Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Inversely Proportional?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> Inversely Proportional? Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 7:55:45 AM   
heartfeltsub


Posts: 1641
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline 		A recent conversation with a Dominant friend of mine has sparked this post and series of questions. He was commenting not only about His relationship with His s-type but also speaking about a conversation that He had had with another Dominant friend of His. He is finding that while the sex is phenomenal with this particular s-type, that she really isn't that submissive. She is BDSM model and former stripper, so fairly attractive and the girl that the other Dominant was talking about falls in the same category of being fairly attractive and highly sexual.

So the question that arose is this: Is there an inversely proportional attractiveness to submissive ratio, ie the more physically attractive a person is, the less submissive that person is or is it something unique to these two cases? Another question that arose was which was more important phenomenal sex and attractiveness or phenomenal submission. Do you see many people who have both, who are highly physically attractive and also highly submissive and obedient?

Thank you in advance for your responses,

heartfelt

_____________________________

Life is an exciting business, and most exciting when it is lived for others.

Life is a succession of lessons which must be lived to be understood.

Life is either a great adventure or nothing.

Helen Keller

50 NZ points
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 7:59:13 AM   
littlewonder


Posts: 15659
Status: offline 		I think women who are highly attractive are simply used to getting what they want and have probably a higher confidence level. They just have simply had no reason to be submissive.

There was a study a few years ago that came out that said that people who are tall and attractive are more likely to be chosen for executive and leader positions in the business world.



< Message edited by littlewonder -- 8/6/2011 8:00:22 AM >

_____________________________

Nothing has changed
Everything has changed

(in reply to heartfeltsub)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:01:03 AM   
Buzzzz


Posts: 839
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline 		Call me shallow but attractiveness counts a lot to me. It goes before all the rest. Then , the sub side comes in.
After rereading your post, it looks like atrractiveness 70% , sub 30%. But like I tried to explain earlier, I wouldn't have the 30 without the 70, it that makes sense?

_____________________________

_"Here is something you should never do to anyone.And here is exactly how to do it to someone you care about". Flagg._



(in reply to heartfeltsub)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:01:27 AM   
joanneeve


Posts: 81
Joined: 7/26/2010
Status: offline 		Beauty is relative and in the eye of the beholder. I am not physically attractive (no I am not seeking complments, I know that I am me) but I have been told that my nature makes me beautiful....being attractive (depends on what you like) has no real connection to how submissive or dominant a person is in my experience.

(in reply to heartfeltsub)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:04:45 AM   
heartfeltsub


Posts: 1641
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline 		Thanks for your response Buzzzz. It leads me to a question, how much non-submission would you put up with for a person who you found attractive?

Thanks,
heartfelt

_____________________________

Life is an exciting business, and most exciting when it is lived for others.

Life is a succession of lessons which must be lived to be understood.

Life is either a great adventure or nothing.

Helen Keller

50 NZ points

(in reply to Buzzzz)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:07:51 AM   
LadyAngelika


Posts: 8070
Joined: 7/4/2004
Status: offline 		My general answer is that I would say no.

People are submissive for myriad reasons. Some were born that way, some were conditioned that way and some chose to be that way. Also, different people have different levels of submission with each partner. The level of submission someone gets too is directly related to the dynamic between the dominant person and the submissive person.

That said, I have come to believe that dominance and submission are not absolutes and are always in flux. People have a tendancy to be more of one than the other but don't operate in one state all the time (at least the people who do are rare). We all have some kind of a balance.

Also, there is the question of what do these people consider submission. One of the things I've come to realise is that what I consider to be submission from a man is very different than what most men who want to offer me submission view it. The few men who fit my paradigm of what I considered to be truly submissive, the way I like it, were actually drop dead gorgeous. So there you have it.!


_____________________________

Une main de fer dans un gant de velours ~ An iron hand in a velvet glove

(in reply to heartfeltsub)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:08:36 AM   
heartfeltsub


Posts: 1641
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: joanneeve

Beauty is relative and in the eye of the beholder. I am not physically attractive (no I am not seeking complments, I know that I am me) but I have been told that my nature makes me beautiful....being attractive (depends on what you like) has no real connection to how submissive or dominant a person is in my experience.


