|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| I'm looking for a woman who wishes to be owned.
Spontaneity and a willingness to experiment, improvise, and try new things are qualities I expect from a woman (and offer myself). I don't demand perfect obedience, but I want to see the desire to obey. Unless you sometimes do things for me that you don't enjoy, it's not the sort of submission I want.
I'd rather inflict mild pain on a woman who feels it than go heavy with a painslut. Among the things I love are breast torture, canes and belts, receiving sexual service, using my hands to inflict punishment, and leaving temporary marks. It'd be an unusual woman who didn't like most of that who'd be interested in (or interest) me. Things I enjoy but don't expect from every woman are edgy activities like humiliation, objectification, and the desire to push her limits. If you can show me something new and interesting, even if I don't particularly like it, that might be the most attractive quality a submissive woman could offer me.
Physical appearance is important, but standard beauty is not. Often some aspect of a woman's appearance appeals to me even if she's not conventionally attractive.
|
|
|
|
|
Today I tweaked my interests.
I don't really "Live for" breast play, canes, crops, and whips (I don't even care much for crops), but that's the highest rating, so I chose it.
Things I "Love" and things I "Live for" are about the same to me in evaluating a woman. She doesn't have to want them all, but I'd hope she'd want at least half of them, and I'd expect her to be willing to discuss and consider any of them. I could be very happy with just all the "Loves".
The things I'm "Curious" about, I no longer mark as a "Beginner". I figure not having much experience is average for someone who's curious.
I'll have more to say soon. |
|
|
|
|
Some things you tell a woman to do and expect it done; other things, you don't even ask. [EDIT: Looking back, this isn't clear. Do I mean there are things you just don't ask a woman to do (in the case of almost all women, the answer is "Yes")? Or do I mean there are things to do with a woman without asking (in the case of women I'm interested in, the answer is "Yes")? I meant the first, to draw a contrast between what you can command and what you can't, and I'd rework the way I said it here, if I were writing this again today.]
For bdsm activities, this is relatively simple: Negotiate, define limits, spend some social time. Once that's done, whether in a first meeting or after a long series of encounters, it's time to work.
Outside bdsm, though, it's harder.
If one person smokes, that can be a killer, whether it's the dominant or the submissive who smokes. Many relationships get past that, and sometimes it ends a smoking habit.I'll call that a happy ending.
Smoking isn't an ethical question. That's why it's so often resolved, ignored, or gotten past.
What about behavior that one thinks is wrong?
Some dominants, masters, and owners are willing to take on a woman who believes they're wrong about something. Such women make enjoyable objects for them to torment.
"Maybe," he thinks, "I can make her change her mind."
Or "Maybe," he thinks, "I'll make her endure feeling bad about this for a long time."
Or "Maybe," he thinks, "I'll enjoy watching her do something she believes is wrong, for me."
All those have an appeal. They also push into progressively darker emotional territory.
In a full-time or committed relationship, a submissive will almost certainly become, at the least, more tolerant of those things she believes are wrong in her dominant. She may come to share them. This is not so very different from the process by which we train a submissive to soften her limits and give herself fully to us. It's a risk a submissive should consider before M/s or 24/7.
In a more casual relationship, the risk is not so great. There, the process of stretching the submissive is more focused on kink and spills over less into straight life.
An interesting case is when the dominant is prejudiced and the submissive finds that to be wrong. That sounds simple: The submissive is likely to pick up those prejudices over time.
What, though, if the prejudice is similar to kink?
I make a good faith effort in my life to not be prejudiced. However, there are many abusive names for women that I might use in private or during a session, but that I would never use in public. I'm okay with the ethics of that. I might use homophobic language to her during a session, and I'm okay with that. My discomfort starts to rise when race enters the picture.
And yet, if a woman who was black approached me and wanted to do race-based play, I might well say yes, even though it's not something I would ever seek out.
Sometimes I thnk ethics is the kinkiest thing in the world. |
|
|
|
|
I've thought enough about training for a while. At least, I've done enough thinking out loud.
Now, a question for my readers: What do other dominant men write in their journals on this site? I read journals from submissive women, and I have some idea what topics they write about. (Topic #1: The cluelessness of so many men on this site.) I don't often read dominants' journals, so I don't know what they write about. So: What do you read in those journals? |
|
|
|
|
Why is training such an issue to me now?
First, it matches both what I desire and what I'm able to honestly offer. I want more than casual play, and I am not offering a permanent or long-term commitment. Training is a middle ground.
Second, I often see dominants called "trainers" or "protectors" and, while I'm sure some of those who make those claims are both sincere and competent, I'm certain quite a few are lacking one or both of those qualities. If I knew which ones, I'd call the Kinky Kops--but they don't exist. To improve the quality of training, my first act is to become a quality trainer.
(Submissives have a role in this, too, when they talk among themselves about who screwed them over and who's the real deal, who's a thorny flower and who's a stinkweed.)
Third, I think there's often confusion (deliberate, sometimes) about the interaction of training and protection. Protection is often a racket, a dominant taking a submissive on the pretext of protecting her. Such submissives are usually looking for a long-term commitment. There's a conflict of interest between the protector and the submissive, dependent on his level of integrity.
I think it's better to take submissives into training. It leaves her emotionally open but submissively engaged, freer to get the relationship she needs without being in a frenzy to find an owner. It's got explicit goals and time limitations. It's focused on developing some characteristic the submissive desires, or possibly something the dominant believes she needs. Finally, it's a form of D/s.
I'm going to say that again: Training is a form of D/s.
Why is that so important?
Because it's honest to say that, in a way that much protection talk is not. If I'm engaging myself in training a woman, that's a form of dominating her. (This is not so true of professional training, and professional training is not what I'm talking about.) For her, it's submission, not a holding pattern or something for her to do in the meantime. It's real, even if it's not everything. |
|
|
|
|
What does it mean to be a trainer?
Dominants want submissives to perform to the dominant's pleasure. Sometimes we have to teach them what we mean. This can happen in any D/s encounter as simply as, "Stop that. Do this."
Is that training? I don't think so. It's teaching and it's learning, but it's not training.
Training is what happens when a dominant has a specific set of goals in mind for a submissive and has a plan for making her fulfill those goals to his satisfaction.
For that to happen, here's what's needed:
* A goal. The dominant has to know what change he wants in the submissive.
* A plan. The dominant has to know how to make that change in the submissive happen.
* A schedule. The dominant has to set a formal structure for the submissive to inhabit.
Those three things are essential (have you ever had a great teacher who didn't use them?) but they're not obvious to everyone. Things which are obvious and necessary, I've left out for now.
The other big issue is informed consent. With some submissives, any sort of training would be a matter of negotiation. It might be initiated by the submissive to develop desires and abilities she doesn't yet have. With slaves, the level of explicit consent could be lower, depending on just how slavish she is. In some cases, it's just one more thing you make her do. Talking would ruin it.
So how much information should a dominant give to get the submissive's consent?
I've never felt the need to ask a woman who said she only liked spankings for consent to make her want the paddle, the flogger, the belt, the cane, the whip. Consent comes after, when it's time to start using it on her. But what if the whip is a hard limit for her? Is it wrong to coax her to want it? What if you want her to be whipped by another as you watch? Whipped as she services you?
(I'll give the reader a moment to fan herself.)
This is what goes into that decision: How far a jump you want the woman to make, how different a place you want her to land, and how much consent she's handed over to you.
Why is this so important to me right now? I'll save that for my next entry. |
|
|
|
|
Something I want in a woman is a willingness to go down her list marked "Tolerates", "Dislikes", "Hates", and do the things on that list which I want her to do.
Something I want that woman to want in me is for me to have the will to push and pull her through hesitation, resistance, distaste or disgust to get my way from her.
Sometimes I want her to learn to like a thing, and sometimes I want to her to submit to a thing without enjoyment, the better to enjoy her pain or her humiliation. |
|
|
|
|
Something new. I keep coming back to that. There are quite a few things I haven't tried, and some of them interest me quite a bit. Or is it doing something old with someone new that I want? |
|
|
|
|
A thought relating to the previous entry:
Do submissive women really encounter nothing on this site but guys just out to get laid?
