Advertisement
This is a new term for me--but seems to describe fairly well what the dynamic is between myself and my current bf/bottom. Anyone have any comments on this type of relationship? Anyone else have any experience with it?
posted by:
|
SF Bay Area
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Unsu...
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Tue, April 29, 2008 - 9:38 PMI got slightly confused when I 1st looked at this because top didn't show up, but I've played with "fluffy tops" which is something else they're called. They love to give you want you want, whether it's a spanking or something like that. They can be lots of fun, but I'm more into the ones that tell me what to do and do things because it makes them happy and not necessariy me-ok kinda me too! :-)
So that's my little ole 2 cents worth.
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Wed, April 30, 2008 - 3:32 AMI was collared to someone briefly who for all intents and purposes was my service top. In that relationship the service was in that he served as kind of my mentor and taught me how things were done and insisted they be done that way, so while there was that DS/MS aspect, there was also a mentor/mentee relationship there.
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Wed, April 30, 2008 - 1:00 PMI have been called a fluffy service top more than once. I do like to take care of my bottoms. -
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Wed, April 30, 2008 - 5:34 PMI kind of wonder what you mean by Service Top. I sometimes am a service Top this way; sometimes my Master feels the urge to be "used" in some way...I also have Topped other people but really don't feel like I'm doing anything more than being of service to them by providing some sensations they crave. I'm just too submissive to be very Toppy but still like to whack on people.
I also really believe many, many Tops are in service to their community. I see it everywhere and am so happy to know that even Tops can give to others. -
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Wed, April 30, 2008 - 6:12 PMWell, I do a lot of daddy daughter play, and also just traditional "guy" stuff. I will give my subs rides, but them clothes, and other "fatherly" like things, and when a girl is living with me, I usually pay most of the household expenses.
I'm also the kind of guy to carry a woman's bags, open doors, pull out a chair, etc, regardless of our power dynamic.
Of course, I've also had subs that almost refuse any help, and want to be treated like a mule. I'm happy to oblige them, but I tend not to "fall" for girls like that. A well behaves "little princess" will melt my heart. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Wed, April 30, 2008 - 6:27 PMOoooooooo you sound like a nice Daddy! :-) I saw you briefly at the Flea Market. I'm usually at the front desk for Mistress Thorn. :-)
Dolores
-
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Wed, April 30, 2008 - 6:16 PMOn the few times I've topped, that's exactly how I have felt. I'm beating them for their pleasure and at their request and the thrill I'm getting from it is solely about turning them on and giving them pleasure. -
-
Oh Chasteguy...
Wed, April 30, 2008 - 8:16 PMI've seen the aftermath of one your scenes. You may think of yourself as a Service Oriented Top but, you're mean :-)
-
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Thu, May 1, 2008 - 7:28 AMLast year at Folsom Fringe, my name tag read "Fluffy Service Top." For some reason, almost everyone who read it laughed.
Domina
-
-
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Thu, May 1, 2008 - 2:49 AM*shrug* I'm a switch, so that might have something to do with it, but I never assume Top = Dominant. I've seen masochistic dominants and submissive sadists. I often top people as a service to them (which doesn't make me one ounce less cruel to their flesh) and the term "fluffy top" grates on me. I've known a top or two that were fluffy but not at all service oriented. I've seen service domination that was cruel enough to make me wince.
Meh.
Play however you want so long as nobody ends up in therapy or the ER as a result of it.
-
Unsu...
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Sun, May 4, 2008 - 4:06 PMService top is one of the titles that fit what I do.
I have put on events, shows and receptions for the community.
I have volunteered at many many play parties, served as a volunteer coordinator and
participated in community panels and events.
I have volunteered along side with my personal submissive at events that I have either put on or helped out with.
Service is something at all of the community can do. One does not have to be a submissive to offer service.
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Wed, May 14, 2008 - 11:34 PMI first learned the term when I arrived in CA 1.5 years ago. I do not fall into the fluffy service category in the slightest. I warm up as little as I can get away with, and leave heavy marks. I do like to enable and shape those who serve me, but I see this more as maintenance and creation than as service because I'm doing what I want to have happen to them and it is certainly not out of a desire to please them. I do desire that the one serving me be happy, but I see that as being purely practical. I also have no remorse when it comes to taking every last ounce of what is available to me from the submissive person. I hunger for submission, devour it even. I love having someone scrub the floors, stack my paperwork, or even suck the sand off of my toes after a walk on the beach. Zero misgivings about what is a happy experience for me, provided it is a happy experience for the one serving me as well.
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Tue, June 3, 2008 - 1:50 PMThere's nothing inherently wrong with being a service top, provided it works for both people in the relationship. IMHO, it is destructive to a healthy D/s dynamic, though. There's a difference between being a top, a dom, and a daddy, and one size definitely doesn't fit all. People really need to find out what works best for them.
