I jokingly remarked to someone in the course of this busy weekend, "I can't wait to get back to work on Monday so I can finally relax."
Like many oft-repeated jokes there's more than a grain of truth in that one. And that got Me to thinking about how work is often less stressful than the other parts of life.
And I think that happens because at work:
1. Expectations are typically much clearer.
2. Short-term outcomes are much more controllable.
(In fact, if one's job doesn't have those two attributes to a reasonable degree it's almost a sure bet that one's job in a source of great stress.)
I've written a lot about how D/s is a magnifying glass of emotions, and thus, overall more difficult than vanilla. But in this aspect, D/s is (or should be) actually easier. Because like most jobs, in a D/s relationship:
1. Expectations are typically much clearer. Just as in the job category, consider the situation in the absence of this in a D/s relationship. I've seen many very devoted, dedicated submissives thrown off the track, sometimes to the point of leaving the lifestyle entirely, because they've been with a one or a series of weak, indecisive, mercurial Dominants. In the absence of clear expectations, clearly stated and re-stated, the submissive can feel set adrift, because the sub's anchor is the certainty that they at least know the "right" thing to do, regardless of whether they actually achieve it in a given situation. Not doing it right, as it were, is something that one can accept and practice and correct, but only if the "right thing to do" isn't a moving target.
For the Dom/me, having clear expectations and expressing them helps ensure that the Dominant will get the best from the submissive, and fuels that magical, oh-so-exciting process by which Dominance and submission feed and boost each other.
2. Short-term outcomes are much more controllable. All of us, to varying extents have some long-term plans/hopes/expectations/goals, etc. Having these, aside from being more or less a given of human nature, also gives us some feeling of "control," some sense of not feeling completely at the mercy of random inscrutable forces. In reality, though, our actual control diminishes in massively inverse proportion to time moving forward from the moment.
It's in the short term where our control over the outcome is maximized. This is an important principle for the submissive, as it helps him or her to not overthink, to remember that "growth" for a submissive is in reality a string of tiny successes. Conversely, it's up to the Dominant to help the submissive bear that in mind by setting things up so that the string of small victories is more possible, and, importantly, easy to see and appreciate.
This is not to say that the Dominant shouldn't have a long-term plan, goals, etc. Nor should the submissive lose sight of that goal that's out there in the far distance somewhere. But it's important for both to remember that control, in the larger sense, is an illusion; to remember that we do what we can, one thing at a time. Far from being a source of frustration, that should be a source of satisfaction for the Dominant and the submissive both.
P. S. I was remiss, in the course of this crazy weekend, to not post on Friday that Friday marked the 2-year anniversary of sorceress being Mine. Thank you, My wonderful girl, for all that you are and do . . . owning you is a pleasure, a joy, and a thrill, always. I love you.
Schedule note
I'll be spotty posting here the next few days . . . lots going on, off-line, so blogging time will be limited. Everyone have a great weekend.
The End?
I was reading poiesia's blog just now, and she was talking about that horrible falling of crashing, of feeling as though she was at the "end" of the journey, that she had somehow reached what felt like a dead end in her exploration of submission.
I've written here, more than once, about My feeling that there is no "final step," no "end" for a submissive or for a Dominant. That's me speaking in ideal terms. The reality is that there is a whole continuum of submission and Dominance; each of us reflects that to greater or lesser degrees. For each person there is a what I call a comfort point and an ultimate settling point.
The comfort point, by definition, feels good. For some, the comfort point is all that's sought, and one never moves beyond it. And happily so. I endorse that fully. Arriving at real happiness is much more important than adhering to any theoretical principles.
Many others though, while they enjoy the comfort point, sense that there is something beyond it. Something in them seeks that "something beyond," and they, not always consciously, seek out Those who are more likely to push them, to show them that place beyond. And, for that kind of submissive, the comfort spot eventually moves along the continuum, and establishes itself in a new place. And the cycle repeats itself -- the submissive senses a longing, still, and seeks out what lies beyond. Or s/he doesnt.
This process repeats itself over and over until the comfort point and the settling point become one and the same. Now, the question arises, and it's really the crux of the matter: How does one know when one's found the settling point?
The short but 100% accurate answer is: you know you've reached the settling point when it feels good. Uncomplicatedly good, with no lingering doubts, no wistful wondering what's around the next bend. It's not the "end" of the journey. I liken it to building one's dream house. There is a point where there are no more nails to drive and it's time to actually live in the dream house.
The converse, however, is the most important thing. If it feels bad, if you find yourself still with that restless churning in some undefined part of you, then it's not over. And it's vitally important to understand that.
Because what happens often is that the submissive finds him or herself between comfort points. The submissive abandons one too soon, or it pushed from it, without knowing exactly where the next comfort point is. That can feel very much like a free fall, and not a pleasant one. At times like that it's difficult, if not impossible, to stop and realize that one's not really falling; one's just searching around in the dark for a safe place to step.
My advice remains constant, if not exactly awe-inspiring. Stop. Breathe. Don't think so much. Take the deepest breath you know how to, and think only about the string of tiny victories behind you, the beautifully-laid stones that have supported your steps to this point. Marvel at that a moment. Take as long as you need in that place, until it starts to feel like a comfort. At some point after that, there will be a little surge of energy, and one turns again, ready, if not necessarily confident, about searching in the darkness for that next smooth stone to step on.
I've written here, more than once, about My feeling that there is no "final step," no "end" for a submissive or for a Dominant. That's me speaking in ideal terms. The reality is that there is a whole continuum of submission and Dominance; each of us reflects that to greater or lesser degrees. For each person there is a what I call a comfort point and an ultimate settling point.
The comfort point, by definition, feels good. For some, the comfort point is all that's sought, and one never moves beyond it. And happily so. I endorse that fully. Arriving at real happiness is much more important than adhering to any theoretical principles.
Many others though, while they enjoy the comfort point, sense that there is something beyond it. Something in them seeks that "something beyond," and they, not always consciously, seek out Those who are more likely to push them, to show them that place beyond. And, for that kind of submissive, the comfort spot eventually moves along the continuum, and establishes itself in a new place. And the cycle repeats itself -- the submissive senses a longing, still, and seeks out what lies beyond. Or s/he doesnt.
This process repeats itself over and over until the comfort point and the settling point become one and the same. Now, the question arises, and it's really the crux of the matter: How does one know when one's found the settling point?
The short but 100% accurate answer is: you know you've reached the settling point when it feels good. Uncomplicatedly good, with no lingering doubts, no wistful wondering what's around the next bend. It's not the "end" of the journey. I liken it to building one's dream house. There is a point where there are no more nails to drive and it's time to actually live in the dream house.
The converse, however, is the most important thing. If it feels bad, if you find yourself still with that restless churning in some undefined part of you, then it's not over. And it's vitally important to understand that.
Because what happens often is that the submissive finds him or herself between comfort points. The submissive abandons one too soon, or it pushed from it, without knowing exactly where the next comfort point is. That can feel very much like a free fall, and not a pleasant one. At times like that it's difficult, if not impossible, to stop and realize that one's not really falling; one's just searching around in the dark for a safe place to step.
My advice remains constant, if not exactly awe-inspiring. Stop. Breathe. Don't think so much. Take the deepest breath you know how to, and think only about the string of tiny victories behind you, the beautifully-laid stones that have supported your steps to this point. Marvel at that a moment. Take as long as you need in that place, until it starts to feel like a comfort. At some point after that, there will be a little surge of energy, and one turns again, ready, if not necessarily confident, about searching in the darkness for that next smooth stone to step on.
The Two Approaches
Generally, there's two ways to teach something: Talking a lot, or talking a little. One can attempt to explain everything, provide the theoretical underpinnings, carefully set the building blocks neatly in a row. At some point, after a lot of explaining has taken place, the student confronts an unfamiliar situation and puts what's been learned into practice (or fails to do so). Or One can simply toss the student into situations, repetitively, and let the student learn what they will learn in the process of dealing with said situation. Talking is limited to the aftermath, mostly; the teacher be in "reactive" mode, as a rule -- answering the questions that have arisen the student from having gone through the situation.
The funny thing about this in a D/s context is that while in other walks of life we're highly aware of how the student's learning style affects what is learned. In D/s matters, I find that the Teacher's teaching style matters a lot more.
I've known a lot of very good Dom/mes who were extremely talented, but simply not very strong formal thinkers, and as a result, not very good explainers. This is complicated by the Dominance issue. Control, ownership, are in many ways incompatible with effective teaching. The things that make One a strong Dom/me often is at odds with the qualities that make One a good teacher. Being a good teacher often puts One in a position where it's helpful to let go of One's will in service to the lesson being imparted; the necessary patience, flexibility, the ability to put One's own self in the same boat with the student, for instance . . . are things that will not come naturally to many Dom/mes.
Whereas the student, in this case, being submissive, is sort of in a natural learning position at all times. s/he's (hopefully) always more or less open, receptive. his or her learning style matters, of course; and obviously to be an effective teacher the Dom/me has to be aware of how the sub learns and either tailor the lessons to the sub's unique learning style. But in the end, learning is going to happen or not happen based largely on how the Dom/me teaches, precisely because flexibility often isn't Our strong suit.
So which approach One veers toward is overridingly important. Mostly as something to be aware of, not necessarily because one approach is inherently better than the other. Both approaches, practiced consistently, lead to the same ultimate result. But the Dom/me being aware of how S/he teaches, and the way in the sub tends to learn, allows the Dom/me to see more easily when things might be going astray and take corrective action (which often is simply just putting a given topic aside until another time).
I am oversimplifying for the sake of discussion, of course. No one (I hope!) embodies one approach to the total exclusion of the other. It's always a blend. For instance, if I were teaching someone how to cook a roast, I will tell them to let the roast sit for twenty minutes after its cooked before carving it, with a short explanation of why that's important, but it's hardly necessary to go into a discussion of the physics that support the technique. So while all teaching is a blend of the two approaches, the effective Teacher is always feeling not only the sub's pulse, but His or Her own, too . . . and is prepared to adjust and try more the other approach.
The funny thing about this in a D/s context is that while in other walks of life we're highly aware of how the student's learning style affects what is learned. In D/s matters, I find that the Teacher's teaching style matters a lot more.
I've known a lot of very good Dom/mes who were extremely talented, but simply not very strong formal thinkers, and as a result, not very good explainers. This is complicated by the Dominance issue. Control, ownership, are in many ways incompatible with effective teaching. The things that make One a strong Dom/me often is at odds with the qualities that make One a good teacher. Being a good teacher often puts One in a position where it's helpful to let go of One's will in service to the lesson being imparted; the necessary patience, flexibility, the ability to put One's own self in the same boat with the student, for instance . . . are things that will not come naturally to many Dom/mes.
Whereas the student, in this case, being submissive, is sort of in a natural learning position at all times. s/he's (hopefully) always more or less open, receptive. his or her learning style matters, of course; and obviously to be an effective teacher the Dom/me has to be aware of how the sub learns and either tailor the lessons to the sub's unique learning style. But in the end, learning is going to happen or not happen based largely on how the Dom/me teaches, precisely because flexibility often isn't Our strong suit.
So which approach One veers toward is overridingly important. Mostly as something to be aware of, not necessarily because one approach is inherently better than the other. Both approaches, practiced consistently, lead to the same ultimate result. But the Dom/me being aware of how S/he teaches, and the way in the sub tends to learn, allows the Dom/me to see more easily when things might be going astray and take corrective action (which often is simply just putting a given topic aside until another time).
I am oversimplifying for the sake of discussion, of course. No one (I hope!) embodies one approach to the total exclusion of the other. It's always a blend. For instance, if I were teaching someone how to cook a roast, I will tell them to let the roast sit for twenty minutes after its cooked before carving it, with a short explanation of why that's important, but it's hardly necessary to go into a discussion of the physics that support the technique. So while all teaching is a blend of the two approaches, the effective Teacher is always feeling not only the sub's pulse, but His or Her own, too . . . and is prepared to adjust and try more the other approach.
Tagged!
rivka tagged me. Getting tagged is some sort of ackonowledgement that one's blog has "arrived." (Why? Because I say so. LOL)
The tag is to write one more D/s and/or erotic haiku. So, into the haiku shanty we go.
1.
My eyes sweep over
your kneeling form. something in
you cracks, and falls. Mine.
2.
The spring tightens. Need
spurts, hemmorages from you
as you crave release.
3.
Smell of leather fills
slave belly, lips touch My boot;
lone impulse: worship.
(This last one is especially for My girls; it will mean nothing to anyone but them.)
4.
My Sister hisses
and bites; lines trace the path to
Her, the Cobra, Me.
Thank you, rivka . . . that was fun. Now I get to tag some people, hm? Let's see . . . I tag freya and this girl.
The tag is to write one more D/s and/or erotic haiku. So, into the haiku shanty we go.
1.
My eyes sweep over
your kneeling form. something in
you cracks, and falls. Mine.
2.
The spring tightens. Need
spurts, hemmorages from you
as you crave release.
3.
Smell of leather fills
slave belly, lips touch My boot;
lone impulse: worship.
(This last one is especially for My girls; it will mean nothing to anyone but them.)
4.
My Sister hisses
and bites; lines trace the path to
Her, the Cobra, Me.
Thank you, rivka . . . that was fun. Now I get to tag some people, hm? Let's see . . . I tag freya and this girl.
Hey, It's The "It's 10:30 And I Haven't Posted Anything Yet" Post!
Today just totally got away from Me. Hope everyone's weekend has been great, and that the coming week isn't too tough. Bye for now. Kisses and hugs to those that warrant them.
Symbols
I was reading this girl's most recent post. she wrote:
"i've been struggling a bit with this issue (slavery)--maybe more so since my neck remains uncollared - though my heart is certainly engaged. So i asked Someone wiser than i and the responce was rather interesting and encouraging."
she goes on to quote from the responses, which were sensible and correct, in My view. This is an excerpt from one:
"A slave desires to be owned completely at some point, but until that time occurs, a slave learns all she can about being one. The more she thinks like one, the more she becomes one."
I do agree that one's state of mind certainly defines the label "slave" more than any outward sign. But it's important not to lose sight of the value of them, either.
I see two processes at work in a submissive's development, a development that leads, or doesn't, to slavery. One is that learning process, which is part training, part reading, part practice, part listening, and part introspection. One learns from various Others, often mostly from One Other; one supplements that with one's own thinking/writing/reading, etc. And one learns of course by doing.
The other process is a process of feeling. A slave feels differently. s/he may or may not be conscious all the time that feelings are developing, changing. one usually only sees the changes upon reflection, when the magnitude of the change is more obvious, with time having passed. The process of changing feelings, when it's right, it's usually so subtle so as not to be noticed on a daily basis.
The learning process and the feeling process of course feed each other, and are intertwined. I've separated them for the purpose of a coherent discussion. Changing feelings make learning easier; learning stimulates the change in feelings (or doesn't, which is another possible and correct outcome, for some).
Where symbols come in is in the feeling process. An outward symbol, like a collar, a brand, a visible tattoo. Or an inward symbol -- a tattoo in a not typically exposed part of the body, going without panties, whatever it may be. Outward and inward symbols work a little differently, but both impact the feeling process. Because symbols are always there, even when not thought about consciously, noticed, commented-upon, their impact is like a gentle hum of submission. They are working on one's feelings, subtly, constantly, in the background.
Where the outward symbol has more power is in those moments when it becomes apparent that another person, especially one with no prior knowledge of one's situation, makes it obvious that s/he is aware of the outward symbol. Then the hum of submission becomes a sharp jolt; feelings are disarranged for a long moment. They slowly settle back to where they were, it seems, but there is the nagging thought that really, one's feelings are not quite the same, in an undefined, impossible-to-articulate way. Everything is the same but something has changed.
Of course, since the symbols are given by the Other, it's out of one's control. So there's no point in worrying about the lack of a symbol. The learning process goes on without the symbol(s); when the symbol comes the feeling process kicks into high gear and then both accelerate and push the submissive along the continuum towards slavery, if that is where he or she should be headed.
"i've been struggling a bit with this issue (slavery)--maybe more so since my neck remains uncollared - though my heart is certainly engaged. So i asked Someone wiser than i and the responce was rather interesting and encouraging."
she goes on to quote from the responses, which were sensible and correct, in My view. This is an excerpt from one:
"A slave desires to be owned completely at some point, but until that time occurs, a slave learns all she can about being one. The more she thinks like one, the more she becomes one."
I do agree that one's state of mind certainly defines the label "slave" more than any outward sign. But it's important not to lose sight of the value of them, either.
I see two processes at work in a submissive's development, a development that leads, or doesn't, to slavery. One is that learning process, which is part training, part reading, part practice, part listening, and part introspection. One learns from various Others, often mostly from One Other; one supplements that with one's own thinking/writing/reading, etc. And one learns of course by doing.
The other process is a process of feeling. A slave feels differently. s/he may or may not be conscious all the time that feelings are developing, changing. one usually only sees the changes upon reflection, when the magnitude of the change is more obvious, with time having passed. The process of changing feelings, when it's right, it's usually so subtle so as not to be noticed on a daily basis.
The learning process and the feeling process of course feed each other, and are intertwined. I've separated them for the purpose of a coherent discussion. Changing feelings make learning easier; learning stimulates the change in feelings (or doesn't, which is another possible and correct outcome, for some).
Where symbols come in is in the feeling process. An outward symbol, like a collar, a brand, a visible tattoo. Or an inward symbol -- a tattoo in a not typically exposed part of the body, going without panties, whatever it may be. Outward and inward symbols work a little differently, but both impact the feeling process. Because symbols are always there, even when not thought about consciously, noticed, commented-upon, their impact is like a gentle hum of submission. They are working on one's feelings, subtly, constantly, in the background.Where the outward symbol has more power is in those moments when it becomes apparent that another person, especially one with no prior knowledge of one's situation, makes it obvious that s/he is aware of the outward symbol. Then the hum of submission becomes a sharp jolt; feelings are disarranged for a long moment. They slowly settle back to where they were, it seems, but there is the nagging thought that really, one's feelings are not quite the same, in an undefined, impossible-to-articulate way. Everything is the same but something has changed.
Of course, since the symbols are given by the Other, it's out of one's control. So there's no point in worrying about the lack of a symbol. The learning process goes on without the symbol(s); when the symbol comes the feeling process kicks into high gear and then both accelerate and push the submissive along the continuum towards slavery, if that is where he or she should be headed.
Attention
I've written before about how attention is, to Me, the most valuable currency there is between two people. Attention can't be faked; it can't be forced. A lot of problems in relationships, vanilla or D/s, are casued by the warped ways(s) in which one or both parties handle attention.
One of the most prominent warpages I encounter is the attention slut. I meet My share in real life, of course, as we all do, but online the proportion of attention sluts seems even more pronounced. I believe that's partially a reflection of the fact that many people treat online as their own personal litter box, and partially that in a flat medium like text chat, certain behaviors come across much more blatantly.
Attention sluts, that I've seen, are mainly of two types: the overcompensator (making up for a lack or perceived lack of attention) and the addict (used to getting loads of attention). Odd, in a way, that the lack of something over a prolonged period and an overdose of the same thing can have the same effect. And while the overcompensator might come off as more desperate at first, since the addict will often have (on the surface at least) apparently higher self-esteem, all attention sluts end up in the same boat: unable to sustain any meaningful relationship for any length of time, including platonic friendships, usually.
Another one of My old saws is that D/s is like a magnifying glass -- things that are potentially small in a vanilla relationship are often overwhleming in a D/s situation.
As a result, an attention slut in either role is a draining experience that has few rivals. The trait is perhaps more annoying in a submissive, but maybe that's just how it feels from My side. Attention-slut Dom/mes are often a little more subtle, but to all but the least perceptive submissives They quickly are seen as shallow and not very interesting.
It sounds like I'm bitching without really offering any practical suggestions. That's because, well, there are precious few. Personally, I ignore attention sluts as completely as possible. As for curing the malady? I have to fall back on a couple of My guiding principles:
1. Not everything that happens to the subsmissive is about the submissive.
2. Not everyone is instantly enthralled with Your Wonderful and Amazing Dominance.
More on this topic soon.
One of the most prominent warpages I encounter is the attention slut. I meet My share in real life, of course, as we all do, but online the proportion of attention sluts seems even more pronounced. I believe that's partially a reflection of the fact that many people treat online as their own personal litter box, and partially that in a flat medium like text chat, certain behaviors come across much more blatantly.
Attention sluts, that I've seen, are mainly of two types: the overcompensator (making up for a lack or perceived lack of attention) and the addict (used to getting loads of attention). Odd, in a way, that the lack of something over a prolonged period and an overdose of the same thing can have the same effect. And while the overcompensator might come off as more desperate at first, since the addict will often have (on the surface at least) apparently higher self-esteem, all attention sluts end up in the same boat: unable to sustain any meaningful relationship for any length of time, including platonic friendships, usually.
Another one of My old saws is that D/s is like a magnifying glass -- things that are potentially small in a vanilla relationship are often overwhleming in a D/s situation.
As a result, an attention slut in either role is a draining experience that has few rivals. The trait is perhaps more annoying in a submissive, but maybe that's just how it feels from My side. Attention-slut Dom/mes are often a little more subtle, but to all but the least perceptive submissives They quickly are seen as shallow and not very interesting.
It sounds like I'm bitching without really offering any practical suggestions. That's because, well, there are precious few. Personally, I ignore attention sluts as completely as possible. As for curing the malady? I have to fall back on a couple of My guiding principles:
1. Not everything that happens to the subsmissive is about the submissive.
2. Not everyone is instantly enthralled with Your Wonderful and Amazing Dominance.
More on this topic soon.
Nothing new . . .
Nothing profound comes to mind tonight. Was disppointed to see that the one new comment tonight was a spam. Please don't make Me turn on commetns verification. Please.
Expectations Part 2 (Slight Reprise)
A follow-up to the "Expectations" post (which, I note, was apparently so incisive and powerful that all potential commenters were stunned into silence LOL).
I ended that post by noting that the follower(s) end up more or less where the Leader leads. That simple fact has big implications, and ends up being a root cause of why many D/s relationships go awry.
Simply put -- a Leader must have some idea of where S/he wants to go. This is so obvious as to be almost embarrassing to set down in print, but from what I've seen, it's something that needs to be written/thought about.
Much of the joy of submission lies in being able to assume (or know, ideally) that one doesn't have to think about the overall direction of things. One of the biggest, most comforting things there is for a submissive to give up is the worrying/thinking about the "direction" stuff. But the sub can't be comfortable in letting go of that if his or her assumptions about not having to worry about it are constantly being disarranged by a Dominant Who seems unsure of what S/he wants, or seems to constantly change what S/he wants. The effect on the submissive is devastating, often.
Some of this is simply a lack of communication, or a lack of clarity in communcation caused by an imperfect meshing of styles or the difficulty on One or the other's part to think/express thoughts clearly. The former is usually worked out over time as the the parties acclimate to each other; the latter is less readily solveable, typcially. In either case the situation takes a lot of hard work.
More serious is when constantly changing desires on the part of the Dom/me are masking a real desire to be out of the situation. (Dom/mes are no better at breaking things off than anyone else, dirty little secret, and often worse since Our egos are invested in a very deep way.) Or, most seriously, changing desires are a reflection of personal instablity on a basic level. In that case the submissive should run, not walk, to the nearest exit.
The good Dom/me expresses exactly what S/he wants from the submissive, and is willing to explain it multiple times and multiple ways if necessary. What S/he wants is in line with His or Her desires, and plan, for the now and for the future. At the same time, S/he doesn't allow the "goal" to become a trap that limits one or both parties.
Simple, huh?
* * * * * * *
Looks like the photo upload is working correctly again. Maybe it was just Me . . . I was pretty tired last night.
* * * * * * *
I ended that post by noting that the follower(s) end up more or less where the Leader leads. That simple fact has big implications, and ends up being a root cause of why many D/s relationships go awry.
Simply put -- a Leader must have some idea of where S/he wants to go. This is so obvious as to be almost embarrassing to set down in print, but from what I've seen, it's something that needs to be written/thought about.
Much of the joy of submission lies in being able to assume (or know, ideally) that one doesn't have to think about the overall direction of things. One of the biggest, most comforting things there is for a submissive to give up is the worrying/thinking about the "direction" stuff. But the sub can't be comfortable in letting go of that if his or her assumptions about not having to worry about it are constantly being disarranged by a Dominant Who seems unsure of what S/he wants, or seems to constantly change what S/he wants. The effect on the submissive is devastating, often.
Some of this is simply a lack of communication, or a lack of clarity in communcation caused by an imperfect meshing of styles or the difficulty on One or the other's part to think/express thoughts clearly. The former is usually worked out over time as the the parties acclimate to each other; the latter is less readily solveable, typcially. In either case the situation takes a lot of hard work.
More serious is when constantly changing desires on the part of the Dom/me are masking a real desire to be out of the situation. (Dom/mes are no better at breaking things off than anyone else, dirty little secret, and often worse since Our egos are invested in a very deep way.) Or, most seriously, changing desires are a reflection of personal instablity on a basic level. In that case the submissive should run, not walk, to the nearest exit.
The good Dom/me expresses exactly what S/he wants from the submissive, and is willing to explain it multiple times and multiple ways if necessary. What S/he wants is in line with His or Her desires, and plan, for the now and for the future. At the same time, S/he doesn't allow the "goal" to become a trap that limits one or both parties.
Simple, huh?
* * * * * * *Looks like the photo upload is working correctly again. Maybe it was just Me . . . I was pretty tired last night.
* * * * * * *
Tired Tuesday
Blogger is doing weird things when I try to post a pic, so this "nothing post with a pic" is going to be a "nothing post without a pic."
I want to express My continued appreciation for those who read Me here . . . I read and value all your comments. Back tomorrow with more rambling, rumbling, grumbling, and musing.
I want to express My continued appreciation for those who read Me here . . . I read and value all your comments. Back tomorrow with more rambling, rumbling, grumbling, and musing.
Expectations
This had all the makings of a bad Monday. It felt impossible to get out of bed this morning. I was groggy and cranky and soooooo not ready for it to be Monday morning. It snowed overnight. Not enough to cause any trouble, but that ir snowed, as spring is about to come (at least technically), was annoying. It was cold today, for late March, with a very nasty wind. Looking ahead to the work day didn't improve the prospects any; I knew there were loose ends from last week and new problems looming. So, the forecast for the day overall was not good at all.
Well, go figure. The day ended being pretty good. Things got done. Some of the looming problems evaporated. I wasn't a bundle of energy but I had enough to do what I needed to do. The wind died down in the afternoon and it was almost pleasant outside. I got home at a reasonable hour and didn't feel like crawling into bed and passing out.
All of which got to Me thinking about not falling into the trap of expectations. Both negative ones and positive ones. Just like there are days like today, there are days when I woke up in a great mood, it was a beautiful day, I'm optimistic as could be and then the day goes completely to hell.
Obviously, it's impossible to have no expectations, ever. Dominants, of course, have generally more expectations. And obviously, high expectations often can be a motivator for the submissive. So in what sense are expectations a trap?
Expectations are a trap when they close off the possibility in One's mind that things can be different.
There are certain things that One might expect from One's submissive(s) -- many of these expectations are essentially givens, "routine" things that by their very simplicity and/or the passage of time have gotten to the point where they are just a fact of life.
But in that process another thing is happening as well, a thing that is often largely unconscious on the part of the Dom/me and the submissive. As things settle into a pattern, certain expectations are expressed and easily met, repetitively; at the same time, the very process by which those have become routine slowly forms other "givens" in the minds of both. These "givens" represent a second, unstated set of expectations, both positive and negative. This is partly the human mind "filling in the blanks" and partly our capacity to hear (and not hear) what we wish to in the words and actions of another person.
For the Dom/me, what emerges is an image of what the submissive is, in His or Her mind, capable of. While in one sense that's necessary and natural, it does, without Our realizing it, limit what the submissive is capable of, since what drives the submissive is typcially going to be the Owner's definition(s), both stated and unstated, of what represents a good submissive. That, to Me, is an atrificial state of affairs that should be avoided if possible.
Towards that end, I strive to not box Myself in by thinking that I know everything My girls are capable of as slaves. I am not always successful in that, of course. I also try to leave as little unstated as possible in this area. I let them know that I believe, in a very deep sense, that they have yet to begin to even touch what they are capable of as slaves. Whether they believe this of themselves or not is ultimately irrelevant; that I am keeping that premise close at hand always is the thing that matters. Because where the Leader leads, consciously or otherwise, is usually where the followers will end up.
Well, go figure. The day ended being pretty good. Things got done. Some of the looming problems evaporated. I wasn't a bundle of energy but I had enough to do what I needed to do. The wind died down in the afternoon and it was almost pleasant outside. I got home at a reasonable hour and didn't feel like crawling into bed and passing out.
All of which got to Me thinking about not falling into the trap of expectations. Both negative ones and positive ones. Just like there are days like today, there are days when I woke up in a great mood, it was a beautiful day, I'm optimistic as could be and then the day goes completely to hell.
Obviously, it's impossible to have no expectations, ever. Dominants, of course, have generally more expectations. And obviously, high expectations often can be a motivator for the submissive. So in what sense are expectations a trap?
Expectations are a trap when they close off the possibility in One's mind that things can be different.
There are certain things that One might expect from One's submissive(s) -- many of these expectations are essentially givens, "routine" things that by their very simplicity and/or the passage of time have gotten to the point where they are just a fact of life.
But in that process another thing is happening as well, a thing that is often largely unconscious on the part of the Dom/me and the submissive. As things settle into a pattern, certain expectations are expressed and easily met, repetitively; at the same time, the very process by which those have become routine slowly forms other "givens" in the minds of both. These "givens" represent a second, unstated set of expectations, both positive and negative. This is partly the human mind "filling in the blanks" and partly our capacity to hear (and not hear) what we wish to in the words and actions of another person.
For the Dom/me, what emerges is an image of what the submissive is, in His or Her mind, capable of. While in one sense that's necessary and natural, it does, without Our realizing it, limit what the submissive is capable of, since what drives the submissive is typcially going to be the Owner's definition(s), both stated and unstated, of what represents a good submissive. That, to Me, is an atrificial state of affairs that should be avoided if possible.
Towards that end, I strive to not box Myself in by thinking that I know everything My girls are capable of as slaves. I am not always successful in that, of course. I also try to leave as little unstated as possible in this area. I let them know that I believe, in a very deep sense, that they have yet to begin to even touch what they are capable of as slaves. Whether they believe this of themselves or not is ultimately irrelevant; that I am keeping that premise close at hand always is the thing that matters. Because where the Leader leads, consciously or otherwise, is usually where the followers will end up.
So Many, But So Few . . . Part 2
In the last post on this topic, I ended with saying how it ultimately becomes the submissive's responsibility to "weed out" the bad Dom/mes.
This isn't necessarily fair, of course, but the fact remains that there is no government without the consent of the governed, as it were. And it creates a problem because for many submissives being choosy feels wrong, feels Dom/mey, or like topping from the bottom. (I'm excluding where the obvious choice must be made -- where things are clearly unsafe/insane/illegal.)
There is a very delicate balance between being sensible and holding out for a certain set of ideals and being a subbie princess or a total do-me sub. I don't have any magic answers for how that balance is achieved.
I've noted before that over time, submissives become, without necessarily trying to, connoisseurs of Dominance. The intelligent submissive can pretty much instantly recognize the weak Dom/me from the strong One. This fairly well insulates them from the proliferation of bad Dom/mes, because experienced submissives can spot/avoid them or are in committed 1-on-1 relationships, making the issue more of less irrelevant for them.
It is the inexperienced, or too trusting, or too automatically submissive who are more at risk. Thus, for Me, this is an important issue because I take it as a given that in any "community," whether that community is a physical one or one of shared interest(s), the most vulnerable are to be protected to the extent that such is possible.
Back to the magic answers or lack thereof. The submissive, I think, has to draw in his/her mind the distinction between courtesy and respect. Courtesy is a surface form of respect. In any community, courtesy allows strangers to interact, each observing certain norms that facilitate communication. which either leads to the deeper thing, true respect, or stays on that surface level. Courtesy is the general respect we accord each other as human beings; Respect is based on a deeper appreciation of the specific person.
So, drawing an example from the virtual community of IRC, you can call Him "Sir," and it doesn't mean anything other than a recognition that the Person in question has self-identified as Dominant. you can serve Him a drink. you can be "nice" in some hard to define but commonly-recognized way. Now, if said Person demonstrates in various ways that He isn't really Dominant, or is lacking in any number of other ways, then one's relationship with that Person never moves beyond the surface. If enough submissives reacted to said Person the same way, He would either develop into a different kind of Person, or leave the community. In either case, the community is strengthened, and the submissive has held out for an ideal but done so without acting "unsubmissively."
It's not the total answer, but it is a good start.
This isn't necessarily fair, of course, but the fact remains that there is no government without the consent of the governed, as it were. And it creates a problem because for many submissives being choosy feels wrong, feels Dom/mey, or like topping from the bottom. (I'm excluding where the obvious choice must be made -- where things are clearly unsafe/insane/illegal.)
There is a very delicate balance between being sensible and holding out for a certain set of ideals and being a subbie princess or a total do-me sub. I don't have any magic answers for how that balance is achieved.
I've noted before that over time, submissives become, without necessarily trying to, connoisseurs of Dominance. The intelligent submissive can pretty much instantly recognize the weak Dom/me from the strong One. This fairly well insulates them from the proliferation of bad Dom/mes, because experienced submissives can spot/avoid them or are in committed 1-on-1 relationships, making the issue more of less irrelevant for them.
It is the inexperienced, or too trusting, or too automatically submissive who are more at risk. Thus, for Me, this is an important issue because I take it as a given that in any "community," whether that community is a physical one or one of shared interest(s), the most vulnerable are to be protected to the extent that such is possible.
Back to the magic answers or lack thereof. The submissive, I think, has to draw in his/her mind the distinction between courtesy and respect. Courtesy is a surface form of respect. In any community, courtesy allows strangers to interact, each observing certain norms that facilitate communication. which either leads to the deeper thing, true respect, or stays on that surface level. Courtesy is the general respect we accord each other as human beings; Respect is based on a deeper appreciation of the specific person.
So, drawing an example from the virtual community of IRC, you can call Him "Sir," and it doesn't mean anything other than a recognition that the Person in question has self-identified as Dominant. you can serve Him a drink. you can be "nice" in some hard to define but commonly-recognized way. Now, if said Person demonstrates in various ways that He isn't really Dominant, or is lacking in any number of other ways, then one's relationship with that Person never moves beyond the surface. If enough submissives reacted to said Person the same way, He would either develop into a different kind of Person, or leave the community. In either case, the community is strengthened, and the submissive has held out for an ideal but done so without acting "unsubmissively."
It's not the total answer, but it is a good start.
Buckle Up For Safety
A yummy little drawing. Straps and buckles and inverted suspension . . . sort of the trifecta.
Masks
Reading this post on Jen's blog, and the comments in response thereto, I got to thinking about the whole question of image, and the real person behind said image.
It's complicated for Dominants. All effective leaders in any sphere of human endreavor have a mask. The CEO of the company you work for, politicians, professoinal atheletes at the highest level of their sport, etc., all have a mask. A public persona that doesn't necessarily hide the real person underenath but which serves to help them maintain focus. The mask could be humor, graciousness, intellectual curiosity, generosity, openness, almost anything. The mask draws people in, and at the same time holds them at bay, without their always necessarily realizing that they are being held at bay. The mask is not a scam or a trick; it is the part that the Dominant keeps on the public side of the shell. It's real . . . it's just not everything.
This isn't a bad thing, really, becasue the mask is, hopefully, a reflection of something real about the person behind it. In fact, any leader whose mask is so at odds with the real person underneath is almost always found wanting by potential followers, often for reasons the potential followers can't quite articulate. But nonetheless such people are rejected much more than they are embraced. Most people hate 99% of all politicians for precisely this reason: Instead of choosing a mask they try to reflect all things simultaneously and that always comes off as completely fake.
That the mask reflect the real person in some way is even more important for Dominants, since what they are leading is so much more encompassing than what your boss or Lance Armstrong is leading. A Dominant seeks to own the whole person. The trust that S/he seeks to lead the submissive into is that of the submissive's very life. To inspire that kind of trust requires a Person whose mask is not only a reflection of the real Person but a completely integrated part of that Person. Without that, there can be no real Dominance, and, thus, no true submission.
Now, back to Jen's post (sorry to take such a long way around). Jen wrote:
"Ok, let's use the words nurturing, caring, sweet, soft, mushy, lovey, quiet, etc. Isn't that the place you get to when the coast is clear? When you trust a man so much that you can show him that place in you where that resides? Or do I have to be that way right off the bat so that anyone can trample over my heart right then and there? Why does a woman need to be vulnerable? Especially a woman who does not exist in a stereotypical role? What does it take to have a man interested in this woman if I do not wear my heart on my sleeve?"
I'd say . . .
1. You don't get to any place. You are where You are. The mask, in effect, clears the coast in and of itself. It shows where You are, but not what it took for You to get there. It inspires those You wish to lead to want to follow and preserves the parts of You what will unfold to the other as time progresses.
2. An effective, real mask, makes Us less like a pincushion for the random hurts that life and love and sex seem to want to deal Us. I don't adovacte anyone, in either role, putting everyting out there, right up front. It is emotionally (and potentially physically) dangerous, and, to most people, off-putting.
3. A Woman of course doesn't need to be vulnerable. Or sweet, or nuturing, or any of those other classically "female" traits. But in order to Dominate, over a long haul, I find that sexual chemistry, while wonderful, can only cover a few other issues, not a multitude. So little of life is overtly sexual that there has to be more. And, while "how was your day? now bend over, slut" might work for a Pro Domme, in a non-financial relationship lasting longer than 1 hour, there has to be something more. Something real. And that, for either Sex, is going to be something that at times might feel a lot like vulnerability in some ways, Dominant position notwithstanding.
4. Anyone, submissive or otherwise, who needs You to wear Your heart on Your sleeve up front in order to be interested in You is either woefully unimaginitive and/or an emotional vamnpire, and thus to be avoided at all costs.
OK, ended up a lot longer than I'd planned on. More on this complicated stew of a topic another time.
It's complicated for Dominants. All effective leaders in any sphere of human endreavor have a mask. The CEO of the company you work for, politicians, professoinal atheletes at the highest level of their sport, etc., all have a mask. A public persona that doesn't necessarily hide the real person underenath but which serves to help them maintain focus. The mask could be humor, graciousness, intellectual curiosity, generosity, openness, almost anything. The mask draws people in, and at the same time holds them at bay, without their always necessarily realizing that they are being held at bay. The mask is not a scam or a trick; it is the part that the Dominant keeps on the public side of the shell. It's real . . . it's just not everything.
This isn't a bad thing, really, becasue the mask is, hopefully, a reflection of something real about the person behind it. In fact, any leader whose mask is so at odds with the real person underneath is almost always found wanting by potential followers, often for reasons the potential followers can't quite articulate. But nonetheless such people are rejected much more than they are embraced. Most people hate 99% of all politicians for precisely this reason: Instead of choosing a mask they try to reflect all things simultaneously and that always comes off as completely fake.
That the mask reflect the real person in some way is even more important for Dominants, since what they are leading is so much more encompassing than what your boss or Lance Armstrong is leading. A Dominant seeks to own the whole person. The trust that S/he seeks to lead the submissive into is that of the submissive's very life. To inspire that kind of trust requires a Person whose mask is not only a reflection of the real Person but a completely integrated part of that Person. Without that, there can be no real Dominance, and, thus, no true submission.
Now, back to Jen's post (sorry to take such a long way around). Jen wrote:
"Ok, let's use the words nurturing, caring, sweet, soft, mushy, lovey, quiet, etc. Isn't that the place you get to when the coast is clear? When you trust a man so much that you can show him that place in you where that resides? Or do I have to be that way right off the bat so that anyone can trample over my heart right then and there? Why does a woman need to be vulnerable? Especially a woman who does not exist in a stereotypical role? What does it take to have a man interested in this woman if I do not wear my heart on my sleeve?"
I'd say . . .
1. You don't get to any place. You are where You are. The mask, in effect, clears the coast in and of itself. It shows where You are, but not what it took for You to get there. It inspires those You wish to lead to want to follow and preserves the parts of You what will unfold to the other as time progresses.
2. An effective, real mask, makes Us less like a pincushion for the random hurts that life and love and sex seem to want to deal Us. I don't adovacte anyone, in either role, putting everyting out there, right up front. It is emotionally (and potentially physically) dangerous, and, to most people, off-putting.
3. A Woman of course doesn't need to be vulnerable. Or sweet, or nuturing, or any of those other classically "female" traits. But in order to Dominate, over a long haul, I find that sexual chemistry, while wonderful, can only cover a few other issues, not a multitude. So little of life is overtly sexual that there has to be more. And, while "how was your day? now bend over, slut" might work for a Pro Domme, in a non-financial relationship lasting longer than 1 hour, there has to be something more. Something real. And that, for either Sex, is going to be something that at times might feel a lot like vulnerability in some ways, Dominant position notwithstanding.
4. Anyone, submissive or otherwise, who needs You to wear Your heart on Your sleeve up front in order to be interested in You is either woefully unimaginitive and/or an emotional vamnpire, and thus to be avoided at all costs.
OK, ended up a lot longer than I'd planned on. More on this complicated stew of a topic another time.
Skipping Ahead to the Dirty Parts
I read/skim a number of blogs. I read a lot of overtly sexual stuff on many of them. Sometimes they are literary vignettes, sometimes fantasies, sometimes reports of real-life adventures.
Doubtless readers have noticed a complete lack of any of that here.
That didn't start out as conscious decision. This blog has simply evolved that way, and I'm pleased with that. Not becasue I disapprove of erotic blogging; far from it. I enjoy reading it and in general I feel there is a dearth of good D/s erotica out there, so I'm always glad to see the available supply being increased.
But it's important for there to be a D/s think tank, if you will, as part of the blogmass too. That's where this blog has settled, and for Me, happily so. The comments I get and the slowly building readership tell Me that I am not alone in this feeling.
I may at some point toss a bit of erotica in occaisionally. There's more than one way to run a think tank, after all.
Doubtless readers have noticed a complete lack of any of that here.
That didn't start out as conscious decision. This blog has simply evolved that way, and I'm pleased with that. Not becasue I disapprove of erotic blogging; far from it. I enjoy reading it and in general I feel there is a dearth of good D/s erotica out there, so I'm always glad to see the available supply being increased.
But it's important for there to be a D/s think tank, if you will, as part of the blogmass too. That's where this blog has settled, and for Me, happily so. The comments I get and the slowly building readership tell Me that I am not alone in this feeling.
I may at some point toss a bit of erotica in occaisionally. There's more than one way to run a think tank, after all.
So Many . . . But So Few
ling wrote:
"I feel like a lucky sub to have been given the opportunity to know two great Doms."
It's a great reminder of a pretty obvious (to Me, at least) but often-overlooked fact: There aren't all that many great Ones.
I recall seeing a figure, somewhere, that there are about 7 submissives for every 3 Dominants out there. Let's assume for purposes of this discussion that that figure is more or less accurate, at least on its face.
Dominance is in short supply relative to those wanting to consume it. In any market like that, the reasonable (and sometimes unreasonable) facsmilies will command more attention/interest than they would if the market were more balanced. Intensifying this phenomenon is that fact that most submissives are, by their nature, more, well, submissive, at the very least in the surface aspects of interaction. So they're often less likely to be "educated consumers," as it were.
Long-term, this has a negative effect on the lifestyle overall. Shifting metaphorical gears, it's a phenomenon like a herd. The herd over time becomes weak as a whole if weak herd members proflierate unchecked.
I realize that in terms of one person to another, this matters little. If someone finds their Someone, and the S/someones are happy together, I celebrate and applaud that, vanilla, D/s, or anything in between. But . . .
Since there is no official governing body of D/s, the lifestyle is, in a very real sense, defined by the people who live it. Someone inexperienced but curious about D/s could go Castle Realm or any number of other wonderful websites and read all sorts of thoughtful, insightful articles and guides about D/s, but what is going to stick with them much more strongly is what they observe of the thoughts and actions of people in the lifestyle. So it matters.
The remedy, and this is the tricky part, really lies with the submissive. This gets very complicated and unearths all sorts of potentially troublesome ideas. Which, if nothing else, is grist for the blogging mill -- something I'll grind away on in another entry soon.
"I feel like a lucky sub to have been given the opportunity to know two great Doms."
It's a great reminder of a pretty obvious (to Me, at least) but often-overlooked fact: There aren't all that many great Ones.
I recall seeing a figure, somewhere, that there are about 7 submissives for every 3 Dominants out there. Let's assume for purposes of this discussion that that figure is more or less accurate, at least on its face.
Dominance is in short supply relative to those wanting to consume it. In any market like that, the reasonable (and sometimes unreasonable) facsmilies will command more attention/interest than they would if the market were more balanced. Intensifying this phenomenon is that fact that most submissives are, by their nature, more, well, submissive, at the very least in the surface aspects of interaction. So they're often less likely to be "educated consumers," as it were.
Long-term, this has a negative effect on the lifestyle overall. Shifting metaphorical gears, it's a phenomenon like a herd. The herd over time becomes weak as a whole if weak herd members proflierate unchecked.
I realize that in terms of one person to another, this matters little. If someone finds their Someone, and the S/someones are happy together, I celebrate and applaud that, vanilla, D/s, or anything in between. But . . .
Since there is no official governing body of D/s, the lifestyle is, in a very real sense, defined by the people who live it. Someone inexperienced but curious about D/s could go Castle Realm or any number of other wonderful websites and read all sorts of thoughtful, insightful articles and guides about D/s, but what is going to stick with them much more strongly is what they observe of the thoughts and actions of people in the lifestyle. So it matters.
The remedy, and this is the tricky part, really lies with the submissive. This gets very complicated and unearths all sorts of potentially troublesome ideas. Which, if nothing else, is grist for the blogging mill -- something I'll grind away on in another entry soon.
Breather
Long, frustrating day, topped with an annoying traffic jam on the way home. Forty-five minutes to go two imiles.
So it's a good night to not post anything of particular importance.
Thank you all for your kind words. Have a great Tuesday.
So it's a good night to not post anything of particular importance.
Thank you all for your kind words. Have a great Tuesday.
Success is Scary
I was reading an entry on another blog just now, and it brought to mind a very common scenario.
Many submissives will encounter a point in their experience where it seems too difficult, where things don't "flow." The submissive will question him or herself extensively, usually in fairly negative fashioin, wondering why he or she can't "get it." Wondering why they keep holding on to things they know they should let go of.
In My experience, what' going on, almost always, is this: It feels like fear of failure, but in fact it's fear of success.
We are all, to varying degrees, resistant to change. D/s is so intense and scary for many people precisely because, particularly in the submissive role, one's confronted with the necessity of changing. That is a scary moment. Even the unhappiest people among us, are, in some (sometimes perverse) way, comfortable with where we've landed. Budging from that spot, even in the face of compelling logical and emotional reasons to do so, is extremely painful and difficult, often, and many people never do.
And success, for a submissive, is largely change. I've talked before about changing one's basic orientation from holding on to letting go. This is the essence, to Me, of true submission. And to change someting so basic in us, something that is the product of a lifetime of socialization, is a momumnetal and scary effort.
Given all that, succeeding is a much scarier prospect than failing, even though failing might ultimately feel worse, and succeeding will feel so good that words are inadequate to describe it. We are, in many ways, perverse, contradictory creatures.
The trick, and this a time where the submissive must fully participate in the trick, is actually not to think about in terms of either success or failure, but instead to remember that one has placed one's trust with the Other, and that following the Other, each day, each moment, each step, is a tiny little success. The big "success" is only felt retroactively, when you turn around a moment and see the seemingly endless trail of tiny successes behind you.
Many submissives will encounter a point in their experience where it seems too difficult, where things don't "flow." The submissive will question him or herself extensively, usually in fairly negative fashioin, wondering why he or she can't "get it." Wondering why they keep holding on to things they know they should let go of.
In My experience, what' going on, almost always, is this: It feels like fear of failure, but in fact it's fear of success.
We are all, to varying degrees, resistant to change. D/s is so intense and scary for many people precisely because, particularly in the submissive role, one's confronted with the necessity of changing. That is a scary moment. Even the unhappiest people among us, are, in some (sometimes perverse) way, comfortable with where we've landed. Budging from that spot, even in the face of compelling logical and emotional reasons to do so, is extremely painful and difficult, often, and many people never do.
And success, for a submissive, is largely change. I've talked before about changing one's basic orientation from holding on to letting go. This is the essence, to Me, of true submission. And to change someting so basic in us, something that is the product of a lifetime of socialization, is a momumnetal and scary effort.
Given all that, succeeding is a much scarier prospect than failing, even though failing might ultimately feel worse, and succeeding will feel so good that words are inadequate to describe it. We are, in many ways, perverse, contradictory creatures.
The trick, and this a time where the submissive must fully participate in the trick, is actually not to think about in terms of either success or failure, but instead to remember that one has placed one's trust with the Other, and that following the Other, each day, each moment, each step, is a tiny little success. The big "success" is only felt retroactively, when you turn around a moment and see the seemingly endless trail of tiny successes behind you.
Dommes and Doms
I was asked recently if I thought that Male Dominance and Female Dominance were fundamentally different energies.
My immediate answer was that actually, I thought that they were the same energy, but that said energy gets manifested in such different ways that they appear to be inherently different.
On further reflection, I'm inclined to stick with that answer. Here's why:
Take sex out of it for a moment, and consider what exactly D/s is about. OK, this will vary from person to person, admittedly, but there are certain underlying common themes that will resonate with just about everyone with any experience of D/s that has gone any bit beyond so-called "kinky sex."
1. Control/Power. The giving/taking thereof . . . how it feels, on each side.
2. Will. The strength of One to impose it . . . and the strength of the other to submit to it.
3. Focus. The concentrated, absolutely intense and sweet feelings that can arise from total focus on one potentially very simple task/idea/action.
Doubtless there are more, but the point is that those, above . . . feel gender-independent to Me. The differences in the sexes are how they are expressed. So I would say the difference in more in styles than in the underlying energies.
Without getting too much into "Men are from Mars" territory, and ackowledging the troublesome nature of generalizations . . . I think there is one underlying important principle in differentiating the styles/approach of Male and Female Dominants.
Men largley see their self-worth in terms of what they achieve, while Women see their worth, often, more in terms of thier connectedness. My own pet theory here is that, in Dominants, those natural(?) tendencies are heightened. So what differences there are will be more stark when the two are compared.
So, if one sex sees Dominance as something to be achieved, and the other sees it as another, deeper way of connecting . . . the manifestations of those are perforce going to look very different. I don't ascribe any bigger value to one or the other . . . and certainly, one's preference in a Dom/me is tangled up with one's sexual preference, so there is less aspect of actually "choosing."
But even if that's true, and it really is the same energy simply manifested in differing ways, does that matter, in practical terms? In many cases, the submissive is going to react a lot more strongly to what's felt than to how it's presented, stylistically. But in important ways, Dominance is like sushi . . . presentation often makes the difference between a magical sensory experience and dead raw fish. And this is where many Dom/mes do fall victim to LTPS (Lazy Thought Process Syndrome) . . . and where some Women might have an advantage, since in My observations Women tend to be more flexible in Their approach to a given submissive. Not compromising Their own desires, but more willing to look for different ways to the same end that take into account the submissive's unqiue self/situation.
So I guess I end up thinking that they are underlyingly the same, and that it does matter, but that, in the end, We're different in ways that are wondrous, exciting, and sometimes maddeningly frustrating. And worth celebrating.
My immediate answer was that actually, I thought that they were the same energy, but that said energy gets manifested in such different ways that they appear to be inherently different.
On further reflection, I'm inclined to stick with that answer. Here's why:
Take sex out of it for a moment, and consider what exactly D/s is about. OK, this will vary from person to person, admittedly, but there are certain underlying common themes that will resonate with just about everyone with any experience of D/s that has gone any bit beyond so-called "kinky sex."
1. Control/Power. The giving/taking thereof . . . how it feels, on each side.
2. Will. The strength of One to impose it . . . and the strength of the other to submit to it.
3. Focus. The concentrated, absolutely intense and sweet feelings that can arise from total focus on one potentially very simple task/idea/action.
Doubtless there are more, but the point is that those, above . . . feel gender-independent to Me. The differences in the sexes are how they are expressed. So I would say the difference in more in styles than in the underlying energies.
Without getting too much into "Men are from Mars" territory, and ackowledging the troublesome nature of generalizations . . . I think there is one underlying important principle in differentiating the styles/approach of Male and Female Dominants.
Men largley see their self-worth in terms of what they achieve, while Women see their worth, often, more in terms of thier connectedness. My own pet theory here is that, in Dominants, those natural(?) tendencies are heightened. So what differences there are will be more stark when the two are compared.
So, if one sex sees Dominance as something to be achieved, and the other sees it as another, deeper way of connecting . . . the manifestations of those are perforce going to look very different. I don't ascribe any bigger value to one or the other . . . and certainly, one's preference in a Dom/me is tangled up with one's sexual preference, so there is less aspect of actually "choosing."
But even if that's true, and it really is the same energy simply manifested in differing ways, does that matter, in practical terms? In many cases, the submissive is going to react a lot more strongly to what's felt than to how it's presented, stylistically. But in important ways, Dominance is like sushi . . . presentation often makes the difference between a magical sensory experience and dead raw fish. And this is where many Dom/mes do fall victim to LTPS (Lazy Thought Process Syndrome) . . . and where some Women might have an advantage, since in My observations Women tend to be more flexible in Their approach to a given submissive. Not compromising Their own desires, but more willing to look for different ways to the same end that take into account the submissive's unqiue self/situation.
So I guess I end up thinking that they are underlyingly the same, and that it does matter, but that, in the end, We're different in ways that are wondrous, exciting, and sometimes maddeningly frustrating. And worth celebrating.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)