RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission

RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (Full Version)

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

Message

celticlord2112 -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/23/2008 4:37:12 AM)
quote: Who was the dominant and who was the submissive in that story? Changing the genders of the characters; does it make a difference? Who's fantasy is fulfilled? If both have their fantasies fulfilled, does it really matter? Control is at best an illusion, and at worst a delusion. A dominant may command, but if the submissive chooses not to obey what real recourse is there? Similarly, if the dominant's command sounds silly and fake to the submissive, what real recourse is there? Yes, dominance and submission are illusions. They are comforting illusions to be sure, but they are still just illusions. Edited to add: My slave tells me those "Dollar Store" ping pong paddles hurt like holy hell, much more than the $30 slappers from Extreme Restraints.[:D]

TysGalilah -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/23/2008 5:17:58 AM)
I posted : "I guess what made me think that way was when he "put" her in the position of choosing the "toy" she wanted used on her. also, at this point in there experience and relationship/role, she would still be holding onto much of her control. Still building trust, she may be giving control or surrendering in the moment ( ie playtime ) much like a bottom would ? but thats not submission ( yet ) as I think Merc was asking about. make any sense?" I wanted to correct to read : but thats not the level of* submission ( yet ) as I think Merc was asking about in his scenario and question.*

cpK69 -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/23/2008 6:41:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 Control is at best an illusion, and at worst a delusion. If you are referring to the idea that one person can control another; I agree. quote: Yes, dominance and submission are illusions. They are comforting illusions to be sure, but they are still just illusions. Is it that they are illusions, or that they are based on something other then control; such as power, or purpose? Kim

RealSub58 -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/23/2008 9:20:48 AM)
OK Mercnbeth, since when did I give you permission to repost an entry in my private journal? [8D] jj The illusion of a starting a relationship. The fantasy both want and play out. The reality is both want something and met to each give each other a chance at seeing what the other is willing to give. Dominance and submission are tested, truly, when the rubber meets the road. I was hoping to open a discussion about getting outside that comfort zone of 100% compatibility. This is the gray area where most fear to tread, mentally or emotionally. As individuals grow and change within a relationship, with dominance and submission become an illusion or will it stay within reality. A relationship takes time to properly develope ...to jump into a collar, to jump into love, to jump into living together, etc are leaps people take, IMHO, the slightest idea of the difference between illusion and reality. You speak of Opera. What about single women with children? Who does the discipline and can both agree on child rearing techniques? What about finances? Can an independent women of 45, who has built a business from scratch give control over to a shared business? Could a woman give up her "identity" as a business woman, a professional, to be only a woman owned by a man who brings in income? Can a man who makes only 40G a year dominate an attorney who makes 100G a year without some incompatability? The illusion of D/s must be tested by the reality of D/s. Awesome topic !!

RCdc -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/23/2008 9:37:50 AM)
Hello Merc - regards to you and yours. I don't really have any thoughts on the scenario presented other than I do not view it as an illusion of dominance and submission but rather an illusion of play. Neither of the charachters have to be D&S - but rather T&B. But it all amounts to the same thing(ish). the.dark.

NuevaVida -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/23/2008 9:49:13 AM)
I think (but could be wrong) what you're getting at here is how many people can look at the same situation and see different things, according to individual values, biases and life experiences, and so no one can really unequivocally define what another's relationship is. I know you're familiar with The Four Agreements, so I'll just add that what I read in your OP is that each of us lives our lives according to what our own individual "stories" are, and that tends to define our perspectives. I'll admit to being really close-minded when I first began posting on these boards, but seeing so many different perspectives based on individual experiences, along with my own evolution from my experiences, has opened my mind considerably. The scenario you described is much like my first meeting with my former master, although there were some differences. I did not consider that to be solely "play" at all, but my first experience in physically submitting to a man in authority over me, and enjoying it. It didn't come from a place of me wanting to get my rocks off; rather it was from a place of wanting to please him and impress him. Understandably, others have different experiences and therefore see the scenario differently. What I'm (finally) discovering is that there is no universal "right way", there is only "what's right for me/us". Frankly, I'm growing tired of labels and definitions (not sure if this is a temporary state or what I'm actually turning into). I think it's the result of trying to fit into a box that I no longer fit into. But then I'm still trying to make sense of a lot of those rocks rattling around in my head these days! I liked your OP - I mulled on it since you posted it. I really can't answer the questions you posed, because they would only be from my perspective, and that could be way off from the perspective of the hypothetical individuals in your scenario.

IvyMorgan -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/23/2008 11:09:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Are you capable of submitting, with pleasure, outside a scenario fulfilling a personal fantasy? Short answer, more to follow probably... I do not have many personal fantasies, and those I do have are probably best not fufilled (some things should remain theory, the therapy bills would be too high). Therefore, rarely do I submit to what is a personal fantasy. Frequently I bottom to something that is for mutual enjoyment, but I don't enjoy it if they don't enjoy it, and I will enjoy things I don't like becuase they enjoy it, I like the fact I don't like it at times, as well. So, I have done this, I will continue to do this, but I'm not sure Submission is the right word, unless you want to put tome contraints on in, and say, as Mist did, I submit for a scene. I was in a relationship where this was prevalent, however, the submitting to things I didn't want/like/enjoy. I did them, they happened, but, it got old, very old, very quickly. The relationship didn't work for many reasons, but this was one of them, I would suggest/ask/hint at doing something, and it wouldn't happen, ever, it would be what he wanted, pretty much all of the time. Weirdly, now we're not in a relationship, that aspect of our play doesn't bother me nearly so much, and he's much better at taking hints/suggestions/just doing what I ask. I can do it, I do do it, if it's all I do, I don't do it for long, I can't say it's all that fulfilling. YMMV, but, I'm growing to think I'm less "submissive" than I thought.

ExSteelAgain -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/23/2008 12:19:42 PM)
I want to clarify something after reading some of the posts. The one in control only has to have his or her desire under control....or not as strong as the partner's. The desire doesn't have to be sexual or even a BDSM fetish. All it needs to be is a desire less than the other's. If the submissive has a desire to submit more than I have a desire to dominate, that is power.

catize -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/23/2008 6:53:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ExSteelAgain I want to clarify something after reading some of the posts. The one in control only has to have his or her desire under control....or not as strong as the partner's. The desire doesn't have to be sexual or even a BDSM fetish. All it needs to be is a desire less than the other's. If the submissive has a desire to submit more than I have a desire to dominate, that is power. Okay, I’m not getting this at all. If one’s desire is to not do something: i.e. not be dominant, that holds more power than if one really really wants to dominate?

LadyPact -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/23/2008 7:07:36 PM)
Hi Merc and the lovely beth. There's only one thing that comes across to Me as to who the players are. I can tell you as a Dominant, if any sub ever called Me "slut" they would live to regret it.

ExSteelAgain -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/24/2008 3:36:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: catize quote: ORIGINAL: ExSteelAgain I want to clarify something after reading some of the posts. The one in control only has to have his or her desire under control....or not as strong as the partner's. The desire doesn't have to be sexual or even a BDSM fetish. All it needs to be is a desire less than the other's. If the submissive has a desire to submit more than I have a desire to dominate, that is power. Okay, I’m not getting this at all. If one’s desire is to not do something: i.e. not be dominant, that holds more power than if one really really wants to dominate? Ah, interesting way to say it. Essentially, yes, however let’s not jump to the conclusion that it is a desire not to be something. Let’s just shade my premise. There is probably much desire to be dominant, submissive or whatever, but if the person is helplessly feeling that way with the other and has to consummate his or her needs while the partner controls his or her desire to a greater degree, the partner has the power/authority dynamic. In an ultimate example, I suppose all this would come down to a submissive who can play with a Dom while not desiring playing with the particular person (or any Dom) quite as much as the Dom wants to play with her. Sure, she wants play, but she is more under control. That gives her power. If she wants to be spanked a certain way and mentions it to the Dom, he falls all over himself doing it her way in this particular situation. In the example given in the OP, it was asked who was the dominant and who was the submissive in an obviously classic D/s encounter. I take that to be asking who is actually leading the movement. I say it could be either and depends on who has more self control.

catize -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/24/2008 4:39:06 AM)
quote: the person is helplessly feeling that way with the other and has to consummate his or her needs while the partner controls his or her desire to a greater degree, the partner has the power/authority dynamic. Thanks for the clarification! I have met a few in my time who demonstrated that helpless desire to consummate their needs at the cost of losing their self control. They handed me the power to walk away, and I did just that.

DMFParadox -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/24/2008 7:55:09 AM)
Submission is not an illusion; nor is dominance. Permanence is an illusion. By which I mean that every action has a cause, to which it submits, and an effect that it dominates. Every choice, every emotion, is the same. And once that moment has passed, a new one exists with different conditions, causes, and effects. The flow of action becomes distinct from other actions, in the observer's mind, as a process. This is proper and just, both truth and illusion. And the processes join to become things, which we see as dominant or submissive. Insofar as the actions of the dominant process cause the actions of the submissive process, it is true. But all exist within greater processes, and all consist of smaller ones, that cross boundaries and communicate as their own histories dictate, colored but not bounded by the metaphor used to describe them. In more practical matters, I disagree with Steel's premise that a dominant must repress their desires. That is, unless his desires run contrary to the need to control. However, it is the dominant's responsibility to be more aware of general circumstance. The submissive, ideally if not practically, need only witness and respond to the dom's actions; if they are required to reject a dom's request due to safety or practicality, that can damage trust, and it is frequently the goal for the submissive to release care about risk, and simply do. The dom must be at least relatively aware of what risks are involved at all times, even during the height of play.

Mercnbeth -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/24/2008 8:20:38 AM)
~ Fast Reply ~ THANK YOU ALL FOR YOU COMMENTS! It's interesting to see the focus put on the scenario. Every answer is 'right' in context of the perspective you took and 'wrong' in the context of 'absolutism'. My original intent was to use the story as a way to show that actions, sensations, and labels in a scene aren't an indication submission or dominance. A person can be identified, or consider themselves, either no matter which character they portray. It doesn't take too many 'what if?'s to make a case that both the person crawling to the chair or the person sitting in it is submissive or dominant. How about advancing the depth of the characters a bit? At the time of this first meeting they were keeping it simple. They believe they represented themselves honestly. Things are as they appear; he's the Dominant, she's the submissive. The first date goes fantastic for both, and every day together is better than the one before. Through open, honest communication they discover they have similar life goals, and 99.9% of their fantasies and lifestyle desires are perfect compliments. Although she has much more experience than him, there is no ego involved and they have a lot of fun together. Over time they develop an emotional bound that deepens their relationship. Enough trust and integrity is established that she commits to do 'anything' he requests. Life is beautiful! It is at that point that an opportunity to experience something exists in that 0.1% of their fantasies that aren't complimentary. Obviously it's not something essential or important. Maybe its a function of his inexperience or a unique past experience that was exciting and he wants to share with his partner. And lets not make this one sided. It's just as likely that 0.1% is the submissive's dark fantasy that 'squick'd' the dominant. The decision making part of the scenario obviously is directed more to the controlling, or dominant partner, would he/she use that dominance to go outside the submissive partner's comfort zone. For the submissive, or the squick'd out dominant, could he/she do it, facilitating the fantasy 'with a smile'? I'm of the opinion that this is really the first time our theoretical couple has the opportunity to confirm their self identity as well as their relationship identity. The first question is, do you agree with that opinion? To this point, FUN was a function of being complimentary. Now, the 'FUN', at least going in, is one sided. For either a submissive or a Dominant, I believe the decision to experience the non-complimentary activity represents a defining demarcation point. I wonder how many think doing something like think it would put the relationship at risk? If so, would you do it? I'll go first... I don't know. How's that for a cop-out? I don't know because I can't think of a scenario where the situation would apply. If anything it would be more of something that beth wanted to do that I don't; but even at that I don't think I'd make the decision to enjoy her enjoyment. On the other hand, I know for sure that if there was something I could come up with that beth didn't desire if she didn't do so with the right 'attitude', smiling, actively participating, and conveying pleasure; I'd be upset at her distracting me from my fun.

leadership527 -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/24/2008 8:42:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MercnBeth Dominance and submission starts out fulfilling personal fantasies. Living by the pragmatic definition of those words starts when the fantasy ends. Where that path leads can not be anticipated. What you are and where you are comfortable living in your submission and your dominance can not be scripted; because you really don't know what you are capable of, or if you are capable at all, until you actually try doing it outside your comfort level and/or fantasy. Again, no 'dogma' or a 'way' - just thoughts for a Monday morning. What do you think? I've had to reflect on this for a few days deciding what I thought. I decided that at least in our case, our D/s did not start out fulfilling personal fantasies. It was discussed as a better way to manage our relationship that would provide clear and obvious paths for each to provide to the other in excessively huge ways -- a thing we have always been focused on. In the end, we're going the other direction.... starting from a fairly "dry" authority transfer model that would be more at home in a relationship self help book than in a kink community. From there, we have been adding spice into it in the form of varous little kinks and fantasies and whatnot. From almost the very beginning, my wife has submitted in a wide variety of areas that were extremely difficult for her and without any personal gratification. From my standpoint as the dominant, I have gone slowly but steadily in pushing my own comfort zones. So yes, we both have sufficient trust in our partner to not just "deal" with the consequences, but thrive under them. Addtion to add comments to the secondary clarification: Interesting that you should post this. We (specifically I) are facing this situation at this moment. I fundamentally disagree with the assertion that dominance or submission is defined by the reaction of the sub to any given command... DnD convinced me otherwise. To me, the thing that you're describing is just a reflection of whatever checks and balances, gives and takes, exist within any one relationship. That being said, we have elected to "not chicken out". But I absolutely would not put my relationship at risk for any given kink... after 13 years we have too much invested in it to place it at risk for such a small thing. The flip side of that is that after 13 years, it ISN'T going to be at risk for such explorations. We'll just explore and it'll either work out for us (together as a couple) or it won't in which case it'll be stopped.

NuevaVida -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/24/2008 12:17:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth I'm of the opinion that this is really the first time our theoretical couple has the opportunity to confirm their self identity as well as their relationship identity. The first question is, do you agree with that opinion? To this point, FUN was a function of being complimentary. Now, the 'FUN', at least going in, is one sided. For either a submissive or a Dominant, I believe the decision to experience the non-complimentary activity represents a defining demarcation point. I wonder how many think doing something like think it would put the relationship at risk? If so, would you do it? I'll go first... I don't know. How's that for a cop-out? I don't know because I can't think of a scenario where the situation would apply. If anything it would be more of something that beth wanted to do that I don't; but even at that I don't think I'd make the decision to enjoy her enjoyment. On the other hand, I know for sure that if there was something I could come up with that beth didn't desire if she didn't do so with the right 'attitude', smiling, actively participating, and conveying pleasure; I'd be upset at her distracting me from my fun. Your cop out is "I don't know;" My cop out is "It depends - on the people and on the scenario." I have done things that went beyond my "squick-out" factor. Admittedly, I was not happily smiling when such things occurred. Nor was I protesting. I was dealing with not vomiting, and with a head space that had me in a really bizarro type of sub space. I did it because he wanted it. It didn't damage the relationship. For him, the harder he made things for me, the happier he was with me when I busted through my internal hurdles and did them. If anything, it made us closer. But it's not a dynamic shared by everyone - where the slave is constantly pushed like that. Over time it does become exhausting. For me it was do-able...until it wasn't anymore. So, there's a breaking point - what it is will vary with each dynamic. My breaking point wasn't about anything squickish; it was an emotional starvation that could no longer cope with a smile.

SlaveIndigochild -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/25/2008 4:40:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist Sherlock Holmes says: They are both married and cheating, hence the hotel. This is the first time she has cheated, that is why she is nervous. He is dominant, he is giving the commands. She is submissive, she is obeying the commands. He is a broke trailer trash poser from the internet, hence the Dollar Store equipment and cheap hotel with “Lysol odors & stained carpet”. He is a noob posing as a Dom, hence the price tags still on the gear and plastic gear bag. They are both really just kinsters using BDMS protocols, hence the slap & tickle gear list. He is British, hence the OTK fetish. /Just joking. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Great story, thanks for sharing this classic scenario. Without being privy to any prior negotiations, this seems like a D/s first meet scenario using polite BDSM protocols. He lets her pick but it isn’t her “negotiated” power because she only gets to choose what “will be the first she feels” used as the warm up. He retains ultimate control in that she will eventual feel all that is in the bag. He is commanding and dominant and she is submissive and obedient. I can’t see how anyone would derive anything different. You wrote it well. Nah: He's a down town guy and she's a up town girl....and soooo british, having arrived at the hotel fresh, very very fresh off a flight from Heathrow. Y'al know (is that how you say it?) well y'al knows how we brit girls submit fully at the whiff of a pound shop ping pong ball...... (i'll retrieve the other answer, which was a long one and serious stuff, posted as the first reply to the OP. But there was a power cut and it all got lost....maybe i just found another way of saying i WAS that girl in the hotel room, submitting fully and completely at the first meet!)

catize -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/25/2008 5:33:35 PM)
quote: I'm of the opinion that this is really the first time our theoretical couple has the opportunity to confirm their self identity as well as their relationship identity. The first question is, do you agree with that opinion? No, I do not agree. It doesn’t matter which option the dominant picks, nor does it matter why. The definitive factor is that the dominant is the one who chooses and the submissive is the one who accepts that decision. quote: Now, the 'FUN', at least going in, is one sided. For either a submissive or a Dominant, I believe the decision to experience the non-complimentary activity represents a defining demarcation point. I wonder how many think doing something like think it would put the relationship at risk? If so, would you do it? I don’t see that every ‘non-complimentary’ desire risks the relationship. You say the shared goal of this imaginary couple is the fun factor. I’d say the risk is determined by whether they are willing to explore re-defining what ‘fun’ means to them.

yourMissTress -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/25/2008 7:13:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth ~ Fast Reply ~ THANK YOU ALL FOR YOU COMMENTS! It's interesting to see the focus put on the scenario. Every answer is 'right' in context of the perspective you took and 'wrong' in the context of 'absolutism'. My original intent was to use the story as a way to show that actions, sensations, and labels in a scene aren't an indication submission or dominance. A person can be identified, or consider themselves, either no matter which character they portray. It doesn't take too many 'what if?'s to make a case that both the person crawling to the chair or the person sitting in it is submissive or dominant. Thank you for a great topic! Not to make it all about the scenario...[:D] But what if the male were a pro dom and the female a paying client? I know, THAT doesn't happen, but think about it! quote: It is at that point that an opportunity to experience something exists in that 0.1% of their fantasies that aren't complimentary. Obviously it's not something essential or important. Maybe its a function of his inexperience or a unique past experience that was exciting and he wants to share with his partner. And lets not make this one sided. It's just as likely that 0.1% is the submissive's dark fantasy that 'squick'd' the dominant. The decision making part of the scenario obviously is directed more to the controlling, or dominant partner, would he/she use that dominance to go outside the submissive partner's comfort zone. For the submissive, or the squick'd out dominant, could he/she do it, facilitating the fantasy 'with a smile'? My cop out answer on the first question is: It Depends. It depends on why the sub is uncomfortable with the fantasy or activity and how much enjoyment I would get out of it. It's most likely that I would insist that the sub participate ~with style~ but maybe not. My answer on the second question is: Absolutely NOT. My limits are the limits of my submissive or slave. There are very few things that squick me, and they are such that I would actually have to review my relationship with someone who gave serious thought to actually participate in them. Oh, wait, you said it's something inconsequential and unimportant...maybe it's something that just doesn't interest me? Yeah, the answer is still no.

cloudboy -> RE: The Illusion of Dominance & submission (9/26/2008 8:43:15 AM)
Illusion serves an important role in relationships. We all need the matrix to cover up our faults and lack of freedom.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875