Submission and Strength?

[cascadiabound]

A question was posed today on another thread regarding a few things that might merit a fuller discussion:

1) the relationship between Submission and character

~~~(in particular: is there a contradiction between being submissive sexually or even in a 24/7 submissive relationship but also being a person who is strong-minded, strong-willed, smart, competent, socially powerful, etc etc)

2) whether kink compatibility or personality compatibility is most important in finding a partner.

there may be some other elements that should be thrown into the mix here...
but that's a start.

DISCUSS please.

 

[MastersDelight]

I'm a submissive sexually. I enjoy handing over that control and being used. Outside the bedroom however, I manage the household. I raise our children and am more dominant in personality than my Master (generally but not always). I'm not quiet, passive, gentle, or soft and have never been viewed as such. (not saying that subs are all those things just saying what I'm not.). In our lives, this dynamic works well for us.

As far as our relationship goes, we started vanilla, we had the basis of compatible personalities long before we explored the kink. We're lucky that a lot of our fetishes over lap.

 

[cfuhrer]

1 - No. There are plenty pyl's who are pyl's at least in part because in their day-to-day life they have to present as strong, powerful and very PYL-ish.

2 - I'm of the opinion that more often than not if the personalities are compatible, the kink will be too. But, I also know that on the boards it's not uncommon to see a "he/she-is-absolutely-perfect-buuuuuut" thread. So, ya know, YMMV.

 

[James1324]

.....

 

[Blue]

1) the relationship between Submission and character

~~~(in particular: is there a contradiction between being submissive sexually or even in a 24/7 submissive relationship but also being a person who is strong-minded, strong-willed, smart, competent, socially powerful, etc etc)

No, there's no contradiction there. The two are mutually exclusive, as I'm quite sure we're all aware. Contrary to what stereotypes suggest; Being a pyl =/= an overly self deprecating or 'feeble' personality and being a PYL =/= being an overbearing sadistic control freak who chucked Molotov's into an orphanage for disabled kittens when they were 12.

As for any relation to character: I can't find any reason to believe that certain personality traits predispose somebody to being into the whole D/s thing. I've never come across somebody's thoughts on why they (as a pyl for example) are who they are that had any realistic credence to it. In line with the topic of this thread; my thoughts are that there's actually no significant psychological trend in pyl's that can be used to determine who is and isn't one. Although, some polls would say that pyl's have a tendency to be on the overly anxious and worrisome side, but I would contest that with the fact that it seems to make a bit of sense that more neurotic individuals would more easily be able to realize their fetishes than relaxed folk since they're more prone to anxious feelings and ipso facto more prone to discovering the mentally therapeutic aspects of D/s.
I think that if there is any psychological or physiological trends (Excluding gender trends since that is one big genetic disharmony where any differences are possible) they aren't significant enough to be of any use discussing and that anybody with any personality and intelligence is capable of being born with pyl tendencies.

I think that the D/s dynamic found in today's humans is probably just a complementary sexual selection mechanism born out of what would typically be an evolutionary dead end, but it just happened to get lucky for whatever reason and develop over time into what could be described as a sexual orientation. I say it probably got lucky because there's a clear fundamental logical schism between, e.g, wanting to be hurt and wanting to hurt people and be a functional member of a pre-modern society. If that's the basic degree to which the original 'strain' of whatever genetic lineage D/s grew off of then one group of people would intrinsically be more prone to infections from damage and another group of people who, as we even see today, set off the ignorant masses' "DANGER" alarms when they hear that they enjoy hurting people, and so would be more prone to social ostracization. Fortunately history has played out in our favour though.

2) whether kink compatibility of personality compatibility is most important in finding a partner.

there may be some other elements that should be thrown into the mix here...
but that's a start.

DISCUSS please.

When talking in the context of long term life partners, both are obviously important. I would say that both are actually equally important in their own regards, if two people's personalities clash and they can't find any mental ground to be attracted to each other on then, obviously, the relationship isn't going to get out of the start gate. But assuming that it does, if one of them is ice cold vanilla and the other has an ambiguous kink then there's a fundamental incompatibility there, but ultimately the damage that incompatibility wreaks on the relationship depends on how much each of them can compromise their wants and limits to what they'll do. But needless to say, all the inherently kinky people I've seen on this forum who had partners that couldn't reciprocate have ended in splitting's.

So I guess what I'm saying is that if your personalities don't mix at all then the relationship won't start, but if your physical wants don't mix at all then the relationship is probably doomed to fail. Got to have both for optimum stability.

[Excuse me if this is worded horribly or barely comprehensible or has some really "Eh?" moments in it, I haven't slept for quite a while.]

 

[babslovesherdaddy]

A question was posed today on another thread regarding a few things that might merit a fuller discussion:

1) the relationship between Submission and character

~~~(in particular: is there a contradiction between being submissive sexually or even in a 24/7 submissive relationship but also being a person who is strong-minded, strong-willed, smart, competent, socially powerful, etc etc)
QUOTE]

Hi, I'm Babs, I am a walking, talking contradiction. LOL. Seriously though, I NEED an outlet for my submissive side exactly BECAUSE I am required to be in control the rest of the time. At work, at home, I have a lot of responsibility and I handle most of it pretty well, I think. Having a relationship where I can put all that aside and just BE, is the only thing that keeps me from losing my mind.

 

[Farawyn]

A question was posed today on another thread regarding a few things that might merit a fuller discussion:

1) the relationship between Submission and character

~~~(in particular: is there a contradiction between being submissive sexually or even in a 24/7 submissive relationship but also being a person who is strong-minded, strong-willed, smart, competent, socially powerful, etc etc)
QUOTE]

Hi, I'm Babs, I am a walking, talking contradiction. LOL. Seriously though, I NEED an outlet for my submissive side exactly BECAUSE I am required to be in control the rest of the time. At work, at home, I have a lot of responsibility and I handle most of it pretty well, I think. Having a relationship where I can put all that aside and just BE, is the only thing that keeps me from losing my mind.

I like this.

I want to weigh in to this thread with a thoughtful response, since I was the one who has all the newbie questions.
Let me gather myself.

 

[Farawyn]

No, there's no contradiction there. The two are mutually exclusive, as I'm quite sure we're all aware. Contrary to what stereotypes suggest; Being a pyl =/= an overly self deprecating or 'feeble' personality and being a PYL =/= being an overbearing sadistic control freak who chucked Molotov's into an orphanage for disabled kittens when they were 12.

As for any relation to character: I can't find any reason to believe that certain personality traits predispose somebody to being into the whole D/s thing. I've never come across somebody's thoughts on why they (as a pyl for example) are who they are that had any realistic credence to it. In line with the topic of this thread; my thoughts are that there's actually no significant psychological trend in pyl's that can be used to determine who is and isn't one. Although, some studies would say that pyl's have a strong tendency to be on the overly anxious and worrisome side, but I would contest that with the fact that it seems to make a bit of sense that more neurotic individuals would more easily be able to realize their fetishes than relaxed folk since they're more prone to anxious feelings and ipso facto more prone to discovering the mentally therapeutic aspects of D/s.
I think that if there is any psychological or physiological trends (Excluding gender since that is one big genetic disharmony where any differences are possible) they aren't significant enough to be of any use discussing and that anybody with any personality and intelligence is capable of being born with pyl tendencies.

I think that the D/s dynamic found in today's humans is probably just a complementary sexual selection mechanism born out of what would typically be an evolutionary dead end, but it just happened to get lucky for whatever reason and develop over time into what could be described as a sexual orientation. I say it probably got lucky because there's a clear fundamental logical schism between, e.g, wanting to be hurt and wanting to hurt people and be a functional member of a pre-modern society. If that's the basic degree to which the original 'strain' of whatever genetic lineage D/s grew off of then one group of people would intrinsically be more prone to infections from damage and another group of people who, as we even see today, set off the ignorant masses' "DANGER" alarms when they hear that they enjoy hurting people, and so would be more prone to social ostracization. Fortunately history has played out in our favour though.



When talking in the context of long term life partners, both are obviously important. I would say that both are actually equally important in their own regards, if two people's personalities clash and they can't find any mental ground to be attracted to each other on then, obviously, the relationship isn't going to get out of the start gate. But assuming that it does, if one of them is ice cold vanilla and the other has an ambiguous kink then there's a fundamental incompatibility there, but ultimately the damage that incompatibility wreaks on the relationship depends on how much each of them can compromise their wants and limits to what they'll do. But needless to say, all the inherently kinky people I've seen on this forum who had partners that couldn't reciprocate have ended in splitting's.

