Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Naturally Dominant


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress >> RE: Naturally Dominant Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Naturally Dominant - 6/20/2007 7:35:57 PM   
SlaveBlutarsky


Posts: 491
Joined: 10/10/2005
From: Upstate, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: chrisy

Can a female really be dominant, naturally? It seems that men are this way instinctively and that for the female it is something put on or forced. Males naturally take charge. They want to protect, provide and usually use as they please. Females, however, are nurturing, want to be provided for and protected and have their needs met in a passive way.

i have noticed that female dominants want all the same things as female subs do, that they (FemDom's) just go about having those needs met in an overtly bossy manner.It does not seem that they crave the control as males do.

Any opinions of thoughts would be greatly appreciated!


I will concur with most that yes women can be naturally dominant and males can be naturally submissive, or passive. People are different, just like there are naturally dominant women, there are good asian drivers, sober irishman and free spending Jews. While there certainly aren't a lot of naturally dominant women, they are out there, and they can be every bit as nurturing and have the same desire to be protected.

The woman I submit to will be naturally strong, but also have a large heart and be every bit of a woman that a submissive, passive one in your eye is.


_____________________________

Strong for all, weak for one

(in reply to chrisy)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Naturally Dominant - 6/20/2007 7:54:57 PM   
ocilla


Posts: 1764
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thetammyjo I don't know of any matriarchical societies. Matrilineal, yes, some of those, but not matriarchical. Could you tell us some?

Yeah, you've a valid point, and I apreciate your tact - for others see included wiki link for the controversy surrounding the existence of matriachal societies. The link also tries to define matrilineal.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matriarchy
And yet part of the controversy I am willing to bet comes from history having been recorded by men and much of herstory having been lost.  And another part of the controversy comes from pure scholarly and anthopological debate, and most likely funding (study like everything else seems to follow the money) and lack of undisputable proof.  As I age and experiecne more of this world and find myself on the inside of the power structure more and more I am shown daily how those in power and calling the shots are not necessarily more knowledgable or even intelligent as a rule and rarely have the communities best interests in mind when making influencial decisions.  I am finding myself getting more radical and feisty and determined with the more experience I have in the big world of business and politics. 

And then maybe I've constructed my own beliefs after reading and study literally years ago and since then rearranged it all in my memory - I'll admit that I like many recall what and how I want rather than what was - but I think I am going to stubbornly stick to my beliefs anyway.  Feels very right to me.  *digging in heels* shrugging and smiling too.  Might as well.

< Message edited by ocilla -- 6/20/2007 8:05:03 PM >

_____________________________

Ocilla

Nature is not a place to visit. It is home.
~ Gary Snyder

It takes a kinky village...

(in reply to thetammyjo)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Naturally Dominant - 6/20/2007 8:11:33 PM   
RopePrincess


Posts: 20
Joined: 4/1/2004
Status: offline 		  Hi LadyPact,
Very well stated. I would like to add just because someone is a gentleman and opens the door for us or something as gallant, does not make us submissive. It also does not make us submissive when we say thank you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

If you are asking whether female Dominants are who they are by the old nature vrs nurture question, you should have already had an immediate answer.  What stereotype in society are you looking at?

It seems to Me that, up until just a few decades ago, women in general were forced into the passive role.  There were a lot of influences on how any female was 'supposed' to be.  Women were brought up to act a certain way, talk a certain way, dress a certain way (in public, anyway).  If anything, we were 'forced' to take on the submissive role.  The same can be said in reverse for the men.  They were reared to be x, y, and z because, supposedly, all men were x, y, and z.
 
Fast forward to the present.  Guess what?  We found out it isn't like that for everybody.  Not all women are passive, and not all men enjoy taking charge.  These are personality traits, not gender traits.  It has very little to do with what is between a person's legs and much more to do with what a person has between their ears.  It's the way they think, the way they feel, and no matter what those around them tell them they have to/should be.... it's the way they are.
 
