Dominance Fetish? (Full Version)

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



Message

topcat -> Dominance Fetish? (10/6/2004 7:01:48 PM)

Greetings, all-

I had an interesting exchange with a friend who's always been very curious about this stuff. In the course of it, we seemed to come to the conclusion that she wasn't submissive, but that she had a fetish for dominant men- she liked rough sex, liked to be manhandled, taken down, etc., but submitting wasn't something that worked for her- she didn't want to give, she wanted it to be taken from her.

This echoed, to some extent, with some of my own experiances with women, and I was wondering if perhaps we should have a new class (as if submissive/ slave didn't cause enough trouble<g>)- the domination fetishist. I've also seen some male submissives that would seem to fall into this catagory, from my observations.

Has anyone else come across this sort of personality?

Stay warm,
Lawrence



INSIDEYOURMIND -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/6/2004 7:21:46 PM)

Interesting point, and hey, what's one more label? We can really go to town with this.............
A sub that likes water sports can be a urinary tract inspector!

ok, who else has got one?



dixiedumpling -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/6/2004 9:05:28 PM)

Maybe it falls into the "play rape" thing. Not many REALLY want to be raped, but sometimes sex can be more exciting after a struggle.



topcat -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/6/2004 9:13:57 PM)

quote:

Maybe it falls into the "play rape" thing.


Midear Dixie-

I suggested the same at some point (we've actually been having this discussion in bits and pieces for a few years now), and that doesn't fit for her.

She's more turned on by being able to drive a strong man into a frenzy of lust and then hanging on for the ride, and it has a hint of objectifcation, but she really isn't about submission either- she doesn't want to be tamed or broken or anything of that sort.

Stay warm,
Lawrence



dixiedumpling -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/6/2004 9:18:47 PM)

Just a tease, huh?



January -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/7/2004 9:26:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: topcat
she liked rough sex, liked to be manhandled, taken down, etc., but submitting wasn't something that worked for her- she didn't want to give, she wanted it to be taken from her.


Hi Lawrence,

That sort of sexual interaction is the theme of almost every old-school romance novel (especially the "historicals"). In these books, the woman is a fireball before, during and after the union, so there's no submission. Just her "surrender to passion".

Making love to a strong, controlling man is the fantasy of many women. So many women enjoy imagining a borderline violent surrender, that in my mind, these popular (and politcally incorrect) romance novels are the mildest, and most widespread, form of bdsm.

January



subbiejenn -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/7/2004 9:48:46 AM)

Hmmmmmm

i have a fetish for dominant men but i still feel i am submissive also. This make me some kind of a Switch?

i like rough sex, to be manhandled - i also love to see a Man take control of things (sweetpleaser knows what i mean *grins*) not just sexually but seeing a Man in control rather at work or here in the boards is a turn on for me. Just like giving a blowjob, i like feeling His hand in my hair almost forcing me to even so i have submitted and willing to do it anyway... but i also submit and love to please... i get satisfaction from serving.

i also don't feel submissive to smaller Men, i like Big Dominate Men... don't know if that is a fetish or just personal preference...

Geee Thanks Lawrence for confusing me even more (j/k)...



magiqual -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/7/2004 9:51:41 AM)

quote:

I was wondering if perhaps we should have a new class (as if submissive/ slave didn't cause enough trouble<g>)- the domination fetishist


Another label?! Aieeee, run for the hills! [;)]

Midori makes an interesting point in some of her classes -- that "giving sensation" vs. "receiving sensation" lie on a spectrum, and "dominance" vs. "submission" lie on another spectrum. As a community, we tend to lump "dominant givers" together as tops/doms/sadists, group "submissive receivers" as bottoms/subs/masochists, and argue about switches; Midori suggests this "duality" really isn't serving us all that well. (If your friend insisted on a label, it might be as a "Dominant masochist".)

Reducing the world to two choices (+ undecided) doesn't fit its richness and complexity all that well (well, OK, Msrs. Bush & Kerry might disagree on this, much as they disagree on everything else.)

- magiqual (a/k/a elfin)



BigBadVoodooDadd -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/7/2004 10:42:04 AM)

So no one has heard of BOTTOMS??

I am a bit surprised that no one has actually used this term. In BDSM we have Slaves, we have Submissives and we have BOTTOMS same as we have Masters, Doms and Tops.

