Littles that aren't allowed to talk to other daddies

[pengudaddy]

If you read the other posts, people said you are either controlling/possessive or not. And you agreed to the former, so I'm not sure there is much philosophy to discuss. Im possessive of my little, but im not gonna cut her off from other people like that.

 

Your own perceptions are what have brought you to this opinion, this reality. This is proven because you said you don't see why littles need to talk to other daddies. THEY DON'T NEED THAT. They like talking to other men. Here's a mind blowing philosophy: some women could care less for other women, and value men more!

 

Also, women being naturally submissive is ignorant. Im all for "humans are animals, its nature". If women are naturally submissive, explain dominatrixes. Or women who are doms in general.

 

Listen mate, if your are worried that since naturally your little is submissive and daddies are doms, and that by chance her talking to a Daddy will somehow make her hook up with him, get on her knees, and serve him... Then she's not really your sub then, eh?

 

My little is my sub. That's where it starts and ends. No Daddy here or anywhere can take that from me. That's why I personally do not give a fuck who talks to her. I just ask they don't fall in love.

Edited February 7, 2017 by pengudaddy

[Daddy's_Babygirl]

I feel like some of you aren't looking at the fact that in a true DDlg dynamic.... the rules are agreed upon.

 

If they aren't... it is t DDlg.

If someone is limiting contact to avoid others from reaching out for their betterment or whatever... that's abuse.

 

As I said, my Daddy and I have this rule as a mutual rule. What I didn't mention is... it isn't just with our opposite roles/genders. My Daddy can read my conversations at any time he chooses (though he never has, as he respects my privacy and trusts me... and so far there hasn't been a reason to). If someone, regardless of role or gender is a negative influence on me... contact over. If a Daddy gets ahold of him, they talk awhile and it's decided that it's beneficial for that Daddy and I to become friends I am certain my Daddy would allow that. I am also certain I would want those conversations monitored. I would WANT that.

 

See... I'm only 23. Ive been in one other relationship ever. I have social anxiety so dating wasn't my thing. My Daddy and I are married and have been together nearly 5 years. I was just shy if 19 when we got together. Frankly... I don't understand men and don't always know when they're flirting to flirt vs. that's just part of their personality. So I would want that monitoring because I feel he understands men better.

 

This rule is one I've consented to. In a situation where it's not consented to... then it's absolutely wrong. Period.

[Johnny Hammersticks]

If you read the other posts, people said you are either controlling/possessive or not. And you agreed to the former, so I'm not sure there is much philosophy to discuss. Im possessive of my little, but im not gonna cut her off from other people like that.

 

Your own perceptions are what have brought you to this opinion, this reality. This is proven because you said you don't see why littles need to talk to other daddies. THEY DON'T NEED THAT. They like talking to other men. Here's a mind blowing philosophy: some women could care less for other women, and value men more!

 

Also, women being naturally submissive is ignorant. Im all for "humans are animals, its nature". If women are naturally submissive, explain dominatrixes. Or women who are doms in general.

 

Listen mate, if your are worried that since naturally your little is submissive and daddies are doms, and that by chance her talking to a Daddy will somehow make her hook up with him, get on her knees, and serve him... Then she's not really your sub then, eh?

 

My little is my sub. That's where it starts and ends. No Daddy here or anywhere can take that from me. That's why I personally do not give a fuck who talks to her. I just ask they don't fall in love.

Im gonna figure this response was directed at me?I just like to express a differing opinion on here sometimes. All i could hope for is for people to respect my views and opinions for what they are. MY views and opinions. I can certainly respect your opinions, until you swear at me. Please dont do that again.

[EbonyKittenPrincess]

Daddy does not allows me to talk to caregivers/dom(me)s and men without his permission both in real life and virtually. But it is for my own good…let me explain that.

 

From 2009 to december 2013, I’ve been in a very, extremely abusive (mentally/physically and sexually) relationship. The guy was very dominant and manipulator and I was very young (I’m turning 19 on Sunday)…he kinda made me his doll, not in the good term, and I developed Stockholm Syndrome.

 

I still have a severe PTSD from this experience, and except with Daddy, I just don’t know how to deal with dominance and tend to act submissive or just have a huge panic/anxiety attack or both. Since I’m with Daddy, I’ve been « almost » abused three times in a few months because men would just talk to me or be flirting with me and I’ll act weird and they’ll understand they could get anything from me with the right words.

 

That is the reason why I am not allowed to speak to caregivers here and Cgs/Ds/men more generally without Daddy's allowance (after I talked to him about the person I want to talk with and after he checked himself if it seems like this person could become abusive)

Edited February 7, 2017 by EbonyKittenPrincess

[DollDirector]

On this thread there seems to be a confusion between two different topics.

I fully sympathise with how painful and energy-consuming it is for women,especially those whose psychological balance is fragile,to deal with creeps.

