Did I over react? Left after I was surprised with another sub on our first meeting.

[Mi****]

The first session is so important, and already filled with a lot of anxiety for most subs, for him to introduce something like this is simply disrespectful. Find another Dom.

[Cr****]

4 hours ago, eyemblacksheep said:

In scenarios like this - that even if the Dominant did not mean any harm and felt it would be a fun/surprise scene - the reaction to this sudden surprise is one that should be understood

at best; this seems like poor judgement from the Dominant.

I have only scan read some of the other comments - but...

let's be honest; any of you would be at least a little bit thrown if you'd been talking to someone for weeks and met up for play and suddenly someone else was present who you had no idea who was.

While we don't have the Dominants side of the story - I treat this as more scenario-based than any form of accusation where we have to find one person innocent and one guilty - and that, no, in the scenario as described it wasn't an overreaction. 

The scenario-based take on this is more appropriate than the majority of what people have mob-ruled into saying.

If strictly scenario-based, still, lack of communication would be the answer.

Was already established D/S had been speaking for an extended period of time; D more than likely had S dialed in about the 3rd party S being present and thought it would be okay.

[Deleted Member]

I would have done the same thing… A DOM IS SUPPOSED TO SHOWCASE RESPECT and if he couldn’t show case restraint, respect and honesty during the first meeting … just think if you continue that relationship how your wants and needs are discounted ! A sub isn’t weak we’re actually stronger than most .. WE ALL KNOW SUBS HAVE TO BE STRONG TO RELINQUISH OUR POWER TO ANOTHER …

[Cr****]

And with OP's follow up not just once, but twice, we have a better understanding of what transpired. As I had already stated, it would have been better if the dom had asked -- I would have. OP clearly stated there needed to be better vocalization on limits.

Still need his side of the story, though.

And as many have stated, it is a learning experience for their D/S relationship.

Stay safe, Sweetness.

[ey****]

1 hour ago, Creampie201 said:

D more than likely had S dialed in about the 3rd party

see; you criticise others for jumping to conclusions but that is exactly what you have done there.

[wi****]

Definitely disrespectful

[ge****]

3 hours ago, sweetness2022xx said:

I wrote a big long reply and it did not post. So let me try to reiterate my feelings, although it never comes out as well the second time. First I do not believe this was done with malice. I do not believe the Dom intended to break my trust. He remained patient and understanding through out my need to leave. And did apologize. I believe it was a misjudgment. I do believe it was done in a slick manner that was not upfront. Maybe he believed once I was there I would be less likely to say no. Which is the opposite, because had I had the chance to get comfortable with her the situation might have gone completely different. Yes this is a one sided perspective on the situation. But I am taking accountability for my missteps. Could I have said something misleading? It’s possible. Could I have misjudged the situation? Also possible. Should there have been better communication? 100%! However, as the one in control, with more experience and introducing another person into the situation, I believe he did not communicate well. The conversation should have gone deeper if this was his intentions. Up until this moment I was having an amazing time. I believe my issue was not with the surprise it self, but more so with the fact that I was blind folded and had no clue that I was being watch or that it was even an option on the table. Last night this had just happened and I was still trying to process my feelings and digest the situation. I reached out and truly so appreciate all of the constructive responses, on both sides. Being less experienced, having this feedback and different options does help me to sort through my thought clearer. Thanks everyone 💖

I don't think from all you have said you have any need to hold yourself accountable in this instance - sure we have all found ourselves in situations where after the event you think "I wish I had said this, or done that" but hindsight is always a wonderful thing.
.
Besides we cannot be expected to think of every single possibility of what might happen in order to ask if it will - we can only lay out our limits and boundaries and expect them to be respected and expect clear communication of any intentions that may lay outside of those or what has been agreed in return.
.
The fact that it appears to have been pre-meditated or pre-arranged limits your accountability further, as does the fact it was done without your "clear" consent.
.
Either way, as I said waaaayyyyy upthread I'm glad you've been able to take this as a learning experience and haven't been left with a completely sour taste, or worse as a result of it.

[ey****]

as a side note on limits

they are not exhaustive.

"you didn't say I/they couldn't..." is a weasel excuse 

things like limits and boundaries are something which should be discussed on an ongoing basis - particularly in first messages it should be clear to the Dominant what they CAN do instead of skirting around a "well, they didn't say this was not permitted"

Because otherwise - I dunno - well you didn't say I couldn't tie you up, blindfold you, take your credit card, piss in your bag, go through your mobile phone, break your left foot, brand you, slice off your nipple, staple up your genitals and stub out cigarettes on your chest all while live streaming it - of which a recording is being distributed.

there has to be a basis of trust here that the person doesn't need everything they can't do spelled out to them.  "Well you didn't say I couldn't shave off all your hair, or cut up your clothes" 

Certainly I would take "I would consider playing with another person but it has to be the right person" as grounds to further discussion as of what the right person is, rather than sling something on them. 

[Da****]

6 hours ago, Creampie201 said:

Guilty until proven innocent is what you people are agreeing upon. You all are so twisted and quick to protect the alleged "victim" it's actually insane. IMHO, you're ignorant of how a civilized society should conduct law.

Whichever way you look at it, though, they are still both to blame. Congratulations on derailing any sort of valid argument you had at defending "sweetness".

This is not about "Law" its about consent and judgment. There was no consent to a third person and even if there was some communication about wanting or being interested in a third person joining, it's the responsibility of the Dom to get clear consent... as for the judgment side...very poor judgment used.. even if the Dom had consent not some you pull on the first meeting.

Are you one of those "doms" that think ... she a sub she will do as i say and has no rights to object... you probably don't believe in safe words either..

[Cr****]

15 minutes ago, Daddy-n-sub said:

This is not about "Law" its about consent and judgment. There was no consent to a third person and even if there was some communication about wanting or being interested in a third person joining, it's the responsibility of the Dom to get clear consent... as for the judgment side...very poor judgment used.. even if the Dom had consent not some you pull on the first meeting.

Are you one of those "doms" that think ... she a sub she will do as i say and has no rights to object... you probably don't believe in safe words either..

The fact that you couldn't identify what I've clearly stated to be subject to law illuminates your inability to objectively discuss this topic.

I've asked every sub for a safeword. Nice assumption, though.

[Cr****]

18 minutes ago, Daddy-n-sub said:

This is not about "Law" its about consent and judgment. There was no consent to a third person and even if there was some communication about wanting or being interested in a third person joining, it's the responsibility of the Dom to get clear consent... as for the judgment side...very poor judgment used.. even if the Dom had consent not some you pull on the first meeting.

Are you one of those "doms" that think ... she a sub she will do as i say and has no rights to object... you probably don't believe in safe words either..

My current primary sub doesn't even require a safeword, even after I emphasized how reckless that was. Bonus for me :)

[AlphaLion]

Not going to read the rest of the comments as it might taint my thinking. It was unacceptable for the Dom to do that to you. It was a breach of the trust and repor you had built up. Your feelings are very valid and I'm not shocked it was a surprise.

Consent is so key and you didn't give consent, it's as simple as that. As you say, you were open to it with the right girl. Where was your option to say if that was indeed the right girl.

If you did enjoy the time, perhaps consider giving them a second chance. People do make mistakes, we are all human at the end of the day. But that's really your choice, could the trust be rebuilt?

[Su****]

2 hours ago, Creampie201 said:

The scenario-based take on this is more appropriate than the majority of what people have mob-ruled into saying.

If strictly scenario-based, still, lack of communication would be the answer.

Was already established D/S had been speaking for an extended period of time; D more than likely had S dialed in about the 3rd party S being present and thought it would be okay.

As I said on another post. This comes down to consent. The fact that he waited until she was blindfolded to admit another person into the play scene shows that it was subversive. 
from what she has explained, from her point of view, this was a first in person play session. This would be the time to build trust, not try and expand on already agreed boundaries.

it is clear from what they have explained that there were no expectations that another person would enter that particular scene/session. 
 

consent is the key issue here which I think is the point you seem to be missing. 
 

We can not hazard to guess his ultimate intentions but we can understand her expectations, reactions and feelings around the episode. From what she has explained this was not an option that was floated or requested. 
 

she did not consent, it’s that simple.

[Ar****]

5 hours ago, sweetness2022xx said:

I was more uncomfortable with the fact that it was never mentioned as a possibility that I might be blindfolded and someone else join without any acknowledgement that they were there until I peaked out of the bottom of my blindfold.

*   *   *

There was no conversation about me being exposed without my knowledge to gauge my comfort level.

*   *   *

I believe it was a bad judgement call on his part to have me unknowingly participating without clear consent and communication to what was happening.

These points right here - these show that you know exactly what was wrong about the encounter and that you didn't overreact. Please don't gaslight yourself into thinking you could or should have done more. Your own inexperience does not mitigate the experience he put you through.

The thing which I don't think anybody else has mentioned so far and which I feel should be a concern is the issue of your safety being compromised from a health perspective. Even if we you and the fella had discussed protection or taken tests prior to meeting, that only goes so far. You had no way to know if he knew whether this other sub was safe, and at the risk of assuming the worst (which is easy to do based on the careless way he seems to have thrown together this engagement) I don't expect that - how can I put this delicately? - he would have given much (if any) consideration to any bodily fluids he was going to pass between the two of you. That was a conversation which he should definitely have instigated, he could quite literally have put your life at risk.

[ki****]

You are not guilty of anything. You have the right to terminate a session or a relationship. In this instance it was ***d upon you and that is not the right way to do things.

[su****]

You DID NOT overreact. These are the types of Doms that need to be exposed and are dangerous. Not only did this man undermine you, he put you in a risky situation and completely shattered any trust that was built. I’m upset for you and deeply apologetic. Not ok. You did the right thing by leaving asap.

[Deleted Member]

This is a total *** ! It was obviously pre-planned ( A set up ) and she knew about it as well. So as far as boundaries and trust. I wouldn't expect him to not cross them in the future or not lie to you.

2 Sub's is SEXY as F**k. Providing it is consensual and there would be zero Jealousy with all involved.

[ge****]

3 hours ago, Creampie201 said:

My current primary sub doesn't even require a safeword, even after I emphasized how reckless that was. Bonus for me :)

Which to turn your whole premise round on you - we only have your word for, similarly that not only do you have one submissive but enough to call one of them "primary" - so are we supposed to believe you? 🤔
.
My point not being that I either believe or disbelieve you (for all I know you could have a whole slew of submissives, or could be a complete fantasist just spouting what he "thinks" is right) but that you can only work on what you are told in forum posts and form a subjective opinion based on them - which is all that anyone has done here.
.
No-one has said there isn't another side to the story, although as I pointed out earlier the *only* alternative side in this instance would be that the OP had lied and had known about, and consented, to a third party being sprung on her - in which case why would she even post what she did in the first place.
.
So all people have done is form a subjective opinion based on what they have been told which is something each and every one of us do countless times a week about all manner of things.

[Scarlettmiss25]

12 hours ago, Creampie201 said:

Again, you all are basing your criticism without the "dom" present to represent himself. Blind judgment based off one person's testimony. There's no detailed analysis of what was exactly discussed nor agreed upon.

Again, lack of communication. This time, lack of evidence to support any valid claims.

Both parties are still to blame.

Okay and maybe we are quick to blame but at no point that WE ARE AWARE OF was Sweetness asked if she wanted a threesome that night. As a first encounter and as she stated she was nervous is was never acceptable to bring a complete stranger that night into play. This is essentially like asking someone if they are open to some anal play (if they stated they are a newbie) and them trying to get them to take a dildo up their ass the same night.
As for suprise, yeah they are great but with someone you know and trust and who knows you! A dom is supposed to make you feel safe and secure, not put you in a situation where they make you uncomfortable or afraid when you are already at your most ***.
In this situation the dom is in the wrong in that he didn't ask or check that in that first play session that Op was open or okay with another women and actually all the OP was asking is that she wasn't overreacting in her reaction and in her shock that this occurred. Which everyone has agreed she was completely in the correct to feel that way.

