Sunday, September 13, 2015

strange train of thought...

I read something a Domme wrote recently about her very difficult childhood and how her mother expectd her to fall in line and do what people told her to, etc., and how that was clearly so unlikely to happen.  The implication was that she has a dominant personality, is dominant (??), and this played a big part in her resiliance growing up.

This writer doesn't know me, doesn't know of me even - so couldn't possibly have been referring to me, of course.  But i heard it as an indictment anyhow.  The implication that came through for me was that submissiveness and submission are weak and undesireable and, by definition not strong and not acceptable ways to survive.

I guess i partly agree - i don't think that going along to get along is always a great strategy and i think it has to eat away at one's self respect and inner strength to kowtow all the time.  I survived my childhood (also not exactly rainbows and unicorns) not through dominance or rebelling but certainly with resiliance and strength and i guess independence.

I would love to discuss with D-types how they honestly feel about s-types sometime - a discussion beyond how they meet their sexual or relationship needs, beyond "i admire the strength it takes to submit," beyond yin-yang.

Because i honestly wonder how you hold in your mind both the unshakeable belief that you are better than she (he) is at all the things/so many of the things and also that she or he is not less than you in some way.  Or - conversely, and more to the point for me- how does one hold in mind both a belief that the other person deserves to lead/should be deferred to and also a belief in her or his (my) own self worth, value, competence,  etc...

By the nature of it, by definition, or by assumption dominance/dominant is higher, in charge, stronger, righter, more capable, pretty much most of the positive superlatives.   You would expect someone who was all that to have some disdain, or at least pity for the people who are lower, weaker, not so right, less capable, etc, etc...

Whether a domineering ass or with refined gentility, or somewhere in between, a D has to have confidence, a certain amount of arrogance; has to believe he or she is right, capable, and deserves to take charge.  I prefer my confidence with a certain amount of humility - but the fact is, by the naure of being D, they believe they ought to lead.

Us s-types, in at least one primary relationship in our lives - believe we shouldn't lead, that the other person is more something than us.   We look up to our D.  We look up to them, we respect them, we admire - even adore them.  We rely on them, often even for things we could absolutely handle ourselves, we defer to them, we submit to them (duh!)   What is there in all that for them to respect, admire, or even desire?

I couldn't explain how it all really works (and for us it really does) to anyone else.  I'm not sure my husband could answer these questions.  But the contradiction is there - at least for those like my husband who doesn't believe i am less than - and wants me to know that also - but does believe he is who and where he belongs in our dynamic, and that i am also.


  1. Don't think, and Omega would certainly agree that submissive doesn't mean "less than" nor does it mean lower or beneath. Omega is compelled to be in control, but he wouldn't be with someone who shared that desire in a relationship beyond friendship. He looked for someone (like mouse) who wanted him to lead and trusted him to be good at it.

    There are some D types who do act as though they're entitled, or feel submissive means they are lower or even stupid...

    Honestly, mouse tends to pity those types because they must be pretty lonely up there at the top all alone.


    1. mouse,
      Agreed - there are people all over who feel entitled - they are extremely unpleasant no matter what they call themselves.

      I work in a fairly heirachical place - i'm used to being subordinate to others and others to me - i don't feel less human or less worthy than those above me, nor more anything than those below - just that i have to do what some people say ultimately, and some have to do what i say.

      Some things made me think about me and Him specifically (absolutely the only situation i have any experience with). I know without any hint of doubt that He doesn't see me as less anything. Yet i chose to defer, to submit, to allow him to correct me, to debase myself at times. For some reason i wondered how we each hold the contradictions in our minds.

  2. Well, I sure wouldn't follow someone that I felt was dumber or less capable than me!

    I also think part of knowing each other really well is knowing the strengths and weaknesses of the other person. We can't all be good at everything. Some are good at leading and some are good at following. Some can do both depending on the situation. Being good at following is not a "nothing" skill. I think it has a lot of value, especially when combined with the ability to discern who is worth following.

    1. ancilla,
      No - i wouldn't either - in fact i would likely be extremely intolerant and very, very un-submissive. I am with my husband and have chosen to submit because of his strengths. There are not so many poeple in the world who would have earned either from me. He is in many areas more capable than I am, but i don't think he is smarter - and he would agree with me. He is certainly a better leader. I am - as you say - a follower, or more correctly in the larger world, a collaborator. And i do believe both are not at all 'nothing' skills.

      What i was reading made me wonder though - people who are dominant respect those dominant traits. The writer seemed to have just a touch of disdain for submissive traits - maybe she would apply that only in herself - but it made me wonder if people who are dominant generally respect submissive traits less in others....

  3. Master has made it a point to let me know He cherishes my submission to Him...and it does not make me less important or eve weaker. I was in control of my everything in my life for a long time...that was how I wanted it and achieved it. I am so much more content now....submission is not always easy....and finding someone to follow who is worth it is not easy..but all worth it. I am not sure how it all works either...but for me..for us it does also...and i am so happy to have discovered that...and this new life...
    hugs abby

    1. abby,
      Every word you wrote - that is true for us as well. It is good for each of us, for the whole Us, and i know how he feels about me. This was a more philosophical wondering i guess. I don't have any experience with real live people in this situation outside of us.

  4. BG says that what he wanst is someone "who's equal, can match me, and is my complement"
    There are tropes galore that don't agree with him but for me, seeing it as a form of yin/yang makes a whole lotta sense.
    But it *is* something I have to keep reminding myself of, for all that. The stereotypes do get in the way...

    1. Jz,
      I like the "can match me" bit. And i appreciate the yin-yang - in this and in so many aspects of life. I was just wondering how the yin really feels about the yang - or vice versa - since, even in yin-yang, one aspect (i forget which is which) is the negative pieces. I do try to stay away from the tropes as applies to us - it is hard sometimes - but not at all useful - as you say.

  5. 'Us s-types, in at least one primary relationship in our lives - believe we shouldn't lead, that the other person is more something than us". In some ways I respectfully disagree. I don't lead because I don't *want* to lead. I am and have been more than capable of leading in our relationship, but it wasn't for the best for either of us. I can do it if necessary, but I don't desire it.

    Do I think my husband is better at making decisions than I am? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. I do know he has a clearer head than I do when emotions get involved. So as to the latter part of that statement yes, I agree. I think a big part of my submission to him is the fact that he knows I am more than capable, yet I decided to defer to him

    1. anon,
      I am not driven to need to lead either, but, like you, i can if i need to. And this - all around - is much better for us, in our case than trying to constantly negotiate from equal footing. In our case - he is more 'something' than me, probably more leader, more decisive, more comfortable in the role. It fits who he is, just as my role fits me.