But you will find this issue on all social sites,vanilla or else; It doesn't feel right to me to mix it up with the different subject,of not allowing communication.

[EbonyKittenPrincess]

On this thread there seems to be a confusion between two different topics.

I fully sympathise with how painful and energy-consuming it is for women,especially those whose psychological balance is fragile,to deal with creeps.

But you will find this issue on all social sites,vanilla or else; It doesn't feel right to me to mix it up with the different subject,of not allowing communication.

 

I'm totally ok with that buut I think it depends on the case. Eg, when you're mentally ill and dangerous for yourself you can legally be under someone responsability for money or health care for example.

 

I'm not speaking for anyone but concerning myself for example, this does help me. I litterally find myself used by a lot of people, often, creep or not. I just can't deal with it. Also it's not like I'm forbidden to communicate to people, I do can, it's just that Daddy will ask for specific information about this person to check if I'm safe or not. It wasn't a rule originally, it became one after I almost got raped, and I'm the one who asked for this rule because it makes me feel way safer and comfortable, considering I'm not good at this.

[pengudaddy]

Im gonna figure this response was directed at me?I just like to express a differing opinion on here sometimes. All i could hope for is for people to respect my views and opinions for what they are. MY views and opinions. I can certainly respect your opinions, until you swear at me. Please dont do that again.

Ya it was m8. I do respect your opinion and I simply disagreed with it. Your first line was how controlling you were, and although I read your entire post (because I respect your views), I didnt have to to understand why you don't let your little talk to other humans. Because you are controlling. That is your and your littles business, so I dont really care.

 

My concern was, the main reason people dont let their littles talk to other humans, specifically those with penises, is because they are controlling, and theres not much other reason beyond that no matter what mental gymnastics you can do.

 

I agree that two consenting adults can make rules and follow them. I understand why some littles don't or can't talk to others for their own protection. But my pov was that (excluding those circumstances others have had here), if you trust your little, and she truly is your sub, then preventing her from talking to other humans could be seen as mental abuse, even if they consent. They don't want to lose you, so they consent. And you know that.

 

Im not disrespecting your opinion, Im just drawing the line at "you either control or you dont" and by no surprise that controlling relationships would deny a little her right to talk to others, even if it's consensual. Like i said, for those who do it out of safety, understandable. For those who do it bcos "Im Daddy, i say so" is kind of... Abusive imho. Abusing your role so you remain satisfied in your relationship.

 

Anyway, do what you want. I don't care what you and your SO do. This isn't a personal attack, its a disagreement. And I never swore at you as if I said go fuck yourself or something. I responded to your post and I swore mate, sorry for the disconnect. I hope I cleared up my statements tho, if there was any confusion!

 

This a great forum to learn and discuss and I wouldn't want to be seen as censoring your pov. Im not an admin, i cant delete your opinions! Feel free to disagree with me and I will be more than happy to engage in conversation with anyone's opinion

[Michael]

Why is it usually that the little is restricted in who they can talk too? I almost never see daddy's that have a policy of "not talking to other little's".

 

I think there's a deep belief here by some that a little will immediately be submissive towards any daddy, and that you have to keep that from happening, because god forbid she meets the perfect super dominant ultra daddy who will steal her away from you with his macho dominance! It's just insecurity being covered up as "I'm looking out for you", but deep down, we all know the daddy is just looking out for his own self interest in preserving the status quo and not get their fragile ego damaged.

 

I see lots of posts in this topic along the lines of "men are creeps" and about people having bad experiences with men, and stuff like that, but if that's the case, isn't that even more of a reason to not ever put yourself in a position where a man is controlling who you can talk too?

[HeCallsMePrincess]

i realize i wasnt very clear in my response before. my Daddy/Dom/HUSBAND also doesnt talk to other Littles that i'm not friends with. he talked to one that wasnt friends with me, and she immediately was trying to make him feel sorry for her because she was "so lonely" and her daddy is so far away. turns out? she doesnt even have one. i sniffed that out and shut it down just as fast, if not faster, than he does for me. it goes both ways and considering we've been together for 10 and a half years, we're clearly doing something right.

[Guest Candy Minx ♡]

Because I have a daddy, I don't really feel the need to be friends with other daddies. My daddy is all I need and want. I think daddies are protecting their littles when they make those rules. There are a TON of so called "daddies" that aren't really true daddies that are just looking for someone to use. That happened to me before.

 

So don't always assume it's because a daddy is insecure or that it shouldn't be a rule. Rules are made and accepted by both dom/sub - daddy/little, and there are always reasons for them that aren't anyone's business but theirs.

