Social Dominance

Social Dominance (Full Version)

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

Message

LadyPact -> Social Dominance (4/11/2012 1:16:25 AM)
This is a topic that Jeff and I talk about from time to time. This is not so much about dominance in a dynamic, but how Dominants interact with each other. I thought it might be interesting to discuss the spectrum. Over the years, I have met a few Dominants who have to be the biggest and baddest in the room. Almost as though if they don't feel they have power, they don't have security. They can't interact with others except from that place. Without that comfort zone, they are like a robot who has be deprogrammed. On the other side of the spectrum, there are some 'dominants' who just yield to any other D type in the room. Not from respecting the dynamic that they have with the submissive, but it's something in them that they know they don't have power in their own right, and when they see those that do, they crumble. It's not submission, exactly, but they see power in someone else that they know they don't have and they react socially in reflection of that. Then, there are those of us in the middle. We don't feel the need to fight each other in the struggle for hierarchy. We just kind of hang out with each other. We don't feel this need to be top dog or screw with what the other person's got. For example, I don't need to interfere with Jeff's power over Carol to connect with My own. I can have joy in seeing it, and if I can venture to say, I think Jeff sees clip and I the same way. So, social dominants among Dominants?

JeffBC -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 1:40:01 AM)
I'm going to be really blunt here (and probably more than a little arrogant) It is my opinion that it is only the beta's that get into needless conflicts. They, unlike the alpha's, need to sort position amongst themselves. They do so with mock combats. Alpha's, in my experience, don't need to engage in such things so they don't. Largely, that's because alpha's don't engage in mock conflicts at all, when they conflict, they mean to end it. It's a messy business that's best to avoid when possible. For myself, I know that is all correct. I do not engage in pretend conflicts. I don't bluff. When I engage, my intent is to end it... as succinctly as possible and with little regard to the consequences to my opponent. My intent is generally to end it permanently and I have few qualms about doing what is required for that outcome. For that very reason, I'm very careful about when I actually engage with someone. Because... you know... I might lose. And also because I'm not an asshat. But until that point, who's to say who's dominant between them? Who knows? Had you and I engaged, then one of us would have won but I have no idea who. I'm really glad I don't know that because I'm pretty sure even the winner would've lost a great deal. It's also interesting that this is why I'm unclear on whether I'm "dominant" over Carol. I think I've actually done that maybe twice with her in 17 years... both times I regret. She is WAY too receptive on those wavelengths to not be damaged by that. There's no win in that for me -- more like "horror". Carol obeys largely because she loves me not because I dominate her the way I'd think of that in the social context. Then, of course, there is the issue of both "respect" and "grace" that I mentioned in the other thread. That has nothing to do with power. You respecting my authority over Carol only indicates that you are an honorable human being. It says nothing about which one of us might have more "power" of any sort. Finally yes, what you and clip both have and had is wonderful. Even were I able, messing with it would've been wrong on a great many levels. I try to avoid being stupid when I can. PS: After these last few posts I think you and I are going to need to get a room or somesuch LOL Someone! Quick! Say something dark and twisted to stop the group hug.

LadyPact -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 1:55:19 AM)
Dark and twisted? We could talk about cutting. No, I think it's good for people to read about friendships on these boards and why certain people connect. I'm not especially deep or anything, but our conversations resonate with Me. It's our absence of 'social dominance' that applies here. I like NOT doing that. It's the weirdest thing, but Carol follows you like clip follows Me. I can't explain it, but I see it. Kind of beautiful to watch, but it's exactly why I don't feel like other Dominants seem to do.

Bucephalus -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 2:12:19 AM)
I feel like, as someone very new to all of this, and temporarily (for how long, it's unsure) only online, I don't have any real right to say much of anything on this particular topic, but, I'm going to anyways. I feel like if I were to encounter other dominants, I wouldn't engage in any needless conflicts or power struggles. I would put my foot down if someone did try to mess with mine and my sub's relationship. I have zero respect for anyone who tries to impede on anyone else's relationship. That said, I can see myself, if I were with other dominants, being rather chill. I don't consider myself humble or arrogant, but I would show respect to those who've achieved the experience and skills of the dominant that I want to be. To me, there's a difference between a show of respect, and submission of any kind. What I would show is complete respect.

