Posted by DR on June 24, 2005 at 06:53 [67.83.76.91]
In Reply to: Since.... posted by Mbob. on June 23, 2005 at 16:18
Hi Mbob,
Frankly, I can't pinpoint precisely when a relationship becomes more ageplay than BDSM, but I do want to respond to your comment here:
"There is a much deeper emotional factor in Ageplay that you can't duplicate through just general Master/Sub play. At least so far as I've seen. There is a much greater emotional attachment. Sure you need alot of emotional and physical attachment with being a Sub, but being a little girl encompasses much deeper feelings of trust. You can get deeper into a psyke that you don't see anywhere else."
Here's where I disagree. Here, I think you're mingling the terms "bottom" with "submissive," which are generally thought of as very different dynamics. Bottoms generally lack the emotional component that submissives have in excess.
Based on my experience, Master/slave and Dom/sub relationships can be just as emotionally deep and powerful as Daddy/LG relationships. I know many slaves and submissives who are as emotionally attached and dependent on their Masters and Doms as any LG would be to her Daddy. I would also say that the deeper one plunges into these relationship archetypes, the more they seem the same. That is, on the surface M/s seems very different from D/lg, but the deeper these couples go, the more their differences -- particularly the emotions -- seem to converge.
I also disagree that a LG can delve into a deeper psyche than a submissive can. Becoming "little" and staying there does require trust for many ageplayers (and even a lot of trust for some), but I know submissives and slaves who pour themselves into a headspace so thoroughly that they would crumble or melt away if not for their Masters or Doms bringing them back from the depths of their submission.
Daddy Steve also added some insightful remarks, which I also have found to be true. Thanks for a smart post Mbob.
Email: