quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin

... "I am a strong submissive and I need a really strong dominant to TAKE control". Some will say that they need a dominant who can outlast or be strong enough to squash their resistance. Some want a dominant who can outthink them and thereby outsmart them into submission. Some will say that their willful refusal is a test of their dominant's power. Some will go so far as to say that if their dominant fails such a test and they are the ones to "win out' in the end, it clearly indicates that the dominant is either not really a dominant or is too weak of one for them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin

... "I am a strong submissive and I need a really strong dominant to TAKE control". Some will say that they need a dominant who can outlast or be strong enough to squash their resistance. Some want a dominant who can outthink them and thereby outsmart them into submission. Some will say that their willful refusal is a test of their dominant's power. Some will go so far as to say that if their dominant fails such a test and they are the ones to "win out' in the end, it clearly indicates that the dominant is either not really a dominant or is too weak of one for them.

On one hand, I fully agree with you that D/s and M/s relationships should not be battlegrounds where one has to fight to win or lose.  Good relationships are about everyone in the relationship winning.

On the other hand, I can relate somewhat to the attitude that you are questioning in the quote above.  I am not submissive to everyone; to me, submission is deference... willingly ceding authority.  I can't reach that point of submission unless and until a certain level of respect and trust have been earned.  Part of that is knowing that he is "worthy" of my respect and trust.  I can't make myself subservient to a man who is less emotionally stable than I am.  I can't defer to the wishes of a man who is less decisive that I am.  I can't subject myself to a man who is less capable and willing to take control than I am.  I can't cede authority and decision making to a man who can't keep up with me intellectually.  lol... What would be the purpose of submitting to a man who was less dominant than I am?

quote:

Some will say that they need a dominant who can outlast or be strong enough to squash their resistance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin

Over the years I've heard countless submissives and recently seen several instances of such on the boards where they say things like "I am a strong submissive and I need a really strong dominant to TAKE control". Some will say that they need a dominant who can outlast or be strong enough to squash their resistance. Some want a dominant who can outthink them and thereby outsmart them into submission. Some will say that their willful refusal is a test of their dominant's power. Some will go so far as to say that if their dominant fails such a test and they are the ones to "win out' in the end, it clearly indicates that the dominant is either not really a dominant or is too weak of one for them.

I fail to see where submissiveness comes into those scenarios. That's not being dominated...that's being coerced. That's not submission...that's losing a battle. D/s and M/s relationships should not be battlegrounds where one has to fight to win or lose. No one should have to fight for or have to take your submission. If you are a submissive and your submission is what fulfills you, why on earth would you need someone to fight you to get it from you? It should be something that comes from you willingly....out of respect, out of trust, out of joy, out of your own need to surrender...but not because someone coerced it from you, battled you for it, outsmarted you, threatened you into it, placated, bribed or bartered with you to get it. That's not submission...that's being the loser of the battle....and there shouldn't have had to be a battle in the first place.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MzMia

quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin

Over the years I've heard countless submissives and recently seen several instances of such on the boards where they say things like "I am a strong submissive and I need a really strong dominant to TAKE control". Some will say that they need a dominant who can outlast or be strong enough to squash their resistance. Some want a dominant who can outthink them and thereby outsmart them into submission. Some will say that their willful refusal is a test of their dominant's power. Some will go so far as to say that if their dominant fails such a test and they are the ones to "win out' in the end, it clearly indicates that the dominant is either not really a dominant or is too weak of one for them.

I fail to see where submissiveness comes into those scenarios. That's not being dominated...that's being coerced. That's not submission...that's losing a battle. D/s and M/s relationships should not be battlegrounds where one has to fight to win or lose. No one should have to fight for or have to take your submission. If you are a submissive and your submission is what fulfills you, why on earth would you need someone to fight you to get it from you? It should be something that comes from you willingly....out of respect, out of trust, out of joy, out of your own need to surrender...but not because someone coerced it from you, battled you for it, outsmarted you, threatened you into it, placated, bribed or bartered with you to get it. That's not submission...that's being the loser of the battle....and there shouldn't have had to be a battle in the first place.

