Healthy Sub

[IrisAlthea]

(And why do parents bother at all, if they can't do anything?)

This is what I ask myself at least once every day.

I disagree with the author's premise that you can look at how an infant girl responds to the faces and voices around her, and accurately determine if she is/ isn't destined to be submissive. Can someone assign XYZ behaviors in infancy to "submissive" traits, and raise the infant (child, young adult) to react "submissively" to the world around her? Yes. But that doesn't mean the child was meant to be that way from birth. It means an adult in their life decided to encourage those traits.

This.

He wrote that infants have different temperaments.

And he wrote that submissive people have a temperament with increased social responsiveness.

And he wrote that people with increased social responsiveness are easier to manipulate, because the reaction of his or her social environment to his or her actions is more important for such a person and therefore will affect his or her actions more.


Lumping these three statements together in a sentence and adding a wrong inference^1 that was never made and garnishing it with exaggerations ("accurately") - well, yes, feel free to disagree with that, but what you wrote was not the premise.

The first statement is scientifically proven.
The third statement is in my opinion a logical conclusion that is impossible to rebut.
This basically only leaves the second statement open for debate.

*shrugs*

^1 If A, then B != If B, then A.

Yes, it's the second one that is problematic for me and obviously for him too because he writes:
"Those who consciously seek a Dominant partner are those who are perhaps, so sensitive that they require not only benevolence, but someone who understands PRECISELY how moldable and influenceable they are, and is capable of using the power to mold her and influence her deliberately and consciously, for her good and the good of the relationship."
That sounds pretty socially responsive and aware of others feelings and needs to me.
If he is saying that it is a good thing in general to be socially aware and responsive without letting yourself get eaten by other peoples needs and wants I think hes beeing very wordy and complicated.

It truly sounds like someone looking to groom submissives. It's extra creepy. Reading those articles didn't warm my heart, they made me sick.

In all fairness, I think he is trying to say that it might be a good idea to take your childs temperament into consideration and be careful not to create a people pleasing, rudderless person of your sensitive child or forcing the not very assertive child into bravado mode.

I googled "healthy sub" and this is what popped up:

http://www.prevention.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/slideshow_display/Blimpie-Turkey-Cheese.jpg

Not sure if that's helpful.

I'd rather have some of the 18 year old scotch and chocolate cake mentioned earlier, please.

 

[StrayKat]

This is what I ask myself at least once every day.

I used to as well. But now, 20 years later, I think I can see the answer.
We can do a lot only it is not so obvious while we are doing it.

 

[cmslt2326]

Actually this thread did exactly what I was hoping it would do All_4_Love. It started a very spirited, very interesting exchange of ideas. Yes, you have to have a thick skin to post here but I knew that when I started it. I began this post because I am a sub who has my own opinions, thoughts and feelings about the origins of my submissiveness and whether or not it is a choice. I am so happy that I read your quote the day that we first spoke. I loved it then and I love it now and I have really enjoyed your comments here.

Thank you

 

[bdsmshade]

Ok please don't lynch me for saying this but can see how this quote could be helpful to those in a hetero male dom relationship, how it serves to validate a lifestyle that society doesn't understand and can see in the worst possible way. And if it helps to make someone feel better about the things that they crave in their hart then good for them, we shouldn't need validation but we all sometimes need to feel that we aren't total freaks.

That said it's an old article using some archaic views of child development that's going to offend and does kind of smell like grooming whether that was intended or not. Also some male dominants have a tendency when trying to justify the normality of their needs to remove themselves from the sub/dom world. Was talking to a male dom recently who has met men who love to tie women up and spank and whip them because that's normal but consider him a pervert for being into bdsm. That's kind of inflammatory particularly since it often embraces the same ideas that a woman should be submissive to a man that are common in spousal abuse.

Many writers manage to except submissives and dominants as people without needing to paint them with gender bias. As a sub male I find that men should be dom idea plays a large part in making me feel like I am broken and a freak with no place in society, or at least on those days when I feel like I need validation.

