July 18, 2004 EhBC Online Discussion

<ModBot> This message is generated by Moderator Bot, ModBot for short. I've set an automatic message that reads as follows...
<ModBot> Welcome to or regular Sunday night discussion. Please refrain from sending "hi" and "bye" messages until after 10 pm. Also note that the discussion is being logged. If you wish to remain anonymous, you should change your nick. Tonight's discussion topic is "BDSM: What's Love Got to Do With It?". The discussion is unmoderated. Enjoy!
* Omy looks at arhiannah 1 What?
* arhiannah grins...i'm excellent, thank you Sir
<Omy> Okay this is a little touchy question..but I seem to have a habit of askign the tough ones
<Omy> Does love have to exist in BDSM?
<ethereal> HAVE to? nope
<arhiannah> *have* to? No...
<_dove{S}> Not in my opinion, but some kind of bond has to exist
<Omy> You mean like trust dove?
<_dove{S}> i see trust and this bond to be different Omy
<_dove{S}> call it a chemistry if you wish?
<Omy> How so?
<Omy> ohh okay chemistry..I understand
<_dove{S}> i can trust a Top, scene with Him / Her and never need to have any other bond
<Omy> So then if love *is* involved, then how does it complicate/simplicate things?
<Omy> err simplify
<ethereal> :)
<blue```> it gives depth on an emotional level
<ethereal> i don't think it does complicate or...umm...simplify
<dana^^> i think its depends on the relationship... ive bottomed for a few Tops ... if its a D/s relationship then yes... there you would give everything...
<ethereal> give everything? meaning...???
<serra^angel> i agree with dana^^, that it does depend on the nature of the relationship.
<dana^^> everything i am ethereal.. its just natural for me to commit deeply ...
<_dove{S}> i guess it would also depend on your definition of love
<dana^^> thats very true dove...
<Omy> Doesn't love have a certain chemistry to it dove?
<_dove{S}> Yes it does
<dana^^> perhaps it also depends on how you define BDSM... if its Top/bottom...Master/slave
<serra^angel> personally i cannot see myself submitting fully to someone, if no Love is part of the equation...
<ethereal> chemistry exists on different levels too, IMO
<Omy> Love - that certain chemistry that makes your heart flutter when your partner walks into the room. Someone you can be yourself. No mask. Someone who accepts you, supports you, for the person you are. Not what they want you to become.
<dana^^> im the same way serra angel
<serra^angel> i can however bottom to someone without Love being there.
<Omy> How does love affect your limits?
<ethereal> I'm not sure love affects my limits as much as trust
<ethereal> though both can go hand in hand
<Omy> Can you love someone without trust?
<serra^angel> I don't beleive I can.
<dana^^> im not sure if its just love or being in a D/s relationship is so much deeper... but i tend to trust the Dom i commit too and wouldnt submit completely unless i knew Him well
<lorraine> can not a Dom and sub have an none loving relastionship, but share the same love for the art of BDSM
<Omy> if your referring to a relationship based on service as an example, I would agree lorraine
<serra^angel> yes i beleive they could lorraine.
<ethereal> i think many people love without trust...look at how many people claim to love their mate but don't trust them any further than they can throw them
<dana^^> yes you can love but not trust... been there.. grins... but its not a healthy relationship
<ethereal> true dana...definitely not sustainable
<serra^angel> are we talking loving without trusting within the lifestyle, or in general?
<Omy> I agree dana
<ethereal> love is love...i don't think it's any different within the lifestyle
<ethereal> and people are people, regardless of their proclivities
<Omy> Agreed ethereal !
<dana^^> there are so many different ideas as to what makes up a relationship... so i can only speak for myself... in D/s love is a must...
<Omy> Your meaning love for the person as apposed to love to serve dana^^?
<ethereal> good point, Omy, many are drawn to servitude...love isn't necessary for them
<dana^^> yes Sir... they can be two separate things.. ive a passion to serve but that doesnt mean i have a deep bond with the Ones i serve.. if that makes sense
<Omy> Yes it does
<dana^^> and both are essential to a viable D/s relationship
<Omy> I believe dana^^ that if you can find someone that share both then you have found a treasure
<dana^^> smiles... one day...
<ethereal> assuming you are looking for a 24/7 relationship....one man's trash is another's treasure ;)
<Omy> I have been blessed to have found this a couple times..and it certainly does make the heart swell with pride when they are combined
<dana^^> its incredible
<Omy> Well ethereal, I think that can you have a D/s relationship that is not 24/7 is a good topic for another discussion
<browneyeddoe> my servitude to a Dominant i was not in love with would really constitute service to myself... service for my own pleasure... because i need to serve.. not necessarily because i needed to serve the Dominant i did not love... service to a Man i love, however, would be what i consider true submission
<dana^^> oh same here browneyeddoe... when i bottom i do feel selfish... its my needs that i negoiate for... instead of just following
<Omy> that's one of the best definitions I've heard of a "true submissive"..service to the Dominant you love
<dana^^> <== is writing it down.. grins...
