Master Scorpion
Experienced
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2003
- Posts
- 52
Gift of submission
Peter Tupper
March 1, 2004
I got tapped for the submissive's panel at the February BIO meeting. I've been doing this for about ten years; I should hope I've accumulated some kind of wisdom.
ne of the points that came up in the discussion was about "the gift of submission." A certain Domme in the audience said that there was no such thing. When mothers make lunch for their kids, or do the laundry, they don't get any special recognition or appreciation. It's taken for granted. That's what they do.
I can see the point of her objection. If anybody is giving a gift, it's the tops. Tops have to do a lot of work, take a lot of initiative and even more responsibility in play. They obtain the toys and learn to use them skillfully and safely. They arrange the scene, set the pace, take their bottoms up and down the intensity scale.
In my few ventures into topping, I've always felt like the weight of the world was on me. Obviously, tops must enjoy that kind of feeling, otherwise they wouldn't do it. Still, I presume that a good top will always have a trace of that fear that one day, something would go wrong for their play partner. That burden keeps tops honest, but it can be wearing.
The good news is that, if top and bottom share that burden in the right way, it shrinks dramatically. Bottoms owe tops the security of knowing that we can take what they dish out. We owe them honest disclosure of our fragile parts, physical and mental, so that they can work around them.
On top of that, they often don't get the appreciation and strokes that subs get. I have a sneaking suspicion that bottoms outnumber tops, not because of any innate craving to be dominated, but simply because most people don't want to do all that work.
The good news is that, if top and bottom share that burden in the right way, it shrinks dramatically. Bottoms owe tops the security of knowing that we can take what they dish out. We owe them honest disclosure of our fragile parts, physical and mental, so that they can work around them.
On top of that, they often don't get the appreciation and strokes that subs get. I have a sneaking suspicion that bottoms outnumber tops, not because of any innate craving to be dominated, but simply because most people don't want to do all that work.
In fact, I'll ask my fellow bottoms and subs, and switches too, to go out and do something nice for your underappreciated tops and dominants. No strings attached.
However, I believe that the gift of submission is valid and important concept.
Bottoms have their own burdens to bear. No matter how sensitive, skillful and careful a top is, a bottom will suffer the consequences if things go wrong, and they are in a better position to see problems coming. As much as bottoms trust their tops, we are ultimately responsible for our own safety first, before anyone else.
A good bottom will do the work of learning about himself or herself, limits and desires. They might also learn how to do massage, cook a dinner, light cigarettes, remember that their dominant's favorite drink is diet Pepsi with lime and keep an extra can in the fridge, or something else. That's work, and work produces value, which can be given as a gift.
Perhaps most important, the idea of submission as a gift matters because it's a good inoculation against bottom's disease. If you see your submission as something of value, you don't give it to just anybody. You give it to someone you like, respect and trust, whom you know will appreciate it.
Giving your submission away to people who don't respect and appreciate it can lead to unsatisfying play at best and outright abuse at the worst. Bottoms should realize that they do have social capital in this culture, that they don't have to roll over for anybody who sticks "Master" or "Mistress" in front of their name and looks at them twice. Once a bottom realizes that, his or her play life improves.
One of philosophy's bugbears is whether there's such a thing as a truly selfless act, or are humans ultimately motivated by self-interest? In the kink world, there's a new dimension to that question. When a service-oriented bottom says he has no thought to his own pleasure, is he being truthful?
However, you don't need to believe in pure altruism to see the point of giving gifts. A gift economy is a system in which people benefit according to how much they give away. The open source software movement is one example; programmers give away software so that other people can use it and improve on it.
A kink relationship (even if it only lasts fifteen minutes) is not some sterile zero-sum game. For the two (or more) participants, the more you give, the more you get.
Back to Top
Peter Tupper
March 1, 2004
I got tapped for the submissive's panel at the February BIO meeting. I've been doing this for about ten years; I should hope I've accumulated some kind of wisdom.
ne of the points that came up in the discussion was about "the gift of submission." A certain Domme in the audience said that there was no such thing. When mothers make lunch for their kids, or do the laundry, they don't get any special recognition or appreciation. It's taken for granted. That's what they do.
