ElanSubdued
Posts: 1511
Status: offline
|
Lady Angelika and Everyone,
At the risk of bringing back a misunderstanding that derailed the thread earlier on, I'll add my two bits. :-)
After reading the OP, I had an MBTI (Myers Briggs Type Indicator) moment and spotted trouble. There's no problem with clarity, however, for those skim-reading and/or those triggered by specific words, the meaning can be misunderstood - even though the OP gives extremely clear, specific definitions for the terms "bend" and "break". As with Carl Jung's seeming dichotomies (introverted versus extroverted, thinking versus feeling, judging versus perceiving, etc.), it's important to recognize these are *not* judgments where one side is good and the other bad. Likewise, they are (in fact) scalar and thus not mutually exclusive. A person rests somewhere on each scale and may thereby have a complex mixture of attributes.
To clarify how I interpret the OP, I'll summarize with the following scale: "bending to breaking". Where, "bending" is an adaptive, dynamic dominance approach (using observation and two-way feedback) to determine the best way to dominate, lead, and help a given submissive grow, and "breaking" is a strict dominance approach in which a submissive is given the dominant's (possibly static) requirements and both benefit from their need/desire for templates.
In the general sense, I've met dominants of both types and I don't see one style as being intrinsically better than the other.
When I was a dominant, my approach tended to borrow from both camps. There are certain, key things I wanted from a submissive and I was unwilling to bend on those. Along the same lines, if I promised to do something or set consequences, unless there were special reasons not to, I always followed through (even when I didn't want to or it wasn't convenient). This is a lesson I learned the hard way. If you don't follow through, submissives learn your word means nothing and start providing structures of their own instead of the ones you're trying to instill. At heart though, I'm a soft romantic and I enjoy hearing my partner's thoughts, incorporating both our ideas, and... *shock* pleasing my partner. I won't take the cliche cop-out and equate this with my submissive, inner soul. Rather, I enjoyed guiding my submissives and helping them grow, and to do this, I found it critical to incorporate their desires, strengths, weaknesses, dreams, etc. in my planning. In this regard, I'm very much a "bending" type of dominant. People aren't static and nor does a single method work with all people. Thus, I think it's essential to incorporate discovery, feedback, learning, and adjustment into one's dominant approach.
As a submissive, I enjoy dominants who use aspects of both approaches. However, I'll somewhat contradict what I said earlier (regarding neither approach being intrinsically better than the other). I avoid dominants who lean greatly toward a "breaking" style because I don't find this workable in long-term relationships. For starters, as a human being, I endeavour to be educated and well balanced, and to manage my own person, as it were. I don't need someone micromanaging me and I'm not effective under stoic rules and static leadership. Also, it would be a lie if I didn't say I have my own desires and things I want "just so". The question becomes "what things are important to my dominant that they must have and what things are important to me that I'd like to have". I've never been involved in any long-term relationship that doesn't require communication, compromise, and patience from all partners. Some breaking style dominants do compromise, but my experience has been those who lean toward the far spectrum really don't (and I admire that they're honest about saying this). This said, I'm much more compatible with dominants who identify with the modus operandi "even though I'm dominant, this still doesn't mean I'll get my way all the time". Similarly, my relationships have been more successful with dominants who motivate with affection and who deal with conflict by showing empathy as opposed to those who point to doctrine (consented to and agreed upon though it may be) and say "obey or hit the road". There probably are submissives who need and flourish under strict, unflinching enforcement, but I'm not one of them.
Elan.
< Message edited by ElanSubdued -- 12/5/2009 5:35:07 PM >
|
RE: Do you bend or break? - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread