RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

SocratesNot -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:21:55 AM)

Also I think that my theory is incomplete. There are some good points, there are some very bad. By combining it with input from other people, a stronger theory could be made.

For example, when it comes to switches. I think they are neither dominant nor submissive. I think they are just kinky and developed lot of fetishes from porn.
I am pretty sure that most males would be sexually aroused by being dominated by very attractive woman.
Most of them simply didn't experience it. If someone persuaded them to visit the dominatrix, a lot of them would develop affinity for submission.
Of course, only if the pain is not too intensive for them.
But all of this belongs to external causes which are mainly fetishistic and which produce switches, tops, bottoms, not real dominants and submissives.

I would be very aroused probably if I had a session with the dominatrix, but this would not make me very submissive. I would just develop erotic fascination and fetish for submission, which would maybe make me a bottom. Just another thought. Maybe completely wrong. There is a lot to think yet.

The worst thing of all is repression of thought !!!



laurell3 -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:24:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SocratesNot


For example, when it comes to switches. I think they are neither dominant nor submissive. I think they are just kinky and developed lot of fetishes from porn.






BAHAHAHAHAHAHA that is absolutely retarded



leadership527 -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:29:03 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: laurell3
I don't think that's so uncommon Jeff. Contrary to the OP's premise, I am a very assertive and open-minded woman who thrives on being submissive to the right person and it's not unusual for D types to have a hard time understanding how that can be possible. As Kana pointed out though, rather astutely, some of us are the way we are, just because that's the way we are.
Point of clarification, I don't think I'd have a hard time at all understanding why someone is this way. I think I get it (in general) pretty well and would have zero issue understanding it in specific with the woman I love. What I said is, "I don't prefer it"

quote:

ORIGINAL: SocratesNot
So basic desire to own a female as you express is very strange to me, so I simply forgot to include it in theory because it's very alien to me.

ROFL, join the club. When I figured that part out about myself you could've knocked me over with a feather. I'm a pretty pragmatic sort and since there was no obvious advantage to owning Carol, I tried for weeks and weeks to reason my way out of it. Heh, not to mention that when you start doing ownership in this way, there are some HUGE cultural and ethical problems. And then, of course, is the law of unintended consequences.



Jeffff -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:29:16 AM)

Ok, this is me being nice. What would lead you to such a conclusion?

Other than a thought wafting through your head.

See...... you continue to place undue emphesis on your own ideas in an area you have no first hand knowledge of.

Would you drive a car with brakes equiped by someone who thoght they knew what brakes should do, even though they have never driven.

You are "thinking outloud"

I recommend you stop that shit



GreedyTop -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:29:17 AM)

he didnt just say that, did he?



LadyNTrainer -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:33:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SocratesNot
I know this is not science. It was my overreaction when someone said that this is "blowing donkey ass".


Are you hearing me when I'm telling you that you *are* blowing donkey ass?


quote:

I put the disclaimer on the beginning so that people don't take it too seriously. I still think that it was a good attempt to understand some things.
And in some points maybe even true. I don't know why you need a theory too be 100% true in order to appreciate.


A disclaimer does not absolve you of responsibility for what comes out of your mouth.  Right now what's coming out of your mouth has a suspicious smell and consistency that most people can easily recognize.

A hypothesis or a theory - and those are different things - are by definition not proven yet to be 100% true.  But if they are based on willful ignorance or false data, and are formulated sloppily after a refusal to do actual research, then you might as well be blowing donkey ass.  It's going to smell and taste about the same.

quote:

By some posts I think some posters would be comfortable with total elimination of psychology as science.


Psychology is science.  Meaningless gum flapping is not.  When you perform meaningless gum flapping and call it science, then it becomes something worse than that. 



SocratesNot -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:33:24 AM)

It maybe more true for male switches, since women are not so much into porn. But I really do think that switches are not naturally dominant nor submissive.
You simply can't be both at the same time.
You can have some affinities for both, but one side must be stronger. And in most cases switches are just kinky.

OR

There is a completely different possibility. They also have some internal insecurity like dominants and submissives. When they dominate, they heal these insecurities in one way, the way the dominant does, when they submit, they heal the insecurity the other way, the way submissive does.

OR something third

instead of endlessly criticizing my theory offer some thoughts of yours.



laurell3 -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:35:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SocratesNot

And in most cases switches are just kinky.



And where Einstein do you come up with this theory? Again WHERE are you getting the evidence to come up with these half-baked proclamations of truth?



GreedyTop -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:36:02 AM)

I believe that you should perhaps quit 'thinking' so much until and unless you have some realtime experience to back up your assertions.



Jeffff -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:36:16 AM)

Ya know... some people keep telling me that you are really harmless and perhaps a bit damaged.

ALl I know is I havn't called you an asshole for days.... and I don't know why



porcelaine -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:37:19 AM)

SocratesNot,

quote:

For example, when it comes to switches. I think they are neither dominant nor submissive. I think they are just kinky and developed lot of fetishes from porn.


I spent years as a switch and I'm not a porn aficionado. I do like pervy stories from time to time. Just saying.

quote:

I am pretty sure that most males would be sexually aroused by being dominated by very attractive woman.
Most of them simply didn't experience it. If someone persuaded them to visit the dominatrix, a lot of them would develop affinity for submission.


I'm not aroused by the thought of a woman hitting me. However, certain men do invoke those feelings.

quote:

Of course, only if the pain is not too intensive for them.


I like pain. I'm not a wuss. And I actually like the stuff that hurts.

quote:

But all of this belongs to external causes which are mainly fetishistic and which produce switches, tops, bottoms, not real dominants and submissives.


PS. I'm a slave

~porcelaine



leadership527 -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:41:48 AM)

None of your answers really apply to how I view it hough porcelaine.

quote:

I respect your ideas as you know. But I think this is why a lot girls have very conflicting issues on this subject. The idea is promoted that if she isn't "naturally" submissive then her desire to yield is suspect
.
Yes, this is what fools think. I'm not one of them. I said quite specifically that I may assess absolutely nothing wrong with the submission... it may come with a great deal of strength and integrity, it may be driven by motives which are laudable by own values. In short, I may approve of it in every possible way.

quote:

And for what it's worth, I've met more than my share of natural girls that aren't very surrendered. The two don't always go hand in hand.

*nods* In the end, it is things like commitment, integrity, strength, compassion, etc. that will determine the quality of that which is offered -- on both sides of the kneel.

quote:

I think it's an easier idea for many men to wrap their mind around in all truth. And some are threatened by it as well. They feel she's harder to control.
Heh, yes. I agree. Semi-dominant personalities are threatened such a thing. If you knew more about my background, you'd know that it's laughable to think I would be bothered by it.

quote:

But you've never been a submissive. Much like the op you're relying on observation and theory. You haven't had the practical experience to realize that it can come in different containers and be just as genuine. Her pliability has more to do with who she was entering the kneel and the impact your ownership has upon her.
Again, you are misreading me. I quite specifically said (and said again above), that it all may be quite laudable. But truly, aren't I allowed to prefer vanilla and you chocolate without a debate on which is "better"?

quote:

Interesting. I've cast everything away just for this. Things I would have never dreamed of doing in the past are simply no longer an impediment. But in my mind it's worth it.
Duly noted. You'll note my hesitation with that statement. I'm beginning to wonder (and collect evidence) that suggests the limits I wondered about my be non-existent. That still doesn't change my preference though. Of course, as I noted, what undoubtedly WOULD change my preference is falling in love with a girl like you who is in the "by orientation" camp. In truth, my existing preference may be driven by nothing other than "this is how Carol is so I appreciate it because I love her". Which STILL doesn't change the fact that in the here and now, the "by orientation" submissives don't generate "domly urges" in me. At this very moment in time, I do not resonate with them.



tigreetsa -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:42:36 AM)

FR

If you cannot communicate a theory or idea in plain and simple terms then it means that you haven't thought it through enough or don't have enough knowledge of the subject.

Just by way of advice.



Kana -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:43:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SocratesNot

Kana, of course that some alpha men have psychological issues. That doesn't even have to be questioned. But NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE ALPHA MEN.
That's just coincidence. Anyone can have issues. What I meant is that they have no issues caused by them being alpha men. And I still think it's true.

