Is there a single definition of a sub?

[NervousSubGuy]

Hey all, just sitting here musing about submission. I've always struggled with who I am as I hide my lack of confidence behind humour, but this has always been a sore subject as I generally look for approval of all those around me even though at times I shouldn't care.

Sometimes my feelings about being submissive are conflicted so I was curious, and to help me understand who I am if there is a general single definition of a sub? Or is it more individual than that?

P.

 

[MeekMe]

Generally, a submissive gives some amount of control to another. The amount is based on the individuals involved. Is that something that you want?

 

[NervousSubGuy]

Generally, a submissive gives some amount of control to another. The amount is based on the individuals involved. Is that something that you want?

It is, but I'm wary about the level of control, the expectations and also if I "fit" into the role

 

[seela]

It is, but I'm wary about the level of control, the expectations and also if I "fit" into the role

Take a look at the What's Your Relationship thread. You'll see that there are so many different kinds of dynamics going on in people's relationships.

You just need to find someone who's compatible with what you want out of a relationship. Don't worry about labels and definitions so much.

Welcome to Lit!

 

[MeekMe]

It is, but I'm wary about the level of control, the expectations and also if I "fit" into the role

This is something you have to figure out for yourself. The thing about d/s, is it's just another way to have a relationship. So you find someone compatible and you workout the details with them. If you want bedroom only, you find someone that also wants that. If you want to give over more than that, you find someone interested in that. Expectations will change from person to person.

Thanks seela, it's really weird for me to put that link up.

 

[seela]

This is something you have to figure out for yourself. The thing about d/s, is it's just another way to have a relationship. So you find someone compatible and you workout the details with them. If you want bedroom only, you find someone that also wants that. If you want to give over more than that, you find someone interested in that. Expectations will change from person to person.

Thanks seela, it's really weird for me to put that link up.

It's a good thread, you shouldn't feel weird to link to.

I'd like to add to Meek's good info, that it's also perfectly fine to change your opinion as you gain more experience and insight. You might think you want to have a 24/7 D/s, but later figure out it's better if it's a bedroom only or maybe just some aspects of life only that works for you better. Or vice versa.

You might even find yourself interested in topping or dominating someone down the road, and that's perfectly fine as well. D/s and BDSM in general aren't set in stone, so you don't have to worry too much about figuring out which niche exactly you fit in.

Find a person you mesh with well and keep the lines of communication open. Relationships, all relationships, shift and evolve.

 

[Blue]

_____

 

[LallyH]

Hello and welcome.

Is your concern 'if I say to someone that I am submissive, will that mean I'll be expected to do things I don't want to do? Do I have the 'right' to call myself submissive?. If I do, am I letting myself in for something I don't fully understand?' ?

It's like everyone has said - all it means is that you enjoy letting someone else make certain decisions. The degree of decision making or control you feel comfortable with will be specific to you, and you will need to be able to discuss this with your partner. No one is born with fully fledged, specific, set in stone submissive self- knowledge - we all develop, learn, read, discuss, experiment, enjoy, fail, worry, try something else, read, discuss, eat, drink, rave, repeat..

Please do read MeekMe's thread, and also glance through the other threads here. If there are other questions you want to ask, then feel free. There is a wealth of different experiences here and someone will be able to answer you.

Good luck!

 

[cookiecat]

I always thought submissive meant having someone be the boss of me, both in and out of the bedroom. Mostly in the bedroom. You know, tie me up, do stuff to me. Make me be a dirty girl.

After a lot of years exploring, I realize being submissive - for me - is about being in service to someone. Putting his/her pleasure in front of mine. I enjoy that. It creates a more thoughtful mindset in all areas of my life, not just the bedroom.

Giving up that control isn't easy. The example I give is my husband really REALLY wanted to see the Rocky & Bullwinkle movie. I would've rather stayed home and scrubbed the floor. But I went because it made him happy. He did do some dirty things to me before we left PLUS he let me get butter on the popcorn so in the end, it was all good.

 

[_Necrosomantic_]

Hey all, just sitting here musing about submission. I've always struggled with who I am as I hide my lack of confidence behind humour, but this has always been a sore subject as I generally look for approval of all those around me even though at times I shouldn't care.

Sometimes my feelings about being submissive are conflicted so I was curious, and to help me understand who I am if there is a general single definition of a sub? Or is it more individual than that?

P.

Hello P.

It sounds to me like what you are wrestling with is simply a lack of confidence, which doesn't necessarily make you strictly submissive. Being guarded or putting on airs is something many people do and usually stems from past instances of/a fear of rejection in some form or another, but this doesn't necessarily make you a sub. Craving acceptance from those around you is a trait not exclusive to D or s, but manifests itself differently depending on your nature. Do you want to be controlled by someone you view as stronger that accepts you despite your flaws? Or do you seek someone that will take whatever you can dish out and whom you don't feel the need to hide yourself from? Once you figure out exactly what you are, then you can put a label on it and progress down the right path.