<browneyeddoe> there are women who don't need that bond though... who truly get pleasure from being used, even to the point of humiliation, so love doesn't always have to be a factor for some... is hard for me to imagine, but it happens everyday
<ethereal> getting slightly off track...i think by that definition 'true submission' can still be pretty selfish...just because you're also meeting the needs of someone you love doesn't lessen what you get out of it
<ethereal> doing it for someone you love may make it feel deeper to you...but it still contains a selfish element
<dana^^> yes i agree ethereal.. but its also following the Dominants lead... and that isnt always exactly what you may have thought it was... smiles...
<ethereal> mind you, i'm not someone who thinks selflessness is all it's cracked up to be ;)
<Omy> Any relationship ethereal involves comprimise. and if your both getting something from it, then that is the best possible outcome
<browneyeddoe> it does to a degree though... when i submit to my Master, for instance, it is truly all about Him.. most surely, i get a great deal of satisfaction for having pleased Him... is it selfish if pleasure extends to both sides?
<Omy> I don't think so browneyeddoe
<ethereal> sure it's still selfish...you still get "a great deal of satisfaction"...that's why I don't think selfishness is always a bad thing...here's a perfect example of when it's not...am i making any sense?
<QTIP> if this type of play is about power exchange, what's wrong with both top and bottom having their selfish desires served?
<dana^^> i think i may have confused the topic when i talked about bottoming... there the scene is restricted to certain activities
<Omy> I don't equate selfishness with submission ethereal.
<arhiannah> an _exchange_ is all about meeting needs for one another....having desires, wants & needs met....for all parties
<ethereal> exactly QTIP, I don't think there's anything wrong with it
<dana^^> nothing QTIP... for now thats all i can give...
<_dove{S}> This lifestyle is all about mutual pleasure.......... some get that from serving, some get it from controlling....
<browneyeddoe> i don't think it's selfish to get pleasure.. but i think i understand what you mean, ethereal
<ethereal> good point arhiannah...it is power "exchange" after all
<QTIP> i guess it's about how one personally defines "selfishness"
<ethereal> or whether one thinks selfishness is always bad
<QTIP> sure. lots of people use the word "love" thinking that everyone knows what they mean as well. often "love" is quite a subjective term
<dana^^> so true QTIP...
<_dove{S}> It's all subjective, imo
<ethereal> bingo dove
<Omy> So how does love change the relationship? We don't start out loving...typically we've played and had sex with our partners b4 that has happened.
<dana^^> perhaps its safe to say in this instance we are talking about love between your primary partner?
<browneyeddoe> i'm not sure about that one.. i started out loving.. lol
<Omy> What affect does it have on submission...and Dominance
<Omy> agreed dana^^
<dana^^> me too browneyeddoe
<serra^angel> i cannot speak for the dominance side, however i do know that it does make the submission stronger, and deeper.
<ethereal> that's a good question...my only experience with how love changes a relationship are in a vanilla sense, so I can't say for sure if it's any different' in a D/s relationship...but i'm inclined to believe that it's not much different
<ethereal> and for me it deepens the committment
<Omy> Do you feel that if your Dominant loves you, he holds you to a higher standard?
<browneyeddoe> most certainly
<ethereal> i would hope so
<_dove{S}> It can also play havoc on S&m
<dana^^> perhaps its more a case of wanting to explore more deeply with you... share and nurture
<Omy> Do you hold yourself personally to a higher standard.
<ethereal> definitely
<serra^angel> would i hold myself to a higher standard yes, but i am not certain that he would hold me to a higher one.
<browneyeddoe> i would think it would interfere more with D/s instead of S&m... play is so easy to get lost in, but day to day service between T/two might be affected..
<ethereal> how about from the dominant side...how does love change things for the dominant? i've heard dominants say that play becomes difficult because they have a hard time reconciling hurting someone they love
<dana^^> hmmm... im not sure... though i would be more aware of representing my Dom than myself
<dana^^> great question ethereal
<_dove{S}> that is what i have heard too ethereal
<Omy> Okay browneyeddoe, "SHOULD" service be affected by love. Do you expect your Dominant to be more forgiving?
<ethereal> i had this same conversation with a D/s couple just last night...so i've got it on the brain
<spankablecyn> I don't consider myself being hurt, I consider myself being pleasured
<dana^^> smiles...
<browneyeddoe> it shouldn't.. but it does have an affect for the B/both of U/us.. even if W/we unknowingly have those expectations.. they just happen
<ethereal> but the question is whether your dom sees it the same way
<Omy> ethereal
<Omy> err definite;y
<serra^angel> may we ask how it changes it for the Dominant, Omy Sir?