I can see the point of her objection. If anybody is giving a gift, it's the tops. Tops have to do a lot of work, take a lot of initiative and even more responsibility in play. They obtain the toys and learn to use them skillfully and safely. They arrange the scene, set the pace, take their bottoms up and down the intensity scale.
In my few ventures into topping, I've always felt like the weight of the world was on me. Obviously, tops must enjoy that kind of feeling, otherwise they wouldn't do it. Still, I presume that a good top will always have a trace of that fear that one day, something would go wrong for their play partner. That burden keeps tops honest, but it can be wearing.
The good news is that, if top and bottom share that burden in the right way, it shrinks dramatically. Bottoms owe tops the security of knowing that we can take what they dish out. We owe them honest disclosure of our fragile parts, physical and mental, so that they can work around them.
On top of that, they often don't get the appreciation and strokes that subs get. I have a sneaking suspicion that bottoms outnumber tops, not because of any innate craving to be dominated, but simply because most people don't want to do all that work.
The good news is that, if top and bottom share that burden in the right way, it shrinks dramatically. Bottoms owe tops the security of knowing that we can take what they dish out. We owe them honest disclosure of our fragile parts, physical and mental, so that they can work around them.
On top of that, they often don't get the appreciation and strokes that subs get. I have a sneaking suspicion that bottoms outnumber tops, not because of any innate craving to be dominated, but simply because most people don't want to do all that work.
In fact, I'll ask my fellow bottoms and subs, and switches too, to go out and do something nice for your underappreciated tops and dominants. No strings attached.
However, I believe that the gift of submission is valid and important concept.
Bottoms have their own burdens to bear. No matter how sensitive, skillful and careful a top is, a bottom will suffer the consequences if things go wrong, and they are in a better position to see problems coming. As much as bottoms trust their tops, we are ultimately responsible for our own safety first, before anyone else.
A good bottom will do the work of learning about himself or herself, limits and desires. They might also learn how to do massage, cook a dinner, light cigarettes, remember that their dominant's favorite drink is diet Pepsi with lime and keep an extra can in the fridge, or something else. That's work, and work produces value, which can be given as a gift.
Perhaps most important, the idea of submission as a gift matters because it's a good inoculation against bottom's disease. If you see your submission as something of value, you don't give it to just anybody. You give it to someone you like, respect and trust, whom you know will appreciate it.
Giving your submission away to people who don't respect and appreciate it can lead to unsatisfying play at best and outright abuse at the worst. Bottoms should realize that they do have social capital in this culture, that they don't have to roll over for anybody who sticks "Master" or "Mistress" in front of their name and looks at them twice. Once a bottom realizes that, his or her play life improves.
One of philosophy's bugbears is whether there's such a thing as a truly selfless act, or are humans ultimately motivated by self-interest? In the kink world, there's a new dimension to that question. When a service-oriented bottom says he has no thought to his own pleasure, is he being truthful?
However, you don't need to believe in pure altruism to see the point of giving gifts. A gift economy is a system in which people benefit according to how much they give away. The open source software movement is one example; programmers give away software so that other people can use it and improve on it.
A kink relationship (even if it only lasts fifteen minutes) is not some sterile zero-sum game. For the two (or more) participants, the more you give, the more you get.
Back to Top
personally i dont see whats wrong with it. a bottom needs to find someone who respects and appreciates their submission..i mean no one, not even the most down submissive, wants to submit to someone who really dosnt give a shit. what bottom wants to submit to someone (im not talking about once you're collared, and a slave, and things are "out of your hands" im talking about before that) who, if the slave died or took off, the Master/Mistress would just be like "oops-no more slavejane. let me go to a munch later tonight and see if theres any new slaves on the market".
). Yes, the top has a great responsibility and burden, but it is their role...and they know it going in. As a sub, I also have responsbilities as the author of that writing pointed out. And as for respect...it's a two way street, baby.
