Why?

Why? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Submissive

Message

louisboy -> Why? (1/28/2015 5:03:06 PM)
I have to admit I'm pure vanilla. I love being a personal servant to a Master. I think the best word in the English language is "Sir". I'm proud that his bath is ready, his shoes are shined, his clothes are immaculate. I get just as much joy in servicing him as he does. And yes, I jump when he snaps his fingers. I know most of you are rolling your eyes at how vanilla this is. Yet, both of us are doing the same thing- striving to accept his authority. Have you ever asked why we do that? I feel so comfortable doing what other people call odd and weird. And I'm vanilla. OK, most people are not into us, but how did we get "into" this? I believe it's genetic. I'm gay. The first guy I fell in love with was Scott. He was six, I was three. And I've always had this inkling to be a guy's servant. Do we we have the "sub" gene?

usememistress775 -> RE: Why? (1/28/2015 6:09:31 PM)
I don't know about genetics playing a role in kink, I really feel way outta my depth here. I will say that it is more than likely a how you were raised type of question. My father was always away with work and my mom and aunt were the primary authority figures in my young life. I find it easier to follow a woman's lead. But that's just me.

RemoteUser -> RE: Why? (1/28/2015 8:50:30 PM)
Personal servitude isn't vanilla. Duty, maybe? Possibly love. But being attentive is lacking in many vanilla relationships, and you do yourself a disservice by relegating your outlook to that particular generic term. Genetics can attribute a predilection, but the practice of any social ritual is socially constructed. Take the stereotype of the immaculate gay man. If you know a number of gay men, then you know that this stereotype is patently false. A person is born gay. They are not born 'neat', and a gay man can be as much of a slob as a straight one. What makes you the way you are isn't always chromosomal, hormonal or chemical. How you feel being the person you are, well, that's a whole other story.

orgasmdenial12 -> RE: Why? (1/28/2015 11:28:36 PM)
I believe it is a combination of free will and nurture. There is no evidence that genetics controls your behaviour and / or sexuality because if it did, your parents would have the same sexuality and behaviour as you.

seekingreality -> RE: Why? (1/28/2015 11:56:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: louisboy I have to admit I'm pure vanilla. I love being a personal servant to a Master. I think the best word in the English language is "Sir". I'm proud that his bath is ready, his shoes are shined, his clothes are immaculate. I get just as much joy in servicing him as he does. And yes, I jump when he snaps his fingers. I know most of you are rolling your eyes at how vanilla this is. Yet, both of us are doing the same thing- striving to accept his authority. Have you ever asked why we do that? I feel so comfortable doing what other people call odd and weird. And I'm vanilla. OK, most people are not into us, but how did we get "into" this? I believe it's genetic. I'm gay. The first guy I fell in love with was Scott. He was six, I was three. And I've always had this inkling to be a guy's servant. Do we we have the "sub" gene? I don't think what you're describing is vanilla, and it doesn't make me roll my eyes. But I wouldn't roll my eyes at a heterosexual couple who said they were satisfied with a sex life that consisted of missionary position sex once a week. My feeling is: If it works for you, and doesn't hurt anyone else, what do I care what you do? What you're describing would bore the hell out of me, but I don't expect other people to have the same likes/dislikes/needs as I do. I don't know that I buy there is a "submissive gene." I think this stuff is a complex blend of a lot of factors, but personally I think in the nature-vs-nurture equation, nature takes a secondary role here. Certainly, there is not at the moment any compelling evidence that anything like a "sub gene" exists.

preytolife -> RE: Why? (1/29/2015 2:27:20 PM)
Doesn't sound vanilla to me. I don't think personal orientation when it comes to BDSM has anything to do with genetics, or personality for that matter. I think it's a case of being moulded by experiences, having preferences in your relationships and how you best relate and express yourself in those relationships. I think devotion is normal in love. Most people that I know aren't hardwired to service just anyone, they want to care for their partners, they want to devote themselves to very specific people over time. That said, I do believe there's some mediocre erotica/porn out there that explores the idea of BDSM roles as genetic but as I remember it I wasn't impressed.

DerangedUnit -> RE: Why? (1/29/2015 3:00:55 PM)
Do we have the sub gene? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_political_orientation This should be helpful in explaining since it is the same concept. But to try to give a simplified overview (which I tend to be terrible at doing). There are actual physical differences in the genetics of democrats/republicans... and thusly, similarly, one can assume dom/subs as well (since most of those differences in political lean heavily towards dominant or submissive personality traits) BUT... genetics does not equal heritability. Epigenetic changes are things that can alter your genetics based on environment. Some of these changes can be heritage but at a lower frequency. For example, people from regions where it's colder develop lighter skin from the lack of vitamin d, this adaptation is now passed down between genrations. But fluctuation is still seen in people's ability to tan, thus changing their genetics in one of the most visible and obvious ways. The above link shows the measured heritability of political changes at 14%.... so it is possible that personality traits like this can be passed down but even if they are, the likelihood that they will again change as a result of environment is even higher. Hopefully, that explained some of the basics.

imtempting -> RE: Why? (1/29/2015 4:58:01 PM)
d/s does not need to be whips and chains and pain etc. It is the act of serving and receiving joy in serving.

