quote:

I feel the same way about this phrase that I do about infidelity -- if a dominant individual and submissive individual are comfortable together, there will be no question between them about how the yielding process is going and who holds the authority, regardless of what it looks like to anyone else, just like a couple who are happy and healthy together will have a relationship that is honest and neither party will break trust with the other, regardless of what it looks like to an outsider.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

im toying with the idea though that too much onus is being put on the Dominant to control the situation.  its a two way street, the Dominant can only control if the submissive submits. if the submissive is forever finding sneaky ways to have things their way rather than go the Dominants way then i would call that TFTB.  i think it is a case of the submissive not giving over that control, if they dont the Dominant shouldnt force it, but i dont believe that it is always the Dominants fault that a sub cant or wont relinquish all control and attempts to steer the relationship in a direction they want.

its actually about letting go and learning to.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

im toying with the idea though that too much onus is being put on the Dominant to control the situation.  its a two way street, the Dominant can only control if the submissive submits. if the submissive is forever finding sneaky ways to have things their way rather than go the Dominants way then i would call that TFTB.  i think it is a case of the submissive not giving over that control, if they dont the Dominant shouldnt force it, but i dont believe that it is always the Dominants fault that a sub cant or wont relinquish all control and attempts to steer the relationship in a direction they want.

its actually about letting go and learning to.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW

I would agree with this to a point -- however, I think that part of being the dominant party in a relationship includes recognizing when a certain individual is not in a position to be comfortable or capable of yielding to the extent that one requires and initiating the discussion that will either move that situation in the direction of becoming closer to the expectation, or end the situation so that both parties can find a more... amenable situation. I believe that this -is- the primary responsibility of the one who holds authority in the relationship, and is a reflection of that individual's capacity to truly recognize the state of hir relationship and initiate necessary action. That -is-, for me, what a dominant party does.

quote:

Sometimes, there is an individual who -wants- to yield, but for internal reasons, xhe finds hirself unable to do so. Unfortunately, many dominant-type individuals will take someone like this on as a submissive partner, only to discover that the submissive individual is constitutionally unable to yield... and rather than letting the "submissive" partner know that the dichotomy has been seen, noted, and then working with that submissive individual to take action to resolve the dichotomy, they, instead, play "ostrich", pretending to hold "control" over this individual who has never truly yielded authority to them... this isn't "topping from the bottom"... it is an ineffective an unhealthy relationship, based on a foundation of fantasy and fallacy -- and both parties are liable to become jaded, feel betrayed, and become even less able to enter into healthy relationships if this kind of situation goes on for any length of time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

im toying with the idea though that too much onus is being put on the Dominant to control the situation.  its a two way street, the Dominant can only control if the submissive submits. if the submissive is forever finding sneaky ways to have things their way rather than go the Dominants way then i would call that TFTB.  i think it is a case of the submissive not giving over that control, if they dont the Dominant shouldnt force it, but i dont believe that it is always the Dominants fault that a sub cant or wont relinquish all control and attempts to steer the relationship in a direction they want.

its actually about letting go and learning to.

quote:


Topping from the bottom = the bottom directing the sensations given by the top

quote:

ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW

I would agree with this to a point -- however, I think that part of being the dominant party in a relationship includes recognizing when a certain individual is not in a position to be comfortable or capable of yielding to the extent that one requires and initiating the discussion that will either move that situation in the direction of becoming closer to the expectation, or end the situation so that both parties can find a more... amenable situation. I believe that this -is- the primary responsibility of the one who holds authority in the relationship, and is a reflection of that individual's capacity to truly recognize the state of hir relationship and initiate necessary action. That -is-, for me, what a dominant party does.

quote:

ORIGINAL: porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

im toying with the idea though that too much onus is being put on the Dominant to control the situation.  its a two way street, the Dominant can only control if the submissive submits. if the submissive is forever finding sneaky ways to have things their way rather than go the Dominants way then i would call that TFTB.  i think it is a case of the submissive not giving over that control, if they dont the Dominant shouldnt force it, but i dont believe that it is always the Dominants fault that a sub cant or wont relinquish all control and attempts to steer the relationship in a direction they want.

its actually about letting go and learning to.

Or better put, if I hire someone that fails to perform as expected they are responsible for their behavior. However, it doesn't change the fact that I hired the schmuck that didn't/wouldn't do his job. You can't separate the two. I'm accountable for bringing him on board. The idea that one should choose wisely goes in both directions. Suggesting that the submissive is at fault for failing to submit without recognizing the dominant chose a girl that won't/can't yield is unfathomable to me.

~porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2
absolutely, i agree.  but we are all capable of making a mistake based on what we think we know of the person stepping up for the job.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

absolutely, i agree.  but we are all capable of making a mistake based on what we think we know of the person stepping up for the job.

quote:

we go on what we believe to be the case.  we cant be held accountable in all cases when someone presents as the real deal only to discover theyre masters of manipulation and actually in this womans case, truely believes she is behaving reasonably.

quote:

its when the TFTB isnt addressed or the Dominant is themselves incapable of dominance and accuses the sub of not being submissive or of topping from the bottom that it starts to become the irritant being discussed here.

quote:

i just wanted to suggest that TFTB is something that can occur and isnt always the fault of the Dominant.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jujubeeMB
It's quite simple, really. If I can manipulate you into doing what I want and you're aware of that fact, don't like it, but do it anyway (or whine about how I'm topping from the bottom), you don't have control over me. If I attempt to manipulate you into doing something that I want and you smile to yourself at how hard I'm trying to get something from you and then realize that you get to decide whether to do it or not, you have control over me. And for the most part, if someone submissive is attempting to manipulate a situation in an other-than-playful manner, you need to sit down and have an "is everything ok" conversation, because that's usually a sign that person doesn't feel they can just be honest and straight forward about what they want/need. A good Dominant will note the subversive behavior and realize that there's a problem in communication.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

now i know people are going to chime in and say, yeah, but im strong and i need to be Dominated in order for my submission to take hold and to varying degrees we are all like that.  and if a Dominant is attracted to that level of aggressive Dominance and enjoys the challenge of breaking through a wall of fiest then cool.  but i would argue that to some extent that is TFTB - and there are quite a number of profiles that 'speak' in this tone, ive read a few myself.  nothing wrong with them, but for me, anyway, they seem to be missing the point of Ds as i understand it.

if we are discussing TFTB as opposed to how a Dominant deals with TFTB, then that is just an example of how it can manifest. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

now i know people are going to chime in and say, yeah, but im strong and i need to be Dominated in order for my submission to take hold and to varying degrees we are all like that.  and if a Dominant is attracted to that level of aggressive Dominance and enjoys the challenge of breaking through a wall of fiest then cool.  but i would argue that to some extent that is TFTB - and there are quite a number of profiles that 'speak' in this tone, ive read a few myself.  nothing wrong with them, but for me, anyway, they seem to be missing the point of Ds as i understand it.

if we are discussing TFTB as opposed to how a Dominant deals with TFTB, then that is just an example of how it can manifest.