So I do have to bite down the urge to scream and jump on this quote which is the most inflammatory thing have read since the article on the Bible as justification for male dominance, still not sure if that's a subset of bdsm or an excuse tobeat the wife Iif ddinner isn't on time.

 

[Netzach]

Ok please don't lynch me for saying this but can see how this quote could be helpful to those in a hetero male dom relationship, how it serves to validate a lifestyle that society doesn't understand and can see in the worst possible way. And if it helps to make someone feel better about the things that they crave in their hart then good for them, we shouldn't need validation but we all sometimes need to feel that we aren't total freaks.

That said it's an old article using some archaic views of child development that's going to offend and does kind of smell like grooming whether that was intended or not. Also some male dominants have a tendency when trying to justify the normality of their needs to remove themselves from the sub/dom world. Was talking to a male dom recently who has met men who love to tie women up and spank and whip them because that's normal but consider him a pervert for being into bdsm. That's kind of inflammatory particularly since it often embraces the same ideas that a woman should be submissive to a man that are common in spousal abuse.

Many writers manage to except submissives and dominants as people without needing to paint them with gender bias. As a sub male I find that men should be dom idea plays a large part in making me feel like I am broken and a freak with no place in society, or at least on those days when I feel like I need validation.

So I do have to bite down the urge to scream and jump on this quote which is the most inflammatory thing have read since the article on the Bible as justification for male dominance, still not sure if that's a subset of bdsm or an excuse tobeat the wife Iif ddinner isn't on time.

No lynching, it's cool. I want to agree with all of what you said, in theory.

But this sticks for me.

Not everything that makes someone feel better is necessarily a great thing. Moronic Female Supremacy tracts make me FEEL awesome, but I surely must realize they are beyond stupid and irrelevant to most people and completely a bad idea in reality.

So when you're constantly saying "we are NATURAL! we are NATURAL!" and you are in a relationship that is reflected everywhere you look in its mildest forms - tell me, what undercurrent does that start to take on?

If female submission is the logical natural happy outcome of being an easy baby, then being a male submissive must be due to incorrect parenting or faulty wiring or Your Mom's Fault or better yet, it's irrelevant to my boner so I don't even care to wonder. (IE: I am squicked, someone else give a shit, please.)

The more "natural and OK it is to be a heterosexual female submissive" (something it's already pretty normal and natural to be if you just look outside your window in the morning and talk to five other people post 50 shades of gloop!) the more (???) fill in the blanks it is to be FDom Msub or other.

And "we don't know enough to comment" basically means "we also think you are all too gross to have contacts with information in your demographics or even any material that we could refer to."

 

[Netzach]

In all fairness, I think he is trying to say that it might be a good idea to take your childs temperament into consideration and be careful not to create a people pleasing, rudderless person of your sensitive child or forcing the not very assertive child into bravado mode.

Take the fetish creepyboner gendered aspects out of this and I think it's incredibly important, probably more so for boys who are going to get slammed at every TURN for these behaviors.

 

[KoPilot]

Oh god I completely forgot about 50 Shades.

Okay but seriously you can't say that your relationship is frowned upon when 1. You can just claim it's biblically mandated (and last I checked thee were just short of a zillion Christians in the western world) and 2. 50 Shades not only exists, but sold just short of a zillion copies and is getting the movie treatment.

 

[All_4_Love]

Validation is not a bad word, or a bad thing. If you don’t search for or feel a need for validation, you’re not human. We have to do the inner work, be whole, and give our own selves that validation, but to act as if there’s something wrong with seeking it outside of yourself, such as in an article, is ludicrous. It’s not self destructive. It’s constructive.

It’s a very easy article for someone like myself to comprehend. In simpler terms, “If you have ever wondered why you are the way that you are, read this, I have a theory”. If that theory resonates with you (like it did me) you are going to feel validated. Again, there’s nothing wrong with that at all.

What makes a woman a submissive?

As with all conjectures about human development, the answer is likely twofold: a combination of nature and nurture, biology and environment.

This basically snuffs out the nature versus nurture debate. This makes sense to me. The author never says that you can directly observe different characteristics in a baby and determine whether the baby will be submissive.

So many of you see this article as him condoning the grooming of children. First off, children are groomed. That is part of being a parent. We groom them to be many things that we want for them to be. That being said, I don’t see the article being written in any way that would reflect the writer saying and/or condoning children being groomed to be submissive. He does not even state one time that these characteristics are observable, only that they are developed through environment if the seeds of submissiveness are already there.

I think one of the traits in this biologically grounded array that makes up temperament is common to all submissives. And that is social responsiveness. I would suggest that the baby who is temperamentally "set" to register and respond selectively and sensitively to social cues has the seeds of submissiveness in her nature. This is the baby that will search the environment for a human face; who will be attuned to, and very responsive to the human voice; who will preferentially and selectively attend to, and process, human interaction.

Yes, all babies respond to the human face, the human voice. This man’s theory cannot be disqualified just because all babies do this. He says some babies do this with acuity, increased responsiveness. They will preferentially and selectively attend to and process human interaction.

This is not something that would be observable in an infant that you could then begin the grooming process of submissiveness. This is an internal process, not an outer one. And, because it’s not observable does not make it false.

I can tell you I have experienced the increased sensitivity to social interaction my entire life. I am constantly scanning the environment for ways to be helpful to others, deferential, pleasing, serving, etc.

Those who consciously seek a Dominant partner are those who are perhaps, so sensitive that they require not only benevolence, but someone who understands precisely how moldable and influenceable they are, and is capable of using the power to mold her and influence her deliberately and consciously, for her good and the good of the relationship.

I have also unconsciously sought, and now consciously seek, a dominant partner. And this is why:

14. The healthy submissive hungers to be the object of an intense and penetrating understanding. When her nature is understood and she is held in a loving and firm frame, her devotion is almost limitless. The healthy submissive has an enormous capacity for devotion, from which springs her service.

Actually this thread did exactly what I was hoping it would do All_4_Love. It started a very spirited, very interesting exchange of ideas. Yes, you have to have a thick skin to post here but I knew that when I started it. I began this post because I am a sub who has my own opinions, thoughts and feelings about the origins of my submissiveness and whether or not it is a choice. I am so happy that I read your quote the day that we first spoke. I loved it then and I love it now and I have really enjoyed your comments here.

Thank you

Yes, it has, indeed, sparked an interesting conversation. That is what it should have done from the start. I hope that there was something that resonated with you in my first response back to you in this thread. Someone else here posted about being a "whole" person. I could not agree more with that statement.

In my experience, being submissive is not a choice. Submitting, however, is a choice. I am not good at initiating things, or "handling" things. It takes a tremendous amount of effort for me to do so. I am naturally a follower and a responder. That is how I function at my best.

Thank you for initiating contact with me. I am always grateful for the opportunity to form new friendships.

 

[bdsmshade]

No lynching, it's cool. I want to agree with all of what you said, in theory.

But this sticks for me.

Not everything that makes someone feel better is necessarily a great thing. Moronic Female Supremacy tracts make me FEEL awesome, but I surely must realize they are beyond stupid and irrelevant to most people and completely a bad idea in reality.

So when you're constantly saying "we are NATURAL! we are NATURAL!" and you are in a relationship that is reflected everywhere you look in its mildest forms - tell me, what undercurrent does that start to take on?

If female submission is the logical natural happy outcome of being an easy baby, then being a male submissive must be due to incorrect parenting or faulty wiring or Your Mom's Fault or better yet, it's irrelevant to my boner so I don't even care to wonder. (IE: I am squicked, someone else give a shit, please.)

The more "natural and OK it is to be a heterosexual female submissive" (something it's already pretty normal and natural to be if you just look outside your window in the morning and talk to five other people post 50 shades of gloop!) the more (???) fill in the blanks it is to be FDom Msub or other.

And "we don't know enough to comment" basically means "we also think you are all too gross to have contacts with information in your demographics or even any material that we could refer to."

The whole child development thing is way complex their is little to no chance of predicting how a child will turn out much less a baby, unless you're gonna lock them in the basement to control what influences them, Gods forbid anyone wants to do that. So that was ridiculous concept.

I agree whole heartedly that not everything used to make us feel better is a good thing could go on all day at the various cults and spiritual leaders who make people feel better in the short term whilst fucking them up and emptying their bank accounts. And yes mindless female dom is just as ridiculous as the extreme male stuff. Have known feminists who have fucked up every poor sod who was unfortunate enough to go out with them, and your fucked if you point that out to them.

Personally I think the quote in question is not the best choice or that healthy and my immediate reaction to it is anger, I had to walk away not to go on the attack. If we shout down the girls gaining support from the quote all we do is drive them away which doesn't seem the best reaction.

 

[KoPilot]

What's dumb, aside from the fact that the guy has no evidence to support his "theory", is that he doesn't ask why some people are submissive, especially because his "analysis" starts with extremely gender-neutral crap about faces and temperament, not "well, first off, most women are born with vaginas, therefore--" with would be more logically consistent, albeit a completely different sort of affront to child development and neuroscience.

He's doing what some folks like to call "adding epicycles".

Please do some real research into this instead of supporting false and damaging platitudes just because it makes you feel better. There's a book about just this stuff by Cordelia Fine that you really, really aught to read before being so set in your ways. Or is your mind already made up, so don't bother you with the facts?

 

[All_4_Love]

What's dumb, aside from the fact that the guy has no evidence to support his "theory", is that he doesn't ask why some people are submissive, especially because his "analysis" starts with extremely gender-neutral crap about faces and temperament, not "well, first off, most women are born with vaginas, therefore--" with would be more logically consistent, albeit a completely different sort of affront to child development and neuroscience.

He's doing what some folks like to call "adding epicycles".

Please do some real research into this instead of supporting false and damaging platitudes just because it makes you feel better. There's a book about just this stuff by Cordelia Fine that you really, really aught to read before being so set in your ways. Or is your mind already made up, so don't bother you with the facts?

My mind is made up because I'm a feelings based person, KP. I don't run on just facts. I understand that doesn't make much sense to someone like yourself, and that's fine. But, what about a theory has anything to do with facts? That's why it's a theory. So, I can't support a theory because you only run on facts? You kind of see how you can't really corroborate a debate on this?

It's like someone who only likes to submit/dominate in the bedroom, in the sexual aspect, telling me that I'm crazy because I submit to anyone who holds what I deem to be an authoritative stance. You know, as in, I don't want to fuck them but I'll submit. You tell me, girl. And, IMHO, for you to say that is dumb, is dumb.

 

[KoPilot]

Personally I think the quote in question is not the best choice or that healthy and my immediate reaction to it is anger, I had to walk away not to go on the attack. If we shout down the girls gaining support from the quote all we do is drive them away which doesn't seem the best reaction.

So what? Our frustration isn't going to drive them away from kink. It might drive them away from Lit at best, then what? They go to Fetlife or cry to their local much or wherever, and have an endless supply of people who are willing to coddle them because they are overrepresented in the community.

They don't have to look for very long to find validation just a about anywhere in the BDSM world.

 

[All_4_Love]

So what? Our frustration isn't going to drive them away from kink. It might drive them away from Lit at best, then what? They go to Fetlife or cry to their local much or wherever, and have an endless supply of people who are willing to coddle them because they are overrepresented in the community.

They don't have to look for very long to find validation just a about anywhere in the BDSM world.

Really, KP? I already know that is what is being done here in this forum and I have thought about leaving the BDSM section and no longer posting here many times. I thought I had something to contribute to this forum. I never in a million years expected to get the "unwelcome" that I have received. I never thought in a million years that just my sig alone would offend so many people, or I wouldn't have even put it on.

Do you give any leeway whatsoever to someone not being well versed in the world of BDSM, or the rules and regulations, and just welcome someone? Jesus H Christ!

