<!--ADULTSONLY-->
<meta http-equiv="pics-label" content='(pics-1.1 "http://www.icra.org/ratingsv02.html" l gen true for "http://asstr.org" r (cz 1 la 1 lb 1 lc 1 na 1 nb 1 nc 1 nd 1 ne 1 nf 1 ng 1 nh 1 ni 1 oa 1 ob 1 oc 1 of 1 og 1 oh 1 va 1 vb 1 vc 1 vd 1 ve 1 vf 1 vg 1 vh 1 vi 1 vj 1 vk 1) "http://www.rsac.org/ratingsv01.html" l gen true for "http://asstr.org" r (n 4 s 4 v 4 l 4))' />
<SCRIPT LANGUAGE=JavaScript SRC=/scripts/common.js></script>
<SCRIPT LANGUAGE=JavaScript SRC=/scripts/scroller2.js></script>
<SCRIPT Language="Javascript">
<!--
runScroller();
//-->
</SCRIPT>
<pre>
  Note: Images files 28 and 29 are mostly journal rather
        than art.  People who like the sort of fantasies
        and discussions that I'm prone to may enjoy them, 
        people, people looking for stories may wish to
        skip them.


My "Images" (a term I stole from Suki) are short ideas, images,
and sketches written for the amusement of and offered as tribute 
to my Liege and Lady.  They were always longer and never so well
crafted as Suki's short masterpieces, and over time, my Images
files began to include various email excerpts and other works
in progress or ideas for works and became more journal than art,
so some juxtapositions may seem odd.


Some of my Images follow.  They are generally cruel and 
nonconsensual and of interest only to sickphuxs, so please 
read no further if such doesn't appeal to you.

The Images are impurely the products of a warped imagination, and
should not be seen as a reflection of the scene, nor should they be 
imitated by anyone not interested in a protracted term as the ward 
of the state.

Steven S. Davis


---------------------------------------------
"Thoughts on Moe"

I'm not sure if excerpts from a series of emails (all
the words are mine) in which I speculate about a college
friend of mine and about different types of domming, with 
various fantasies and revelries along the way, are going 
to be very interesting to you, but on the chance that they 
might be, I thought I'd send them along.


--------

[...]  I remember a line from "The Lion in Winter" (or actually,
I don't quite remember it, but it goes something like "Who's to
say it's wrong ? I'm the king and if I call it just then it's
just").  So if you think securely binding a man with him rigged
up so he's both in pain and also relentlessly sexually stimulated but 
despite his most exhausting efforts, also unable to gain relief, putting
him in an ordeal of endless arousal without release and awfully
desperate efforts all futile, and when he's in agony and his aching
muscles and chafed skin can't bear to move and he's too exhausted to
move anyway and his aching desperate maddening need has no hope of
finding release and he's shamed by how he's crying in pain and need
and frustration in front of you and there is absolutely nothing he
can do about it and nothing he could have done to make things any
different and everything has happened to him just as you planned 
it, and you blame him for all of it, well, you're the dominant, and
if you call it justice, it must be justice.  If you were the punishing
sort and told him he would now be severely punished for his failure,
that too would be justice.


[snip question about a wet finger]

As it happens, I've not been particularly excited about a woman's
fliuds, save as a sign of her excitement.  But I suspect that I could
be trained to respond to it, and certainly what it interests her
would interest me, which would make me easier to train.  I'd certainly
respond very well to her lust or her happiness, so whether she responds
to my licking/sucking her juices from her with smiles and giggles or
laughs or flushed passionate looks or with cruel stares, I'm sure she
could quickly train me to desperately want to lick her juices anywhere.

I hope that if my dom ever opts to so train me that she quite
enjoys herself (ah, so to speak).

Of course, she could also get me to struggle forward against
my bonds, perhaps also against clamps or rubber bands, by offering
me her lips to kiss or her breasts to worship.

I'm afraid I'm not so limber or mobile as might be desired, but
I hope she'd enjoy seeing me bound and flopping like a rather short
flippered seal after her as she walked away from me, offering
me her fingers or nipple to suck.


