RE: What does "submissive" mean to you?

RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (Full Version)

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

Message

AQuietSimpleMan -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/21/2010 10:51:18 PM)
julia, Some people feel the reward is necessary for their surrender, they need to know that what they will receive will be worth the submission that they will give. Maybe this is what leadership ment. QSM

juliaoceania -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/21/2010 10:54:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AQuietSimpleMan julia, Some people feel the reward is necessary for their surrender, they need to know that what they will receive will be worth the submission that they will give. Maybe this is what leadership ment. QSM I think people need to feel their relationships are rewarding, regardless of orientation.... I mean, do you think gay people think "what reward am I going to get from being gay with this person?"..... See what I mean? I am not attacking, but I am clarifying, and as someone that has had relationships in which I was "submissive" I think I am qualified to weigh in....

leadership527 -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/21/2010 11:16:29 PM)
And I'm very glad that you have your definitions and thoughts julia and I'm pleased that they work for you. But as I read the OP, the question was specifically how do I (well, each of us being an I) think of it. I gave my answer and I'm content with it.

juliaoceania -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/21/2010 11:29:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 And I'm very glad that you have your definitions and thoughts julia and I'm pleased that they work for you. But as I read the OP, the question was specifically how do I (well, each of us being an I) think of it. I gave my answer and I'm content with it. I suppose I see no issue with how you define it, but there are internal states and external states... and internal states are for those who experience them to define (in my opinion). I do not know how someone could define an orientation based upon the internal psychology that differs from person to person and isn't exhibited on the outside..... For example: If this thread was about defining dominance, I probably would think of those external things that I see as a sub that define it for me (i know it when I see it), but I have no idea what defines a dominant based upon how he internalizes his motivations to dominate, in fact I would think that varied from dom to dom... Just me, etc

AQuietSimpleMan -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 12:03:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I think people need to feel their relationships are rewarding, regardless of orientation.... I agree with this whole heartedly, and I leave the determination of what is rewarding up to them. Certain submissives do not require anything from their partner beyond being there and letting them do things for them. They do not need a Power Dynamic they simply need someone to serve. The point I am making in the way I replied is that not everyone has the absolute desire to be submissive as an alternative lifestyle dictates they simply need someone to please and do things for. quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I mean, do you think gay people think "what reward am I going to get from being gay with this person?"..... See what I mean? I do, but am confused we are not talking about a gay person, we are talking about a submissive person, your argument that a gay person would not ask what reward am I getting from being gay with this person is flawed in that we do not know if the gay person is also submissive and if they are the kind of submissive who does think they need to see the reward in being submissive and gay with that person. I think there are certain types of PEOPLE who only do things for the reward of being with a certain person.... How often do you hear about women who want to marry a doctor, or a lawyer, or men who want women with nice large breasts, or someone who simply wants a person who performs oral sex, and although that may not be the ONLY reason someone gets involved with someone else it could be a reason why someone does not STAY with someone or at least consider someone worth being with. The Point being that to some people being submissive is a conditional thing. I know you know the type I am talking about, they are just about everywhere you look. "I will only surender to a Master who is ____, and ____ and they must be okay with me doing _____ and have to be knowledgeable in ____." you are not familiar with statements like this? quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I am not attacking, but I am clarifying, and as someone that has had relationships in which I was "submissive" I think I am qualified to weigh in.... You do qualify, but your view is not the only one here and sometimes what a person says is how they feel, it needn't go any further because it is as simple as it has been presented. I think what Leadership said was clear enough and did not need to be forced into an explanation that may not express his views. I think some people are Twits because of the way they talk. If I were asked to expand on that, perhaps give an example of something someone says that makes them a Twit, it would be construed that all people who say _____ are a Twit, when in realty NOT ALL people who say _____ are Twits, just the ones that are twits are Twits. Do you see what I am getting at?

juliaoceania -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 12:13:16 AM)
quote: I do, but am confused we are not talking about a gay person, we are talking about a submissive person, your argument that a gay person would not ask what reward am I getting from being gay with this person is flawed in that we do not know if the gay person is also submissive and if they are the kind of submissive who does think they need to see the reward in being submissive and gay with that person. I think of submissive as a relationship orientation... just as being gay or being het.... it is the way I relate in my intimate relationships....it is not something that I decide to be based on a reward. I decide what relationships are rewarding, but submissive is not something I decide to be because of "gain"... does that make sense?> quote: I think there are certain types of PEOPLE who only do things for the reward of being with a certain person.... How often do you hear about women who want to marry a doctor, or a lawyer, or men who want women with nice large breasts, or someone who simply wants a person who performs oral sex, and although that may not be the ONLY reason someone gets involved with someone else it could be a reason why someone does not STAY with someone or at least consider someone worth being with. The Point being that to some people being submissive is a conditional thing. I know you know the type I am talking about, they are just about everywhere you look. "I will only surender to a Master who is ____, and ____ and they must be okay with me doing _____ and have to be knowledgeable in ____." you are not familiar with statements like this? Some people that do this are dominant, some are vanilla, and some are submissive... this is not something tied to orientation..... quote: You do qualify, but your view is not the only one here and sometimes what a person says is how they feel, it needn't go any further because it is as simple as it has been presented. I think what Leadership said was clear enough and did not need to be forced into an explanation that may not express his views. So if someone asked you to explain your definition, that would bother you? I asked a question... that was all I did.....I can't force him to comply with answering it, this seems a bit dramatic to me.... He has every right to quantify submissive anyway he likes..He isn't "wrong".... I just was curious, and I am not trying to start a fight.... quote: I think some people are Twits because of the way they talk. If I were asked to expand on that, perhaps give an example of something someone says that makes them a Twit, it would be construed that all people who say _____ are a Twit, when in realty NOT ALL people who say _____ are Twits, just the ones that are twits are Twits. Do you see what I am getting at? No, I don't see at all, but that is okay.... I think that if I made blanket statements about what motivates dominants, you might see why I asked these questions...perhaps try viewing it from that perspective.... and I am not saying that doms have no idea of what motivates us, but I am saying that it is variable... that is all....

laurell3 -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 3:27:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 And I'm very glad that you have your definitions and thoughts julia and I'm pleased that they work for you. But as I read the OP, the question was specifically how do I (well, each of us being an I) think of it. I gave my answer and I'm content with it. That's correct. This isn't a quiz. Everyone is entitled to express their own personal viewpoint without having to defend it. The issue isn't whether one's definition or thoughts are right, it's whether they are realistic. Clearly Jeff's definition works for him as he is living it. Thanks for the input Jeff and everyone, I'm not going to attempt to respond to every post, sorry.

laurell3 -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 3:33:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Missokyst I agree that most couples engage in some sort of submission toward the relationship to keep it healthy. However, that of which I speak goes beyond it. For instance, I am a very precise linguist, but I learned to cuss, use slang, and relax my speech patterns because my mate at the time said this casually to me.. "it makes my friends think you think they are dumb". It only took that sentence to cause me to go out of my way to make people more comfortable in my presence by stiving to become more like the norm. It took a lot for me to adopt those changes. For me submission is not just making my mate happy. It is making my mate happy and content regardless of the effort it might take me to achieve it. This is a need beyond my control. Normal people do things because they want to please. I do things because I cannot stop myself. That is why I am very gaurded about to whom I submit. Once I am there I am unable to stop myself from doing what ever it takes. That is not normal. quote: ORIGINAL: laurell3 How does one fit in as a submissive though? Isn't making the life of your mate easier something all people should do in relationships? I'm not nitpicking, I really am trying to get a feel for what you see as the distinction of who is a submissive and who isn't for you. I know it's not that easily defined which is why it's a difficult OP to word. Thanks Miss, I get it. I do that too, to an extent. For me personally, it took me awhile to learn that losing myself only makes me wake up in an unhappy relationship and I had to cut off the tendency to be what someone else wanted and be me. It seems odd now to even look back at that, I'm probably too much the other way now!

Inthewoods -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 7:09:13 AM)
I see the term "true submissive" used a great deal - and have had it applied to myself. It's like it is a badge of specialness, but really it means nothing, does it? I am what I am, with different facets in different situations. In my business life, for example, I am anything but submissive. For me "submissive" means that in my initimate relationships my needs/wants/desires come second. In fact, I''d almost go so far as to say that I don't have any, other than to make the other person happy.

daddysprop247 -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 7:21:31 AM)
beth's three basic "types" of submissives explain it pretty well for me. i believe that there are people who are submissive sexually only, people who are submissive by personality and it describes their general approach to the world around them, and people who choose to be submissive within the confines of a particular relationship, usually because something about their partner "inspires" their submission. so when someone describes themselves as submissive, i ask a couple of questions to determine which of the three "types" they are referring to.

leadership527 -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 7:40:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Inthewoods I see the term "true submissive" used a great deal - and have had it applied to myself. It's like it is a badge of specialness, but really it means nothing, does it chuckles I would be not quite that cynical. Giving people the benefit of the doubt, I'd interpret it as "someone who submits in a way I can relate to". To be fair, it's really hard to get rid of personal bias since it is... after all... our personal bias. Even as I admit in my intellectual brain that anyone who submits is, by definition, a "true submissive" (laughs gee, rocket science there) my gut still reacts to a particular type and how can I help but think of that particular type as more "real" to me... it's the only type I can actually feel rather than intellectualize about. Honestly, more often than not, I suspect that these debates come out on the boards because someone let their gut get through the filters in their intellect then someone else with a not particularly solid self-image gets offended by it. Generally I see the debates as mountains out of molehills. Then again, this is the internet where molehills are made to be built into mountains and it's ever so much easier to be cynical, aggressive, or a host of other things than it is face to face.

