Andalusite
Posts: 2492
Joined: 1/25/2009 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: IrishMist Since it is my own personal belief that being Dominant or submissive is a personality trait and something that you ARE ( versus something that you do ), it matters little whether or not a person has a submissive to serve them or a Dominant to serve. You would still be either Dominant or submissive in my eyes. So, what do you consider switches to be? I was submissive in my last relationship, but was dominant in a previous one. My other BDSM relationships were egalitarian kinky, and I'm usually pretty neutral toward people as far as D/s goes. I can be a little deferential when meeting strangers, especially in large groups, or if they are significantly older than I am, but I'm also perfectly capable of taking charge when appropriate in vanilla circumstances. cpK69, to me, it isn't a matter of how they make me feel - there are plenty of dominants and submissives who I don't react to on a D/s basis. I just don't see people that way unless I'm directly interacting with them on a date/usually with at least mild play, just like I don't tend to get sexually attracted to them until they're touching me/etc. Someone is Dominant if they are oriented toward wanting control in a *consensual* acknowledged D/s or power exchange relationship. That can include traditional marriages without using the language, but it definitely involves their relationship style. Likewise for submissives. Some switches are both, some are neither, some are Dominant masochists or submissive sadists. For me to interact with someone on a D/s basis, one of us needs to have a yielding of will toward the other, it's not just about who's doing the tying up and thwacking. Cat, I see it as an orientation, not just a relationship title. It can be used in both ways, depending on circumstances.
|