&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Oddly, it may perhaps be a sign that I'm really not a dominant,
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; "just" a top and a sadist, because I wouldn't get any deep thrill
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; from a submissive of mine crawling to me with ropes in her teeth



&gt; &gt; No, I'm afraid not.  I might thrill at the idea of beating
&gt; &gt; her, but I wouldn't have my heart especially touched by her
&gt; &gt; gesture (neither would I fail to appreciate it, it just
&gt; &gt; wouldn't touch me at my core).



Perhaps because of my sadism I'm less interested in willing submission.
The "abandon all hope" speech or variations thereof have always been
big for me.  Holding the woman's head between my hand splayed across
her face and the other hand in her hair and telling her that her last
chance to say "no" and have it mean something is *now* is very hot for
me.  Having her in just heels and hose propped up on pillows with her
hands cuffed behind her and her ankles in a close hobble as I show
her the torture toys and discuss what I'm going to do to her and how
there's nothing she can do about it, while I'm getting her good and
scared, maybe even get her to cry without touching her, is very hot 
for me.  I like it when she lunges for my feet and hugs them because 
she's hoping for mercy during a beating rather than because of her 
submission (if I play long enough and become a real big scary bastard
perhaps I won't respond to that, but rather surprisingly it does work 
on me).  

A lot of this needs an element of "I don't want to be doing 
this but I don't have a choice" (which of course means playing with 
the right sort of bottom who likes not having a choice once things 
start, and knows that she isn't going to like all that I chose for
her) which is different from "I don't want to do this but I choose 
to do it for you".  Which I also like and certainly appreciate but
I get hotter at the scenario of:

"I don't want to do this, please stop."

"Are you applying for mercy ?"

"Yes, please, mercy, please."

"Reuest denied."


&gt; &gt; But I would rather like it if my crawling to my domme with ropes
&gt; &gt; in mouth and dropping them at her feet then staying there with head
&gt; &gt; on the floor (till she shifted a foot near my face which was an
&gt; &gt; indication to me that worship would be accepted) sent thrills through
&gt; &gt; my domme and made her feel very powerful, very cruel, and very
&gt; &gt; hungry.

[snip questions]
 
Short answer: yes.

Longer answer:

Well, there are of course many possible futures which would be,
for me, a happy life as a submissive.  Your question brought
to mind one such future, or one such fantasy.  Again, only one
of many such fantasies.  It happens that this one involves a 
woman who is not, or was not, prior to meeting me, very much
into either sadism or domination (given my disinclination to 
become involved with a vanilla woman, this makes it rather
improbable).  This hardly means that I'm suddenly not
interested in lifelong sadists.  But it's what I came to think
of after your question.

One thing which I realised is how much what I was thinking of
seemed to be tailored to a college friend of mine, Mary - a 
common enough name that I figure there's no need to conceal 
it - to whom I'd been very attracted but both because I was in 
my "I need no one period" and because she became involved with
my best friend, being more than friends never was an option.


Mary was, it seemed to me, a conflicted person.  Not a tortured
person (damn! (back then people who I might have had masochistic
fantasies about (at the time I didn't feel nor see myself as
being at all submissive, just as a sadist who sometimes had
masochist fantasies) weren't outside my sadistic fantasies, and 
in any event, Mary wasn't clearly dominant, so she was horribly
tortured in my imagination on a regular basis, including having
her head shaved and being bound naked and hung by her ankles from
a tripod with her head above a slow buring fire), but she had her
conflicts, which is actually attractive to me.

The core of her conflicts - or what seemed to me to be her
conflicts pieced together from observation and stray comments
and maybe possibly some projection and/or wishful thinking -
was the conflict between being fun-loving, feminine, and horny
and being both a good Irish Catholic girl and a good mid 70s
(it was the late 70's but Penn State was generally a bit behind
the curve in these matters) feminist (the good Catholic and the 
good feminist had their own conflicts, but those weren't of as
much interest to me).

