Lit 'subs' Are Borderlines

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

On line are plenty of articles about submissive borderline personalities. The BPD is a most difficult woman to cope with, libraries are filled with books about them, but I advised my screeners to think of BPD females as people you wanna stab thru their hearts with your pencil 15 minutes after you meet them.

I contend there are no 'real submissive' borderline personalities, there are haridan/harridan 'submissives' who aren't submissive at all.

Melanie Wilkes was a real submissive, and Melanie wasn't Scalett O'Hara.

We'll explore Melanie and Scarlett further, later, so youre aware of the con these LIT shrews pull.

 

[FetishandPainCP]

yeah right...

 

[lovecraft68]

James....you're out of your element in this forum. You're trying to quantify things that can't be. Nothing is black and white and predictable in this lifestyle.

I also have the feeling your one of those types that think a woman-or man-who is a submissive should be that way 24/7 and you are not understanding submissive is an aspect of that person, not the entire person.

Subs are that way with their dom/top/partner they are not submissive to everyone and certainly not to the legion of male assholes who show up on these boards thinking every man is going to say "yes sir" to them

So when they don't say "yes sir, beat me sir. treat me like crap you big stud" the reaction of the poser is to be "Hey, you're not submissive" That's why you start these threads.

 

[rosco rathbone]

Many subs, lit and not, are borderlines, it's true. But this is wrong:

" BPD females as people you wanna stab thru their hearts with your pencil 15 minutes after you meet them."----> It's more like 6 months.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

James....you're out of your element in this forum. You're trying to quantify things that can't be. Nothing is black and white and predictable in this lifestyle.

I also have the feeling your one of those types that think a woman-or man-who is a submissive should be that way 24/7 and you are not understanding submissive is an aspect of that person, not the entire person.

Subs are that way with their dom/top/partner they are not submissive to everyone and certainly not to the legion of male assholes who show up on these boards thinking every man is going to say "yes sir" to them

So when they don't say "yes sir, beat me sir. treat me like crap you big stud" the reaction of the poser is to be "Hey, you're not submissive" That's why you start these threads.

No, dear. I use an old, old measuring stick, not the recent narcissistic one size fits all bullshit that's so popular. Bear with me.

Forever and a day men were submissive in armies and serving their feudal lords, and their egos weren't affected. Most were submissive to their fathers and trade masters. That's the essence of submission.

When Prince Escalus rides through the Capulet-Montagu brawl he isn't submissive, he's in charge and all cease and desist their bull shit. He's the dom.

Sub/dom isn't about beatings or power swapping or the other role playing our posers do. Its about your breeding and natural constitution. At LIT its 99.44% shrews and numnutz playing pretend. Its acting entirely. Otherwise none of these bitches would act like Robert Conrad with chips on their shoulders.

I know shit about comic books, when did you become expert at psychology? You didn't, youre talking out your ass. What you know is the rules of the pretend game.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Many subs, lit and not, are borderlines, it's true. But this is wrong:

" BPD females as people you wanna stab thru their hearts with your pencil 15 minutes after you meet them."----> It's more like 6 months.

My radar is really sensitive. People aint jigsaw puzzles.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6Gv3A8Nypc

Prince Escalus speaks as doms speak

 

[RawHumor]

Its acting entirely.

I just summed up your entire "argument" with one snippet.

Nobody else needs to get their feathers ruffled over someone who's just looking to poke with his pointy stick.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I just summed up your entire "argument" with one snippet.

Nobody else needs to get their feathers ruffled over someone who's just looking to poke with his pointy stick.

You cant have it both ways. You cant pretend youre a girl, or pretend youre black, or pretend youre sub, and deny my claims.

 

[Netzach]

Sub/dom isn't about beatings or power swapping or the other role playing our posers do. Its about your breeding and natural constitution.

Fucking is not limited to fucking sociology. Thank fuck.

 

[Tech_Director]

Stirring the pot again?

Somehow I suspect you are sitting over there just pissing yourself laughing when you post stuff like this.

You do realize that you MIGHT just happen to stumble across somebody that actually buys into what you put up here, right?

In fact, I know one girl that was mentally-challenged and she managed to find her way into BDSM chatrooms on a site that I frequent. I made it a point of trying to look out for her the best I could and many of the people that I knew were also helping to keep her safe from the predators that lurk online.

So I'm going to believe that you're just stirring the pot trying to get a discussion going and if someone like this girl wanders across your thread you will do the RIGHT thing and not advantage of her.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Fucking is not limited to fucking sociology. Thank fuck.

