This page sponsored by Madame S, San Francisco    [other banners]

	SD! : Web boards : IE Theory : "Getting on in MS?" 1 2 3 4 Getting on in MS? (35) 29 Mar 08, 4:32 AM IntentionalCruelty US, 12 mths kitten_x wrote: Personally I need a loving stable relationship as the foundation. I couldn't imagine a M/s relationship without that emotional connection. ks I like this. Technically, sex, love, and M/s can exist independent of each other. But, in my opinion...where's the fun in that? On a slightly more sober note, I can't imagine why I would bother enslaving someone I wasn't in a stable loving relationship with. It just wouldn't be worth the effort to me. But, I recognize there are others who think differently on the matter. Will Whip for Sex. 29 Mar 08, 1:01 PM luna_lux US, 12 mths Y! IntentionalCruelty wrote: kitten_x wrote: Personally I need a loving stable relationship as the foundation. I couldn't imagine a M/s relationship without that emotional connection. ks I like this. Technically, sex, love, and M/s can exist independent of each other. But, in my opinion...where's the fun in that? On a slightly more sober note, I can't imagine why I would bother enslaving someone I wasn't in a stable loving relationship with. It just wouldn't be worth the effort to me. But, I recognize there are others who think differently on the matter. i find all of this fascinating, because i suppose i ended up on both sides of this. when i began a relationship with my (now) owner, it was simply, not not not about love. for either of us. i suppose when i take a few steps backwards, the relationship *involves* love, now, but it is not *about* love. one of the reasons this relationship works for us is because both of us recognized along the way that if the affection-based part of the relationship (all the vanilla kind of stuff) didn't work out, we would still be pursuing a relationship with this particular D/s or M/s dynamic with *someone*. it's who we are as people, irregardless of the other. my need for submission and desire for intense control, and his for dominance and taking control, is not based on the other person specifically, but on our wiring. in other words, i yam what i yam, with or without him, and the same is true for him. we happen to get along, and have a great deal of love and affection in our relationship, but it wasn't *necessary*. we've grown with each other, and towards each other, but i have no doubt that it would have been a very fulfilling power-aware relationship even without that aspect of involvement. so the question becomes, then, is it a *more* fulfilling relationship with the "love" involved? besides the obvious answer that there's no way for me to answer that about the relationship i am currently in, because it *is* involved, i'd venture to say yes. but i'd answer that way because a huge part of "love" (however you're defining it these days) involves incredible trust - something that doesn't come lightly. more important than the romance and drama and occasional teamwork that a loving relationship involves is trust and faith in who they are as people (although you won't find me saying romance is absent from D/s, either). and imho, *any* relationship, but especially a power-aware relationship, is better with trust. 29 Mar 08, 3:34 PM slavegail UK, 3 yrs Y! written with permission of NG1. this slave has been with her present Owners M Norman and Mistress Georgina for about 4 years now slave is not "in love" with either and they not with slave.ours is a 100% Owners/slave relationship..with owners having total control of slaves life. apart from trust fund set up by former Master. present Owners volantary pay a small sum into it each month. it cannot be touched until slave is 60 years old. when Owners found slave she was working in a private bondage sex club. also doing one to one bondage parties. slave was a mess selling bondage sex and pain for money to feed drug habit.Owners were looking for someone who had lost everything and had everything to gain by joining them slave was told the rules and agreement she would live under. and it would be a 10 year agreement with optoin to renew if all parties were happy.there would be no leeway in rules or limits full agreement took over 4 weeks to complete. then three month trial on both sides.before slave was told she would be their slave full time. slave does not say it was easy getting off drugs and drink was hard and slave is greatfull for Owners this slave serves Owners and is well aware that she could very well be dead by now from overdose. can you be a slave without a loving relationship for this slave yes you can this slave needs to serve. slavegail Property of NG1 18 Apr 08, 3:50 PM Damocles US, 12 mths luna_lux wrote: IntentionalCruelty wrote: kitten_x wrote: Personally I need a loving stable relationship as the foundation. I couldn't imagine a M/s relationship without that emotional connection. ks I like this. Technically, sex, love, and M/s can exist independent of each other. But, in my opinion...where's the fun in that? On a slightly more sober note, I can't imagine why I would bother enslaving someone I wasn't in a stable loving relationship with. It just wouldn't be worth the effort to me. But, I recognize there are others who think differently on the matter. i find all of this fascinating, because i suppose i ended up on both sides of this. when i began a relationship with my (now) owner, it was simply, not not not about love. for either of us. i suppose when i take a few steps backwards, the relationship *involves* love, now, but it is not *about* love. one of the reasons this relationship works for us is because both of us recognized along the way that if the affection-based part of the relationship (all the vanilla kind of stuff) didn't work out, we would still be pursuing a relationship with this particular D/s or M/s dynamic with *someone*. it's who we are as people, irregardless of the other. my need for submission and desire for intense control, and his for dominance and taking control, is not based on the other person specifically, but on our wiring. in other words, i yam what i yam, with or without him, and the same is true for him. we happen to get along, and have a great deal of love and affection in our relationship, but it wasn't *necessary*. we've grown with each other, and towards each other, but i have no doubt that it would have been a very fulfilling power-aware relationship even without that aspect of involvement. so the question becomes, then, is it a *more* fulfilling relationship with the "love" involved? besides the obvious answer that there's no way for me to answer that about the relationship i am currently in, because it *is* involved, i'd venture to say yes. but i'd answer that way because a huge part of "love" (however you're defining it these days) involves incredible trust - something that doesn't come lightly. more important than the romance and drama and occasional teamwork that a loving relationship involves is trust and faith in who they are as people (although you won't find me saying romance is absent from D/s, either). and imho, *any* relationship, but especially a power-aware relationship, is better with trust. A life that includes love is generally considered more fulfilling than a life without love. Therefore adding love to any equation makes the totality more fulfilling. But yes, I would be pursuing this dynamic with or without love. Then there is the Meaning Of Love question which is a whole other thing... Additionally, there is much to be said for BDSM, M/s, D/s, etc., specifically with the absence of love. It is much easier to fully objectify someone with whom you are not involved on a daily basis, whose parents you don't know, whose history you don't know, and so on. Fortunately I am blessed/cursed with the ability to ignore all that stuff and objectify those I love regardless. But I certainly see the value of a loving M bringing in a detached third party M or S to fill a function that requires that detachment. If this is in fact something the S deeply needs, I see it as a very loving act indeed. To the OP, I think "getting on" is NOT necessary if the M/s aspects work well. However for me personally I doubt it would last terribly long or develop any deeper bond without love or at least mutual admiration. Sometimes that deeper bond is not what you're looking for. I may not be young, but I'm very immature. 18 Apr 08, 5:14 PM 000-810-743 US, 4 yrs Greetings, all: After tossing this about my head for way too long, i've only been able to come up with a "yes and no" answer. As said earlier by very astute posters, there are those who need the relationship without love and emotional 'baggage' mucking up the dynamic. There are those who thrive and grow with a steady flow of love and emotional connection. i would maintain that it is entirely up to the constitution of the slave, and the desires of the Master/Owner/Fillintheblank. The dynamic i am in was vanilla love-based to begin with, and progressed through D/s into solid M/s. My need to serve is not diminished by my emotional attachment...contrary, it is enhanced by my adoration. i have a deep need to serve, and would fulfill it in a love-less relationship if required to. Thankfully, that is not the case for me. i like to view it as building houses...some houses, depending on the ground, require deep footings and concrete foundations. Some only need a crawlspace. Neither is worse than the other, just different based on the circumstances and needs of the builders. Thank you for the challenge, slave tora, devoted to Sir N 16 Jun 08, 1:31 PM Domme_deluxe UK, 8 mths I am sure that there is a place in M/s for those who do not want or require emotional engagement and for those who prefer it, are open to it or have no immunity to it. I've heard / read that some hold the opinion that emotional attachment makes it difficult to be sadistic or detracts from making logical decisions. Perhaps some Dominants think, or know, that admitting feelings for their s would ruin the whole thing. I haven't found that to be the case with me. I've seen that D/s and M/s is a fuller experience for me though when the logical and emotional sides of me are engaged in tandem. Being in love does not adversely affect my actions because the logical side doesn't become drowned out by it. I regard myself as fortunate to have found a lad who matches me well. We have a great deal of fun without losing the dynamic. 