Inexperience!

[Wa****]

2 hours ago, gemini_man said:

If you look at local events to you on here or other sites or even Google munches in your area you'll find listings - then where you're located you're not far from Liberty Elite so might be worth checking if they have kink/fetish events or any looking at other clubs you'd be willing to drive to.

Without knowing your area that well I couldn't recommend any specifically and to an extent it is trial and error I guess

Thanks for your help :)

[ey****]

10 hours ago, YoungRX said:

From the naked eye, that seems to only apply to Doms, where as the inexperience sub does not need to go through those steps!

the next question then is a little why.

I think that subs should learn about the activities they want to try, or that their Dominant wishes to do with them.

But there is a little difference - a submissive over a bench being caned, for example, probably cannot see the Dominants posture or technique to help improve or correct it. A Dominant who has a submissive strapped to a cross should already know not to keep them up there too long and they are the one who can release the straps.

Now also - I'm sure if you spoke to a lot of male subs, they would say this is not the case that they are inexperienced and "nobody wants to help them" 

Equally if a new female sub walked in and loads of male Dominants rushed to "help" her this says more about them than it does about the process, that so many seem keen because they are almost preying on her inexperience and naivety. Or, at least, that how it comes across.

But equally, you (and to a degree, I) are assuming they don't do anything to help their own experience?    I know single subs who do stuff like... self spanking, self ties, anal training, oral training, edging, chastity/denial, ruined orgasms, inflicting *** on self - and so much more - in order to gain experience on what some sensations are like.

[ge****]

I think we can all agree that inexperience on either side of the coin isn't a bad thing - the key is how individuals deal with and approach that inexperience that *can* be either bad or good.

The difference being, a submissive that dives straight in without having first educated themself to some degree is putting themself at risk mostly (and in some instances others) - a dominant who dives straight in without having done so is not only putting themself at risk but any submissive they interact with physically for sure.

So there *are* dangers on both sides, but the danger associated with an inexperienced dominant is arguably and demonstrably far greater than that of an inexperienced submissive.

[Deleted Member]

Something that I'm not seeing specifically pointed out here, is that sub's will (rightly) learn pretty quickly to avoid inexperienced doms when they're new. Not really having the experience, confidence or knowledge to set boundaries, subs that don't really know what they're doing yet will only go after doms who can demonstrate a superior knowledge about kink so that they can feel safe in just trusting the dom knows what they're doing.

And I don't think that's an attitude that's going to change. Even though you get to a point where an experienced sub probably knows more about the dynamic and whatever forms of play they've engaged in, at that point the mindset that "well my dom needs to be on my level of experience" comes into play. It's not just about feeling safe and just trusting the other person educated themselves, it's about having someone 'on your level'. And I think this in part is what contributes to a lot of the education gatekeeping in the kink community, you don't need to be a dom to know that it feels good to declare people as below you, that they have to earn the right to engage with you. And having a comfy little in group is just one of those tribal things that satisfies the human monkey brain. Discussing, educating and engaging with people you might otherwise view as your lessers is a lot less psychologically satisfying. (And you know, this is on top of the 27 other reasons thatve been posted in this thread, most of which I agree with)

[Deleted Member]

On 1/6/2022 at 7:09 PM, eyemblacksheep said:

So.  When we're talking about inexperience... the who myth of "the sub is the one with all the power" is woefully inaccurate.   

Sure of course, you have to respect the submissives limits, their safeword.  You have to assess what to do based on their likes, dislikes, limits (the difference between "I get nothing out of this but will do it", "I don't like this but will do it" and "I won't do this") but EXACTLY the same is true for the Dominant.

Sub being a *** in the arse in play. You can stop the scene.

Sub wants certain play that is against your limits - don't do it.    You are not in the mood for your subs favourite thing - you don't do it.

If you're not entirely happy at the end of play you have as much right to decline further play as the sub is.

I wouldn't disagree with you on the whole here. I just think that nobody is saying subs have ALL the power, and I see this a lot in kink discussion, where people overcompensate to disprove a myth that just isn't being peddled. I mean thd problem here is there's so many f**king myths about kink, and they're all contradictory it's hard to know when somebody is falling into one.

I read OP as saying that sub's have an equal amount of power over the content of a scene as the dom, which I think is true, and something that people need reminding off. Though you're right that in the heat of the moment the dom has more responsibility, I don't think that's a contradiction to say.

[Yo****]

5 hours ago, OneKinkToRuleThemAll said:

Something that I'm not seeing specifically pointed out here, is that sub's will (rightly) learn pretty quickly to avoid inexperienced doms when they're new. Not really having the experience, confidence or knowledge to set boundaries, subs that don't really know what they're doing yet will only go after doms who can demonstrate a superior knowledge about kink so that they can feel safe in just trusting the dom knows what they're doing.

And I don't think that's an attitude that's going to change. Even though you get to a point where an experienced sub probably knows more about the dynamic and whatever forms of play they've engaged in, at that point the mindset that "well my dom needs to be on my level of experience" comes into play. It's not just about feeling safe and just trusting the other person educated themselves, it's about having someone 'on your level'. And I think this in part is what contributes to a lot of the education gatekeeping in the kink community, you don't need to be a dom to know that it feels good to declare people as below you, that they have to earn the right to engage with you. And having a comfy little in group is just one of those tribal things that satisfies the human monkey brain. Discussing, educating and engaging with people you might otherwise view as your lessers is a lot less psychologically satisfying. (And you know, this is on top of the 27 other reasons thatve been posted in this thread, most of which I agree with)

Made a lot of good points!!

[Deleted Member]

Couldn't be further from the truth. Don't know what they are learning from 50 shades of grey. If the sub is a true sub, the Dom is in charge, director, producer and star. Yes a sub has a right to say no, that is eht there is usually a discussion about the play before play starts.

[ge****]

23 minutes ago, DaBrat said:

Couldn't be further from the truth. Don't know what they are learning from 50 shades of grey. If the sub is a true sub, the Dom is in charge, director, producer and star. Yes a sub has a right to say no, that is eht there is usually a discussion about the play before play starts.

Sorry, but "true sub"? By whose definition?

There is no such thing as a general definition of a submissive or what makes us "true" or "real" - it's defined by the two (or more) individuals involved, and they agree the "rules" between them.

Now that may mean the dominant is "in charge, director, producer and star" but *only* if that is what is agreed by all for that particular instance, from an informed and consenting position.

My version of D/s may well (and does in fact) differ wildly from yours - for me it is a thing of equality and both equally holding the control in different ways, yes the balance may tip in one direction or another at times, but it's still from a foundation of equality - that doesn't mean I am not a "true sub" just means I am not the sub for you - same as any other sub who has a different view to you.

[ey****]

34 minutes ago, DaBrat said:

Couldn't be further from the truth. Don't know what they are learning from 50 shades of grey. If the sub is a true sub, the Dom is in charge, director, producer and star. Yes a sub has a right to say no, that is eht there is usually a discussion about the play before play starts.

Actually that *is* 50 shades of Grey

In 50SOG - Christian dictates all the rules to Anastasia and dictates how the scenes should be.   When she tries to instigate something, he accuses her of topping from the bottom.

[Deleted Member]

16 minutes ago, gemini_man said:

Sorry, but "true sub"? By whose definition?

There is no such thing as a general definition of a submissive or what makes us "true" or "real" - it's defined by the two (or more) individuals involved, and they agree the "rules" between them.

Now that may mean the dominant is "in charge, director, producer and star" but *only* if that is what is agreed by all for that particular instance, from an informed and consenting position.

My version of D/s may well (and does in fact) differ wildly from yours - for me it is a thing of equality and both equally holding the control in different ways, yes the balance may tip in one direction or another at times, but it's still from a foundation of equality - that doesn't mean I am not a "true sub" just means I am not the sub for you - same as any other sub who has a different view to you.

Yes I do agree it does depend on the dynamics of the D/s relationship.

[Yo****]

3 hours ago, gemini_man said:

Sorry, but "true sub"? By whose definition?

There is no such thing as a general definition of a submissive or what makes us "true" or "real" - it's defined by the two (or more) individuals involved, and they agree the "rules" between them.

Now that may mean the dominant is "in charge, director, producer and star" but *only* if that is what is agreed by all for that particular instance, from an informed and consenting position.