If McDonalds closed it doors we'd eat each other. My Egyptology perfesser said that 45 years ago. Fucking is simply about fucking, we fuck who's available.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Somehow I suspect you are sitting over there just pissing yourself laughing when you post stuff like this.

You do realize that you MIGHT just happen to stumble across somebody that actually buys into what you put up here, right?

In fact, I know one girl that was mentally-challenged and she managed to find her way into BDSM chatrooms on a site that I frequent. I made it a point of trying to look out for her the best I could and many of the people that I knew were also helping to keep her safe from the predators that lurk online.

So I'm going to believe that you're just stirring the pot trying to get a discussion going and if someone like this girl wanders across your thread you will do the RIGHT thing and not advantage of her.

I wrote a story about an assassin who murdered a mental health manager who fucked the low IQ girls in his adult daycare program and made babies with them.

Tis true, I love tossing dead cats through the church sanctuary window.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Somehow I suspect you are sitting over there just pissing yourself laughing when you post stuff like this.

You do realize that you MIGHT just happen to stumble across somebody that actually buys into what you put up here, right?

In fact, I know one girl that was mentally-challenged and she managed to find her way into BDSM chatrooms on a site that I frequent. I made it a point of trying to look out for her the best I could and many of the people that I knew were also helping to keep her safe from the predators that lurk online.

So I'm going to believe that you're just stirring the pot trying to get a discussion going and if someone like this girl wanders across your thread you will do the RIGHT thing and not advantage of her.

Many years ago I wanted to fuck a young woman (25) who dissed my age. I was 40 then. Then one day all of us participated in a marathon I won. The youngster fell outta the race. Afterwards she invited me home and fucked me silly. You never know how you influence others.

 

[LWulf]

...

Forever and a day men were submissive in armies and serving their feudal lords, and their egos weren't affected. Most were submissive to their fathers and trade masters. That's the essence of submission.

...

Sub/dom isn't about beatings or power swapping or the other role playing our posers do. Its about your breeding and natural constitution. At LIT its 99.44% shrews and numnutz playing pretend. Its acting entirely. Otherwise none of these bitches would act like Robert Conrad with chips on their shoulders.

...

I would contest that men of the era you refer to weren't submissive. They were lily-livered chickens who would break rank as soon as drop hat (and leave their leader to fend for himself (this is also one of the reasons why a leader was typically on a horse; so he could outrun his own men)). However, they would hold ranks out of belief and conviction of their leader so in that regard I think you are correct.

However again, there comes a time when the ranks would hold only when they know their leader could "put up or shut up." So in that regard, I think you are wrong; it's more than just about the strut.

 

[Tech_Director]

Thank you

I wrote a story about an assassin who murdered a mental health manager who fucked the low IQ girls in his adult daycare program and made babies with them.

Tis true, I love tossing dead cats through the church sanctuary window.[/QUOTE

My original assessment of you was incorrect and I am glad to see that this time I was right.

 

[Netzach]

I would contest that men of the era you refer to weren't submissive. They were lily-livered chickens who would break rank as soon as drop hat (and leave their leader to fend for himself (this is also one of the reasons why a leader was typically on a horse; so he could outrun his own men)). However, they would hold ranks out of belief and conviction of their leader so in that regard I think you are correct.

However again, there comes a time when the ranks would hold only when they know their leader could "put up or shut up." So in that regard, I think you are wrong; it's more than just about the strut.

Most *people* are submissive. Period.

When you're doing a sociology lesson, it's not that complicated. Look around and it's everywhere.

When you're talking about whether most people would like to lie around and have other people be the sexual activities director and not be the person who has to figure out what the fuck we're doing and how much and how often, and why, most people will say yes, if they truly feel that nobody's judging them based on their answer. Again, people, not women only, but people. Getting people into a zone of safety isn't exactly easy, so very few people will admit this because they don't want to lose any ground. What's ridiculous is that it's not like you're gaining a ton of ground to be the other way. Being sexually dominant isn't exactly making you into sexiest man or woman alive category, it's more admitting that you're a weirdo who needs some very complicated fit in your relationships.

Basically D/s is like the least interesting variable in the sexual encounter (someone has to do shit, someone has to have shit done unto, big whoop) , but we've loaded all kinds of value onto being in charge, so people, especially men, feel like they have to say they are.

The control freaks who would prefer to know that their partner will hold a penny to a wall with their nose if told to rather than have an orgasm are few and far between. Very few and very far between. The problem with using this kind of metric for "is a Dom" is that I think a lot of people need both mutualistic fairly mundane orgasms AND the knowledge that someone, somewhere, will bark like a dog on command for them. I'm the latter, though I skew toward penny-wall over getting off.

Because fucking isn't fucking sociology class, thank fuck, as I said before, it's not as simple or as obvious, and you don't get this either/or without examining trend over time versus once ever.

Also whether you're a social winner or loser has pretty much no bearing on what you need in bed, it's often inverse, it's sometimes not, you can go to a shrink and talk about your mommy all day and it's still not changing, you didn't pick it, and you can't do anything about it, so get at peace with it. JBJ will never accept those facts, whether it's because he's a professional douche or a shrink and therefore has made a living off of selling the amulets of repairing things that ain't broke as often as fixing things that are, I don't know. But I DO know that thirst for power in bed and thirst for powerlessness in bed show up where you'd last guess them.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I would contest that men of the era you refer to weren't submissive. They were lily-livered chickens who would break rank as soon as drop hat (and leave their leader to fend for himself (this is also one of the reasons why a leader was typically on a horse; so he could outrun his own men)). However, they would hold ranks out of belief and conviction of their leader so in that regard I think you are correct.

However again, there comes a time when the ranks would hold only when they know their leader could "put up or shut up." So in that regard, I think you are wrong; it's more than just about the strut.

During our Civil War one of my ancestors was commanding officer of Florida's troops in Virginia. Near Yorktown in early 1862 he sent a battalion of his men to attack a platoon or so of Union snipers harassing the Southern camp. In the event the battalion acted cowardly and incompetently until my ancestor mounted his horse and flew past his men to attack the snipers alone. His men then ran to catch up with George, and it ended well. A reporter watched and sent a report to his Charleston newspaper.

A few weeks later the whole regiment, 1044 men attacked Battery A, 1st New York Artillery Regiment. A New York officer recorded what happened when the Floridians came. They took 500 casualties from the cannon fire...solid shot, grape, and canister. Killed all the horses and captured 6 guns and caissons.

At Gettysburg Lee ordered the Floridians to attack Cemetery Ridge after Pickett was repulsed, they did and were wrecked. They are on the High Tide monument, there. One officer and 59 men made it to Appomattox Court House, my ancestor was killed in action.

My daddy served out in the Pacific during World War 2, he was 15 years old when the war ended. He got in because he was 6'-4" at 13. He never touched my 5-2 mom or even sassed her much. She invented dom and packed a gun. She was Indian and Swiss.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Most *people* are submissive. Period.

When you're doing a sociology lesson, it's not that complicated. Look around and it's everywhere.

When you're talking about whether most people would like to lie around and have other people be the sexual activities director and not be the person who has to figure out what the fuck we're doing and how much and how often, and why, most people will say yes, if they truly feel that nobody's judging them based on their answer. Again, people, not women only, but people. Getting people into a zone of safety isn't exactly easy, so very few people will admit this because they don't want to lose any ground. What's ridiculous is that it's not like you're gaining a ton of ground to be the other way. Being sexually dominant isn't exactly making you into sexiest man or woman alive category, it's more admitting that you're a weirdo who needs some very complicated fit in your relationships.

Basically D/s is like the least interesting variable in the sexual encounter (someone has to do shit, someone has to have shit done unto, big whoop) , but we've loaded all kinds of value onto being in charge, so people, especially men, feel like they have to say they are.

The control freaks who would prefer to know that their partner will hold a penny to a wall with their nose if told to rather than have an orgasm are few and far between. Very few and very far between. The problem with using this kind of metric for "is a Dom" is that I think a lot of people need both mutualistic fairly mundane orgasms AND the knowledge that someone, somewhere, will bark like a dog on command for them. I'm the latter, though I skew toward penny-wall over getting off.

Because fucking isn't fucking sociology class, thank fuck, as I said before, it's not as simple or as obvious, and you don't get this either/or without examining trend over time versus once ever.

Also whether you're a social winner or loser has pretty much no bearing on what you need in bed, it's often inverse, it's sometimes not, you can go to a shrink and talk about your mommy all day and it's still not changing, you didn't pick it, and you can't do anything about it, so get at peace with it. JBJ will never accept those facts, whether it's because he's a professional douche or a shrink and therefore has made a living off of selling the amulets of repairing things that ain't broke as often as fixing things that are, I don't know. But I DO know that thirst for power in bed and thirst for powerlessness in bed show up where you'd last guess them.