 

[KoPilot]

My mind is made up because I'm a feelings based person, KP. I don't run on just facts. I understand that doesn't make much sense to someone like yourself, and that's fine. But, what about a theory has anything to do with facts? That's why it's a theory. So, I can't support a theory because you only run on facts? You kind of see how you can't really corroborate a debate on this?

It's like someone who only likes to submit/dominate in the bedroom, in the sexual aspect, telling me that I'm crazy because I submit to anyone who holds what I deem to be an authoritative stance. You know, as in, I don't want to fuck them but I'll submit. You tell me, girl. And, IMHO, for you to say that is dumb, is dumb.

And I feel that the Earth is flat, that women should have never gotten the vote, and that the Holocaust never happened. Knowing these things makes me feel better.

 

[StrayKat]

14. The healthy submissive hungers to be the object of an intense and penetrating understanding. When her nature is understood and she is held in a loving and firm frame, her devotion is almost limitless. The healthy submissive has an enormous capacity for devotion, from which springs her service.

I am capable of devotion when I am in my dominant frame, and I am capable of not giving a shit in my submissive one. I dont need understanding when I am a sadist, just a willing body. Arms that hold me dont have to be loving when I am a masochist, just respectful. I am not a people pleaser, I am not a serving personality, I find 99% of visibly dominant people annoying and if they try to occupy my personal space I will react aggressively.

My submissive side is part term and reserved for bedroom, or whatever place I get certain triggers that make me wet. Because that is the only way I express submissiveness, no serving no loving no devotion in any other frame of mind. Just sexual.
My devotion is reserved for a single person who is a switch just like me and it has very little to do with BDSM terms, rather with completely human ones.

I guess I am not healthy nor submissive then?
Even tho I know I am both.

 

[All_4_Love]

And I feel that the Earth is flat, that women should have never gotten the vote, and that the Holocaust never happened. Knowing these things makes me feel better.

And I feel like if that is the best that you have to contribute to me, as a person and a human being with valid thoughts and emotions, just as yourself, then I am done with conversing.

 

[All_4_Love]

I am capable of devotion when I am in my dominant frame, and I am capable of not giving a shit in my submissive one. I dont need understanding when I am a sadist, just a willing body. Arms that hold me dont have to be loving when I am a masochist, just respectful. I am not a people pleaser, I am not a serving personality, I find 99% of visibly dominant people annoying and if they try to occupy my personal space I will react aggressively.

My submissive side is part term and reserved for bedroom, or whatever place I get certain triggers that make me wet. Because that is the only way I express submissiveness, no serving no loving no devotion in any other frame of mind. Just sexual.
My devotion is reserved for a single person who is a switch just like me and it has very little to do with BDSM terms, rather with completely human ones.

I guess I am not healthy nor submissive then?
Even tho I know I am both.

You know what I find so interesting? Is that you and I can be so very different, yet still maintain a level of friendship, kindness, and respect for each other. That's called a healthy relationship. That's what I was hoping to find here when I joined. Who flippin cares what our differences are? We are all still human beings at the end of the day.

How about putting aside the ego and just accepting people, AND THEIR SIGS, without getting offended and just being friends?

 

[KoPilot]

And I feel like if that is the best that you have to contribute to me, as a person and a human being with valid thoughts and emotions, just as yourself, then I am done with conversing.

You really don't get it. And that's fine, there's no way to engage with someone who "doesn't run on facts". You basically say "that's nice, good for you" and move on.

What you don't seem to understand is that, no, I can't support anything and everything that justifies all fee-fees everywhere. You come in here, link to a creep that tries to explain why the people that give him boners exist, and expect me to be your cheerleader when that shit is exactly the stuff that has made my life hell? No. I'm not going to do that for you. Your feel-good is my, and many others', real-life actual nightmare that we have to deal with day in and day out.

 

[All_4_Love]

You really don't get it. And that's fine, there's no way to engage with someone who "doesn't run on facts". You basically say "that's nice, good for you" and move on.