Mary was a very nice, sweet girl and her actions led her to be
generally perceived that way (also to be perceived, unfairly,
by some not so nice people as being ditsy (BTW and FWIW, we both
lived for a couple years in the same coed dorm, women in one
wing and men in another but which plenty of interaction (which
I'm using literally and not euphemistically; there was certainly
sex going on but it was hardly a non-stop orgy and there was
not, I think, any more sex than was occuring in putatively 
single-sex dorms)).  She rather disliked her "sweet Mary"
image, partly because like anyone who's truly sweet she didn't 
see herself as a sweet person, and partly because she wanted
to be more wild and daring than "sweet Mary" (but of course
*being* sweet she couldn't actually get all that wild, and when
she did seek to be more wild it came off as sweet that).

She was, I believe it can be said based on evidence and not
just my wishfulness, quite hot blooded sexually but this was 
constrained by her being a good Catholic girl.  I was, as I
said, best friends with her boyfriend and think I'd have heard
about it if they were having sex (he did, FWIW, concur with and
hope I was correct that she was going to be very busy once she
had a wedding ring on her finger (but they drifted apart in the
last year of college and that didn't happen)).  They were at
some points in their relationship very active in ways short of 
intercourse and she was both rather proud of this being known
and somewhat embarrassed about it being known (she had, I think,
some exhibitionist tendencies, and in fact seemed to enjoy
intense kissing sessions with Jim while I was present; at least
she'd start them and tell me not to leave when I started to go;
however, one time when I was holding the janitor closet shut with
Jim and her within (I don't know why we used to think that was
fun to do - oh, yes, I remember now, people used to go into the 
bathroom and throw water on the trapped person through the air vent; 
I don't know why we used to think *that* was fun) after she and Jim had
created a bit of a stir by making out on the desk in the study lounge
(they thought they were alone, but they may - or may not - have 
forgotten that the building was L shaped and the study loungue was 
on the inside of the L and they were visible through the window
from the other wing) that I didn't say who was being held inside.

I'd say she was very vanilla then but tolerant of the idea of
consensual kinks.  She tolerated being restrained and manhandled
pretty well, but  a) this was after the sexual revolution and before
the raising of consciousness about sexual harassment, all the women
seemed to tolerate being restrained and manhandled in a friendly
manner  b) the men didn't tolerate it as well but it happened to
them anyway  (our dorm was very big on abuse - pronounced "ah-BUU-se"
and not considered abusive - be it male on male, male on female, 
or female on male (interestingly, the girls seldom inflicted
"ah-BUU-se" on each other, at least not when guys were around,
but they not infrequently ganged up on guys) and I suppose it
was hard for women to regard themselves as being sexually harrassed 
when guys were doing much worse to each other than they did to
the girls (it's not like anything very perverse was going on;
ah, well, actually there was, but there was nothing ugly going
on); well, OK, I don't recall any guys being chained to the
urinal in the woman's bathroom (they had them, since the bathrooms were
made to be used by either gender), but FWIW the girl who got
handcuffed to a urinal didn't seem to mind and told everyone coming
in not to mind her and to just go about their business (no one did
until she was out of there).

Anyway, neither the fact she tolerated being restrained nor
the clear pleasure she seemed to have being one of the women
dragging a man into the shower, nor the way she seemed to look
very pleased when she called on me for help when Jim tickled
her (she didn't mind when he had her pinned down but she didn't
like the tickling) and I extracted her nor the fact that Jim
mentioned once taping her legs togther add up to much evidence
of being kinky.  But there's enough to give me so hope that
she might have been, and might have found being dominant fun.

