Nogimmicks
Posts: 38
Joined: 6/15/2006
Status: offline
|
I think that in this genre we get a little confused about the concept of dominance and submissiveness. Some people, like me, are very gregarious and pushy and just naturally expect everyone else to bend to their will. Such people can be said to be domineering and thusly have a dominantnature, or at least a desire to be dominant. Other people are very quiet, even shy, but they have certain standards that they expect and so tend to take control of a given situation, such people can also be said to be dominant. Interestingly, I would even go so far as to say that many people are very manipulative and rather clandestine in their approach, preferring that nobody see them as being domineering; they might even describe themselves as being submissive, the so-called "passive-aggressive" type. Then there are people who really have very submissive personalities, most of these people are not into D/s as an erotic lifestyle, it is simply who and what they are.
In my experience, in the realm of a D/s relationship, it is really a matter of the dominant and submissive being just two sides of the same coin. Much like testosterone seems to affect human sexuality for both men and women, dominance, or an appreciation of dominance, is what drives both sides of the erotic D/s relationship. The "submissive" has a high level of dominance, but is more sexually aroused at being the "bottom" of the power relationship. So-called "slaves" are often the most domineering and manipulative women I know, except that their "wiring" is such that they truly appreciate someone who will turn that dominance back on them. A truly submissive person would never be aroused or excited or mentally stimulated at being required to spend long periods of time on their knees at the whim of a dominant. However, a person who has a certain level of dominance in themselves will find the juxtaposition and irony of the situation very erotic. In other words, in order to want to be a "slave" a person has to have an appreciation of the power dynamic, which is best acquired through having a dominant nature.
This, I believe, is why it is so very common to find that the "dom" in the relationship is engaged in a less lucrative career than his/her "subbie". The "submissive" is actually very dominant, but simply chooses to surrender that part of her/his personality to the other person, particularly when it is a great way to take the pressure off in their homelife.
I have known some truly submissive people, the real "go-along" types. These are people who will do just about anything to avoid conflict. They live their entire lives in dread of having to relay bad news or to be forced to actually have to make a decision or to espouse a view that might not be popular. They would far and away prefer to be enslaved, in the very real sense of the word, than to have to fight to retain their liberty. They have no political beliefs, or at least none that matter, even to themselves. These people are not the kind of people who are interested in surrendering themselves to the love of another, there is no will to surrender. They have no interest in a D/s relationship. Rather, they are generally in abusive relationships, and resent every minute of it.
As to being a natural dominant, well, pretty much anyone that is in this forum is probably a natural dominant, slaves and masters and mistresses alike. The natural submissives are the people out there looking at us and saying "Gee, I don't know what they see in that whips and chains stuff".
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. These people were all definate "type A" personalities. There was nothing "submissive" about them.
|
Naturally Dominant: Rare? - 
Profile
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