JeffBC -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 2:13:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact I can't explain it, but I see it. Kind of beautiful to watch Yes, I think it is beautiful although for me, at least, it's not at all dark and kinky. I also think I can explain succinctly why Carol obeys. I think Carol is an honorable human being. And I think in her assessment I have given her so much that giving herself to me seems perfectly reasonable. It's not really "dominance" in the way I think of it in the social context. I've just paid into the pot enough to earn a human being.

LadyPact -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 2:24:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bucephalus I feel like, as someone very new to all of this, and temporarily (for how long, it's unsure) only online, I don't have any real right to say much of anything on this particular topic, but, I'm going to anyways. I feel like if I were to encounter other dominants, I wouldn't engage in any needless conflicts or power struggles. I would put my foot down if someone did try to mess with mine and my sub's relationship. I have zero respect for anyone who tries to impede on anyone else's relationship. That said, I can see myself, if I were with other dominants, being rather chill. I don't consider myself humble or arrogant, but I would show respect to those who've achieved the experience and skills of the dominant that I want to be. To me, there's a difference between a show of respect, and submission of any kind. What I would show is complete respect. See? That is what social dominance is about. It means not having to do that. If Carol (Jeff's property) sucks him off in front of Me..... I'm GLAD for that. When it's the opposite and clip makes Me cum Jeff is glad for Me. Both of us are ok with it and we don't have to interfere. Some D types can't do that.

Bucephalus -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 2:28:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact See? That is what social dominance is about. It means not having to do that. If Carol (Jeff's property) sucks him off in front of Me..... I'm GLAD for that. When it's the opposite and clip makes Me cum Jeff is glad for Me. Both of us are ok with it and we don't have to interfere. Some D types can't do that. Honestly? I would put my foot down even if our relationship were still in the vanilla category. lo. I really find it appalling when anyone thinks they have any sort of right to try to come between anyone's relationship under any reason or circumstance. In my inexperienced eye, I do see that anyone who does do that, does have some major insecurities that they need to work out. Or maybe they could just be jealous. [:D]

sunshinemiss -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 2:39:31 AM)
You know... to me it's about being comfortable in your own skin. I've been in the room with D-types who get along like peas and carrots (as the two of you two seem to). When a person is comfortable with who s/he is, there's no reason to jockey for position. In the totem pole of "Who is in charge of X relationship" there is generally only 2 people on the pole - obviously this is different in poly relationships, but for the sake of simplicity and clarity, I'm going to stick with a power dynamic relationship between two. Basically these people know that interlopers don't get a spot on the totem pole. It's like asking who's the best baseball player to a cellist, a ballerina, a computer technician, a police officer, and a doctor. "It's not my thing" may be the only answer to the question. (Did that make sense?) If a person knows who s/he is within the context of the relationship and keeps the focus there, why would there be a need to battle it out? Pfft. That gets old fast. Watching things like that strikes me as proof of a need for some more self-awareness. As an aside, it's a similar thing with s-types. Who can be the slaviest? Who can be the most submissive? There's a false humility set up for being the best at s-type-iness. I've seen it and been challenged a time or two. Meh. I've got nothing to prove. Feel free to crown yourself queen of the sluts. I'll be over here having an interesting conversation while you do. Best, sunshine p.s. I'd love to be a fly on the wall when y'all are together. Oh heck who am I kidding? I'd like to be right there in the thick of things!