It would have been easier to reconcile with her feminism
(which FWIW also created some conflicts with her feminity,
as she both liked dressing up and seemed to resent any 
expectations about her making herself look good (well,
she was after all very young and a lot of people were finding
this stuff vexing back then) and would have made her seem
daring rather than put upon.  I think that she might have found
it an attractive way to "live in sin" (recalling a woman
in a Graham Greene novel the name of which eludes me now,
who told her fiance that she'd love to live in sin and he
said she could, any time, and she replied that *that* wasn't 
living in sin, living in sin was wearing a tiger striped bikini
on a tropical beach (well, this was the 1950s).  Mary's ideas
of what would have been living in sin were probably different, 
but I think she'd have understood where the woman was coming from.


Sorry to go on at such length about her, but I thought it 
would be helpful in explaining why I have felt that a certain
type of woman might find being carefully encouraged to be
more sexually dominant very congenial, especially with a lot
of reassurance that she was being daring but not really bad.
How she might be easily - more easily over time - encouraged
to get sinful with me, and as she saw that things went well
might get more daring, and how maybe  one day if I slipped
down to sit by her feet she might give me a sly smile and
tug at my hair and say "stay" and slip away to change her
corduroy and hush uppies for a leotard and high heels and
might enjoy teasing and controlling me and maybe might one
day shock herself by kicking me and she'd probably be mortified
afterwards but she'd find herself wanting to do it again and
getting to where she liked doing it quite unreservedly and
it made her very hot and happy and she was getting to where 
she'd initiate her dominance instead of being dominant
only when I drew it out of her, but she was still only this 
way with me and very few of her friends could imagine that their
sweet friend would afix me with gleaming eyes in a flushed
face as she put me through my paces then teased and tormented
me (but never too badly, since she's still a nice girl) before 
giving in to a voracious lust.  Some might notice that she
seemed a little more confident, more assertive, with more
authority, but they'd never guess that she enjoyed keeping me
under her high heels or biting my nipples or having me crawl
after her with a chain from her ankle to my collar.  This
was - to be rather unsubmissively possessive - all mine,
I called it out of her (but in time w/o overt gestures;
that'd be nice in many ways, but I'd come to feel bad if
she only became dominated when I signalled her that I was 
willing) and while she might be getting more dominant and
assertive she still needed me for her to become the femdom
and she really enjoyed becoming the femdom and came to need
this (and therefore to need me).


Again, not the only scenario I could enjoy, not by
any means.  But one which definitely has its appeal.



I wrote:

&gt; Again, not the only scenario I could enjoy, not by
&gt; any means.  But one which definitely has its appeal.
&gt; 


Not that the rest of my message would suggest that.


I'm sorry about that, I'd not meant to go on at such
length about why I thought maybe a person I knew years 
ago might have been pervertable.  By the time I was done
with that actually explaining why/how she or someone like
her might figure in one submissive scenario for me I was
tired and out of steam and didn't have much left for discussing
the scenario.  What I did have to say about it mainly soundly
like I was being highly possessive and looking for a scenario
in which my domme wouldn't ever be looking for/at anyone else,
and/or that we shared this deep secret, "Who'd have thought she's
a domme ?".  

