RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating

RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (Full Version)

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

Message

LadyPact -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 9:20:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeverinVim Who knows, maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt it. I was detecting a VERY needy, "submissive" vibe from her. I know, I know, submissive does not equal needy, blah blah blah, so offensive, but really. By the way, it's crazy to think that I just met the woman and I was ready to pass judgment on her personality like that, right? How judgmental of me, huh? It's nothing like reading someone's post online and making a slew of assumptions about them... That's something completely different. ;-) Dude, this is the first thing you've said on the entire thread that made sense to Me. I'm not trying to sound condescending saying that. Just hear Me out. There's a thread here somewhere that talks about this very thing, about the 'vibe' that some folks get, or don't get, as the case may be. About the vibe and/or energy that some people experience when dealing with a person who is intrinsically Dominant. It works the other way around when a person is submissive. You can call it D/s chemistry, electricity, or any other word that you might apply to that vibe. I don't have the link but you could probably find through the search feature in the Ask A Submissive section by a guy named FukinTroll. Some D types have people experiencing this feeling, this 'vibe' about us all of the time. We're used to it. Even from first meeting type of stuff or the first time an encounter happens when we walk in a room. My last 'do you ever switch' story came up about five years ago and even then, I had a room full of people laughing at the person who asked. Not all D types put out that kind of vibe. It doesn't make them lesser Dominants. It just means that they have a different way about them. Not everybody exudes Dominance in the same way. While I appreciated Akasha's post, I don't even want to call it aggressive or passive Dominance. Some people walk in and they have commanded the room. Others are quieter but one person sees that level of Dominance in them. When you don't get that vibe, it doesn't mean the other person isn't Dominant. It does mean that person might not be the Dominant for you.

JeffBC -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 10:20:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact When you don't get that vibe, it doesn't mean the other person isn't Dominant. It does mean that person might not be the Dominant for you. It may also mean that the person is under-cover. I know that I have a real habit of wanting to keep my sharp pointy teeth well hidden. In most situations they serve no purpose and get other people agitated.

JeffBC -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 10:22:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeverinVim I think that Dominant people are generally "control freaks" If that is true then I'd say (man I've been saying this a lot lately) that what you mean by "dominance" isn't what I mean. Just to illustrate the point, I find myself in leadership situations way more frequently than I desire. I don't go seeking such things out. I didn't really seek this out with Carol. I just end up in charge in my life. Generally, I'm really really happy when someone else is in charge and doing a credible job of it.

LadyPact -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 11:30:00 PM)
I'm too late to edit but I need to make a correction to My prior post. The thread that I referenced was not created by FukinTroll. It was actually created by OldHen and the title of the thread was "Primal Power Exchange".

MsLadySue -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 11:41:44 PM)
It sounds to me as if you expected this Dominant Lady to take control of things at the word go. In my case, I want to learn about the submissive as a person. I'm not interested in pulling out my 'control card' right away because it's important to ascertain if we have compatibility as people first. There is more to the getting to know each other stage than what I've written but it's a start.

TwoHeartsBeatOne -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/17/2013 12:29:24 AM)
A funny thing happened on my way to discovering I am a Domme. And, I'm not alone. Many people who are now experiencing dominance actually began their BDSM journey as submissives or slaves. One of the most respected local Dommes began as a slave and that lasted for a year. Although that was a very long time ago, she still says it was an invaluable experience that made her a better Domme. So, sometimes people need to find their way and that may mean that their profiles used to be one thing and now they are another. A Dom helped me understand. I have a deep need to serve humanity on a global level, so I do that. When anyone enters my space, I immediately check to see if they have what they want and / or need. Service, right? I also have the ever so common, sexual fantasy of being possessed by a man. As a lover, as a friend, as a family member, etc... I always try to make things better because I was there. So, submissive, I thought. Then the Dom explained that a dominant can be doing all of the above, but it tends to look more like management, providing... rather than service as a submissive act. Got that? I struggled my butt off to submit. To me, submission was an extreme effort to provide what a man with heavy control needs, said he needed. That man was called a Dom... very much in need of attention! Some others have no such epiphanies and no change in their direction, ever. They aren't better, more right or more dominant. It's not a contest. Since we are individuals, there can never be enough labels. My profile seeks all people and if you read my profile, you will see why I seek people of any "ilk." It's not brain science... it's just reading and talking and doing a whole lot of listening. If you only get one gift from BDSM, get this... "Different isn't bad." ETA - For me, I understand that I may have a desire to be a sexual bottom on occasion, but I will never desire submitting my will to that of another. I love responsibility and the freedom it creates. Domme.