 

i don't generally see it as protecting by telling someone they aren't allowed to

speak to another gender, defining rules based on someone's gender just seems..

sexist, really. yes, daddies are suppose to protect their littles but they're also 

suppose to guide them, as a caregiver telling someone flat out not to talk to someone

because they have a penis isn't guiding, it's not teaching them how to be able to

judge people in the real world and walk away with knowledge that allows them to 

make informed and conscience decisions. it's fine if people want to cherrypick

what being a caregiver/dom is to them but it doesn't feel right to flat out demand

that someone doesn't talk to another based on gender.

 

i love that my Daddy wants to protect me but it i'd rather have him assist with 

figuring a judgement on someone to allow into my life over straight up telling

me 'no you can't talk to him'. having my Daddy there to give me a viewpoint

from a male/daddy is wonderful because i don't always think in the same manner

he does. but i also adore the fact that my Daddy trusts me enough and is secure

enough in our relationship to let me judge and do what i think is right for me. what

Michael said about relationships being between two people and how a dom shouldn't

affect him being friends with someone's little is on point af. 

 

and yes, some PEOPLE are creeps.. not just men, i see the excuse used that you

see a lot of personals by daddies who don't contribute to the forums but i also see

females doing it, too. i've seen more females roll into chat/status messages begging

for daddies and no one bats an eyelash. the moment a male does it, he gets meanmugged--

and some PEOPLE out there like to use others to get what they want and i'm not

shoving blame onto those who it happens to, i'm not victim shaming or the like but

in cases like these? being able to judge someone for yourself is mad helpful, it's a

super important life skill that should be learned and can't be if someone is telling you

that you're not allowed to talk to others. i've had friends who swear off men because

they keep getting cheated on but i'd get my head bitten off if i suggested maybe

figuring out how to be a better judge of character and take things slow. same applies

here. 

 

i, personally, would LOVE to have more friends who identify with a daddy/mommy role.

to have more people to share this dynamic with who just aren't littles.. sometimes people

like to blanket over being an adult by claiming littlestatus. well, despite the fact someone

is a little/sub/middle/etc they're still adults. they're adults first. 

 

 

all that being said, all we have to go on is assumptions until other parties share their views,

specially something over 'no my little can't talk to other daddies' because on any given day

i've seen it here that it's a red flag for a over controlling dom and could be used as an

introduction into an abusive relationship and that can have ill affect on someone's mental

status/health. we can assume and voice that it shouldn't be a rule because we're all 

entitled to our opinions and have to respect that someone may or may not disagree with us.

it becomes someone else's business when it's shared so that the public can view it, you're

deciding to share that information with us - you're letting us in and no one can get upset

over what any other party thinks. but, to an extent, i agree that if it's between two consenting

adults that it should be left alone. but sometimes, even if the sub/little/middle party is consenting

they may or may not know that it's damaging to them on a mental/emotional level. 

Edited February 7, 2017 by ☄ Cosmic Pengu ☆

[pengudaddy]

I think there's a deep belief here by some that a little will immediately be submissive towards any daddy, and that you have to keep that from happening, because god forbid she meets the perfect super dominant ultra daddy who will steal her away from you with his macho dominance!

I constantly have to stop myself from actively messaging littles here. ESPECIALLY if their Daddies say they cant talk to me, because of this reason.

[James.]

It seems Michael has stirred up quite a debate with this topic, haha. I suppose I'll chime in with my 2 cents worth.

 

While it is true that there are many cases of insecure doms, I have to disagree with what some have said about this always coming from a place of insecurity or  "abusing your role." There have been multiple examples given wherein the reason has to do with safety or even just to prevent unwanted attention from random doms. It's also not quite accurate to say that this is exclusive to ddlg. It's really pretty common in bdsm as a whole. There's a even a whole dynamic where a dominant will protect a sub who is "unowned" (And usually new) by giving her a protection collar. This signals to other dominants that they must first go though him before talking to the submissive. Sometimes the dominant doing the protecting is considering her as his sub, but often this is a platonic agreement. Despite our best intentions, the bdsm community is often a scary and dangerous place. There is reason to sometimes be cautious when meeting new people.

 

Having restrictions on who the submissive is able to talk to, especially online, is also common in bdsm outside of ddlg. It is often the case that those wishing to interact with the submissive must first speak to the dom. This is generally a matter of respect. By not following this clearly stated rule, they show the dom that they do not respect him, and additionally, do not respect the sub who they wish to talk to. This is a very good way to weed out those who would have bad intentions. I actually did something similar with my last little. She had a number of people on her friends list before meeting me, who I didn't want interacting with her (I don't remember all of them specifically, but I know of at least 2 of these people who ended up getting banned later on). It wasn't that I didn't trust her, or was afraid that these guys could "steal her away," but many of them did seem predatory/creepy and they weren't the type of people I wanted talking to her. She was definitely a bit naive and was the type to assume everyone had good intentions.  After we cleared out her friends list a bit, some of the behavior from these people made her uncomfortable (checking her profile every few minutes, multiple times a day, and over the course of multiple weeks.) She decided she'd feel most comfortable not even friending any Daddies unless they were close friends of mine, and I wanted her to get to know them. This was a decision she made herself, and was more "controlling" than what I had originally planned to do. But she didn't use the forum a whole lot, definitely not as much as I do, and trusted me make a judgement about who should and shouldn't talk to her. She didn't easily pick up on certain behavior from others, so she took comfort in letting me decide for her.

