Re: Causality (F/M, FF/M) (Part 17 Added - 25/07/23)
Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2023 10:43 am
Written very professionally!
A Site dedicated to stories about Tie Up Experiences!
https://www.tugstories.blog/
I realize that this is still marginally earlier in their arrangement, but I'm a little surprised that the narrator isn't sure by now whether his actions caused the increased level of gag or not. I'm wondering if it's because he has lacked the intellectual curiosity to really test it and find out or whether Louise just lacks a process. It's always fun for captor to keep their bottom on tilt... but logical consistency has its benefits over a longer period of time. And if I'm a captive of somebody and see myself being their captive on the regular... I'm going to be kicking the tires on this from the jump. Having fun and doing what you want is all swell in the short term, but if you're looking to provoke desires behaviors you need to show that actions have causality.Rtj65 wrote: 1 year ago "There, much better. I would have just done a few strips, but that's what you get for all your backchat. Hope it's not too tight," she says, smirking.
“Mmhhmss hmmppphh yhhmm whmmmdmpffh!†I protest, knowing that she probably would have done this anyway, but it’s extra frustrating to know that this has been specifically as a result of my actions.
I think in my mind I assumed that the issues facing them were bigger than they were. Louise's actions were irresponsible, but I thought that the rift was going to be caused more by the actual consequences of her decisions and not just the narrator's frustration with her duplicity. My guess is that he'd gotten injured in his struggles when she'd last left him alone and that concerns over his safety had led to him breaking things off. Barring that, I assumed that he might just be willfully cutting the lines of communication to punish her. He might be the submissive, but punishment has to be a two way street. But that only works if the other party enjoys the arrangement more than you do, or else you're just hurting yourself.Rtj65 wrote: 1 year ago It’s becoming clear that we weren’t communicating properly with one another, and that this could have been resolved much sooner, if I hadn’t been so stubborn.
This strikes me as a little disingenuous. I know that she means it. But the problem here was that she was leaving him alone or with a third party. They might have signals worked out that tell her when to back down. But unless Rachel knows those signals or she has a way of receiving them when she's not in the room with him (and potentially miles away) then they're not particularly useful within the current context.Rtj65 wrote: 1 year ago “Of course not. You can always say no to me,†Louise says, looking genuinely apologetic. I raise an eyebrow. “Or click your fingers, you know what I mean!
This would have been my main concern. I really liked the delivery here. This is the thesis statement of his grievance and I like the way that he pushes it forcefully enough and without diluting it while still displaying tact and not trying to weaponize it.Rtj65 wrote: 1 year ago “When you go back on your word, it makes me feel like you don’t respect me,†I say after thinking things over. I choose my words carefully because I don’t want to be too accusatory here. After all, Louise seems to accept her share of the blame for our miscommunication, and I’m in no mood to reignite a fire that is on the verge of being put out.
I enjoyed this answer and worried about this answer. It makes total sense to me. It strikes me as entirely honest. I don't think Louise handled the means of getting her answer in a mature way, but I respect that she had something earnest that she needed to know and took steps to find out. That being said... this would give me the implication that "what she does" is done for the narrator's sake and not with her own pleasure in mind. I've tied up women who I knew enjoyed it and I've tied up women who I knew were consenting to it because they knew that I enjoyed it. The former is always preferable me. This answer strikes me as having a tinge of the latter. This seems like an honest answer to "what was in it for you?" but it wouldn't be the one that I'd want to hear. I constantly alternate between identifying with the narrator because I relate to him and being perplexed by him because in other ways I find his thoughts and actions quite foreign. But the way in which I do relate to him the most is that he seems to be constantly in his head and unsure of himself. And if this was me... this answer would mess with me.Rtj65 wrote: 1 year ago “I have to ask though – you said you thought that I could handle it. But what was in it for you?â€
“Don’t be mad, but…I almost wanted to you to not enjoy it, yet still want to come back for more. I wanted to be sure that it’s me that you want, not just what I do.â€
The presumptiveness here is something else. Even if I've seen pictures of this women... there is no part of Occam's Razor that tells me that my domme's old roommate who now lives in America is back in town and has driven two hours to go stalk me at a gym. For her to expect things to click seems like an unreasonable expectation (something I think I'll see a lot of from Vicky). The fact that he got it without her wearing a sandwich board that reads "Hi, [Narrator]... I'm Vicky." is impressive.
I'm really proud of Narrator here. I think he has learned some lessons from his dealing with Louise. Vicky has driven two hours to see him. There is no reason for him to be thirsty or think that he needs to win her approval. She's already on the hook, and playing with advantage and asserting yourself and your expectations is absolutely the right play here. It sounds from Louise's recantations like Vicky was always entitled, but time in America wasn't going to help that. You have to be firm with us Americans (or Scots who have lived amongst us too long). Make her wait or she'll take a mile for every inch that you give.Rtj65 wrote: 1 year ago “Um, bye?†I say after her, making her pause. She turns back, though not fully.
“You’re supposed to follow?â€
“I just got here?â€
“So? I came all this way to see you,†Vicky says, making no effort to hide her irritation. “I’ll take you out to lunch...†Notwithstanding the fact that she has shown up completely unannounced like this, I can rarely turn down an offer of lunch, especially given that I have no further plans today beyond my workout. That said, she’s definitely up to something.
“Give me half an hour and I’ll meet you outside,†I say finally. Vicky pulls a face, as though she is contemplating something.
This is an interesting look into the narrator's psyche. I enjoyed it. I'll also be quite fascinated to see what the perceived relationship dynamic between Vicky and Narrator will be not just from each of their perspectives but also from Louise's. I tend to right about switches because I find them the most interesting. But you're exploring a dynamic that I've always wanted to take a stab at. You've got a (alleged) domme who dominates a (alleged) switch who dominates a (alleged) sub... what does that mean for the relationship between Party 1 and Party 3. I know what I think it means but I have no doubt that there are many schools of thought and I'm rivetted to see which school of thought each of these three characters had. I recently bought a book from a DA artist that addressed this same triangular dynamic and found the opinions and implications of it engrossing.Rtj65 wrote: 1 year ago “Hmm…sure, I’ll see you there. I’ll remember that though.â€
As she turns tail for the second time and heads out of the gym, I reflect on this unexpected turn of events. I’m not quite sure what to make of Vicky yet. So far, her behaviour has been confusing, unpredictable, and borderline rude. I think I like her.
At this stage, it's more a product of the narrator having not tested Louise very much, as he's been happy to go along with things. Understanding the full range of a captor's behaviour is important to determine, though he's learning this at quite a slow place - as is Louise. This kind of relates to some of your later points, but some of Louise's decision making is related to her own inexperience. She might know what she's doing, but she hasn't been in this kind of relationship before.Fandango wrote: 1 year ago I realize that this is still marginally earlier in their arrangement, but I'm a little surprised that the narrator isn't sure by now whether his actions caused the increased level of gag or not. I'm wondering if it's because he has lacked the intellectual curiosity to really test it and find out or whether Louise just lacks a process. It's always fun for captor to keep their bottom on tilt... but logical consistency has its benefits over a longer period of time. And if I'm a captive of somebody and see myself being their captive on the regular... I'm going to be kicking the tires on this from the jump. Having fun and doing what you want is all swell in the short term, but if you're looking to provoke desires behaviors you need to show that actions have causality.
You're spot on - it was definitely irresponsible of Louise, and she's still got a few things to learn on that front. As for whether the issues were wider than the lack of communication (i.e. safety and being left with Rachel), all I'll say is that I've yet to conclude the May 2019 scene, which should go some way towards addressing that.Fandango wrote: 1 year ago This strikes me as a little disingenuous. I know that she means it. But the problem here was that she was leaving him alone or with a third party. They might have signals worked out that tell her when to back down. But unless Rachel knows those signals or she has a way of receiving them when she's not in the room with him (and potentially miles away) then they're not particularly useful within the current context.
Thanks, I want the narrator to be able to stand up for himself and be strong in his own right. Given that communication has been at the heart of his issues, being more direct here and questioning Louise's respect for him was a big step forwards.Fandango wrote: 1 year ago This would have been my main concern. I really liked the delivery here. This is the thesis statement of his grievance and I like the way that he pushes it forcefully enough and without diluting it while still displaying tact and not trying to weaponize it.
