mstrjx
Posts: 2045
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
|
Well, since I started this basketball game, I should probably make my ideas a little clearer. Of course, saying 'easy' leaves a lot of room for discussion, so I'll go over what I mean here.
To begin, let's start with a simple analogy. Let us think of a dominant to being a general in an army, and a submissive to be a private. I've not been in the military myself, but I see being a private to have a few set of 'rules'.
a) Shut up
b) Follow your orders
c) Don't get yourself killed
The first two we would call 'obedience'. No argument there. The third, is what is thought of as 'self-preservation'. There are examples of this. Safe words are a way for a submissive or slave to communicate their own safety. Also, simply the choice of who to dominate a submissive is a way of self-preservation. A wise selection yields positive results. A poor selection might not give the same results.
A general has many tasks with their position. They need to set goals, make plans for achieving the goals, and many other tasks. Finally and still importantly, they need to keep the morale of their charges high.
All of these things a general (or dominant) have to keep in mind are, simply, 'responsibilities'.
If you think in terms of a dom/sub relationship (not M/s), I think it is fair to say that a submissive enters into this type of situation because they are willing to give a portion of themselves and make it 'vulnerable' to another. With the appropriate trust levels in place (having made a sound choice in dominants), each layer or aspect of their life that they turn over to a dominant results in greater vulnerability.
But this vulnerability isn't given in a vacuum. Just as in physics (opposite and equal reactions), there must be a corresponding element to vulnerability, and no it isn't 'invulnerability'. It is a heightened 'responsibility'. So, within any given relationship, as there is greater submission, there must be greater responsibility.
Why MUST there be? Think about it. If you think in terms of bondage, tightly bound, blindfolded, gagged, results in a high level of vulnerability. If the other party is not being responsible, then bad things are likely to happen. In a D/s relationship, the same level of 'pain and suffering' can result from a word, a phrase in the form of humiliation and/or degredation. The phrase I think of to illustrate this is 'a soul can be crushed just as easily as Elizabeth Montgomery on Bewitched twitches her nose'.
Submissives need to consider their heightened vulnerability in the choice of who they decide to be with.
Dominants need to understand that the more submission they are given, they MUST be willing to take on a greater amount of responsibility, or else they shouldn't be allowed in the game. We see (users, abusers, rapists) what happens if they are.
You can see that in the case of an M/s relationship, this level of vulnerability and responsibility expands greatly. An 'owner' needs to understand the authority that they are taking, and act accordingly.
You might find fault with this statement, but I believe that the one thing that CANNOT be taken from a slave is their own sense of self-preservation. They need it if they are ever to need to walk away.
So, this is why on a scale of 'ease' it is simpler to submit. Each responsibility that falls to the dominant results in one fewer responsibilities that a submissive or slave needs to concern themselves with. The more that is 'taken' from them, the more 'free' they can become to get on with the business of submitting and (if need be) serving.
Areas that are outside of the relationship (i.e., those areas of a sub's life that they still control) are not counted, because they are not part of the negotiated 'scene'.
If I remember correctly, one of the arguments against what I said in the other thread was that it takes a lot of effort simply to find ways to 'please' their dom/master/mistress/owner.
Baloney.
As a dominant, if you are not pleasing me, that is because I have not adequately 'trained' you to please me. If I have never explained what I like and don't, a sub CANNOT be held responsible for that. That responsibility rests on the shoulders of the dom.
Most arguments, I believe, will fall into one of two areas. Responsibilities that the dominant 'should' be claiming for themself, or those things that are outside of the negotiations.
Emotions do NOT fall outside of this. If a sub feels 'bad' about something, it is probably a lack of communication or ignorance on the part of the dom. And while I agree that communication IS a two-way street, it is up to the dom to be able to enforce how that communication is disseminated. So, communication IS part of the dom's responsibilities.
I hope this helps to clear things up, even in quite a lengthy post.
Don't get yourself killed.
Jeff
_____________________________
Know thyself. It's the best gift you can ever give yourself.
|
RE: Do submissives REALLY have it easier? - 
Profile
(I know what you are trying to relay, LA, just having fun with it because it was never the case for me). 
RE: Do submissives REALLY have it easier? - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread