Submissive and romantic love
19 October 1997
This discussion took place on #SanTara on Sunday,
the 19th of October, 1997
The discussion revolves around the differences, and what they actually
are, between romantic love and submissive love.
|
Symbols and abbreviations
|
:)
;-))
<g>
|
Smilies: symbols that represent smiles (when viewed sideways)
|
|
BP
|
Blackprince
|
|
LM
|
LordMilz
|
|
|
Participants
|
|
Alexa^^
|
A Pro Dom (Professional Dominatrix). Owner of dina (a slave)
|
|
MrEos
|
A male Dominant
|
|
jalinari
|
A female submissive
|
|
spider_doll
|
A female submissive
|
|
warrigal^
|
A submissive
|
|
LordMilz
|
A male Dominant
|
|
sarah_ts
|
Transexual, biologically male
|
|
frogaroo
|
A male Dominant, "owner" of alycia
|
|
|
Alexa^^
|
A little info on the topic before we begin; two of us
here are working on papers regarding the topic--essay-type
things--and while this night isn't just to pinch ideas for that, it is
a topic that I think Doms, especially, could use info on via the website
OK. I just need to remind everyone that the meeting
is logged and will appear on the website in a few days
If anyone needs/wants to have their names removed
just see MrEos
I didn't put any 'points to discuss' on the list post.
What we are hoping for is your views on what the differences
similarities and correlations might be [between submissive love
and romantic love]
Has any one here an experience on the topic or wish
to share with us first up their opinions?
|
|
BlackPrince
|
Me ponders... Yes, I have Alexa. I am
trying to arrange my thoughts
|
|
BlackPrince
|
OK. In some ways I think submissive love is
a deeper form of romantic love. It is somehow MORE
thinks some more
I think the difference lies
in the yielding, if that makes sense
|
|
Alexa^^
|
How would you deal with a slave that had romantic
intentions and yours where purely scene-related?
|
|
BlackPrince
|
I would talk first. I would explain that our
interests diverged and were obviously not congruent
It seems to me that if a Dom/me entered such
a scene the sub could get BADLY hurt and I would say so
shuts up for a bit...
|
|
Alexa^^
|
Nods
How about an example, and then people can
give their opinions and comments?
Dom states intentions are non-love-related. sub agrees
and says it is acceptable. After a time that changes; sub or
Dom grows to love in more than a sub/Dom relationship. The other
doesn't. How best can that be handled?
|
|
warrigal^
|
I find that at times some people get confused between
love
and the more Physical side
|
|
frogaroo
|
I agree. Love is *one* kind of pleasure
|
|
warrigal^
|
Many people that I know use BDSM as a foreplay they play.
It is a game, not for real,
and do not understand the real needs some of us
have
|
|
frogaroo
|
My sub needs *some* foreplay to enter a scene better.
The name of the game being to release the right chemicals
in the brain.
Foreplay accelerates this process with alycia.
I think the love potion AND the pain potion are very
close
|
|
BlackPrince
|
Tell me something--difficult, I know--but are
women more prone to the "love" syndrome than men?
|
|
Alexa^^
|
I believe that most ages of women are prone, but that younger
males tend to be more strongly prone to falling in
'love/lust' and are more easily hurt when they realise that there
are 'different' loves. It is a matter of relating on two different
levels, and of being able to operate without 'romantic' love,
a necessity that makes it difficult for either gender
I just wanted to make a point about being in love and
loving are two very separate things for me when I am relating
with subs and slaves
|
|
BlackPrince
|
I would like to pick on the chemicals thing...