 

When you look at this from the perspective of a long distance relationship, even a vanilla one, this type of thing makes sense as well. You may trust your partner, but being long distance, it's easy to have doubts about certain things. When it comes down to it, you often can't be for sure that your partner is going to be faithful. A lot of partners find that it puts their mind at ease to put some mutual restrictions when it comes to being alone with people, friending certain people online, etc. Often, it's a matter of showing their commitment by somewhat restricting themselves in this way. For example, even if one partner trusts the other to be alone with someone who they could potentially cheat with, the fact that they have gone out of their way not to put themselves in that position in the first place, can be quite reassuring. Long distance is hard, and people deal with it in different ways. If this helps some people deal with the distance, then I don't see a problem with it. It is only when it comes from a deep level of insecurity, and not the innate insecurity that comes from being in a long distance relationship, that you begin to see issues. Where you draw the line is debatable, and in the end, up to those involved.

 

Additionally, those who have a very deeps D/s dynamic, specifically those in some sort of Master/slave relationship, often enjoy this level of control, just for the sake of it. It isn't always something the sub is forced into. She may crave this level of possessiveness and enjoy the restrictions in place. Whether for the safety aspect as listed by others, or simply to deepen the feeling of ownership her dom has over her. Some may have a hard time understanding why a submissive would want this, but I encourage you to keep everything in perspective. Most vanillas would view a typical ddlg relationship as "controlling." Having one partner hurt(spank) the other because she didn't follow his rules would seem abusive to many. If something's not your bag, that's fine, but it may be for others. I think it's best to reserve judgments of other people as insecure, abusive, etc., unless they display very obvious examples of this behavior. It is a common mistake to attribute motive to someone's actions where it either doesn't exist or is inaccurate. 

 

At the end of the day, any power exchange involves one person executing a certain level of control over the other. The level of control varies between each individual relationship, but it's always there. There are some who want a little bit and some who want a lot, but as it has been stated many time on this forum, "there's no right way to do it." The relationship is what you make it, and what separates any level of control from abuse is the consensual agreement that has been made between both partners. As long as they both know exactly what it entails and have consented to it, there's nothing inherently wrong with controlling or being controlled in any particular way.

[Guest Candy Minx ♡]

It seems Michael has stirred up quite a debate with this topic, haha. I suppose I'll chime in with my 2 cents worth.

 

While it is true that there are many cases of insecure doms, I have to disagree with what some have said about this always coming from a place of insecurity or  "abusing your role." There have been multiple examples given wherein the reason has to do with safety or even just to prevent unwanted attention from random doms. It's also not quite accurate to say that this is exclusive to ddlg. It's really pretty common in bdsm as a whole. There's a even a whole dynamic where a dominant will protect a sub who is "unowned" (And usually new) by giving her a protection collar. This signals to other dominants that they must first go though him before talking to the submissive. Sometimes the dominant doing the protecting is considering her as his sub, but often this is a platonic agreement. Despite our best intentions, the bdsm community is often a scary and dangerous place. There is reason to sometimes be cautious when meeting new people.

 

Having restrictions on who the submissive is able to talk to, especially online, is also common in bdsm outside of ddlg. It is often the case that those wishing to interact with the submissive must first speak to the dom. This is generally a matter of respect. By not following this clearly stated rule, they show the dom that they do not respect him, and additionally, do not respect the sub who they wish to talk to. This is a very good way to weed out those who would have bad intentions. I actually did something similar with my last little. She had a number of people on her friends list before meeting me, who I didn't want interacting with her (I don't remember all of them specifically, but I know of at least 2 of these people who ended up getting banned later on). It wasn't that I didn't trust her, or was afraid that these guys could "steal her away," but many of them did seem predatory/creepy and they weren't the type of people I wanted talking to her. She was definitely a bit naive and was the type to assume everyone had good intentions.  After we cleared out her friends list a bit, some of the behavior from these people made her uncomfortable (checking her profile every few minutes, multiple times a day, and over the course of multiple weeks.) She decided she'd feel most comfortable not even friending any Daddies unless they were close friends of mine, and I wanted her to get to know them. This was a decision she made herself, and was more "controlling" than what I had originally planned to do. But she didn't use the forum a whole lot, definitely not as much as I do, and trusted me make a judgement about who should and shouldn't talk to her. She didn't easily pick up on certain behavior from others, so she took comfort in letting me decide for her.

