RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man?

RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (Full Version)

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

Message

OrionTheWolf -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/20/2009 2:02:38 PM)
~FR~ I keep seeing mention of Alpha, and if you are not alpha then you are submissive. This is incorrect, as some that may have a dominant trait do so in a more passive manner. Defering to anothers authority, does not always equal submission.

ShaktiSama -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/20/2009 2:05:01 PM)
Oh yes. And submissive men are sooooooo sexy! [:D]

blmtrsne -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/20/2009 2:14:35 PM)
Yes, I married one. I was the one who had to learn to accept my Dominance, he followed every directive or order I put on him. We were so young when we found each other... we both had to learn what these feelings meant.

bealigerent -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/20/2009 5:07:53 PM)
I like the earlier reply about submission vs deference. A totally submissive-accepting whatever women or men do to him--is to be despised-no fun here. A strong man who defers to other men because he is a gentleman---has no need to push himself to the front of the herd--THAT is attractive. The whole alpha male thing is designed for top dog to impregnate top bitch. I am not here to be bred--the most intelligent men I know would be called "submissive" because they do not pose with their arms crossed defensively...yes, there are submissive men who choose this because it takes the guesswork out of a relationship...you both get what you want--.hopefully.

windchymes -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/20/2009 5:43:44 PM)
When you've got their dick in your mouth, I've found that men can be pretty darn submissive......

OrionTheWolf -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/20/2009 6:06:14 PM)
So is force or threat of harm acceptable to force submission? If that is the case, then everyone is submissive depending upon the threat or coercion applied.

windchymes -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/20/2009 6:08:08 PM)
If you're referring to having the dick in the mouth, there's no threat or coercion there....they're just so damn happy to be there, they agree to everything [;)]

Lucienne -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/20/2009 7:02:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GYPSYMAMBO THIS comes from a question posed in another thread.. that with the last 5000 years of patriarchal chaos and diabolization of relationship..body..spirit....and general fukkedupness... HOW COULD THEY BE? HOW DID THEY DEVELOP/? IF THEY ARE IF your "man"/mate/sub is submissive...was he when you met? and how did you enhance this? GM If you want to talk about cultural norms, it's foolish to ignore the longstanding belief that men are essentially beasts and one of the roles of marriage as an institution is to get men to "submit" to the civilizing influence of their wives. In modern times, see "Honey Do" lists. On a more individual level, yes, of course men can be submissive. Personally, I tend to make them, if not more submissive, more comfortable with their submissive sides, through sheer force of personality. It's not something I've tried to do. It actually drove me crazy for years. But for me, part of maturing as a human being has involved accepting the fact that suppressing my dominant side is unhealthy and it never fooled most people anyway. As a switch, I know that for me submission doesn't involve weakness as much as trust. And I see no reason to believe that men are incapable of having equal urges to feel that sense of trust and safety in their partner. If anything, cultural training makes them even more eager to feel that sense of reliance when they're constantly pushed to be so strong and independent.

kdsub -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/20/2009 7:48:57 PM)
This is a good thread...it hits home with me. Is there anything wrong with being submissive to certain things and not others? If there is good communication between people about what they want and need does it really make a difference if I am dominant or equal in all things but sex for instance? I think it very rare to find a man or woman that is submissive in all things all the time. Is it not a waste of time to fit people into single word definitions? I find it shortsighted to say you must be dominant in the bedroom to be a dominant leader or if you are submissive you can’t be head of a household. Relationships between two people do NOT have to transfer to all parts of their interaction with the life. Butch

OrionTheWolf -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/20/2009 9:22:02 PM)
Yeah I suppose most males are easily manipulated and entertained, so you are probably right. Not to mention that being demur and submissive has been a procreation strategy for as long as humans have been around. quote: ORIGINAL: windchymes If you're referring to having the dick in the mouth, there's no threat or coercion there....they're just so damn happy to be there, they agree to everything [;)]

bravemax -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/21/2009 5:46:42 AM)
And from postmodernism we have the question rephrased... Is there such a thing as a submissive? Is there such a thing as a man?