Not that security doesn't have it's appeal or that sharing secrets
isn't fun.  But really more than either of those is the appeal
of having "made" this domme (ah, not in that sense).  Not a very
submissive thought, perhaps, and clearly one can't make a domme
if the person isn't suited (you can make a woman dom, but you can't
make her be a domme).  But one can perhaps discovery and bring out
a domme that might not have been found.   The real appeal of the
sort of scenario I have in mind is not that no one would suspect
her of being the dominant, nor that other people would be amazed
by it (one small issue (so to speak); Mary was 5'2" and light framed 
and while she ran and exercised she wasn't real buff nor was she 
trained in martial arts so she wouldn't have been able to dominate
by force or strength; that's not actually a requirement for me
(one potential dom was very much into weightlifting and very strong)
but it is an attractive element for me)).  The real appeal would
be for my domme to be utterly amazed at all this, to have never
thought (well, maybe there was a bizarre fantasy now and then that
she quickly dismissed) that this was possible.  For her to be
pressing her heel into me looking flushed and intent and deliciously
cruel and for her to say "I could never have imagined that it could
feel so good to make you feel so bad", for her to never have imagined
(and be somwhat intoxicated by) the feeling of power over a man.
To have never imagined it or to have ever imagined wanting it and
now not to be able to imagine being without it and whatever else
may ever happen I did this for her, whoever else she may ever have
under her heels, it would always be the case that I had slowly
enticed and reassured and seduced her and made it safe for her
and empowered her and she would in some ways be my creation (and,
yes, always owing me gratitude, though of course I might find that
being tied to the floor while she walked around me kicking and jabbing
me with her heels and telling me how grateful she is to me - emphasizing
the gratitude with a kick - for all that I've done for her and for
all the joy I've brought her and recollecting happily the first time
she'd gotten it in her head to kick me and how thrilled she'd been
but hwo soon she'd been shocked and mortified and she'd cried and
apologized and I'd made her feel so safe and secure and accepted
and loved and now she can kick me agains and again - demonstrating as
she's speaking - and thoroughly enjoy it and never feel the slightest
twinge of guilt, and she's so happy that I made her into what she is
today (said while grinding my balls under her foot, with perhaps a
remark (or maybe none is needed) about how she's my creation and 
aren't I proud of that and well, I won't really need to be using
*these* to create anything, will I ?).



More later, if I think of anything worth saying.




Well, then maybe it wasn't quite as badly done as it had seemed.
I probably should have saved what I'd written and put it away
until a time when I was in better shape to finish it.
 

[comment about seeing things fresh through a new dominant's eyes]


Yup.  To see her discovery and her pleasure and her amazement at
her discovery of this pleasure.




Well, of course I think about this stuff rather a lot. ;-&gt;
The above was more the case of images and ideas flowing easily
(sometimes).  It wasn't particularly well thought out and
bits from different fantasies crept in.  While discovery and
change is certainly key to the fantasy, so perhaps nothing needs
be excluded, I can't look into my crystal ball (just had an
image of a kinky fortune teller, or maybe a domme would do
a fortune teller shtick as she looked at a crystal cock and balls
and predicted a man's future) and see Mary, or someone else I
would see in this role, getting to the point where she could
kick me hard and repeatedly and enjoy it.  A few light taps,
more symbolic kicks than real ones, is the most I'd expect. 
To be able to enjoy delivering hard kicks to someone who wasn't
a masochist one would, I believe, have to have a lot of hard-wired
sadism, and if that were the case one wouldn't find that if this
sneaky conniving little sub (he's twice your size, or would be only
twice your size if he stays on a diet long enough, but all subs 
are little) hadn't become your friend and then your lover and then
gotten you used to having things done for you and having your wishes
or suggestions regarded as orders and worked on you till you enjoyed
this power and then showed you other ways you could enjoy power over 
him until now you're happier than you've ever been and in ways you'd
never thought you'd be and you can't possibly imagine not keeping
him near you and using him and - hey, wait a minute, that sneaky
conniving little sub "Boy, you get your ass in here now sub, make
me into a power junkie will you, I'm going to string you up and
hang weights from your balls and tap them with my toes till you 
beg for mercy, now get.... well, that was fast.  Now at least try 
to look scared, will you !" - and anyway, without that you'd never
have thought of being where you are now.  A hard wired sadist might
be surprised to be able to actually live her fantasies, or some of
them, and not be put in jail or a mental hospital, but she wouldn't
be having the same amazement as the sort of woman I'm describing.
That woman would be more into the power and the perverseness than 
the pain.  She's be more apt to enjoy getting a cage with serpentine
bars (maybe with short not terribly sharp spikes on the inside) and
getting her submissive's soft cock (maybe after handling it a bit to
elongate it while living it still limp (she'd perhaps have to make
him come a couple times to get to where she could handle his cock 
without him becoming rigid; the things dommes have to do somethimes !)
and thread it between the serpentine bars and then lay atop him and
kiss him and enjoy his distress as his cock hardens and he learns
a new definition of "get bent" and he's now trapped in the cage,
unable to get out while firm with his cock all bent and twisted and
the spikes biting into him and she smiles sweetly at him, but with
just a little wickedness in her glowing eyes, and says "I'll stop
if you ask me to" and goes on kissing him, enjoying  1) kissing
him  2) his distress at what the cage is doing to him  3) the fact
that he'd rather the pain continue than her kisses stop.