 

When you look at this from the perspective of a long distance relationship, even a vanilla one, this type of thing makes sense as well. You may trust your partner, but being long distance, it's easy to have doubts about certain things. When it comes down to it, you often can't be for sure that your partner is going to be faithful. A lot of partners find that it puts their mind at ease to put some mutual restrictions when it comes to being alone with people, friending certain people online, etc. Often, it's a matter of showing their commitment by somewhat restricting themselves in this way. For example, even if one partner trusts the other to be alone with someone who they could potentially cheat with, the fact that they have gone out of their way not to put themselves in that position in the first place, can be quite reassuring. Long distance is hard, and people deal with it in different ways. If this helps some people deal with the distance, then I don't see a problem with it. It is only when it comes from a deep level of insecurity, and not the innate insecurity that comes from being in a long distance relationship, that you begin to see issues. Where you draw the line is debatable, and in the end, up to those involved.

 

Additionally, those who have a very deeps D/s dynamic, specifically those in some sort of Master/slave relationship, often enjoy this level of control, just for the sake of it. It isn't always something the sub is forced into. She may crave this level of possessiveness and enjoy the restrictions in place. Whether for the safety aspect as listed by others, or simply to deepen the feeling of ownership her dom has over her. Some may have a hard time understanding why a submissive would want this, but I encourage you to keep everything in perspective. Most vanillas would view a typical ddlg relationship as "controlling." Having one partner hurt(spank) the other because she didn't follow his rules would seem abusive to many. If something's not your bag, that's fine, but it may be for others. I think it's best to reserve judgments of other people as insecure, abusive, etc., unless they display very obvious examples of this behavior. It is a common mistake to attribute motive to someone's actions where it either doesn't exist or is inaccurate. 

 

At the end of the day, any power exchange involves one person executing a certain level of control over the other. The level of control varies between each individual relationship, but it's always there. There are some who want a little bit and some who want a lot, but as it has been stated many time on this forum, "there's no right way to do it." The relationship is what you make it, and what separates any level of control from abuse is the consensual agreement that has been made between both partners. As long as they both know exactly what it entails and have consented to it, there's nothing inherently wrong with controlling or being controlled in any particular way.

 

i honestly agree with a whole lot of what you had to say here, lots of it was true!

'specially since i find myself in a ldr but there's quite a large part of me that has

noticed - which was the fire behind my post - that a lot of those who decide to

go the whole cutting off of talking to other doms aren't necessarily apart of 

a dom/sub agreement. more so on THIS website in particular, i say this because

a lot of the people here come here uneducated and with open minds to learn,

that being said it feels kind of like a teaching website. when you google ddlg/cgl

things this website is usually the top result if not on the first page within the first

few results given - people who don't know what they're doing come here to figure

out how to do things and quite a large chunk of them have found out about this

dynamic through some other kind of social media that usually presents it in the

wrong light. so, at least i feel, on this website more than a good part of the time

it's two people engaging in something with little 'proper' knowledge on how to do

it. my viewpoints were MOSTLY specific to this forum. not that i needed to reply

to make that clear to you, but just to make it clear to everyone as a whole. 

 

this being a place of learning isn't at all bad, it's great for the most part, but it's

also part of the reason people who just aren't informed with something more than

they read on tumblr or instagram give off this air of being controlling or insecure.

i see it daily where people assume that just because this isn't a vanilla relationship

that somehow the participants magically don't have feelings, or aren't human, can't

have a certain kind of care because they roll with a particular role. people who figure

that once cgl/ddlg is what fuels their relationships everything has to change. i beyond agree

with the fact to each their own, that each person and ship will have different ways of

doing things.

 

i guess what i'm getting at is that a lot of people here are learning, not necessarily doing it

'wrong' but there are more than a handful of people new to the bdsm world passing through

here and can't always differentiate from the control of a dom and the control of an abuser

( hell, i'm still learning about all there is out there. i am by no means an expert but i know

that by being new you're not necessarily able to immediately understand the dynamics of the

many types of different relationships that world of bdsm has to offer ). or people who don't

get that not every relationship is going to be the same way and try to  enforce things they

think they need to because they saw someone else doing it or think they're doing wrong

by their relationship by not having something another has. even seeing some of the topics

made by people asking if something is wrong with them because they don't like a certain

something worries me when knowing those are the impressionable types misinterpreting

things. it's not my job to make sure everyone is safe, well educated and leaving with dry

eyes but i still really, really do think that a lot of people come here with the wrong idea or

no idea at all. like this is literally the perfect place for people to prey on others - not to

mention that there are people out there who we can't keep off of the forum who are unable

to care for themselves on a mental/emotional level or flat out refuse to do so and that could

easily become something toxic and damaging. 

