Noah
Posts: 1660
Joined: 7/5/2005 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: missturbation women r born to serve. earlier they accept it, happier their life will be. I recieved that as a first message today. Now it hasn't offended me or angered me, thats not the point of my post. It has made me wonder though :- I personally have made a choice to submit to my God, in general a choice to be submissive. I do feel that i am naturally submissive but still i made the choice to follow through with the life submissiveness brings me. As the poem by Rosaleen young titled 'two women (the submissive to the suffragette) says - If you please ma'am calm your rage Your gift i'll not ignore 'Twas choice you gave and choice i take As slave to man once more. So personally whilst i agree that i was born to serve and i accept it and am happier for it obviously not all women feel the same. I still feel i made a choice though. I'm wondering if anyone (and im sure the answer will be yes for some) feels they have no choice but to be submissive /dominant? The second question this memo made me ask is the person who sent me this memos opinion is obviously that all women should serve man. Why would he have this opinion? I find it hard to believe in this day and age that someone would have this opinion. Is it possible that he has just been around submissive women so long that he feels all women should be the same? Or is the first thing that sprung to my mind closer to the truth, that he is just a sexist pig? Edited to add - if i had brains i'd be dangerous, i meant to post this in off topic lol - doh I think the "born to serve" stuff is crap beneath responding to. I'm posting to share the thought that a conception of submission which does not involve choice seems to move away from what lies at the heart of the concept. To me this has to do with one person imposing his or her will, another subjugating his or her will. If you are submitting to me without choosing to then your behavior means no more to me than the performance of my washing machine or lawn mower. I push their buttons and they go, or fail mechanically. If you have no choice but to submit to me then when I push your buttons you will will go, or else fail mechanically. Ho hum. I get no domly kick out of it when my car engine turns over in response to my key. It has no choice. Does it stir anyone's domly juices when some choiceless automaton reacts in a way that it has to react? Weird kink, in my book. I'm in it for the meanings as well as the experiences. I can see no meaning, none whatsoever, in the submission of what amounts to a machine who has no choice but to submit. Should I be gratified when I drop a stone and it falls "for me"? I think I'd be a fool. The stone is just "doing what it has to do" as that preposterously overused expression says. Why should that dropping have any particular significance to me? Far less should I care for and value that stone insofar as it fell "for me". It has no choice. I'd no sooner spend time with a person incapable of exercising her own will than with one who was incapable of exercising her own mind. A willing mind in an utterly inert body would be far more attractive, and interesting, if only that inertia didn't preclude communication. I see human beings as beings of will. Self-controlled. For another human being to willingly--not of some "born necessity"--subjugate herself to me, well that it something powerfully significant. If I were to learn that she had no choice, could no more choose not to not submit than the stone could choose not to fall then she would immediately be transformed into something subhuman in my eyes, beneath the reach of care. This is as different as can be from the fully human, willing being who wishes to submit her will to mine, even to the extent of performing as responsively and reliably as a machine; to be deeply objectified. But it is her choice, not the mechanical operations of her limbs, which fills the relationship with meaning for me. In fact, since I believe that willing is constitutive of humanity I think anyone lies to himself who says: I have no choice. This sort of moral blindness does not mark them as sub-human, to me, beneath the reach of care. Pity is a sort of care. But it cordons them off from any personal interest on my part beyond an urge to show them that they in fact are fully human. They are willing beings, irrespective of their staunch denials. You might as well deny that your body takes up space. When they submit they make a choice and it can be a very beautiful thing.Why obscure this with some insupportable claim to be less than human, lacking the ability to exercise your own will? I celebrate your choice to submit in a healthy relationship, whomever you may be. What a shame if instead of celebrating it yourself you formulate this sort of a myth: That It Couldn't Be Otherwise. I'm aware that every single time someone special submits to me in this or that particular she has indeed made a choice; a choice in my favor. The people special to me are aware of this too and we each value and celebrate that willingness, that act of will. My barnyard and toolshed are full of things that bend to my will of necessity. Things that have no choice. My heart and my bed are occupied by fully human, willing beings whose choice in favor of me is born again each day, in each moment of our interactions.
|