RE: relationship dynamic

RE: relationship dynamic (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

mysouldesire -> RE: relationship dynamic (1/8/2012 2:43:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fragilepieces I suppose but-- I have heard the word relationship dynamic used in a vanilla setting with that said can only polar opposites have it---like a man/woman not a gay/gay non D/s couple? "relationship dynamic" is NOT sanctioned for only use in WIITWD! lets beat the dead horse some more !!

fragilepieces -> RE: relationship dynamic (1/8/2012 3:02:11 PM)
ummm you don't have to participate I am not twisting your arm....[:D]

agirl -> RE: relationship dynamic (1/8/2012 3:57:58 PM)
It just means * what we have and what we do. It, like a lot of phrases, has it's * burn my ears off* point. I'm all for plain-speak but the fashion is to colour the obvious with rainbow words and phrases. agirl

fragilepieces -> RE: relationship dynamic (1/8/2012 4:06:16 PM)
agirl I totally agree with you---love that burns my ears off.

Casteele -> RE: relationship dynamic (1/8/2012 4:25:18 PM)
I've also wondered at times exactly what it meant--Not so much it's origins, as I just view it as the latest buzzword used by people to appear "in the know." Somehow, every time I hear it on this board, it conjures up a mental image in my head of two highbrow, well-learned, gentleman in leathers sitting in some exclusive English country club sticking their pinkies out while holding their teacups and in a snooty voice saying something like "You know, Rutherford, ol' chap, just the other day I was out sporting for quail and discussing the relationship dynamics of some bullyish brute of a caveman at the commoner pub tying up some lass and flogging her for fun and sexual arousal.. Oh MY! Forgive me, Rutherford, but I must go tend to myself, the thought has caused me to 'spring a woody' as the commoners would say!" Of course, it's much funnier in my head :-P But as such, it only makes me snicker and hasn't yet become an annoyance. Yet. Like, Totally! Fo' shizzle, yo!

agirl -> RE: relationship dynamic (1/8/2012 4:34:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Casteele I've also wondered at times exactly what it meant--Not so much it's origins, as I just view it as the latest buzzword used by people to appear "in the know." Somehow, every time I hear it on this board, it conjures up a mental image in my head of two highbrow, well-learned, gentleman in leathers sitting in some exclusive English country club sticking their pinkies out while holding their teacups and in a snooty voice saying something like "You know, Rutherford, ol' chap, just the other day I was out sporting for quail and discussing the relationship dynamics of some bullyish brute of a caveman at the commoner pub tying up some lass and flogging her for fun and sexual arousal.. Oh MY! Forgive me, Rutherford, but I must go tend to myself, the thought has caused me to 'spring a woody' as the commoners would say!" Of course, it's much funnier in my head :-P But as such, it only makes me snicker and hasn't yet become an annoyance. Yet. Like, Totally! Fo' shizzle, yo! Yes, that's VERY amusing and a little odd considering the very few english people that post here. :) agirl

fragilepieces -> RE: relationship dynamic (1/8/2012 4:41:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Casteele I've also wondered at times exactly what it meant--Not so much it's origins, as I just view it as the latest buzzword used by people to appear "in the know." Somehow, every time I hear it on this board, it conjures up a mental image in my head of two highbrow, well-learned, gentleman in leathers sitting in some exclusive English country club sticking their pinkies out while holding their teacups and in a snooty voice saying something like "You know, Rutherford, ol' chap, just the other day I was out sporting for quail and discussing the relationship dynamics of some bullyish brute of a caveman at the commoner pub tying up some lass and flogging her for fun and sexual arousal.. Oh MY! Forgive me, Rutherford, but I must go tend to myself, the thought has caused me to 'spring a woody' as the commoners would say!" Of course, it's much funnier in my head :-P But as such, it only makes me snicker and hasn't yet become an annoyance. Yet. Like, Totally! Fo' shizzle, yo! OMG LOL LOL AGAIN---I never pictured two English guys---but a couple of submissives kneeling in a corner with their pinkies out saying 'relationship dynamic' because they want to appear 'in the know'. OMG LOL you made my day because I was really thinking I was the only one who felt this way or saw that is was a 'buzz' word. I was actually feeling kind of silly for even saying anything and I was trying to be nice and not tread on anyone who used it but...Casteele I promise not to squash anymore of your posts (unless I have to) [:)]

Casteele -> RE: relationship dynamic (1/9/2012 12:42:57 AM)
Squash away as needed--I need more intellectual challenge in my life. Honestly, until I found this board, I felt as if my intellectual growth was in retrograde. Besides, I'll use my safeword if I can't handle it. ;-)

fragilepieces -> RE: relationship dynamic (1/9/2012 3:25:22 AM)
Sighs Safewords Casteele are only effective if I hear them and acknowledge them....[8D]

Fetters4U -> RE: relationship dynamic (1/9/2012 4:34:46 AM)
I see a relationship dynamic as being the fluid interplay of personalities, opinions, actions, etc. between any (small?) group that by chance or circumstance are together for a while. Here "relationship" means how the creatures/people get on with each other, and "dynamic", as opposed to static, implies that it changes over time. Obviously, it applies to any couple in any type of relationship, but it could just as easily be applied to a group of office workers, a football team, soldiers in a platoon, or a bunch of survivors in a lifeboat. It probably applies to creatures other than humans too, so one could talk about the relationship dynamic of fish in an aquarium, or wolves in a pack. It is a useful term in the BDSM community since it encompasses non-traditional relationships of two or more people that may or may not be based on friendship, love and/or sex. It probably does not apply to trees in a forest, that interact, but probably do not care about each other in any meaningful sense. It probably does not apply to passengers in a bus, who are probably not together for long enough, although it could come into play if the bus was to break down in a remote area. It probably does not apply to people at a football game, where there are too many people for individual relationships to affect the entire group, although within a small section of season ticket holders, it would certainly apply. Ed

LadyPact -> RE: relationship dynamic (1/9/2012 7:49:22 AM)
My thought on this is that people might possibly be using the term to be specific about the type of dynamic that they share. For example, a relationship dynamic would be a D/s (or M/s) dynamic that is relationship (i.e., romantic love, etc) based as opposed to a different type, such as a service based dynamic. A quick way to give an overview of what kind of dynamic in which they participate or seek.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125