|
ShaktiSama -> RE: one possible theory (5/3/2009 1:34:54 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: stella41b
Very few women are prepared to love a man who is 100% submissive. It would appear that no man is able to be 100% submissive without having other issues.
Honestly, I think the core of any problems between potential partners is in defining these terms.
What does it mean to be "submissive", in general? What does it mean to be "100% submissive"?
Does being "100% submissive" mean that you do not work outside the household or contribute economically, even to the extent of paying for your share of the rent, bills and food? If so, you may find it hard to find a female dominant partner--not because a woman is incapable of enjoying the fantasy of keeping a sexy houseboy or a leather-clad gimp caged in the basement, but because very few women are economically capable of supporting an additional adult male in their households, along with themselves and whatever children they have, in addition to obligations they may have to elderly parents etc..
Female dominants are part of the economic demographics for our gender: on the average women are subjected to greater rates of poverty than men and are paid 80 cents on the dollar relative to men. Finding a woman who is completely free of economic concerns is very hard, and those that are independently wealthy or successful in a lucrative profession tend to be fairly selective about their boytoys--they can afford to be.
Does being "100% submissive" mean that you can't perform sexually as anything but a bottom, that you're incapable of vaginal intercourse or of providing your domme with any service other than bending over or being a post upon which to sharpen her claws? If so, you may find it difficult to find a monogamous relationship with a domme, because we are also part of the demographic for heterosexual women: most heterosexual women have physical and emotional needs for intercourse with men. Women who don't have sex with their submissives are usually having sex with someone else.
Does being "100% submissive" mean that you have no original thoughts or opinions, no desires and fantasies, no hopes, dreams or ambitions, other than to find a woman who will tell you what to do and kick you around a bit? If so, you may find it difficult to find a female dominant partner, because female dominants, like other other women, are usually looking for relationships with people, not puppets. A bit of conversation and initiative is appreciated in a person that you spend a lot of time with; if you aren't going to get that from a man, you might as well get a large breed dog instead--they're easier to train and cheaper to feed.
I suppose the last question is: does being "100% submissive" mean that you are a complete failure in the "game of life"? No career or career plans, unable to hold down a job or drive a car, having no marketable skills, no social skills, no education, no athletic or combat ability, no artistic ability, no sense of humor, no sense of beauty, etc.? Are you attracted to the idea of submission to a woman because you are looking for someone to "fix you", to overhaul your body, your mind and your soul, to give your life direction, to make you "somebody"?
If so, this is a problem as well. Sometimes I find it difficult to sort out the place where the kinky need for humiliation play ends, a genuine lack of self-esteem or more serious emotional problems begin. All I can say is that even if a man needs to be told, in the course of D/S scenes and play, that he is a worthless pig-whore-slutpuppy-man-thing who has no purpose to his existence other than lick spunk off the kitchen floor? That needs to be something other than the truth in real life.
Honestly, I think many men would meet with greater success if they were able to tell a woman: "I am a successful person and I am quite good at my job and many things, really. I just want to feel small and diminished, dominated and maybe even a little dehumanized occasionally...by a special woman in a special relationship."
|
|
|
|
