Similarities in doms and subs of both sexes

[JustADom]

Ok, so I've been reading many posts and stories by both doms and subs of both sexes... and I notice that there are some obvious similarities. For example, subs of both sexes like things like panties and licking off cum and things like that. But I mean, why? Is there some sort of hormone that makes them like and be drawn those things? Or is it all mostly psychological?

It seems to me... that subs are generally higher in oxytocin - which is popularly known as the "feminine" or the "love" hormone. This hormone enhances supposedly "feminine" traits like being more trusting or pair-bonding behaviors (or its negative effects such as envy and jealousy). Could this be the reason that subs of both sexes are attracted to supposedly "masculine" things, such as cock and authority? The masculine hormone is the androgen or testosterone... I forget which.

What do you think? Are there any studies or something like that would confirm this?

 

[Stella_Omega]

I think that most subs, or people that call themselves subs, get a huge sense of satisfaction out of being paid attention to. If someone is forcing you to wear panties, then someone is watching you wear them. If you're licking cum someone is watching you do it. If you've been beaten to tears, someone was doing the beating on you. If you've been humiliated, someone was pointing and laughing... at you, you, you.

I know the stories don't usually talk about that, but my experience is that people generally avoid self awareness-- and also nice girls (and subs) aren't supposed to act like narcissistic beasts in bed. I've only seen the concept used o express scorn, and I don't think that's right.

 

[Kellydude666]

I know for myself playing the sub role I don't look at it as being or wanting to be feminine. In real life I'm always in control telling people what to do so I like when a pretty feminine female is having her way with me. I don't have any homosexual tendencies so I wouldn't lick anyone's or even my own cum. I like a little pain not too much just because it's part of the control but stop at major pain or bruising marks. The panties don't bother me because it's just part of the belittling game. And for some reason I love the golden shower, major turn on, I'm guessing because I have zero control over it.

 

[JustADom]

Oh interesting... so everyone is different.

I think that most subs, or people that call themselves subs, get a huge sense of satisfaction out of being paid attention to. If someone is forcing you to wear panties, then someone is watching you wear them. If you're licking cum someone is watching you do it. If you've been beaten to tears, someone was doing the beating on you. If you've been humiliated, someone was pointing and laughing... at you, you, you.

Oh... if that's true, then that is interesting. As for me (not a sub), I would not want being paid attention like that. Wow, that would be very annoying, indeed.

Why do you think that they enjoy being paid attention to?

 

[Netzach]

Judging from the marathon blowjobs and the long slow sensual foot worship and muffdiving sessions that Dominant folks generally like I call "bs" on the "Dominant people don't like being center of attention" meme. Just because subs do doesn't mean we don't.

 

[CutieMouse]

It seems to me... that subs are generally higher in oxytocin - which is popularly known as the "feminine" or the "love" hormone. This hormone enhances supposedly "feminine" traits like being more trusting or pair-bonding behaviors (or its negative effects such as envy and jealousy).

If one is arguing the point from a male dominant/ female submissive/ BDSM occurs within relationships (as opposed to less formal arrangements) point of view, I can almost understand the conclusion that submissives have higher levels of oxytocin, etc.

However...

Oxytocin also triggers orgasm. And labor. And is essential for breastfeeding. Oxytocin does contribute to pair bonding, but there's a whole soup of hormones involved there. Oxytocin isn't (IMO) so much a "feminine" hormone, as it is biologically essential for furthering the species. Given that women are the ones giving birth and (prior to the development of formula) feeding the babies, they tend to have more of the hormone than men.

I would also argue that envy and jealousy aren't feminine or masculine traits, either... the sexes simply express them differently.

 

[KoPilot]

I don't get why people keep trying to bring biology into the discussion. Subs have more feminine hormone levels? Right. Because I'm sure there's no msub or fdom (or even just an aggressive woman who exhibits "masculine" behaviors) who has gone to get their hormones checked and be told "everything's normal".