<ethereal> of course...but being human, doms have to work through that too...and it's not always easy to change one's paradigm to accomodate changes in one's heart
<Omy> By the time I have coem to love my girl, I know her quite well. I know what she can take. It is far easier to walk her along her personal edge then with a play partner
<Omy> So typically, I play harder with my girl then I do with anyone else
<serra^angel> but Sir? would that be because You love her? or just because of hte time You have spent and gotten to know her?
<Omy> Good question serra^angel...and I thought I was the one that asked the tough questions;)
<ethereal> i'm glad to hear that Omy...obviously there are many different ways this affects dominants
<serra^angel> *smiles* oops sorry.. hadn't seen that rule written anywhere *wink*
<Omy> I think serra^angel I think it is because I have made a differnt commitment to her
<Omy> lol serra^angel
<Omy> To give some perspective
<Omy> I was raised devote Irish roman catholic...so the whole issue of hitting a women was a hurddle I had to overcome. With a playpartner its easy..but when loves enters it, the line gets a little fuzzy again
<shareena> so because you have made a commitment Omy, you play harder?
<dana^^> smiles...
<shareena> or you don't play harder?
<dana^^> wouldnt that only be for a while though Sir... then the need to explore deepens...
<serra^angel> from what i see Omy is saying.. is that because of that commitment, He "dares" to take it further, because of the depth of the relationship.
<ethereal> is it easier with a play partner because it's easier to objectify someone you don't know well? but when you do know someone well it's more difficult to objectify them?
<Omy> I play harder shareena...I know her better and the trust level is much higher..freeing
<shareena> I can understand that
<browneyeddoe> the fact that you love or do not love her should really have no bearing on how hard you play, Sir... that would be determined by her threshhold for pain, i would think
<shareena> not neccesarily browneyeddoe
<Omy> We al explore the lifestyle...we all push or have limits pushed..that's the freedom. It is I think a little easier to push those limits when in a commited relationship
<shareena> i would think that would be a consideration
<spankablecyn> I agree browneyeddoe
<dana^^> i agree Omy Sir...
<ethereal> easier to push limits if you know it won't chip away at trust
<Omy> browneyeddoe
<browneyeddoe> well in the terms i was speaking, i was referring to pain...
<Omy> It was a limit for her that she gave me to push...a wonderful birthday present
<browneyeddoe> nods
<Omy> When I say play hard...I'm not talkign about how hard I can swing a flogger...I'm talking about personal boundaries..which would include pain
<Omy> I'm talijg about walking a person on their boundary edge.
<Omy> talking
<browneyeddoe> :)
<Omy> Okay..why doesn't mirc have auto spell correction . lol
<browneyeddoe> laffs.. they should
<dana^^> blames my poor spelling on typos...
<Omy> Pain would be a physical limit but there is also the mind.
<ethereal> an the mental limits are really the ones that require the most caution, IMO
<dana^^> there are some relationships where perhaps the Master isnt "in love" with His slave... yet boundary seem to be pushed...
<Omy> Would any of you submissives push a limit without love?
<browneyeddoe> my Master is not one to push my mental limits... so i don't really know enough about that to contribute.. i guess W/we've grown comfortable in O/our old age
<ethereal> yes
<_dove{S}> yes
<dana^^> no Sir... i consider that part of the joy within a solid D/s relationship
<Omy> If you love your Dominant, then don't you trust him? That he wouldn't do anything that would cause you harm?
<serra^angel> i am unsure really..
<ethereal> if i truly trusted the dominant, respected them and had faith in their competence, I would allow limits to be pushed
<ethereal> notice i make no mention of love ;)
<browneyeddoe> chuckles
<dana^^> absolutely... i wouldnt be in a relationship unless it was like that..
<serra^angel> i see things completely like you do on this dana^^
<ModBot> There are only about five minutes left in the formal part of tonight's discussion. Does anyone have any last-minute thoughts on the subject?
<dana^^> what kinds of limits ethereal.. if i may ask...
<dana^^> like pain tolerance perhaps...
<ethereal> physical or mental...again, if it were someone i trusted and knew they would be there after the fact to help me process things then yes, I would...and it wouldn't have to be someone I was 'in love' with
<dana^^> thank you ethereal...
<spankablecyn> I love the way my Dom can read my thoughts and body language and respects my limits. I had been with a Dom that "fell out of love with me" and there was is a clear difference, less respect I would say and less concern
<browneyeddoe> i bet, spankable
<dana^^> is bias i guess... but the relationships ive had the pleasure of watching grow do so more deeply with love..
<ModBot> Well, that's it for the formal part of the discussion. The discussion log is now closed. It should be processed and uploaded to the www.ehbc.ca website soon. Please feel free to continue chatting informallly. Have a good night, everyone!
<ModBot> Thank you to everyone who participated in the discussion.