Jump to content
IvyLarae

Dom/ Domme Double Standards

Recommended Posts

So I admit I've been looking for a master or Mistress to spend my time with and theirs a pattern I've noticed when people see my pick (which is on my alt Tessreil Resident) about it

It reads:

 I am a masochistic Para RPer, I love situations that have me covered in welts, slap/ spank marks, cuts and bruises.

For a more in-dept idea of what I am and am not into, please see the pick Limits/ Likes/Dislikes

Please read the pick "My Role" to get an idea of what kind of bottom I am.

**If you want it to, this relationship will extend to all 5 of my alts. Unless you want to be, you won't be owning a character, you'll be owning me, so if you prefer the look of another alt, or want to collar them all, then your welcome to if I accept your collar**

Here are the things I am looking for:
- Fully updated, mesh avatar. If you wear bento hands, then please wear a bento AO
- Know how to emote properly in a turn-based  paragraph role-play style.
- Be okay with me playing at other sims and with other people when not in your presence/ when your offline
- Be okay with how I look. A dress code is fine.

If the above sounds like something you would enjoy or if you have questions , then please IM me!

You'll notice that I have the 4th point of my pick underlined, and its for a reason. The pattern I've noticed, is a lot of them have a problem with me not being willing to be exclusive to them right at the beginning of the relationship, despite me telling I would probably be willing once i was sure They would be everything I wanted and if I enjoyed what was happening. Then when I bring up the question if they would be willing to be exclusive to me and me only, they act like I'm rubbing salt in an open wound that I would ever suggest such a thing.

Have you all ever experienced this???

Edited by IvyLarae
Grammatical Errors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, IvyLarae said:

 

Have you all ever experienced this???

No. 

I'm surprised that you find ppl how was able to read and understand most of what you wrote. 

As I see most "dom, master", etc are think the fallowing: me, me all about me, want want, me want, me, me.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, IvyLarae said:

Then when I bring up the question if they would be willing to be exclusive to me and me only, they act like I'm rubbing salt in an open wound that I would ever suggest such a thing.

Have you all ever experienced this???

I've run into plenty of crap like this. It's certainly not limited to BDSM, though I can see it being even worse in that, or even sex sims. Just visiting a scenic (non-RP) place or checking out a new textures store or whatever, and someone starts a random conversation which quickly becomes a list of his requirements and then an utter negation of my feelings about them. Some people are just completely focused on their needs and getting them met.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, IvyLarae said:

 

Have you all ever experienced this???

You can't expect your dom/me to be exclusive to you. In my opinion an owned sub can only have one owner, but an owner can have many collared subs.

I agree though, you need to be free to do what you want when your owner is not around, just be ready to come to them when they log in.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

You can't expect your dom/me to be exclusive to you.

No? Are subs cattle? I see you still have much to learn about the variety of possible BDSM relationships...

  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

   If that's your wishes and terms, that's just what it is and whoever wants to have a go at it will have to accept and respect that. People have different needs and wishes though, so I don't think that there's anything strange or wrong with people having conflicting terms. Polyamory is pretty trendy even with the mainstream now, and has been a thing in the BDSM communities for a long time - but expecting that everyone should be fine with it is pretty silly. To some people, anything but absolute monogamy simply doesn't work, and that's fine; that's their terms, and should someone want to be with such a person, that's a term to be accepted and respected likewise.

   I've been a monogamist for the most part of my life, getting into polygamist relationships has been a relatively new thing for me. So from the perspective of a dominant who certainly can get behind a monogamist mindset: there's a whole lot more involved in attaining a submissive, than copying a contract from the Interwebs, popping a collar on them, swatting them on the posterior and getting to play. Personally I'd find it entirely impossible if I didn't at some level connect with the person to begin with, and finding out whether two people are compatible is a process that takes time. Not to sound cruel, but on paper you're 'just yet another submissive', whatever you offer is offered by basically anyone, why should I pick you? And you wanting to begin with an open relationship, well that can easily be interpreted as if you just aren't ready for a monogamous D/s relationship - it sounds like what you want is to play. So, play. Meanwhile I'd just find someone whose wants and terms are more in line with my own.

   That doesn't by any means make your terms are invalid - you're wholly allowed to make whatever demands you want. You just can't expect that everyone will accept your terms. Likewise, I don't expect everyone to accept my terms; when that occurs and there isn't enough give to negotiate, no hard feelings but that's not going to go anywhere. Relationship-wise, at least. 

   Just as there are dumbinants/wannadoms who can only see their own wants and needs, there are submissives who expect that they are entitled to being served whatever they want on a silver platter and are very quick to say that anyone who doesn't give them what they want aren't 'real' doms. I find it equally hilarious and intellectually revolting that people can't see beyond the constraints of whatever rules they have subscribed to as if they were commandments of some all-powerful BDSM deity by whom they stand in the ranks of the 'chosen ones' that know the 'truth'. It's pseudo-religious yap. 

   People like and want different things. Get over it and move on.

Edited by Orwar
  • Like 10
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Fionalein said:

No? Are subs cattle? I see you still have much to learn about the variety of possible BDSM relationships...

If she "expects" her dom/me to be exclusive to her, then she's trying to domme from the bottom, which probably no real dom/me would put up with.

I'm not claiming to be an expert, but I think that there are as many variations of bdsm relations as there are people that into those relationships.

  • Like 4
  • Confused 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm "in" a d/s relationship with my bf, but he's not really a dom, and I'm not really a sub. Everything he "does" to me, it's because  I want him to do it, but on the other hand, I only want him to do it, if he likes it and enjoys doing it.

I suppose to"real" bdsm practitioners, we are the worst sort of posers and fakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

If she "expects" her dom/me to be exclusive to her, then she's trying to domme from the bottom, which probably no real dom/me would put up with.

Not necessarily,  if its a limit for her, she should communicate ALL limits, and this sounds like a hard limit for her, before entering into a relationship with a Dom(me).  If that's not what they both want then they both move on.   It is possible to have a monogamous D/s relationship if that is what is agreed from the start.  (not going to get into the alts playing part as we all know that can happen too)  

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

If she "expects" her dom/me to be exclusive to her, then she's trying to domme from the bottom, which probably no real dom/me would put up with.

I'm not claiming to be an expert, but I think that there are as many variations of bdsm relations as there are people that into those relationships.

I personally don't see how not putting up with double standards is Domming from the bottom. I personally don't believe in having expectations from someone that you can't do yourself. So why if they can't be exclusive to me, should I be willing to be exclusive to them?

Edited by IvyLarae
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

If she "expects" her dom/me to be exclusive to her, then she's trying to domme from the bottom, which probably no real dom/me would put up with.

I'm not claiming to be an expert, but I think that there are as many variations of bdsm relations as there are people that into those relationships.

..That's not how  topping from the bottom works. That isn't how BDSM even works.   Before even a single "scene"  begins let alone a commitment to a d/s relationship those involved  make it clear what they expect, their likes, dislikes and limits,. on both sides.

Topping from the bottom is  trying to dictate the scene while in the midst of it instead of letting the Top do their thing. It's not saying. "Hey I'm uncomfortable with how you expect me to be exclusive to you, but you won't be exclusive to me." That's  basic  respect and relationship building 101.

If someone is monogamous, then they're monogamous. But they're also more likely willing to outright state it. The people getting uppity when she asks if they'd be exclusive to her instead of merely going. "Yeah, I prefer exclusivity both ends " or gosh even admitting that they'll  have other subs (but somehow still demand said subs only play with them.. which is a  whole different kettle of fish.) are being deliberately  obtuse and  appear to lack the maturity to simply spit out what they really want out of  such a relationship. I doubt  OP would pitch  a *****-fit if they simply answered yes or no.

 

It's ok to be mono. It's ok to be poly. But I think we can all agree that demanding  someone to be  one or the other while you don't and do whatever you want. IS a hypocritical double-standard.

 

 

  • Like 14
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The not being exclusive part makes me think you (and I am joking here!) go around and collect a handful of boyfriends to fool around with until one day you decide on one to put a ring on. How many of that handful of boyfriends would be fine with there being others? ;)

 

On a more serious note, I can personally understand why they would be reluctant to spend time rp'ing with you if you are not comitted to it as much as they are. If you stray while they treat it as an exclusive relationship than your interests simply differ and it's not meant to be. You seem to have found those who are looking for an exclusive one from the get go while you would prefer to leave it open ended. That's just a difference of taste, both is completely fine, and that is something you can't fix. To each their own, live and let live and all that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a lot of subs realize that dominating someone is more work then being submissive. Like, the actual difference when done properly is staggering.

A proper sub really needs to focus on what they are giving back, because just doing what your told isn't worth anything, its just what is expected.

Needs to be equivalent exchange, which this self advertisement does not imply or reflect.