I could be way off, but I encourage people to exhaust all avenues before coming to conclusions.

" Know thyself."

 

[cfuhrer]

Didn't Stella write something about the various labels we use and what they mean?

I kept meaning to read it but never made it a priority.

 

[SpunThings]

There will be people who will tell you there is a single definition of submissive in this context. For themselves or what they want in a relationship they would be right. For everyone else they would be wrong. You do what works for you and your partner. You don't squeeze into a label, but you find a label that fits best as a convenient shorthand and conversation starter. Then you add more words if the other person is interested, so you can be more specific to what you want.

 

[HerFavoriteToy]

Wow, some really articulate replies here.

I've had folks in BD/SM clubs tell me I'm a sub just because I like to crossdress but neither does this make me gay or willing to submit to a man.

Then on the other side of the same club I've had others mistake me for a dome because I wore a leather skirt and boots.

There's much more than 50 shades of gray.

 

[cascadiabound]

Wow, some really articulate replies here.

I've had folks in BD/SM clubs tell me I'm a sub just because I like to crossdress but neither does this make me gay or willing to submit to a man.

Then on the other side of the same club I've had others mistake me for a dome because I wore a leather skirt and boots.

There's much more than 50 shades of gray.

No one gets to define you. What you want to wear and what kinks you like are just what you like.
I am off to find that link to Stella's definitions of sub, Dom, top and bottom.

 

[cascadiabound]

Here is a LINK to her essay, and below please find the entire text. Enjoy!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Top. dom. sub. bottom. And the differences between them. AKA "Stella's usual rant."

Note: Our society has become very enamored of the concept of Dom and Sub. Many people come into the lifestyle without ever hearing that any other dynamic can exist, which is why I have written this little essay. I do not wish to give the impression that you or anyone else are restricted to one or another of the roles I have described here. My reason for writing it, in fact, is exactly the opposite-- to show that there are more roles and motivations within BDSM than are commonly recognized.

I don't want to give the impression that any role is solid or permanent. There is a lot of fluidity in most people. Needs and desires change and mutate over a lifetime, within a relationship, for any reason or none. And motives, methods, preferences can be mixed together.


----
Many people know what they want to feel, and how they want to feel it, and many people get a lot of pleasure out of providing sensation for someone else. This kind of dynamic is widely misunderstood in current BDSM parlance.

Let me start with a handful of Definitions;

This, as someone recently pointed out to me, is not a definition included in Webster's dictionary. But the way I am using "top" and "bottom" here has been common since the seventies. I swear it! Long before I ever heard "submissive" and dominant" there was "top and bottom." Google agrees with me, so there.

Topping and bottoming refer to relative roles in activities. Dom and sub refer to relative roles in relationships.

When two people are fucking, there is usually one person who is active and one who is receptive. In SM activities, one person is doing unto, and one is being done unto. The active person is the top, the receptive person is the bottom.

Dominant and submissive refer to relative status. Also, for many people, the motivations behind many relational activities.

In the relationships that we define as D/s, one person's preferences and desires define the relationship, and the other person allows the relationship to be defined by their partner. We say the sub has given their power to the dom.

For our purposes here, we can say that topping and bottoming are the things we do, dom and sub are how or why we do those things.


------


Why are these distinctions important to you?

The big problem that arises from this misunderstanding and the resulting social expectations, is that people-- women in particular-- believe that they want to be submissive and owned because of their desire for sensation when what they really want is to have a whole lot of attention paid to them. And when a service top-- whose real intent is to serve-- thinks that he has to be the boss in all things, when in fact he might not be suited for that role at all.

Many people come into the lifestyle thinking that anyone who does unto, is dominant. Anyone who receives, is submissive. That's not always true; Not all tops are doms. Likewise, not all bottoms are subs.

Folks who know how they want to be done are often called "Bossy bottoms," or SAM's ("Smart Ass Masochists") or "Pillow Princesses" or other things, but they they might actually be "Dominant Bottoms." They might not be submissive at all, in other words. And really, there is no reason why they should try to be.

Tops who *want to provide* what such a person *wants to feel* get told that they are wimps, or not really Doms-- and in fact, they might not consider themselves to be dominant. They can call themselves "Service Tops," and IMO, that's a mighty fine and honorable position to claim. An active partner might not be suited to be the boss. If not, then there is no reason why they should try to be.


If you want more information on what kinds of things can happen in BDSM, I recommend these books, All four of them are 'old' these days, and pretty much every other book about BSM is a repeat of what is in these books.

