Cherishing Her

DaddyO's BDSM

by DaddyO


I choose to be a Daddy Dom because I absolutely love and cherish women and when a woman submits to me it is unexpected and beautiful.



To be a Master Dom I feel as though I'd be acting. Don't get me wrong, I'm a darn good actor, but at the end of the scene when the Director says "cut!" I'm back to being a Daddy (I like being the Director too but thats for a different blog).


There are countless "s-types" in the BDSM realm (slave, sub, masochist, bottom, babygirl, boot black....the list is as long as your imagination) but only three types I most consider my counterpart for being in a D/s relationship with: babygirls, subs and slaves.


Most women I play with make up elements of all three of these archetypes but for comparison purposes let's call them all "submissives" and draw the line in the middle dividing the definitions into "babygirl/subs" and "slave/subs." (Many subs on the "babygirl/sub" side of this line have no babygirl qualities whatsoever but I put them on that side of the comparison because they do share the common goal of wanting to be cherished and it just makes it easier).


With the exception of extreme degradation play I would suggest all "s-types" desire to feel cherished. To know you have value and feel appreciated is vitally important.


A woman identifying as a babygirl/sub begins to display more submission due to being cherished and is actually uninspired by possessive behavior. The thought of being owned outright probably is a huge turn off.


The loss of autonomy is frightening to her. A Daddy/Dom must first cherish his babygirl/sub before submission can even be offered.


Whereas the slave/sub prioritizes the ownership idea and her feeling of being cherished is derived from possessive attitudes towards her by her Master/Dom.


A slave/sub often enjoys possessive behavior and either likes or becomes oblivious to any loss of autonomy. The impetus for her existence is due to her station as His slave.


A Master/Dom will certainly cherish His slave/sub, but it will be conditional to fulfillment of her submissive duties towards Him. The slave/sub's submission is not the gift, she is

A Daddy/Dom must foremost cherish his sub. Then and only then can the Daddy/Dom happily accept his babygirl/sub's gift of submission that she has returned. And her submission will be gradual and dependant not on his possessive qualities but instead on how nurturing of an environment he as her Daddy/Dom has provided.


A babygirl/submissive's primary desire is to feel cherished whereas a slave/ submissive's primary desire is to feel owned and possessed.


I cannot in good conscience cherish a person I am also exploiting for my own benefit. But I sure as fuck can cherish and appreciate a person who gifts me that honor.


Master mentality is not *wrong,* it's just wrong for me. Just as my "Daddy" mentality is not right or even attractive to everyone either.
Note: These are just my thoughts and how they relate to how my mind has evolved in the D/s thought process over time. I've chosen to use gender specific pronouns and place males in the "D" role and females in the "s" role simply because this is how most of my ideal relationship models play out and it feels more comfortable for me to write this way to get my concepts across. So please take no offense to my cisheteronormative wording.

Author's Notes/Comments: 


View daddyo's Full Portfolio
Starward's picture

I spent several years

I spent several years researching bdsm, although i came to conclusions with which the bdsm culture would strongly disagree (and some of them did; one dominant actually threatened me with bodily harm), and I am not used to giving compliments to anyone who identifies as dominant.  However, in all honesty, I was so impressed with one of your statements in this essay that I cannot pass the opportunity to compliment you on it.  This statement---"A woman identifying as a babygirl/sub begins to display more submission due to being cherished and is actually uninspired by possessive behavior. The thought of being owned outright probably is a huge turn off . . . ." is one of the finest I have ever read with regard to bdsm.  Although I did not arrive at most of the conclusions you suggest, nor would my personal opinion of bdsm be welcome or even appropriate here, I am greatly and happily impressed that the statement I have cited, supra, has come from you, as it supports several of my own conclusions during that period (over a year) of difficult, sometimes shocking, research.  I applaud you, in this regard, and thank you for a bit of validation, although I am now too old and too tired to pursue this particular aspect (which I first took up, believe it or not, to extend my research on the Whitechapel serial killings) any further.  Thanks again.


[* /+/ ^]