Interesting dinner conversations

Dinner conversation at the House of X can often be quite stimulating.  A few recent subjects thread together quite nicely because there is a common theme running through them.

Masters and sadists walk a razor edge between pleasure and abuse for the benefit of our charges.

We had a lovely evening of dinner and conversation and some light bondage and flogging thrown in for good measure.  Five people in all, and all but one were quite interested in certain aspects of BDSM.  A young lady, we will call her Kitty, has an interest in being a bottom. Not a full on slave mind you but she wants her man to step up and be more Dominant and like almost every subby on the planet she doesn’t want to top from the bottom.  If she has to tell him to Dominate her, it doesn’t work.

So much of our conversation was about how the model that he was brought up in, the gold standard for treating women he thinks is his blue print, may be all wrong for the person he is with.

He has get inside Kitty’s head.  He has to understand what makes her tick and then fuck with that.  The best fuck is always starts between the ears.  He has to push certain limits, both Kitty’s and his own.  He has to push the limits in himself that tell him how to respect and treat his woman.  He has to push her limits so she feels his Domination.  It’s an age old problem.. one we often hear.

It is a razor edge that we Master walk.  Sadists too.  When I control every aspect of Izrinia’s life we both derive pleasure from this.  She from service and submission, I from the Domination and positive changes I make in her life.  I must constantly push my Domination deeper, looking ways to keep it fresh.  From the outside looking in, others may only see me using her.  They are not inside feeling the pleasure we both enjoy.  They don’t understand.. and I mean really do not.  It breaks all notions of conduct in a relation they have been taught.  It is the antithesis of their gold standard.

Imagine though if Izrina and I should end our relation.  Izrina could look back and say: “I don’t know what I was thinking at the time.  He abused me.  He used me.”    If  Izrina is to be punished, and I send her to the bedroom to wait for me and leave her there for hours, and she obeys then consent is given.  She can revoke her consent at any time.  When she obeys it is always through consent.  But from the outside looking in others might say I am abusing her.  I am controlling her.  She doesn’t know what she is doing.

What changes consent to abuse and abuse to consent are a fascinating subject.

And that brings yet another dinner conversation: “RJ Kelly”.  RJ has a history which I am trying to pick through the hype on.  Yes he takes in young women and reshapes their lives.  Yes, he Dominates and controls every aspect of their decision making.  Yes, these women often cut off contact with family and old friends.  Yes, after leaving him they often describe this as abuse.  But those that refuse to leave even after their parents beg them to are still apparently consenting and therein lies the question.  Is this history revision?  Was it pleasurable and consenting at the time but through the eyes of a changed life later labeled abuse?   Or is he crossing certain lies that blur consent?  What are those lines that blur consent?   More on that later…  Fascinating subject..

Carpe Diem my friends, be someone’s great day!