(quote)
i have noticed that female dominants want all the same things as female subs do, that they (FemDom's) just go about having those needs met in an overtly bossy manner.It does not seem that they crave the control as males do.
 
We're all people, dear.  Many of us want the same things.  Companionship, love, satisfaction, and a whole list of other things.  If you think We go about getting these things in an "overtly bosy manner", you haven't met many of Us.  If anything, it's because We crave control that may have led to this perception on your part. 
 
Good luck with your learning curve.

(in reply to LadyPact)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Naturally Dominant - 6/20/2007 9:39:46 PM   
Ayanaev717


Posts: 72
Status: offline 		Society have pretty much placed women in a difficult position when it comes to female domination. They want women to be strong and soft. Men and women are often socialized as children to respect their gender roles. Women are told they must submit through culture, family, and religion. And if they show signs of strength they are no longer good mothers, peacemakers, or worse they are b-tchy. I believe this idea keeps women and men in a box. From the feminist approach all men and women should be educated and empowered. Each have equal rights and should be able to explore not only their strong and soft sides without consequence.

I am naturally dominant, assertive, and confident. I am caring, gentle, and compassionate. I don't force myself on anyone nor do I walk around as if anyone owes me anything.  However no matter where I go...I expect respect, honesty, and people to be real with me. If they are not, I will call them up on it. I believe power is in the woman's walk, talk, and how she responds to her world.

You do not need leather or BDSM to make you a dominant woman. However the lifestyle allows female dominants to explore it in ways they probably could not in the real world.

Always,

Ayanaev









(in reply to Lashra)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Naturally Dominant - 6/20/2007 11:17:13 PM   
LadyPact


Posts: 32566
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RopePrincess

Hi LadyPact,
Very well stated. I would like to add just because someone is a gentleman and opens the door for us or something as gallant, does not make us submissive. It also does not make us submissive when we say thank you.


Thank you for the compliment.  I didn't especially think it was My best articulated post.

(in reply to RopePrincess)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Naturally Dominant - 6/21/2007 12:45:10 AM   
MistressRouge


Posts: 876
Joined: 3/18/2005
From: Birmingham West Midlands UK
Status: offline 		I consider Myself a naturally Dominant woman. I do not hang it up as & when, or take on a different persona to suit, I am always Dominant whether in My lair, or out shopping :) or socialising, or day to day life.

Yes,  I still nurture, protect, cherish what is Mine, that is also a fundemental trait of a true Dominant.

I believe female Dominance differs greatly from Male Dominance, Male Dominance steers more towards sexual gratification, and sexual acts, I find the overall servitude, subserviance and mind control, BDSM overall much more rewarding.

_____________________________

My Members Site.
http://mistressrougeuk.c4slive.com/


http://www.clips4sale.com/store/13392

(in reply to chrisy)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Naturally Dominant - 6/21/2007 6:28:16 AM   
thetammyjo


Posts: 6322
Joined: 9/8/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ocilla

quote:

ORIGINAL: thetammyjo I don't know of any matriarchical societies. Matrilineal, yes, some of those, but not matriarchical. Could you tell us some?

Yeah, you've a valid point, and I apreciate your tact - for others see included wiki link for the controversy surrounding the existence of matriachal societies. The link also tries to define matrilineal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matriarchy
And yet part of the controversy I am willing to bet comes from history having been recorded by men and much of herstory having been lost. And another part of the controversy comes from pure scholarly and anthopological debate, and most likely funding (study like everything else seems to follow the money) and lack of undisputable proof. As I age and experiecne more of this world and find myself on the inside of the power structure more and more I am shown daily how those in power and calling the shots are not necessarily more knowledgable or even intelligent as a rule and rarely have the communities best interests in mind when making influencial decisions. I am finding myself getting more radical and feisty and determined with the more experience I have in the big world of business and politics.

And then maybe I've constructed my own beliefs after reading and study literally years ago and since then rearranged it all in my memory - I'll admit that I like many recall what and how I want rather than what was - but I think I am going to stubbornly stick to my beliefs anyway. Feels very right to me. *digging in heels* shrugging and smiling too. Might as well.


I'd be thrilled to find evidence of other types of social and political arrangements. Human beings can certainly imagine them -- I study Amazon legends personally and that is what my PhD dissertation is on.

But I see no evidence for matriarchy. Not in prehistory artifacts, not in writing, not even in grave goods. At most these reveal a far greater number of societies were both men and women were expected to fight or hunt than the idea of the man = hunter and woman = gatherer stereotype.

So when folks say "look at matriarchies" I think that actually weakens their arguments because any could say "they don't exist" and not counter evidence can be honestly offered. As a feminist I don't want women's rights and responsibilities tied to such easily dismissed claims.

As an ancient historian, heck as a historian period, I can learn many things about the past but I do not think one of them is how "natural" such and such an institution or idea is one that it existed in certain cultures under certain circumstances. I also never understand the desire to find historical roots to our social questions as a way to prove what we want. You may understand why things happen and how but I do not think it proves how it should. If it did many, many things we take for granted today throughout culture would have to be deemed unnatural or improper and a few things we (as a culture) hate would have to be seen as ok.

Sorry, historian's rant.

_____________________________

Love, Peace, Hugs, Kisses, Whips & Chains,

TammyJo

Check out my website at http://www.thetammyjo.com Or www.tammyjoeckhart.com

And my LJ where I post fiction in progress if you "friend" me at http://thetammyjo.livejournal.com/

(in reply to ocilla)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Naturally Dominant - 6/21/2007 1:54:19 PM   
chrisy


Posts: 34
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		thank you all for a great discussion! i appreciate it!

(in reply to MistressRouge)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Naturally Dominant - 6/21/2007 10:58:00 PM   
ocilla


Posts: 1764
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline 		to Tammyjo's historian's rant,

I do love to study the past - but a scholar I am not, so defer to the scholar and appreciate the head's up as to the hole in my argument.  I will definitely think about what you have said.  Actually noticed your point of not looking to the past for social explainations in other posts you;ve made and you have started me to think on it a bit. 

I love it when we get to really discuss things thoroughly.  It's fun.  Thanks for your rational grounded well thought out and worded disagreement with me.  Smiling - glad you got a chance to rant too - chuckling

< Message edited by ocilla -- 6/21/2007 10:59:22 PM >

_____________________________

Ocilla

Nature is not a place to visit. It is home.
~ Gary Snyder

It takes a kinky village...

(in reply to chrisy)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Naturally Dominant - 6/21/2007 11:46:03 PM   
FullfigRIMaam


Posts: 718
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline
quote:

It does not seem that they crave the control as males do.
From where I stand, you couldn't be more wrong in your assessment.
Control is my kink.   M

_____________________________

"touching was and still is and will always be the true revolution" Nikki Giovanni
"Love is the only sane and satisfactory answer to the problem of human existence." Erich Fromm

(in reply to chrisy)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Naturally Dominant - 6/22/2007 4:10:27 AM   
maledave7


Posts: 142
Joined: 8/4/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: chrisy

interesting. you have me thinking

however, i believe most male submissives are in it for the sexual part. am i wrong?




I feel that it might be true for some. Some may have started out sexual and found that there was more to it.
I am interested in a Domme for a long-term relationship. Yes, I would be interested in her sexually, but it is only a part of what I seek.

< Message edited by maledave7 -- 6/22/2007 4:12:53 AM >

(in reply to chrisy)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Naturally Dominant - 6/22/2007 7:24:28 AM   
thetammyjo


Posts: 6322
Joined: 9/8/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ocilla

to Tammyjo's historian's rant,

I do love to study the past - but a scholar I am not, so defer to the scholar and appreciate the head's up as to the hole in my argument. I will definitely think about what you have said. Actually noticed your point of not looking to the past for social explainations in other posts you;ve made and you have started me to think on it a bit.