This insight is really interesting to me, because I hadn't looked at it that way until now. In this exchange, both the narrator and Louise are displaying some of their insecurities, and want to know that they are wanted by each other. Louise instigated this relationship, and also recognises that she's providing the narrator something that he wouldn't necessarily get from many other women. She might be the one in control but she doesn't want to be used, though I get that this doesn't exactly line up with her decision to introduce Rachel into things. Both of these people still have some maturing to do in terms of how they express their feelings for each other.Fandango wrote: 1 year ago I enjoyed this answer and worried about this answer. It makes total sense to me. It strikes me as entirely honest. I don't think Louise handled the means of getting her answer in a mature way, but I respect that she had something earnest that she needed to know and took steps to find out. That being said... this would give me the implication that "what she does" is done for the narrator's sake and not with her own pleasure in mind. I've tied up women who I knew enjoyed it and I've tied up women who I knew were consenting to it because they knew that I enjoyed it. The former is always preferable me. This answer strikes me as having a tinge of the latter. This seems like an honest answer to "what was in it for you?" but it wouldn't be the one that I'd want to hear. I constantly alternate between identifying with the narrator because I relate to him and being perplexed by him because in other ways I find his thoughts and actions quite foreign. But the way in which I do relate to him the most is that he seems to be constantly in his head and unsure of himself. And if this was me... this answer would mess with me.
I was wondering how this introduction would go down, and you're certainly not wrong with this assessment. When writing Vicky, I wanted to create somebody with a different sort of personality to what we've seen so far. It's quite typical to make confident, extroverted characters with a high degree of competence in social situations, and vice versa, so I was interested in exploring the consequences of someone who is both confident and a bit awkward.Fandango wrote: 1 year ago The presumptiveness here is something else. Even if I've seen pictures of this women... there is no part of Occam's Razor that tells me that my domme's old roommate who now lives in America is back in town and has driven two hours to go stalk me at a gym. For her to expect things to click seems like an unreasonable expectation (something I think I'll see a lot of from Vicky). The fact that he got it without her wearing a sandwich board that reads "Hi, [Narrator]... I'm Vicky." is impressive.
Fandango wrote: 1 year ago I'm really proud of Narrator here. I think he has learned some lessons from his dealing with Louise. Vicky has driven two hours to see him. There is no reason for him to be thirsty or think that he needs to win her approval. She's already on the hook, and playing with advantage and asserting yourself and your expectations is absolutely the right play here. It sounds from Louise's recantations like Vicky was always entitled, but time in America wasn't going to help that. You have to be firm with us Americans (or Scots who have lived amongst us too long). Make her wait or she'll take a mile for every inch that you give.
I'm actually with you in that switches are the most interesting from a psychological perspective (even though I have yet to explore that properly in this story). The dynamic you describe is definitely going to become more of a focus for the story going forward, and will overlap with some of the other storylines I've been developing. With that in mind, there will be some F/F and M/F scenes ahead, they just aren't in the title because I don't want to mislead any readers about what this story is primarily about.Fandango wrote: 1 year ago This is an interesting look into the narrator's psyche. I enjoyed it. I'll also be quite fascinated to see what the perceived relationship dynamic between Vicky and Narrator will be not just from each of their perspectives but also from Louise's. I tend to right about switches because I find them the most interesting. But you're exploring a dynamic that I've always wanted to take a stab at. You've got a (alleged) domme who dominates a (alleged) switch who dominates a (alleged) sub... what does that mean for the relationship between Party 1 and Party 3. I know what I think it means but I have no doubt that there are many schools of thought and I'm rivetted to see which school of thought each of these three characters had. I recently bought a book from a DA artist that addressed this same triangular dynamic and found the opinions and implications of it engrossing.
Thank you, I'm really pleased that you enjoyed the latest part! It's great to hear that Louise is such a memorable character, and there will be plenty more to come from her.Roboticrobin20 wrote: 1 year ago I finally remembered that this site wants me to constantly refresh the page before the new chapter loads in.
And boy am I glad I did it. Loved the new chapter, Louise can be really devious and I love it. If I wouldn't have work in five minutes I would restart this story from the beginning just to meet her all over again. Thank you so much for continuing this story