They are;
The New Topping Book
The New Bottoming Book by Dossie Easton and Janet Hardy
Screw The Roses, Send Me The Thorns by Philip Miller and Molly Devon
SM 101; A realistic Introduction by Jay Wiseman

They can be found at Amazon or ordered from your local independent bookseller.

 

[Wallaby07]

This is all very confusing to me

 

[cookiecat]

This is all very confusing to me

Why???

 

[_Necrosomantic_]

Why???

Agreed, what are you having trouble following?

 

[UpwardSpiral]

Several of the responses here have made me very happy to see. I posted a writing recently on FetLife, in response to a profile I saw of someone describing themselves as a "true submissive". I don't believe there is any such thing. As some of you have said, as long as the dynamic works for you and your partner(s), no one else's definitions or rules or systems really matter. In fact, I really like seeing the use of the phrases "s-type" and "D-type", as they speak to that broader range of submissive/Dominant spectrum identities and dynamics. Be you a bottom, slave, babygirl/boy, rope bottom, pet, toy, masochist, or what have you, if you experience fulfillment through your chosen role and with your chosen partner, then you're gold.

 

[hooterbif]

Isn't it simpler to say that the dom is controlling the situation and the sub is not controlling the situation, regardless of what physical acts are occurring?

 

[_Necrosomantic_]

Isn't it simpler to say that the dom is controlling the situation and the sub is not controlling the situation, regardless of what physical acts are occurring?

Of course it would be easier to set labels in stone.

Reread that essay, particularly the bold, and keep in mind that it's not a black and white matter.

 

[SpunThings]

Isn't it simpler to say that the dom is controlling the situation and the sub is not controlling the situation, regardless of what physical acts are occurring?

Sort of. If I wanted to argue semantics I'd say the dom was in charge or had the authority, because we really can't control someone else unless you mean by physical force. But if we're not squibbling over semantics, control and authority are generally used interchangeably in this context.

Your main point is spot on. The actions do not determine your role in a power exchange. It is who is giving power, and who is receiving. A man giving a woman oral could either be the dom or sub in a power exchange context. You could have a masochistic dom, or a dom who likes to be tied up. It's not as common I don't think, but it happens.

 

[cascadiabound]

A lovely metaphor ~~~ for your consideration (author unknown)

It is a fetish on Fetlife. ‘How do you like your coffee? Handed to me.’

And I do. But I also enjoy making my own. Because then I know I get exactly what I want. Because there is no universal perfect cup of coffee.

People ask me what a good submissive does, how they can train to be one, etc. My answer is usually: as with coffee, there is no universally perfect submissive. Every Dom likes different things in a submissive and in their morning beverage.

And yes, you could take analogy that a step further: a D might enjoy making their own, because then they know that they get exactly what they want.

We can’t, of course, ‘make’ people. But as D or M-types we can mould people, or teach them to do things a certain way that pleases us once we are in a relationship with them. (And have their consent.) In some relationships that ‘moulding’ goes very far, in others not so much. That too is a matter of individual (or mutual) taste. In every instance, it starts with a person who is compatible on basics at least. You wouldn’t start with a cup of coffee if you only like orange juice.

If a sub goes in search of a Dom, it’s likely they will encounter a bunch of ‘wrong’ cups of coffee before they find that perfect extra skinny, soy-based, one and a half shots vanilla latte with whipped cream on top. But in the process, it makes little sense to try and turn a cup of tea into that dream contraption. And it also makes no sense for that cup of tea to try and be that thing, because nobody will believe it in the long run.

Back to my triple espresso. If you’re a sub, that Dom you are actually looking to hook up with might not like it. So what would be the point in me teaching you to make my perfect coffee? I could teach you that making coffee might be of interest, I could teach you what role learning to make the perfect coffee could play in a relationship, I could even teach you how I like mine, because I’m a fussy bastard. But the latter part is of no use in the grander scheme of things. Because that Dom you want to start a relationship with might prefer tea.

 

[NervousSubGuy]

Hey all thanks so much for the help, I've not been on in a while as the very first person who chose to speak to me one on one has already damaged my confidence. They seemed extremely genuine, knowledgeable, didn't ask anything of me other than to get to know me, then just went quiet and refused to respond to messages.

I really appreciate the effort, and I love the coffee analogy

 

[cascadiabound]

Hey all thanks so much for the help, I've not been on in a while as the very first person who chose to speak to me one on one has already damaged my confidence. They seemed extremely genuine, knowledgeable, didn't ask anything of me other than to get to know me, then just went quiet and refused to respond to messages.

I really appreciate the effort, and I love the coffee analogy

Sorry you had a tough first go. That's a bummer.
Take a deep breath. Realize it's not you. Pick yourself up, dust yourself off, figure out what lessons you've learned and try again.
It's worth it.
Good luck.