restraint

restraint (Full Version)

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

Message

greeneyes600 -> restraint (9/20/2008 11:48:45 AM)
Should a submissive be restrained to take what their master wants them to take? I can see the point of the sub standing to take what's given, without movement, without a sound....but then it's the sub who has the power...over herself. If she is retsrained, immobilised, then the restrainer is the one with the power, over her. He decides she isn't to move, he decides she stays there until he is finished with her. My view only of course...what do you think?

peppermint -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 11:51:43 AM)
There are no rules. Restrained or unrestrained are equally suitable depending on the needs of the Master and the circumstances.

windchymes -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 11:52:35 AM)
I think they both have their place. Why not....I like variety.

camille65 -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 11:54:24 AM)
Whether I'm moving or not.. he has the power. I happen to love love restraints and am lucky that he indulges me as often as possible. That he indulges me doesn't alter who holds the power either, it is simply that he is my owner and always holds the power no matter who is doing what. It isn't the action that determines the power IMO but the mindset.

mistoferin -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 12:00:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greeneyes600 If she is retsrained, immobilised, then the restrainer is the one with the power, over her. He decides she isn't to move, he decides she stays there until he is finished with her. My view only of course...what do you think? Actually, it's the restraints themselves that cause her to be immobilized. What I mean by that is that the only power that the dominant has to wield is when to take off the restraints. The rest is done for him. If the sub is unrestrained and stays immobilized it is because of the power that he has over her in his instruction not to move. It takes far greater effort on the part of the sub to submit to his will when unrestrained than it does when she/he has no other choice due to physical restraints. I like both ways...but I find it far more challenging and requiring me to get more in touch with the reasons for my submission when unrestrained.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 12:05:31 PM)
~fast reply~ My preference for discipline is not to restrain... for me, it is part of the disciplinary process to accept and yield to that process. While I may restrain for enjoyment (mine or the one bottoming to me for a scene), I tend not to use restraints during discipline. Acceptance of the consequences of one's actions is fundamental to a disciplinary path. In my mind, requiring a servant to accept the discipline under hir own self-restraint, and, in fact, requiring hir active participation, reinforces that need to face the consequences of one's own actions. If I restrain hir, it is an external act and xhe still has the opportunity to fight the disciplinary process and to fail to accept responsibility for getting to that point. Without that external 'crutch' the burden rests where the poor decision-making originated. Calla Firestorm

greeneyes600 -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 12:05:32 PM)
I understand totally all of the sides to this discussion. Mistoferin I was interested in your sentence 'It takes far greater effort on the part of the sub to submit to his will when unrestrained' that is exactly what i mean. It's the subs power which makes her stay put...albeit because she wants to submit...whereas when bound it's because he says so...and therefore she has no choice in the matter. I do agree with all the posts actually...that it's down to the moment....but like to understanbd the mentality behind actions in bdsm

lovingpet -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 12:05:50 PM)
There is a different mind game being played with each. Both I find absolutely delicious. Restrained, it is a matter of knowing there is no hope of escape. Unrestrained, there is the fear of consequences and the delibrate focus on controlling one's own body for the pleasure of another. Control is an illusion for both always. The submissive consented both to the activity and to be restrained, so had initial control. Further, there is often a method for ending things that go beyond a certain level, so he/she also has final control. During the space inbetween, the dominant has full whim as that is the purpose of the interaction. That dominant can require whatever within the confines of the relationship and its dynamics and the submissive party has only two responses, accept it or leave the dynamic. Maybe I stated this a bit strongly, but I tire of this idea that somehow the process of actually getting to a scene were meaningless. It gave certain rights and responsibilities to each person. What they are is completely in the realm of personal choices of the parties involved. I do not wish to overstate, but there is a certain smack of reality one must not overlook. lovingpet

OttersSwim -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 12:06:47 PM)
Totally agree. I just experienced this with a pretty hard spanking unrestrained over Milady's lap. Our bodies will instinctively want to move away from the pain, but the D is holding us with their will alone. A wonderful expression of submission.

CalifChick -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 12:12:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greeneyes600 My view only of course...what do you think? I think you're overthinking. When I'm restrained, I don't think "oh I can't get away", just as when I'm not restrained, I don't think "I am standing still because I want to" or even "I am standing still because he wants me to." The invisible bonds can be just as powerful as the visible ones. Cali

catize -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 12:15:29 PM)
There is no ‘should’ here. The dominant writes the rules. In fact, I love rope play, but the 2 men in my life find it tedious. So, when I am put in bondage it is by other means. I view physical bonds as symbolic of the relationship. I am restrained by his voiced commands; the leather cuffs or spreader bar are simply icing on the cake!