There are chemicals involved--we all know
endorphins.The other that seems to be involved is serotonin. I
think the second lot is a "love" chemical and maybe in frog's
case you have to have BOTH
|
|
frogaroo
|
Both endorphins AND serotonin (love) act upon dopamine
|
|
frogaroo
|
I refer you to a title by a bioneurologist called
Jean-Didier Vincent: "The biology of passion". A must.
|
|
Alexa^^
|
Beams
Thanks, frog:)
|
|
sarah_ts
|
There are different levels of submission as well
as love
For me, the level of submission I give to someone
depends on how much I am attracted to them and they to me,
so it is not just a case of one or the other, but
a mixture of both
|
|
Bunter
|
many of you know of my recent mail to the list about
the "horror" scene [ed: this relates to a scene where an older
Dom abused a young sub]
The sub is now head over heels in love with the Dom
|
|
BlackPrince
|
Nods
Bloody chemicals again ;)
|
|
Alexa^^
|
I disagree
It is more than chemicals.
Not all emotional processes can be as simply defined
as chemical imbalances
|
|
frogaroo
|
The lowest common denominator of our emotions IS
chemical. Sorry, Alexa
|
|
Alexa^^
|
Nods and understands that
But how do you relate that to the emotional without
being impersonal?
Shuts up now :)
|
|
BlackPrince
|
It isn't a matter of IMBALANCE at all, I think. I
think there are neurological/chemical processes happening all
the time and it is a matter of which is FELT.
The FEELINGS that are experienced are the key.
|
|
LordMilz
|
I cant accept the "raw chemical reaction" idea without
it seeming like we are slaves to a set of chemical processes
and don't have any choice
In addition, I don't define love as emotion therefore
I don't accept that it is chemically based; it is an action
|
|
frogaroo
|
LM, it depends if you subscribe to the notion of
romantic infatuation or to that of sexual felicity
|
|
Alexa^^
|
OK. Taking the case of this sub via Bunter's interpretation
of events; wouldn't you say that it is as much a matter of psychological
conditioning as a chemical process? That her conditioning has
affected her as much as her chemicals?
That her experiences past and present have led to
this, not just a chemical reaction to stimulus provided by the
Dom?
|
|
BlackPrince
|
OK. I think that what LM said is at least partly
correct--we are not totally slaves to the chemical processes; we
can modify them through our feelings. It's an adjustment
process happening all the time--based on FEELINGS
|
|
sarah_ts
|
I don't think that sub of Bunter's is a good example
for this discussion.
It would be better off in a discussion about why do
so many people stay with those that hurt them physically and emotionally.
What I'm saying is that many people are so afraid
of losing the small amount of affection they have, they put up
with anything
|
|
Alexa^^
|
LM, did you have comment to make?
|
|
LordMilz
|
Yes
To frog's [earlier] comment: I don't subscribe to either actually.
I don't tie "love", as I described it, to either romance or sexual
behaviour.
I relate it to a pure commitment of someone to choose
the good for another person over their own person good
|
|
Alexa^^
|
Thanks, LM. Anyone else care to comment?
OK. How would some of you describe the _differences_
between romantic love and sub[missive] love to a newcomer?
Smiles
Anyone?
|
|
BlackPrince
|
I am taken by sarah's earlier comments about different
LEVELS. I think that the key is there. I see sub-love as a deeper
form of romantic love
|
|
Alexa^^
|
I see it as two clearly distinct entities :)
How would you clarify your position, BP?
|
|
sarah_ts
|
Maybe you see them as different because you are primarily
a top, not a sub?
|
|
Alexa^^
|
No. I have felt that way long before. Perhaps it is
an experience-related opinion
|
|
jalinari
|
For me, i think it is a bit of a case of the chicken
and egg syndrome; neither exist in a vacuum devoid of the other. However, the
D/s context can, i think lead to ummm...
greater depth, but also greater potential [and] emotional
harm if abused :)
|
|
MrEos
|
I think that the necessarily deeper intimacy required
in a BDSM relationship fosters a deeper emotional relationship
(ie. love).