I am sure that you all know what the terms mean. Even thoguh I hate actually identifying people as a part of a sub culture or a group I find this one to be very much useful. Bottoms are just the way that you have described your friend. They have to be forced in to being in the submissive position. She surely has a great potential of getting into the lifestyle but she needs a very strong man that would literally supress any attempt of hers to become the Dominant one in the relationship. Most bottoms in the lifestyle I see as very good potential slaves but they have not encountered a person that would bring that desire to serve and please out of them. I think that is the bratty Dom in me that wants to convert all women in to slaves though... LOL

The truth is that most bottoms are very strong individuals that hav been raised that it is wrong to submit, it has been ingrained in them that it is wrong to do anything even remotely submissive but in essence they crave that dynamics. Some bottom are the ultimate power exchange addicts but they differ from Switches in one fact and that is that they get completely turned off when they actually win. As long as you are able to be on top of the bottom they are actually as submissive as any other but as soon as you start slipping and giving way they get rid of ya like a bad habbit.

Anyways, that is my look on things. I might be wrong so I am going to look for other people's replies!

I hope this helps!

BBVD



LadyAngelika -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/7/2004 2:38:52 PM)

quote:

she wasn't submissive, but that she had a fetish for dominant men


Let me make things more complicated for you Lawrence.

I too have a fetish for Dominant men. Not the kind of Dominant man who wants to try subbing to me like I talked about in another post.

I like the kind of Dominant who will look at me eye to eye and “take me on” so to speak. Nothing like a good “tug-o-war” type rough sex to get you right in the viscera!

And since I do not submit to them, then I’m not switching.

Though I use labels all the time because it can help me get my point across, I sometimes resent them a great deal.

- LA



BigBadVoodooDadd -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/7/2004 4:02:05 PM)

There is one difference between you LadyAngelika and her is the fact that she is very much vanilla and she, from what I see, does not have the dominant desire or need.

I don't think that she has much knowledge of the lifestyle and what she might be. I think that if she is actually educated more about the possibilities and other choices she would be much more in the "sub" mode than she leads on at the moment. I have had a chance to meet few people like that and the desire to submit becomes stronger the more they experience it but also the will to fight for it grows stronger.

I do agree that the "tug-o-war" experience between two Dominant personalities is amazing. I think that it is an experience that everyone should try out for.

WHOA!

Never mind... my head is in the gutter now!



topcat -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/7/2004 5:36:43 PM)

quote:

So no one has heard of BOTTOMS??


M. BBVD-

Nope- she's not a masochist- she'll accept some pain as part of the roughness (and confesses that a little slapping in very hot for her), but doesn't process pain as anything but unpleasant.

But thanks for jumping in, and welcome to the boards

Stay warm,
Lawrence



topcat -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/7/2004 5:39:55 PM)

Midear J.-

Exactly her style! Cheesy romance novels!

and she is such the literatti, she's going to HATE the observation!

Thanks!

Stay warm,
Lawrence



BigBadVoodooDadd -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/7/2004 11:13:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: topcat

quote:

So no one has heard of BOTTOMS??


M. BBVD-

Nope- she's not a masochist- she'll accept some pain as part of the roughness (and confesses that a little slapping in very hot for her), but doesn't process pain as anything but unpleasant.

But thanks for jumping in, and welcome to the boards

Stay warm,
Lawrence


Well firstly bottoms are not exclusively masochists. That is like saying that all subs and slaves are sluts and pain sluts. It is an assumption that will take you down the wrong path.

Websters dictionary actually has a very extensive description of a "bottom"

quote:



In the terms of BDSM scenes or interactions, a bottom refers to the person who takes on the submissive role for the duration of a scene. This term is associated with being on the receiving end of bondage, discipline, and sadism. (Note: this term has significant connotative differences from submissive or slave.) They may be involved in such acts as bondage, flogging, humiliation, or servitude from the top.

A bottom is not necessarily submissive, and vice versa. The bottom enjoys the intense physical and psychological stimulation but does not submit to the person delivering them.

It should be noted that the bottom is most often the partner who is giving instructions - the top typically tops when, and in the manner, requested by the bottom.

In Japanese bondage and sexually-themed anime and manga (especially yaoi), a bottom is referred to as uke, a term from kabuki.


