True doms?

[daikarasu]

I would like to chime in with my 2 cents worth on the "natural domination" thing. I think what might have been meant is that there are people out there who's charisma and personality invite people to follow and obey. now, i dunno if this really counts as dom, or not.

[CutieMouse]

Originally Posted by APWriter

You can't separate private from public in this because it's a question of personality, i.e. who you really are.... unless you're just talking about play time. But if you're just talking about play time, then you aren't really getting dom, you're just getting an actor who can play a dom.

This attitude is similar to the people who say I can't be a "true submissive", because even though I work in a very service oriented luxury sales environment, *I* run my dressing room, not my clients. They come to me for my expertise; they need *me* to run the show.

I once had a guy tell me I was obviously a Domme, or at the very least a switch, since I didn't let clients do whatever they wanted. 'Cause ya know, one can't possibly exhibit strength in service or anything...

[Netzach]

Originally Posted by CutieMouse

This attitude is similar to the people who say I can't be a "true submissive", because even though I work in a very service oriented luxury sales environment, *I* run my dressing room, not my clients. They come to me for my expertise; they need *me* to run the show.

I once had a guy tell me I was obviously a Domme, or at the very least a switch, since I didn't let clients do whatever they wanted. 'Cause ya know, one can't possibly exhibit strength in service or anything...

We're far more comfortable culturally with this whole thing when the private personal expression is submissive because we have this deranged power cult of a culture where everyone has to be the chief in their own imagination or something, I think. You can take off the mantle of power when you get home, but you can't possibly put it on.

[Netzach]

Originally Posted by daikarasu

I would like to chime in with my 2 cents worth on the "natural domination" thing. I think what might have been meant is that there are people out there who's charisma and personality invite people to follow and obey. now, i dunno if this really counts as dom, or not.

No argument there.

It doesn't count as dom, IMO. It's unrelated. It's like "this person is a poker player, so they like the color red." Maybe they do, maybe they don't.

[Stella_Omega]

Originally Posted by Netzach

Did he ever have a kind of low-status just-do-as-told job, like waiting tables or making sandwiches or something like most people at some juncture who wind up in authority? If he was still pretty much the same person in that context, then this actually proves my point. We do what we have to and most people have to move in several contexts. Why this is impossible for some people to admit, I don't understand. Why it is that nine times in ten it is some XY person who can't seem to swallow it, I think I do understand.

Oh, snap...

Originally Posted by Netzach

We're far more comfortable culturally with this whole thing when the private personal expression is submissive because we have this deranged power cult of a culture where everyone has to be the chief in their own imagination or something, I think. You can take off the mantle of power when you get home, but you can't possibly put it on.

A friend of mine writes BDSM novels and she is damn good at it, and she plays herself-- in Phoenix which is huge-- and she generally knows what she's talking about. But one time she had a sub not want to play with a top-- even though the guy was well known-- because the sub had found out that this guy held a menial job. The way she had written it made it seem as if she, the author felt that was a legitimate reason to disrespect an otherwise well-regarded Dom. I totally had to ask her about it-- she rewrote to show that it was a flaw in the sub's thinking. And its a common flaw.

[intothewoods]

Originally Posted by Netzach

Did he ever have a kind of low-status just-do-as-told job, like waiting tables or making sandwiches or something like most people at some juncture who wind up in authority? If he was still pretty much the same person in that context, then this actually proves my point. We do what we have to and most people have to move in several contexts. Why this is impossible for some people to admit, I don't understand. Why it is that nine times in ten it is some XY person who can't seem to swallow it, I think I do understand.

Oh yeah, and also dealt with a lot of craziness from parental figures and family as a kid. I think all of that shapes you and how you view power/control/authority in various contexts.

[intothewoods]

Originally Posted by CutieMouse

This attitude is similar to the people who say I can't be a "true submissive", because even though I work in a very service oriented luxury sales environment, *I* run my dressing room, not my clients. They come to me for my expertise; they need *me* to run the show.

I once had a guy tell me I was obviously a Domme, or at the very least a switch, since I didn't let clients do whatever they wanted. 'Cause ya know, one can't possibly exhibit strength in service or anything...

I don't think we are how we "really are" at work, or maybe some people are but at the least we wear different hats.

Some people do want to have fun in the bedroom and not work that hard. That could be a dominant or submissive/top or bottom thing.

[TheOneWhoGotHer]

The idea of being a "true Dom" is exhausting. Would that mean that every move that person makes is with the intention of control? I'd think that being a Dom (true Dom or bedroom Dom) is just being yourself and being comfortable in that position. I think that goes for a sub too.
My wife and I have a great amount of respect for each other but she still asks permission before buying something (... and she earns more than I do). I never "made" her do that. She is my sub in the bedroom, but respects our relationship outside of the bedroom.
Being a Dom in the bedroom is easy and fun. It's the rest of life that would be the challenge. I don't go all over town barking commands at everyone I meet. I'd never have any friends that way. But if the situation comes up where someone needs to make a choice I think that the dominate voice is heard.

[Sir_Winston54]

<Sigh> This thread, or a variation on the same theme, comes up every three to six months. It gets pretty much the same arguments, statements, descriptions and theories every time.

I wonder if there's a way to program the Ignore button to eliminate from my view any thread with an initiating post that includes the word "true" followed by Dom, sub, Master, slave, yadda yadda yadda?

[midwestyankee]

Originally Posted by Sir_Winston54

<Sigh> This thread, or a variation on the same theme, comes up every three to six months. It gets pretty much the same arguments, statements, descriptions and theories every time.

I wonder if there's a way to program the Ignore button to eliminate from my view any thread with an initiating post that includes the word "true" followed by Dom, sub, Master, slave, yadda yadda yadda?

Stella occasionally promotes a browser plug-in that's good for such tasks, though I don't think it can be programmed as elegantly as you describe here. Perhaps she'll drop in with the usual commercial.

[Netzach]

Originally Posted by intothewoods

Oh yeah, and also dealt with a lot of craziness from parental figures and family as a kid. I think all of that shapes you and how you view power/control/authority in various contexts.

Exactly. And if anyone is ever entirely sure what part of it is essentially them and what part of it is culturally derived or family-derived, then they are lying. Because nobody knows. No. Body. Knows.

You just know part of it is - you. When everyone's saying "don't be that!" you have to come up with some pretty insane coping mechanisms.

You can get pretty philosophical about "you" too, if you get into recreational or medicinal chemistry. I'm very wary of the fixed, and people who are convinced of it.

[Netzach]

What's funny is that in the communities dedicated to com-domme that I play in for as long as I can possibly stand it once in a while, the entire discourse is centered on "fake domme" and outing "fakes" and who is a "fake" or an "insta"

It's like hetero guys are obsessed with NOT being the asshole who buys the fake Tag Heuer, it's all framed in regard to "not" instead of "is."

[Stella_Omega]

Originally Posted by midwestyankee

Stella occasionally promotes a browser plug-in that's good for such tasks, though I don't think it can be programmed as elegantly as you describe here. Perhaps she'll drop in with the usual commercial.

it has stopped being updated-- doesn't work on these newer versions of firefox

I talked with one of those "my parent's fault type people last night. She was ascribing her fascination with suspension bondage to childhood abuse. I suppose it's possible. I'm not disrespecting her-- just. That's oddly specific.

[midwestyankee]

Originally Posted by Netzach

Exactly. And if anyone is ever entirely sure what part of it is essentially them and what part of it is culturally derived or family-derived, then they are lying. Because nobody knows. No. Body. Knows.

You just know part of it is - you. When everyone's saying "don't be that!" you have to come up with some pretty insane coping mechanisms.

You can get pretty philosophical about "you" too, if you get into recreational or medicinal chemistry. I'm very wary of the fixed, and people who are convinced of it.

Seems to me there's a multi-billion dollar industry centered around the notion that people can - and often will pay good money to learn how to - change.

Not that practicality and evidence ever make much of a difference in these discussions.

[RjThoughts]

Originally Posted by Stella_Omega

Nope.

Some people dominate out of strength, some out of weakness.
There are long lists of personality traits -- and motivations-- that can lead to a person being happier in a dominant role than otherwise. Some of those traits are not much of a social problem if they are cultivated, some of them could end up being simply godawful for everyone in the vicinity.

I concur. I do so out of strength, more precisely, out of strength of nurturing. I give a sense, so to speak, of comfort and safety to those that wish to submit to me.

[Stella_Omega]

I doubt that many folk will ever admit to dominating out of weakness.

