Not Dom, not sub...

[Pure]

Not Dom, not sub

Are there any such persons around this forum? Might there be one or two out of a hundred who do NOT fit into one of the single categories, dom or sub? Such a person would not feel comfortable with the simple description, "I am a dom." or "I am a sub."

For example: Might some feel they fit in BOTH categories equally well? And maybe, equally, a few more? Might some NOT fit either category? Nor even the 'switch' category?

Do you/we have anything to say, any issues to discuss?

Indeed, is there a Dom who's a *teensy* bit unsure about being totally in that category? of a sub who's the *tiniest* bit wondering if maybe she or he isn't 100% 'sub'?

AND, if, for instance, not totally 100% 'sub', is there anyone who does not go on to say, "I'm learning," by which is meant, "I'm learning more and more every day to become a better sub, as fully submissive as I can be."

Just curious. Please ignore this posting if you're happily settled in one category and its lifestyle. Enjoy! (If you feel you *must* post to this thread, and denounce the 'mixed up' persons to whom it might appeal, could you at least be brief?)

[Slightly revised at Spectre T's suggestion.]

 

[sharingfantasies]

What I always liked about the BDSM world is that each set of partners dictates their relationship so that there are many different levels or types of dom and sub. Personally, after lots of reading, asking questions and listening to others, I decided that I was a borderline sexually submissive person. Not fully submissive, not completely vanilla, but somewhere in between.

I have had people tell me that I was submissive, that I wasn't submissive, that I was a borderline sub/slave, that I was vanilla with a liking for kink. LOL

After a dozen years I have a pretty good idea of where I fit, now if only I could resolve the conflict between who I am and who I think I should be..

 

[Pure]

imo, you should be (become) who you are. there is no reason a borderline-ly submissive person should be thought of--or think herself-- as a kind of factory 'second' (slightly defective item of manufacture).

 

[Netzach]

I'm very open about the fact that just because the vast majority of the time I prefer to be in control this realization is not from not having tried other things in my past and not for the inability to do anything else under any circumstances. I don't flag switch because I'm not *looking* to switch, not because this is an impossibility for me so much as not ideal.

 

[SpectreT]

"Not Dom, not sub..."

Interesting way to put it. Words can cause prejudgements, intentional or not. And Pure, I know you're too precise to do anything unintentionally, when it comes to semantics.

To open, some people think I'm nothing because I call myself Switch, or that I'm somehow less dominant or submissive because of the label.

It's not an "either/or" proposition, at least not for me. There are elements, aspects, of my personality that come from both categories. Having played both sides, I know they both work for me, so it's a "both/and" situation. I throw the switch label out there because some folks like having a conveinient label to describe a complex situation. Doesn't mean it fits perfectly, and the label means a different thing to every single person who encounters it.

To attempt to address your questions, no, I don't doubt my dominance at all. Enough people who've met me in real life have given me enough feedback to know I project that vibe when I'm feeling it. To be honest, it's been so long since I've done the submissive thing that I occasionally doubt it, but some mundane experiences with other personalities and how I react to them reassures me that it'll still be there if/when I need it.

I used this illustrative description on b.com, and it was well recieved there, for the most part:

Think of it like magnets. Push two magents' north poles together, and one will flip around so they can meet. Some folks have one magnetic pole (dom or sub) heavily insulated, that pole can't attract or repel anything, which leaves their other pole. Thus they identify themselves as either Dominant or Submissive; it's their "magnetic pole" that's exposed, and doing the attracting/repelling. By contrast, neither of my poles is insulated; I'm the magnet that can flip. Versatility works for me, though it may not work for you.

So it's not a case of "Not Dom, not sub..." It's a case of "Both Dom and sub... just not simultaneously, and only once so far with the same person.."

 

[SirFace]

I'm too new at this point to answer much but I have found that I have some aspects of Dom that seem to come naturally and I am strong in, others not so. I am also exploring some ideas that could be construed as sub. We have talked about this and neither or us is very hung up on "what should be" but more on what is and as long as we are both having fun and enjoying it then we are happy.

 

[sincerely_helene]

Pure, I don't know you well enough to decipher whether you are speaking strictly on a kink basis, or general persona.

Sorry I can't be of more help.

 

[Pure]

Hi Spectre,

Thanks for the note.
ST: ...By contrast, neither of my poles is insulated; I'm the magnet that can flip. Versatility works for me, though it may not work for you.

So it's not a case of "Not Dom, not sub..." It's a case of "Both Dom and sub... just not simultaneously, and only once so far with the same person.."

P: This is an excellent point. I've added a line or so to my opening post.

Thanks! (to my colleague who speaks precisely)

 

[JMohegan]

Not Dom, not sub

Are there any such persons around this forum? Might there be one or two out of a hundred who do NOT fit into one of the single categories, dom or sub? Such a person would not feel comfortable with the simple description, "I am a dom." or "I am a sub."

When I am in a long-term relationship with a submissive SO, I am a Dom. I'm also Tarzan, Indiana Jones, and King of the Universe, if you catch my drift.

At all other times, I'm just a guy who occasionally fucks or tops women.

 

[Hester]

Not Dom, not sub

Are there any such persons around this forum? Might there be one or two out of a hundred who do NOT fit into one of the single categories, dom or sub? Such a person would not feel comfortable with the simple description, "I am a dom." or "I am a sub."

For example: Might some feel they fit in BOTH categories equally well? And maybe, equally, a few more? Might some NOT fit either category?

Do you/we have anything to say, any issues to discuss?

that would be me.

other than not relating to those labels or really fitting in anywhere, issues like what?

 

[kitty4ever]

Think of it like magnets. Push two magents' north poles together, and one will flip around so they can meet. Some folks have one magnetic pole (dom or sub) heavily insulated, that pole can't attract or repel anything, which leaves their other pole. Thus they identify themselves as either Dominant or Submissive; it's their "magnetic pole" that's exposed, and doing the attracting/repelling. By contrast, neither of my poles is insulated; I'm the magnet that can flip. Versatility works for me, though it may not work for you.

I love this description. Thank you. I've been with a switch before, so I learned the motions of Dom-like actions to fullfill his wishes, but it wasn't entirely comfortable for me to do until I looked at it as another way of serving his needs. Good or bad, that's what it took.

I'm very much an Alpha personality, especially when I was in school and now in my job. So I've seemed to attract more of the men who want to please/serve than those with a strong enough personality (an equal or stronger Alpha personality than myself) for me to submit to. So, most of my relationships have been vanilla, such as my marriage.

Hmm...just thought of this, but has my past willingness to be in a vanilla relationship if the man chose been an example of my way of 'submitting' to what type of relationship he chose? I have to ponder this now. I ultimately didn't end my marriage due to lack of D/s, but because I was tired of the mind games, his crap and then when we were in the counselor's office, he completely tried to backpedal out of admitting any of it happened. Lack of D/s contributed to my frustration, but that wasn't the proverbial 'last straw'.

Sorry for the tangent.

 

[Vulpesvulpes]

I've stated here before that I hate labels.

I am who I am and I like what I like. I don't care what other people call it or whether they think it's real or legitimate. I reject the idea that some people are somehow superior because of their ideology and the rest of us are just posers or wannabes.

For me, it all depends on what kind of mood I'm in. I very much enjoy dominating a woman most of the time but occaisionally, I want to be 'forced' to lick pussy before being fucked in the ass.

 

[Lilith]

I used to think I was a switch but never felt comfortable with that label because I rarely, if ever have the urge to be anything other than dominant. I used to think that if I enjoyed an occasional less than top experience it somehow lessened my position as well. Shockingly there are even a few people who I would consider having vanilla sex with <<gasp>>

 

[Pure]

well, vv, the Marquis would be proud of you!

chip off the old block



vvI very much enjoy dominating a woman most of the time but occaisionally, I want to be 'forced' to lick pussy before being fucked in the ass.

 

[Pure]

hester

H: that would be me.

other than not relating to those labels or really fitting in anywhere, issues like what?

anything your fevered imagination can cook up!

for me, two of the big issues for any set of sexually variant desires (esp. those in the SM realm) are these:

1) how do such desires, or their practice, fit, if they do, with psychic health and sanity? or more basically, how may life with them be made tolerable?

2) what are the ways of imaginatively/artistically expressing or fulfilling those desires? [taking writing/reading or stories as just one example] what are the stories to be written? to be enjoyed?

what others can you think of?

 

[*curious*]

I used to think I was submissive... then met someone who taught me it isn't quite about who is what, as much as it is about being a Lover.

... Of course, that is far easier said than done, so for now I'm safely tucked away in my little ivory tower, avoiding the whole issue.

 

[DVS]

np

 

[Hester]

H: that would be me.

other than not relating to those labels or really fitting in anywhere, issues like what?

anything your fevered imagination can cook up!

for me, two of the big issues for any set of sexually variant desires (esp. those in the SM realm) are these:

1) how do such desires, or their practice, fit, if they do, with psychic health and sanity? or more basically, how may life with them be made tolerable?

2) what are the ways of imaginatively/artistically expressing or fulfilling those desires? [taking writing/reading or stories as just one example] what are the stories to be written? to be enjoyed?

what others can you think of?

i don't think those things are issues for me. i consider myself relatively sane and psychically healthy and my life is more than tolerable. i express myself by being myself.

i yam what i yam. i don't know of many people who are kinked like me, but i have met a few people and that i find comforting. it makes it nearly impossible to find a partner who can truly satisfy me, but i am lucky to be one of those people who is happy on her own. lack of a companion with whom i feel true kinship is probably my biggest "issue" but at the same time it's not something that keeps me up at night.

 

[Pure]

Three more for discussion.

i originally made a list of four or five questions, but decided initially to simply post two. since you possibly allude a little to this area, here they are for you or any other persons who wish to comment.

3) To what extent may the set of desires be fulfilled is any social way, i.e. with some consideration for the other.

4) To what extent does the set of desires fit--if it does-- with friendships--or must it exist outside or alongside them. (Do friends and sexually satisfying partners form two entirely separate groups?)

5) To what extent does the set of desires fit--if it does-- with a loving relationship.

feel free, hester or anyone, to add to the list.

 

[Hester]

i originally made a list of four or five questions, but decided initially to simply post two. since you possibly allude a little to this area, here they are for you or any other persons who wish to comment.

3) To what extent may the set of desires be fulfilled is any social way, i.e. with some consideration for the other.

4) To what extent does the set of desires fit--if it does-- with friendships--or must it exist outside or alongside them. (Do friends and sexually satisfying partners form two entirely separate groups?)

5) To what extent does the set of desires fit--if it does-- with a loving relationship.

feel free, hester or anyone, to add to the list.

it's really hard to answer these general questions. i think it would be different for different people with different desires.

i learned a while back that the paradigm in which i look for one person to be the be-all, do-all in my life---one person to satisfy all my needs---doesn't work for me. i since learned to compartmentalize and to find fulfillment of my needs in more than one person. so, to a great extent, my desires are filled by different people in my social circle.

my friendships are essential.

yes, sometimes---most of the time for me---friends and sexually satisfying partners are not one in the same. on rare occasion in my life, i have found multiple needs satisfied by a single person and that was muy mos cool, but not a requisite for my contentment or happiness.

desires fit well within a loving relationship, both of the sexual and nonsexual nature. it seems you are talking about intimacy there, which doesn't necessarily have anything to do with sex, although sex can certainly intensify it.

 

[ammre]

i say i'm submissive to make my life easier, but in reality, sometimes i think i'd make a better Dom. i don't like to BE Dom, but it dosen't feel against my nature to do it.
I'm a controlling submissive? I dunno. I think for me it relates back to that whole idea of alpha sub. I will lay down and show my soft vulnerable underside, but i can and might just claw our eyes out too...

 

[davro]

People are too complex to fit into defined roles.Who and what I am in public is different to the me only my friends see and even they dont see the side of me those that I`m intimate with know....which varies according to the person.I`m deeply suspicious of those who appear to fit too neatly into "lifestyle" pigeonholes,they tend to be role-playing or following a script,doing what they`re "supposed to do".Find someone you`re compatible with and do what works,why bother with labels or what anyone else thinks.Dont worry about what you are,think about who you are and go with it,if you enjoy it and no-one gets hurt (unless they`re into that of course)then why worry what box you "belong"in?

 

[FurryFury]

I'm beginning to debate what I am to myself a little again.

When I take charge "for Him," I find my ego suddenly wants, demands or expects certain things for ME.

Also like I said, I rarely come unless I am taking charge of that part.

But I still feel like a sub.

*shrugs*

Perhaps I am a 70/30 kind of person who knows? Whatever I am, it's okay with me it's just hard to define sometimes and maybe defining isn't that important.

As long as I am happy and he is happy that's really all that counts.

Fury

 

[Pure]

note to hester,

hester said,

i don't know of many people who are kinked like me, but i have met a few people and that i find comforting. it makes it nearly impossible to find a partner who can truly satisfy me,

here's an issue that isn't much discussed: why is it often assumed either 1) partner must be the same (e.g. get off on menstrual blood) or 2) complementary (one likes to be whip, other likes to whip).

it would seem to me that friends and lovers, not to say, 'enlightened' casual partners could and would 'bend' a little: "If you like that and I'm neutral, we'll do it, and i'll at least get off on you getting off."

i think you would agree, from other things you've said, that it's a mistake to think "I'm a unique lock and somewhere there's person who's the unique key."

 

[Pure]

to amre,

A: I'm a controlling submissive? I dunno.

P: I don't think that would be so rare! The possibility of fundamental intermixture is an issue related to the thread. In the SM area, the useful term is 'sadomasochistic tendencies". Yet one never hears of "dominasubmissive tendencies."