RE: Submissive in many contexts (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

velvetears -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 7:23:45 AM)

littlesarbonn, two subs being married could both find a dominant together to serve. In fact i remember a girl who used to post a lot a few months back, she was married and both her and her husband were subs and they searched for a dominant together. 

Instead of marrying a submissive what about a vanilla woman - i think there are probably lots of vanilla women out there who would love a service oriented guy, as long as they didn't have to actively dominate him, just show appreciation and treasure him for what he does for them.  Again this would work if the guy was service oriented only - i suppose it could happen without the terms ever being discussed - same for fem subs i guess, but with both male and fem subs i think there is the risk that eventually your partner will start to take advantage of you or see you as weak and the realtionship would then crumble. No one wants to be seen as weak and taken advantage of, not appreciated - although i shouldn't say no one - maybe some get off on that as well. 



velvetears -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 7:32:06 AM)

jauntyone thanks for clarifying, you are submissive period, to everyone you come in contact with, it is how you relate to people in your world.  Were you raised this way?  Do you ever feel taken advantage of or that your submissive nature puts you in danger with people?  i would think this type of submissive would especially need a dom to serve if only to keep her safe.  i would assume your masters word or needs take precedence over everyone else. 

Would you agree that what you are describing is termed a "natural submissive"?



jauntyone -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 7:44:53 AM)

Greetings velvetears
 
I will try to explain the best I can
 
I was raised this way yes, in our house, the women deferred to the men. Period. Whether it was my father or my brother, we listened and did what was asked of us. ( I want to point out though a small thing about my parents; my father is retired military and my mother is a surgeon )
 
I was taught to show deference to all men; to all who were older than I, and to those who were my superior. ( I am in the military also so it’s a hard balance to keep in place ) By superior, I do not mean military wise; but rather those who I looked at as being my superior.
 
I was raised by my father to also take care of myself. He taught both my sister and I self-defense; we were taught to NOT lose also. So in that respect, no, I have never felt that my nature has made me more susceptible to danger. I can snap a neck in two if the occasion calls for it and not think twice about it; nor feel remorse.
 
I can probably say without any doubt that I was very attracted to Master for several reasons; one being that yes, he did have a very dominant and controlling personality that showed the first time we ever talked. I also should point out that Master is in the Marines also J If his personality was not such, if I had still fallen in love with him, I would still be the same way that I am now.
 
Yes, I would call MYSELF a natural submissive; though I would never think to try and use the same definition for others J I would also state though that I am a firm believer in natural order, another belief that stemmed from my growing up years.
 
I wish you well
 
melissa



velvetears -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 7:47:41 AM)

beth i agree with you that it would be horrible to open up to a vanilla and have them turn around and tell you to get help, how hurtful and rude actually.  i personally agree with this If there are no ideals, rules, dogma, authority or control that you submit to or situational experiences with others that you participate in, what are you submitting to? but there are others, like jauntyone who experience their submission differently, i am trying to understand what the difference is between the two. 

You mentioned the first vanilla guy "acted" dominant from time to time to please you then eventually got tired of it.  Did the exchange, when he was acting, satisfy you?  It's a conundrum of sorts - he's actually being submissive, by acting, to please you, by letting you be submissive to him lol.  i am glad you got out of that second relationship it must have been awful. This is the risk subs take when they don't find someone who understands what it is they are given and takes responsibility of it.  You and Merc seem like such a complimentary couple and i always enjoy reading your posts. You are both lucky to have each other :-)  Thanks for your input



velvetears -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 7:57:44 AM)

Thank you jaunty, i find it very interesting that you are in the military. i would think anyone, male or female, who was submissive in nature would find that a difficult life because in fighting a war (which is always a risk when you join) you have to be agressive if you want to survive.  You state you believe in natural order, that doesn't go against women being in the military?  Just curious and trying to understand, not put you down - i admire you for that courage and strength actually. 



jauntyone -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 8:07:02 AM)

Greetings velvetears
 
As I said, it is at times a hard balance between the two. Perhaps I am able to keep it because of the fact that though my father raised us in a certain way, he also raised us GIRLS to stand up for ourselves. My father would often train with us, and like I said, he trained us to not lose.
 
There is a subtle line that is drawn between being deferential to another and letting the natural instinct of survival take precedence over everything. There are times I liken it to a very devout religious person who, for the sake of survival has killed another.
 
I do not wish to hijack this thread into a debate of natural order J , which is sure to happen if I answer your question about it. I will say this though and it is only MY opinion on the subject and nothing else. I do not believe in any way that men and women are equal; I DO believe that men are stronger; I DO believe that women were put here to make the lives of men easier.
 
( again, please, I do not wish to hijack this into a debate over whether this is right or wrong, it is only my opinion and something that I adhere to )
 
I am not sure if I answered your question or not though. J
 
I wish you well
 
                                                                  melissa



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 8:24:50 AM)

quote:

my question is this: If you identify as submissive, (bdsm needs aside, unless they are tied in with your submissive nature, which is something that someone may bring to light here) then why would it matter if your "guy" or "gal" were dom or not?  Being submissive entails submitting to the will of another.  Most submissives, as stated in the other thread, don't prefer vanilla men as their needs are not met in those kinds of relationships. What needs specifically? What i want to understand is why does submission have to necessarily have to rely on dominance to work?  What is it that a dominant does to make your submission work or feel more validating for you?  If you met and fell madly in love with a vanilla, couldn't you just quietly go along being submissive to him without anything back as far as active dominance?  Submission is conditional if it requires active domination on your partners part - not saying that's wrong at all, just trying to understand the nuances of the dynamic better. Submission, to be fulfilling,  needs something more then just submitting your will to another. 

What put the idea that submission should be unconditional into your mind?

That's what consent does- it puts a condition on.  And I fully support that.



Mercnbeth -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 8:33:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: velvetears

beth i agree with you that it would be horrible to open up to a vanilla and have them turn around and tell you to get help, how hurtful and rude actually.  i personally agree with this If there are no ideals, rules, dogma, authority or control that you submit to or situational experiences with others that you participate in, what are you submitting to? but there are others, like jauntyone who experience their submission differently, i am trying to understand what the difference is between the two. 

You mentioned the first vanilla guy "acted" dominant from time to time to please you then eventually got tired of it.  Did the exchange, when he was acting, satisfy you? ...


this clip from the previous post: 
quote:

with the first one, even “acted” dominant from time to time, just to please him.
should have read:  
quote:

with the first one, this slave "acted"dominant from time to time, just to please him.
it was a purely vanilla pairing.  we never discussed Dominant/submissive, BDSM or this "syle of life"---frankly, this slave was unaware that folks structured relationships of a specifically M/s or D/s nature from the beginning, or that people specifically sought out those "types" for relationships.

quote:

  i am glad you got out of that second relationship it must have been awful.


it was incredibly damaging, but this slave has healed and moved forward.  again, this was purely a vanilla intended pairing, as in there was no talk of D/s, M/s, BDSM, etc. except he thought this slave's masochistic tendencies, interest in sex and submissive nature was the definition of a "sick, nymphomaniac that no self-respecting MAN would ever want a relationship with...especially after I'm done with you" but he didn't start terrorizing this slave until after we had been together for two years and had a wee one together.


quote:

You and Merc seem like such a complimentary couple and i always enjoy reading your posts. You are both lucky to have each other :-)  Thanks for your input


thank you for the compliment!!!  this slave feels that the something we have has to be more than luck...it's a blessing!!! [:)]



SirDominic -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 8:59:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: velvetears

Sir Dominic, that sort of was my question in a way - can they feel fulfilled being submissive with a man who isn't necessarily actively dominating them, but your example was a good one in that i think it gave a good example of domination that was unhealthy to a person. Do you think this woman is happy with this man? You said "it doesn't bother her enough to do anything about it." that doesn't sound very encouraging, it sounds like she's accepting of her lot in life and not really enjoying it - like it's a forced submission not something she would freely choose. He sounds like a domineering man and a very insecure one at that.



I also think it is a very unhealthy relationship, and have gently talked with her about it a few times. Do I think she is happy with her husband and this arrangement? No. But I do think she is content with it, or more probably it is more comfortable to let the relationship exist as it is than take the risk of trying to change it, with all the fear that comes with change. He is very insecure indeed, and it is a forced submission, yet one that she seems to have freely chosen to accept.

The arrangement does not fulfill her, it is obvious to me that she has been terribly stifled in her growth as a person. I am sad about that because I perceive a lot in her that would be special that is never going to be allowed to blossom. Why she would voluntarily choose this life is beyond my ability to understand.

The other odd thing is that she is very vanilla, and I think the concept of a D/s fetish arrangement would horrify her. Even though she is living it anyway in a vanilla lifetyle.

Namaste, Sir Dominic



velvetears -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 10:33:57 AM)

LA i don't actually have that idea about submission in my mind but i think some subs do think of it in unconditional terms, maybe therein lies the difference between subs and slaves, i hesitate to say that as i DON'T WANT this to turn into that debate [&o]

i am not sure what led you to believe i was saying it should be unconditional... maybe you could explain that more. i am just trying to get different perspectives on submission and how the dynamics work for others and what possibilities there are out there that people take advantage of. 

You say consent puts a condition on it - how so?  What about slaves who consent to be owned and that's their last decision they ever make for themselves?



velvetears -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 10:42:45 AM)

beth thanks for clearing that up - you were the actor - that puts a whole different spin on it. 

It sounds to me like this guy was terribly insecure of himself and had no clue in hell how to handle the situation and had to resort to abuse and finger pointing.  He prolly had some deep seated twisted concept of what was right and wrong behavior for woman and anyone outside his little box was a threat to him.

i am glad you are so blessed now :-)  It must be so liberating to be with someone who knows exactly and precisel who we are and cherishes us for that which we bring them.



velvetears -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 10:48:15 AM)

SirDominic, how truly sad and unfortunate.  i hope she has the courage one day to see her own value more and want better for herself.  Change can be very scary, it's easy to stay with the status quo, but if the alternative is living a miserable life??  i am glad she has a friend like you who can understand her - perhaps in time you can make a positive impact on her life and be that catalyst for change in her [:)]



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 10:49:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: velvetears
You say consent puts a condition on it - how so?  What about slaves who consent to be owned and that's their last decision they ever make for themselves?

But the consent to be owned in A particular context.  The conditions had to be right in order for consent to be given.



velvetears -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 10:53:52 AM)

Thanks jauntyone, i think i understand better - you are a very interesting person and i have enjoyed getting to understand your perspective better. 

i don't really believe in the natural order idea - i admit to not really knowing that much about it, only that men are superior to women and women are by nature, here on earth (according to the bible i believe), to serve men.  

If you are in the military - a very male dominated place by and large - do you ever feel out of place there?  Wouldn't natural order dictate that women stay at home, have the babies, etc and the men work and are the protectors of the home? 



darkinshadows -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 10:57:06 AM)

I just wanted to agree with Em and say that even one single consent ie - consent to be owned - is itself places a condition upon the submission.
 
That is why so many Ms relationships rely on contracts - it binds people into conditions.
As do safe words.  It binds you into a condition upon play.
 
Peace



velvetears -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 11:07:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

I just wanted to agree with Em and say that even one single consent ie - consent to be owned - is itself places a condition upon the submission.
 
That is why so many Ms relationships rely on contracts - it binds people into conditions.
As do safe words.  It binds you into a condition upon play.
 
Peace



One can consent to something - let's give a simple example, to be spanked.  If you then put conditions on the spanking - only OTK, not too hard, leave no marks, etc - i would question how submissive this is?  i have read examples of many subs who live their relationships very unconditionally - daddysprop, ownedgirlie, chewise, are just a few that pop into my mind from remembering their pov.  i think consent and conditions are two seperate things - maybe linked but different.  Isn't that where trust comes in - giving consent without conditions because you trust your dom enough to know you and not bring harm to you in any way?  Wouldn't too many conditions be topping from the bottom?  i am not advocating giving a dom free reign to do whatever he pleases, once you consent to allow him to dominate you, by any means, that would be too risky in many a situation. 



mstrjx -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 11:16:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: velvetears

Mstrjx, You feel submissives need structure and consequences and that can only be gotten by being with someone who also buys into a relationship that is inherently unequal.  i can see where a vanilla can expect structure from his partner but have a real hard time with the consequences part.  You mentioned how having an opportunity to make choices would go against the subs grain - i am not sure if this would be the case for some subs, and is that really tied to want to hand over responsibility to the dom for all choices?  Thats one thing i think probably many negotiate on - how much control one wants to relinquish. i would suspect that some doms perhaps don't want to make every choice in a relationship either - just whats important to their own needs as opposed to the opposite which would be micro managing someone.  But i understand your basic point.


How much or how little 'control' is allowed the dominant party is going to vary by relationship.  There are some people who cannot give up all parts of their life, be it for practical reasons, or inadequate experience and trust.  And that's fine.  Others are able to surrender complete authority.  But in either of these cases there is negotiation and consideration.

Dominants are or can be the same way.  Not everyone is capable or in some cases interested in a TPE relationship.  The relationship becomes tailored to those areas that can be agreed upon.

This type of process might possibly not work well in a relationship between a submissive and a vanilla.  The control 'flow' would generally be more dynamic than in a D/s relationship, because the vanilla doesn't know to keep the structure and allow the submissive to 'simply' submit.