I'm not saying there aren't any guys like that. I know perfectly well there are. But I don't think that's everyone, and I know it's not me. I won't make a secret of enjoying sex and of demanding it, in some form and at some point, from women who submit to me. (There have been exceptions. They're rare.) I'm also not trying to do every woman in sight.
I am also not saying I think the women who say things like that are lying. They're not. They're reporting what they experience and perceive, and I believe they're telling what they believe to be true.
So: What reasons could there be for this perception if it doesn't fit the facts?
Possibly men are more aggressive about writing to lots of women. I know I've written to many who had very little detail on their profiles but who were near enough to be possibilities. (I'm not a long-distance dominant.) Quite a few of them don't answer. Quite a few who do answer are uninterested or taken. Some don't interest me once I've talked to them. That's a lot of women!
Possibly also the guys who are the hyperhorndogs are the ones who get noticed and who form the perceptions of the women who have this perception.
There are other possible reasons, but I'll put those out there. If you have an opinion, I'd like to hear it. |
|
|
|
|
Someone thoughtful wrote me about my previous journal entry. Parts of my reply might be of more general interest. I know her comment and my response helped me clarify my thoughts.
Some of the note was personal, but this part (which I'm not quoting directly) wasn't:
"That journal entry makes you look like every other horndog on Collarme, which is all we encounter here."
I'd like to think I'm a better writer than most dominant men on the site, and that should set me apart a little bit, but she was going to the public content of the post and not my style.
So: That post does portray me as I am.
I am a bit of a horndog and I won't deny it. That part, she pegged.
I am very much unlike many other horndogs, though, because I draw the line at manipulating emotions of romantic love to seduce a woman who is seeking love when I don't plan to give it.
People of all orientations enter bdsm because they have not found love elsewhere. I hope they find a partner of an appropriate matching orientation who also seeks to love and be loved.
That's what they deserve and should--indeed, must!--seek.
That's also not what I have to offer.
Think of this white boy as though he were chocolate. What I offer is dark and sometimes bitter. I sure ain't Hershey and not always Godiva, but a fine taste for those who crave it.
I'm not a consumable item, either, but that's a metaphor for another day. |
|
|
|
|
Among the things I haven't done in a while and miss is vaginal fisting.
Fisting isn't something I demand of a woman, since there are so many reasons it may not be possible for her, but it is something I want her to do for me, and which I lead her towards.
Why? Because I enjoy it.
But there's more: Fisting is a great metaphor for deepening submission.
As the fingers begin to open the vagina and the hand pushes in, there's resistance. Sometimes the resistance can't be overcome without too much force, and the hand must return another day.
Other times, just enough force (and sometimes none at all) is required to push past the resistance. Then, once the widest part of the hand has entered, the vagina pulls the hand in, greedily.
At that point, the woman has submitted physically and mentally, and her writhing starts.
Eventually, I learned to fist with one hand while using the other to torment the woman's nipples and breasts. Light whips and canes, butterfly clamps and clothespins, my fingers, with one hand moving and the other quiescent, then both at once, It's remarkable how far into a woman you can get by hand, both mentally and physically, before ever using your penis. |
|
|
|
|
My profile needed working over, so I did it.
If you need working over, let's talk. |
|
|
|
|
Lately I've been thinking about either trying something new or going back to something I haven't done in a while, but I'm still deciding what that is.
There are so many things I've seen done in public play that I might develop a taste for doing if I had a partner or a mentor with some experience in doing those things.
I still remember the first time I saw needleplay, done to a woman lying on the floor just in front of me, thin little spikes running through the skin just around her nipples, her back arching and her breathing quickening and deepening. She was a beautiful spectacle, yet I've never learned to do it. I'm not saying needleplay is what I want to try just now, but I know I need to do something new.
Possibly just going back to things I haven't done in some time will satisfy me.
For now. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| Age: 27 |
| New York,
New York |
|
|
|
| |
