CreativeDominant
Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: eyesopened INot sure if my thoughts will be well expressed but I've heard so very often that people who are part of smbd communities, events, groups, etc are more credible than those who have practised their interests in the privacy of their homes, or who may attend an event as a spectator rather than a public participant. For example, a supposedly well-known person may think because they have never met me, that I am less credible than his or her friends within the "community". I have attended quite a few events over the years but have never stayed for the play party, road trip to the dungeon or in a lot of cases, even been introduced to everyone at the event. I know a wonderful Dominant, extremely skilled in the emotional as well as physical aspects of smbd and he has never been a member of a group and has only attended a handful of demonstrations as a guest. No one except the submissives he has been involved with, knows him, knows of him or has ever met him. Yet he is one of the most credible people I have ever met. My Master also fits this discription. Not only is He skilled in a variety of activities, His skill with rope is equal to or better than those who have been presenters at demonstrations I've attended. Yet there is no one in our local "community" who has ever met Him. I've met quite a few people and I seriously doubt more than 5 people even remember who I am. So how is credibility measured? Could we agree that who we know isn't always the best measure of credibility? I think credibility is something that is gained, like almost anything else, by what you show yourself to be to those within your world who matter. I think I'm a pretty good doctor. The great majority of my patients over the last 26 years would agree with that assessment...I've lost very few and those I've lost were due to reasons ranging from the mundane---Doc, I just don't like putting on a dressing gown/treatment shorts"--- to the unfortunate but unavoidable "Doc, there's just something about you that rubs me wrong". I have credibility as a doctor in these people's eyes and they refer in their friends and/or family. BDSM and D/s is another matter. I've had 3 long-term submissives. One of those D/s relationships ended on a good note, the other two did not. Does that mean I am no good at relationships? Depends on whose side of the story you come down on...mine, hers, or the truth. I have not played publicly for 2 years, I've played privately with a couple of submissives. Those I've played with have enjoyed it, judging by the fact that they've come back for more. Does my lack of playtime in the last couple of years mean that I am not a good player...or does it mean that I am rusty...or does it mean that I took some time off after the last long-term relationship to look at myself and what I want? Does it mean the play was not available to me or does it mean that I took the time to avail myself of learning more about BDSM play, to get some things squared away with my ums that had been neglected for a couple of years, to change some things about my practice? I can give a submissive references but as has often been stated on here and was stated by Merc and Iron Bear so nicely, those credentials...those symbols of my credibility...would be coming from sources that the submissive does not know and which she has to know were picked by me because they are GOOD references. If you want to know how credible I am, go slow with me...be cautious...watch and learn and listen to me and my actions and thoughts and words and see how well your intellectual, physiological and emotional response to me stacks up...how resonant you as a person are with me as a person first and then how well you as a submissive resonate with my dominant style and how you, as a BDSM player, respond to me as a BDSM player.
|