OrionTheWolf -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/21/2009 6:56:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bravemax And from postmodernism we have the question rephrased... Is there such a thing as a submissive? Yes, as a known and an adjetive. I use it to describe a personality trait. quote: Is there such a thing as a man? That would depend upon your definition of "man". With such a wide variety of humans, I am sure someone would fit whatever definition you made. Personally I cannot identify with a submissive male, and though I consider myself an objective person, I am sure my perceptions of a submissive male are skewed.

pyroaquatic -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/21/2009 8:03:57 AM)
you can't argue with blowjob logic.

LookieNoNookie -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/21/2009 4:46:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GYPSYMAMBO THIS comes from a question posed in another thread.. that with the last 5000 years of patriarchal chaos and diabolization of relationship..body..spirit....and general fukkedupness... HOW COULD THEY BE? HOW DID THEY DEVELOP/? IF THEY ARE IF your "man"/mate/sub is submissive...was he when you met? and how did you enhance this? GM Huh?

windchymes -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/21/2009 6:19:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pyroaquatic you can't argue with blowjob logic. Ahhh, you are wise beyond your years, young grasshopper! [;)]

bravemax -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/21/2009 8:25:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf quote: ORIGINAL: bravemax And from postmodernism we have the question rephrased... Is there such a thing as a submissive? Yes, as a known and an adjetive. I use it to describe a personality trait. However when we turn a trait or cluster of traits into a discrete entity/identity we have created something that sometimes ends up generating it's own mythology. Consider the diagnosis of borderline personality disorder which is merely a cluster of traits. Is the disorder a real "thing"? How is a disorder anything anyway? The families of people recieving the diagnosis sometimes imagine it as a disease distinct from their loved ones real personality, which is a nonsense created by wordplay (albeit a helpful nonsense perhaps). The "Submissive" and the "Dominant" just like the Heterosexual/Homosexual are also wordplays which create from traits a "real" entity. (And both have to incorporate their flawed copies - Switches and Bisexuals). It is this phenomenom of the Submissive which when coupled with the cluster of attributes called male struggles to sustain itself perfectly. That we find this surprising is that we have forgotten that we are only talking about traits and not a "real thing". If we just ask , any men with more submissive traits than dominant ones... it's a lot less hard to suggest there wouldn't be.

Bruticus -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/22/2009 10:48:54 AM)
Something I would add that I haven't seen mentioned thus far - or maybe just touched upon...even an alpha can be broken. The old theory for wolf behavior (I've heard that the model is changing as new observations are made was that a wolf could challenge the alpha, and if the challenger proved his or her ability to kill the alpha, they would then assume that position. I'm not encouraging people to actually engage in extensive personality modification (particularly if it's not consensual!), and I'm not saying that it would be easy, but it's possible. For example, consider Stockholm Syndrome - where a victim develops feelings for their captor.

LadyHibiscus -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/22/2009 11:14:52 AM)
I have met a few submissive men, and you know you have too, GM! [:D] They are pretty uncommon, though, and certainly not as easy to find as the light blue letters on the other side would have you believe! BDSM is an aspect of our private lives, the place where we can express our truest selves. Yes, the patriarchy encourages "real men", but how many men fit that mould? Not everyone can be an alpha, there is only so much room for pack leaders. A person can be fulfilling some workplace role that has nothing to do with his true desires or life skills.

slavekal -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/23/2009 7:49:03 PM)
Yes. But it is a qualified yes. A man can be aggressive, strong, and decisive, yet obedient to a woman. A woman has to be smart enough and seductive enough to make that man submit. And most submissive men will draw a line someplace. I may submit to my lady, but if she wants me to drink tea, go antiquing, and swear off meat, she got the wrong slaveboy.

looking4princess -> RE: IS there such a thing as a submissive man? (10/24/2009 3:10:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucienne If you want to talk about cultural norms, it's foolish to ignore the longstanding belief that men are essentially beasts and one of the roles of marriage as an institution is to get men to "submit" to the civilizing influence of their wives. In modern times, see "Honey Do" lists. An interesting point, Lucienne, but aren't you making the assumption that women in hunter/gatherer societies were not "essentially beasts?" I wonder if that is not disputable. You might consider the rise of agriculture and the need for "home grown" labor as a major cause for the rise of marriage as an institution. With those imperatives gone in the West the institution of marriage seems to be in dire straights. I am not sure that wives today have as much of a civilizing influence as say business and education do.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.25