We might not really agree with everything but I do actually agree with what they say about the bottoms and how they identify themselves. I know many people that are bottoms and they completely agree with the definition.

If you read it you will notice that what she is as much of a bottom as it gets. She does not have to be a masochist, the fact that she likes to be dominated without her willingly submitting makes her a bottom. Masochist is a masochist, nothing more or less. I know Doms that are masochists and that does not make them any less of a Dom, just makes them crazy ass bastards but that is it!

I hope this helps!

BBVD



LadyAngelika -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/8/2004 4:54:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Websters dictionary

A bottom is not necessarily submissive, and vice versa. The bottom enjoys the intense physical and psychological stimulation but does not submit to the person delivering them.

It should be noted that the bottom is most often the partner who is giving instructions - the top typically tops when, and in the manner, requested by the bottom.


First, way to go for the folks at Webster for being so detailed. I snipped that excerpt out because I thought it was very interesting. Here are my two questions:

1) "and vice versa" refers to what? And a top is not necessarily dominant?

2) If the top is giving the bottom what the bottom wants and following the bottom’s instructions, is the top submitting to the bottom? I’d love to see the look on the face of one of my sadistic play partners if I said to him “thank you for submitting to my desires and servicing my needs chéri!” Then again, I better make sure I say that after he’s put down the whip!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigBadVoodooDadd
I know Doms that are masochists and that does not make them any less of a Dom, just makes them crazy ass bastards but that is it!


In my case, a crazy ass Bitch ;)

- LA



Sylverdawn -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/8/2004 5:04:58 AM)

I suppose for me its about intentions.. ( god I hate that word )... no act in itself is submissive or Dominant... its the intention behind the swinging of the paddle... Is it about controlling your partners response.. its it about giving up that control.. or as in the case of your friend is it simply about rough sex. Rough hot wild sex is great.. the fight .. the ride and the release... for both partners.. but because she gets swatted on the ass and has her hair pulled.. or because she is held down and rode hard.. doesnt make it an act of submission... she is in no way surrendering her power to her partner she may infact be encourging it and directing the action.. and visa versa. I dont think its a fetish because a fetish is by defination Something, such as a material object or a nonsexual part of the body, that arouses sexual desire and may become necessary for sexual gratification. Its a preference its how she likes her sex and her men.. its like over easy, scrambled or poached.. its how she prefers her eggs.. More power to her.. I happen to be right there along side her I love Dominant men.. I love rough sex with a Dominant man.



LadyAngelika -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/8/2004 5:13:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sylverdawn
I dont think its a fetish because a fetish is by defination Something, such as a material object or a nonsexual part of the body, that arouses sexual desire and may become necessary for sexual gratification.


Actually, it can be a fetish in my opinion. The definition of fetish you give is a common one but far from the original ones. Check this out if you are interested.

- LA



Sylverdawn -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/8/2004 5:20:44 AM)

I s uppose anything can be a fetish.. peanut butter to pea coats.. Because a woman gets off seeing a guy dressed in tight wranglers and it makes her aroused is it a fetish.. no not unless wearing the wranglers during intimacy is required for her to enjoy the act. I think its a case of you call it a Tomato.. and I call it a Tamato.



sweetpleaser -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/8/2004 6:13:36 AM)

Hey, I didn't know Webster's was into alternative lifestyle terminology!! Wow. Anyway, dominance in a man is a big turn on for me also, maybe it is a fetish. I submit all the time, but to be taken is super exciting. I spent my high school years reading those smut novels and it was so erotic to imagine myself in the role of the strong-willed protagonist. My favorite Shakespeare play is "Taming of the Shrew".

I learned something new (woohoo), you can be a bottom without submitting. hmmmmmmmmm

ann



January -> RE: Dominance Fetish? (10/8/2004 6:24:31 AM)

Lawrence,

So, have you noticed all the women who've replied to your post enjoy rough sex? Even those who identify as Domme? It's a common desire--even if they don't read romance novels. (Maybe they're closeted romance readers?)

Anyway, I never did offer you a name or classification for women like your friend. I forgot. So here it is. The rough sex, surrendering to passion, historical romance novels are disparagingly called "bodice rippers" by those who don't read them. So a woman who likes the kind of sex portrayed in these novels could be called a "bodice rippee".

Or, because the desire so nearly universal, she could be called vanilla. [:)]

January



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
6.152344E-02