 

but yeah, Michael's thread did manage to stir up quite a debate! i suppose i was super over

seeing people throw down being a little as an excuse to not remember that they're still adults

and responsible for what they say and do and will be held accountable for their actions. or that

littles need to be loved and protected and completely disregard the fact that they are still adults -

or that the caregivers out there are less in the face of a little ( or even the fact people can so

easily decide to be sexist against the males who claim caregiver status, biased because of a

penis. and everyone who bases their opinion on a gender as a whole instead of someone as

an individual -- stuff that also happens here a lot ). even in here it seems that i've seen it used

for as an excuse for certain behaviors and all that other nonsense.

[Daddy's_Babygirl]

Why is it usually that the little is restricted in who they can talk too? I almost never see daddy's that have a policy of "not talking to other little's".

 

I think there's a deep belief here by some that a little will immediately be submissive towards any daddy, and that you have to keep that from happening, because god forbid she meets the perfect super dominant ultra daddy who will steal her away from you with his macho dominance! It's just insecurity being covered up as "I'm looking out for you", but deep down, we all know the daddy is just looking out for his own self interest in preserving the status quo and not get their fragile ego damaged.

 

I see lots of posts in this topic along the lines of "men are creeps" and about people having bad experiences with men, and stuff like that, but if that's the case, isn't that even more of a reason to not ever put yourself in a position where a man is controlling who you can talk too?

 

I can't answer why it's mostly littles because as I said this isn't the case in my relationship. Maybe Daddys don't state it as often or maybe they don't follow it, I don't know.

 

For me I don't feel that men are inherently creeps. I think there are good men and bad men, good women and bad women. I think I am generally a decent judge of character... face to face. Behind a screen? I don't know. I haven't had enough interaction to say really, and even if I had more interaction it's easy to hide behind a screen.

 

I don't think that the littles who are truly consenting to this do so lightly or without thought. I don't think we see it as "controlling", truthfully. I can't speak for everyone here... but I actually feel quiet special with this rule in place. Daddy following it too makes it that much more special. It makes me feel super loved. I don't feel abused or controlled in the slightest. I reckon... to each their own. I do feel my Daddy is possessive... and I quiet like it that way.

[Little Illy]

Why is it usually that the little is restricted in who they can talk too? I almost never see daddy's that have a policy of "not talking to other little's".

 

I think there's a deep belief here by some that a little will immediately be submissive towards any daddy, and that you have to keep that from happening, because god forbid she meets the perfect super dominant ultra daddy who will steal her away from you with his macho dominance! It's just insecurity being covered up as "I'm looking out for you", but deep down, we all know the daddy is just looking out for his own self interest in preserving the status quo and not get their fragile ego damaged.

 

I see lots of posts in this topic along the lines of "men are creeps" and about people having bad experiences with men, and stuff like that, but if that's the case, isn't that even more of a reason to not ever put yourself in a position where a man is controlling who you can talk too?

 

Michael you tend to hit on a ton of good points.

 

Another caveat I would like to highlight is a simple one - I think people need to realize that not every little has the intention of submitting to every Daddy they talk to. Just like not every Daddy (or Big) has the intentions of dominating every little they talk to. To think this is accurate, IN MY OPINION, is somewhat damaging. As Ive said before - restrict communication with those who pose a true and distinct threat, but not those based on the "role" they are (who they are as a person).

 

But everything, as always, comes back to trust. I trust my Daddy would never Dom another just like he trusts I would never submit to another. Because of this, we are free to form many types of friendships. And, EVEN MORE BENEFICIAL, we are able to communicate when we feel someone is crossing the line. Thus taking the appropriate actions. Typically most littles and Bigs will respect a person's relationship status as long as that status is made clear from the beginning. It is the case when people who are vague on their status where you see a lot of complaints of "creeps" or talking to multiple people....

[Little Illy]

It seems Michael has stirred up quite a debate with this topic, haha. I suppose I'll chime in with my 2 cents worth.

 

While it is true that there are many cases of insecure doms, I have to disagree with what some have said about this always coming from a place of insecurity or  "abusing your role." There have been multiple examples given wherein the reason has to do with safety or even just to prevent unwanted attention from random doms. It's also not quite accurate to say that this is exclusive to ddlg. It's really pretty common in bdsm as a whole. There's a even a whole dynamic where a dominant will protect a sub who is "unowned" (And usually new) by giving her a protection collar. This signals to other dominants that they must first go though him before talking to the submissive. Sometimes the dominant doing the protecting is considering her as his sub, but often this is a platonic agreement. Despite our best intentions, the bdsm community is often a scary and dangerous place. There is reason to sometimes be cautious when meeting new people.