There's no evidence to support 90% of gendered kink theories out there, and the ones that vaguely do (of the sort so neatly debunked in Delusions of Gender) are bad science.

Yes, it's true that women generally have more estrogen than men, and men more testosterone and androgen. It's true that those things change the way you feel and react to things (ask any trans* person on HRT). The rest is socialization. Why can't we talk about socialization? Why are people afraid to not be "born this way"? It doesn't make anybody a sucker or a fake.

Let's talk about kids and where they get 99% of their ideas about submissiveness and dominance. Let's talk about which cartoon or movie character they try to emulate because they represent someone they'd like to be. Let's talk about the common trappings of weakness and strength.

Why do subs like wearing girly panties? Well, when have you ever seen boxer briefs get associated with being done-to and doted on? I didn't come out of the birth canal believing that cock = authority. You've gotta be kidding me.

For the record, this sub prefers plain underwear in bed unless otherwise asked, and saves the girly panties for wearing under jeans. Thongs are only useful for getting spanked and paddled with.

 

[LallyH]

Ok, so I've been reading many posts and stories by both doms and subs of both sexes... and I notice that there are some obvious similarities. For example, subs of both sexes like things like panties and licking off cum and things like that. But I mean, why? Is there some sort of hormone that makes them like and be drawn those things? Or is it all mostly psychological?

It seems to me... that subs are generally higher in oxytocin - which is popularly known as the "feminine" or the "love" hormone. This hormone enhances supposedly "feminine" traits like being more trusting or pair-bonding behaviors (or its negative effects such as envy and jealousy). Could this be the reason that subs of both sexes are attracted to supposedly "masculine" things, such as cock and authority? The masculine hormone is the androgen or testosterone... I forget which.

What do you think? Are there any studies or something like that would confirm this?

I don't wear panties for my own amusement, but for the pleasure it gives to the viewer, which in turn makes me feel good. It's a way of satisfying a desire to serve another.

And in my albeit limited experience, I've seen the same levels of jealousy expressed by both Doms and subs of either sex, so I think you're hormone theory is way off.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Oh interesting... so everyone is different.



Oh... if that's true, then that is interesting. As for me (not a sub), I would not want being paid attention like that. Wow, that would be very annoying, indeed.

Why do you think that they enjoy being paid attention to?

Well, maybe nobody did when they were little. Or maybe everyone did when they were little. Or maybe its an innate narcissism, which we have certainly seen in many a kinkster, let's face it. (me me me! ) Or maybe they learn to want attention because orgasms.

I know you are poking around at "biology is destiny" here. But you are talking to a group where a double handful of people Live perfectly decent lives while ignoring their birth sex, or even transitioning away from it. And each and every one of us are proof that those biological destinies are social constructs and nothing more.

Do you have any idea of how many young people assigned female at birth are claiming trans-male status? Honestly, it's tens of thousands. And many of them are not-- but they are unable to conform to standard expectations of what women are supposed to be like.

Judging from the marathon blowjobs and the long slow sensual foot worship and muffdiving sessions that Dominant folks generally like I call "bs" on the "Dominant people don't like being center of attention" meme. Just because subs do doesn't mean we don't.

Damn straight.

 

[BrightlyGo]

For example, subs of both sexes like things like panties and licking off cum and things like that. But I mean, why?

In some cases, because they're outward expressions that have some currency in the sub-culture. My Domme doesn't care for the cross-dressing thing, for instance, and, in the absence of someone who feels like putting me in her clothes expresses dominance, the idea actually does nothing for me.

Eating a creampie, OTOH, is just hot. It shows submission and abandon - that i'm so into pleasing Her that such exigencies don't matter.