A vanilla relationship doesn't necessarily require that
same intimacy to function
|
|
BlackPrince
|
OK. I agree with MrEos. I think that is what
I meant about sub- love being deeper than romantic love. And, in
clarification to sarah, I am a long way from being just a top. I
subbed for 3 years full-time. While I am now almost exclusively
dom, I do know the difference
|
|
Alexa^^
|
An example: I _love_ dina [Alexa's slave] but I am not
_in love_ with her, and there _is_ a difference.
For us it didn't lessen the experience or lessen the
commitment to her collar for each of us
|
|
spider_doll
|
Intimacy, trust, understanding, self-awareness,
caring, understanding and sharing are all required in a good
D/s relationship. They are also good building blocks for a
"romantic" love but they do not necessarily lead to it *soft
smile*. And BDSM does not necessarily need Romantic Love,
but it does need what most term love to be in a good relationship.
(I agree with Alexa: love but not in love)
But it is the rare few who find both. To find
so much Y/you need from one [person] is a lucky thing indeed
|
|
jalinari
|
i suppose love is a term i use very, very rarely as
there are far too many different connotations placed on it by
others. Two people rarely mean the same thing by it. With
my Dom i will use words such as affection, commitment, trust...
|
|
LordMilz
|
OK. Regarding things as emotional, what do people
think of this? I know of a few 24/7-oriented submissives that
are without a Dominant at the moment. They tell me that they already
"LOVE" their potential new Master/Mistress even though they have
not met them yet. To me this is not emotional; it is a choice
the submissive is making
|
|
BlackPrince
|
Hmmm... Well, I would be careful about that. It
seems to me that subs who a priori commit to the notion of "LOVE"
well in advance of meeting their Dom/me, are almost always heading
for problems
|
|
MrEos
|
I tend to feel that love is sort-of template-oriented.
The closer someone is to the template the more likely love will
be the result
|
|
BlackPrince
|
I agree with MrEos. Interesting idea!
|
|
MrEos
|
If a key requirement for someone to feel love is, say,
that their partner must have red hair, then they are well on
the way when they meet someone with red hair.
If a key requirement is that their partner must dominate
them, then a Dom is also well on they way, even before he has
met the sub
|
|
spider_doll
|
Nods in partial agreement, but knows that most will
never learn the subtleties of their templates
|
|
Alexa^^
|
Nods and agrees cautiously with MrEos
But I think
a lot of subs confuse 'devotion' with 'love'; moreso 'being in
love'
|
|
spider_doll
|
Nods in agreement with Alexa; definitely agreeing
|
|
LordMilz
|
As has been pointed out, one can have a clear picture
of who they will love and the more 'ticks' the happier they
are, but my point was actually that no emotions are involved;
no scenes are involved, no chemicals are involved; therefore
something else must be involved. What is it?
|
|
jalinari
|
Just a thought; there is, to me, a vast difference
between love of a situation and love of an individual. i suspect
that it can be very easy to *need* or to love a particular situation
of slavery/subbiness wherein the identity of the Master/Mistress
is not an issue. But, yes, i agree with spider as well. i suspect
that many of us do not know when it is a situation and when it is the
individual that we are attracted to
|
|
MrEos
|
I just wanted to point out that my template theory doesn't
imply that people know what their template requires. I just want
to theorise that it exists
and that it determines how easily and quickly someone
will fall in love... their predisposition to it, if you will
|
|
Alexa^^
|
smiles
Thanks, MrEos. Is the essence something similar
to devotion? Or is it something else again?
Any ideas anyone?
|
|
LordMilz
|
I believe it is a choice, or a decision, an action;
but I would prefer to hear how people experience it
and what they think it is
|
|
frogaroo
|
LM, I don't understand what you mean by *action* in
the context of Love
|
|
LordMilz
|
Well, maybe this will explain it...
I have already decided to love my slave, no matter
who they are.
Once they are my slave I will love them.