[RosineK]

5 hours ago, gemini_man said:

I don't think from all you have said you have any need to hold yourself accountable in this instance - sure we have all found ourselves in situations where after the event you think "I wish I had said this, or done that" but hindsight is always a wonderful thing.
.
Besides we cannot be expected to think of every single possibility of what might happen in order to ask if it will - we can only lay out our limits and boundaries and expect them to be respected and expect clear communication of any intentions that may lay outside of those or what has been agreed in return.
.
The fact that it appears to have been pre-meditated or pre-arranged limits your accountability further, as does the fact it was done without your "clear" consent.
.
Either way, as I said waaaayyyyy upthread I'm glad you've been able to take this as a learning experience and haven't been left with a completely sour taste, or worse as a result of it.

Totally agree.

[Sh****]

This was not an overreaction. There was no consent to this situation. I’m glad you were able to leave before he could have violated further your trust. He did violate your trust. The termination of the relationship is up to you to decide. But once trust is broken, it is hard to earn it back, almost impossible.
To me, you expressed the boundary, he chose not to hear it. Someone who doesn’t respect your limits or boundaries in a scene, certainly wont outside of it.

[Deleted Member]

Creampie201, yes you are making a valid point. But still the fact remains that he did something without her consent. And it was planned out behind her dack. He had time to explain himself before she left. And so did the suprises Sub.
Clarity is always paramount.
So are boundaries and consent. .
She was blindfolded and unaware.

[Li****]

That situation is horrifying as a bisexual submissive myself I 100% agree about it having to be the right girl to add on and it would have to be discussed and arranged before hand. You did not consent to adding a third and that was a *** of your trust. I don’t think you overreacted

[Ho****]

This is totally unacceptable. I would definitely say to break this off. Ofc it is up to you but they (both the Dom and the other sub) violated your trust. He is not a true Dom in my opinion. A true Dom will respect his subs boundaries and adhere to them.

[Catsailor69]

21 hours ago, eyemblacksheep said:

as a side note on limits

they are not exhaustive.

"you didn't say I/they couldn't..." is a weasel excuse 

things like limits and boundaries are something which should be discussed on an ongoing basis - particularly in first messages it should be clear to the Dominant what they CAN do instead of skirting around a "well, they didn't say this was not permitted"

Because otherwise - I dunno - well you didn't say I couldn't tie you up, blindfold you, take your credit card, piss in your bag, go through your mobile phone, break your left foot, brand you, slice off your nipple, staple up your genitals and stub out cigarettes on your chest all while live streaming it - of which a recording is being distributed.

there has to be a basis of trust here that the person doesn't need everything they can't do spelled out to them.  "Well you didn't say I couldn't shave off all your hair, or cut up your clothes" 

Certainly I would take "I would consider playing with another person but it has to be the right person" as grounds to further discussion as of what the right person is, rather than sling something on them. 

Having taken time to read everyone’s replies and consider this OP’s experience, I believe you have nailed it.
I absolutely agree that using the excuse, “you didn’t say I couldn’t do….” as any form of consent, is not consent.
Consent comes in honesty and complete disclosure of what you want to do. I always insist on a broader/specific base of hard and soft limits to begin with. Then BEFORE each scene, I take responsibility to question about some of my thoughts and desires that have not previously been discussed in detail. Even if they have been discussed, in respect and value of my submissive, I check again to ensure that in this scene it would be acceptable. Things do change, feelings and headspace change, expectations and courage change.
IMHO, consent is specific. Anything else is not consented. Is that too limiting? I don’t believe that it is. It’s an agreed boundary with the freedom to act within that both may still spontaneously enjoy.
I appreciate your pointing this out and clarifying this perfectly with graphic examples. Hopefully others will notice it and many more Doms who may be new to the lifestyle will learn from it.