do not like micromanagement. I want someone who can think and act for themselves within the established boundaries and rules of the dynamic.
I also would prefer someone with opinions who can (respectfully) disagree with me.
Other factoids: I will always treat you with respect unless we agree otherwise. Intelligence turns me on more than looks. Spelling and grammar count.
I am open to getting involved with a long-distance partner, with the intention of them relocating to San Francisco after a reasonably short time. My house has plenty of space for another person.
|
|
|
|
|
One I am talking to asked me to give her a sense of "my darkness."
"My darkness" is a misnomer; I do not consider myself a dark person. I am, in fact, optimistic and happy most of the time, and I maintain that demeanor with my sub/slave. The dynamic I seek is not all about formality, restrictions, heavy pain and suffering; it is also about sharing laughter, fun experiences, and deep conversation or debate. |
|
|
|
|
== Results from http://bdsmtest.org/ ==
100% Dominant
95% Master/Mistress
89% Owner
88% Degradation giver
85% Non-monogamist
84% Bondage giver
82% Sadist
70% Experimentalist
59% Brat tamer
45% Primal (Hunter)
45% Daddy/Mommy
22% Vanilla
16% Voyeur
11% Exhibitionist
2% Masochist
2% Primal (Prey)
1% Ageplayer
0% Submissive
0% Slave
0% Bondage receiver
0% Degradation receiver
0% Brat
0% girl/boy
0% Pet
0% Switch
0% All-Rounder
See my results online at http://bdsmtest.org/result.?id=505191 |
|
|
|
|
I was reading Asimov's "I, Robot" yet again, and it struck me that his Three Laws of Robotics are actually remarkably adaptable to be the Three Laws of the Slave. See:
1. A slave may not harm its master or, through inaction, allow its master to come to harm.
2. A slave must obey the orders given to it by its master, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A slave must prevent itself from coming to harm, as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
And I think that’s a beautiful framework. It doesn’t exact match the Prime Directive – the third law would have to be higher up – but honestly, I like it better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| Age: 27 |
| Fairborn,
Ohio |
|
|
|
| |
