Healthy Sub

What constitutes a healthy submissive? Is it the choice to submit.....the choice to follow......the choice to obey etc?

Or are we all just a little damaged in someway and this is how we cope?

Please respond and give me your feedback

D

I can only speak for myself, and I'm not "damaged."

I do my best as someone who follows. Strong leadership is something I crave. It would be a terrible place if we all wanted to be leaders. Could you imagine the chaos of everyone fighting for power?

I'm "healthy" in the sense that I take care of my mind and body. Submitting to me feels good, and in no way is a detriment to my overall well being. If it interferes with your life or impacts you negatively, reevaluate what you're doing.

MeekMe said:

I'm not "damaged."

Click to expand...

How would you know?

If you grew up damaged, it would be your normal state.

No it does not impact me negatively. I am a healthy sub too and i choose to submit. I enjoy subbing too and so was curious what other subs thought about it. I read a quote today from a book entitled "The Healthy Sub" and that is why I posed the question.

Thanks for the feedback

Maybe it makes sense to step back and define what "healthy human" means.

Healthy choices for me seem to measured in what it adds to my life. Does it strengthen me? Does it promote growth? Do I find joy in it? Do I find value in it? When in the company of the result of this choice, do I feel more vibrant? Momentum? Passionate? Safe? Or am I stagnating? Wilting?

When I am in a pattern of making life enriching choices, that feels healthy for me. When I am in a pattern of making life force draining choices, then it is time to step back and change directions.

The goal seems like it should be to be a health sub, but I think it should be more like... I am healthy. I am also... (insert whatever else you self identify here)

Primalex said:

How would you know?

If you grew up damaged, it would be your normal state.

Click to expand...

There's a reason it's in quotations. I'm completely fucked based on my upbringing.

cmslt2326 said:

What constitutes a healthy submissive? Is it the choice to submit.....the choice to follow......the choice to obey etc?

Or are we all just a little damaged in someway and this is how we cope?

Please respond and give me your feedback

D

Click to expand...

I'd argue that the "choice to submit... choice to follow... the choice to obey" has jack to do with being a[n emotionally, physically, psychologically] healthy human being.

I'd also argue that everyone is "a little damaged"; I have yet to meet anyone who is without any flaws, struggles or challenges.

Why do you feel the need to "legitimize" your sexuality, the stamp of approval that it's "healthy?"

18 year old scotch and flourless chocolate cake aren't healthy. They're also pretty stellar.

A lot of people have spent their entire lives being told they were sick and wrong by people who were completely sick and wrong, and the thing is it didn't change anyone, it didn't deter the brave, and ultimately it does not matter.

Being told "you're great, your sexuality is fine, go you!" is a relatively new development for anyone outside the most mainstream parameters. I wouldn't hang much peace of mind on it.

Netzach said:

Why do you feel the need to "legitimize" your sexuality, the stamp of approval that it's "healthy?"

18 year old scotch and flourless chocolate cake aren't healthy. They're also pretty stellar.

A lot of people have spent their entire lives being told they were sick and wrong by people who were completely sick and wrong, and the thing is it didn't change anyone, it didn't deter the brave, and ultimately it does not matter.

Being told "you're great, your sexuality is fine, go you!" is a relatively new development for anyone outside the most mainstream parameters. I wouldn't hang much peace of mind on it.

Click to expand...

I do not feel the need to legitimize my sexuality but I did spend a portion of my life denying it and another portion trying to understand it. I read a book quote from a book called "The Healthy Sub" and it was so apropos to my life I thought it would be a great starting point for a discussion.

Thanks for your feedback

If you don't mind sharing, I'm curious what the quote was?

Don't know, don't care.

I'm not dead, not in jail, not on drugs. I consider that enough as far as any of this matters.

CutieMouse said:

If you don't mind sharing, I'm curious what the quote was?

Click to expand...

Also interested in the quote, please.

CutieMouse said:

If you don't mind sharing, I'm curious what the quote was?

Click to expand...

CutieMouse this is the quote you asked about from the book "The Healthy Submissive". It was on another subscribers profile page and I commented on it. She shared it with me and I have since read much more about it. Since she gave it to me and I used it as the basis to start this thread and discussion I am hoping she will not mind my sharing it........


There are two kinds of strengths: the strength to lead, and the strength to follow; the strength to control, and the strength to yield. There are two kinds of power: the power to strip another's soul bare, and the power to stand naked.

Do not mistake following for weakness, for it is not. Do not mistake yielding for weakness, for in yielding there is resilience. Do not mistake the submissive’s need for relatedness for inability to be alone. Submissive women are not weaklings. They are sensitive people who have a great deal of resilience in the face of their particular challenges. Submissiveness is a strength seeking a proper context ~Yalda Tovah, “The Healthy Submissive”

Endless_Night said:

Also interested in the quote, please.

Click to expand...

This is the quote you requested......

There are two kinds of strengths: the strength to lead, and the strength to follow; the strength to control, and the strength to yield. There are two kinds of power: the power to strip another's soul bare, and the power to stand naked.

Do not mistake following for weakness, for it is not. Do not mistake yielding for weakness, for in yielding there is resilience. Do not mistake the submissive’s need for relatedness for inability to be alone. Submissive women are not weaklings. They are sensitive people who have a great deal of resilience in the face of their particular challenges. Submissiveness is a strength seeking a proper context ~Yalda Tovah, “The Healthy Submissive”

Thanks for asking about it and I would appreciate any feedback you might have.

cmslt2326 said:

CutieMouse this is the quote you asked about from the book "The Healthy Submissive". It was on another subscribers profile page and I commented on it. She shared it with me and I have since read much more about it. Since she gave it to me and I used it as the basis to start this thread and discussion I am hoping she will not mind my sharing it........


There are two kinds of strengths: the strength to lead, and the strength to follow; the strength to control, and the strength to yield. There are two kinds of power: the power to strip another's soul bare, and the power to stand naked.

Do not mistake following for weakness, for it is not. Do not mistake yielding for weakness, for in yielding there is resilience. Do not mistake the submissive’s need for relatedness for inability to be alone. Submissive women are not weaklings. They are sensitive people who have a great deal of resilience in the face of their particular challenges. Submissiveness is a strength seeking a proper context ~Yalda Tovah, “The Healthy Submissive”

Click to expand...

I don't mind you sharing, lady. Just to clarify, it's not a book. It's an article from a man that has an entire website dedicated to IE, which is internal enslavement.

That is one of his articles explaining his theory on the submissive personality in a woman stemming from birth and childhood, and how she came to form her personality in adulthood.

On the "healthy" versus "not healthy" part, he basically says that because a lot of our submissive tendencies start early in childhood, should our development as children go awry, that we will still develop into submissive women but not necessarily of healthy mind and emotions.

Being a "healthy" submissive is no different than being a "healthy" adult that is not submissive. It just means taking care of your mental and emotional health.

The choice to submit, in my opinion, is something altogether different. "You cannot give to others what you don't already have for yourself." The same as love, trust, respect, etc.

That is how I see the choice to submit. You cannot give another total control over your mind and heart, thus leading to control over your body, unless you have that for yourself. That is where the strength part comes in.

Again, just my opinion. I have spent years with my nose buried in articles on the internet, interestingly, most of them written by male Dominants, such as the article that you asked me about.

cmslt2326 said:

There are two kinds of strengths: the strength to lead, and the strength to follow; the strength to control, and the strength to yield. There are two kinds of power: the power to strip another's soul bare, and the power to stand naked.

Do not mistake following for weakness, for it is not. Do not mistake yielding for weakness, for in yielding there is resilience. Do not mistake the submissive’s need for relatedness for inability to be alone. Submissive women are not weaklings. They are sensitive people who have a great deal of resilience in the face of their particular challenges. Submissiveness is a strength seeking a proper context ~Yalda Tovah, “The Healthy Submissive”

Click to expand...

Well that's very... fluffy.

One of the issues I have with writings like this, is that it perpetuates this overly romanticized, emotionally edgy, gosh golly the world just doesn't understaaaaaaaaaaaaand how submissive I aaaaaaaaammmmmm thing. It reeks of teenage angst, which (IMO), isn't very beneficial [in adult relationships]. Statements like the one above support the concept that submission is some sort of radical social/political statement, when (in all honestly) submission* more often than not simply feeds into society's centuries old message... men lead/ women follow.

* Of the hetero male dominant/ female submissive definition.

All_4_Love said:

I don't mind you sharing, lady. Just to clarify, it's not a book. It's an article from a man that has an entire website dedicated to IE, which is internal enslavement.

That is one of his articles explaining his theory on the submissive personality in a woman stemming from birth and childhood, and how she came to form her personality in adulthood.

Click to expand...

See my comments above.

I do believe that our environment impacts who we are. However, the theory that a woman's environment from birth turns her submissive (or not), is a bit of a stretch. It also kinda smacks of the whole "all submissives are products of abusive backgrounds".

cmslt2326 said:

This is the quote you requested......

There are two kinds of strengths: the strength to lead, and the strength to follow; the strength to control, and the strength to yield. There are two kinds of power: the power to strip another's soul bare, and the power to stand naked.

Do not mistake following for weakness, for it is not. Do not mistake yielding for weakness, for in yielding there is resilience. Do not mistake the submissive’s need for relatedness for inability to be alone. Submissive women are not weaklings. They are sensitive people who have a great deal of resilience in the face of their particular challenges. Submissiveness is a strength seeking a proper context ~Yalda Tovah, “The Healthy Submissive”

Thanks for asking about it and I would appreciate any feedback you might have.

Click to expand...

This is very boring.

I wish people would read a little less from manly hetero man doms spouting 1950's purple prose and a little more of... pretty much anything else please god anything else.

You know what strength is? Being a pre-op dom trans woman.

CutieMouse said:

I do believe that our environment impacts who we are. However, the theory that a woman's environment from birth turns her submissive (or not), is a bit of a stretch. It also kinda smacks of the whole "all submissives are products of abusive backgrounds".

Click to expand...

If you read the article in its entirety, which I did state was his "theory" earlier, he does not theorize that a woman's environment turns her submissive. He says that there is a certain temperament that an infant is born with, which is then subsequently developed into a submissive personality, more or less, based on environment.

For the record, I am not a product of an abusive background. Traditional, yes, as in what my father said was final. He ruled our home with an iron fist. He is also one of the most loving, affectionate, and compassionate men I have ever known, on his terms, of course.

When she first posted this, I made what I felt was the smartest decision by staying out of the conversation, judging by my previous discussions regarding the matter, first because she didn't tell me she was going to start a thread on it, and secondly she did not quote my sig specifically in her OP. Now, she has, so I chose to speak up and offer clarification.

KoPilot said:

This is very boring.

I wish people would read a little less from manly hetero man doms spouting 1950's purple prose and a little more of... pretty much anything else please god anything else.

You know what strength is? Being a pre-op dom trans woman.

Click to expand...

You know what strength is? Being able to laugh at this and not take it so damn personally.

You know what else strength is? Backing out of this thread because I can already see the direction it's going to take since I posted on it.

OP, good luck.

All_4_Love said:

If you read the article in its entirety, which I did state was his "theory" earlier, he does not theorize that a woman's environment turns her submissive. He says that there is a certain temperament that an infant is born with, which is then subsequently developed into a submissive personality, more or less, based on environment.

Click to expand...

While she took her toys and left, this isn't about the sig or her. At all.

The poster asked opinions about a text. My opinion is to close-read things, OP. Think about whether any of the grand conclusions are being backed up with anything.

This IS a piece that's been on the internet forever plus, I must have encountered all this via Gloria Brame's site in the year 1. 1997 or something. Presented with a huge amount of AUTHORITY. As a lot of internet reading from the era was, regarding BDSM. A lot of people monetizing and setting themselves up as experts. I think there's a little less of that stance, while people are still monetizing.

A THEORY is typically arrived at and then tested with information in order to be a theory anyone wants to present authoritatively. Are the authors spending a lot of time with hundreds of infants to sort out these personality types? Are they cobbling together other people's research and pooping it out, and if so, how much and from where? Or are they consulting five or six moms they know? Are they asking their own mother what they were like because they're a sub?

Everyone's a doctor or a shrink, and it's funny but almost every MD or shrink I've ever encountered in 3D is all about data and outliers and investigation, and would present anything they ever found about kids and brains with "well we're not really sure about a lot in this area, but it looks like...."

I never remember a lot of data in these things more "trust me I know"

It's very truthy for people who already have their minds made up and then they get very huffy if you dare question any of the dogma.

CutieMouse said:

Well that's very... fluffy.

One of the issues I have with writings like this, is that it perpetuates this overly romanticized, emotionally edgy, gosh golly the world just doesn't understaaaaaaaaaaaaand how submissive I aaaaaaaaammmmmm thing. It reeks of teenage angst, which (IMO), isn't very beneficial [in adult relationships].

Click to expand...

This reminds me of a story (supposed to be a true story) of a slave being punished. It was horribly romanticized. It read from the slave's POV and it was about a horrible whipping she received. The whole time I was thinking, "this is extreme, what did she do that was bad enough to deserve this?" She used her safe word in the middle, but the safe word only meant she got to have a small break before the whipping started again.

When it was finally over, her master asks her why she received such a punishment. I'm thinking, "alright, how bad did she fuck up? Her back is torn to shreds, it must be something crazy!"

She replies, "I should know better that Master is paying attention to me and that I don't have to ask him for it." I'm paraphrasing, but it was some stupid shit like that.

He sheds a tear (cause he REALLY cares about her), lets her down and walks away. Meanwhile, I'm sure with a mirror and flexibility she will be just fine tending to her own back.

Now, maybe I just don't understand their dynamic, but I thought it was pretty ridiculous. This romanticized view of "he had to go to extremes to show me how much he cares" shit is dangerous, IMO. Alright, enough with my derailment.


There are two kinds of strengths: the strength to lead, and the strength to follow; the strength to control, and the strength to yield. There are two kinds of power: the power to strip another's soul bare, and the power to stand naked.

Do not mistake following for weakness, for it is not. Do not mistake yielding for weakness, for in yielding there is resilience. Do not mistake the submissive’s need for relatedness for inability to be alone. Submissive women are not weaklings. They are sensitive people who have a great deal of resilience in the face of their particular challenges. Submissiveness is a strength seeking a proper context ~Yalda Tovah, “The Healthy Submissive”

This is very specific.

They are sensitive people who have a great deal of resilience in the face of their particular challenges. Like refugees or something?

It's nice that these things are written, sometimes we need something that sounds beautiful. I feel like it's like watching a romantic movie, it's too perfect. The guy always knows the cutest thing to do to win the girl and live happily ever after. Real life doesn't work like that, though. It's cute to see, but it's best to realize that it's a movie.

In this discussion, I will be talking primarily about the female heterosexual submissive, because I don't know enough about non-heterosexual female submissives and Dominants to know whether this analysis is completely applicable. This focus is not to suggest that lesbian female submissives and their challenges are less worthy of study, merely that I am not equipped at this time to do such a study.

That's taken from the same guy. And that alone lets me know I shouldn't take him seriously. This looks at women alone as being submissive and doesn't acknowledge in any way that a man can be submissive or that a woman can be a dominant. On top of that, he starts making wild assumptions about infants.

I think one of the traits in this biologically grounded array that makes up temperament is common to all submissives. And that is social responsiveness. I would suggest that the baby who is temperamentally "set" to register and respond selectively and sensitively to social cues has the seeds of submissiveness in her nature. This is the baby that will search the environment for a human face; who will be attuned to, and very responsive to the human voice; who will preferentially and selectively attend to, and process, human interaction.

This baby, as she grows into childhood, will be easy to control, to shape, especially if she is temperamentally on the "easy" side. This little girl will be exquisitely sensitive to criticism and correction, to disapproval, to praise. Rather than requiring a raised voice to correct, a raised eyebrow will often do.

Seriously? Ugh... (p_-)

I can't even continue reading, because the assumptions get so outrageous. "The Troubled Submissive" isn't any better.

All_4_Love said:

You know what strength is? Being able to laugh at this and not take it so damn personally.

You know what else strength is? Backing out of this thread because I can already see the direction it's going to take since I posted on it.

OP, good luck.

Click to expand...

Strength is investigating the empirical evidence that would tear your beliefs to shreds and accepting it.

Neuroscience supports very little of the romanticized fluff--to use CM's word--that so much of the normative BDSM world wraps itself up with.

KoPilot said:

Strength is investigating the empirical evidence that would tear your beliefs to shreds and accepting it.

Neuroscience supports very little of the romanticized fluff--to use CM's word--that so much of the normative BDSM world wraps itself up with.

Click to expand...

The more I read items like the article quoted above, the more I become convinced that for some people BDSM must resemble a religion and they, dammit, are going to be immortalized as one of the Thirteen Apostles. Others seem married to the notion that they have to read and subscribe to the fluffyness in order to truly belong to The Religion of BDSM. And I think we all know what the evangelists look (and post) like.

cmslt2326 said:

What constitutes a healthy submissive? Is it the choice to submit.....the choice to follow......the choice to obey etc?

Or are we all just a little damaged in someway and this is how we cope?

Please respond and give me your feedback

D

Click to expand...

I dont know. I am not a submissive. Or better said, I am not only submissive. I am a dominant with all the loving caring nurturing aspects as I recently found out thanks to a singe special person waking it in me. I am a sadist and a masochist. I am a dominant bottom or as I like to say do-me-bitch. I am bisexual, polysexual and polyamorous.
And in the end I discovered I can be the epitome of submissiveness with the right person.

So what do you think, from your one dimensional point of definition - am I healthy? Am I "damaged"?

How do you even measure your health in BDSM sense? By what somebody else who cant even understand who you are but on some superficial level tells you you are supposed to be? I only have my own criteria and enough confidence to trust them.
I am functioning in all my social circles pretty fine. I didnt kill anyone or hurt anyone badly yet. I had and have relationships with well adapted men who find me awesome. My friends and family love me quite unconditionally. So what other parameters of health can I dig out?

As for all the romantic notions.... I am in the most romantic relationship I could ever even imagine in my life right now, and I am still skeptic about my submissive side being so noble, righteous and virtuous. When it comes to simple basics its really just a pussy talk.