Just saying.

[RjThoughts]

Originally Posted by Stella_Omega

I doubt that many folk will ever admit to dominating out of weakness.

Just saying.

We could say that the titular character in the "50 Shades" doms out of weakness.

[Netzach]

How about both? How about almost everyone does both, and nobody talks about their less flattering aspects unless they're a sub in which case insecurity is sexy.

I absolutely have both in play.

[RjThoughts]

Originally Posted by Netzach

How about both? How about almost everyone does both, and nobody talks about their less flattering aspects unless they're a sub in which case insecurity is sexy.

I absolutely have both in play.

I know my flaws: I'm opinionated, foul-mouthed, politically stubborn.

[BiBunny]

Originally Posted by Stella_Omega

I doubt that many folk will ever admit to dominating out of weakness.

Just saying.

People hardly ever admit to it, but, boy, you still see it a lot, don't you? There are times around here that I have to, quite literally, sit on my hands to keep from saying the things I want to say about people's doms.

[Stella_Omega]

Originally Posted by RjThoughts

We could say that the titular character in the "50 Shades" doms out of weakness.

We could more accurately say that the character was written in a second-rate porn novel.
And think about it... the woman who wrote the thing-- there's a reason she wrote him that way. The reason was-- because she wanted him to be like that.

Originally Posted by BiBunny

People hardly ever admit to it, but, boy, you still see it a lot, don't you? There are times around here that I have to, quite literally, sit on my hands to keep from saying the things I want to say about people's doms.

know for a fact that when I am feeling most Dommish-- I am; passive-aggressive, hungry for attention and approval, at a very low intellectual ebb. DOM is a childish state. At least, for me. And I don't see anything shameful or embarrassing about channeling those baser impulses into a sexual energy.

[BiBunny]

Originally Posted by Stella_Omega

know for a fact that when I am feeling most Dommish-- I am; passive-aggressive, hungry for attention and approval, at a very low intellectual ebb. DOM is a childish state. At least, for me. And I don't see anything shameful or embarrassing about channeling those baser impulses into a sexual energy.

Oh, yeah, there's a lot of pouting, foot-stomping, tantrum-ing, "I want it my way, DAMMIT!" that goes into being a Dom/me (note caps). That was how it was for me, too, when I did it because I wanted to, rather than because someone else wanted me to.

I just hate when people try to say that they're pushing their own selfish impulses "for the good of the sub." It's dishonest and disingenuous. Also, everyone else can see that they're full of shit. So just man up and admit it, y'know?

[KoPilot]

Originally Posted by daikarasu

I would like to chime in with my 2 cents worth on the "natural domination" thing. I think what might have been meant is that there are people out there who's charisma and personality invite people to follow and obey. now, i dunno if this really counts as dom, or not.

Apparently I'm naturally like this to a lot of people. I've had a friend--albeit a particularly whiny, spoiled, and insecure one--often complain that our group would always do what I wanted instead of him. Doing that gets exhausting though, and when I sense that others enjoy following me around and start deferring to me, I get majorly anxious and want to get out of the situation ASAP.

[KoPilot]

Originally Posted by Stella_Omega

know for a fact that when I am feeling most Dommish-- I am; passive-aggressive, hungry for attention and approval, at a very low intellectual ebb. DOM is a childish state. At least, for me. And I don't see anything shameful or embarrassing about channeling those baser impulses into a sexual energy.

This actually has to do with a lot of the work I'm doing with S. He's had bad situations in previous relationships that basically wound up making him unable to be selfish when it came to the other person (though he would very happily revert to that thinking if the situation didn't involve my direct input as a partner), so I'm trying to help him get over some of those mental blocks that's causing him to be so flexible that he sometimes resembles a wet noodle.

[KoPilot]

Originally Posted by Stella_Omega

I doubt that many folk will ever admit to dominating out of weakness.

Just saying.

It's kind of like the stigma artists face (admittedly, from amateurs) when it comes out that they use reference for their work instead of it being all from their "imagination" or something.

I actually prefer stories involving individuals who dom out of weakness, or struggle with it, and actually exhibit those things outside of the domliness. I dunno, they just seem like more of a real fucking person that way instead of this cardboard cutout that says "dom". And s-types complain about D's being objectifying, fft.