Youâre missing one very important point here: DDlg takes place between consenting adults. Also be aware that Littles are a broad spectrum; not all of them âact like kidsâ or âlook like kids.â Little run the gamut from those who enjoy a paci to those who enjoy climbing inside a blanket fort with a jar of PB and a spoon to those whose Littleness consists of little more than curling up with a Disney movie after a hard day at work. Educate yourself, and lose your misconceptions.
Before some time in the 1960âs it was widely held by psychologists, law enforcement, and clergy that men who sought fellatio from women were âlatent homosexuals.â Same with rear-entry âdoggie styleâ vaginal intercourse! These acts resembled what (authorities believed) gay men did, therefore it was secretly gay behavior.
Instead Caregiver/Littles in general and sexual DD/Lg in particular adopt and emulate a familiar power dynamic familiar to… well… everybody who wasnât born at age 21.
One could argue as Shulamuth Firestone did in Dialectics of Sex that the socially condoned custodial dynamics between all adults and all children is illegitimate and should be abolished.
One could argue that all forms of erotic power-exchange should be abolished because each in some way emulate some form of coercive exploitation.
One could even argue with, I guess, some small justification that regressing Littles in Cg/L represent adult colonization of childhood the way Marie Antoinetta colonized milkmaids.
But one would be mistaken to say Cg/L in general or DD/Lg in particular represent or endorse pedophiles.
Depending on your age youâre going to get one of two very different responses coming from two totally different parts of my brain.
True fact: In 20-odd years of actively parenting I donât think I ever once called my actual, live children or any of their friends âlittle boyâ or âlittle girl.â I donât even think it occurred to me! Itâs just not something youâd do, any more than youâd call your neighbor âgrown manâ or a business client âgrown woman.â
Meanwhile, if weâre D/Lg partners Iâm very likely to call you Little girl. Itâll almost certainly happen at least once if weâre playing. Â
What do you suppose the difference is between a small child, who Iâd never call âlittle girlâ and a grown woman, who Iâd call âLittle girlâ during kinky activities?
Right in one! If I call you âlittle girlâ itâs precisely because youâre not a little girl! Â
If you donât get that rather glaring difference you might mistake D/Lg for something worse. Itâs not. D/Lg is a kinky practice between capable, consenting adults.
And if youâre a $@!^!^ pedophile who canât get that obvious difference you might not understand why you get your festering ass called out and maybe the cops called everytime you try and pull âbut Iâm an âall ages Daddyââ bullshit on actual D/Lg kinksters. Because bullshit, youâre not âdoing kinkâ youâre doing criminal endangerment of a child.
D/Lg is fun because it bypasses all those âSubs shouldnât initiate or be on topâ stereotypes. Because itâs allllwaaaayyys ok for Littles to play Hop on Pop, shirtstarch! Always!
Daddy Iâm a dirty [racial/nationality] slut from disgusting [nation] who wants to get shamed on tour (sic) blog and hopefully raped in the endâ€ïž
Got this in a first-time direct message from an otherwise empty blog. I wonât explain why itâs both rude and beyond inappropriate.
I am curious why me though. Is there anything in my blog that suggests Iâd appreciate it? Welcome it? Be turned on by it? If there is please let me know so I can pull the plug!
I will say the poster should probably be ashamed of themselves. The nation theyâre from is fine and so are itâs people as a whole. Even if some individuals from there, like people from everywhere, are pretty gross.
Tip: say hi first. Establish some kind of connection. . Many tops are willing to consider humiliation and degradation play, and consensual non-consent play too. But not without a little context. Or maybe a lot.
Iâd rather not shame someone for their consensual kinks. But Iâm fine shaming anyone who tries it on someone without their consent. Thatâs just plain rude.
Dominance is not about control over a submissive. Dominance is about leading and the submissive following. These words have been said thousands of times by thousands of people. I suspect it will continue to be said for many years to come.
Submissives do not seek people to control them. They seek a leader that proves time and time again that they are qualified to follow.
Mistakes happen. Wrong decisions are made. Itâs how you handle those decisions that make you reliable and trustworthy.
