|
rskenderian -> Hierarchal D/s and the BDSM sacred sub-culture (3/25/2007 11:27:15 PM)
|
Hi,
Interpersonal dynamics are .... dynamic. Primitively, Homo-Sapiens live in communities, in which an order of hierarchy is established, much like in a pack of wolves, or den of lion, monkeys, and every other mammal i can think of off-hand. But we no longer live in a single community, we live in a "Society". So, it would be natural now for two individuals, who would normally be 'alpha' per se in each their primitive community - or village - to be in a BDSM situation together.
What to do?
Hierarchy, or one's "place" in the community, is an important establishment that occurs in at least most mammilian species .. including Homo-Sapiens. This typically last years to establish during the growth-to-adult age, but in contemporary Society, we're just all thrown together and left to figure it all out ... immediately.
i notice within myself a sense of "hierarchy". There's individuals i defer to automatically, and there's individuals i expect to defer to me automatically. Within myself, this sense of Hierarchy is strong, and i find that others - the vast majority - automatically fall in line with this hierarchy i feel. It is not at all necessarily 'primitive' as opposed to 'Civilized'. In fact, it appears to be an enjoyable process for everyone - provided they are tuned into it, or aren't trying to fool themselves. i know that i'm a lot more at ease knowing my place in regards to another, and this 'finding' can happen quickly with people who are more actualized, i've noticed (if i've used the right terminology).
It also appears that most people DISLIKE the exact individuals who cannot rightfully understand their hierarchal place. These are the individuals that get all the snide comments behind their backs, or when they enter somewhere everyone else present goes "Oh, no .. not THEM again." It appears that it is exactly these individuals, who cannot or do not find and establish and recognize their hierarchal place within a group, who receive all the negative descriptions; obnoxious, pompous, boorish, etc..
... and who are generally shunned, or at kindest, pittied.
It would seem natural for two people who view themselves as essentially 'equal' to each other to 'switch' - not just in BDSM, but in all things. Plus, since evolution places almost everyone someplace in the middle of the hierarchy (there's only so much room at the top or bottom), it is absolutely natural for each individual to have submissive AND dominant traits.
But BDSM-D/s is REALLY about strong tendencies, which is why switches, i think, tend to be viewed as 'outsiders' or so. i am unquestionably a switch - but a hierarchal switch; i prefer to be one or the other, which makes me very comfortable in knowing, and - having my choice - i prefer to be submissive, since
I'd Be Completely and Ravingly Intolerant As a Dom. I Would Be Insane With Zero Tolerance and Infinite Rage. Every Tiny Thing To My Dissatifaction Would Send Me On A Rampage.
so, i find it is much, much, much more satisfying in every way to be extremely submissive. Plus, i actually am extremely submissive, thanks to Mother Nature, who humbles me naturally.
But i'm 43, and some "kid" in their 20's (no offense, but if you're in your 20's, you'll understand in another 20 years ;) is simply not going to stand a chance being dominant with me. They can, however, gain my fullest respect and certainly a great admiration. Hierarchy at work. How often do you see a D/s relationship (not pro) of that sort anyway? No-one even really tries to do that, as far as i've heard or seen (which i'll admit is not everything).
i extremely tolerant (meaning non-judgemental and accepting of others' happinesses), and i can imagine, and have toyed with switching. There's things i love about being dom, but my dominance is more of a "forced servicing" which is very sexy - but not really Dominant. i don't really get off on inflicting pain except i will do it if my lover - even Domme - enjoys it, and there it's really just sexual or a topping from the bottom; but i do very much get off on being punished, and pain is just a form of punishment for me. Well .... ok ... there's more to it. So at an earlier age [i can't say here nor count too high, since i ony have so many fingers on one hand] i was already a 'gentleman' sub to girls with punishment fantasies all over the place - but absolutely ravenously dominant (or alpha) to the teeth with boys.
Switching, i think, tends to upset the balance that is really BDSM. Although i'm tolerant and have my own feelings regarding switching, i can fully understand those in the BDSM community who might dislike switching; BDSM is, after all, really for them. It is THEIR sub-culture and community, as opposed to the outside world, where 'equality' is the norm ,and 'switching' takes place in every vanilla bedroom in Society. It is completely understandable that Doms, Dommes, subs and slaves DO NOT want 'switching' in it's various permutations going on inside the BDSM environment; i share those thoughts and feelings, too. But i also have switch tendencies/fantasies/feelings, have experienced being 'dominant', have powerful images ingrained in my mind.
People talk about their "rights". But if it's BDSM, how much "right" do you really have to not be what BDSM is really about and for? If BDSM exists to meet the needs of strongly sub/slave and strongly Dom/me, what real "right" does someone who's pursuing vanilla-type relations have? Please don't think i'm hateful or critical; conversely, i empathize.
But personally, i prefer things sub or Dom and that such should be evident on sight. i don't want to even have to ask. i like feeling that comfortable.
Also, is it switching, or really topping from the bottom?
i simply believe that there are sub-cultures for very real and very important reasons, and that these are for the people who really belong there - meaning that's what they really, strongly are, and Society does not meet their needs at all, and so they do need their subculture, and they would like it to be how it is supposed to be in order to meet their needs.
and i believe that should be strongly and highly respected.
i'd love to live in a world where there were only Dominants and submissives, and everybody was that way. subs have dominant qualities - i do - and i know i'm never going to be happy being Dominant, so why bother with it, when i'm in ecstacy, floating around in sub-space, finally at peace, as a sub? But there is still a natural hierarchal tendency born in almost everyone, and as a sub, i should be getting any dominant displays or feelings beaten the shit right out of me. Otherwise, i'm going to be in that place of confusion and chaos, and am not ever going to be happy. i'm much too complex enough as it is, so anything that simplifies me and makes me happy is highly desireable - most desireable, perhaps needed.
i can't be any one thing, ever. i can't view anything in any way but from multiple vantage points simultaneously, ever. i can't have a simple philosophy, ever. i can't think except in multiple dimensions, ever. i cannot make one true statement without also making the converse statement true, ever. i am so much of everything, i am nothing. i am so inclusive, i have no identity.
Except i know one thing for certain; i am submissive; and that is my cure.
Switching, although i can't - because of my own switch feelings and images - criticize, is to me, unwelcome - in myself and in others. i personally don't want it around, since "pure" BDSM is my cure and simplification, and is really, the only one i have. This isn't a big conflict for me (although if i were Dominant, it would be), and i can't say that it disturbs my submissiveness; only that i don't find that it 'fits' into what BDSM is all about. i don't criticize people for their fullness, because we are full, but BDSM allows me to be simply one thing FULLY. No conflicts, no inner turmoil, no concurrent opposites being additively 'true'.
Just very simple.
i agree there's room for exploration and familiarization, and should be; and i've probably been too hard on myself for staying away for so long in my life. But eye-contact restriction sends me, because it tells me who and what i am, for real; and there i am, being what i am, and that is far, far too incredible; because i can't make all the things i am go away and just be simple, except that THIS is real and very simple and absolutely true, and it is true that i am to have eye-contact restrictions, and i know this and can feel it. And it's the ONLY thing i have that is for real.
What people find in life for real cures to their individual suffering is sacred, and should be held that way - by all people; and THAT is a respectful and tolerant society - not the opposite.
my contribution to hopefully simplify things, and to put things in what i see as a truer and more meaningful perspective. This is not a rant (nope, no more weekly rants - not after my first one), but a strong case for, basically; 'why is sacred' and 'keeping things sacred'. Please no flames, i had enough of those already - but keep in mind the aspect of sacred, because that's the intention.
- puppy
|
|
|
|