DesFIP -> RE: Why? (1/30/2015 9:12:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: imtempting d/s does not need to be whips and chains and pain etc. It is the act of serving and receiving joy in serving. Or not. I have zero interest in serving. My drives are emotional transparency and being ordered. Serving gives me no joy at all. It is fair to say that your primary drive is service. It is wrong to state that it is that way for everyone because that implies that people who don't feel like you and the op aren't 'twue'. Nor is it okay for you to announce that people who are only into bedroom d/s are fakes. When you make a categorical statement the way you did, the implication is that you have the one true way and anyone else is wrong. It gets my goat and I know from past discussions where people say stuff like this, that I'm not the only one.

imtempting -> RE: Why? (1/30/2015 2:32:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP quote: ORIGINAL: imtempting d/s does not need to be whips and chains and pain etc. It is the act of serving and receiving joy in serving. Or not. I have zero interest in serving. My drives are emotional transparency and being ordered. Serving gives me no joy at all. It is fair to say that your primary drive is service. It is wrong to state that it is that way for everyone because that implies that people who don't feel like you and the op aren't 'twue'. Nor is it okay for you to announce that people who are only into bedroom d/s are fakes. When you make a categorical statement the way you did, the implication is that you have the one true way and anyone else is wrong. It gets my goat and I know from past discussions where people say stuff like this, that I'm not the only one. Wow, reading a lot into nothing and I'm correct unless your too blinded for attempting to rage against me cause I've obviosuly upset you with another post I've done. Your own words "being ordered". that is the same as serving. Like it or not but my statement is the basis for all D/s play. Why do you think none of the other sheep have jumped on board with your attacking because they know, I'm right

louisboy -> RE: Why? (1/30/2015 4:21:22 PM)
Well, I guess I can always blame my servile need on my parent. Either I got lousy parenting or lousy genes.I think it was in right from the start. I remember playing horsey with my buddies. Betcha can't guess who was always the horse. Thinking about back then-it was way before I had any idea of sex. I loved the way boys felt on my back. I remember how good their weight and warmth felt on me.

FieryOpal -> RE: Why? (1/30/2015 4:55:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: imtempting Wow, reading a lot into nothing and I'm correct unless your too blinded for attempting to rage against me cause I've obviosuly upset you with another post I've done. Your own words "being ordered". that is the same as serving. Like it or not but my statement is the basis for all D/s play. Why do you think none of the other sheep have jumped on board with your attacking because they know, I'm right [8\|] Do you always have this problem when others have an opinion which differs from your own? And why do you presume that you are anywhere on that poster's radar or that she has even read any of your other posts? (Some of which went missing rather quickly when two threads were shut down yesterday as a result of them) How presumptuous of you. If those who frequent these Message Boards are "sheep," then what does that make you, an outlier? Be an outlier, but be one who doesn't take every. freaking. thing. personally. As for "D/s play"...perhaps your concept of D/s and serving constitute play. Other submissives might choose to take their D/s relationships more seriously than that and reserve play for playtime. [:)]

Moderator3 -> RE: Why? (1/30/2015 5:23:10 PM)
FR Just a reminder. This is not a Feisty section and while some don't understand what I did yesterday, it may be clear in the coming days. I need to run something by the Team. However calling one person or a group names isn't a good move and with the current being what it is, I may just put on a safety vest. If you think I am being cryptic, you might be right. [;)]

imtempting -> RE: Why? (1/30/2015 9:45:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal quote: ORIGINAL: imtempting Wow, reading a lot into nothing and I'm correct unless your too blinded for attempting to rage against me cause I've obviosuly upset you with another post I've done. Your own words "being ordered". that is the same as serving. Like it or not but my statement is the basis for all D/s play. Why do you think none of the other sheep have jumped on board with your attacking because they know, I'm right [8\|] Do you always have this problem when others have an opinion which differs from your own? And why do you presume that you are anywhere on that poster's radar or that she has even read any of your other posts? (Some of which went missing rather quickly when two threads were shut down yesterday as a result of them) How presumptuous of you. If those who frequent these Message Boards are "sheep," then what does that make you, an outlier? Be an outlier, but be one who doesn't take every. freaking. thing. personally. As for "D/s play"...perhaps your concept of D/s and serving constitute play. Other submissives might choose to take their D/s relationships more seriously than that and reserve play for playtime. [:)] Blah blah blah that's what most of what you said in trying to argue a losing point. I'll make it more simple. If your being told what to do, what are you doing??? :o your serving. Once again, D/s, the lifestyle is fundamentally serving with everything else on top depending on your fetish. And what I call a sheep is someone who backs up a friend even when their totally wrong. I never attacked someone unlike people who attacked me but rather then punish their friends, they rather delete a thread. I agree moderator3, people need to be less aggressive like fr and the other poster