Wrong. You miss the part about real subs loving it when a dom pays the piper and calls all the tunes where sex is the ball. It is delicious, sometimes, when responsibility is taken from you, and you gotta submit to the world as it is. There's no power trade..***** does as it pleases without consulting you. I've had men get drunk and sing after I called them and said, COME TO WORK IN THE MORNING! The joy or relief knocks them on their ass. The whole business with Christs passion is his submission.

Youre pretty nearly the smartest person here but your education is incomplete. You do not yet get how things naturally interact.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Maybe I'll write a BDSM story of what I mean. Steinbeck wrote one.

 

[boomer177]

I here depart from my general practice of ignoring your hate-filled invective, OP, to strongly suggest you attend to your own psychological issues, of which there are surely many.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I here depart from my general practice of ignoring your hate-filled invective, OP, to strongly suggest you attend to your own psychological issues, of which there are surely many.

Actually no. Back in grad school I took all the popular tests like WAIS, MMPI, Millon. Myers-Briggs, GATB, etc and I'm rather average. So that means your assessment of me is nutty-butty.

 

[Netzach]

Wrong. You miss the part about real subs loving it when a dom pays the piper and calls all the tunes where sex is the ball. It is delicious, sometimes, when responsibility is taken from you, and you gotta submit to the world as it is. There's no power trade..***** does as it pleases without consulting you. I've had men get drunk and sing after I called them and said, COME TO WORK IN THE MORNING! The joy or relief knocks them on their ass. The whole business with Christs passion is his submission.

Youre pretty nearly the smartest person here but your education is incomplete. You do not yet get how things naturally interact.

Conflating everything that leaps into your brain is not the natural interaction of "things" whatever those are. The same guys who are panting after your phone call might be king shit of fuck mountain with their boyfriends or girlfriends or whatever they're sticking it in. Or not. You don't know, but you think you do. I strongly doubt you're going to consider that possibility, though.

You're looking for whatever congruity makes you comfortable and you're snide and dismissive of anything that you think should fit differently. I'm just privy to whatever shit a cross section of men have wanted to tell me for 2.99 a minute, and believe me, the winners want to be losers, the losers want to be winners. More often than not. They're definitely less guarded than they are with their shrinks. I would be too. I make fewer assumptions about everyone based on all this. And I don't believe most of what anyone says, but I definitely can suss out emotional candor if not factual.

This is one human arena where what you do matters a LOT less than what you *think* you're doing. Your specific understanding of the brain does not fully address points south, it's another ball of wax.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Conflating everything that leaps into your brain is not the natural interaction of "things" whatever those are. The same guys who are panting after your phone call might be king shit of fuck mountain with their boyfriends or girlfriends or whatever they're sticking it in. Or not. You don't know, but you think you do. I strongly doubt you're going to consider that possibility, though.

You're looking for whatever congruity makes you comfortable and you're snide and dismissive of anything that you think should fit differently. I'm just privy to whatever shit a cross section of men have wanted to tell me for 2.99 a minute, and believe me, the winners want to be losers, the losers want to be winners. More often than not. They're definitely less guarded than they are with their shrinks. I would be too. I make fewer assumptions about everyone based on all this. And I don't believe most of what anyone says, but I definitely can suss out emotional candor if not factual.

This is one human arena where what you do matters a LOT less than what you *think* you're doing. Your specific understanding of the brain does not fully address points south, it's another ball of wax.

I'm snide and dismissive with what I know doesn't work, though I'm aware of paradoxical anomalies. I sometimes harvest two crops of grapes when one crop is the rule. I don't bet on two crops, because its low probability. And low probability events and causes I dismiss without 2nd thoughts. Theyre too unlikely. My way is where most competent leaders and experts fail. But its calculated risk not hubris, and the odds favor me.

Its like when I post a story here, I assume plenty of readers will hate the story and one-bomb it, but most readers enjoy it (more than half). I then evaluate what readers seem to like and extract that gold from the crud.

I don't doubt youre amazing at sensing the emotional steam (I call it steam) or its absence. My things (forte) are patterns and gold flakes.

 

[submissannie]

It is not right to put us all in the same basket and call us shrews. I think you are the one who does not understand what submissive means on so many levels. It is not something you can learn and truly understand just by reading articles...

I was offended by your thread and just thought I would speak my mind. But I guess it is to each their own...