quote:

ORIGINAL: Faramir

What's interesting is that you are talking about sexuality, about a sexual orientation or mode, but most of the posters here are talking about their leadership qualities, and I don't think there is any relationship between the two.

Leadership is a the presence of a suite of virtuous: a person who is just, has good judegementt, is decisive, has initiative, is dependable, has tact and integrity, enthusiasm, bearing, unselfishness, courage, etc, etc is the kind of person who can persuade others to follow them.  I'm borrowing from the Marine Corps 14 leadership traits, and that is likely slanted towards military leadership, but you get the idea.  Leaders have moral qualities and follow principles that inspire other people to follow their lead.

quote:

I am an unnatural dominant

quote:

As a side note, Richard Crane (Hogan's Hero's), Adolf Hitler and Lawrence of Arabia are all known to have enjoyed the "bottom" or "submissive" side of sexual relationships.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Faramir


He is a leader, he is socially dominant, and he is sexually submisisve.  Sexuality and leadership are not related.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarkC
The same rules still apply though and I believe that anyone who considers themselves a dom should have some basic traits in common. ie accepts all challengers, can indimate others, and force others I believe that a dom in our world must do all this with brains rather than braun.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarkC

I'm pretty new to this so I'm prolly gonna get flamed for my opinion. :) I've always based Dominance on the animal kindom. There is only one head of a lion pack.

quote:

Dog packs have a chain of command one could say. This is based on physical strongest. With that physical strength he forces, cowers, or indimateds the others. He is forced to accept all challenges and he must prove himself daily.

quote:

That is not particularly accurate, zoologically speaking.  If you base your philosophies on something, it would be wise to know more about it than the least accurate of publically believed stereotypes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarkC
I do know more about it, I've watch and done research. Admittedly nothing recently, but discovery channel is still my friend. Rather than watching them at play though I watch them with food. In that situation I think everyone will agree all the lions/lioness desire it, yet the pack leader or male eats first, even though the lioness made the kill.

quote:

I've always believe honor, or domiance is most readily seen when there is conflict or difficulty. It's easy to say your honorable or dom when you don't have a challenger or a situation which demands a choice. Hmm maybe I shouldn't have brought honor into this too. /shrug

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

Was going to hijack the thread, but I suppose a new one's better..

quote:

ORIGINAL: NakedGirlScout
I believe that natural, non-switching dominant women are just rare enough that some people would never have met one and come to the conclusion that they don't exist. The same could be said of natural dominant men, though!

I hope you don't mind, GirlScout.  If so, my apologies for not taking the time to check first and I'll edit it out.

I just have to ask this, because it's confusing me so badly.  What do people mean when they say something like "natural dominants are rare"?  I've heard this sentiment so many times, and I've often asked for explanation when seen, but now I'm just far too curious.

I've never been very social, so I never paid much attention to others outside my family and close friends to notice a lack of dominance.  Inside my family, most are at least somewhat dominant.  I've come to believe it's a normal, human characteristic that most people have.  So is this not the case, or do people mean something more than what I'm readily picking up by "naturally dominant"?  (I'm getting now that most people might not be naturally dominant, but for it to be "rare"?  That's the part that's confusing me.)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icarius
I simply find myself struggling to submit to anyone else, even in the workplace, though it may be required there. I do not appreciate taking orders from other people, nor being told how to handle things, when I am confident that I can handle them in my own way.

That being said, I have always found myself being the one to take charge in situations, to solve the problems, to give the orders. Likewise, I have noticed that, in the vast majority of even my vanilla relationships, I tend to end up becomming the primary decision maker, and the one that my other comes to for advice. What it comes down to with me, is that I am most happy with someone who loves and respects me enough to submit to me entirely. Someone whom I can protect, take care of, guide, and teach, all while still being able to recieve a deep love and intimacy from them.

On top of that, I suppose it could also be said that I can be highly aggressive at times. If I see someone doing something that offends me greatly, or if someone disrespects myself, or any of my friends, I am the first to confront them about it. This may or may not result in blows, depending on if they continue with the abusive actions, or simply back down, but it is simply something I cannot avoid doing. I am, more or less, wired to not tolerate disrespect, to not follow another's whim, and to simply take on that role of leader.

One might say that these traits simply make me overly aggressive, one might say they make me selfish or arrogant, however, I also have no issues with following advice I feel is sound, nor do I shut myself off from the opinions of others. Likewise, I have absolutely no problem with learning from someone more experienced than I, and I do realize that I do not know all that there is to know, (Hell, no one, ever, can EVER know all there is to know, life is an ongoing, ever-changing, learning experience, and that knowledge that we obtain through it is what true power to impact and chance the world around us derives from).

So, the question truely is, does that all make me a "Natural" Dominant, or does it simply make me an assertive, strong-willed person? How, exactly, can one define a "Natural" and "Non-Natural" Dominant? If, to be a "Natural" Dominant, does one simply need to be capiable of Dominating others, or must they have a deep love or need to Dominate others? Are you still a "Natural" Dominant, if you've undergone training to learn how to Dominate, or are you only a "Natural" Dominant if you simply do it with the knowledge you, yourself, have aquired? Furthurmore, if a "Natural" Dominant is one who does not require the knowledge to be taught to them, is such a Dominant always the wisest of choices?