quote:

ORIGINAL: Bhruic

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

I see the first. *smiles*

The second, no. It's not leading, or taking responsibility. It's not powerful or influential. It is suborning yourself to another's view, then avoiding it.

Domination, in the general sense of the word, is not always about being a leader or taking responsibility... sometimes it is just about control. Lots of manipulative people use passive aggressive techniques to control people.

If you are talking about a very specific definition of Domination and submission as it relates to kink, then I can see what you mean... but I am not sure the terms have been defined.

quote:

quote:

Interestingly... you could phrase things another way and say that someone who generally identifies as a submissive does not act submissively when leading her children... when leading her children, she is not, in fact, a submissive.

quote:


I disagree. She is still a submissive. She is just exhibiting dominant traits.

Yes... but that is just one way of seeing it. I think it is equally valid to say that people are submissives when they are being submissive, and dominants when they are being dominant... and that picking one of those terms has limited meaning for the purpose of understanding who someone is.

quote:

quote:

Submissive and dominant describe an interaction dynamic, for the most part. Thus it is possible for the character of that dynamic to change with every new person, and every new situation.

quote:


I disagree. People are using those words to describe core personalities. Who they are. Therefore a submissive can have both dominant and submissive traits, and behave submissively or dominantly towards others.

Yes, I understand what you are saying... I was just expressing the opinion that using those terms to describe core personality is not terribly accurate, or useful... unless the behavior is consistent.

quote:

Think of straight and gay. I identify as straight, but like getting fucked by men... I can argue till I am blue in the face to you that I identify as straight, but how usefully descriptive and accurate is that term to your understanding of me? (although I admit that straight and gay are more clearly understood, or at least generally agreed on, terms, and most people would rightly say that I would be incorrect in identifying as straight.)

quote:

I guess if the terms were definitively descriptive and useful we wouldn't be having this conversation :)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

I assume they do. however, to suggest that because he knows a submissive who does not exhibit the trait has nothing to do with whether the trait is submissive.

And this keeps happening. "I know dominants who do this, therefore it must not be submissive." Again, the words are not related to the point, so I clarify.

*shrugs*

Nookie: this isn't good manners, for obvious reasons.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bhruic

Yes, I understand what you are saying... I was just expressing the opinion that using those terms to describe core personality is not terribly accurate, or useful... unless the behavior is consistent.

I think that using those words to describe core personalities is very useful. It is telling what people identify with. And what their leanings and preferences are in relation to others, regardless of the roles they must play in life.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bhruic

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bhruic

Yes, I understand what you are saying... I was just expressing the opinion that using those terms to describe core personality is not terribly accurate, or useful... unless the behavior is consistent.

I think that using those words to describe core personalities is very useful. It is telling what people identify with. And what their leanings and preferences are in relation to others, regardless of the roles they must play in life.

I take all your points. It's certainly a topic worthy of discussion... as regards describing core personalities, I still feel like a single word description is unlikely to have anything but the most superficial value. As other parts of the discussion have illustrated, human personality is a vastly complex, often self contradictory, thing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit

I think I'm going to give up the noun/adjective argument and just go with it (insert face palm a couple pages ago)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit
Nookie: there's a reason I have a reference to the dunning-Krueger effect on my profile. I swear people do it just to mess with me but then that's probably my optimism/narcissism talking *chuckle*

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bhruic


I take all your points. It's certainly a topic worthy of discussion... as regards describing core personalities, I still feel like a single word description is unlikely to have anything but the most superficial value. As other parts of the discussion have illustrated, human personality is a vastly complex, often self contradictory, thing.

I think the value is more than superficial, especially when someone self-identifies.

Yes, very worth discussing on various levels.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bhruic
It made me think about the perils of picking a label for oneself, and then trying to live up to what you think it means, to you, and to others... rather than not worrying about these descriptions, and simply understanding yourself and your desires. She had chosen a one word description of her core personality, and then wondered why it never felt quite right...

quote:

I think part of the problem was that these one word labels, Master, sub, slave... are not so much valuable definitions of core personalities, but rather thin cutouts of archetypal personae.

