Physique and Dominance

Case 1: Two male Doms meet and go a couple of rounds slugging it out, one wins.

Case 2: Middle age Dom/me with a bit of a spare tire, not in what you call excellent shape.

It is funny, but when I think of Dominance my mind tends to think of images of strength, power. Lions and Tiger and Bears. The whole survival of the fittest mentality etc...

Yet in the above to cases, I see some interesting things. In case one we obviously have two Doms going at it. When the fight is over one is the winner. Does that make the loser not a dominate? I don't think so. It makes him a dominant with his ass beat. Or in Case two, the not so muscular and phyiscally fit Dom/me. Just because they are 20 pounds over weight and out of shape doesn't mean they are not dominate.

I don't know if you get what I am driving at here, but I think it is interesting how at some level I associate Dominance with being the strongest. And yet I know the reality of that truth is somewhat grey or not true.

Its seems to me there is an intelectual level of dominance at work(much of BDSM is a balance of mental and physical), and communication seems to be the key aspect of this intelectual dominance. Of course when reason and communication go out the window, we quickly revert back to pysical force in an atempt to show a demonstration of strength & power. Almost like a instinctive reaction.

Perhaps you have have some insightful comments about this subject. I'd like to hear them. Does physique play a role for Dom/mes, and if so to what extent? How do plys view this? Is it easier to submit to a guy taller and who has rippling muscles than lets say a 98 pound soakin wet guy?

{{{{{search function update test of this thread}}}

RJMasters said:

Is it easier to submit to a guy taller and who has rippling muscles than lets say a 98 pound soakin wet guy?

Click to expand...

Yes, very much so.

On a serious note, stature and physique does play a huge part, but a lot of it is in the mind and attitude of the Dom.

I had wanted a particular man to dominate me in the past, but he just wasn't able to. He tried, but couldn't pull it off (as it were). He is smaller than me (I'm not huge, but taller than average for a woman and curvy), he was both shorter than me and skinny. But, it wasn't really his physical appearance that didn't do it for me, it was his attitude.

My Dom now and the man I was finally able to fully submit to is bigger than me and incredibly confident and sure of himself. It's that confidence and completely relaxed attitude toward his own sexuallity that really does it for me. He is powerful, but he's also controlled.

So, yeah, in conclusion I'd say it's a bit of both, but without that mental attitude, physical attributes don't mean much.

I cant see any of the Dominant men in my life doing anything as crass as fighting, unless of course it was an emergency situation to protect their loved ones.

Ive always found intellect to be the most exciting strength in a man.

soapstar said:

Ive always found intellect to be the most exciting strength in a man.

Click to expand...

Flexes brain muscle.....

*passes out

RJMasters said:

Flexes brain muscle.....

*passes out

Click to expand...

Is that the cue for the woman to walk all over you?

soapstar said:

Is that the cue for the woman to walk all over you?

Click to expand...

Stocking with high heels, no panties and a short skirt.

I could live with that

But when did anyone get to make the rules while they were being walked over?

(but I may have missed something here. Im blonde)

RJMasters said:

Flexes brain muscle.....

*passes out

Click to expand...

that actually made me laugh out loud

back on track

soapstar said:

Ive always found intellect to be the most exciting strength in a man.

Click to expand...

Yes I know what you mean.

I don't know where I am really going with this thread. In another thread where I asked what was the most important aspect of BDSM the mental or physical aspects. In that thread Writerdom wrote a great answer in that they are both equally important. This led me to think about the physical side mroe, and eventually I found a glitch in my thinking.

On one hand I associate the concept of Dominacy with power and strength, yet for me the mental side of BDSM is more important. I too find that the mential aspects of a person's character is what I know to be true when it comes to power exchange, yet we cannot eliminate the physical as it is equally important. Hence my question, what extent does physique actually play.

I would not argue your statement that "intellect to be the most exciting strength". I think that's where I hang my hat too. But I would like to discuss and explore the possibility of how physique actually plays into the whole scheme of things. I do know that after I get done lifting weights and working out, I feel extrememly energized and feel good about myself.

Again I am probably just confusing the hell out of everyone as I don't seem to be able to clearly articulate what I am looking for. Was hoping that some one would make sense out of it and bring some clarity. I do thank you for your post though.

Grinz

Kajira Callista said:

that actually made me laugh out loud

Click to expand...

Congratz to you by the way.

Re: Grinz

RJMasters said:

Congratz to you by the way.

Click to expand...

thanks

Not sure about the scenario's (except I would likely steer clear of any Dom I found in a fistycuffs), but do know that it has always been the mind and mindset which has done it for me, never the physique. One of the most powerful and commanding Doms I ever met was wheelchair bound...it all came down to his presence and his confidence in being able to dominate with nothing more than a glance. That level of intellect and self assurance is sexy to the max, not to mention captivating.

Catalina

And in all of my worldly experience of Partners ... er, the whole two?

Well. Draw your own conclusions.

two

I feel the need to explain this is in a D/s context.

Just so you know.

I'm a shorter guy. 5'6 give or take. While my 5'0 even mother ensured I'd always be short I don't associate how tall i am (or am not) with dominance.

