Over-protection (12)

I'm not talking here about the kind of consented-to control which may also be viewed as protection (e.g. vetting other potential play partners, a sub being provided with 'pocket money' whilst the dom/me takes control of their finances, etc). I am more interested in the subtle ways in which over-protection might emerge.

For example, there are countless posts on these boards emphasising the importance of communication to the D/s dynamic, but I wondered if some dom/mes are ever tempted to hold back information about things which might affect the dynamic, but which may worry the sub or be hard for them to hear, in order to 'protect' the sub?

To me this crosses the line from 'protection' to 'over-protection' because if a sub doesn't have all the info it can effect their ability to decide one of the few things subs do get a choice on - whether they want to participate in that dynamic or not. But I don't know if that's just my way of thinking.

So, dom/mes - do you ever hold back? Has this ever backfired on you or has it been a force for good?

And subs - have you ever found out that you hadn't been given the whole picture, and how did this make you feel?

Switches - feel free to reply for either or both sides

Subette

I want to reconcile the violence in your heart. I want to recognize your beauty is not just a mask. - Muse, Undisclosed desires

I think it's dangerous to generalise. Relationships which fall under the general banner of BDSM are endlessly varied. I'm sure what you describe does happen. As we all know, the relationship in which the 'dom' simply uses and abuses the sub also happens. And every possible strata in between also happens.

I am sure there are perfect, durable, intense, supportive, caring, fulfilling, nurturing, satisfying BDSM relationships. It is my ambition to form one. But I also know that they are not the norm.

;; Semper in faecibus sumus, sole profundum variat.
Some of my stories are here. Others are here.

Thanks Stillyet but I didn't think I was generalising. Apologies if it comes across this way.

And I am not saying over-protection happens in all instances, but I guess the potential is there. I was just wondering if it was something other people are aware of / had experienced.

Or if I am just over-analysing kink again???

Subette

I want to reconcile the violence in your heart. I want to recognize your beauty is not just a mask. - Muse, Undisclosed desires

Edited 5 Mar 10, 6:39 PM by subette

What sort of information do you mean? Maybe it is more a questions of basic honesty as opposed to "over-protection"

"I am from nowhere and everywhere" Karl Lagerfeld

I am expected to be and want to be in charge and make decisions that benefit us both. I therefore reserve the right to not always tell him everything, because he worries about little things. I tend to focus on the big picture and our overall wellbeing. If that makes me a bad overprotective Domme so be it, I personally think it just comes with the territory of being in charge.

ETA very interesting topic btw!

*insert silly text or moneymaking link of choice here*

Any relationship tending towards TPE or 24/7 will have things the dom/me is in charge of and doesn't always share with the submissive. I wouldn't call it overprotective though, in that situation. Rather the opposite, for me to make a TPE relationship work, there must be complete openness and trust. Of course with my knowledge I will protect and lead the sub, however it could destroy the synamic to always share every little detail with me. Afer all, I am in charge in a FLR - and that's how both sides want and enjoy it.

currently organising: The @Femdom_Munch - Every last Sunday in Central London!
The @Crystal_Palace_Munch - every first Tuesday in CP!
Come, join us!

Your points rise very important underlining factors in such dynamics of 'protecting' a submissive.

First I think it is necessary to specify what kind of PE dynamic is present in a Ds relationship (because this line of thinking is only truly applicable in the contest of Power Exchange relationships and not Role Play). In other words if the submissive wish to retain some form of control over certain areas of his/her PE relation, he/she may not be happy with certain form of 'protection'. Other submissive do wish for the release of such control in the terms mentioned by you. In this case the contractual nature change drastically from the first one.

There is however a serious problem to address too, and that is that such 'control/protection' dynamics are also a matter of recognising the nature of the dominant too. Is the dominant a 'mentor' figure, a protecting person and owner, or is merely a Top domming in mere sexual/erotic way and then manifesting a 'control-freak' nature?

There are dominants that only because they had some S&M experience, think that they should be capable in real term of taking care (because in the end that is what really is all about) of her/his possession (and in real TPE relationship 'property'). In reality it is easy to talk about it, in reality 'protecting' does not means at all to have 'cart blanche' with 'control-freak' behaviour. First of all such relations are built over a period of 'trust building' (or as some like to call it: training periods). Secondly, the 'trust' for this very reason is never expected or given blindly, but it is gained by the Dominant in question and never demanded as a priori. The true is not only submissive should not have 'expectations' in regard of the Dominant as a priori, but the dominant too, should not have 'expectations' of behaviour of submission without having invested into the sub training and more importantly having gained (in real terms) their trust.

In such terms therefore, before releasing any control over personal life, a sub need to know clearly who the dominant is, and be able to recognise someone that has a real dominant nature, from a little 'daily life-frustrated' individual with 'control-freak' tendency. And a Dominant is never just some one that enjoy 'popularity' in the scene, or that 'demands' a submissive behaviour per se from anyone that think of themselves as submissive. Quite the opposite, the dominant in question for a sub is ONLY relevant to the sub in question and NOT to O/other. But being 'dominant' in the end is not paramount of being 'perfect'. Here the need for not taking contractual nature of real Power Exchange relationships lightly. If a Dominant is not a 'control-freak' will have no issue in investing lot of time in 'trust-building' exercises (if in the end truly interested in the sub in question). Casual players or (as I call it) 'club-sluts' (of any role & nature) don't' tend to do so. This is only in terms of personal choices and standards of course. There is no point in rushing PE relationships just base on physical attractions or simile, if after all both Dom/me and subs complain of each other's limitations. Know what you are doing first, and then grow into the relationship (because there is no one that is a fixed point in time and stops from growing in human terms, unless is just a 'control-freak').

So when certain things are not clear in the mind of the submissive, it is crucial not to repress communication. In the end the dominant (if truly dominant in nature and not a role player) will deal with each circumstance and gradually setting appropriate parameters for such dynamics of communication to be done in the proper way. As much as 'being an open book' is the commitment of the submissive to the dominant (and even so, it takes time for the sub to grow to that point), so is the dominant responsibility to establish clear and define patterns of control and communication that allow the sub to feel safe in her/his protection.

'Over-protecting' (if is not a matter of distorted perception on the part of an inexperienced sub, but a real problem of 'control-freak' behaviour in the nature of the dominant) is most of the time a sign of 'luck of dominance'. Were there is an establish PE relationship, this feeling of 'over protection' occurred, simply because the sub does not feels fulfilled and at ease with his/her nature under the mentorship and ownership of his/her Dominant. If the sub finds it overbearing and intrusive, the PE relationship is either in trouble or the dominant is a 'control-freak' (and therefore not capable of creating the trust necessary for the sub to be able to free him/her self from 'being-in-control'). Discussing this in theory is one thing; the reality of accepting and giving 'protection' (with all that it brings into a Ds relationship) is another matter al together. So in this sense, generalising is not very practical. We should talk about the type of relationships (TPE o PE) and what kind of nature a dominant/sub has and if they are compatible to each other to live in real term, certain form of 'releasing & taking control'. Only my two pennies of course.

This is indeed a serious point of discussion, thank you for bringing this up in an open discussion.

Be Safe and at Ease with your Nature...
Mdm.Masha [The City of London Femdom/Women of Leather Munch's Group Profile on: Fetlife.Alt.Facebook.FemDomZone.Legami.BacaroSadico .IC.. and more]

Edited 6 Mar 10, 7:40 AM by MadamEmme

So I don't hold back when it comes to making certain that they're taking care of their lives. I do hold back sometimes when they need a lesson from something other than me.

SinPar

-- The weak are the most treacherous of us all. They come to the strong and drain them. They are bottomless. They are insatiable. They are always parched and always bitter. They are everyone's concern, and like vampires they suck our life's blood. (Bette Davis)

You could characterise keeping some thoughts private as holding back.

In every relationship you use judgement on what you do and don't say to your partner. I say your partner in this case to mean either of the partners. Both parties have thoughts that they don't articulate to the other and some that they do.

It would be a pretty noisy world if we articulated every thought in our head without any kind of filter.

It's one of those impossible to answer questions because it comes down to the individuals, the information, the circumstances etc. etc.

Yes there are some things that should be said and some that shouldn't but their isn't a specific line anyone can draw.

Give me Rachmaninov and give me depravity!

I am not at all certain that it earns you any brownie points in the eyes of anyone with the opposite motivation...

If I were to tell everything it would take a month of Sundays to do and would bore the other person rigid, then I would have to listen to all that they had to tell me, there simply isn't the time for it all - not to mention that some things are far too personal to tell everyone so, unless it's a definite LTR, why reveal too much (everything) about yourself? If it's a LTR things have a way of coming out, when something prompts it.

Being honest is one thing... being a self-obsessed bore is quite another.

Edited

"Truth is stranger than fiction."
Q. What are the components of a good dynamic? A. The mutual desire to share ourselves with each other. (If you don't want to share yourself with me, don't offer yourself to me.)
@The_Problem_Page

Edited 7 Mar 10, 10:48 AM by chartreuse