The consequences are a way to be held accountable.  They also have the ability to maintain a focal point for the submissive partner.  If you have ever seen a submissive lose respect for a dominant because the dominant partner would not adhere to (or follow through on) their own structure, you can imagine how that submissive person would tend to think of their vanilla partner.

Jeff



darkinshadows -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 11:19:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: velvetears

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

I just wanted to agree with Em and say that even one single consent ie - consent to be owned - is itself places a condition upon the submission.
 
That is why so many Ms relationships rely on contracts - it binds people into conditions.
As do safe words.  It binds you into a condition upon play.
 
Peace



One can consent to something - let's give a simple example, to be spanked.  If you then put conditions on the spanking - only OTK, not too hard, leave no marks, etc - i would question how submissive this is?  i have read examples of many subs who live their relationships very unconditionally - daddysprop, ownedgirlie, chewise, are just a few that pop into my mind from remembering their pov.  i think consent and conditions are two seperate things - maybe linked but different.  Isn't that where trust comes in - giving consent without conditions because you trust your dom enough to know you and not bring harm to you in any way?  Wouldn't too many conditions be topping from the bottom?  i am not advocating giving a dom free reign to do whatever he pleases, once you consent to allow him to dominate you, by any means, that would be too risky in many a situation. 

Yes, but they would not have consented to their submission if they did not trust their Master and negotiations had already taken place.  That means, that they already have things in common.  They already share the same fetishes or that the women concerned (in this case who you have mentioned) have already come to the realisation that the dominant they are in a relationship with will not do anything to hurt them intentionally.  Or leave them intentionally.  That they already understand - the condition - that they are cared for.  That the pain they go through is done with this in mind.  Unless these s-types really do consent to having a limb removed, or a baby aborted if such a thing were to happen, they wouldn't consent to being owned by a particular person.  This is all negotiated in the first place.  You talk and communicate and find out if your submission is compatable to the others dominance.  Then if this is great, you consent.  But it is still under condition of 'care' - or abuse - if that is what people are into.
Yes there is trust - but trust come under a condition too.  You can't consent honestly if you dont trust, and you cannot trust if there isnt the conditions that you adhere to, to be true to yourself. 
 
Peace



jauntyone -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 11:24:45 AM)

quote:

If you are in the military - a very male dominated place by and large - do you ever feel out of place there?  Wouldn't natural order dictate that women stay at home, have the babies, etc and the men work and are the protectors of the home? 

Greetings velvetears
 
actually, no, I do not feel out of place in the military; despite my own views on some things. It was a simple decision for me to enter the marines; my father EXPECTED it of us, both my brother and my sister and I. Not so much just the Marines, but he expected us to do our duty to our country. I could have been the rebellious kind and gone against everything he expected and taught us; but, I like the way I was brought up [:)] .
 
Just to again throw a twist at you is the fact that I am part of the base police while state side. So, in my work, I go against everything that is in my nature; I have to be aggressive, there is no choice about it. Yet, one can learn to be aggressive and yet, respectful and deferential at the same time. It is a delicate balance that is learned only through hard work and trial and error.
 
I wish you well
 
melissa
 
edited to add a sentence that I had previously left out



velvetears -> RE: Submissive in many contexts (4/15/2007 11:42:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows
Yes, but they would not have consented to their submission if they did not trust their Master and negotiations had already taken place.  That means, that they already have things in common.  They already share the same fetishes or that the women concerned (in this case who you have mentioned) have already come to the realisation that the dominant they are in a relationship with will not do anything to hurt them intentionally.  Or leave them intentionally.  That they already understand - the condition - that they are cared for.  That the pain they go through is done with this in mind.  Unless these s-types really do consent to having a limb removed, or a baby aborted if such a thing were to happen, they wouldn't consent to being owned by a particular person.  This is all negotiated in the first place.  You talk and communicate and find out if your submission is compatable to the others dominance.  Then if this is great, you consent.  But it is still under condition of 'care' - or abuse - if that is what people are into.
Yes there is trust - but trust come under a condition too.  You can't consent honestly if you dont trust, and you cannot trust if there isnt the conditions that you adhere to, to be true to yourself. 
 
Peace



i do understand what you are talking about, you need to chooose wisely which is what you call the "condition" but in that do you mean to say that the dom will always care for you, never leave you, etc is implied, by simply knowing him well or is it actually put out on the table up front in the form of "Yes Sir, i think we have many things in common and would be a good match but will you promise never to leave me and to always care for me, etc, etc"?   Where would pushing limits come into play?  Wouldn't that be a breach of trust in such a relationship where there is no room for loose ends? 




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625