In fact, I blogged extensively about this topic just yesterday. Identifying as a dominant, rather than as a top, I have a strong resistance to being a service top. It's not what I want for Myself, and not something I care to experience in a relationship. That doesn't mean it's wrong; it's just wrong for Me.
Your mileage may vary. -
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Tue, June 3, 2008 - 2:19 PMThere are dominant bottoms. Are you saying that a relationship with a dominant bottom and a submissive top is a bad relationship? I'd say any stable, working relationship is healthy.
Domina -
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Tue, June 3, 2008 - 3:37 PMWhy would you choose to ignore My entire first paragraph--or most of the rest of My post, for that matter? Are you just trolling for an argument? Do you genuinely feel that other people's opinions are not as valuable as your own? Inquiring minds want to know.
Since we apparently both agree that any relationship that works for the people involved is fine for them, I'm not even clear on what your point of contention is. -
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Wed, June 4, 2008 - 3:36 PMBecause you said it was destructive to a healthy D/s dynamic. Leading one to wonder if you consider a dominant bottom/submissive top dynamic to be a sick relationship.
Domina -
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Wed, June 4, 2008 - 5:26 PMi've know some really nurturing and caretaking Dominants. Those are the ones that i would call "service" Tops. Yes, they tend to run into the "Daddy/Mommy" genre, but just because someone is Dominants doesn't mean they can't be loving and caring. i've also known (what i consider to be) service Tops that are tough disciplinarians and wicked sadists, there was/is nothing "fluffy" about them in that way. It 's just that they enjoy caring for and nurturing their subs/slaves. That doesn't mean that they are "in service" because all that they give is completely under their control.
i remember reading a story in a book by Jack Rinella (the title escapes me at the moment) in which he described a long term M/s relationship in which the slave became very ill. The Master spent quite a bit of time taking care of the slave and to all outward appearances it looked like the roles were reversed. It's not the act that creates the dynamic, but where in the heart that dynamic comes from. In another book i read:
Slave : i drive because i serve
Master : i drive because i want to be in control
Same act, different reasons. As i said it all depends on where your heart is. -
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Thu, June 5, 2008 - 1:43 PMActually, a dominant who is NOT caring and supportive of his/her submissive is not a dominant at all in my book. We have the duty to take care of our slaves and submissives when they are ill or in a crisis situation. And we are supposed to help them to become the best that they can be.
Personally, I think it's wonderful when it works both ways, and our submissives or slaves can help us to become better people, too.
Domina -
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Thu, June 5, 2008 - 4:55 PMI'm just trying to figure out how a person would define a "service oriented Top." I mean, is a Service Submissive one who just does service, no romantic involvement? How would that apply as a Top? A Top that only provides service to a bottom without romantic involvement? I'm a little confused (and this is an old thread and I'm a lazy sub that doesn't want to read all the previous posts from long ago.) -
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Thu, June 5, 2008 - 5:39 PMWhy would there be no romantic involvement? If the couple were romantically inclined, there is certainly nothing wrong with that.
Service tops (And I'm not one, which is why the "Fluffy Service Top" name badge got so many laughs) "do" a submissive or bottom the way that submissive or bottom wants to be done. For instance, my submissives both like to be hit on the back. Neither of them likes being hit on the butt. If I were really a service top, I would hit them ONLY where they want to be hit, with toys they enjoy, in ways they like. I'm not. And I LOVE using canes. While I have nothing against hitting them on the back, I definitely enjoy using canes, straps, and paddles on butts and especially thighs. And I do. If I'm feeling nice, I might single tail their backs for extensive periods. If I were really a fluffy service top, I concentrate on their backs when playing and do little or no butt caning.
There is nothing wrong with being a service top. Or a dominant bottom. It's always whatever works for people.
As for emotional content, some relationships are for other reasons than emotional involvement. Some are because the people involved are in love. Some involve service and some mild emotion. It all depends on what works for that couple or group.
Domina -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Thu, June 5, 2008 - 6:02 PMMaybe I said that because this is in the description of this tribe;
"Do you love pleasing your partner in ways that may not always be sexual? Do you enjoy cooking for them? giving them massages, manicures, pedicures... helping around the house or perhaps being a personal assistant? If so, we welcome you to join us."
I guess I'm thinking of this Service Top question more along the lines mentioned above...service...but not the sexual kind. No whippy whappy.
-
-
Re: Service Oriented Tops?
Fri, June 6, 2008 - 12:03 PMThis is a tribe for people who are into service. If your only service is sexual service, then it's probably not for you. But the description does not preclude sexual service, it merely relegates it to one of many possible services you can perform for your dominant. And I regard sexual service as nice, but not the main focus of my relationship. (Of course, tastes differ.)
The people on this tribe are diverse. Some are in loving relationships, some are in relationships that are service oriented, and affection is not a major concern. Some are in relationships where training in various skills is paramount and where there may be respect, but no overt affection. It's all good.
Domina
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