What a wonderful post erin, you are on fire!
It must be close to the 4th of July, what a firecracker you are.
I am just glad that a submissive female actually wrote this, and you
described so well what many of us Dominants think.
I have enough battles in my day to day life, I will pass on a submissive
that I must fight and play games with.
A submissive that wants to "test" me?
WTF?  I thought I was supposed to test them!
If there is a battle you will win, because I will run away any submissive that
is looking for fights and battles.

quote:

ORIGINAL: happypervert

Similarly, the comments about wanting dominants who can outthink them may come from those who are used to outthinking and manipulating others. In that case, they need someone who can see through their little games and even beat them at it, and wouldn't respect or submit to someone who couldn't do it.

So I think strong submissives know they have power and simply want someone who has more. Nothing wrong with that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin

Over the years I've heard countless submissives and recently seen several instances of such on the boards where they say things like "I am a strong submissive and I need a really strong dominant to TAKE control". Some will say that they need a dominant who can outlast or be strong enough to squash their resistance. Some want a dominant who can outthink them and thereby outsmart them into submission. Some will say that their willful refusal is a test of their dominant's power. Some will go so far as to say that if their dominant fails such a test and they are the ones to "win out' in the end, it clearly indicates that the dominant is either not really a dominant or is too weak of one for them.

I fail to see where submissiveness comes into those scenarios. That's not being dominated...that's being coerced. That's not submission...that's losing a battle. D/s and M/s relationships should not be battlegrounds where one has to fight to win or lose. No one should have to fight for or have to take your submission. If you are a submissive and your submission is what fulfills you, why on earth would you need someone to fight you to get it from you? It should be something that comes from you willingly....out of respect, out of trust, out of joy, out of your own need to surrender...but not because someone coerced it from you, battled you for it, outsmarted you, threatened you into it, placated, bribed or bartered with you to get it. That's not submission...that's being the loser of the battle....and there shouldn't have had to be a battle in the first place.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MzMia
IMHO, if people would take the time in the BEGINNING and get
to know their partners well, that would circumvent a lot of the confusion.
Ask the hard questions early, get to know your Dominant well, and be smart
and wise enough to only agree to submit to a Dominant that you respect and trust.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Missokyst

I was with you right up there till you said "out-think".  I do take the position of looking for someone who is "strong enough to be my man".  But for me that is not a physically overwhelming person even though at times it is fun to be ravished.  It is not someone who is going to bully me into submitting, because I see bullying as a childish tatic and not at all dominant.  
For me it is someone who doesn't need to knock me down to make himself feel better about who he is.
I have sought out people who are not threatened by my intelligence or my personality quirk of over thinking.  I do want them to out think me at times because even though I may not pay attentiion at the time, I am able to recall that later and use it.  It is not a matter of out-thinking me in order to get me to submit.  It is more like added information which might help redirect my spiral of thoughts later.  I am not sure if that is as much out-thinking as it is being at a similar level with different eyes.
I do agree with you on all other points without question.
Kyst

quote:

ORIGINAL: happypervert

quote:

Some will say that they need a dominant who can outlast or be strong enough to squash their resistance.

If we replace the biased word "squash" with something like "overcome", then I think this behavior is entirely normal. In the early stages of  relationships I'll give a submissive a task she probably doesn't want to do. I expect some internal conflict between the desire to submit and not wanting to surrender that little piece, and it may take a while. She may try to get out of it, but I won't let her and all I have to do is wait until she gives in. I'm not doing any squashing, though maybe she is. I see this as a necessary exercise we must go through to get deeper into the relationship; without it we're just scratching the surface.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin
. Those who if they don't get that push back they see it as a failure on the part of the dominant....and not as a failure of their submission.

quote:

ORIGINAL: happypervert
Similarly, the comments about wanting dominants who can outthink them may come from those who are used to outthinking and manipulating others. In that case, they need someone who can see through their little games and even beat them at it, and wouldn't respect or submit to someone who couldn't do it.