Thank you for your response. While i agree that the level of one's attractiveness or maybe better put perception of one's own attractiveness shouldn't have an influence on how obedient or submissive a person is, i see too many instances where that is not the case. It seems a little bit like littlewonder said. But it bothers me, maybe it shouldn't that if one is more attractive (confident as littlewonder said) then one doesn't feel that they have to submit.

To me submission is an internal thing and should be the s-types behavior (if they identify as a submissive) regardless of attractiveness.

Thanks again for your response,
heartfelt

_____________________________

Life is an exciting business, and most exciting when it is lived for others.

Life is a succession of lessons which must be lived to be understood.

Life is either a great adventure or nothing.

Helen Keller

50 NZ points

(in reply to joanneeve)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:08:37 AM   
sirsholly


Posts: 42360
Joined: 9/7/2007
From: Quietville
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: littlewonder

I think women who are highly attractive are simply used to getting what they want and have probably a higher confidence level. They just have simply had no reason to be submissive.


So attractive, successful confident women who want for nothing have no reason to be submissive?

This is wrong on so many levels. It implies that a submissive nature is closely related to greed.


_____________________________

PICKED UPON
TECHNO-DOLT
MEMBER OF THE SUBBIE MAFIA
GRACEFULLY CHALLENGED :::::splat:::::
BOOT WHORE
VAA/S FAN

GIVES GOOD HEART (Lushy)

CREATOR OF MAYHEM (practice)


(in reply to littlewonder)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:10:26 AM   
Lockit


Posts: 11292
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline 		I think it can be... and it seems reasonable for a time, to think that the more beautiful a person is, the more independent and confident they are (and less submissive)... until you run into the most drop dead gorgeous woman without make up, that looks better than most with make up and she bends the reasoning.

Anyone that is more confident, independent, less submissive or more dominant or anything else based on appearance... better hope they never get old or never have that change somehow... because they will most likely become a muddle of upset, freaked out insecurity. lol


_____________________________

No matter how old a woman gets, some men will think she was born yesterday! ROFL... I love this place!


(in reply to heartfeltsub)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:11:07 AM   
Buzzzz


Posts: 839
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline
quote:

Thanks for your response Buzzzz. It leads me to a question, how much non-submission would you put up with for a person who you found attractive?

Thanks,
heartfelt


I do not know about "put up"!!
Call me picky, but I need to find the attractive woman 1st then sub. If she has only attractive, it isn't going to work (been there , done that = vanilla dating).
If I am attracted and she is a sub it most likely is going to work. I do not know how much "submissiveness" I need, but from my experience, it worked over the years (or maybe , it didn't work, because the relationships are over now, so that would make them failure, but that is a totally different subject!!)

_____________________________

_"Here is something you should never do to anyone.And here is exactly how to do it to someone you care about". Flagg._



(in reply to heartfeltsub)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:13:36 AM   
NuevaVida


Posts: 6707
Joined: 8/5/2008
Status: offline 		Hi heartfeltsub,

It's kind of a loaded/dangerous question, because the premise is basically saying if you're pretty are you less submissive and therefore if you're super submissive you must not be very attractive.  I don't think that was your intent here, but it could come across that way.

That said, I must not be very submissive at all! 

In all seriousness, though, no I don't think submission is attached to attraction.  I think people's orientations don't have much bearing on their looks.  I've seen some amazingly beautiful slaves whose submission to their owners was a site to behold (for me).   I've seen some "less attractive" folks be less submissive.  It's all anecdotal, though, isn't it.

As for the "what's more important" question, the Mister has said a gazillion times, he does enjoy a physical attraction, but without the submission, it's just that - physical.  He wanted a woman who would give him what he wanted - her submission and service, and her heart.  Since he also finds me physically attractive, well I guess he got both.


_____________________________

Live Simply. Love Generously. Care Deeply. Speak Kindly.