My version of D/s may well (and does in fact) differ wildly from yours - for me it is a thing of equality and both equally holding the control in different ways, yes the balance may tip in one direction or another at times, but it's still from a foundation of equality - that doesn't mean I am not a "true sub" just means I am not the sub for you - same as any other sub who has a different view to you.

By this logic, There's no general definition for a Dom neither, there's no "true" or real Dom. "it's defined by the two (or more) individuals involved, and they agree the "rules" between them." So folks should stop saying they want a "real Dom" and not a fake one. They should say instead they want a Dom that's compatible to my liking.

[ey****]

I hate words like "true", "real" (and "fake") because - people simplify into a kinda "real Dom/sub fit my mould of what I deem they should look like and everything one else is fake"

And so these words are thrown around so much the only meaning they have is that the poster is demonstrating their lack of understanding

People get called 'fake' cos they won't meet for a coffee or dish out fantasies, won't call someone Sir in a first message and all these other bullshit reasons.  

[Yo****]

51 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

I hate words like "true", "real" (and "fake") because - people simplify into a kinda "real Dom/sub fit my mould of what I deem they should look like and everything one else is fake"

And so these words are thrown around so much the only meaning they have is that the poster is demonstrating their lack of understanding

People get called 'fake' cos they won't meet for a coffee or dish out fantasies, won't call someone Sir in a first message and all these other bullshit reasons.  

I'm glad you said that, I wish all in the community can correct folks when they're calling others "fake" just because they're not doing something based off of something they read or pass encounters. That's why I put on my bio that would like to find someone that's into what I'm into while still learning, exploring together

[ge****]

16 hours ago, YoungRX said:

By this logic, There's no general definition for a Dom neither, there's no "true" or real Dom. "it's defined by the two (or more) individuals involved, and they agree the "rules" between them." So folks should stop saying they want a "real Dom" and not a fake one. They should say instead they want a Dom that's compatible to my liking.

Absolutely there's no general definition of a dominant just as there isn't one of a submissive - the problem lies on both sides of the coin for sure.

That said there *are* some general expectations that a dominant or submissive has a level of knowledge and awareness of the lifestyle and what it means to them and that expectation is possibly weighted more towards the dominants because of the potential dangers involved, than towards submissives. Not that it *should* be that way or that there isn't a level of responsibility on a submissive to be knowledgeable and aware, just the dangers of a dominant that isn't are greater.

[Yo****]

8 hours ago, gemini_man said:

Absolutely there's no general definition of a dominant just as there isn't one of a submissive - the problem lies on both sides of the coin for sure.

That said there *are* some general expectations that a dominant or submissive has a level of knowledge and awareness of the lifestyle and what it means to them and that expectation is possibly weighted more towards the dominants because of the potential dangers involved, than towards submissives. Not that it *should* be that way or that there isn't a level of responsibility on a submissive to be knowledgeable and aware, just the dangers of a dominant that isn't are greater.

Agreed.

[th****]

That’s called a mentor

[Yo****]

2 hours ago, virginia-be497 said:

That’s called a mentor

What are you referring to exactly?

[Li****]

I'm inexperienced compared to others I have like 3 years of experience but have learnt that I like impact play I like to f*ck someone roughly while choking them, punching them, slapping them I don't scratch however I ain't got the nails for that but I find it easier if you say youre switch so then maybe if you find the right person they can teach you the dom side so then you can switch between roles it's better to get a first hand experience so you know you're hard and soft limits.

[Lu****]

Finding a sub/dom is like finding a job. It might suck or not, but first jobs always suck as you are inexperienced and unsure of what fits you. If it doesn’t click, it does not click.

[Ch****]

Any good Dom/me-sub relationship will take in account both parties desires/limits, etc…This should be be discussed in detail BEFORE any actual play begins! I’m an experienced male sub, and I have been with a few inexperienced Dommes. It usually worked out well, since they respected my safe word when I used it, (rarely)! Likewise, I always showed approval when things were good. I never tried to “top from the bottom”, was always aware, and never wanted to do that!

