Ky**** Posted Tuesday at 05:24 PM I’m curious to hear what everyone’s BDSM pet p**ves are — those little (or not so little) things that consistently make you roll your eyes, disengage, or quietly hit the back button. This isn’t about attacking anyone or starting drama. Every role, orientation, and experience level has its clichés and recurring issues, and talking about them can be a good way to reflect, learn, or at least commiserate. I’ll start with mine as an example: Pretentious, narcissistic Doms who believe they are infallible. The “I’m always right because I’m dominant” mindset is a huge pet ***ve for me. Dominance doesn’t equal perfection, emotional immunity, or exemption from self-reflection. To me, a Dom who can’t acknowledge mistakes, accept feedback, or engage in mutual growth isn’t powerful — just fragile. That’s my pet p**ve, but I know everyone has different experiences and boundaries.
Qu**** Posted Tuesday at 11:24 PM So many to choose from. People who say they have "no limits". People who think blo0d is any worse than any other fluid. People who thinking kink is an easy way for sex. People who think they can do x just because they've seen it.
da**** Posted Tuesday at 11:42 PM My pet ***ve is also egotistical doms. Treating women like shit isn't a kink
da**** Posted Tuesday at 11:48 PM 23 minutes ago, Quixote_69 said: So many to choose from. People who say they have "no limits". People who think blo0d is any worse than any other fluid. People who thinking kink is an easy way for sex. People who think they can do x just because they've seen it. I'm sorry but in the same breath as "people who say they have no limits" you also say that you don't like people with a limit for one body fluid and not another? Seems like you just don't like that they disagree with you. That's not a pet ***ve
Ky**** Posted Tuesday at 11:52 PM Author 48 minutes ago, Christopher350 said: All the damn fake accts and bots I'm with you there Christopher. It would seem there would be better ways to weed them out.
Qu**** Posted Tuesday at 11:53 PM 4 minutes ago, darkfae69 said: I'm sorry but in the same breath as "people who say they have no limits" you also say that you don't like people with a limit for one body fluid and not another? Seems like you just don't like that they disagree with you. That's not a pet ***ve What I'm saying is blo0d, lactation, cum, etc all contain the same risk. Not dissing anyone for their limits, but not being informed of those risks and singling out 1 over the other is a pet ***ve.
da**** Posted Tuesday at 11:54 PM Just now, Quixote_69 said: What I'm saying is blo0d, lactation, cum, etc all contain the same risk. Not dissing anyone for their limits, but not being informed of those risks and singling out 1 over the other is a pet ***ve. That's not what you said.
Qu**** Posted Tuesday at 11:57 PM 3 minutes ago, darkfae69 said: That's not what you said. Reread what I said. '*** is no worse than any other fluid'. In other words the risks are the same.
da**** Posted Tuesday at 11:59 PM 1 minute ago, Quixote_69 said: Reread what I said. '*** is no worse than any other fluid'. In other words the risks are the same. I'm pretty sure anybody reading that would take it as you saying that you think it's weird for people to like cum and squirt but not ***. It's not about my ability to discern, it's about the way you typed it. You really dislike being wrong, don't you?
Ky**** Posted Wednesday at 12:03 AM Author 38 minutes ago, Quixote_69 said: So many to choose from. People who say they have "no limits". People who think blo0d is any worse than any other fluid. People who thinking kink is an easy way for sex. People who think they can do x just because they've seen it. I agree with pretty much all of these, and the “no limits” one is actually something I almost used as my own example. I’ll see profiles that boldly state no limits, and then two lines later there’s a list of boundaries, conditions, exclusions, and situational caveats. Which is fine — everyone should have limits — but that just rein***s that “no limits” is usually a marketing phrase, not a reality. To me it signals either inexperience or a lack of self-awareness. On ***, I’m with you. It’s often treated as uniquely extreme when, with proper precautions, it’s not inherently more dangerous than other bodily fluids we regularly exchange. Like anything else, risk-aware practice and education matter far more than pearl-clutching labels. The idea that kink is an easy shortcut to sex really bothers me too, especially because it often results in submissives being pressured or manipulated under the guise of “this is just how BDSM works.” Unfortunately, you’re right — some people absolutely try to use it that way, which is why discernment and communication are so critical. And the last point is a big one: thinking you can do something just because you’ve watched it or read about it. That mindset is irresponsible at best and dangerous at worst. BDSM isn’t cosplay-by-observation; research, training, mentorship, and understanding consequences are not optional. All solid ***ves — and honestly, all tied together by people skipping the self-work and education part.