(in reply to littlewonder)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:15:21 AM   
LadyAngelika


Posts: 8070
Joined: 7/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: littlewonder

I think women who are highly attractive are simply used to getting what they want and have probably a higher confidence level. They just have simply had no reason to be submissive.



But if what they want is someone to dominate them, shouldn't they be happy submitting to the person they've chose to allow to dominate them? As I said in my earlier post, it's all a question of dynamic.

But I think you hit the nail on the head with the word confidence. Sexual attractiveness isn't the only advantage someone can have to give them confidence. Intelligence, social status, career status, financial status, etc can play a big part. We also all know some very physically atttractive people who are absolutely insecure, right?

The bottom line is that people who are confident don't submit as easily in life (let alone bdsm dynamic) as others. They don't settle, they  have higher standards, they know what they are worth and know that others have to work for it. So maybe in some cases that confidence comes from physical/sexual attractiveness, but it can come from other sources as well.

I am however convinced that when a very physically attractive, strong, successful woman or man who wants to experience submission finds the dominant person of their dreams, they will have no problem submitting to them. They'll love it in fact.


_____________________________

Une main de fer dans un gant de velours ~ An iron hand in a velvet glove

(in reply to littlewonder)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:29:19 AM   
Tantriqu


Posts: 2026
Joined: 12/29/2006
Status: offline 		What a repulsive generalisation!
It sounds like the two 'doms' were actually two spotty teens sniggering and wanking behind the bike sheds and calling a classmate a lesbian because she wouldn't kiss them; in this case, a hot chick wouldn't do what they wanted sexually or whom they can't control because they themselves aren't attractive in any sense, i.e., I bet the dudes are oogly, inside and out.

So, NO, there's no inverse relationship between physical attractiveness and submission; lots of gorgeous men crave submission. Contrariwise, I'm inverse to submissive, and I'm first to admit I'm no Madison Avenue '10', except on the 'cute as a button' scale, wherein I'd be an eleven.

I would think there's a far stronger link between body image problems, masochism, low self-esteem and victimisation; look at all the skinny chicks who marry cheating dicks [Halle Berry/David Justice/Eric Benet, Angeline Jolie/Billy Bob Thornton, Nicole Kidman/Tom Cruise, Jennifer Aniston/Brad Pitt]. At least Elin Woods and Sandra Bullock clubbed [hah!] their losers to the curb!

_____________________________

"Then I did the simplest thing in the world. I leaned down... and kissed him. And the world cracked open." - Agnes de Mille

(in reply to heartfeltsub)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:37:25 AM   
heartfeltsub


Posts: 1641
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NuevaVida

Hi heartfeltsub,

It's kind of a loaded/dangerous question, because the premise is basically saying if you're pretty are you less submissive and therefore if you're super submissive you must not be very attractive.  I don't think that was your intent here, but it could come across that way.

That said, I must not be very submissive at all! 

In all seriousness, though, no I don't think submission is attached to attraction.  I think people's orientations don't have much bearing on their looks.  I've seen some amazingly beautiful slaves whose submission to their owners was a site to behold (for me).   I've seen some "less attractive" folks be less submissive.  It's all anecdotal, though, isn't it.

As for the "what's more important" question, the Mister has said a gazillion times, he does enjoy a physical attraction, but without the submission, it's just that - physical.  He wanted a woman who would give him what he wanted - her submission and service, and her heart.  Since he also finds me physically attractive, well I guess he got both.



Hey there NV,

The bolded part I would like to address. That was the premise put to me by my Dominant friend and one that I find highly insulting and repugnant, but one that I have seen to be more prevalent than not. That is not to say that there aren't highly attractive and also higly submissive men and women alike, but I have seen some, maybe also many very attractive (mostly) women who claim to be submissive, but more often than not use their attractiveness as a way to maniupulate the man they are with to do things the s-types way.

I realize that attractiveness is unique to each person, and it may just be anecdotal evidence. I was really trying to get some idea if what I have seen is unique to me or if others have seen the same thing.

Thanks for your reply,
heartfelt

_____________________________

Life is an exciting business, and most exciting when it is lived for others.