[Strix]

I've not had much experience in being a Dom and little in being a sub. I'm classed as a switch. In this case I've had a sub of my own and we learnt together what works for us, it didn't last but I. Gained experience from there and have had a few play partners as a dominant side and each have said I'm a good Dom. I'm now in training with a couple and I'm learning skills to be a better Dom/Top I could be. My sub side is not sub but a bottom. I will bottom for a few people at present who I trust not met many only had one Domme when I first started out and that helped me learn and put things in to practice. I also realise that being a bottom helps me try new things before putting them into practice on a sub or another bottom.

[Sa****]

I’m going to start off by saying this is my opinion or experience and may not be that of anyone else. I don’t think it’s blasphemous for a sub to consider an inexperienced Dom.

I think the real issue as to why experienced subs turn down an inexperienced Dom has to do with a few things.

First and foremost is safety and prior experiences. It’s not at all uncommon for a sub to have experienced “doms” who just slapped the title on and were terrible, which leads to hesitations. Do you think a sub who has had that type of experience would be willing to teach or mentor an inexperienced Dom? Not likely. It’s also a lot harder for a sub to guide and lead a Dom one on one in certain situations as we don’t have a visual of the whole situation in certain scenes.

Another reason I believe has to do with approach. I think first interacting with someone you’d want experience from would be more helpful than just messaging them out of the blue. Anyone who is inexperienced, be it either a dom or sub would have more success finding someone to guide them if they meet each other at munches, classes, etc. A request for me to guide someone I’ve meet, gone out with, etc., would be less likely to fall on deaf ears.

The last reason, off the top of my head, is education. Doctors and nurses just don’t go become interns. They study, go to school, etc..So put in the work, find local munches and classes, and I’d bet you’d be more likely to find yourself less “inexperienced” and more likely to find a partner to navigate the lifestyle with.

Think “dating” and education before jumping right to wanting to be guided in a dynamic. Just my two cents.

I could be wrong. I could be disagreed with. No one person will ever know all the things as this community is forever evolving. As it should.

[Strix]

2 hours ago, SammySub07 said:

I’m going to start off by saying this is my opinion or experience and may not be that of anyone else. I don’t think it’s blasphemous for a sub to consider an inexperienced Dom.

I think the real issue as to why experienced subs turn down an inexperienced Dom has to do with a few things.

First and foremost is safety and prior experiences. It’s not at all uncommon for a sub to have experienced “doms” who just slapped the title on and were terrible, which leads to hesitations. Do you think a sub who has had that type of experience would be willing to teach or mentor an inexperienced Dom? Not likely. It’s also a lot harder for a sub to guide and lead a Dom one on one in certain situations as we don’t have a visual of the whole situation in certain scenes.

Another reason I believe has to do with approach. I think first interacting with someone you’d want experience from would be more helpful than just messaging them out of the blue. Anyone who is inexperienced, be it either a dom or sub would have more success finding someone to guide them if they meet each other at munches, classes, etc. A request for me to guide someone I’ve meet, gone out with, etc., would be less likely to fall on deaf ears.

The last reason, off the top of my head, is education. Doctors and nurses just don’t go become interns. They study, go to school, etc..So put in the work, find local munches and classes, and I’d bet you’d be more likely to find yourself less “inexperienced” and more likely to find a partner to navigate the lifestyle with.

Think “dating” and education before jumping right to wanting to be guided in a dynamic. Just my two cents.

I could be wrong. I could be disagreed with. No one person will ever know all the things as this community is forever evolving. As it should.

I am in agreement with your statement. It's where I started from made lots of friends and its best place just to be part of the lifestyle

[Sa****]

Strix! That’s awesome that you’re immersing yourself in the lifestyle and learning. When you have your first long term dynamic, it’ll be awesome!

[Pr****]

As a submissive I can say that I have talked to some inexperienced Doms and it did not go good. One guy thought since he called himself a Dom I was just immediately fall to my knees for him. Another guy thought because I was a Service submissive all I wanted to do was give blowjobs and that would send me to sub space. They had no idea how to get me to a place where I could submit. I like submitting cause I like giving up control but I have to have faith the person being in control knows what they are doing. Having to teach someone how to top would not work for me at all. That being said I know many women that are switches that have trained Dom’s. I know many seasoned Dom’s that have mentored beginners.