 

Having restrictions on who the submissive is able to talk to, especially online, is also common in bdsm outside of ddlg. It is often the case that those wishing to interact with the submissive must first speak to the dom. This is generally a matter of respect. By not following this clearly stated rule, they show the dom that they do not respect him, and additionally, do not respect the sub who they wish to talk to. This is a very good way to weed out those who would have bad intentions. I actually did something similar with my last little. She had a number of people on her friends list before meeting me, who I didn't want interacting with her (I don't remember all of them specifically, but I know of at least 2 of these people who ended up getting banned later on). It wasn't that I didn't trust her, or was afraid that these guys could "steal her away," but many of them did seem predatory/creepy and they weren't the type of people I wanted talking to her. She was definitely a bit naive and was the type to assume everyone had good intentions.  After we cleared out her friends list a bit, some of the behavior from these people made her uncomfortable (checking her profile every few minutes, multiple times a day, and over the course of multiple weeks.) She decided she'd feel most comfortable not even friending any Daddies unless they were close friends of mine, and I wanted her to get to know them. This was a decision she made herself, and was more "controlling" than what I had originally planned to do. But she didn't use the forum a whole lot, definitely not as much as I do, and trusted me make a judgement about who should and shouldn't talk to her. She didn't easily pick up on certain behavior from others, so she took comfort in letting me decide for her.

 

When you look at this from the perspective of a long distance relationship, even a vanilla one, this type of thing makes sense as well. You may trust your partner, but being long distance, it's easy to have doubts about certain things. When it comes down to it, you often can't be for sure that your partner is going to be faithful. A lot of partners find that it puts their mind at ease to put some mutual restrictions when it comes to being alone with people, friending certain people online, etc. Often, it's a matter of showing their commitment by somewhat restricting themselves in this way. For example, even if one partner trusts the other to be alone with someone who they could potentially cheat with, the fact that they have gone out of their way not to put themselves in that position in the first place, can be quite reassuring. Long distance is hard, and people deal with it in different ways. If this helps some people deal with the distance, then I don't see a problem with it. It is only when it comes from a deep level of insecurity, and not the innate insecurity that comes from being in a long distance relationship, that you begin to see issues. Where you draw the line is debatable, and in the end, up to those involved.

 

Additionally, those who have a very deeps D/s dynamic, specifically those in some sort of Master/slave relationship, often enjoy this level of control, just for the sake of it. It isn't always something the sub is forced into. She may crave this level of possessiveness and enjoy the restrictions in place. Whether for the safety aspect as listed by others, or simply to deepen the feeling of ownership her dom has over her. Some may have a hard time understanding why a submissive would want this, but I encourage you to keep everything in perspective. Most vanillas would view a typical ddlg relationship as "controlling." Having one partner hurt(spank) the other because she didn't follow his rules would seem abusive to many. If something's not your bag, that's fine, but it may be for others. I think it's best to reserve judgments of other people as insecure, abusive, etc., unless they display very obvious examples of this behavior. It is a common mistake to attribute motive to someone's actions where it either doesn't exist or is inaccurate. 

 

At the end of the day, any power exchange involves one person executing a certain level of control over the other. The level of control varies between each individual relationship, but it's always there. There are some who want a little bit and some who want a lot, but as it has been stated many time on this forum, "there's no right way to do it." The relationship is what you make it, and what separates any level of control from abuse is the consensual agreement that has been made between both partners. As long as they both know exactly what it entails and have consented to it, there's nothing inherently wrong with controlling or being controlled in any particular way.

 

Very astute points, James. I agree with everything - but it is arguable that, at the end of the day, the level of control is also present during the lack of consent. For example, when I talk to Daddies, if anything is said I have this inherent need to go straight to my Daddy and we discuss. That level of control is ingrained. Not only does it allow me to meet new people (because he isn't on the forum as much) but also allows him to vet if needed. But because I know he has the ultimate say in who I can associate with, I will always share my interactions with him. But, in our case, it just isn't pragmatic to have him vet every single Daddy that wants to be my friend. Neither of us have that kind of time. 

 

As I stated in my most recent reply, being very clear on your status in any power-exchange dynamic also eliminates a ton of these issues.  And, with everything else in the BDSM/DDlg community, it all comes down to what works for the couple. If restricting puts them at peace and makes them happy, huzzah! If open communication is preferred, wootzor! Whatever works is what is best.

[MrWrongUk]

I think its normal. If you met a little you love would you want every hard dude online talking to her? But it should be the littles choice not the daddys. I find those kind of demands kinda creepy.

[MrWrongUk]

But saying that i would not want to get close to a little that talks to every daddy she meets,but thats just me.

[EbonyKittenPrincess]

Why is it usually that the little is restricted in who they can talk too? I almost never see daddy's that have a policy of "not talking to other little's".

 

I think there's a deep belief here by some that a little will immediately be submissive towards any daddy, and that you have to keep that from happening, because god forbid she meets the perfect super dominant ultra daddy who will steal her away from you with his macho dominance! It's just insecurity being covered up as "I'm looking out for you", but deep down, we all know the daddy is just looking out for his own self interest in preserving the status quo and not get their fragile ego damaged.