But that's just my opinion :)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

Some irritating but not universal traits found in submissive I have known.

Mind reading requirement.
A one twu Dom will know what I want without having to ask. Communicate! If the submissive asks you to "play with my butt" is she asking for a spanking, wanting anal sex, or needs a lower back massage? If you don't ask, in words, you can't be sure you are going to get what you had in mind. Trust me, to a very kinky mind "play with my butt" could involve insertion of a Kong (dog toy) filled with raw ginger.

Rabid Refusal to express ANY opinion when asked.
D: Where would you like to go for dinner.
s: Oh, whatever you want is fine by me.
D: Ok, there is that new Indian place that just opened up. Let's try it.
s: Oh, I can't eat Indian food.
D: Ok, we will go to the Chinese buffet then.
s: I can't stand Chinese food.
D: Gritting teeth.... where would you like to eat?
s: Oh, anywhere you like is fine with me.
D: Takes submissive home, in tears, and goes to MacDonalds

Occasionally, you can find the very scary type of rush to collar...
i.e. After a fun first meeting for coffee and conversation you make plans for a dinner and some play time. She shows up with five suitcases ready to move in. That is when the D type channels Monty Python "Run AWAY!!!!" <Yes, it happened to me shortly after coming out of the kink closet.>

Nope, none of these behaviors are stereotypical but prevalent enough to be wary of.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit

Are there traits which you see as superior and submissive/ inferior and dominant or are they mutually exclusive?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit

I see shyness, insecurity, approval seeking, defensiveness as mainly submissive traits

Some traits I see as dominant are protective types ,stability, a "devil may care" attitude, a refusal to back down, extroverted

Some traits I see as inferior are being argumentative, perpetually sad, stubborn, my definition of passive aggressive which is trying to use guilt or something akin to alter someone's behavior

And so the traits I am most drawn to are happy go lucky types, an ability to laugh at yourself, spontaneity, passion, longevity

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anchises

Having felt both sides of the kneel, I think the personality trait most common in a submissive is attention to the pleasure of the dominant.

If I may expand upon that (which I shall anyway ). The desire to please in itself is neither submissive nor Dominant. It's just a expression of human nature in some more than others, depending on how interconnected or empathic-empathetic the person is in being attuned to the needs of others and in wanting to be a good provider. There are plenty of Dominants who derive pleasure from seeing that their sub receives gratification.

I would characterize the submissive component of this as compulsive people-pleasing and approval-seeking with a compliant attitude. Their raison d'être. How to separate the wheat from the chaff? Compliance as more than just a show. There are people-pleasers who are motivated out of ego insecurities, who need frequent pats on the back and will go out of their way to get them, but who aren't truly compliant out of submissiveness.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anchises

I'm not sure what the most common personality trait of the dominant is, as there are many I'm sure.
Taking a swag at it, I'd guess, for dominant women, it to be the enjoyment of the control of things more powerful than they are.
For dominant men, I think a general enjoyment of femininity and blowjobs would suffice as a main personality trait.

A man doesn't have to be Dominant to be a selfish pig. Blowjobs are not a necessary ingredient of foreplay for a man who is virile, whereas women often need foreplay (in one form or another) in order to reach sufficiently high states of arousal.

With Dommes, it isn't a matter of "more powerful" but of an attraction to power, of gaining more power, of having power over, or else the power to manifest one's will. The same would go for male Doms. Submissives tend to be power-averse or look for ways to give their power away, and this can be unhealthy when it translates into not wanting to take personal responsibility for themselves. Personally, this is where I see the biggest fail in submissives, the ones who don't realize that being powerless and acting powerless is not an attractive trait, except to those who would prey upon the weak (psychological scavengers or psychic vampires) because they themselves have so little personal power of their own.

DreamLady