seekingreality
Posts: 599
Joined: 8/11/2011 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Kana quote:
ORIGINAL: seekingreality quote:
ORIGINAL: Kana Third, again, what have these gals done to qualify themselves as a dominant? I have this irrational, perhaps outdated idea that being a dominant involves more than providing phone sex style wank fodder and an amazon wish list. It involves things like the ability to take charge, integrity, insight, honor, good judgement, consideration-not just hurling invectives at some "cash piggies." Hell, do these chicas even have a clue how to handle a cane, much less a bullwhip? I'd say "being a dominant" means whatever works for the people who are in the relationship. I've known plenty of dominants who don't know a thing about a bullwhip, and plenty of dommes and subs who have no interest in incorporating such things into their relationship. I am not into findom myself, but they don't bother me, because I don't really care much what other people choose to do. To each his own. But the notion that there is some criteria of what a dominant "should be" strikes me as silly. BDSM is a spectrum. As long as you find someone on the spectrum that works for you that's all that matters. If that's a findom, knock yourself out. So saying "Send me your money," makes one a dominant? Alrighty then. Guess that makes every cashier in America a dom/domme. And generally speaking I agree with you. One of the things I like best about BDSM is that there are no rules, and no one way to do it right, or wrong. And again, maybe I'm being old school, maybe I'm sliding into Simply Michael/Lady Pact side of things, but I think there's a wee bit more to being a dominant than demanding cash. And that applies for men, women, german shepherds, aliens, whatever. I think at some point there should be some leadership involved, some control, crazy things like that. So yeah,call me crazy, label me deluded, IMHO it takes more than the capacity to fill out an amazon wishlist to be dominant Ah, c'mon about the cashier example. That's like me using your bullwhip example and saying that someone who is a whip expert performing at at a carnival is automatically dominant because they know how to use a bullwhip. My point is I don't get hung up on titles -- people can classify themselves as "dominant" and have a wide range of reasonable beliefs about what that means. To me, "dominant" is only a broad classification that separates people apart a little, so you can can about finding the people in that wide classification who fit with you. Your view is domination should have "leadership"; that's fine for you, and you need only find subs who take that same attitude. I know plenty of dom/sub relationships where leadership isn't really an element, and it works for them just fine.
|