Life is a succession of lessons which must be lived to be understood.

Life is either a great adventure or nothing.

Helen Keller

50 NZ points

(in reply to NuevaVida)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:41:13 AM   
heartfeltsub


Posts: 1641
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline 		To explain the put up with comment, I am watching a man who used to be adamant about being obeyed allow or put up with a great deal of disobedience and disrespect because the s-type he is currently with is very attractive to him and the sex is phenomenal. With previous s-types who were still attractive, but not as attractive, he was adamant about being obeyed and didn't tolerate any disrespect.

_____________________________

Life is an exciting business, and most exciting when it is lived for others.

Life is a succession of lessons which must be lived to be understood.

Life is either a great adventure or nothing.

Helen Keller

50 NZ points

(in reply to heartfeltsub)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:50:40 AM   
Tantriqu


Posts: 2026
Joined: 12/29/2006
Status: offline 		He's afraid the cute one will cheat on him because she can, and he feels vulnerable so he's on his best top behaviour.
He's counting on the 'less attractive' ones to put up with his crap, and he feels/knows he can control them and they still won't run. He's a rich kid in a candystore, but someone walked in with their own wad of cash.
This is not about BDSM, just with his narcissism and his being a playah and a dick.

_____________________________

"Then I did the simplest thing in the world. I leaned down... and kissed him. And the world cracked open." - Agnes de Mille

(in reply to heartfeltsub)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:56:24 AM   
Arpig


Posts: 9930
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: Increasingly further from reality
Status: offline
quote:

s there an inversely proportional attractiveness to submissive ratio, ie the more physically attractive a person is, the less submissive that person is
If that were the case, how would you explain the number of butt ugly dominants?

_____________________________

Big man! Pig Man!
Ha Ha...Charade you are!

Why do they leave out the letter b on "Garage Sale" signs?

CM's #1 All-Time Also-Ran


(in reply to heartfeltsub)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 8:57:31 AM   
heartfeltsub


Posts: 1641
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline 		You don't know this person at all, and you couldn't have described him more inaccurately if you had tried. And this is not an issue that i have seen only with him and that is what prompted my initial question.

_____________________________

Life is an exciting business, and most exciting when it is lived for others.

Life is a succession of lessons which must be lived to be understood.

Life is either a great adventure or nothing.

Helen Keller

50 NZ points

(in reply to Tantriqu)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 9:02:27 AM   
LadyAngelika


Posts: 8070
Joined: 7/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: heartfeltsub

You don't know this person at all, and you couldn't have described him more inaccurately if you had tried. And this is not an issue that i have seen only with him and that is what prompted my initial question.


This is what happens when you make generalizations based on one specific situation. I strongly suggest that you take the time to go back to the top of the thread and read some of the responses you've gotten, rather than arguing your point, as you will see you've gotten a variety of perspectives on the subject.


_____________________________

Une main de fer dans un gant de velours ~ An iron hand in a velvet glove

(in reply to heartfeltsub)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Inversely Proportional? - 8/6/2011 9:16:59 AM   
heartfeltsub


Posts: 1641
Joined: 11/5/2004
Status: offline 		Hello LA,

I have read and reread the posts above. It seems that you are saying that inside the right dynamic, a person regardless of how attractive he or she is, he or she can submit completely. But then you made a comment about how confident a person is and how that person is less likely to be submissive. I may be reading what you have posted incorrectly. While I do not think there should be a correlary between how attractive or good a person is sexually and how well they submit and obey, there does seem to be one. In my experience, it seems more in the case of very attractive women who say they are submissives, but who really don't actually submit or obey, except when they want to. My experiences may be skewed, that is why I asked the question, because I don't like the implications that if someone is very submissive and obedient, they are somehow less confident or attractive.

Thank you for your reply,
heartfelt

_____________________________

Life is an exciting business, and most exciting when it is lived for others.

Life is a succession of lessons which must be lived to be understood.

Life is either a great adventure or nothing.

Helen Keller

50 NZ points

(in reply to LadyAngelika)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> Inversely Proportional? Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




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

0.098