The 'range' of submission?

The 'range' of submission? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

stella41b -> The 'range' of submission? (2/22/2008 9:38:40 PM)
I'm posting this as a new angle on the subject area of limits... Now I know the discussion and identification of limits in a D/s relationship is rather integral to the development of the relationship and defines the shape of it, and then you get the controversy of the 'no limits' situation. Maybe it's me, but it just strikes me as odd that you're working to develop a relationship and part of that development is purely focussed on what you cannot or will not accept. I personally look at this from the opposite angle - which I feel is far more positive - which is to work out a 'range' of submission of areas and activities which are essential and necessary to the development and growth of the relationship. There's no discussion as to what is a 'soft' limit or what is a 'hard limit', but instead you have a 'range' which encompasses all what the relationship is about, where the focus is more on what is necessary to the relationship rather than what is unnecessary or detrimental. Your comments or opinions, thoughts, impressions, please..

Lumus -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/22/2008 9:52:52 PM)
I'd like to offer a vanilla [or at least, not directly kink-related] analogy to this. Say you and your SO share expenses and both work full time. You make twice as much as they do, but hey, it all goes to the same place. When setting a budget you have to focus on what resources you have...which, by virtue means you also make yourself aware of what you cannot afford to do. It seems silly until: - a guy hits midlife crisis and tries to buy himself a Jaguar <unexpected expense>; - or a woman wants to work out at the gym her friends go to even though it's an expensive place <unexpected expense>; - or an unexpected pregnancy <BIG unexpected expense>... So knowing what falls outside your limits keeps you from oversplurging; knowing what you can juggle and rearrange to deal with an unexpected but necessary expense is also important [metaphor for 'soft' limit...you could do it but would rather not...]. If I understand what you're driving at [and please correct me if I don't], what you're proposing is building up limits from what you do know as opposed to what you don't. Sadly, that isn't always as practical or safe as the opposite. You buy life insurance because you know you're going to die, but you don't want to be thinking about dying every day. It's a lesser negative, if you will. By the same token, I would rather know that my girl can't handle knife play before pulling out my tiger blade...because that happens to be something I -do- like. And how will she react if I try to impose an act on her that breaches a hard limit for her...? Probably Roshambo me, and rightly so...

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/22/2008 10:50:26 PM)
Do both :) Our boundaries are part of what defines who we are. It can be very important to understand what we will and will not do, and more so to understand WHY we will and will not do certain things. However, it is sad that the concept of limits itself becomes a fetish for so many- we rank ourselves according to a list of activities which really aren't even that directly related to personal growth or daily life at all. Oohs and aahs over needles far outnumber the angst over paying bills. Boundaries and non-boundaries may be important pieces of the self-identity puzzle, one should not lose the forest for the trees. While I'm not sure that I'd consider it a "range" I do think more people should look at the forms of activities they like and dislike, and from a practical standpoint see more of exactly what it is they want to get out of things. I often consider myself rather boring in the scene because I can do the exact same activity a gazillion times and still end up totally buzzed afterwards- because it's nothing to do with the KINK, it's all about the connection and experience I'm having IN THAT MOMENT. I take so much for granted, I wasted so much of even my young life to become this image of success and while that image was not a waste of time...there was a lot of time wasted on things that were illusions. So I say do both- define yourself through your actions, through your goals, through your limits- but to concern yourself with only one part leaves so much else left untouched and unexperienced.

SailingBum -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 3:47:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stella41b I personally look at this from the opposite angle - which I feel is far more positive - which is to work out a 'range' of submission of areas and activities which are essential and necessary to the development and growth of the relationship. There's no discussion as to what is a 'soft' limit or what is a 'hard limit', but instead you have a 'range' which encompasses all what the relationship is about, where the focus is more on what is necessary to the relationship rather than what is unnecessary or detrimental. Your comments or opinions, thoughts, impressions, please.. Soft limit is a term Ive seen tossed around here. WTH is a soft limit is it like maybe? or ask me later after Ive had a couple beers in me? Perhaps at some point you may be able to convince me? My point either it's a limit or it's not. If your unsure of what you like to try saying just that. BadOne

Foititis -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 4:08:57 AM)
I was always under the assumption a soft limit was something you were curious about but have never really tried and your not sure if you want to do it straight away. Such as a guy or girl who’s never tried anal sex before might have it as a soft limit because they don’t want someone just hammering away at it straight away but want to work up to it.