25 Sep 08, 1:50 PM jjsslave US(OH), 14 mths In my situation i met Master when i was in search of just that, a Master. The rest all seemed to just fit. But on the same note i feel thats a case by case thing. i remember thinking that there needed to be a relationship as a foundation first and with some i met before Master i was right( or should i say during because even after i met Him we had years that we were apart due to circumstances beyond our control, and in that time it was a half hearted search where i was looking for someone that was just like him. That didnt exist, and it took me along time to discover that and i had almost settled when he came back into my life and now going on 11 months later while we met because of the lifestyle everything else in our lives fits together. and it all started as me thinking of him as a Master and building on that, its just turned out to be soo much more. Another part of it to me also is the fact that over that time i grew from a submissive to a slave. i cant even imagine being a slave to anyone else and without Him thats probably where i would still be( not that that would be bad so please i dont mean to offend anyone by that). i can fully give up total control to Him where as i couldnt do that with anyone else. Thats why, not to sound too sappy but why i consider us to be soul mates. we have an understanding of eachother unlike anything ive ever had and it was all started on a sub/Master level. 27 Sep 08, 1:09 PM 581-347-553 UK, 3 mths sooner or later one of a couple will be ill, or stressed, or worried about something... the sex will dry up a bit, the toys will be put in their box and if you don't have a strong bond... watch how fast the relationship crumbles... so yes course you need a good connection in an Ms relationship 27 Sep 08, 3:23 PM Remoses US(PA), 3 yrs In another posting, I made an analogy to the relationships that employees have with their employers, and the relationships that employers have with their employees, and the relationships within an M/s dynamic. I believe that few employees “love” their bosses (sure, it does happen, but…) and still those relationships function quite well. By the same token, few employers “love” their employees. For that dynamic to function well, “love” is not essential. Is respect necessary? Certainly, it is. But the “typical” M/s relationship we find here at TSR is not really like the employer/employee relationship. Though some similarities do exist. I think the most striking difference between a work relationship and an M/s relationship is the intimacy that usually exists within the M/s relationship. That is seldom found in a work environment. (At least we hope that is the case! Though I know that many employees feel as though their bosses are fucking them! And likely the same is true of the bosses!) So it is reasonable to think that in an intimate relationship (such as may be found in a more typical M/s relationship) some genuine affection should occur. Perhaps it is not absolutely necessary, but it seems as though it is a good thing, nevertheless. Yes, I can imagine an M/s relationship that is devoid of love and is based solely upon respect, but I do think that some affection is likely to occur, even if it is not vocalized. I do have genuine affection for all the important people in My life: My friends, My family, My wife and certainly for My slaves. I personally would not want it any other way. I can even go so far as to say that I feel some affection for My co-workers, though I do know that we are thrown together by the nature of our work and not so much by the nature of our personalities. Still, there is some genuine affection, even for them. But I do love those close to Me. I would not wish for anything else. After all, it is love that makes for the singular most rewarding human experience. I am Remoses. Just because it's inconvenient, doesn't mean it's not required. Quod principi placet legis habet vigorem (The pleasure of the prince has the force of law.) **Pronounce it: Ray-mosay.** 27 Sep 08, 5:13 PM 613-411-535 4 mths I don't think a romantic relationship is necessary. Indeed, it might even get in the way. However, absolute trust, honesty and a good dose of empathy are essential, I think. So there must be a good, ongoing relationship, perhaps akin to a nilla friendship, to build on to make a successful D/S dynamic. Next page