The sexual side of it all

[Lisal]

Originally Posted by Bjorn Brimble

These days pretty much every PD with a website will have a page listing services they are happy to offer.

Followed by a shorter list of things they definitely don’t offer.

It’s then down to the client to make his/her decision.

Anything else they offer/don’t offer with selected clients is then a matter between two consenting adults and none of our business.

And of no interest to me whatsoever.

It’s worth reiterating with threads like this one the importance of refraining from naming individual Mistresses too. For obvious reasons.

Sure

But we are talking about the sexual side of the session which - as we have discussed- might be something that PDs would not wish to advertise on their website (if it is something that they may offer)


I’ve certainly seen a few sites where it is very clear about not offering such services

[Slutty Rimmer]

Originally Posted by reefknot

The previous Mistress to my current Mistress would think nothing of while I was in bondage sit on my face a just say eat or sit astride ride me for he pleasure ...............I got no pleasure from it at all.

Very similar to a couple of my experiences Reefy. Awful isn’t it ?

Even now I can wake in the middle of the night in fits of torment as my mind flashes back to those moments. Sometimes several times a night…if I’m lucky !

We survivors of PDSGA* need to stick together…and figure out how best to help others not to avoid it…

Kind Regards,
Rimmer.

* PD Sexual Gratification Abuse.

[Lisal]

Originally Posted by Bjorn Brimble

“The sexual side of the session”

Surely it’s all sexual. Is for me.

Would subs pay all that wonga for pain, humiliation, thrashings, maid training etc etc if it wasn’t sexual?

I very much doubt it.

My advice is to take dommes at their word on what they list on their sites.

If they say they don’t offer something, there’s probably a reason for that.

It’s not rocket science.

And I pointed out up thread that I was talking about tie and tease, hand relief etc

My advice is to read the website carefully - if something is mentioned as taboo definitely don’t talk about it. Otherwise if something isn’t mentioned which you would like to do in session ask very politely about it.

Definitely talking is the best communication - not the written word - in this sort of instance.

[Slutty Rimmer]

Originally Posted by Lisal

Otherwise if something isn’t mentioned which you would like to do in session ask very politely about it.

Definitely talking is the best communication - not the written word - in this sort of instance.

Took me a long time to realise that. I always took the written word on the websites as gospel and never thought to be so presumptuous and enquire about more. It took a few Ladies who just ‘took matters into hand (and elsewhere)’ for me to realise there was no harm in asking politely. It was the answer to the enquiry that needed to be taken as gospel and respected.

Long chats with a few ladies afterwards made it clear they were not offended by requests or enquiries but they obviously liked to be discerning in who and when they granted such requests so did not advertise such services on their regular menu.

Some sweet desserts could be found on the ‘specials’ board.

I still didn’t request though, not on first visits anyway. Far too pushy for me to be comfortable with.

Kind Regards,
Rimmer.

[ex nihilo]

Originally Posted by Lisal

And I pointed out up thread that I was talking about tie and tease, hand relief etc

My advice is to read the website carefully - if something is mentioned as taboo definitely don’t talk about it. Otherwise if something isn’t mentioned which you would like to do in session ask very politely about it.

Definitely talking is the best communication - not the written word - in this sort of instance.

You need to be careful. PD's appreciate potential subs reading their websites carefully, highlighting their services and specialities. It must be really annoying to get a plethora of questions at the going in stage, as to activities that are not on offer. A bit disrespectful, if the motivation is to get tie and tease or hand relief. Maybe find an escort.

Individual professional arrangements may evolve over time.

A typical PD website will want to differentiate potential submissive clients between those who would be on a genuine journey with a PD and those who would be better off with an escort.

You establish a start point in acceptance with the PD’s published guidelines and if it becomes long term and if the communication and relationship is good, things will evolve along the way. But that is a two way street, with the PD still having the whip hand. We don't want topping from the bottom sneaking in...

[Slutty Rimmer]

Originally Posted by Bjorn Brimble

We have to be mindful of the golden rule here Lisal. Professional Domination does not = prostitution.

Put simply if a lady states on her site in capital letters that she does not offer sexual services, then there’s a good chance she means it.

Wasn’t that ‘Domination does not = prostitution’ a legal necessity to avoid potential censorship of the site ? When the sites overlapped with contact mags, the mags didn’t always make the same assertion.

True though, certainly visit with the understanding you will get no more than advertised but once together and chatting who knows what accommodations can be made for personal preference…?

P.S. Even though Mistress XXxXxXX has long retired I still think we should be mindful of Lisal’s request not to identify specific ladies.

Kind Regards,
Rimmer.

[Slutty Rimmer]

Originally Posted by ex nihilo

But that is a two way street, with the PD still having the whip hand. We don't want topping from the bottom sneaking in...

The client has the wallet hand so there is never really a ‘top’ as such, just an agreement to exchange for mutual satisfaction.

Kind Regards,
Rimmer.

[ex nihilo]

Just imagine how interesting this thread might have been, if the wide array of wonderful PD's who frequented this parish a decade ago, could give us their opinions.

Male only submissive or plain old wanky man is not moving the conversation on...

[Slutty Rimmer]

Originally Posted by ex nihilo

Just imagine how interesting this thread might have been, if the wide array of wonderful PD's who frequented this parish a decade ago, could give us their opinions.

Male only submissive or plain old wanky man is not moving the conversation on...

…and not many of those either !

I’m not sure you need to identify men who smack the salami as being a greater disincentive* than those who like to smack other things…

Kind Regards,
Rimmer.

* Besides which the thread is interesting and certainly an improvement. We now know some members are hard for the duration of the whole session…and I mean rock hard ! Wouldn’t have known that otherwise.

[Slutty Rimmer]

Originally Posted by Bjorn Brimble

Great point. The problem with DoI in a nutshell …

Didn’t take long for a DoI discussion to become another miserable whinge. Thought that might have been quarantined in the cesspit, but no.

Obvious now what your game plan is…to infest the whole board. Oh well, tin hats back on fellas.

P.S. If you really want Mistresses to partake then maybe try sticking to the ‘discussion of interest’ rather than wanging on about Mistresses not posting. Probably more likely to partake if there is less discontent and nastiness on the forum…so not much chance of that happening then !

Kind Regards,
Rimmer.