It wont depend on endorphins, emotions or feelings,
I will just do it,
and I have come across submissives that describe
a similar 'sense' of what love for them is
|
|
frogaroo
|
Thinks that this sounds like mystic love
|
|
LordMilz
|
No - it is love in action
|
|
sarah_ts
|
So does that mean you only love them for the fact
that they are your slave,
or will you only pick slaves that you think you will
love?
|
|
LordMilz
|
No. It means that whoever I have a relationship
with of that level I will love;
and it does not depend on anything they do, say,
are, etc.
It is a decision I have made
|
|
Alexa^^
|
I think that it is a matter of personal definition of what
love is
|
|
Alexa^^
|
We each have our own [definition] but problems arise especially
in BDSM when people don't effectively communicate what it is for them
Having said that I have still had situations arise
when a sub has 'fallen in love' after accepting terms that did
not include that
|
|
spider_doll
|
Nods, agreeing with Alexa, but it is the same
in any relationship
|
|
Alexa^^
|
No, spider. I think that in BDSM for me, the clarification
MUST be made ASAP, then when confrontation arises, or conflict,
there is an agreement to go back to.
Not all BDSM D&s relationships are between 'lovers'
|
|
spider_doll
|
Agrees, but communication is the basis for any
relationship; just more formalised in BDSM
|
|
warrigal^^
|
Nods to spider
|
|
sarah_ts
|
I understand what you are saying, Alexa.
My main experience in D/s is with professionals.
When I see one, although there is an amount of feeling
on both side, it is purely a professional situation
and will very rarely amount to more.
If it does then it has crossed the boundary--similar
to doctor/patient relationship
|
|
Alexa^^
|
Nods to sarah
But is it possible for you to say
'hell, I love that dom/me'--and mean it--but not be in love? Can
you act upon your love as devotion without emotional detriment
to either of you?
|
|
sarah_ts
|
Yes, Ma'am, it is... and almost certain to happen :)
|
|
Alexa^^
|
Smiles
Thanks for clarifying, sarah
|
|
MrEos
|
LM, without wanting to sound critical, it sounds like
a confusion between intimacy and love
|
|
Alexa^^
|
Agrees with MrEos
|
|
LordMilz
|
No. No confusion. I am already in negotiation
with my intended slave who is in the US. We are not intimate,
yet I have still chosen to love her, and I will continue to
love her even when we are intimate
|
|
Alexa^^
|
So differences then, tend to be in individual perception
of love, intimacy, etc.? Any more differences?
|
|
BlackPrince
|
I think that you are right, Alexa. It is a perceptual
thing and, what's more, it is a TWO-way thing. So each
diad (couple) defines these things for themselves
|
|
sarah_ts
|
That's the fun of experimenting :)
|
|
Alexa^^
|
OK, then. Correlations between the two? How, when
where to they interrelate? Submissive love and romantic...
|
|
LordMilz
|
I don't think that they do correlate or interrelate in any
predictable way. It comes back to what BP said about it being
specific to each diad. There may be none of one, and all of
the other, or a mixture
|
|
Alexa^^
|
Smiles
Couples or lovers is one way. Does it cause
conflict in scenes with couples when the Love factor is, or could,
determine a punishment/treatment?
|
|
BlackPrince
|
For me the answer is clearly no to your question.
I don't love her any the less if I have to punish her. It is
a separate issue for me
|
|
Alexa^^
|
To clarify, I meant would love and its after-effects be a
determining factor on _giving_, or on _how_ you scene?
|
|
frogaroo
|
I'm a Dom who met a girl who met a Dom... For better
of for worse :)
|
|
BlackPrince
|
Grins at frogaroo
Well said!
|
|
Alexa^^
|
I know it might sound like I am slack, etc., but I
did find that when I felt more intimately for dina on a 'chemically
and emotionally' deeper level, my judgement of her misdemeanours
was swayed by possible affects to our 'outside' relationship
OK. Does anyone have anything they would like to add?
...
OK then, folks. Thanks for coming :)
You can see the
result on the website soon
|
|