Ok. So most vanilla people understand roleplaying games. Not everyone understands D/S or D/Lg. Theyâre really not the same things but you can actually get a lot of mileage out of comparing D/S and D/Lg to roleplaying games that you just happen to play most of the time.
If I really controlled you then you wouldnât be able to say things like âI donât like this game, I want to stop.â If I really controlled you then you couldnât say âyouâre being a chad, Iâm outta here.â Same if I was literally your custodial adult (though eww!) – I couldnât say âthis isnât working for meâ because Iâd have a moral and social as well as legal responsibility for you.
But I wouldnât really be the boss of you. You really wouldnât be a ward in chancery. Â
D/S and D/Lg are like roleplaying games – either one of us can call a timeout or walk off the field entirely if one of us isnât playing fair, isnât playing well, or is just phoning it in. Â
Like any game, D/S, D/Lg, and all other power-exchange relationships are 100% consensual and therefore âcontrolâ is always, always negotiable, re-negotiable, and revokable.
That sounds like a pretty huge red flag. Balance is key. A willingness to cut out (âforsakeâ) friends and family indicates some deep-rooted attachment and esteem issues. Iâd look into that before considering a relationship, much less marriage.
Yikes!  There are definite red flags in that ask. Just not the ones the anon worries about.
I often say kink relationships are at heart relationships but itâs particularly important to filter D/S out of this one and just look at its essentials.
1) Forsaking all others probably isnât a problem, but thereâs an easy way to find out.
âForsaking all othersâ has been part of the bog standard English wedding vows since before English was a language. (Back in the 11th Century they said âet omnes alias propter eam dimittere et illi soli adhaerereâ but it means basically the same thing.)
In other words âforsaking all othersâ just means âyou come firstâ and maybe âIâm making a monogamous commitment to you.â Also possibly âif you and my mom disagree Iâll side with you.â  Itâs meant those things for a very, very long time. Iâm surprised that anyone would find it surprising.
Relationship researchers do often warn that men have a tendency to center their social lives around their long-term romantic partners, including abdicating much of their social scheduling to them. On the other hand those same specialists note that women will often unconsciously work to isolate their partners from their previous social relationships. Neither of these are ominous or conspiratorial – itâs just something relationship partners need to watch out for. Â
If this is a concern for the anon they might want to might ask him what heâs thinking when he says it.
2) Wanting to âtestâ a prospective husband or wife (or Dom or Sub) is a big red flag
Asking him what he means by âforsaking all othersâ as opposed to, I donât know, maybe âputting him to various tests?â Because WT actual F?
My heart goes out to the anon. Â If theyâre thinking about putting their own relationship and their partnerâs emotional health at risk by performing âvarious testsâ then… theyâre suited for this relationship. Â
Trust issues or not, deliberately âtestingâ oneâs partner is a manipulative, passive-aggressive, cynical, and quintessentially vanilla thing to do. Itâs also abusive as hell.
I mean, one does obtain informed consent oneâs prospective partner before performing possibly emotionally-damaging tests on them â tests which may result in you summarily dumping them if they fail, right? Â Right?
If you tell someone youâre going to test them then unless theyâre âromanticâ to the point of oblivion then theyâll never be able to trust you. If one doesnât get their informed consent then one is unethical, immoral, and an abusive creep.
Testing is something one does to a thing. Itâs something performed on a subordinate. And once performed, whether they pass or fail, the tester will never be able to have a peer-to-peer relationship with the person tested.
Iâve advised bottoms to break it off with tops who say they need to âtestâ prospective partners. Â If I knew the anonâs Dom Iâd advise him to do the same with her.
The goal of human beings is to get rid of oneâs own shit without putting it on anyone else. Again, my heart goes out to the anon, but lightening her own trust issues by dumping them on someone else just… isnât a healthy approach.Â
Iâm a good little slut who loves being forced to take a big cock, but because I feel like I need to say it sometimes, Iâm still consenting. For me, even if I really donât want it, I take it anyway because thatâs what excites me and makes me squirt all over the fucking place.
