|
CreativeDominant -> RE: Taking what you can dish out (10/31/2007 7:59:16 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Tigrita
Okay, there are a bunch of related questions in here… I’ve seen it come up a few times lately that some dominants would balk or break if forced to endure what many submissives do. I’m curious to see, from both the dominant and submissive perspectives, whether people think it is reasonable to expect a dominant to be able to take what they might dish out. I can see both arguments: why should a submissive submit to someone who is arguably weaker than they are (if the dominant couldn’t take what they themselves dish out)?; or conversely, why should a dominant be expected to be able to endure something that is contrary to their natural role and desire?
Not being able to endure a stroke of the whip does not make me weaker than the submissive that can endure it. It is but one small thing in a broad and varied tapestry that is me and there is a part of me that can endure pain but not relish it whereas the submissive in question not only can endure this pain but transmute it into pleasure...the masochist in her coming out. If a submissive were to offer up that argument...you can't take what you dish out...I just might point out to her that while she may have been able all she has endured to become a submissive to a dominant, she may not have been able to endure what I did to become a good soldier in the military and rise to the rank I did in 3 years. Does that fact make her, in reality, a weak person? No...it is a different area from her wants and needs and desires.
quote:
Questions to submissives: Does a past history of bottoming or endurance of hardship or submissive roles in life influence how much you respect a dominant and how?
To dominants: How many have, or have at least considered bottoming to get more appreciation/perspective towards submissives? How many would not consider this and would be offended by the thought?
I've stated on the boards before that I had a friend who was a switch come to visit me for a few weeks one time. During this time period, she submitted to me...that was the nature of our relationship. At that time, I had come out of my first D/s relationship and wanting to expand myself more. So for one day, I agreed to submit and bottom to her. I spent a couple of days trying to get into the submissive headspace beforehand and found that, while I could roleplay, I could not get into a submissive headspace despite the fact that I respected both sides of her persona. As for the bottoming, I enjoyed the sexual aspects of it much more than I did the pain aspects. I never was able to transmute the pain into pleasure and it was only after the pain stopped and she began to "use" me in a sexual fashion that I became aroused. I learned from this experience that I do not want to be a submissive, I have no submissive headspace and that I do not like pain for pain's sake or for sexual arousal. I learned that I can enjoy being "used" as a sex toy to satisfy another's sexual desires but am selfish enough to want my own desires taken care of also. Has that knowledge been helpful in dealing with submissives? Yes. Has it been a major portion of my dealing with submissives? No.
quote:
Are there any submissives who would refuse to do something if their dominant would not be willing to do it? Dominants who as a rule would not ask a submissive to do something they themselves would not be able to endure?
I am sure that there are submissives who would refuse to do something if their dominant would not be willing to do it. To put it bluntly, they would not be a submissive for me. Our roles and wants and needs and expectations are different and should be. That is what makes the dynamic of D/s what it is...not some vanilla expectation that "my partner should be willing to endure whatever I endure and should be able to understand it exactly because he/she has felt it also". To me, that is PC BS. I find it ironic that so many nowadays want to turn D/s into some PC relationship when in all reality, when you sit back and look at it honestly, D/s is about the most un-PC type of consensual relationship possible. It is not for "I am woman, hear me roar" submissives or for "Alan Alda-wussy" dominants. Another noted that D/s in many ways stands for double standards and that is true. While you (the generic you) have the right to define your dynamic the way you want to, expecting "fairness and all things equal" in a relationship that celebrates inequality within the equality and the equality within the inequality is...to me...akin to banging your head against a brick wall.
|
|
|
|
