Surprise, your Daddy is likely not a "lifestyle" Daddy. He sounds like he is probably only a BeDeeSeM-based kink/fet-ish Daddy (
or, even possibly, only be interested in relative relations roleplay but that's sort of a separate subject). Perhaps your initial perception was that the CGL dynamic would not be entirely sexually focused since fathers aren't so with their children and maybe that's where some misunderstandings come from for you.
I've come to realize that there are at least two distinct groups (
which some people are certainly both members of) in terms of relationships referred to as "DDLG" and the like. I'm not sure if the community as a whole commonly realizes yet that these two distinct groups exist and are using the same sort of phrasing but it's become clear to me over the years that we are not all always talking about the exact same thing (
and this is an extremely important reason why people must have thorough conversations with each other about expectations and desires prior to assuming a partnership label):
- Group One. The kink/fet-ish, sexually-centered connections group. Majority of the connections are heavily BeDeeSeM based where one partner is more Dominant than "parental" and the other partner is more "submissive" than "childlike". This very well can be "bedroom only" situations or can bleed into a situation where there is always a little physically intimate tension being built up or maintained. A lot of times it's used in a way to contribute to foreplay or to simply "act out" a "scene" together (which may or may not outright bleed into relative relations roleplay).
- This is type that often advocates that CGL is inherently physically intimate, BeDeeSeM-based, or just outright "k-inky". They believe that there is always a Dominant and submissive at the core of CGL and that these dynamics have an underlying physically intimate tone or can become sexually heated at any given moment.
- I feel like this group may have the most "members" within it, but also feel that they have a lower success rate at long-term serious partnerships due to the basic "burn out" factor relationships go through after engaging in physically intimate fulfillment frequently. It's important for these people to realize that the relationship should not center only around one activity and that a partnership needs to go well beyond sex.
- Group Two. The more parent/child relationship group, which may or may not involve some physically intimate gratification but is not necessarily driven by or focused on physically intimate scenarios or motivation. This type usually is more parent/child in structure where one person takes on a more parental, guiding, caring role and is not necessarily forceful, aggressive, or sexually heated majority of the time. When people talk about dreaming of being in a "lifestyle" situation with their partner then they are often talking about the little being primarily regressed majority of the time in a primarily nonsexual manner, and the Caregiver tending to them not only as a partner but also as a life guide and, well, parent to some degree.
- This is the type that often advocates that CGL is age regression and that age regression is not inherently twisty or physically intimate by nature. Many don't necessarily believe it's BeDeeSeM based, and a few don't even believe a "true Daddy type" is not necessarily "Dominant" (or, at least, not necessarily the type of dominant we think of as being within the BeDeeSeM world; they believe a "true Daddy type" would be much more like a biological parent to their partner). Many people in this group are not highly physically intimate or prefer not to often mix age regression with physically intimate situations (usually what a person means in the CGL context when they say they are a nonsexual age regressor--meaning, they may or may not engage in physically intimate activity but regressing is not sexually arousing, a type of foreplay, or sexually gratifying for them).
- I feel like this group has less genuine "members" within it (or, at least, active online) but it is equally just as valid and respected. I feel like many Mommy only type of people frequently fall under this category and not even necessarily realize they are Mommy types when it comes to relationships. I also feel like this group may have more success with long-term, serious partnerships but that they also need to keep in mind that even the little partner is a physical, biological adult who has experienced life and will sometimes incorporate adult knowledge and behaviors into their lives (which is really okay, but could be a struggle for some to feel comfortable accepting upfront as truth).
These two groups are not exclusive though. Sometimes a little bit of "typical behavior of group 2" bleeds into a couple who falls under the primary "group 1" category and vice versa. I'm only talking about primary, core behaviors and relationship structure, desires, and focus.
I do know people in group 2 that sometimes incorporate group 1 type of "scenes" when it comes to building physically intimate tension or having physically intimate gratification. I know of people well within group 2 who use things like punishment as a physically intimate motivator and, thus, sort of let that part of their relationship into "typical activity of group 1".
It's obvious to me though that those people live out their relationship primarily as group 2 though. Primarily, they want to create a parent/child bond where the childlike person innocently relies on the parental type to take care of their needs, take over responsibility, and insure safety on behalf of their childlike partner. While "take care of their needs" may also involve physically intimate relief and situations, it isn't the core focus, is not what drives the couple, and is not something that their dynamic involves as a constant basis.
Group 1 often is "bedroom only", where they may claim they want an ongoing, never-ending dynamic but, really, they only use the dynamic at certain times. Group 1 doesn't "not care" about one another, but their focus isn't building a bond that resembles that of a parent and child. They are more BeDeeSeM-focused, where they are using family-based labels as a form of physically intimate desire and expression and ease of denoting which person "should" be "submitting" to the other person's direction.
There is no shame in only or primarily falling within "group 1" or "group 2". I understand the community doesn't often discuss the different types of coupling and exceptions of such that exist, but I think if someone really let themselves think more broadly in reviewing claimed CGL-based relationships they would also agree. I strongly believe that a lot of talk about "fake" persons within the community truly centers around a misunderstanding of existence between the two groups and a lack of one-on-one communication prior to beginning a relationship. It often seems that an individual within either group falls under the innocent assumption that all members of the community are within their same group and hold their same desires, core values, and beliefs when it comes to CGL connections.
I also believe that the "pressure to partner" can be so intense feeling for many members in the community that people frequently forget to treat one another as real people and not just labels or online roleplayers. (
It's truly unfortunate but many people seem to feel so pressured that they also forget that doing their due diligence in dating within the community means that they have to converse and they have to ask questions to make sure that their goals align just like any other type of romance.) Since the fulfillment and satisfaction components from the separate groups stem from entirely different zones I do not see how a person who is primarily within core group 1 can partner successfully with a person primarily within core group 2 without making some seriously deep compromises for both parties as well as potentially facing more hurdles and stressors than coupling within the sectors. I don't believe it's entirely impossible but I feel like if you have a person who is primarily only seeking physically intimate gratification and lust and a person who is primarily only seeking emotional care and bonding then those two people are going to have a difficult time finding their middle-ground compromises to really, fully get along on a romantic level.
Outside of the DDLG portion of your relationship, I don't personally feel what you've said about your relationship sounds like it is equally as fulfilling to you. I feel like becoming upset at a partner for not meeting a physically intimate demand, and completely disregarding their reasoning for such or emotional distress they may be facing, may be teetering into an unhealthy "abuse" category if the partner (
you) feels it was unacceptable. Though, that's also very personal and specific to the relationship and not necessarily a blanket statement anyone can make and apply it to all other people. After all, many of us promote "unhealthy" codependency as a core portion of our CGL-based relationships yet we happily consent and act these out without concern that they are "wrong" or inherently "bad"--because they aren't to us, for us.
Only you can truly determine if your partner overstepped boundaries or neglected your emotional state, needs, or self as a person, and only you can determine your actions or choices from there on out. Only you know if this was acceptable for you and your relationship or not.
There is no additional advice to give aside from telling you that you need to talk with your partner about this more. That is definitely clear and required. There is no magical answer other than that or to simply just break things off with this person and move on. I strongly feel that researching this will only get you so far if you're not communicating with your partner about mutual expectations and desires. Ultimately, you could be researching based on the opposite group in which your partner falls, creating to even further misunderstandings and miscommunication in the future! I would suggest you start by asking core questions like:
- What does DDLG mean to YOU? How do you define or describe it?
- What do you feel a Daddy is or does? What type of Daddy are you?
- What do you feel a Little Girl/Baby Girl is or does? What type of Little do you think is the most ideal for you?
- How do you think a relationship that is DDLG based is different than a typical relationship? In your opinion or as far as you're aware, what, specifically, is done differently?
- Where or how did you learn about DDLG?
- Do you have any resources you could point me toward that you feel accurately explains DDLG?
- Do you think you've had a DDLG relationship before? Why didn't it work out in the end? What was the most fulfilling about it?
- Is DDLG a kink to you? Do you only or primarily think of it being physically intimate for you? Is it a "turn on" for you in general so that any time you think of DDLG you think of physically intimate situations?
- Are there times where you want to be very Daddy-like but not physically intimate at all? Can you give me some examples of times where you want to be Daddy-like and what those times look like in your mind?
- What do you want from a DDLG relationship?
- What makes you the happiest about DDLG relationships?
- Do you expect me to be sexually submissive to you in all cases, in all situations, since you are taking on the Daddy role? Is being a Daddy a sexually Dominant position for you?
- If I am to be a submissive partner to you then what do you feel is mandatory for me to be what you would feel is the right match for you and your type of Dominance?
- When do you feel is the right time for a Dom/sub pairing to exchange things like personal limits?
- Do you feel that a submissive who says "no" to a Dominant's demands is just being a brat? When is it reasonable for a Dominant to take a submissive's "no" as a seriously acceptable "no"? Do you feel if a submissive says "no" they're just being defiant and need to be pushed a little and that your happiness should ultimately mean their happiness?
A few other core questions are here (
I do encourage you to look them over since maybe something will stick out that you need to have answered to be able to continue):
http://www.littlespaceonline.com/app.ph ... rquestions
You'll find that majority of
the resources developed on this site centers around "Group Two" as being core. With that being said, you may also want to ask more people involved in BeDeeSeM pairings about questions they feel are important to ask a potential partner and pull from some of those recommendations to really have a well-rounded idea of the relationship your partner is seeking with you.
Sometimes talking together and researching together is the best in furthering a relationship in a healthy direction. Beyond the above suggested questions I would say that your next step (
if you decide to continue the relationship, of course) is to share your own definitions, opinions, and perspectives about these things with your partner. You two may also want to join an online community that is targeted to the group that you fall within better so that you can explore and further your learning
together. There are also in person meet-ups, lunches and brunches, and events you could attend together to feel like you are truly involved in a community together.
Lastly, aside from everything really community-specific, exchanging explicit physically intimate gratification for deep emotional care (
for what you and our community generally might even consider to be love) is very rarely a good, healthy idea. It very rarely ends up the way the person seeking love wants it to end up. You may consider that your initial agreement may have actually boiled down to that, and may want to think about how that plays out in terms of a possible future with this person (
and if you actually want to spend time on this sort of agreement). You may very well want to sit down together and make an expansionary revision to your agreement so that your specific core needs are being met too.
- By princejayjay
- By Yori
- By LilBeth