What you don't seem to understand is that, no, I can't support anything and everything that justifies all fee-fees everywhere. You come in here, link to a creep that tries to explain why the people that give him boners exist, and expect me to be your cheerleader when that shit is exactly the stuff that has made my life hell? No. I'm not going to do that for you. Your feel-good is my, and many others', real-life actual nightmare that we have to deal with day in and day out.

KP, I think you have a lot to learn about the very harsh accusations that you seem to feel so comfortable directing toward others. I see a lot of hypocrisy, not only in your posts, but in a lot of other posters here as well. I don't expect anything. I did, however, hope to be a bit more welcomed here.

 

[StrayKat]

You know what I find so interesting? Is that you and I can be so very different, yet still maintain a level of friendship, kindness, and respect for each other. That's called a healthy relationship. That's what I was hoping to find here when I joined. Who flippin cares what our differences are? We are all still human beings at the end of the day.

How about putting aside the ego and just accepting people, AND THEIR SIGS, without getting offended and just being friends?

Mind I didnt quote you but the person you quoted. I think it is great that you find yourself in his words, even though I dont at all.

The problem as I see it is in that word "healthy", because it is implying that anything outside of the norm he established is not healthy. And that goes into personal and borderline offensive and is not just giving opinion someone can or doesnt have to agree with.

I have absolutely no problem with you or your feeling that his writing appeals to you, just with the way he worded it.

 

[bdsmshade]

So what? Our frustration isn't going to drive them away from kink. It might drive them away from Lit at best, then what? They go to Fetlife or cry to their local much or wherever, and have an endless supply of people who are willing to coddle them because they are overrepresented in the community.

They don't have to look for very long to find validation just a about anywhere in the BDSM world.

Because there are people who post on lit who are smarter, with much more up to date information and more direct in their delivery than the writer of the article. Will it help to cut anyone off from such things just because they resonate with something that makes us uncomfortable?

 

[All_4_Love]

Mind I didnt quote you but the person you quoted. I think it is great that you find yourself in his words, even though I dont at all.

The problem as I see it is in that word "healthy", because it is implying that anything outside of the norm he established is not healthy. And that goes into personal and borderline offensive and is not just giving opinion someone can or doesnt have to agree with.

I have absolutely no problem with you or your feeling that his writing appeals to you, just with the way he worded it.

Okay, I hear you. So, basically we are back to the same argument here. Because my reality does not match your reality, it's offensive to you.

I am sorry if that comes off as cocky. It's frustrating for me. I never ever expected my sig to be offensive to anyone. I am literally in shock over this. I don't even know what to say. I'll take the sig off, but it seems to me that the damage has already been done.

I just can't wrap my mind around it, Stray.

So, now I'm in tears. My sig is gone. I am devastated at how I've been treated here and the fact that I unknowingly and inadvertently offended so many others. And, KP, you have your wish. I won't be posting anymore in the BDSM forum. And, no Netz, it's not because I am taking my toys and going home. It's because I have a fucking heart and I am sick and tired of it being trampled on. I never wanted to offend anyone here. I wanted to make friends.

And on second thought, there are really very few here that I would want to be friends with anyway.

 

[StrayKat]

Okay, I hear you. So, basically we are back to the same argument here. Because my reality does not match your reality, it's offensive to you.

No, please understand, it has nothing to do with your reality, it has to do with the quote you posted that implies how those who are not <all what is written there> somehow unhealthy and damaged.
You dont see how that can be offensive?

 

[bdsmshade]

SOCIAL RESPONSIVENESS is a trait common to dominants as well as submissives so it could be said that it is a predictor (if such was possible) of someone with the ability to function in sexual situations outside of the 'norm'

Personally I'd say emotional intelligence is more important in a dom than a sub since being able to see when something is wrong before it becomes a problem.

 

[StrayKat]

Personally I would say I am sick and tired of men trying to establish the parameters how women should be. I am a woman, I would fucking know better what is it to be a woman, submissive or not. Even if he is the mighty domly flawless just because dominant.