JeffBC -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 2:45:02 AM)
~fast reply to no one in particular~ Just to point out how "not dominant" I am over Carol, twice now I have tried vigorously to release her and twice now I have failed. In our case, "release" means that I still love the heck out of her, I just don't expect obedience. I am not anywhere near stupid enough to divorce her. As it turns out, Carol is perfectly able to defend her boundaries against me. She just has different boundaries than most might. As long as, in her considered opinion, owning her is good for me then I'm stuck with owning her. My "consent" doesn't matter. So now who's dominant here?

Whenready -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 4:08:17 AM)
I used to go munches and play parties mumble mumble years ago. I don't go now because they were not enjoyable. SO many people fighting and jockeying for "position" and "status" in some form of hierarchy. The fallout online for the two weeks after the party was also unpleasant as people dissected who did what with whom. The caveat is that these were a long time ago and in another place. However, I have no desire to go back and see if it is any better. I suppose that makes me asocial. I don't actually care what other people think of me as a dom. The only view that would matter would be that of my sub.

MissImmortalPain -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 4:17:25 AM)
I may be missing the point but.....am I the only person in the world that really doesn't see others as dom or sub when it comes to social interaction? I mean , yes, I see that some people have personalitys that "could" define them as dom. That some people have actions that "might" imply that they are sub. But for me personally, I just look at everyone based on the same thing.....how they interact with me. I don't care if someone is "dom" as long as they aren't shoving it down my throat. I don't care if someone is "sub" as long as they aren't running behide me begging to lick my boots(that really annoys me) I think the actions of others tell us something about the person in terms of how they feel about themselves. But until someone inserts themself into my life, my realationships, my air space, then it really doesn't matter. People are just people. They should be treated as people with the same respect one would want themself to be treated with.

sunshinemiss -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 4:24:56 AM)
quote: I don't care if someone is "dom" as long as they aren't shoving it down my throat. I think this is the point. Some people ARE shoving it down people's throats....

MissImmortalPain -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 4:45:07 AM)
Oh, well, in that case I must just be lucky. The only two people in the whole wide big world that have ever tried to do that to me are my father (when I was young) and my big brother (because he is a jackass) Oh, and a doctor, but he was right I needed to shut up and listen because things needed to be taken care of quickly...so it was okay. I think if someone did that to me in public I would just turn away from them and go on with whatever I was doing before they decided to point out that they have very little self control.

NuevaVida -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 6:52:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sunshinemiss You know... to me it's about being comfortable in your own skin. I've been in the room with D-types who get along like peas and carrots (as the two of you two seem to). When a person is comfortable with who s/he is, there's no reason to jockey for position. In the totem pole of "Who is in charge of X relationship" there is generally only 2 people on the pole - obviously this is different in poly relationships, but for the sake of simplicity and clarity, I'm going to stick with a power dynamic relationship between two. Basically these people know that interlopers don't get a spot on the totem pole. It's like asking who's the best baseball player to a cellist, a ballerina, a computer technician, a police officer, and a doctor. "It's not my thing" may be the only answer to the question. (Did that make sense?) If a person knows who s/he is within the context of the relationship and keeps the focus there, why would there be a need to battle it out? Pfft. That gets old fast. Watching things like that strikes me as proof of a need for some more self-awareness. As an aside, it's a similar thing with s-types. Who can be the slaviest? Who can be the most submissive? There's a false humility set up for being the best at s-type-iness. I've seen it and been challenged a time or two. Meh. I've got nothing to prove. Feel free to crown yourself queen of the sluts. I'll be over here having an interesting conversation while you do. Best, sunshine p.s. I'd love to be a fly on the wall when y'all are together. Oh heck who am I kidding? I'd like to be right there in the thick of things! I agree with all of this. Although, I don't think it's a dom/sub thing, I think it's a "people" thing. In reading LadyPact's OP and Jeff's subsequent response, I was thinking it really has to do with how comfortable someone is being themselves, and how they few life as a whole. And then I got to sunshinemiss' answer, which talked about being comfortable in your own skin. I think it applies to all areas in life. Example, just yesterday I was verbally attacked by a "friend" for being happy. I was called a liar, a pollyanna, full of shit, and in denial. I really have nothing to prove, so I said I was sorry she felt that way, and wished her well. To me, someone who responds with push-back to who/what someone else is, often times the issue is within themselves. My happiness threatened and offended her. In the OP's example, someone's dominance may well be threatening or offending another. And so on. Of course, when someone crosses a line, then boundaries must be upheld. And if you're comfortable with who you are, those boundaries can be upheld in a non-threatening, non-offensive way. Jeff spoke of "winning" and I've seen him speak of this before. It's not a concept I relate to, though. I'm of the "we're all winners if we allow ourselves to be" mindset, because we can choose what we get out of every interaction. Even in a situation where someone might mentally run circles around me - even clobber me - I can gain from it, if I reflect inward. So...I'm sure this happens between dominants. Just as sunshine said it also happens between submissives. But it happens with all facets of life, to some degree or another. How we respond to it is what shows our character as a person.

