|
undergroundsea -> RE: What about me? (6/8/2009 6:35:25 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: NeedAKinkyFriend
I'm not looking for anyone to "do me" in any particular way, and would like to find a life partner with whom I can have a genuine relationship AND serve HER needs in the bedroom. The hope is that her need to be sexually dominant would line up with my need to be sexually submissive, and the rest of the relationship would be open to negotiation.
quote:
really marginalizes the genuine emotional depth I'm seeking. I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not looking for purely recreational bdsm, or submission outside of a relationship. My submission, my need for someone to worship and serve, however linked to my sexuality it might be, is to me a special and beautiful expression of love and devotion. It's the deepest way I would like to express my love for my partner. This isn't "play" for me. I'm trying to find someone who understands, reciprocates, and approves.
Perhaps the difference in perspective about whether or not the OP is a bottom comes partially from semantics. To me, a bottom is someone who enjoys an activity for sake of sensation and not for sake of any power dynamics. Midori does a class on D/s archetypes in which she explains that there can be a dominant bottom. A dominant bottom would give instructions for how to be hit and the like and control the scenario to achieve the sensation sought. The significance of semantics, or at least comparing notes on what each means by a term, is that it leads to better communication and better understanding of compatibility. For instance, from Midori's class there also exist submissive tops. Dominant bottoms and submissive tops make for compatible pairings.
To me, anyone who has an interest in any transfer of authority (to whatever extent) enjoys submission. The degree of transfer of authority falls over a spectrum. Personality traits and an interest in submission are independent variables. One might encounter people who enjoy submission but have personality traits (selfish) that make them unattractive partners to that person.
I am not convinced we are all interpretting the OP in the same way. I wonder if some people are interpretting his words to mean as follows:
During sex he likes to be on bottom. He might perform oral sex on his partner. Maybe he'll beg to be tied up and spanked. When he's done he says he is hungry and is going to make himself a sandwich. He asks his partner if she would like a sandwich. Then, the instant he crosses the bedroom door, he says, wait a second, I am no longer in the bedroom, you go get your own sandwich.
;-)
I interpret bedroom submission to mean that D/s exists mostly across sexual and romantic expressions in a mostly egalitarian relationship, which I think is a fair form of a BDSM relationship. From what I sense through the OP's words, he would indeed go make that sandwich for his partner. From his words in boldface type above, I expect that acts of submission would blur with acts of love and that they would occur even outside the spatial confines of the bedroom. However, he sees his relationship to be a loving egalitarian companionship first (most of the time they would exist and appear, even when alone, as a romantic couple without any obvious difference in status and power), and BDSM as something that adds to this companionship.
There are other people into BDSM--women and men--who seek a similar relationship. It is not that they do not have an interest in BDSM. It is that they define their overall relationship in a manner that achieves a balance between different needs (BDSM, companionship) they have for a relationship. There are those for whom BDSM defines the structure of the relationship in a more elaborate manner. It is not a question of right or wrong, but one of compatibility.
For those who interpret his dynamic differently than I do, I invite you to elaborate how you see it to be.
Cheers,
Sea
|
|
|
|