So I guess what I'm saying is that if your personalities don't mix at all then the relationship won't start, but if your physical wants don't mix at all then the relationship is probably doomed to fail. Got to have both for optimum stability.

[Excuse me if this is worded horribly or barely comprehensible or has some really "Eh?" moments in it, I haven't slept for quite a while.]

Your last 2 paragraphs (not the "Eh?" disclaimer) are what I was getting at in the other thread.
It is the same as any relationship. If there is no compromise, there is no relationship.

If sexuality can't be compromised by either vanilla dude or kink chick, it is doomed to fail. I'm wondering how much insecurity plays into it. If one person is steering the sex one way and says "I want this" and the other person is not comfortable, he/she may feel they are lacking, and then it fizzles anyway.

The second part of what I was getting at is...is that what you look for in a person? Does it trump other things. Yes, we all want both, but sometimes we can't. How do you reconcile that?
Pushing it down and hoping it goes away doesn't work.

 

[Raingirl85]

1) Agree with everyone else.. there's nothing contradictory about being a sub and being a strong willed, assertive, independent, or power human being. In fact, I think it takes a good degree of strength and will power to submit/surrender and really let everything fall away and enter sub space.. but that more philosophical bit aside, I find for myself that submission in the bedroom is a very cathartic escape from the constant pressures and responsibilities in my life outside of the bedroom.

2) I don't think you'll have a successful relationship unless BOTH components are present: compatible personalities, and compatible kink.. the latter probably offers more leeway for development-- if someone is open-minded you can introduce them to your kinks and they may embrace them-- but in the case of the former you are not likely to change someone whose entire personality is incompatible with yours. And you probably shouldn't even be trying to.

 

[SpunThings]

If I couldn't have both personality compatibility, and kink compatibility, I'd wait until I found it. I'd also need lifestyle compatibility (non smoking, homebody, into similar things, eco conscious, country life...). I'd need emotional compatibility too. I'm pretty sensitive, so some people's way of relating to others can hurt me. This doesn't have to be any different from finding a vanilla partner as far as compatibility.

Are people in the military weak? Because they all have superiors they report to. People who allow someone to have authority over them are not weak. In fact I would argue it takes a certain strength to hold out until you find a suitably compatible partner, rather than giving into the desire to submit at the easiest opportunity that comes along.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[James1324]

I'd say his is his skeleton and mine is an exoskeleton maybe.

I very much like this metaphor. I might have to steal it.

 

[MeekMe]

A question was posed today on another thread regarding a few things that might merit a fuller discussion:

1) the relationship between Submission and character

~~~(in particular: is there a contradiction between being submissive sexually or even in a 24/7 submissive relationship but also being a person who is strong-minded, strong-willed, smart, competent, socially powerful, etc etc)

There is no contradiction. People are people. I do think there's a huge problem with all the fluff floating about depicting pyls as needing protection and guidance and PYLs being strong emotionally steeled individuals/teachers. This fluff often makes pyls seem like they are completely incapable of adulting, while PYLs are super-adults capable of mind reading.

I am not always just one way. In some situations I take control and get shit done. In other situations, I take direction really fuckin' well. The times that I take control do not have any bearing on how I submit to my PYL.

2) whether kink compatibility or personality compatibility is most important in finding a partner.

there may be some other elements that should be thrown into the mix here...
but that's a start.

DISCUSS please.

Having both would be ideal. Personality is more important to me, though. I can compromise on kinks, but GTFO if I can't stand to be around you for long.

 

[cascadiabound]

There is no contradiction. People are people. I do think there's a huge problem with all the fluff floating about depicting pyls as needing protection and guidance and PYLs being strong emotionally steeled individuals/teachers. This fluff often makes pyls seem like they are completely incapable of adulting, while PYLs are super-adults capable of mind reading.

I am not always just one way. In some situations I take control and get shit done. In other situations, I take direction really fuckin' well. The times that I take control do not have any bearing on how I submit to my PYL.

Having both would be ideal. Personality is more important to me, though. I can compromise on kinks, but GTFO if I can't stand to be around you for long.

Oh how I love you Meek Me.
especially this last line:

I can compromise on kinks, but GTFO if I can't stand to be around you for long.

and the lines above bolded for emphasis.

 

[cookiecat]

When I was super new at all this, I fell head over heels for a "Master." Within 3 months, I was registered as his slave, I was doing things, in hindsight, that weren't super safe. And then it hit me, I didn't really like the guy. I liked how he made my pussy feel and that clouded my judgement in a big way.

I can get kinky experiences from people I don't especially want to be in a relationship with but maybe they're really good at flogging or they have a great electrical gizmo I'd like to try... so from the point of view do kinks matching up first matter? I'd say no. Liking the person comes first.

As to strength? It took a while to figure out that being submissive is - for me - just a more thoughtful, quiet, centered part of me. It balances out the rest of the chaotic, random, outgoing side.

I see the submissive side of me as the stronger side - the one who thinks before reacting, the one who sets aside my comfort to please the people in my life. Don't get me wrong - the other vanilla side keeps me off balance enough to keep me on a see saw of self-centered uncertainty.

 

[Farawyn]

When I was super new at all this, I fell head over heels for a "Master." Within 3 months, I was registered as his slave, I was doing things, in hindsight, that weren't super safe. And then it hit me, I didn't really like the guy. I liked how he made my pussy feel and that clouded my judgement in a big way.

I can get kinky experiences from people I don't especially want to be in a relationship with but maybe they're really good at flogging or they have a great electrical gizmo I'd like to try... so from the point of view do kinks matching up first matter? I'd say no. Liking the person comes first.

As to strength? It took a while to figure out that being submissive is - for me - just a more thoughtful, quiet, centered part of me. It balances out the rest of the chaotic, random, outgoing side.

I see the submissive side of me as the stronger side - the one who thinks before reacting, the one who sets aside my comfort to please the people in my life. Don't get me wrong - the other vanilla side keeps me off balance enough to keep me on a see saw of self-centered uncertainty.

Giving is strong. Beautiful.

 

[jlwill702]

A question was posed today on another thread regarding a few things that might merit a fuller discussion:

1) the relationship between Submission and character

~~~(in particular: is there a contradiction between being submissive sexually or even in a 24/7 submissive relationship but also being a person who is strong-minded, strong-willed, smart, competent, socially powerful, etc etc)


2) whether kink compatibility or personality compatibility is most important in finding a partner.

there may be some other elements that should be thrown into the mix here...
but that's a start.

DISCUSS please.

I may be submissive sexually (and maybe to my husband about daily life things sometimes) but for the most part I am a strong woman. If you were to meet me in my regular life you would never know. My life requires me to be strong, my submission gives me an outlet to let go of the weakness that I have to push away. It may not make sense to anyone but me, and that's okay, but it helps me deal with life.

As for the kink/personality compatibility, I do have to say personality is more important. My husband is rather vanilla, once in a while I can kind of get him into handling me a bit rougher, but honestly that doesn't bother me. I've read the stories here for a long time, I play them out in my mind with me in them and it helps to satisfy my needs. If we didn't didn't get along I wouldn't be able to handle that. Sure we fight, and sometimes I REALLY don't like him, but we are compatible. I can be with someone with whom the sex may be lacking, but I need to know that the person I'm with will stick with me through a rough patch.

 

[Collar_N_Cuffs]