laurell3 -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 7:59:43 AM)
Jeff, I think it's true on the other side of the coin as well that we are drawn to certain types of dominants. I don't think there's anything paticularly offensive at all about having a preference. Oddly though while subs/slaves have various categorizations we rely on (such as those mentioned by beth and others), I really haven't seen much of that with regard to doms....well none that are flattering or helpful anyway. [;)] The thread really isn't borne out of any sense of offense as much as the number of times these things are said or alluded to really makes me wonder how many of us are really not all that well grounded in reality when it comes to our expectations about people being roles. Thanks again for your input.

leadership527 -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 8:10:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: laurell3 Oddly though while subs/slaves have various categorizations we rely on (such as those mentioned by beth and others), I really haven't seen much of that with regard to doms....well none that are flattering or helpful anyway. [;)] You mean that dom's dont' classify subs? Can you restate this sentence? quote: The thread really isn't borne out of any sense of offense as much as the number of times these things are said or alluded to really makes me wonder how many of us are really not all that well grounded in reality when it comes to our expectations about people being roles. Heh, well you'll get no argument from me there. I see a ton of that in general... at least on the internet. I see way less of it in real life... at least the real life places I go. For me personally, it's always important to remember that we can slice and dice humans in any number of ways and those ways can sometimes be helpful in understanding. But by applying a cognitive filter over the real life human, what you're doing is viewing one part at the expense of the remainder. I can say something like "Carol is submissive by personality trait" but who I SEE is "Carol"... all of her... including the part that can get quite thoroughly dominant given enough provocation.

Missokyst -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 8:53:04 AM)
I was fortunate to find this out about myself early on in my life. It was this knowlege that has kept me grounded and able to gaurd myself from letting this take over. It is the primary reason I have not had many men in my life even though I have been single since I was 23 and am now in my 50's. I don't let many people in and if I do it is because there is something about them that lets me feel secure. Apart from my early marriage when I was still unaware of my personality bent, I have never had a relationship that made me unhappy. It was ending them that brought about unhappiness and all too often that was my own doing. Those endings were of my doing, and inevidibly ended to benefit my partner. quote: ORIGINAL: laurell3 Thanks Miss, I get it. I do that too, to an extent. For me personally, it took me awhile to learn that losing myself only makes me wake up in an unhappy relationship and I had to cut off the tendency to be what someone else wanted and be me. It seems odd now to even look back at that, I'm probably too much the other way now!

juliaoceania -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 9:01:55 AM)
quote: That's correct. This isn't a quiz. Everyone is entitled to express their own personal viewpoint without having to defend it I was not attempting to derail your thread, nor put anyone on the defensive.... I exchanged cmail with Jeff, and I won't post on this thread again... My apologies Laurell...

LadyPact -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 9:02:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: laurell3 I think it's true on the other side of the coin as well that we are drawn to certain types of dominants. I don't think there's anything paticularly offensive at all about having a preference. Oddly though while subs/slaves have various categorizations we rely on (such as those mentioned by beth and others), I really haven't seen much of that with regard to doms....well none that are flattering or helpful anyway. [;)] The thread really isn't borne out of any sense of offense as much as the number of times these things are said or alluded to really makes me wonder how many of us are really not all that well grounded in reality when it comes to our expectations about people being roles. Thanks again for your input. If I'm getting the right vibe from this, I'm going to say that the reason you don't see it is because there is a sense of prejudice on the other side of the coin. There is some great unspoken rule where it becomes perfectly acceptable to determine the level of submissiveness someone has, but dear blazes, don't ever question the level Dominance one has. How dare anyone question the mighty? It seems to Me that it stands to reason if you break it down to three categories for submissives, the same has to work in reverse. Personality, relationship, and situational. Truthfully, I have a hard time with that last one, because you really can have the same situation, and neither participant necessarily being submissive or Dominant in the energy that they are interchanging with another person. I'm not excluding it as some folks in their first person knowledge (being the participant) will feel one way about it and others will feel completely different. Using Myself as an example, I can draw the distinction between having a Dominant headspace with one person and simply topping another doing the very same activity. With one the energy flow is there and with the other it's not. This is not to say that within the context of a personal dynamic that people shouldn't look at the compatibility factor of another person and make good choices for themselves in whether a person is 'submissive enough' or 'Dominant enough'. Throwing a severe imbalance into the mix of a dynamic is a quick recipe for failure.