Not enough thinking on the subs half, which is unfortunately also the case with most submissives in SL.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IvyLarae said:

I personally don't see how not putting up with double standards is Domming from the bottom. I personally don't believe in having expectations from someone that you can't do yourself. So why if they can't be exclusive to me, should I be willing to be exclusive to them?

Why should YOU be exclusive if YOUR partner won't?

There is no reason whatsoever.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

Why should YOU be exclusive if YOUR partner won't?

There is no reason whatsoever.

Exactly! The main reason i get on SL is because I love to Role play, If I become monogamous to someone, then its going to be at a time when I am 100% sure I will be happy in doing so, and I can't be that sure at the very beginning of the relationship unless I've known the person for a long time. Why should i be expected to just sit around and wait for him/ her when they still get to play with whomever they wish, whenever they want, its unfair. if it was RL then its an entirely different story

 

50 minutes ago, Syn Anatine said:

On a more serious note, I can personally understand why they would be reluctant to spend time rp'ing with you if you are not committed to it as much as they are. If you stray while they treat it as an exclusive relationship than your interests simply differ and it's not meant to be. You seem to have found those who are looking for an exclusive one from the get go while you would prefer to leave it open ended. That's just a difference of taste, both is completely fine, and that is something you can't fix. To each their own, live and let live and all that.

Thats just it and the point I am trying to make. I am not saying all doms are like this, I've met quite a few who are completely okay with their subs going off and doing their own thing when they arent in their service and when they're offline. The point I am trying to make, I am not saying I'm not willing to be monogamous, I said in my original post, when people have asked me about it, I told them I would be willing to once I was sure that we were a sure match and I was completely happy with what was going on ( I'd have said as much in the pick itself, but with the limitations, its hard to fit all of that in)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

   The BDSM community in SL is so full of people who don't know or care about what they are doing, and a lot of people have either been hurt directly by it or witnessed friends being hurt or cheated - BDSM should be all about trust, it's one of the - if not 'the' - pillar that the foundation stands on. 

   As Jennifer said, and as I mentioned earlier - a dominant has to put a lot of work into a relationship, in a wholly different way than a submissive does. It's a huge responsibility to take on and really shouldn't be done lightly. Why should any dominant who is looking for a monogamous/exclusive relationship put in all that effort if you can't even give them a token of good faith? It's easy enough to find casual kinksters up for doing a scene every now and then, and there are communities in which people are looking for just that, and that's a perfectly acceptable way to go about it. But as the expression goes, you can't have the cake and eat the cake - if you want a monogamous relationship with a dominant, part of your flipping role is to be there for them and support them. There are a billion ways one can do that, but the way you're phrasing it, you're saying that you'd rather want to spend that time getting your needs fulfilled elsewhere.

14 hours ago, IvyLarae said:

- Be okay with me playing at other sims and with other people when not in your presence/ when your offline

   What if they come online when you're mid-scene? Do they still have precedence over your casual bedfellow or are they to twiddle their thumbs until you're finished? You've essentially created a term that really should be part of an agreement or contract with extensive enough subtitle to make it entirely clear what the terms actually are. And whilst one might think that 'obviously' the statement goes both ways, you've written 'okay with me playing at other sims and other people'. 

   Rephrase the sentence and save yourself the headache.

   A D/s relationship is still just that, a relationship, it's about giving and taking - the dynamic certainly is different from vanilla in many ways, but you can't seriously expect that someone will go through all that a dominant has to go through to make you happy, if the moment they aren't in the mood or around to service you, you turn your attention elsewhere. 

   People often talk about how wannadoms/dumbinants/bad doms that abuse their submissives are the worst, but very rarely does anyone address how submissives can hurt and abuse their dominants. That someone who can trust another to tie them up, blindfold them and ball-gag or choke them all at once, can themselves break the mutuality of that trust by cheating on their partners, manipulating and threaten their partners, and all too frequently completely neglect their dominants' needs for aftercare, affection and affirmation. Whilst a submissive is lyrically swimming in bliss at the apogee of a scene, a dominant must even through those moments be aware, creative and intelligent not just about their own status and actions, but of that of both or all involved in the scene. The repercussions of top/dom-drop can be truly devastating. If you want a dominant to be there for you, the very least you'll have to do in turn is to be there for them.

   You may very well find someone who's absolutely fine with a relationship that's open in the beginning though. But that's just some examples of why a dominant might not like what they see when they read your profile. Just my two cents, anyway. 

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I'm one of the Dommes who allows her subs to roam and play on other sims while I'm offline. However,  I state in the Rules that I teach each of my subs, that I am supposed to be greeted when I do come online.