 

I see lots of posts in this topic along the lines of "men are creeps" and about people having bad experiences with men, and stuff like that, but if that's the case, isn't that even more of a reason to not ever put yourself in a position where a man is controlling who you can talk too?

 

Well, it has nothing to do with the reasons why I don’t talk to daddies, but Daddy-Dom-boyfriend also doesn’t talk with/befriends other girls I don’t know anything about without my allowance too.

 

Because I’m a jealous kitten x3

 

I see people coming with the « lack of  trust » thing, but it is not. I trust Daddy like I never trusted anyone, and there is no strong enough metaphor to tell how much I trust him. It’s just that I am jealous, it is the way I am, and he’s jealous too. We’re both possessive freaks and we’re doing well with that. I believe that when it comes to this, it’s like everything else : it is ok if you and your partner have the same point of view. If not, the relationship can become abusive on a side like on the other. But we kinda both suffers from a fear of abandon and being with a possessive partner helps, so yeah it’s maybe not « healthy » but we’re still doing great and this summer we’ll celebrate our three years together. Td ;lr I’m jealous, he’s jealous, we both jealously happy xD

 

Concerning the second point, I totally agree…buuuut, sometimes you just need control. I need control. This rule wasn’t even Daddy’s though, it’s mine. But I agree that, if you had bad experiences, it is a tough topic.

[EbonyKittenPrincess]

It should be the littles choice not the daddys. I find those kind of demands kinda creepy.

 

EXACTLY

[EbonyKittenPrincess]

And, with everything else in the BDSM/DDlg community, it all comes down to what works for the couple. If restricting puts them at peace and makes them happy, huzzah! If open communication is preferred, wootzor! Whatever works is what is best.

 

I 900% agree with that. It is what works for you.

[Cold Princess]

I think this is more of a personal preference in a relationship. Whither it be a vanilla or kink relationships there will be boundaries and rules applied to all!

 

Personally I will always tell my daddy if I feel like someone is flirting or trying to get in my pants. Only then will I ask my daddy for his opinion if I can still be friends with these people. Of course the answer is always no. Let's be honest who wouldn't be jelly if your partner gets flirted with? I honestly have a bit of a sadistic streak and would loves to see papa green with jealousy ❤

 

My daddy has made it very VERY clear he does not want me talking to other daddies. Reasons being he does not want me to be stolen, he wants me to be the only daddy I talk to. I also agree with this rule because it gives him a peace of mind but mainly because I respect his boundaries. Putting yourself in his shoes.

 

My papa let's me make whatever friends I want other than daddies. I just need to tell him if something is fishy is all. Me and my papa has set this rule together as adults and can be changed if needed or case to case basis.

 

Remember all relationships are different and if they have a rule of no talking to other daddies so be it I hope my post has been useful to you, have a wonderful day and keep trucking on in life!

[Guest SifuTheWolf]

I for one do not let my little friend/message other Daddy/Dom types. For starters because it has been my experience that the vast number of Daddy/Dom types that contact her have only one thing in mind even though her profile says she isn't interested, 2nd, I don't need my little listening to some other guys ideas about what he likes or finds important, she only needs to concern herself with pleasing one person and that's me. As far as my little is concerned if I have the time to talk to a little it better be her and I feel the same way about her talking to other Daddy's. Her time is better spent talking to other littles whose conversation and friendship actually have the opportunity to be of benefit to her.

[-LittleDisneyPrincess]

You are your boyfriend's sub, but the effects of that should only be felt by you and your boyfriend. For example, if I want to be your friend, I shouldn't be effected by whether your dom approves of us or not; because the power exchange is between you and him, and should be kept private and not influence your other relationships, friendships, or interactions with people.

 

Aren't we all adults at the end of the day? Surely you can at least correctly judge the types of people to befriend, without letting your daddy have to approve for you (probably based on what little information he has to go on). This type of stuff gives doms too much power, and shouldn't be so common, because abusive doms can take advantage to isolate a little from helpful people.

I understand what you are saying but, I want my dom to have that much power, so I openly and consensually give it to him. If I wasn't okay with it, all I'd have to do is say, and it's something he wouldn't do. Y'know?

[Guest Kittehmuffin]

I've never had any restrictions put on me that way from a Daddy. My first made it clear he didn't be like me talking to other men, specific men at that, but he trusted me enough to allow it. He was possessive and I was his and it was an exclusive relationship. My 2nd was poly relationship and there were no restrictions on speaking to anyone either. The trust was in the love and care we had for each other, though he didn't want me to have another Daddy, talking was fine.

 

Even though I'm little/middle or however you wish to term it I don't know how I would feel having such strong limitations put on me for just talking. Perhaps it would be ok if it were mutual...but I'd wonder about why I couldn't be trusted to just talk if it were exclusive. Would be hard to come from a poly background where there's was a lot of openness and freedom to not even being allowed to talk.