Aileen1968 -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 9:33:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: laurell3 what does the word submissive mean to you? It means that I do what he says in all aspects of our relationship in the areas that he chooses to control at the times he chooses to control them. His wishes are the top priority of my day. Some days he's specific and detailed...how I dress, what order I do things, what I eat. I follow those to a tee. Some days he chooses to give me free reign with the stipulation that I have to tell him what my plans are. I have to ask permission to do things that I know are out of the ordinary. quote: What does it mean for someone to be submissive in the larger sense of the word for you personally? Does your personal definition leave room for reality? Is there an element of fantasy or unrealistic expectations in D/s and/or BDSM that come from the internet? What have you experienced in that regard? There must be just a tad bit of reality in how we interact since we're going on two years of being together and this last year has been practically 24/7. As for the internet...it serves as my source of visual porn and that's about it when it comes to all of this. I like learning by doing.

leadership527 -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 9:55:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact If I'm getting the right vibe from this, I'm going to say that the reason you don't see it is because there is a sense of prejudice on the other side of the coin. There is some great unspoken rule where it becomes perfectly acceptable to determine the level of submissiveness someone has, but dear blazes, don't ever question the level Dominance one has. How dare anyone question the mighty? No no.. haven't you read the profiles LP? Every single dominant who ever walked the face of the earth is a "natural dominant" and has never had a submissive thought in their entire lives -- each and every one a natural leader of men and beast both. I honestly wish I had known this when I used to work for a living. We were constantly struggling to find good leaders. If only I'd know they all hung out on collarme. Actually, I find it to be HUGELY interesting that we expect every dominant to be purely dominant in every fiber of their being and that is a good thing. However, a submissive who is that same way is a doormat and to be maligned. I wonder frequently why we don't call the "pure dominants" something more like "assholes" if we're going to call the pure submissives "doormats". Interestingly, it is also true that the dominants who want the purely submissive types are considered weak dominants cause... you know... a real man would be able to break a spirited filly... or somesuch. Honestly, there's some very squirrelly shit that goes on regarding dominance and submission

laurell3 -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 9:58:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: That's correct. This isn't a quiz. Everyone is entitled to express their own personal viewpoint without having to defend it I was not attempting to derail your thread, nor put anyone on the defensive.... I exchanged cmail with Jeff, and I won't post on this thread again... My apologies Laurell... It wasn't directed at you personally julia, I am aware many people have viewpoints that aren't what has been expressed here. I am merely attempting to get everyone to post even if they have those viewpoints.

laurell3 -> RE: What does "submissive" mean to you? (6/22/2010 10:05:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact If I'm getting the right vibe from this, I'm going to say that the reason you don't see it is because there is a sense of prejudice on the other side of the coin. There is some great unspoken rule where it becomes perfectly acceptable to determine the level of submissiveness someone has, but dear blazes, don't ever question the level Dominance one has. How dare anyone question the mighty? No no.. haven't you read the profiles LP? Every single dominant who ever walked the face of the earth is a "natural dominant" and has never had a submissive thought in their entire lives -- each and every one a natural leader of men and beast both. I honestly wish I had known this when I used to work for a living. We were constantly struggling to find good leaders. If only I'd know they all hung out on collarme. Actually, I find it to be HUGELY interesting that we expect every dominant to be purely dominant in every fiber of their being and that is a good thing. However, a submissive who is that same way is a doormat and to be maligned. I wonder frequently why we don't call the "pure dominants" something more like "assholes" if we're going to call the pure submissives "doormats". Interestingly, it is also true that the dominants who want the purely submissive types are considered weak dominants cause... you know... a real man would be able to break a spirited filly... or somesuch. Honestly, there's some very squirrelly shit that goes on regarding dominance and submission Well we do call some of them assholes or wankers or worse yet "abusive" Jeff, it's just not as accepted by "the community" (for lack of a better term) as terms like "bedroom submissive" or "bratty submissive". Instead we tend to somehow say the submissive is at fault or "not submissive enough". I agree, it's an issue of compatibility like LP says. There certainly is such a thing as too much or not enough kink or D/s or whatever floats one's boat. But then again, we are talking about judging potential partners, not unknown parties whom we are not in a dynamic with. The number of times I have read something someone has said on these forums and winced saying, wow I could NOT do that, but I have to admire the love and committment they have to their relationship and ideals is uncountable. I'm just not sure why more people aren't recognizing that role can very much be contextual for some and it's unrealistic to expect it otherwise.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875