How to spot a non Dominant

[MissTaken]

There are times when men who are sincerely vanilla identify themselves as a Dom as they view the BDSM as a hunting ground for submissive women who are willing to meet their every need and fantasy. These men may be too lazy to find a relationship in the vanilla world as it takes work to create the partnership tehy need. Little do they know the work and effort that goes into makeing a successful BDSM relationship is equal to that of any good relationship, anywhere and at times, more involved.

These men may learn enough about BDSM to begin a dialogue, but have underlying beliefs that would help a sub know thta they are talking with someone who is hoping to use her without regard for her needs.


Some signs that you are talking with a non Dom are:

1. His continuously expecting, stating or even ranting that his needs are to be met, yours are not to be considered and that you should be happy to "serve" him with no regard for yourself.

2. A man who views his sub or women as whores, only whores and without respect for individuality, elegance, intellect or class. I hvae never talked with a Dom who truly wanted a woman to only be a slut/whore etc. Those who called themselves Doms quickly got that ignore option!

3. A man who isn't wiling to openly discuss activities and limits, often resorting to, "You will love it, trust me, " isn't to be trusted.

These are a few examples and no, this is not a thread about predators. It is a discussion about how to identify those who are confused about the lifestyle and could lead to difficult and disapointing times for a sub.

Yes, I believe there are subs who also fit the description of non subs and perhaps another thread should be devoted to the same.


2.

 

[WriterDom]

There are subs who are happy to serve with no regard for themselves and relish the whore title. Does that make them non subs?

I think it’s more about preferences. While I think we on the same page about what we want, I wouldn’t put down someone who saw things differently.

 

[MissTaken]

I think what I am trying to say is that the person who has no regard for what the potential sub may want is someone who either lacks knowlege and information or who isn't truly interested in BDSM as much as self serving.

So, if the sub relishes being his whore 24/7 and serving, that is great, but is it likely that the man I am referring to is going to know what she relishes? No.

I hope that helps to clarify.

 

[WriterDom]

I would be just as concerned about a potential Dom who was too much into the desires and needs of a sub and then uses that information to model himself into the sub's ideal image.

 

[Ricckk]

Some signs that you are talking with a non Dom are:

First, I need to say that I agree wholeheartedly. Secondly, I disagree as a matter of semantics. You are describing a person fundamentally devoid of self-respect and therefore respect for others. This person IS DEFINITELY dominant, but not "A Dominant" as is generally thought of in the lifestyle. This person is NOT a "Master" but can be a master in terms of ownership or control of an individual. And it is also true that some submissives, much to their detriment, are attracted by and devoted to this type of individual.

It would be safe to say that a relationship with the type of person you described will be unhealthy.

Sorry for splitting hairs here but when you have as few hairs as I do, each one is important!

 

[MissTaken]

I would be just as concerned about a potential Dom who was too much into the desires and needs of a sub and then uses that information to model himself into the sub's ideal image.

I agree, completely.

It is a fine balance that must be achieved.

A Dominant who is too involved in the desires and needs of his sub cannot effectively dominate.

I have had experience with just this sort of thing and found myself very disappointed and he was quite uneasy.

 

[MissTaken]

Re: Re: How to spot a non Dominant

.

Sorry for splitting hairs here but when you have as few hairs as I do, each one is important!

Go ahead and split hairs!

This thread was offered as a matter of discussion. IT would be a boring and short discussion if everyone nodded their head assent!

 

[Pure]

For Miss T,
I kind of sense what you might be getting at, but it's not really clear. Let's call your guy a 'fake, exploiting dom'.

Originally posted by MissTaken
There are times when men who are sincerely vanilla identify themselves as a Dom as they view the BDSM as a hunting ground for submissive women who are willing to meet their every need and fantasy. These men may be too lazy to find a relationship in the vanilla world as it takes work to create the partnership tehy need. Little do they know the work and effort that goes into makeing a successful BDSM relationship is equal to that of any good relationship, anywhere and at times, more involved.

OK. For a moment, consider what I will call a "Pretend Dom/me." This fellow (assume M) thinks that finding sub services and sex is easier than finding a vanilla sexual relationship (or even fly by night sex), and (dubiously) believes female subs are in greater supply than vanilla female sex partners, or are easier to persuade.
He reads up on what a dom should look like and do, while remaining inwardly vanilla. So he tends to order the sub around, demand service, and ignore her needs.

But that person is simply a "bad" i.e., unskilled pretender. IF there were such a person, surely he could learn about contracts and limits and "sensitivity" and *really* look more convincing.
(So, Is the 'fake dom' just an unskilled 'pretender'?)

But you want to say "inwardly" he's not the real thing. Well, that's a tricky question. "Inwardly" he fantasizes straight sex, while carrying out kinky sex! Very odd!. But is this odd guy a danger?

These men may learn enough about BDSM to begin a dialogue, but have underlying beliefs that would help a sub know thta they are talking with someone who is hoping to use her without regard for her needs.

Again you make it too easy, see above. A skilled pretender could do more than 'begin the dialogue.' Also consider the novice domme. He may not know as much as you expect for the certification as 'the real thing.' So one would have to distinguish your 'fake dom' from a 'pretender.'

Some signs that you are talking with a non Dom are:

1. His continuously expecting, stating or even ranting that his needs are to be met, yours are not to be considered and that you should be happy to "serve" him with no regard for yourself.

2. A man who views his sub or women as whores, only whores and without respect for individuality, elegance, intellect or class. I hvae never talked with a Dom who truly wanted a woman to only be a slut/whore etc. Those who called themselves Doms quickly got that ignore option!

3. A man who isn't wiling to openly discuss activities and limits, often resorting to, "You will love it, trust me, " isn't to be trusted.


2.

There are doms, are there not, who to some degree are (what you would call) selfish, or inelegant, or even crude?? Many are not 'ideal' types (same as any other kinky category) They would fail some of these tests. What's the diff between your fake dom and one of these?

You later say

I think what I am trying to say is that the person who has no regard for what the potential sub may want is someone who either lacks knowlege and information or who isn't truly interested in BDSM as much as self serving.

Well, 'not truly interested' and 'self-serving'. That's going to be a hard test. Indeed the skilled pretend dom I described would have some interest in learning the subculture and practice.

"Self serving". There's another thread about 'selfishness' and all the semantics of it. In one way, of course the dom (or domme) is self serving, he (or she) wants his (her) pleasure and the satisfaction of exercizing authority. Having foresight, however, and not being an anti-social psychopath, he (or she) can see that giving or allowing the sub a bit of pleasure is in his (or her) long-range interest.

So I've talked of the 'pretend dom' and the 'selfish dom/me' and may not have captured what you're after. Both might be problems, but are hardly insidious. There are pretenders everywhere, every bar. As long as they don't dice and slice, then they are part of life's normal hazards.

The only other clue you give is that your fake dom doesn't pay attention to the needs of his sub, treats her as a whore, etc.

As Writer Dom has suggested, in far fewer words, this is very tricky. You seem to want a very compassionate, 'sensitive' sort, almost an altruist. Maybe that person is a dom, but if so, he's not the ONLY possibility, surely? Beyond the health and basic respect, basic psychological security of the sub, how much are the 'needs' supposed to be considered? [I'm assuming all the illegal things are ruled out, assault, rape, kidnapping.]

So again it might be easiest instead of your fake dom
(my wording) the issue, again, is the 'selfish' dom.

I'm trying to guess what you're getting at, and see some valid, imo, concerns, but just don't see how you would deal with the above issues.

 

[rosco rathbone]

Right on Pure. A man who wants to fuck specifically submissive women has desire to dominate in him, even if he is incompetent or insensitive.

 

[MissTaken]

Absolutely, a man can be dominant without being a Dominant.

Yes, some faux pas are to be expected from a novice Dom.

Some of the non Doms are simply odd and are not dangerous.

In the extreme, there are men who use a sub search to act upon their resentment toward feminism and see the number of subs available as women eager to allow him to control them without concern for their welfare. Abuse may even play into some of them.

These may be men who are eager to discuss punishment nd how they will set a sub up for punishment. When, in fact, a Dom is capable of using real life situations to meet hte needs of the sub and Dom.

Another issue that may present itself when trying to determine the innate desires and worthiness of a Dom is is perspective toward submissives. A man who finds subs interchangable is not likely to have a grasp on teh depth of D/s.