Moderator3 -> RE: Why? (1/30/2015 10:06:50 PM)
I will have you know that I really don't have friends here. Some might even say I hate everyone and am mean. You address a member, but speak to me and your accusation is unfounded and as the moderator around here, I will determine when someone is calling members names and determine how the forum proceeds from TOS and Guidelines and what is best for the forum. I did not delete a thread to support anyone, but did to determine how to proceed within a situation and that isn't something I can always speak about. I am known for being a straight shooter and accountable, but I am also known for friendliness and not being afraid to moderate ANYONE, even if I were to have a friend. Let's move on.

thishereboi -> RE: Why? (1/31/2015 6:27:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP quote: ORIGINAL: imtempting d/s does not need to be whips and chains and pain etc. It is the act of serving and receiving joy in serving. Or not. I have zero interest in serving. My drives are emotional transparency and being ordered. Serving gives me no joy at all. It is fair to say that your primary drive is service. It is wrong to state that it is that way for everyone because that implies that people who don't feel like you and the op aren't 'twue'. Nor is it okay for you to announce that people who are only into bedroom d/s are fakes. When you make a categorical statement the way you did, the implication is that you have the one true way and anyone else is wrong. It gets my goat and I know from past discussions where people say stuff like this, that I'm not the only one. Yea, one way truism gets my goat. But imtempting didn't say it was the only way, they said d/s DOES NOT NEED TO BE whips and chains. And they are right, it doesn't.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Why? (1/31/2015 7:08:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: imtempting I'll make it more simple. If your being told what to do, what are you doing??? :o your serving. Once again, D/s, the lifestyle is fundamentally serving with everything else on top depending on your fetish. I disagree with this posit. Quite simply, I can tell a dog to go in its bed. That is doing as it is told and it is NOT serving. An officer can tell you to stop jaywalking. That is doing what you are told and it is NOT serving. So no, your fundamental posit of "being told what to do is serving" is false. And your particular idea of D/s is yours and yours alone and doesn't fit everyone. Continually projecting your idea onto everyone else makes you an uneducated one-trick pony. Submission is a mindset, not just an action.

GoddessManko -> RE: Why? (1/31/2015 7:22:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: imtempting I'll make it more simple. If your being told what to do, what are you doing??? :o your serving. Once again, D/s, the lifestyle is fundamentally serving with everything else on top depending on your fetish. I disagree with this posit. Quite simply, I can tell a dog to go in its bed. That is doing as it is told and it is NOT serving. An officer can tell you to stop jaywalking. That is doing what you are told and it is NOT serving. So no, your fundamental posit of "being told what to do is serving" is false. And your particular idea of D/s is yours and yours alone and doesn't fit everyone. Continually projecting your idea onto everyone else makes you an uneducated one-trick pony. Submission is a mindset, not just an action. For me, it's both. I guide my sub in his personal pursuits as well as accepting his desire to be in service to me. It all goes hand in hand for me. I like to know my sub is growing as a result of submission. That is where I differ from those who cannot do the WORK required to truly submit but desire the play. However this fellow is just trying to be provocative and scapegoat others for his lack of collar. Doesn't want to do the work, nor does he want to pay for play. I suppose We should simply cater to his desires without question or protest now. [8\|] They really should be thanking the FinDommes if they acknowledge their existence at all.

DesFIP -> RE: Why? (1/31/2015 7:27:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Yea, one way truism gets my goat. But imtempting didn't say it was the only way, they said d/s DOES NOT NEED TO BE whips and chains. And they are right, it doesn't. No they said service is the one true way. And it isn't. Him saying go call the doctor about my cough and me doing it isn't service, it's obedience. Service is doing stuff for him like sweeping the peanut shells off the rug because he likes to eat peanuts but he doesn't like stepping on the dropped shells. If he says to me to sweep them up, that's both obedience and service. If I do it on my own, it's service. Unless I do it because I don't want to step on them either, at which point it's just housework.

imtempting -> RE: Why? (1/31/2015 12:28:15 PM)
Rolls eyes. Obeying, being told what to do, taking orders = serving Giving orders, giving commands, saying what to do = served I don't think I can make it any more clearer. As someone else could see, whips and chains is an add on. People may not like it to be called "service and served" but that is what it is.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875