JeffBC -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/17/2013 8:36:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TwoHeartsBeatOne A funny thing happened on my way to discovering I am a Domme. And, I'm not alone. Many people who are now experiencing dominance actually began their BDSM journey as submissives or slaves.... What? You mean humans are complex and don't tend to fit into the nice, tidy little BDSM boxes very well? ~grin~ Yeah, I agree.

AAkasha -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/17/2013 9:14:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: TwoHeartsBeatOne A funny thing happened on my way to discovering I am a Domme. And, I'm not alone. Many people who are now experiencing dominance actually began their BDSM journey as submissives or slaves.... What? You mean humans are complex and don't tend to fit into the nice, tidy little BDSM boxes very well? ~grin~ Yeah, I agree. As a more physical, sensual, sadistic femdom (some would call me a top, I suppose), I find that my desire to dominate a man is tied into a few things: attraction, lust, affection, chemistry. It's also the way I share intimacy, and it's completely tied into how I express physical attraction. But if I am not attracted to a man on some level or entering those stages of exploration, I have no desire to explore physical dominance with him on any primal level at least. This is in the flesh, of course. Online or over the phone is a bit different as imagination can play a role, but the OP is talking about physical chemistry. I've experienced what a lot of femdoms have on "first dates" in real life. A submissive says to me from across the table, "you don't really seem that dominant!" Well, what did he expect? I was going to bring a whip to dinner? Take my panties off under the table and pass them to him and order him to go masturbate with them? That happens AFTER there's lust involved, not when I'm out with some random schmoe. Or as they say in the real world, "Sorry, I'm just not that into you." Yes, I've had "first dates" where the hair pulling and sharp nails came out within 10 minute. That's incredibly "lust at first sight." But even then, it's tricky waters - a physical femdom does not blindly go into asserting that kind of control over a man without getting a sense of his psyche. Akasha

poise -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/17/2013 9:28:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeverinVim I just think it would be better if someone could have a designation like this: "Submissive Male interested in Dominating" or "Switch interested in submitting" or "Switch female interested in dominating." While I tend to think Switch best describes the scenario you are explaining here, there actually IS another way to indicate such an interest, although it would probably still not be spelled out completely to your satisfaction. Using my very submissive profile as an example, I could simply click any or all of the boxes in the Actively Seeking category. Wahhhlaaaaaaaaa! [image]local://upfiles/1031783/8CC6F28AC0094555886B974FA3AB072E.jpg[/image]

CynthiaWVirginia -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/17/2013 4:49:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeverinVim Well, yeah, I came across a submissive woman masquerading as a Domme. I don't think she knew it. I knew it (having met lots and lots of dominant women AND submissive women in my ten-plus years in the scene). It wasn't my place to tell her, and I didn't say anything...but yeah, no offense but it sucks to meet someone expecting A and then receiving B. And, she's failed at every attempt she's ever made at getting a submissive male to be hers. Again, I think I know why, but it's not my place to tell her. But I do think that she would be better suited finding a "switch" or a "Dominant" male. I think if she gave serious thought to her needs and her personality, she would have saved herself (and many others) a lot of grief. I wonder if you ever met her in person, or if this was just an online thing. Sorry to hear that things didn't work out, but...I think you are shoving too much blame in her direction. I seriously doubt that "every attempt she's ever made at getting a submissive male to be hers" is entirely her fault either. See, before finding someone compatible we have to kiss hundreds of toads, metaphorically speaking. [;)] It took me years to find the one I was looking for, and in the meantime I decided on Topping newbies and having several (what I knew would be) temporary relationships. To some, I might come across as having a submissive personality. I was raised that way. LOL, a male friend of mine told me that if I don't want to conquer the world that I wasn't really a Dominant...maybe you think like him. I don't want to boss the world around, nor do I want to "act Dominant" around people who are not mine. What I'm saying is...it's possible that, like me, the "submissive woman passing herself off as Domme" just hasn't found the right person to be motivated yet. (Why act all Dommely, giving away free wank fodder, to men that cannot or will not meet our needs?) The only one I own is my own slave, bo. When I am around other submissive males I treat them as any other human being, usually with kindness and courtesy and occasionally am also helpful. There is no need to act like a Princess/Queen/whatever, projecting some image. Someone near my area had the same distainful attitude toward me that you have toward the Domme you are complaining about. All the ass kissing in the world couldn't hide the vibes I felt coming from him...with him, he disrespected Dommes who didn't hold down high powered jobs. I knew that he would feel that he was lowering himself, in a bad way, to be my submissive. Others didn't have that attitude, but HE did, and this is why I "failed" at making him mine. [;)] I had walked away because his attitude cooled off my interest. That derisive attitude is not attractive. Even if you said nothing to her face, it might have made her spidey senses tingle. Btw, there are a lot of good reasons to "fail every attempt she's ever made at getting a submissive male". (Attempt? Does this mean that every answered first contact is an attempt, with a pass or fail grade?) 1) Incompatible emotional/sexual/kink needs that cannot be worked out. 2) Not every submissive male who writes is submissive. 3) Most are married and cheating, or have a significant other and is cheating. 4) Many guys who send us letters have a long line of wrecked relationships under their belt and seem to be lacking in basic social skills. 5) Have an entitlement attitude. 6) Distance, relocation issues, extended family and responsibilities for elder care or child visitation, etc. 7) No mutual sexual sparkage, and/or no D/s sparkage. 8) Substance abuse problems. 9) Physical or mental disabilities that the prospective Dominant doesn't feel she can handle. That sentence I quoted...shows a contemptuous attitude that would make me disqualify the prospective "submissive". I would also warn my friends that if he talked with them...and "failed" to get him as their submissive...that all of their friends and many strangers would hear about what a failure they are as a Domme. In our real time BDSM communities, I am known as CynthiaWVirginia. If you have been involved in your local BDSM community for the past ten years, if SeverinVim is not your scene name in r/t, surely others will know by your location and physical stats, and perhaps even your writing style, who you are and who you have been negotiating with recently. These posts of yours...do NOT make you look like a good prospect.

StrongSpirit -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/17/2013 4:59:50 PM)
I think we have established that: 1) people are complicated and don't fit into neat little boxes. 2) It sure would be simpler if they did 3) Too bad everyone wants to make their own little boxes as opposed to using the ones other people like. I personally find the problem is not personality vs desire, but instead a combination of two different sets of complications: A) Sadism/masochism vs Dominance/Submission (they are very different scales/desires/needs and lots of people confuse them. B) Reality vs fiction. Somethings are great in your mind but not so good in reality. It often takes people a long time to realize this. You can go through several partners without realizing you don't really like what you think you like. In the 'vanilla world', this happens a lot with guys who think being in a three-way with bisexual women is heaven, but they don't always like being a side dish instead of the center of attention.

seekingreality -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/18/2013 12:14:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeverinVim 1. Dominant 2. Switch 3. Submissive This probably sounds obnoxious, but I think that women with major self-esteem issues should not be encouraged to hold themselves out as "Dommes." There should be another label for them, like "women interested in dominating men," or something to that effect. It would be like me saying that I'm a "Dominant Male" if I ever feel the need to dominate a woman. The title of "Dominant Male" just wouldn't be true to my personality. Sometimes I may fantasize about dominating a woman, but that doesn't make me a "Dominant." I will still have a submissive personality. Lots of submissive women are interested in dominating men, and a lot of men (and women) enjoy this. But there should be more truth in advertising. For example, if I know that it is a submissive woman looking to dominate me, I will approach the interaction much differently. The difference? Submissive people (myself included) crave attention; we need a LOT of care. What do Dominants get in return? The control. Dominants generally crave the CONTROL. Yes, I'm aware that these are broad generalizations, but there is a lot of truth to them. Incidentally the term "switch" doesn't exactly apply, either. Why? "Switch" implies that the person is capable of being "Dominant" and "Submissive." A lot of submissive people (myself included) are only capable of being one way, even when we "dominate" another person. In other words, we are dominating as a "submissive" would, not as a "Dominant" would (which is what a switch would be doing when he/she dominates another person). Anyway, it may all sound rather confusing, but when you really think about it, it makes perfect sense. People should take the time to figure out what they really are before advertising on these pages. You seem to have some odd fantasy of a huge BDSM labeling system, based on your personal view of the world, that will capture every shade of someone's personality, wants and needs in seven words or less so you don't have to bother reading their profile or talking to them as an individual and figuring out what makes them unique as a person. Good luck with that. The collarme system works fine. You can categorize yourself by any broad label you like. Then you can write a lengthy profile spelling out exactly what you want. There is only confusion if you are inarticulate. Or, if like you, you don't bother to write a profile.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.222656E-02