ProlificNeeds -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 7:00:18 AM)
To reply before I have read the responses, I don't think the social phenomina you describe LadyPact, is even remotely an occurance limited to social engagement between people within BDSM practices. You can see the same behavior everywhere you go from grade schools to high schools, to the middled aged and beyond. I think the specific behavioral patterns you describe are more founded in peoples insecurities or their inability to deal with any peer pressures, how one reacts in a group of people often seems to relate directly to their confidence and interpersonal skills not their sexual orientation or personality traits. Some people play well with others, and enjoy being in groups, some feel the pressing need for pecking order regardless of their place on it, and some people feel put upon by the mere thought of having to fit into someone elses social order.

Marc2b -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 7:07:17 AM)
I don't interact with the BDSM community much in real life so situations like THIS don't often happen but as a general philosophy I believe in picking your battles carefully, asserting yourself when necessary and not for simple ego gratification. Otherwise all you're doing is providing fodder for an insecure dink and making yourself look like the same.

OsideGirl -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 7:13:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC Alpha's, in my experience, don't need to engage in such things so they don't. Largely, that's because alpha's don't engage in mock conflicts at all, when they conflict, they mean to end it. It's a messy business that's best to avoid when possible. That describes Master to a "T". He gets along with other dominants and with submissives as well. He has no need to thump his chest. He is however, fiercely protective of me.

littlewonder -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 7:31:29 AM)
Master never intentionally forces social dominance with others. He has no need to do so. He doesn't feel threatened by others and doesn't even give much thought at all to other Doms really. He is the type, however, who will step up to the plate to take charge of situations if it's needed but he never shoves his way in. He's the type of Dom who sits back quietly and scans the room with a big evil smile. lol

OsideGirl -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 7:53:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sunshinemiss I think this is the point. Some people ARE shoving it down people's throats.... The perfect example: I was at a play party, talking to a friend who is also female submissive. A male "dominant" walked up, put himself between us and turned his back to me, interrupting our conversation and blocking us off from each other. I walked around him and informed him that T and I had been having a conversation. He stuck his finger under my chin and told me to shut up and go sit down. Needless to say, both T and I walked away. (By the way, we're not REAL submissives according to him) People who aren't really a dominant personality tend to confuse being domineering with being dominant.

LaTigresse -> RE: Social Dominance (4/11/2012 8:03:02 AM)
Because I don't socialize in any sort of BDSM wading pool, I haven't a clue whether the douche canoes that like to wave their dicks (figuratively speaking) around and play I am bigger and badder than you, are in fact any sort of real dominant person. To ME, dominance without mastery is just being a blow hard bully. Not a real strength at all. In fact, it's usually a sign of personal weakness. LadyP, the sort of person you describe is always, in my eyes, trying to compensate for their own fears, weaknesses, and inadequacies. It's nearly always a bluff, more hot air than any real substance. And if substance, it's without the inner strength and leadership that they are so frightened by and intimidated of. Crass bullies, pure and simple. I don't think that sort can get along with many people, to be honest.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.640625E-02