A Dom or sub who is able to determine their own needs, then ascertain who the "pretenders" are is going to be much happier in their search.

Are their subs who may be enticed by some of the behaviors and attitudes I am presenting in a negative light? Probably. But they need also to know what it is they seek, why they seek it and how to find it in a safe, sane and consensual manner.

Yep! The cue words...safe, sane and consensual.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Bad Doms

I think this is a good issue and goes beyond semantics.
There's a lot of people out there--usually men, I would think--who believe that a sub is simply a human doormat; someone who'll let them do whatever they want to her and come back for more. These people confuse dominating someone with being a Dominan. That's like saying that beating up women is the same as BDSM.

"Am I a Dom? Sure, sweetheart, I can kick the shit out of you as well as anyone!"
This ain't BDSM. It's misogyny.

Whatever a BDSM relationship may be, i,ost of them involve a lot more than one person treating another like shit, and there's a lot of people out there who don't know this or don't care about this.

Sure, there are people who like to be treated like crap, and there are always those who will oblige them. But I don't think anyone who knows much about BDSM would call this a relationship.

So in answer to Miss T's original question, I think the whole thing comes down to the kind of human-to-human communication that should take place at the start of a relationship when understandings are reached. And you know, if you have found a ptential Dom/me who simply doesn't have the experience, the sub can do some teaching too. Technique can always be learned. And it's just an expression of what's behind it anyhow.

---dr.M.

 

[MissTaken]

Thank you, Dr.

It is my hope that bringing this issue to open discussion, others read , add to the discussion and perhaps, some may have learned something that could help them to identify the Dom/me for them.

Yes, you said it much more clearly than I did.

Thanks again!

 

[WriterDom]

Mistaken, I'd be curious to know what percentage of men have met your 3 conditions of non Domhood on your search? I know it isn't isolated, because I've had sub friends that have left bondage.com because of all the mail from assholes.

 

[MissTaken]

Geesh!

That is a tough one, WD.

A fair amount, I would say have met the "conditions."

At least an equally fair amount haven't. Unfortunately, early on, I didn't find this out until a real life meeting had taken place.

I am not suggesting that all Doms on line are assholes, but as with any group of people, there is a fair share.

BTW...I shut down my bondage.com profile, as well.

 

[LC Rough Caress]

Re: Re: Re: How to spot a non Dominant

Go ahead and split hairs!

This thread was offered as a matter of discussion. IT would be a boring and short discussion if everyone nodded their head assent!

As wise fortune cookie says "When you find yourself standing on the side of an absolute majority, it's time to step back and take another look at things."

While certanily these conditions aren't universal, I think having a good discussion about what to look for when trying to spot a "non-Dom" is a good idea. Many subs are, no doubt, looking for different kinds of Doms, just as many Doms are looking for different kinds of subs. Some may want a relationship that is based on pure psychology and games of the mind, while others may want the "Dungeon of Dominance" with whips, chains, shackles, electroshock therapy, and a few other things only their twisted minds can think of.

The point is, if we discuss what to look for, we'll get plenty of opinions on the different levels of Dominance and what their standards should be, and by doing this, we'll offer a lot for others to look at when they're trying to decide whether the guy who wants to tie them up is looking for a full D/s relationship or if he's just looking to get someone in bed who will try anything for him (or her).

 

[Pure]

How to spot a non-Dom.

OK, Ms T. I see you are talking of a 'vanilla' guy, who likes to abuse, and who pretends to be a dom, in order to have a cover for abuse.

Well, this fellow, as you say, is going to be a little too eager to punish, he's going to want the sub to be exclusively enamoured of him; he'll be jealous of her friends, esp. male and try to cut her off from them.

His punishments will be too harsh, and result in real damage, which he'll claim is deserved.

Certainly this (would be) abuser is to be watched for. A woman, if she suspects, should not agree early on to private sessions; should set up safe calls, etc. She should suspect if he's a little too secretive; won't allow safety measures; or maybe he's just too full of himself, a braggart. She should worry if there are little explosions of temper, violence, or cruelty, early on, whether it be to the dog or a waitress or whomever.

And, up the road, if truly injured she should go to the police, and this means she should know she has a right NOT to be seriously injured, even if she consented to something kinky.

I think you can see where this is going. It's pretty clear that it makes NO difference that this guy is 'vanilla' inside. He could as well be kinky (Dom) inside, but be inclined to abuse (he's a kind of Dom, but a bit sick). The issue of seeing 'non-Dom', if I'm understanding you, is in the end, a red herring.

Even if one could find the 'non dom' inside, it's irrelevant. Find the abuser outside (in what he does; or find out what he's done with others). Not always easy, in view of the 'line' of some charming psychopaths, but at least an investigation in the right direction.

As you said, a non-dom could well be NON dangerous. (He's no more dangerous than a straight guy who pretends to be gay and wants to hang out and practice in a gay setting. Maybe he's re-hearsing for a movie role. Odd, but not dangerous.)
=======

I have in mind a wonderful story of a NON dangerous vanilla infiltrator. He's got the talk and the leather and all that. Wonderful dungeon and shelves of back issues of Leather Quarterly and Dom's Digest. One day, however she reaches behind his books and discovers a couple videos. Playboy Playmate of the Year! She's stunned, but doesn't confront him.

But a couple days later she comes home at lunch time and hears sounds from the bedroom. She pushes open the door and is aghast: he's having NORMAL sex with the woman who lives next door!

Subs, think about your partner... are there subtle signs of... vanilla???

 

[Guest]

I htink I understadn what you are sying here misstaken...I think that a true Dom/sub relationship is one based in love to begin with. If you have no love, then you get what you are pointing out.

From what I understand about a Dom/sub relationship...the Dom has to have respect and at least a bit of love for the sub too. No person who would ask a sub to do somthing just because they said to, without at least a simple explaination, should be considered as a true Dom or lover either.

 

[MissTaken]

edited to remove a bit of sarcasm....

If you want to get into semantics....

I couldn't use "wannabe Doms", that reflects badly on novice Doms.

I couldn't use "abusers" because the issue isn't entirely about abuse. Just because a sub isn't physically unsafe from someone who is manipulating her submissive nature, doesnt' mean that it is a small matter of little interest.

Furthermore, vanilla sex isn't the issue. IT is the lack of understanding of power exchange and willingness to learn that is the issue. If someone misuses a sub's willingness to offer her trust and submission AND that sub is looking for far more than kinky sex, it can cause serious damage mentally and emotionally.

When the "non Dom" loses interest in the submissive and the D/s lifestyle, it might play out badly.

Much like the woman living with the man who makes her solely dependent on him and then walks away, leaving her with no resources and sometimes, insufficient self confidence to move on. What will she do? Latch onto the nearest resource she can find...perhaps another such pretender.

Note: As semantic continue to be an issue, I believe there is a difference between abuse and misuse.

 

[MissTaken]

I htink I understadn what you are sying here misstaken...I think that a true Dom/sub relationship is one based in love to begin with. If you have no love, then you get what you are pointing out.

From what I understand about a Dom/sub relationship...the Dom has to have respect and at least a bit of love for the sub too. No person who would ask a sub to do somthing just because they said to, without at least a simple explaination, should be considered as a true Dom or lover either.

Some Dom/mes on the forum may not agree that there needs to be love for the sub, but yes, respect is key.

Thank you for the post unreg.

 

[Pure]

Hi Ms T.

I couldn't use "abusers" because the issue isn't entirely about abuse. Just because a sub isn't physically unsafe from someone who is manipulating her submissive nature, doesnt' mean that it is a small matter of little interest.

I think of 'abuse' in a broad sense, including psychological; so called 'mental cruelty.' Child abuse legislation recognizes this.
I didn't say a quality of relationship is of little interest unless there's physical abuse. A sub should find all issues of 'quality', of interest.

Furthermore, vanilla sex isn't the issue.

Well, that's the issue you raised in the first and second sentences in your first posting of this thread.

IT is the lack of understanding of power exchange and willingness to learn that is the issue. If someone misuses a sub's willingness to offer her trust and submission AND that sub is looking for far more than kinky sex, it can cause serious damage mentally and emotionally.

Stated and responded to. There are (among the good ones), clumsy doms, crude doms, mean and punitive doms, women- hating domes, and even a few 'criminal' doms (who assault and rape). These are, to varying degrees, dangerous individuals, esp. if very smooth on the outside.. They are to be watched out for, regardless of their 'knowledge' of bdsm, or 'learning.'