Nor do I associate who can beat who up with dominance.

In my younger days, growing up, it was in a rough burb stuck between Jersey City and Newark NJ. There was a constant influx of gangs and wannabe gangs to my high school.

I've been jumped with baseball bats, brass knuckles, and kicked with soccer cleets in the face. (and have scars to prove it)

I've never lost a fight face to face, no matter what size they were (or what weapon they had). Does that make me more dominant? Absolutely not.

I think that what makes a person dominant in part, is control. Control over youself, not others. At that time I wasn't dominant, didn't even know what it was in the BDSM sense of the word. Even though I was routinely ensuring my "status" in the community i lived in through violence.

I haven't thrown a punch in about 6 years. I hope to never have to fight again. If you don't think I'm dominant because i'm not a typical alpha male, then so be it. I can live with that and never think about it twice.

What I do think is wrong with people's perception is that someone who can fight is thought to be dominant, and/or given more respect due to that fact. I never saw such a turn around in how people at large treated me than after taking a few punches to the head and face with brass knuckles and still winning the fight.

If it was purely a physical matter then every guy over 6 foot and everyone that took a karate lesson would be a Dom. Sure, I have had more than my share of brawls, won a few, lost a few. But in truth, as soon as I clenched my fist and the thought of hitting someone popped up, I had already lost. Violence is only a last ditch reason and it is only used when your mental can't cope. I have not let this happen in many many years. Actually, I don't think I have hit anyone other than in self defense in my life. But then I fought professionally for years and never had the need to prove myself in anger.

I am a very physical person, I have trained since the age of 3 in the martial pursuits, I am a jock and to me, it is a neccessary part of me. I work out to build my strength, my stamina, and to perfect my techniques. I have been known to work out 6 hours a day, 7 days a week in the pursuit of physical perfection. But with muscles and power comes responsibility. Without a brain to control it I am just a tool, not a user of a tool.

I cannot think that my physical size is why I am a dominant, I am not a "big" man, 5.10- 200lbs. I know that it is my mental strength, my will alone that allows me to dominate another. The look in my eyes, the timber of my voice, the subtle manipulation in my words. It is the strength a sub sees behind the muscle that makes it true domination. Without that kind of control you are not a Dom, just a tool. Like it was stated before, it is all about control, mental and physical, for Dom and sub. How can you control another if you cannot control yourself? How can you be controled without releasing it? That is mental, purely mental.

Re: back on track

Originally posted by RJMasters
In another thread where I asked what was the most important aspect of BDSM the mental or physical aspects.... I too find that the mential aspects of a person's character is what I know to be true when it comes to power exchange, yet we cannot eliminate the physical as it is equally important. Hence my question, what extent does physique actually play. ...But I would like to discuss and explore the possibility of how physique actually plays into the whole scheme of things. I do know that after I get done lifting weights and working out, I feel extrememly energized and feel good about myself....(parts of message about being real confused deleted)

Click to expand...

This is kind of a recap of what's already been said, but I think the place you get very confused is when you to insist to yourself that physical health or strength has something to do with dominance. I think physical strength can help a dominant do what they want to do, but what makes a person dominant is a psychological and sexual (or psychosexual) orientation toward life. Dominants enjoy control and the body that the controller is randomly assigned by nature has no effect on that.

Now I agree that strength is sterotypically associated with dominance in virtually every facet of mainstream media, beginning with the body-building ads young boys find in the backs of comic books, but since when has the mainstream media (with a few very small and isolated exceptions) known anything _real_ about S&M sexuality? I've known a dominant in a nine-year old's body, in a 100% disabled body, in an older woman's normal-sized body, as well as the more standard variations. I've never known a dominant in a bodybuilder's frame, but that doesn't mean they don't exist: people's enthusiasms, including their choices of sports, are for the most part not directly connected with their sexuality--although with certain individuals you could make a very good case for submimation.

As a counterexample: look at the Chippendale dancers. These guys have physiques that are so built that they look muscle-bound, but as a group do they appear that dominant to you? They don't to me, lol.

Or look at gay S&M art, Tom of Finland et. al: this art shows huge muscled brutes of men in the most subservient and humiliating situations, dominated by men who are strong, but not nearly as big and tall as the "calf being led to slaughter." I used that analogy on purpose because in a lot of sexual venues, not just gay or bdsm, the tall, heavily muscled guy is depicted as a prize steer at a county fair: massive meat to be manipulated and enjoyed by his stronger-minded betters.

Anyway, my belief is that a person's physical strength or lack of it has very little to do with what sort of sexual fantasies they entertain. Those sexual fantasies are, many shrinks believe, "fixed" at a very early age in all of us, an age in which we are all small and helpless. And your sexuality stays with you all your life, no matter what happens to your body. If you become a paraplegic or if you reach the age of 90 and are physically much weaker, if you are a dominant you're still going to be a dominant, even if you're not actively practicing your sexuality at that point. If you're submissive, you're still going to be submissive, and if you're neither or both... etc.

I understand what you're saying about getting a rush from working out, and it's quite possible you feel more sexual then too. (I think that varies a lot too--some people will feel less sexual after a hard workout.) But if you were born or imprinted early on with a submissive sexuality, then after such a workout you'd probably be very energetically looking for somebody to beat the living shit out you.

