The last two posts have been to do with who has control in a relationship. Daneswood told me of an example of her own,
"I had someone offer to pay me £23k a year to be his Mistress. All I had to do is torture him and work him hard as a slave 24/7 and attend the odd business meeting on his behalf. He’d tailored his business to work online 99% of the time. I turned him down because I didn’t feel I’d have all the control, it would be him."
Daneswood felt that despite some of the things he wanted to experience being quite extreme - it was his list of activities not hers. She wouldn't be using her imagination and getting her pleasure from using him. In the end he still had the control as she was carrying out his instructions. Perhaps the financial aspect also gave him some control.
I suppose it was an extreme case of topping from the bottom. I think she was very virtuous to turn down the money though!
COVID-19
-
No, I am not a health expert or a scientific expert. So I will not try to
offer you any of my own advice. Instead I am going to shamelessly pinch
from Fetl...
4 years ago
5 comments:
I have to agree with Pygar that this is an extreme case of topping form the bottom.
A true BDSM relationship is one that is built over time with trust and honesty being the cornerstone of the relationship. submission is a gift that is given freely.
If the two of them had known each other for some time and had worked their way into that kind of relationship, then it would be the both of them getting what each wanted form the relationship.
With the offer of money he is in control simply buying what he wants at any given time.
As for Daneswood turning down the money, well money cannot buy happiness. So hats off for saying no.
Isn't that what you call a money slave?
This seems more like paying someone to fill a role, than it *being* a role.
A business arrangement.
Certainly not "true" D/s.
(in my oh-so-humble- opinion, *grin*)
nilla
Thanks Southern Sir. Sweet girl and nilla.
I think we are in agreement that as soon as money becomes involved then it is no longer a "real" relationship. As nilla says "paying someone to fill a role rather than it *being* a role." I guess that is a large part of why Daneswood walked away from it. It as not a "real role" for her.
Blogger has been down for a couple of days and seems to have lost some posts and comments.
I know a few comments have been lost from this post and will try to add them here:
Southern Sir has left a new comment on your post "the importance of control":
I have to agree with Pygar that this is an extreme case of topping form the bottom.
A true BDSM relationship is one that is built over time with trust and honesty being the cornerstone of the relationship. submission is a gift that is given freely.
If the two of them had known each other for some time and had worked their way into that kind of relationship, then it would be the both of them getting what each wanted form the relationship.
With the offer of money he is in control simply buying what he wants at any given time.
As for Daneswood turning down the money, well money cannot buy happiness. So hats off for saying no.
Sweet girl (aka NewToThisLife07) has left a new comment on your post "the importance of control":
Isn't that what you call a money slave?
nilla has left a new comment on your post "the importance of control":
This seems more like paying someone to fill a role, than it *being* a role.
A business arrangement.
Certainly not "true" D/s.
(in my oh-so-humble- opinion, *grin*)
nilla
Pygar has left a new comment on your post "the importance of control":
Thanks Southern Sir. Sweet girl and nilla.
I think we are in agreement that as soon as money becomes involved then it is no longer a "real" relationship. As nilla says "paying someone to fill a role rather than it *being* a role." I guess that is a large part of why Daneswood walked away from it. It as not a "real role" for her.
Post a Comment