1) the relationship between Submission and character

~~~(in particular: is there a contradiction between being submissive sexually or even in a 24/7 submissive relationship but also being a person who is strong-minded, strong-willed, smart, competent, socially powerful, etc etc)

In response to your particular, I think submissives come in all colours and flavours There is no contradiction in my opinion with a smart, strong willed person being sexually submissive. As a matter of fact, smart, strong willed people may be more likely to be submissive in my opinion, because they are more likely to know what they want and how to get it.

As to the general relation between submission and character, I can say very affirmatively, as a switch, that there is a definite link between character and submission. That is to say, the other person's character, and my submission If they are not able to tickle the right chords in me, I am unable to respond submissively. But that's a bit of a side track to this thread.

2) whether kink compatibility or personality compatibility is most important in finding a partner.

there may be some other elements that should be thrown into the mix here...
but that's a start.

This is a really tough question for me, and I struggle with it a lot. People's personalities change and grow, tastes and proclivities wander about the sex map and then wander back again. I have to say that both have to be there, but if forced to pick one I would definitely pick personality compatibility. I want to be able to joke, talk and smile with the person I'm with after we have had sex, wether it was good or bad

 

[cascadiabound]

I have been meaning to come back to this thread and thank everyone for adding to it.

I personally do not see any contradiction between submission and strength. In fact, it seems to be that the people who are most clear about their submission are also the most in touch with their own power and their own vulnerability. Two sides of the same coin perhaps. And there has been quite a bit of discussion about vulnerability on several threads lately. So it seems a rather important theme. Because it is getting airing elsewhere I am not going to explicate it here.

In my public life I am a powerful, confident, take charge, person. One who leads. I make decisions, I teach, I mentor, I critique, I work to see the big picture and I have the audacity to believe I can change things big and small in my world.
I believe I can persuade people that I am right with my words and that my example matters.

I am an equal in all things. I choose to submit - but this does not make me less than. It does not make me weak. The fact that I like certain kinks, including impact play and control, does not make me less than. Or wishy washy. Or in need of guidance. I find I do want rules in my personal life. That these boundaries make me stronger. But this is something that I am choosing to have as part of my relationship and part of my kink. Not something that is imposed on me because I am a child. Or not able to adult all over the place.
It is a gift given to me within my relationship to not HAVE to be in control and be the powerful one ALL THE FUCKING TIME.

The idea that I can give that all up to someone else - that I can trust someone else as much or more than myself - this takes all the strength I have. And sometimes more than all of the strength I have. Because this is what it means to submit. Willingly.

 

[Civilwhore2]

edited for content

\

 

[Mr2Apprentice]

Ive read many of threads like this over the years and I assume that there is a period of self realization that people go through when they grow into their sexuality or embrace whats always been there for the first time. It appears as if women, more so than men, feel a sense of guilt or apprehension regarding their desires and question their own character for "liking such depraved things".

The question I would ask is: Why would anyone assume that a submissive or dominant person would be "lacking in character" in the first place.

People are people...sexuality is just a part of people. There is no difference between a random sample of assholes in the general public as there is in a room of people who enjoy power exchange sexuality.

My two cents and hope I did not hijack the thread with this.

J

 

[AKentuckyLady]

I have been meaning to come back to this thread and thank everyone for adding to it.

I personally do not see any contradiction between submission and strength. In fact, it seems to be that the people who are most clear about their submission are also the most in touch with their own power and their own vulnerability. Two sides of the same coin perhaps. And there has been quite a bit of discussion about vulnerability on several threads lately. So it seems a rather important theme. Because it is getting airing elsewhere I am not going to explicate it here.

In my public life I am a powerful, confident, take charge, person. One who leads. I make decisions, I teach, I mentor, I critique, I work to see the big picture and I have the audacity to believe I can change things big and small in my world.
I believe I can persuade people that I am right with my words and that my example matters.

I am an equal in all things. I choose to submit - but this does not make me less than. It does not make me weak. The fact that I like certain kinks, including impact play and control, does not make me less than. Or wishy washy. Or in need of guidance. I find I do want rules in my personal life. That these boundaries make me stronger. But this is something that I am choosing to have as part of my relationship and part of my kink. Not something that is imposed on me because I am a child. Or not able to adult all over the place.
It is a gift given to me within my relationship to not HAVE to be in control and be the powerful one ALL THE FUCKING TIME.

The idea that I can give that all up to someone else - that I can trust someone else as much or more than myself - this takes all the strength I have. And sometimes more that all of the strength I have. Because this is what it means to submit. Willingly.

CB, this entire post could have been written by me. Every. Single. Word.

And the part in red is something I've only recently come to understand and learn to accept. I'm still learning, exploring, trying to define who I am as a submissive. I've run into a lot of men who want to "play" Dominant, but have no clue what they're doing. I've waited a very long time to find someone that I trust, respect, and honestly love talking to. I was patient. He was patient. And something has blossomed between us that positively thrills me every time I hear his voice or see his messages.

Our relationship is still in the pink flush of dawn. We're slowly getting to know how each other thinks, feels, responds. I think this is the best part of getting to know someone new - that wonder of discovery every day is amazing. And I'm so grateful that I've met someone that I connect with on a D/s level as well as a personal, intimate level.

I'm very fortunate that I've had the people on Lit to talk to and get advice from. I've been able to observe women like BFG and CB on the threads, giving me hope that as a strong, independent woman, my submissiveness is just another facet of me. I can be both, and anyone that says that only damaged women can be subs are the ones doing the damage.