Ky**** Posted Wednesday at 12:12 AM Author 30 minutes ago, darkfae69 said: My pet ***ve is also egotistical doms. Treating women like shit isn't a kink I’m definitely with you on egotistical Doms — that overlaps almost exactly with my own pet ***ve. Ego, entitlement, and hiding behind a title to avoid accountability isn’t dominance, it’s insecurity with a label. Where I think it gets a little more nuanced for me is the “treating women like shit isn’t a kink” part. I absolutely agree that using kink as an excuse to disrespect, demean, or mistreat people without consent isn’t a kink — that’s just being an asshole. No argument there. At the same time, some people genuinely do consensually enjoy *** or *** as a kink, and I think the difference is context, consent, and containment. When *** is negotiated, role-played, and supported with clear boundaries and aftercare, the submissive knows it’s a scene — something they can step out of, process, and feel safe in afterward. Even in 24/7 dynamics, it only works when there’s trust, agency, and mutual fulfillment behind it. For me, the problem isn’t the kink itself — it’s when people blur the line between consensual roleplay and real-world disrespect, or assume that enjoying *** means someone deserves to be treated poorly as a person. That’s where it stops being kink and starts being harmful. So yeah, I think we’re probably aligned on the core issue: consent and awareness make the difference. Judging the behavior without judging the consensual kink itself feels important to me.
mo**** Posted Wednesday at 12:29 AM Leaving this here to expand on later, but one of mine is a dom that has no self control/emotional regulation & subs that have no autonomy / individual thought processes
pu**** Posted Wednesday at 12:31 AM 34 minutes ago, Quixote_69 said: Reread what I said. '*** is no worse than any other fluid'. In other words the risks are the same. Okay, I get that you’re saying the risks among all the bodily fluids are the same, but how do you know that their hard limit on *** is about risk and not something else? Maybe they’re the squeamish type who faints at the sight of it regardless of the situation. Maybe they have some kind of trauma involving *** that triggers them. Unless you’re referring to people specifically mentioning their concern of risk involving ***, I don’t think it’s fair to assume the reasons behind their limits.
mo**** Posted Wednesday at 12:47 AM Unnecessary add-in: i think the risk varies slightly for each bodily fluid, but there are precautions for every kind, and having different levels of interest in each doesn't mean that any person should or does condemn another for not sharing the same interests.
al**** Posted Wednesday at 02:32 AM 3 hours ago, Quixote_69 said: So many to choose from. People who say they have "no limits". People who think blo0d is any worse than any other fluid. People who thinking kink is an easy way for sex. People who think they can do x just because they've seen it. I guess I am guilty of this. I actually have on my profile both my limits and that I have no limits with my Master. I think I wrote like this because in my head it was 2 different things. I DO have a set of limits that would strictly be in place with anyone new I ever met. But on the other hand, when I became slave to Master I told him I have no limits with him and I 100% mean it but that is because of the trust we developed over the years. I know our d/s values align on all the “hard” limits ( ***s, age play/kids, ***) and the other stuff that I don’t care for.. I would do if He decided He wanted it.
al**** Posted Wednesday at 02:37 AM My personal pet ***ve is dominants that start a new conversation with “Call me Sir” or call me babygirl, slave, slut .. etc.My name is Ali. You can call me that. I don’t answer to anything else from a so-called stranger. Nor will I call any new person Sir out of the gate. That is earned in friendship. Until that you are your screen name or first name if you give it to me.
pu**** Posted Wednesday at 02:45 AM 7 minutes ago, aligurl80 said: My personal pet ***ve is dominants that start a new conversation with “Call me Sir” or call me babygirl, slave, slut .. etc.My name is Ali. You can call me that. I don’t answer to anything else from a so-called stranger. Nor will I call any new person Sir out of the gate. That is earned in friendship. Until that you are your screen name or first name if you give it to me. So much this!!! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
da**** Posted Wednesday at 03:23 AM 46 minutes ago, aligurl80 said: My personal pet ***ve is dominants that start a new conversation with “Call me Sir” or call me babygirl, slave, slut .. etc.My name is Ali. You can call me that. I don’t answer to anything else from a so-called stranger. Nor will I call any new person Sir out of the gate. That is earned in friendship. Until that you are your screen name or first name if you give it to me. Its giving "entitled to any woman" when they do that.
pu**** Posted Wednesday at 03:26 AM 3 minutes ago, darkfae69 said: Its giving "entitled to any woman" when they do that. That, or it shows that they’re the fake Doms who don’t have any knowledge (or care) of proper etiquette within the community. Huge 🚩 IMO.
