OK, Theory A or Theory B (re 'dominance')

This has come up a hundred times, and now is partly a topic in the dominant heterosexual woman thread.

I will present two pictures, 1 and 2, and two theories, A and B.. Vote your conscience:

Picture 1: Dominant personality: Someone who, in everyday exchanges with others, in a number of--but not all--spheres of life sees to it that his or her wishes are made plain and complied with, [or at least not opposed,] by others, in situations where he sees a need to act. He or she generally insures that his/her views are known, and will attempt to convince others of their being better founded than others' views, should s/he deem the matter important. That his or her desires and views generally prevail is taken a 'natural' outcome, and it is assumed that others will appreciate his or her direction and notice and approve of these outcomes.

When members of group are needing to decide what to do--e.g., on a jury--, she or he naturally takes the lead if it’s a matter of import; if not putting forward his own plan, s/he directs the discussion, shapes its course, and molds the decision of others as s/he deems appropriate. Resistance is seen as there to be overcome. Depending on his or her social skills and diplomacy, s/he may be liked and looked up to or (if there is a main reliance on force and crude methods) thought to be an overbearing asshole. Depending on his or her real knowledge, he may be revered as a wise leader, or thought to be a arrogant ignoramus.

Picture 2: Dominant in bedroom (b.r.)

[Note: 'bedroom' is used figuratively, for the sexual arena; if that's the kitchen table in one's home, it counts as 'bedroom']

Takes charge of his or her sexual partner. Directs or commands their activity. Overcomes their resistance to his or her will. In doing all of these exercises of power (over), there is erotic arousal and, in prevailing against resistance, ultimate satisfaction. The more sophisticated operate with at least technical legal consent, and overcome with minimal or no physical force. Although taking his or her own sexual needs as primary, s/he will, as s/he thinks appropriate, indulge the needs of the other to some extent, for reasons of generosity or for more narrowly selfish reasons, i.e., to insure the other's continuing satisfaction, since s/he knows that for the arrangement to become long running, the subordinate has be at least somewhat satisfied in it.

Theory A.

There is a close connection between 'dominant personality' and 'dominant in the b.r.' The bedroom (b.r.) is simply one sphere of activity (an intimate one) among other spheres, such as job, friendly gatherings, etc. Not every 'dominant personality' is exceptionally assertive in the b.r., BUT we DO expect, according to Theory A, in the other direction, that, the one quite assertive in the bedroom is going to be assertive in lots of other spheres.

Theory B.

There is little, and maybe no, connection between 'dominant personality' and 'dominant in the b.r.', though sometimes the two occur together. Although sometimes one finds a 'dominant personality' who is 'dominant in the b.r.' one may about as often find a 'dominant personality,' who is mild and accomodating in the b.r. Or, one may find, not uncommonly, that the 'dominant' in the b.r. is projecting a social impression that is of just average confidence. The dominant in the b.r. is as likely to be socially laid-back and amiable as to be socially assertive and leading. [ADDED: In short knowing this person's 'bedroom' or sexual style does NOT enable us to predict his or her interpersonal approach in the main spheres of everyday life.]

[[NOTE: For purposes of this discussion, Theory B will include the view that the dominant b.r. is frequently *opposite,* in social dominance. Strictly speaking, of course, if one thinks that a person's having *opposite* tendencies inside and outside the b.r is typical; we might call this Theory C: that the b.r. behavior generally allows a prediction, but in the opposite direction about social behavior]]

I can't identify with either Theory , I won't take the 'partial' option its misleading to the outcome of the poll in my opinion.

I think every person who chooses to be Dominant in the bedroom is different.

Some will be more dominant in everyday activities, and some will not.

I chose partly, because they're both right. And both not right. And both only a little right. Depending entirely on the person.

In the beginning of February, a very smart guy sent me a PM which said:

"Men really want to take charge. I've always believed this..."

To my great surprise & delight, he was correct. (At least as far as my husband is concerned.)

Of course, there are exceptions to every rule.

I would define neither 'dominant personality' nor 'dominant in the bedroom' the same way you do, Pure. However, I understand what you are asking here, and for the purposes of responding to your poll I adopted your definitions.

The guy who sent me the PM quoted above is proof that Theory A is nonsense. He is not pushy or aggressive or demonstrably eager for his views to prevail.

He's just a guy who, because of his wit and his charm and his breathtaking charisma, draws more women to his side than any other guy I know of here at Lit.

Common sense and my observation of others confirms my conclusion.

With immense gratitude and respect for the guy who wrote that PM, I voted for theory B.

Alice

I really don't like either theory. I am a scientist at heart and would like to see some statistical survey done to try to back up either theory, or a different one.

I don't know enough people in the lifestyle yet to be able to form an opinion on theory B.

For me personally, I have a dominant personality, but I certainly do not want to be the one in charge in the bedroom (at least not a majority of the time), which, to me blows theory A out of the water (i.e. Dominant in life = dominant in the relationship).

If you were to take a survey, there would also be an inherant flaw - that of self reporting. You sample would be limited to those willing to take the survey, who report things from their personal point of view, include in this the "wannabe" dominants who may report less than truthfully about the areas outside of the lifestyle - Your results get skewed.

Don't get me wrong, I am not totally a numbers girl. I also take my personal observations to account as well at times. It's just in this situation I don't have enough to say where, or if, there is faulty reasonong in the statements of theory.

Private_Label said:

I am a scientist at heart and would like to see some statistical survey done to try to back up either theory, or a different one.


If you were to take a survey, there would also be an inherant flaw - that of self reporting. You sample would be limited to those willing to take the survey, who report things from their personal point of view, include in this the "wannabe" dominants who may report less than truthfully about the areas outside of the lifestyle - Your results get skewed.

Don't get me wrong, I am not totally a numbers girl. I also take my personal observations to account as well at times. It's just in this situation I don't have enough to say where, or if, there is faulty reasonong in the statements of theory.

Click to expand...

Amen to the scientist bit. After eleven hours of critical thinking, experimental design, and multivariate statistics today, all I could think of when I saw this was that this would be really hard to actually test, and then my brain supplied a bunch of really nerdy statistical explanations why.

After struggling for control and overpowering my inner statistician, I eventually decided that Theory B fit with my world outlook better. In my experience, I've found that the kind of relationships and power dynamics that turn you on in the bedroom can be completely different than those you feel comfortable expressing in average social situations WAY too many times for these to be very strongly correlated.

On a similar note, I've also noticed this in regards to submission too. Quite often in my experience, those who display great confidence, power, and "dominance" in their day to day life can really enjoy letting their romantic or sexual partner take complete control. I imagine it's rather liberating.

On a completely random note, apparently someone has decided to perform some opera outside my apartment window ... how odd.

So, it's a bit of a surprise...

My impression was that Theory A was vastly preferred in these parts.

Maybe its advocates are just shy or are so busy leading the world or being led that they don't vote.

It seems to me that most all those who believe in the 'natural dom/me' or 'born dom/me' would be Theory A persons, esp. those who think the archetypal male (and the everyday male, latently) is that way, e.g., the 'taken in hand' admirers, and the 'internal enslavement' fans.

In speculation, I can *conceive* that someone might hold that the 'dominant person in the b.r.' was born that way, but that would require a much more complex account that explained why, despite that innate b.r. dominance, there was not necessarily any outside manifestation.

I'm puzzled.

Pure said:

It seems to me that most all those who believe in the 'natural dom/me' or 'born dom/me' would be Theory A persons, esp. those who think the archetypal male (and the everyday male, latently) is that way, e.g., the 'taken in hand' admirers, and the 'internal enslavement' fans.

Click to expand...

I do believe that they're born, just as I believe subbies are born too.

I just don't believe that all dominant people feel the need, desire, or just natural compulsion to be as assertive in public as they are in private.

It's not much different than if one were to flaunt being bisexual, or choose to keep it quiet. Different choices in the way one conducts one's life. *shrug*

That'd probably make a lot more sense if I hadn't just woken up and the caffiene had kicked in...

I'd say the correlation is an inverse one - people who are successfully dominant in their everyday life are usually playful and pampering in the bedroom, while people who are strongly dominant in the bedroom are usually those who are frustrated and forced to 'play nice' or submit to others in their every day life.

Those people who are submissive in the bedroom are usually those who feel overburdened with responsibility in their every day lives and often feel uncertain that they are competent and worthy of their everyday responsibilities.

There's a lot of "evidence" (meaning anecdotal) that men who are leaders in business and every public area of their lives are often submissive in the bedroom.

But I understand the question and I'm interested in the apparent contradiction too, but I don't see why there would have to be a connection; many people act according to expectations they feel are imposed on them in their public lives. Hopefully, in bed they can give in to what is "real" for them.

Because of how complex human nature is, perhaps connecting the two theories is just more simplistic than we'd like to think? Sorry if I sound like I think I know what I'm talking about ...

ST

hi sun

and shadow.

that's interesting, inverse correlation. certainly there are cases that fit.

i guess we'd have to call that
Theory C.

for purposes of this poll and dicussion, however, i feel it's more akin to Theory B.

Carillon said:

Amen to the scientist bit. After eleven hours of critical thinking, experimental design, and multivariate statistics today, all I could think of when I saw this was that this would be really hard to actually test, and then my brain supplied a bunch of really nerdy statistical explanations why.

After struggling for control and overpowering my inner statistician, I eventually decided that Theory B fit with my world outlook better. In my experience, I've found that the kind of relationships and power dynamics that turn you on in the bedroom can be completely different than those you feel comfortable expressing in average social situations WAY too many times for these to be very strongly correlated.

On a similar note, I've also noticed this in regards to submission too. Quite often in my experience, those who display great confidence, power, and "dominance" in their day to day life can really enjoy letting their romantic or sexual partner take complete control. I imagine it's rather liberating.

On a completely random note, apparently someone has decided to perform some opera outside my apartment window ... how odd.

Click to expand...

sunandshadow said:

I'd say the correlation is an inverse one - people who are successfully dominant in their everyday life are usually playful and pampering in the bedroom, while people who are strongly dominant in the bedroom are usually those who are frustrated and forced to 'play nice' or submit to others in their every day life.

Those people who are submissive in the bedroom are usually those who feel overburdened with responsibility in their every day lives and often feel uncertain that they are competent and worthy of their everyday responsibilities.

Click to expand...

This is the way I am!

What???

Fury

No Necessary connection.

I voted B, although a lot depends on the individual. Personally I am submissive in the bedroom/sexual context; but very aggressive and dominate in the 9-5 world.

I have a job that forces me to be a bit Type A since I am in a leadership role. I don't always enjoy the responsiblity, but I prefer it to a lack of control.

I am a Domme and control my intimate relationships because it pleases me. I never really considered how one impacts the other.

I haven't always been in a job where I was in control. I spent the first 5 years in the BDSM world concentrating mainly on S&M, but considered myself a sub/switch.

I don't believe one is connected to the other all cases. My alpha is very aggressive and dominiant personality outside of his relationship with me. Actually, most male subs I am attracted to are very assertive, masculine, intelligent, macho types outside of our relationship. I like men with strong opinions on things that matter. That is the attraction in breaking them. Women...well...I like female subs of all flavors because women are attractive regardless of their nature.

I think I was born or programmed in pretty early on to enjoy power and control in my sex life, but I definitely don't gravitate toward social leadership or alpha situations in the public sphere. I'm a private person who prefers to be left alone to my own brilliance or stupidity in decision making and to hold responsibility mainly over myself first and foremost.

i don't think i was programmed 'pretty early on' to have much of any sex life--your parents must be much more liberal than mine, N.

Nature versus Nuture at its finest.

"Am I Dom because I was born this way or raised to be a Dom?"

FurryFury said:

This is the way I am!

What???

Fury

Click to expand...

Re the opera "what" ... that's what I thought. But there they were, on the street, serenading SOMEONE in my 12 story apartment building, I assume. I can't help but wonder who it was ... I love random things like that.

I'm also submissive in the bedroom but very assertive in day to day life. Heck, as a lifeguard I had to be. I told everyone in the entire pool exactly what to do! That's about as far away as you can get from what I'm like in the bedroom.

ok, help me understand this. is it that being assertive and directive in everyday life is a burden you like to get rid of in the bedroom (b.r.).

is the everyday dominant a kind of cover or compensation-- were you once a pushover that learned what it takes to survive?

is the everyday dominant personality 'not you', the 'real you emerging in the b.r.

which personality everyday or b.r. do you feel most confident in?

I found this post quite interesting.

Personally, I voted for option B, that siad I do have a but.. Due to my profession (Teacher/Professor) Im in charge 99% of the time, sexually I'm extremely dominant (is there such a thing as a bratty dominant?). One may think that I would have voted for option A, but here is the thing, I feel that my real world dominance is a reflection of a professional role, and although I do tend to be listened to and my opinion is generally valued I do no feel the need to assert myself in this role all the time.

I believe (and have no evidence to support this) that the real world and sexual world do not touch each other. Human relationships are about roles, its one of teh reasosn we distinguish between sex and gender, sex being a biological consideration (do you have a pipi?) and gender being a socially established set of parameters with which me measure conduct (which today is pretty varied).

summing up before I go into a ramble, I firmly believe that when we are alone with our SO, in the privacy of our homes, we can indulge in a certain level of release from the strictly set and enforced social conduct imposed on us.

mr_demon said:

I found this post quite interesting.

Personally, I voted for option B, that siad I do have a but.. Due to my profession (Teacher/Professor) Im in charge 99% of the time, sexually I'm extremely dominant (is there such a thing as a bratty dominant?). One may think that I would have voted for option A, but here is the thing, I feel that my real world dominance is a reflection of a professional role, and although I do tend to be listened to and my opinion is generally valued I do no feel the need to assert myself in this role all the time.

I believe (and have no evidence to support this) that the real world and sexual world do not touch each other. Human relationships are about roles, its one of teh reasosn we distinguish between sex and gender, sex being a biological consideration (do you have a pipi?) and gender being a socially established set of parameters with which me measure conduct (which today is pretty varied).

summing up before I go into a ramble, I firmly believe that when we are alone with our SO, in the privacy of our homes, we can indulge in a certain level of release from the strictly set and enforced social conduct imposed on us.

Click to expand...

I agree with you mr demon. I myself am in control of every detail of my daily life. I also have to impose rules and punishment for my 3 children. Although where we differ is that when i retire to the privacy of my bedroom, i want to be released from all of the responsibilities i have during the day. To let someone else take control. I find that it makes my daily life a lot less stressful.

NiceButtNaughty said:

I agree with you mr demon. I myself am in control of every detail of my daily life. I also have to impose rules and punishment for my 3 children. Although where we differ is that when i retire to the privacy of my bedroom, i want to be released from all of the responsibilities i have during the day. To let someone else take control. I find that it makes my daily life a lot less stressful.

Click to expand...

and Im sure hubby/boyfriend/Master appreciate it deeply my dear, and in turn we Dominats get to relieve some of our stress in our own fashion, paddle, floggers and canes oh my LOL

Pure said:

ok, help me understand this. is it that being assertive and directive in everyday life is a burden you like to get rid of in the bedroom (b.r.).

is the everyday dominant a kind of cover or compensation-- were you once a pushover that learned what it takes to survive?

is the everyday dominant personality 'not you', the 'real you emerging in the b.r.

which personality everyday or b.r. do you feel most confident in?

Click to expand...

Well, in every day life, I feel most confident as my more assertive every day personality. And in the bedroom, I feel most confident when I'm with someone dominant who lets me relax into my submissive bedroom mode.

Neither of them is "fake" or "not me", and for me at least it would be oversimplifying to think that a person could be only one or the other. It's situation dependent.

Like in the bedroom, I really like being naked. At the same time, going to work naked would be excruciatingly painful and embarrassing. Like my submission, my nakedness depends on both situation and company

Pure said:

i don't think i was programmed 'pretty early on' to have much of any sex life--your parents must be much more liberal than mine, N.

Click to expand...

I was masturbating as long as I can remember, I don't know what they thought of that because I choose to labor under the delusion that I wasn't caught.

Pure said:

ok, help me understand this.

1.) Is it that being assertive and directive in everyday life is a burden you like to get rid of in the bedroom (b.r.).

2.) Is the everyday dominant a kind of cover or compensation-- were you once a pushover that learned what it takes to survive?

3.)Is the everyday dominant personality 'not you', the 'real you emerging in the b.r.

4.) Which personality everyday or b.r. do you feel most confident in?

Click to expand...

1.) For me yes, to a certain extent and sometimes to a LARGE degree!

2.) I've certainly learned what it takes to survive but no, this is not a cover. I take charge because someone has to. Few will bother, even as a child I was more adult than my caregivers and had to take charge, which may be a way of compensating or balancing their lack of care or ability. Now however, this is my comfort zone. I'd rather brush others aside and do "it" quickly and efficiently than show them how to do it over and over until they can do it to my satisfaction, quickly and efficiently, if they ever can. I know I will do "it" right and get it done. I can rarely say that about anyone else.

3.) They are both me. The yin and the yang of me. I wouldn't want to do without one or the other.

4.) I am equally comfortable with both. Though there are times I wish someone else would help out a little. I am overwhelmed at times with what I "should" do. LOL! I've built my life this way and I'm pretty happy with it.

HTH,

Fury

Netzach said:

I was masturbating as long as I can remember, I don't know what they thought of that because I choose to labor under the delusion that I wasn't caught.

Click to expand...

I believe certain things like sexual orientation must be wired into us pretty damn early that includes Dominance and submission. Our parent's may or may not know about our sexual urges, but they are undeniably there earlier and earlier too, as far as I can tell.

Fury