 

[MissTaken]

In terms of using "vanilla", honest question....

Does that term only apply to sexual practices?

I assumed it was a quick and easy word to use to denote anyone who isn't engaged in BDSM...

 

[MasterKensbeany]

If I may

Seymour, a middle aged, recently divorced man hasn't been laid for over a year now. He tried bar hopping, cruising the grocery store, even his local church but, nothing. Then Seymour hears about all the hot women online that will fuck anyone at the drop of a hat...so off he goes to Circuit City to get a computer. After about 6 months (the first couple spent figuring out what an ISP is and how to get one), he's online and putting personal ads at every site he can find.

After a year, our poor Seymour, having tried everything from "Wanna fuck?? No strings attatched" to "I love candlelight dinners, walks on the beach at sunset and holding hands" has still gotten no nookie and is desperate. He can't figure out where all these hot, horny internet women are.

One day, talking to a buddy at lunch he laments about his problem. His buddy tells him he's looking in the wrong places, he tells old Seymour that the really wild chicks are at the BDSM sites. All he has to do, he explains, is do a little reading to get the lingo, place some Domly sounding ads, write some Domly sounding emails and the women will come out of the woodwork to suck his cock.

That night Seymour races home and spends his entire weekend reading all he can about how to act and talk Domly. He thinks its all a bit weird, all the talk of spanking and floggers and nipple clamps but, what the hell, if it gets him laid. He's read lots of ads from other Domly guys and he thinks he's got it down. So Sunday night he puts a couple of ads up at alt.com and bondage.com and starts cruising the ads of submissive women. He sends out massive emailings to any women who sounds remotely interesting and waits. The next day, sure enough, there's a reply from an inexperienced sub looking for an experienced Dom to train her and make her his.

How will this end...who knows but, I would bet money it won't end well for her.

Just my take on MissTaken's post. I've met this guy more than once.

Respectfully
beany

 

[MissTaken]

Yes, MasterKensbeany,

No. She may not be abused, only disillusioned.

Yes. She is likely to be unhappy, very unhappy.

While it isn't necessarily abusive that Seymour took this route, it is manipulative.

It is likely that there will come a day, when she finds that he is less than Dominant, in the BDSM context of the word and will find herself alone and searching again. This time, on shakey legs.

Oh...

one way to avoid some of the problems associated is to ask for real life references. This doesnt' even need to be a formal "reference", so much as being able to talk to someone who knows him in real life. If he refuses the request, either he is hiding something or doesn't trust the sub well enough to ask discreet questions. Both are red flags.

 

[WriterDom]

As far as picking up women on the internet, it has been my experience that nilla women are 10 times easier to pick up than subs. And 10 times less concerned about safety. Most probably have never heard of a safe call.

Of course, there are naive, inexperenced subs too, but most are pretty well informed.

 

[Pure]

Master Ken's B--
Interesting story, but hardly menacing. Many a male, hearing of some group, becomes an ISP--Infiltrator Seeking Pussy. My brother began attending the local Catholic church as an ISP because of the fine 'stuff' he saw. Outcome: not too terrible; he married her.

The local Young Republicans might have some hot babes and our lothario tries to talk like one and go hunting at the YR conference!
I suppose suspicious misses might ask "What's 'supply side'?" or
"Who or what is Newt!" That would unmask the fella.

BDSM women could have a similar set: "Name one of the huge novels of De Sade?" "What was the location of the Story of O?"

Reminds me of the series of books, "Bluff your way through..."
E.g. Wines. Maybe there should be one for BDSM! Then a 'protective' one, "How to spot a bluffer in ..."

As for the 'unhappiness' and 'disillusionment'. No, Miss T, I don't like those things or wish them on anyone. A woman, and esp. a sub should be sure that someone is able to treat her (and others) decently, and is able to 'relate'. And as I've said several times here, that's got nothing to do with finding and identifying the 'non-Dom'. [For many a 'true' Dom could equally be unsuitable as a partner.]

Be careful with strangers; check out 'history'; arrange safety checks; beware of being gagged and totally bound, immobilized by a relative stranger in a strange place. ...Regardless of his BDSM pin or his 'inner Dom-hood' or lack thereof!!!