zakkan -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 12:17:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CalifChick The invisible bonds can be just as powerful as the visible ones. Cali [sm=applause.gif]

mistoferin -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 12:22:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greeneyes600 I understand totally all of the sides to this discussion. Mistoferin I was interested in your sentence 'It takes far greater effort on the part of the sub to submit to his will when unrestrained' that is exactly what i mean. It's the subs power which makes her stay put...albeit because she wants to submit...whereas when bound it's because he says so...and therefore she has no choice in the matter. Can you not see that it's the dominant's power and ability to control his submissive that keeps them there also? Yes, they do have a desire to submit...but in order to do so they have to override all natural instinct of survival and self preservation. I know that I draw the strength to do so from my Dominant. Yes, I am the one that has to be in charge of my reactions....but it is his will and his power that make that possible. In restraints I don't find much "submission" except for the moment at which you consent to restraint. Beyond that moment it is a choiceless position.

greeneyes600 -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 12:26:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin Can you not see that it's the dominant's power and ability to control his submissive that keeps them there also? Yes I do see that.....maybe i do 'overthink' but for me knowing and understanding the mental side of this life makes it far deeper.

mbes -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 12:28:50 PM)
Standing still and "taking it" is an act of submission. Since I prefer activitiy to passivity, it's my preference. Just my nature. Of course, either way, the sub performs an act, either by staying, or in allowing the bonds to be placed. But once the binding is done, passivity comes into play, and it's not my strong suit. I'm afraid that I would tend toward fighting the binding (not that there's anything wrong with that!) The binding my other half uses tends to run more toward a reminder, than an incapacitating force. I CAN get out of it. My will to submit is tested. I like that, and he seems to as well. So I'm not seeing any "shoulds" in any of that.

SirJohnMandevill -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 12:54:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greeneyes600 Should a submissive be restrained to take what their master wants them to take? I can see the point of the sub standing to take what's given, without movement, without a sound....but then it's the sub who has the power...over herself. If she is retsrained, immobilised, then the restrainer is the one with the power, over her. He decides she isn't to move, he decides she stays there until he is finished with her. My view only of course...what do you think? My submissive lady and I have played -- and immensely enjoyed -- both ways. Normally I restrain her with cuffs, chains and ropes. But we also had a very memorable scene where I whipped her front and back as she stood naked, unrestrained except for cuffs, and totally at my mercy. Mmmmmmmmmmmmm...again, lover? Five more days....[;)] Les (Purveyor of Fine, Handcrafted Kink) Whatever the Dominant wants should be the rule.

Aileen1968 -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 12:59:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greeneyes600 quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin Can you not see that it's the dominant's power and ability to control his submissive that keeps them there also? Yes I do see that.....maybe i do 'overthink' but for me knowing and understanding the mental side of this life makes it far deeper. Your mental side will be vastly different from anyone else's. There is no right or wrong, just whatever works between the two unique people.

lizcgirl -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 1:13:29 PM)
I like both equally. When I'm not restrained I'm focusing more on holding still and behaving, which is what makes it submissive to me. When I'm restrained, I've handed Him the power to do what He wishes without being able to do anything about it- handing Him the power is what is submissive to me in that situation. Just because I can't move doesn't mean it's easier, it just means I submitted in a different way at that time. I wouldn't walk up to any joe-blow and let him restrain me, just like if some one randomly told me to hold perfectly still I wouldn't comply. Both are acts and signs of submission because you choose to do them for the One you serve. Still, I love to be restrained. The mentality of it, knowing He can do whatever He wishes I can't stop Him even if I wanted to, is hot as hell to me. It all boils down to mentality.

NormalOutside -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 1:24:15 PM)
Rope bores me, I have to admit it. And yeah, I call myself a dominant. :p I'm not big into the kinky aspects of BDSM - the chains, the outfits, the roleplays. I'm about reality. If I want to hurt my girl, I can do it without ropes. Punishment, same thing. Pleasure, you guessed it, I can do it without ropes or cuffs. I'm bigger, I'm stronger, and restraints or not I'm going to get what I want, always. I don't really get the side I'm hearing in here, mostly the submissives, saying "I'm giving him the control to tie me up, I'm giving him the control to punish me, I'm in control of when it ends", etc. To each their own, of course, but to me that wouldn't work. If you're getting so much control out of this restraint/punishment, you're probably more bottom than submissive. (there should be a profile option for bottom or top, not just submissive and dominant..... fetlife does it that way, they have 10 or so options for what you are)

CalifChick -> RE: restraint (9/20/2008 1:35:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NormalOutside I don't really get the side I'm hearing in here, mostly the submissives, saying "I'm giving him the control to tie me up, I'm giving him the control to punish me, I'm in control of when it ends", etc. To each their own, of course, but to me that wouldn't work. If you're getting so much control out of this restraint/punishment, you're probably more bottom than submissive. I'm pretty sure only one person (not "mostly the submissives") said they are in control of when it ends. As far as the rest of the "control" goes, it's given to him by being in the relationship. I hardly find that makes any of us "more bottom than submissive." Cali

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125