stella41b -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 1:42:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SailingBum quote: ORIGINAL: stella41b I personally look at this from the opposite angle - which I feel is far more positive - which is to work out a 'range' of submission of areas and activities which are essential and necessary to the development and growth of the relationship. There's no discussion as to what is a 'soft' limit or what is a 'hard limit', but instead you have a 'range' which encompasses all what the relationship is about, where the focus is more on what is necessary to the relationship rather than what is unnecessary or detrimental. Your comments or opinions, thoughts, impressions, please.. Soft limit is a term Ive seen tossed around here. WTH is a soft limit is it like maybe? or ask me later after Ive had a couple beers in me? Perhaps at some point you may be able to convince me? My point either it's a limit or it's not. If your unsure of what you like to try saying just that. BadOne I see it in just the same way - either something is a limit or it isn't. But then again I know that there are some who like to split hairs, and this is a community for everyone, so please don't think I'm judging anyone. I just see it as that people change, we all change, and when you get one person who's changing and another person who's changing then logically for me you have a relationship which is changing, it's something which changes, grows and develops with each interaction which takes place. Maybe it's me, and the fact that I'm looking at this from a submissive perspective, but surely a limit is a restriction or inhibition on what a Dominant can do in the relationship? Some limits, for example many hard limits, are to me so obvious they don't even need discussion, such as activities which would place a grave danger to my health or wellbeing, or which would cause me to commit a crime, but surely others are 'I'm not prepared to accept this'? I just find the focus on limits, from my perspective, contradictory to the essential nature of the relationship. I am the submissive, I am the one who submits to the Dominant and hands over control to a degree which allows them to satiate their need to dominate, they know what they need and in what situation to be able to dominate and gain satisfaction from being able to dominate, so surely my imposing limits is counterproductive to the relationship? This is the whole problem I have with limits, the problem is about control. Surely if I am telling a Dominant I am submissive to them, but imposing restrictions and inhibitions over how they dominate me, then surely I'm retaining control of the relationship? I just have this POV that if I need to impose limits on what a Dominant can or cannot do with me as their submissive, then maybe either I need to work more on trusting the Dominant as opposed to getting involved in play, or even that I am not with the right Dominant.

Lumus -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 1:54:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stella41b Maybe it's me, and the fact that I'm looking at this from a submissive perspective, but surely a limit is a restriction or inhibition on what a Dominant can do in the relationship? Just a footnote: Dominants have "limits" as well; whether the terminology is applied or not is another thing. Example: I have had several women in various venues ask me to be "one of their owners" or "be respectful of the fact that i need to be shared". Co-ownership baffles me, and I wouldn't participate in it; by the same token, I don't share my toys [or necessarily play nice, now that I think about it...]. Those could be construed "limits" for me, as a Dominant. quote: ORIGINAL: stella41b This is the whole problem I have with limits, the problem is about control. Surely if I am telling a Dominant I am submissive to them, but imposing restrictions and inhibitions over how they dominate me, then surely I'm retaining control of the relationship? I just have this POV that if I need to impose limits on what a Dominant can or cannot do with me as their submissive, then maybe either I need to work more on trusting the Dominant as opposed to getting involved in play, or even that I am not with the right Dominant. If you have control of yourself, you ultimately have a say. What you do with that say is entirely up to you, of course... Everyone has some control over themselves, unless you need to be given a command to breathe. [;)] Limits are not the be-all and end-all, or they would never be tested; nor are they without purpose, since a modicum of reality must be adhered to. Any extreme example can be used to testify to that, but the chainsaw analogy works just fine. If you're not familiar with it, ask; you'll get several responses. [:)]

sweetnurseBBW -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 2:44:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stella41b Maybe it's me, but it just strikes me as odd that you're working to develop a relationship and part of that development is purely focussed on what you cannot or will not accept. I personally look at this from the opposite angle - which I feel is far more positive - which is to work out a 'range' of submission of areas and activities which are essential and necessary to the development and growth of the relationship. There's no discussion as to what is a 'soft' limit or what is a 'hard limit', but instead you have a 'range' which encompasses all what the relationship is about, where the focus is more on what is necessary to the relationship rather than what is unnecessary or detrimental. Your comments or opinions, thoughts, impressions, please.. Everyone has different reasons and needs for entering a D/s, M/s realtionship. For some limits are the core and focus and for others they aren't. There are many types of dynamics that may be the focus is different than other dynamics. What is unnecessary and detrimental to one is not to other. It is too subjective to say what would work for one and then not for another.

Paulsgirl -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 3:45:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stella41b I'm posting this as a new angle on the subject area of limits... Now I know the discussion and identification of limits in a D/s relationship is rather integral to the development of the relationship and defines the shape of it, and then you get the controversy of the 'no limits' situation. There's no discussion as to what is a 'soft' limit or what is a 'hard limit', but instead you have a 'range' which encompasses all what the relationship is about, where the focus is more on what is necessary to the relationship rather than what is unnecessary or detrimental. I'm happy at last that Master P decides both the range and what is necessary....sometimes i struggle and feel i am pushed and stretch emotionally (especially when he gives me really tough assignments which i feel are impossible at the time) and sometimes i feel limited and controlled and oftentimes just plain ignored but if i allow myself the emotional luxury of leaving those decisions to Him AND seeing my reaction as reactance (reaction + acceptance) then even all pain is beautiful.......