Quote

#5: You're not prisoners on my land. If you want to visit friends or attend a job inworld, tell me. If necessary, I'll lift restrictions that hinder you to go visit or work, so that you're not too isolated or too focused on me. You're with me on your own free will, you don't need to revert to alts in order to do your job or meet your friends. Also: When I'm not online, you're free to travel through SL anyways (except if you have a temporal penalty - in this case, I expect you to stay where you are).

#6: Even though I give you certain freedoms with Rule #5, I do expect that you at least recognize my presence. That's why you will greet me as soon as you see that I'm online. You don't have to let everything go and hurry home - just greet me, and we'll proceed from there.

2

I worded this Rule #5 that way because I had a sub who became like "*You* are my SL, everybody else and everything else can f* off". And when she acted disrespectful toward me, and badly against my other subs, I kicked her -- only to learn her "logic" amongst a lot of drama and stalking: "I'm leaving for good: No time with you, no SL for me!" 🤨

However, I also taught my subs that, whenever I learn that they serve someone else during my absence without my previous OK, I will consider it as if they left me. 😈

Edited by ThorinII
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Orwar said:
18 hours ago, IvyLarae said:

- Be okay with me playing at other sims and with other people when not in your presence/ when your offline

   What if they come online when you're mid-scene? Do they still have precedence over your casual bedfellow or are they to twiddle their thumbs until you're finished? You've essentially created a term that really should be part of an agreement or contract with extensive enough subtitle to make it entirely clear what the terms actually are. And whilst one might think that 'obviously' the statement goes both ways, you've written 'okay with me playing at other sims and other people'. 

   Rephrase the sentence and save yourself the headache.

I'm genuinely asking because I'm drawing a blank here lol how would you suggest I word that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I would reframe the whole thing in terms of looking for a committed play partner, or some such phrasing. Skip "ownership" even if that is the ultimate goal, because of the strong reactions it can evoke, as seen in this thread.  When you find a match in terms of style, schedule, chemistry etc, a conversation about taking it further is only natural. The only long term D/s relationship I've had happened by accident is where I am coming from :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, IvyLarae said:

I'm genuinely asking because I'm drawing a blank here lol how would you suggest I word that?

   Well, to put it as plain and simple as possible, you could just pop 'polygamous'/'polyamorous' in there. It isn't until in the discourse of the post that you at all bring up wanting to be exclusive later down the line, and that's a discussion you'll need to have with your potential partner anyway. Of course, they might then expect the relationship to be permanently open, and if that's not what you want (I've rather lost track by this point) you could just shortly put it down as 'poly - willing to go exclusive with the right person*' (*insert your preferable terminology for who and/or when).

   Honestly, it feels as if the whole pick just raises more questions than it gives directives. As does your whole alt-chained profile setup, really (they seem familiar... I think I've browsed them before. Oh, you were the one who asked to be roasted, no?). You've got 5 profiles, all with more or less the same information, some that aren't kept up to date, small variations in all - which profile is 'you' and what of the variations are still you and what is alt-specific character? It seems rather vague and elusive, and there's enough material across your profiles to prompt a study on the '50 shades of Ivy/Lore/Sabrina/A.J./Rhiannyn: complex, confused or crazy?'

   Heck, I can't tell whether you want to role play a BDSM relationship or if you want a BDSM relationship with role play - and it's starting to feel as if this conversation should have you reclined on a chaise lounge and me having a notepad at hand. Unfortunately I don't think I can fit five chaises in any room I currently have at my disposal.

   If you know what you want, then write it down in bullet point, transform it into concise paragraphs, distil them as necessary and layout your profiles. Do the same for any picks. And whilst I on the one hand can appreciate your transparency with who your alts are, it's rather gotten past the point where reading your profile gives a brief introduction of yourself, and turned into a puzzle where some pieces are missing, some come in multiples and some just don't seem to fit anywhere. I'm going to need to clear up a wall space and get some red yarn to figure this out. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, cicelydawn said:

Honestly I would reframe the whole thing in terms of looking for a committed play partner, or some such phrasing. Skip "ownership" even if that is the ultimate goal, because of the strong reactions it can evoke, as seen in this thread.  When you find a match in terms of style, schedule, chemistry etc, a conversation about taking it further is only natural. The only long term D/s relationship I've had happened by accident is where I am coming from :)

I see where your coming from and its funny you state that, I was talking to a friend last night about this actually. I stated I don't actively go looking for a boyfriend/ girlfriend/ partner because I am a firm believer, if you're looking for it you'll never find it, and I half joked and was half serious when I next said  "I wonder if  the same mind set should be used to a master/ Mistress"

 

13 minutes ago, Orwar said:

Honestly, it feels as if the whole pick just raises more questions than it gives directives. As does your whole alt-chained profile setup, really (they seem familiar... I think I've browsed them before. Oh, you were the one who asked to be roasted, no?)

