Part 1: Kinky Needs When I have an orgasm (even without a female giving me permission or being under her control), I feel like: A fish out of water; A little kid sneaking a cookie from the jar; A soldier when his commander isn't supervising him; A prisoner wandering outside the prison walls; A school-kid cheating on a test; A driver speeding when the cops aren't around; A shoplifter avoiding the cameras; Something is simply not right in my world, and through no fault of my own. Part 2: Kinky Wants I also have a major foot fetish, among other things. However, I'm completely fine with not having the opportunity to be at a woman's feet. I'm completely fine with taking the rare opportunities to be on my knees, kissing the exquisite female foot when they present themselves. Being in such a position is fantastic... But I don't actively seek such opportunities out like I do orgasm control. The reason is that for me, I feel orgasm control is a need as opposed to a want. It is probably one of the most basic and deepest ways in which a man can submit to a woman, whether by means of a physical chastity device or the honor system. My desire to give up such control to a female is, in my opinion, overwhelming proof that I'm genuinely submissive.
Wants vs needs is a chastity staple. Some of it we want something but don’t need it, and some of it is needing something but not wanting it. I am not someone that enjoys being punished. I lose my erection, it’s not something I’ve ever fantasized about, and in general (besides happy that she’s happy) dislike it. Well anything hard enough to be considered discipline anyway. So here I am not wanting something...yet I understand that I actually need that kind of scary discipline. I desperately want to orgasm, but I need to be told no. There are many different examples for just as many people. I want her to peg me, I enjoy the feeling of humility and being used, but it’s a desire not a need. I don’t need her to do that for me to feel ok.
Does that mean a submissive guy should wait until the woman takes charge and begins implementing her rules on her own initiative? This principle would hardly apply in the vanilla dating world...a woman can be very interested in a guy and want to date him, but it's usually the guy who needs to approach and get the number, ask her out, etc.
Of course women are capable of having initiative...but there are a lot of women who enjoy the pursuit and want the guy to take action as well...so for me sometimes it's hard to tell.
Subs always have to make the first approach, I've never approached anyone. They also have to submit in a way the dominant female wants, or they are useless to her. If the sub wants her to deny his orgasms but she has no interest in it, then it's not submitting to her. You can't give someone a gift they don't want.
I get the impression that you have some other issues going on that you haven't discussed or even realized. I'm not trying to put you down in ANY way but it seems you may have some issues with interpersonal communications, gender and sexuality. I may be way off base on this though.
I believe in the model of dominant-led (rather than submissive-led) relationships, in which the dominant person decides what she or he wants to receive from the submissive person (within negotiations, limits, and boundaries). To reiterate what @L-u-c-y said, if the dominant is not interested in your chastity, then offering your chastity to her has nothing to do with submission and is only based in your own desires. (And though this sounds like no sub anywhere would ever get his needs and wants met if she's doing all the deciding, that's where compatibility and negotiations come into play.) As far as who initiates, I don't think there's a hard rule. Some dominants enjoy being approached by subs, other would prefer to find their own subs. In the vanilla dating world (and especially online dating), I am usually the one to contact a man first. My current partner is someone I found on OKCupid and made the initial contact.
I think ultimately anything kinky or sexual is a want and not a need. You need air to breath. You need water to drink and food to eat. You need shelter from extreme elements. Anything beyond mere survival is a want. You might want pizza, but all you need is food. In terms of kink and sex don't let others define you or what works for you. For my wife and I she does things she doesn't get pleasure from. She see's it like physical exercise. She wants the benefit of the activity, not really the activity itself. Some will say she's not being dominant, she's being submissive because she's doing something she wouldn't otherwise do for me. That's their opinion and they are entitled to it. For us it works as she is doing things that I see as being dominant and that reinforces my submissive side. Keeping me in my place via these methods makes me feel like I must serve her. When she says "I need a water", I don't hesitate. I jump up and fetch it for her. If she didn't do the other things including locking me and punishing me I would be less inclined to be unquestioningly obedient. Well I guess I'm really more like mostly obedient. I'm a work in progress.
Which is why the title of my post is "Kinky Needs Vs. Kinky Wants" and not "Needs vs. Wants" or "Needs Vs. Kinky Wants" Of course, the starting assumption that I didn't even think needed to be mentioned is the fact that kink itself is not a need on the same level as food or shelter is a need. But, since we're already in the specific realm of kink, I think there's still a difference between needs vs. wants.
It's ok for a submissive to have needs and communicate those needs, and the same goes for wants. Having a sexual need is totally valid and doesn't make someone any less submissive. It's foolish to think that the only need every submissive has is to submit to a dominant in whatever way is defined by the dominant, otherwise that person isn't actually submissive. I like to define a sexual need as something that brings fulfillment, and without which sexual fulfillment is difficult if not impossible. Also, in this definition sexual fulfillment does not mean climax or orgasm but something deeper. If chastity/orgasm denial is a true (sexual) need, then without it there is no or little sexual fulfillment. If a submissive communicates to the dominant: "Without chastity or orgasm control, I'm unfulfilled sexually. It's something I feel I need" and the dominant has no interest in either chastity or the submissive's sexual fulfillment, then the submissive has the choice of either remaining unfulfilled or leaving the relationship. Too many people live their lives this way, whether vanilla or kinky. If the dominant, however, has no interest in chastity but does want their submissive to be sexually fulfilled, they can give their submissive what they need without giving up their 'domliness.' But let's say the relationship has different parameters. Both parties have negotiated and agreed to roles, limits, acceptable behaviors, etc. and the relationship revolves solely around the fetish of subservience, and nothing else. That is, the dominant commands and the submissive obeys, and the submissive receives all of their sexual fulfillment through subservience alone. The submissive has, presumably, agreed to this. However, deep down this person is just waiting and hoping to get to the point where they can coerce/manipulate/badger the dominant into fulfilling their own fetishes beyond simple subservience. Well, then that person may be submissive in their own mind, but they are certainly not meeting the definition of submissive that they have agreed to. Furthermore, they have betrayed the dominant and misled them. This is bad and unacceptable. Many relationships are much more inline with a mutual aid/mutual benefit model. Perhaps the couple have been in a relationship for some time before any kink or D/s was introduced. Perhaps one partner has always identified as submissive and the other has always identified as neither submissive or dominant. This is the minefield many people interested in chastity find themselves. They must figure out what is the primary motivator, is it chastity or submission? They are the only ones who can answer that question, all while trying to balance the myriad other considerations of being in a relationship. And the other partner has the same minefield to walk through. The best thing both can do is hold hands and walk it together, and figure it out as they go. I'm much like @SmartandObedient in that orgasm control is inherent to my sexual identity. I have all the same feelings when I orgasm that he outlined. The fact that my wife does not have, as part of her inherent sexual identity, the need to control my orgasms, doesn't mean she is less dominant for helping me find sexual fulfillment. And having sexual needs does not diminish my submissiveness. To no one in particular, just in general: I think what all this hinges on is whether the self-proclaimed submissive values their needs above their dominants. If fulfilling your own needs is more important to you than fulfilling your dominant's needs, then it would be a good idea to do a thorough self-examination and figure out whether you are actually submissive or just a dominant bottom. If you're a dominant bottom, that's fine, just don't try to pass yourself off as submissive. It's dishonest to your partner and even worse, yourself.
This is a great thread! This is also something that took me a long time to understand as stupid as that sounds. When beginning Chastity my mind was filled the kinky wants and the possibilities of what may come. I became too consumed with my kinky wants and that became my focus of our relationship instead of focusing on my Ms. I was a complient sub for the most part, I would do anything she asked. But I would go through periods of being upset that our sex lives weren't progressing in the way that I wanted to after "trying so hard" to be a good submissive. I failed to see the point big time. It wasn't until recently that I realized I how incredibly wrong I was. I realized that the "kinky wants" can make you selfish and focus more on what you want instead of what your partner wants. Once I realized this it was like a huge burden off my mind and I genuinely felt happy and relieved having a new direction and a redirected focus. Of course I still have my kinky wants but I'm not focused on them. If Ms chooses to do something I really like that makes me a lucky guy and if she doesn't then I'm just happy she let me please her. The more I try for her and make her happy the more she'll want to step out of her comfort zone and try something different for herself. The difference now is that there is no pressure on her and which is how it should've been all along and whatever happens will happen. I think what you see here at the Mansion with couples is one of few things... you have couples that practice chastity and have a little bdsm on the side, then you have couples that practice bdsm with a little chastity on the side, then you have couples that can appropriately balance both worlds and make it work ( I know theres many more ways to go but I'm trying to keep it simple). I believe many men are confused about what they are really asking for when asked to be locked by their partners. This can be the root of many arguments and why couples quit chastity after a short period of time. A couple of years ago @L-u-c-y tore me a new one when I was using the screen name @Lockedwithlove. I was inquiring as to how I could "get" my key holder to be more "sexually aggressive" with me. Long story short Lucy pointed out that my focus wasn't on my Ms and only on myself. I didn't want to accept that answer and I didn't for a couple of years. As I've come to learn I was very wrong and once I realized I was wrong it made a huge difference in my MS's and my relationship dynamic. So @L-u-c-y thanks for putting the bug in my ear a couple of years ago I'm just sad it took me so long to realize. So make sure you have your priorities straight when asking or submitting to this type of relationship. Have your wants and needs in order ! I'll get off my soapbox now