 [I had to change that one from "me" to "him" because while it was
  an interesting fantasy it was hard - ah, difficult - to overlook
  the small detail that a device like that would be best used on
  someone with a rather long cock (perhaps with some comments on
  how glad he must be to have such a nice long cock) ]


It would be about fun and games for her, not about finding 
ethical ways to deal with the evil within.  She'd enjoy the
liberating features of being "bad" (more like "nasty" since
whether she likes it or not (she does, most of the time, but
sometimes she just thinks about walking on the wild side) she's
a good girl) because of the ways it lets her escape the dominant
- ah, primary ? - parts of herself rather than because of the way 
it allows her to express suppressed parts of herself.

Which is one reason why I'm not sure this fantasy would work
for me, since I'm not sure a woman who doesn't know that evil
herself could understand the evil within me and that I'm not
better matched with a woman who would stand alongside me at
the deli counter and watch the salamis (hmmm) being put into
the meat slicer and have a little revelry at which she'd nudge
me and give me an evil look to be sure I knew what she was 
thinking.

Though I might feel safer with a "Mary or equal" type. ;-&gt;

  [FWIW, we sometimes buy products by soliciting for a
   "Acme Widget # 4 or equal" meaning we want something
    that does what Acme Widget #4 does but any product
    with that functionality will be considered]

  [FWIW2, in no crystal ball(s) do I ever forsee Mary or equal
   (I wonder if she'd be offended if I took to refering to
   "Moe") ever producing such meat slicer/grinder thoughts on
   her own, though I can imagine her reaching the point where
   she'd find them amusing rather than dismaying if she
   heard them from someone else]


[question about attraction to hard-wred sadists]

I have been attracted to hard wired sadists.  Pursue them ?
Probably, though my form of pursuit is more trying to be
entertaining/attractive/useful and hoping she'll pursue me.

Which has, so far, not been a particularly effective technique
(though I don't know if having been, by my perception, dumped
twice is really so remarkable; it seems less so when expressed 
that way instead of saying that I have a 100% failure rate with 
this method).



                                         [....] hard-wired sadist 
covers a lot of territory.  I'm one myself, so the idea of being
with a hard-wired sadist isn't frightening to me (one hard-wired
sadist I find attractive (who as it happens seems also to have 
dumped me but we were no longer considering playing because
of my situation with my former sub and in any event was so extremely
long distance that they'd never be much possibility (since neither
of us had any inclination to change continents) anyway... who
seems to have dumped me as a correspondant but whose new
correspondant (I should check and see if the words are spelled
the same way in the "sends letters to" and "is involved in 
a divorcing proceeeding" senses, but I'm too lazy) is a house
(actually a pair of houses - two-timing slut - one that she's
selling and one that she's buying), so I don't feel so bad,
since I know that no man, no matter how handsome or charming
or sweet or witty, can ever compete with a house) is much
more frightened of herself than I am of her).  Not that I
don't know that a hard-wired sadist could be dangerous,
just as a domme with lots of attitude could be a real bitch.
The key is what else do they feature besides sadism or attitude.
I'm not a hazard to people who bottom to me (fact of the matter
is, most of the "abandon all hope speech" is a lie; I may tell
them nothing that they say or do from this point onward will
matter, but it will, and I may say that I'll use them strictly
according to my desires, but I don't desire to exceed anyone's
limits (stretch them some, maybe, exceeed, no) though one shouldn't
bottom to me if one wants a service top who's going to give a
strictly pleasing experiencing (so far in my extremely limited
experience as a top I'd say my partners found the experience
satisfying, but I don't think they'd call it pleasing).