Yep that was me! lol and HA! Got you to roast me anyway =P  *Does a victory dance*

15 minutes ago, Orwar said:

which profile is 'you' and what of the variations are still you and what is alt-specific character? It seems rather vague and elusive, and there's enough material across your profiles to prompt a study on the '50 shades of Ivy/Lore/Sabrina/A.J./Rhiannyn: complex, confused or crazy?'

Couldn't tell ya how many times people have accused me of having DID or something because of my alts lol its been pretty funny. And you got all but one right, its  '50 shades of Ivy/Lore Da'ae/Sabrina/A.J./Rhiannyn and not gonna lie, that would be a book I would read, it would be funny to see lol

15 minutes ago, Orwar said:

Heck, I can't tell whether you want to role play a BDSM relationship or if you want a BDSM relationship with role play - and it's starting to feel as if this conversation should have you reclined on a chaise lounge and me having a notepad at hand. Unfortunately I don't think I can fit five chaises in any room I currently have at my disposal.

On a more serious note though I do see where you're coming from. I've had that pick off and on in my ( I've got it on both AJ's and Sabrina's, though I havent been on Sabrina's in Ages so I understand both picks are different on each) profile for almost a year and only a few have asked about it. I understand where my profile(s) can be pretty confusing, even after my efforts to make it less so. As for what I want...Maybe I do want a story based sort of D/S relationship then I do an actual one, I've never really thought about it ( I know, thats sad on my part, it just hadn't crossed my mind till now). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, IvyLarae said:

Yep that was me! lol and HA! Got you to roast me anyway =P  *Does a victory dance*

Relaterad bild

6 minutes ago, IvyLarae said:

( I know, thats sad on my part, it just hadn't crossed my mind till now). 

   Doctor Furlgrimr reclined onto the right armrest of his chair, his fingertips idly combing into his beard as his brow furrowed deeply. His gaze settled on the patient, stern and focused as if trying to pierce right through her eyes and observe the pulses of the neurons of the very brain itself, lingering for a few moments all the while his lips pressed together into thin, pale strips under his moustaches. The grandfather clock behind him ticked slowly, every swing of the pendulum reverberating with an almost deafening beat that alone conquered the silence - even the usual, faint bustle from the street below the windows seeming to have vacated the room as if not to disturb him in his thoughts. A slight flinch in his pale blue eyes signalled his thoughts having reached a conclusion, and a deep inhale starting through his nostrils, but half-way through turning into an oral, audible sigh as if to stall whilst he processed his assessment into a comprehensive sentence. "I shall prescribe thee with having a think on it."

  • Like 2
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Orwar said:

The grandfather clock behind him ticked slowly, every swing of the pendulum reverberating with an almost deafening beat that alone conquered the silence

sigh  I love that grandfather clock. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

20 minutes ago, IvyLarae said:

I see where your coming from and its funny you state that, I was talking to a friend last night about this actually. I stated I don't actively go looking for a boyfriend/ girlfriend/ partner because I am a firm believer, if you're looking for it you'll never find it, and I half joked and was half serious when I next said  "I wonder if  the same mind set should be used to a master/ Mistress"

Probably. It's a matter of chemistry like any other relationship. Forced chemistry imo leaves an empty disassociated feeling regarding the play. If your heart's not in it, it falls flat, despite the skill of your partner. I hate to give my secrets away, but one of my benchmarks in gauging how well a scene is going is an increase in my partners typos as their RL physical selves are affected by the scene I'm setting.

People are likening D/s as a co-equal partnership, like a vanilla relationship. IMO, it's not.

Anyone with an ounce of imagination can create a scene. Which (again imo) is fine for a one-off scene. But for a deeper Dominant/submissive relationship I prefer to liken it to cooking. Ultimately, there can only be one head chef, and the submissive is the dish being prepared. As a Domme, I shape the play between myself and my subs to suit the person I'm Domming. I put work into scenes. I tailor it with certain goals in mind. I want to help make my subs into better, stronger versions of themselves. I don't like other 'chefs' changing my recipe or the dynamic I've established. Have you ever heard the phrase "Too many cooks spoil the broth."? Yeah, exactly like that.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...