The Ownership Flag and Icons    [other banners]

	TSR : Web boards : M/s D/s O&P : "Sex, no sex?" 1 2 Sex, no sex? (20) This post is on the M/s D/s O&P web board. 1 May 09, 1:13 PM SeanT70 9 yrs 483-608-929 wrote: 000-874-172 wrote: Remoses wrote: Can you be a slave and not be a sex object for your Owner? Sure ya can, I'm primarily a service slave within a marriage; sex is a bonus, but then even outside an M/s relationship, people don't get married just to have sex, they can't really know or see each other as people. Remoses wrote: Sex, no sex? Can you be a slave and not be a sex object for your Owner? No, i couldn't live without knowing that i was found desirable and sexy and that someone wanted my body. i don't find being a sex object degrading or humiliating. For me, it's exciting and fulfilling. I just want to re-iterate; I know, without question, that Phay finds me attractive and desirable; whether she actually chooses to play with my body as use it purely as a sexual object, is her prerogative. Sean. Lovingly Owned by ~Miss Phay~ 1 May 09, 1:57 PM destinynh 3 yrs Remoses wrote: Sex, no sex? Since it is normally an association that seems almost fundamental, I wonder if in fact it is as fundamental as it may seem. Here is the question for you, My dear readers: Does an M/s or D/s relationship require sex? Or is it possible to maintain ownership of another without the element of sex? Don't misunderstand. I like sex, but I wonder if it is possible to have a nominally kinky relationship without the sexual element? Can you Own a slave without sex being involved? Can you be a slave and not be a sex object for your Owner? What do you, My friends and colleagues think of this question? I am Remoses. For me the answer would be yes, i have been in both a M/s relationship where there was never/always sex involved. It was just the way it was and it was both very intense and satisfying for both without it. However; my preference would be with sex involved as i find it to have a deeper bond to the relationship. destiny Trust is feeling totally safe and secure while knowing you're totally vulnerable 1 May 09, 4:28 PM Lion_Heart US(UT), 3 yrs Y! destinynh wrote: ... However; my preference would be with sex involved as i find it to have a deeper bond to the relationship. destiny For Me too, there's something special in a M/s relationship when there's sex involved, but I appreciate those comments from those that are not sexually involved. This has been a good topic to discuss because so many who want to get into a Dom relationship think that it's all about sex, and clearly it isn't from some of the replies in this thread. Lion Heart 4 May 09, 3:17 PM ravenkaldera US(MA), 6 yrs I've had nonsexual service contracts with people. I could probably own someone without there being sex, but the situation would have to be right. I'd have to know that they were getting the sex they needed elsewhere, or else that they didn't need it at all (or there was some other reason; for example one of my short-term service contracts was with a woman who was religiously celibate, and she knew I wouldn't push her for sex). However, this would not work if this was my only slave (obviously). But as a secondary submissive, possibly, yes. I'd like to have sex with all my slaves, but if I had one that was useful in other ways, it would be acceptable. I think I'd prefer it to have a strong spiritual component, though. And they couldn't fall in love with me emotionally, either. -Raven Kaldera -If you're in charge, it's all on your head. If it's not all on your head, then you're not really in charge. 5 May 09, 1:53 AM MRmaster00 US(MA), 5 yrs Y! Dominance is sex for me. The actual act of intercourse ( or what ever ) is just another form of control. But with that said, I think for the relationship to last, or progress there must be intimacy. Weather or not that means a sexual. Even just a kiss is sexual.....right ? MR 7 May 09, 5:14 AM his_slavepet US(GA), 4 yrs Y! Just this slave's two cents: From all that I have read and studied, sex appears to be a "perversion" of what M/s and D/s actually is "supposed to be". There are purists out there who feel that D/s is about arousal and eroticism through controls and the exchange of power. Having sex is a "no-no" to them. *shrug* Those purists believe that their concept was first and that everything from it is a spin-off and somewhat uncouth. I think its a chicken and egg kind of thing. Those like us who practice S&M and incorporate sex into the lifestyle think that sex is a natural extension of it. I could not be owned without sex involved, but then I am a pleasure slave. That is what I do. Its what I'm good at and what I was born for. I live and breathe sex and everything of the senses. I'd die if Master did not use me in that fashion. What was I made for but this? Please do not take offense, anyone, at my comments...I am simply detailing some of the things I have read from hardcore BDSM channels. I don't think they are "right" nor that those who have sex and practice BDSM are "right." Its truly what is "right" for you. That's what S&M is all about, truly. Blessings on your paths! pet "You are indeed beautiful, worthy and capable, and you will become even more so, my dear slavepet, under my hand. We will make the trip together." - Master David 7 May 09, 10:53 PM bastinadolover UK, 3 yrs Yes, it's more than possible to maintain ownership of another in an M/s or D/s relationship without the element of sex. With regards to my previous relationship, I spent the first two years being trained by my Mistress as her domestic submissive with the aim of eventually becoming her trained slave. During those first two years my Mistress had made it absolutely clear to me that no sexual intercourse would be allowed. Although as part of my training I was taught by her to pleasure her without sexual intercourse taking place. With regards to my needs the maximum I was allowed was controlled sexual relief under her strict supervision, once a week depending on her mood and how pleased she was with my behaviour. I personally found those first two years physically, emotionally and psychologically satisfying, it was extremely enjoyable. Our relationship still flourished without the act of sexual intercourse. I found all my needs being met within the rules and boundaries of our relationship. The way I see it, a non-sexual relationship does not mean a non-physical relationship. On analyzing our relationship, I believe that if we did have sexual intercourse during those first two years, it would have muddled the power dynamic between us. Although I don't believe my Mistress would have surrendered the power she had over me by being sexual, but I do believe that my perceptions with regards to the relationship would have changed from “ how can I serve my Mistress?” to “ when am I going to get off?” I also believe that the no-sex rule helped to head off any emotional confusion I had as to my status in my Mistress' life. The no-sex rule made it clear to me that I wasn't her lover, nor her partner, nor her equal, rather that I was her owned submissive property and the only status I had was to be underneath her feet. I believe that it was extremely important for this distinction to be maintained in order for our relationship and power dynamic to thrive. Otherwise I may have developed a white-picket-fence expectation that may not have been fulfilled. This would have probably led to resentment on my part, and nothing kills a relationship of any variety faster than simmering resentment. Anyway, I can only speak from my personal experience and having sex or having a no-sex rule, at the end of the day, all depends on those D/s or M/s couple's individual power dynamic and personal taste. Enjoy !! There's no such thing as failure - just life experiences from which you get stronger!! 11 May 09, 1:24 AM 957-322-238 US, 3 yrs i exist for my Master's pleasure. Pleasuring Him sexually is one of my great joys, as are massage and being used for any other pleasure He may desire. The fact that often, His desire is to control me sexually is a bonus that i am grateful for every day. (144, thank You Master!) 14 May 09, 10:14 PM monstermash UK, 3 yrs I think 'sex' can be incorporated into most m/s relationships if both partys are happy with it although not needed,however love is a whole other kettle of fish if you love your slave and are imposing your will on them if you can see they are genuinly unhappy or uncomfortable or just plain tired it can be very difficult to maintain the status quo as im discovering . 28 May 09, 9:51 PM pyroaquatic 5 yrs i believe it is possible to be a slave without being seen as a sex object. the Dominant must have as more discipline than the slave (that's why they are the Dominant.) in that instance a slave is more like an androgynous being, completely trusting in the Dominant.