I love it when we get to really discuss things thoroughly. It's fun. Thanks for your rational grounded well thought out and worded disagreement with me. Smiling - glad you got a chance to rant too - chuckling


Thank you so much, ocilla, for taking my historian's bent the way it is intended. I don't mean to sound like a know-it-all or bossy, ok, well sometimes I do, but history is a passion for me so I do tend to get ranty about it.

Matriarchies as one of many ways to organize societies are very interesting and great fantasy for myself as well as anyone who has read some of my fiction will see. Personally I think matriarchies and matrialineal societies make more sense than patriarchies though both can offend me equally.

You also tickled me so much when you've mentioned you've noticed some common threads in my post. It's so cool to think that someone remembers what I write. (May I never lose that thrill of learning that.)

_____________________________

Love, Peace, Hugs, Kisses, Whips & Chains,

TammyJo

Check out my website at http://www.thetammyjo.com Or www.tammyjoeckhart.com

And my LJ where I post fiction in progress if you "friend" me at http://thetammyjo.livejournal.com/

(in reply to ocilla)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Naturally Dominant - 7/5/2007 8:11:21 AM   
MistressLeissa


Posts: 3
Joined: 12/14/2006
Status: offline 		Chrissy,
There are both Dominant and submissive people, some to more of a degree, it's like after a war, the winning tribe takes over, and the previous "Dominants" will "submit, as opposed to die. Those individuals will breed with the "new" overclass and the next generation of Dominants are spawned. The degree of ability to control, propagate, and prosper, these are the particular circumstances of a persons situation, and will determine the dynamics of that person's interaction with those around them.
Different societies "cast" one sex to be Dominant, and it changes in various aspects of a gender's interactions, each person's "accepted dynamics", are pre-set and outlined by that society that they live in. The workplace, the family, as well as economical forums. Everything is a learned behavior, however I beleive that some of our traits are inherited over generations and time. Dominants, for the most part are those raised by Dominants. The prince is raised to be a king, the handmaiden is raised to serve.
I also think that it is what is in your heart, and that too may be an inherited state to some degree. As for MYself,...I am unable to really submit to anothers will, I can bottom, to experience the different aspects of what I subject those who serve Me to,....but I am unable to release power over My whole being to another person. I have always had a Dominant heart, often cursing the responsibility one must assume for anothers state of being as control is taken from them. A submissives heart feels comfort in trusting that thier needs will be met, they will flourish in the freedom of not having decision, following directives meticulasly.
There are different dynamics, with degrees of control. The way one interacts with one individual, may be in a "Domme mode" as a wife runs the home and the house,... she is Domme to the children, and may be the Domme to others of her class, as in the interaction of women's activities, say, with the other women of her church. Yet she serves her husband's commands without question, and is the follower of her employer's directives. Each child is Domme to the next younger. Proffessionally the farmer outranks the cowboy,  but to both of them, the banker is the one calling the shots, and he pays the politician to make the laws in his favor.
Gender is probably one of the 'lightest' of things that are added to the 'scale' as far as what weighs in heavy in the making of a Dominant.

(in reply to chrisy)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Naturally Dominant - 7/6/2007 9:06:59 AM   
SlaveSubtoserve


Posts: 282
Joined: 6/21/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyHeart

The most naturally Dominant person I have ever met was female, and it was certainly not put on or forced. I have met Dominants, both male and female, who do fake it, but would not agree that Dominance has anything to do with gender. If your argument was to hold water, it would have to account for the

fact that male submissives seem to outnumber females 10 to 1. How would your theory account for that?
:))
LH


.....most of the Female Dommes answer that question every day on this forum= most of those male subs seem to be bottoms is what is said here.

(in reply to LadyHeart)
Profile   Post #: 54
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress >> RE: Naturally Dominant Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094