There *is* a serious question whether I could be pleasing
to a hard wired sadist; my partners were masochists or at
least people who did enjoy some severe use.  I'm not, and
I'm not sure I wouldn't become boring to a sadist who wanted
to play harder than I was able to manage.  That's a point 
that remains to be seen.

But as a sadist I know that one doesn't need to enact
one's harder fantasies and that play within limits can still
be quiet cruel and quite fun, so if I ever do end up with
a hard-wired sadist I imagine that it could work out.  I won't
think ill of her for wanting to do horrible things to me
(maybe it will be satisfying to her to be able to tie me
and then threaten me with horrors) and she'll find pushing
my puny limits fun.  Or so I would hope.

 

[snip description of desires for d&s play]

Which wouldn't need be that different with a "true" sadist.  It would
be, I think, more of matter of appreciating reasons for behavior.
If I were submitting to someone who was mostly dominant and partly
sadistic I'd expect (in the sense of predict/hope, not in the
sense of require) that she'd be touched and aroused by my willingness
to suffer for her.  If I were submitting to someone who was mostly
sadistic and partly dominant (FWIW, I can't imagine myself serving
someone who was dominant but w/o any sadism nor being partnered
with someone who was sadistic but was purely a sensation player)
I'd expect her to appreciate my willingness to serve but to get
most of her thrill from "victimizing" me.

So I probably would not crawl up to my sadistic friend with ropes
in my teeth and a whip coiled around my neck, the way I might
if I were submitting to you.  If I were submitting to you I'd
want to make a point of my willingness to serve and my wish to
please and to find ways to encourage you to use me despite my
fear of the pain.  If I were submitting to someone primarily 
sadistic I'd try to be enticing rather than encouraging, that is,
I'd want her to to feel a little more predatory and that she'd
pursue and take me when she felt the urge (even if I sometimes
did try to encourage the urge) and my acceptance of my fate
was more resignation than cooperation.

I'd probably be mouthier with a sadist.  Not a brat, that would
never be my style.  But more willing to tell her "shit that
hurt" or "damn, you're one mean bitch" or "you're gonna do what
you want anyway so go ahead and do it".  I don't think I'd be
so cliched as to tell you "if it pleases you, Madam" but what
I'd say to you would be skewed more in that direction (maybe
"damn, I hope you're enjoying this") to indicate compliance
with your wishes more than helpless acceptance of your actions.

But it would all be a matter of skewing a little bit this way 
or that, just a few points in either direction, rather than
an utterly different thing.


[regarding sneaky subs and a dominant's awareness that she had
 been seduced]

I'm not sure how aware I'd prefer her to be.  If dealing with "Moe"
I think that she would intitially have to be unaware of the seduction,
beyond an awareness that I was interested in making her happy.  With
"Yone" ("You or nearly equal") I'd want her to be aware of the process
but still to be subtle enough about it that it was sort of a background
awareness, i.e. you'd know what I was doing but when confronted with
individual acts of seduction you'd not see them as such.

Generally, that is.  When I got up and place a pillow a few feet to
your right so I could kneel on it and put my head on the floor by
your feet so you could rest your ankles on my neck, I figure you'd
see through that one right away.

[regarding play as a ribbon that tightens bonds between partners]

Which is just want he wants.

Somewhere I've a piece about submission as a process of gradually
wrapping a submissive in very fine threads, such that at the beginning
and for a long time thereafter the submissive has to try hard not to
break them (and, of course, the dominant must try not to cause the
submissive to move) but in time the wrapping is such that the submissive
can relax and still stay bound and maybe even stretch against it
and stay within it, and eventually will find him or her unable to get 
free no matter how strenuously he struggles.

Ribbon will do the job as well as would gossamer threads.

[regarding leading different types of dominants]

Well, Moe I'd have to lead.  The sadist might also need some leading,
but with her it'd be more the case of getting her to feel more
comfortable with herself and to show her that I trust her (so she
can trust herself) and that she can trust me (so she can be herself
and not worry that I'll run away when I see who she really is).
 