SirJohnMandevill -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 6:11:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stella41b I personally look at this from the opposite angle - which I feel is far more positive - which is to work out a 'range' of submission of areas and activities which are essential and necessary to the development and growth of the relationship. This is EXACTLY what the submissive I'm courting and I did when we met in person for the first time two weeks ago. We were very free-form and willing to experiment. Most things worked. Some didn't -- at least, for our first encounter. Fortunately we're both open to at least TRYING many different things. Les (Purveyor of Fine, Handcrafted Kink)

alwaysuna -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 7:23:10 PM)
quote: Soft limit is a term Ive seen tossed around here. WTH is a soft limit is it like maybe? or ask me later after Ive had a couple beers in me? Perhaps at some point you may be able to convince me? My point either it's a limit or it's not. If your unsure of what you like to try saying just that. I have learned that a "soft limit" is something I don't want or feel like doing, so I just whine and bitch about and it and then suddenly, rapidly and with no futher negotiation it becomes something that I certainly AM going to do. [;)]

MzMia -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 7:27:19 PM)
Wonderful topic as usual Stella. [;)] Most of the submissive's I have talked to indeed DO fit into a "range". There are often many area's in which they do not WANT to submit to, but are not hard limits. Discussing a range of what submission means to them, early on makes it easier for both parties to be on the same page. As you stated, it is a matter of finding the RIGHT partner for you.

Leatherist -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 7:30:16 PM)
I don't worry about the power trips. I just want to know if they like the program I have in mind, and are willing to work with me on it.

LadyHathor -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 7:41:06 PM)
quote: This is the whole problem I have with limits, the problem is about control. Surely if I am telling a Dominant I am submissive to them, but imposing restrictions and inhibitions over how they dominate me, then surely I'm retaining control of the relationship? *Bingo and beautifully stated!*

MzMia -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 7:55:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyHathor quote: This is the whole problem I have with limits, the problem is about control. Surely if I am telling a Dominant I am submissive to them, but imposing restrictions and inhibitions over how they dominate me, then surely I'm retaining control of the relationship? *Bingo and beautifully stated!* Stella? I simply have to save this statement. It is worth keeping and sharing. Thank you!

ThistleDown -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 8:00:52 PM)
Master and I already do a little of both. In fact, the first things we talked about were the things we DO want to do. We talked about all the fun things we're interested in and curious about and then got to the limits part. Actually, after 2 years of talking about these things, we're just now getting to the limits in detail. We had mentioned when something came up if it was something one of us didn't want to do but we haven't really gone into it much until now. Except for medical things, I had to explain my health issues to him which automatically set limits for my safety (and also so that he wouldn’t be disappointed by expecting me to be able to do something I’m incapable of) but it wasn't something we really discussed as limits it's just kinda... how things are. (At least that’s how I think of it, he may feel otherwise) LadyHathor & Stella That's an interesting point, I understand the argument that a sub who makes limits is keeping control but I also see that may be only partially true. They are asking/negotiating/demanding control concerning those particular things, but giving up control in other areas. So I tend to see limits as more of a gray area than something that is black and white. I don't split up limits and desires (donts and dos) in my mind as two opposite things as it seems many people do. They're like two sides of the same coin to me. This whole opinion of mine really matches the way I experience my relationship with my Master though, and I can see how it wouldn't fit with all other dynamics and relationships that require a different way of things in order to be fulfilling to all parties involved. ~puppy

hopelessfool -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 8:05:07 PM)
If you had a trumatic experience, something say like being locked in a small room for hours of the day, then that is not something you want to re-experience. Limits, as well as keeping some control espically in the begining of the relationship I see as something very important. Many of my limits (soft) are set because they are not something I would do with someone I didnt trust. Im not going to trust my owner from the day I meet him, after time my limits lesson, things that I wasnt willing to do say in the first few weeks, are things I'm offering now. After several months I have some of the not soft but not exactly hard limits pushed, and then after that maybe some of my hard. But it will not change that I can not, with out having alot of mental anguish, as well as physical harm, be put in a cage, its not that I want to limit my Dom, but more so keep my mental sanity intact and safe. If someone has had some bad experiences in life, they arnt going to be to keen on trying them again. Would you honestly wish to jump in and do anal with your partner if your last experience involved stitches? Its more about what people are comfortable with, at the start, what they are comfortable with after trust is formed (and maintained). So as for the OPs opinion I think there is a range thats ever evolving and changing. Espically with trust being formed and honesty being presented.

velvetears -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 9:56:21 PM)
i agree that it's much healthier to focus on what two people can explore together then focus on the off limits stuff, but just because you define what's off limits doesn't necessarily mean that you make that the focus. Imagine you could put every single bdsm activity there is out there in one big pile. From that pile you pick out certain activities to be the chain link fence that creates the safe space for you to explore in. Once that fence is up, there's no worry that anyone is going to wander off and get lost or leave anyone else behind. This actually creates the environment for a more relaxed and carefree time.

MzMia -> RE: The 'range' of submission? (2/23/2008 9:58:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: velvetears i agree that it's much healthier to focus on what two people can explore together then focus on the off limits stuff, but just because you define what's off limits doesn't necessarily mean that you make that the focus. Imagine you could put every single bdsm activity there is out there in one big pile. From that pile you pick out certain activities to be the chain link fence that creates the safe space for you to explore in. Once that fence is up, there's no worry that anyone is going to wander off and get lost or leave anyone else behind. This actually creates the environment for a more relaxed and carefree time. I just love the idea of the "range of submission". There is also a "range of Domination". The concept is brilliant!

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125