Oh, one more thing: the few people I have known who I can honestly label dominant have never fought each other. When they happen to meet, their instant recognition and appreciation of the other has been far too strong for anything that petty. Talk about a mutual congratulation society! And, they do something much worse than duking it out: they tend to gang together, pool their mutual talents and strengths. Instead of feeling competitive, the presence of another dominant only seems to increase or reinforce the already unusually high self-esteem each of them entertains.

--Taint

edit: This isn't your issue, but a whole lot of people confuse _apparent_ mental strength (i.e. hard-driving, pushy Type A personalities) with dominance. Assuming this specific typology has any validity at all (and I think it does, to an extent), all dominants that I have had the personal pleasure to have known, without a single exception, have been 100% Type B's. Type A's, for all their apparent macho drive and willpower, always seem to me to be sadly out of control of their own compulsions. In other words, while they are speeding down the road of life at a breakneck speed, passing some, running others off the road, they aren't exactly in the driver's seat.

What is it ZZtop says...

Women go crazy for a sharp dressed man...

I like a man who cares how he looks, cares that he is in pretty good shape and carries himself with confidence. But I especially like a man who can talk to me on many levels and control me on all. ;-)

Oh hell... I like most men, period.

I'm too tired to go any further with this right now. But all the posts make great sense to me... even in this muddled brain of mine. I'll come back and read when I wake up again.

Re: Re: back on track

TaintedB said:

edit: This isn't your issue, but a whole lot of people confuse _apparent_ mental strength (i.e. hard-driving, pushy Type A personalities) with dominance. Assuming this specific typology has any validity at all (and I think it does, to an extent), all dominants that I have had the personal pleasure to have known, without a single exception, have been 100% Type B's. Type A's, for all their apparent macho drive and willpower, always seem to me to be sadly out of control of their own compulsions. In other words, while they are speeding down the road of life at a breakneck speed, passing some, running others off the road, they aren't exactly in the driver's seat.

Click to expand...

You managed to start a very interesting topic. This last bit though is especially good. I would like to throw into the discussion something on physically dominating males/females who are not Dom/mes. We've all seen them. People who use their size or who are just pushy assholes and that also mistakenly think they are Dominant but sadly mistaken.

Myself as an example with my chosen career field. I do ground based spacecraft mission control. The job is extremely boring almost all of the time and we usually study/get into asinine conversations, etc to stay awake at night. There is the other part of the time when something goes horribly wrong and the need for flawless, high level performance becomes acute. It is at that point that you can seperate people into two groups. One group maintains complete control of themselves and exudes a calm kind of confidence that helps to keep everyone from panicking. These are the people who can perform under stress. Then there are the ones who fall apart, panic, hyperventilate and lose control. They also tend to spread panic around. We usually promote them to management to get them out of the way. Sad but true.

Which is more dominant, not in a BDSM context but from a psychological perspective.

Also, per your observation. Every one of us that I've seen without exception that can perform like that are type B personalities. Wear blue jeans and t shirts to work. Relax and joke and have fun. Also tend to have very dirty minds.

This novel needs to end, but please post up feedback. So I'll pose a question also.

Which politician is Dominant? George W. Bush or Jesse Ventura? Not due to physical size or background either. But sheer force of personality and accomplishments on the job.

I'm 5'9 and around 130lbs on a good day. ( bad days I weigh less) I've ultimately got a soft heart and want to help those around me. Many people look at me and I get many responses from guys in the manner of "trophy girlfriend" Most women don't know what to think of me but more times then not underestimate me physically as well as psychologically. I tend to date guys taller then me as well as more "built" and two of my longest term relationships both guys where trained in martial arts. Blackbelts each. But, I was the dominant one in the relationships and thats ultimately what ended the relationships. So no... just cause you know some form of hand-to-hand combat doesn't make you dominent. I could kick their asses without much more then a blink and a few words.

a dom/mme in my own mind is someone who is confident in what they do and is a leader, not a follower in life itself. Just because they don't dominate every minor aspect in life doesn't make them less of an "alpha".. But if they have "Control" of whats going on that makes them a Dominent.

I for one like a well dressed person period.

chippendale's... hehe.. playtoys!

I have a submissive who is a strong personality, often independent, a leader in lots of areas in his life, at most times a top in his own right, (the reluctant Dom) and could easily throw me across a room.

The fact that I usually mop that same room with him like a dustrag, is, to me, pretty hot, and pretty much a textbook demonstration of psychosexual dominance in action.

Georage W..

Maybe behind Laura's glued-on smile there's a pants wearing woman. I got that sense with Bush senior, anyway.

Originally posted by DarkLadyOfDeath
Georage W..

Click to expand...

Oh no, it's bdsm politics!

Well, many people have been calling ol' Georgie the "sock puppet" since about nine months before before he first obtained office, and in my opinion that doesn't speak too well for his dominance.

Bush does try to do the scolding punitive daddy stchik a lot in his speeches. IMO, he doesn't carry it off that well, although this form of political guilt-tripping clearly works on some people.