When it comes to dominant women, every science article will tell you that they usually have more testosterone. With more testosteron there is increased it's more likely that they will be attracted to feminized men or other women.

When it comes to matriarchal cultures, you should better read a Wikipedia article on that. There is no known, proven matriarchal society, not now, not even in the past.



I'll take the hit on the matriarchal comment though the Trobriand islands have been considered a matriarchy by at least one anthropologist.

And there's a helluva big jump from increased testosterone to "Quite likely becoming lesbian"

But you are ignoring what everyone else is telling you. You are whacking together a bunch of stuff trying to find something cohesive, essentially a composition fallacy in logic. You are taking singular circumstances, often one of many acts which could add to or cause a future behavior, and building castles in the air. Just because one person sees or has a thing happen does not predetermine response, yet you are attempting to apply very broad strokes to individualistic behavior. Some submissive's were abused as kids, many weren't. Some grew up in controlling households, others never had any discipline or accountability at all and crave it. No two people react quite the same way to anything. Instead they respond based on an infinite number of reasons, including personality, prior history, past experiences, is it a sunny day, did the cat shit in my shoe, emotional sensitivity, personal security, worldview, morals and values just to start.

And as for alpha males having psychological issues, I gotta mention that many of the historical figures who history tends to see as alpha, Patton, McArthur, etc... often had deep seeded issues which were arguably the source of their drive, ambition and determination. Alpha males haven't always demonstrated themselves to be the sanest set of genes in the gene pool.






LuckyAlbatross -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:47:22 AM)

quote:

I think they are just kinky and developed lot of fetishes from porn.


Oh.  My.

I did some really great bondage tying up at CCFF.  I looked at it and knew any real shibari master would cry at how immature, unrefined and messy it was.   

As someone who actually has studied philosophy and is experienced in kink, I think I am experiencing what I imagined that shibari master would, only ten times more painful.



laurell3 -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:49:37 AM)

and definitely NOT the good type of painful!



LadyNTrainer -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:54:56 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SocratesNot
I really do think that switches are not naturally dominant nor submissive.
You simply can't be both at the same time.


Factually and fundamentally incorrect.  Do you actually know anything about behavior, starting with animal behavior and the basic concept of dominant/submissive social interactions?  The majority of individuals in social species, almost without exception, are capable of both and will display both. It is actually rarer to find individuals on either end of the typical bell curve who only infrequently display one of those behaviors.

quote:

You can have some affinities for both, but one side must be stronger. And in most cases switches are just kinky.


Remember back when I told you that making pronunciations of fact about other people's feelings and experiences is a poor idea, especially when you don't even know a damn thing about the area in which you are attempting to pass judgment?   I must conclude that either you have an incredibly short memory or that you are incapable of learning and changing this behavior pattern.

quote:

They also have some internal insecurity like dominants and submissives. When they dominate, they heal these insecurities in one way, the way the dominant does, when they submit, they heal the insecurity the other way, the way submissive does.


And still you continue to blather this nonsense despite being told that it is not just factually incorrect, it is socially inappropriate.  Saying it's only a possibility does not disclaim your responsibility.


quote:

instead of endlessly criticizing my theory offer some thoughts of yours.


My thought is that if you are not deliberately seeking to annoy and offend people, then you may well be perceptually and socially or emotionally impaired in some manner.  You continue to lecture others and to make pronouncements and judgments about their personal experiences, despite the fact that you have no experience yourself.  You remain unwilling to listen and learn rather than attempting to lecture and teach based on willful ignorance.    Ergo I am unlikely to waste any more time responding in an attempt to communicate with you.  You aren't communicating, you're lecturing.  When you don't actually have a clue what you're trying to lecture on, that is quite annoying, and a complete waste of time to engage with. 



cloudboy -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 11:57:30 AM)

quote:

Psychology is science.


Some might argue with you there.....



Jeffff -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 12:02:20 PM)

Hey!...does anyone wanna hear how I masturbate?



LadyNTrainer -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 12:03:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

quote:

Psychology is science.


Some might argue with you there.....


It is not hard science.  However it does have peer reviewed journals, the expectation of replicable experiments, and professional standards of research prior to publication.

What we're dealing with here......not so much. 



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875