da**** Posted Wednesday at 03:29 AM 2 minutes ago, purplegemini said: That, or it shows that they’re the fake Doms who don’t have any knowledge (or care) of proper etiquette within the community. Huge 🚩 IMO. I honestly think entitlement means you're not a real Dom, like it's mutually exclusive with just not being educated on kink. You have to work for any individual's respect and affection, that's what kink is at its core 😭
pu**** Posted Wednesday at 03:33 AM 4 minutes ago, darkfae69 said: I honestly think entitlement means you're not a real Dom, like it's mutually exclusive with just not being educated on kink. You have to work for any individual's respect and affection, that's what kink is at its core 😭 Excellent point. You’re absolutely right.
mo**** Posted Wednesday at 03:44 AM 3 hours ago, moonpet said: Leaving this here to expand on later, but one of mine is a dom that has no self control/emotional regulation & subs that have no autonomy / individual thought processes Coming back to this, it goes along with the "always right" doms. The ones who strike out when questioned (even by their sub) and don't see any issue with punishing their sub for requesting more information. Like, they cant get out of their feelings enough to rationalize or be in control of themselves/their reactions. They're the kind of people that can end up seriously injuring a sub because they dont know how to hold back/not punish while angry. On the sub side: when a sub doesn't know /acts like they don't know how to function and operate like an adult member of society. As if they need someone to tell them what to do/think at all times and what's good/bad in all things. Like they're incapable of deciding for themselves if they like/dislike something or if someone that's approached them is super toxic or not. These are notoriously dangerous people to interact with as a counterpart to them. A dom with a "limitless sub" can end up incredibly misled and burnt out, as well as experience a lot of dom guilt because their sub didn't know how to express/have their own boundaries and limits so all the work to uphold the health of the dynamic landed on the doms shoulder. A sub with an emotionally immature/undisciplined dom can end up extremely traumatized or worse, also hospitalized. It can scar their relationship with the world and bdsm itself because they put all their stock/eggs into one basket and didn't know they had a say in what happened to them/didn't know they were allowed to say no&have limits&boundaries. Seeing this kind of thing bothers me a lot. Especially when its romanticized to draw in more victims who a deceived into thinking/gullible enough to think they DONT have to think because someone claiming to be a "world class dom" is there to "save" them. BDSM or not, relying 100% on another person is a fast track to hurtsville. Same with not being able to look in the mirror and admit that you CAN and HAVE done wrong, dom or not. Id rather stay out of it and research to discover my own boundaries and limits first before getting into this kind of thing with anyone else. It just seems safer that way.
da**** Posted Wednesday at 03:47 AM 2 minutes ago, moonpet said: Coming back to this, it goes along with the "always right" doms. The ones who strike out when questioned (even by their sub) and don't see any issue with punishing their sub for requesting more information. Like, they cant get out of their feelings enough to rationalize or be in control of themselves/their reactions. They're the kind of people that can end up seriously injuring a sub because they dont know how to hold back/not punish while angry. On the sub side: when a sub doesn't know /acts like they don't know how to function and operate like an adult member of society. As if they need someone to tell them what to do/think at all times and what's good/bad in all things. Like they're incapable of deciding for themselves if they like/dislike something or if someone that's approached them is super toxic or not. These are notoriously dangerous people to interact with as a counterpart to them. A dom with a "limitless sub" can end up incredibly misled and burnt out, as well as experience a lot of dom guilt because their sub didn't know how to express/have their own boundaries and limits so all the work to uphold the health of the dynamic landed on the doms shoulder. A sub with an emotionally immature/undisciplined dom can end up extremely traumatized or worse, also hospitalized. It can scar their relationship with the world and bdsm itself because they put all their stock/eggs into one basket and didn't know they had a say in what happened to them/didn't know they were allowed to say no&have limits&boundaries. Seeing this kind of thing bothers me a lot. Especially when its romanticized to draw in more victims who a deceived into thinking/gullible enough to think they DONT have to think because someone claiming to be a "world class dom" is there to "save" them. BDSM or not, relying 100% on another person is a fast track to hurtsville. Same with not being able to look in the mirror and admit that you CAN and HAVE done wrong, dom or not. Id rather stay out of it and research to discover my own boundaries and limits first before getting into this kind of thing with anyone else. It just seems safer that way. I actually agree, I just don't know if I ever would have been able to verbalize it like you!
mo**** Posted Wednesday at 03:47 AM Just now, darkfae69 said: I actually agree, I just don't know if I ever would have been able to verbalize it like you! That's incredibly kind of you! Thanks 😊
Recommended Posts