I don't get why people keep trying to bring biology into the discussion. Subs have more feminine hormone levels? Right. Because I'm sure there's no msub or fdom (or even just an aggressive woman who exhibits "masculine" behaviors) who has gone to get their hormones checked and be told "everything's normal".

i'm sure there is some biological or chemical or brain difference or other innate thing going on with some of us. But, i agree that it's not anything as straightforward as sex hormones. i must have gotten the full dose of androgens and testosterone - physiologically, i'm as male as it gets, i've got the broad shoulders, deep chest, flat ass, heavy beard, male pattern baldness, forest of body hair, freak'n ear hair, everything. But, i'm short, and rather than having some hyper-aggressive Napoleon complex, i'm a passive (sometimes passive-aggressive), shy, introspective, 'type-B,' instinctive follower/'beta' and very much the 'natural' submissive.

Personally, though, i'd prefer to believe that it wasn't a matter of genetics or biology, but of choice or 'character,' but then i'd like to believe in Cartesian dualism, even though i know it's been conclusively disproved.

The rest is socialization. Why can't we talk about socialization? Why are people afraid to not be "born this way"? It doesn't make anybody a sucker or a fake.

Well, for M/f, sure, if they had an oddly old-fashioned upbringing, socialization might come into it, but F/m, they're defying even post-modern socialization.

Let's talk about kids and where they get 99% of their ideas about submissiveness and dominance. Let's talk about which cartoon or movie character they try to emulate because they represent someone they'd like to be.

i have never seen a cartoon or movie character that shared my orientation, and was male. (Female characters, sure, and the occasional male character that gets part of the way there, and i can project or fill in the rest.) The depiction of overt msubs is pretty consistent: they're fetishists who are only submissive in the context of the fetish.

Let's talk about the common trappings of weakness and strength.

The association between strength and dominance, weakness and submission is obvious, but a physically weaker Dominant can completely control a physically stronger submissive. The same goes for more metaphorical ideas of 'strength.' The partner in a relationship that is the breadwinner and has a position of authority in the culture can still be the submissive. The more psychologically secure partner can be the submissive. Consensual D/s doesn't require the D have anything over the s.

 

[JustADom]

Eating a creampie, OTOH, is just hot. It shows submission and abandon - that i'm so into pleasing Her that such exigencies don't matter.

Interesting. Now we're getting somewhere. This is something that I see in both the male and female cuckolds/subs. It's the "I am pleasing my partner, no matter what" factor.

But what do you mean by "abandon"? Are you abandoning yourself?

I don't actually believe that you can 100% please your partner and never yourself. There must be something positive for the cuckold/sub. What is it? Yes, the pleasure that they feel is there, but what is underlining that pleasure?

 

[KoPilot]

i have never seen a cartoon or movie character that shared my orientation, and was male. (Female characters, sure, and the occasional male character that gets part of the way there, and i can project or fill in the rest.) The depiction of overt msubs is pretty consistent: they're fetishists who are only submissive in the context of the fetish.

I mean, that's the point though. Socialization just means the stuff you learn from other people and from other outside, human-made stuff, whether it was intentionally fed to you, part of some sort of norm, or something else completely by accident.

I mean, I suspect I had some part of my idea of my own gender develop from reading the descriptions in D&D monster manuals. I can't imagine that a single person responsible for that book could have imagined that a 11 year old girl would build a piece of her identity based on what she read about fairy dragons.

 

[Netzach]

I don't get why people keep trying to bring biology into the discussion. Subs have more feminine hormone levels? Right. Because I'm sure there's no msub or fdom (or even just an aggressive woman who exhibits "masculine" behaviors) who has gone to get their hormones checked and be told "everything's normal".

There's no evidence to support 90% of gendered kink theories out there, and the ones that vaguely do (of the sort so neatly debunked in Delusions of Gender) are bad science.

Yes, it's true that women generally have more estrogen than men, and men more testosterone and androgen. It's true that those things change the way you feel and react to things (ask any trans* person on HRT). The rest is socialization. Why can't we talk about socialization? Why are people afraid to not be "born this way"? It doesn't make anybody a sucker or a fake.

Let's talk about kids and where they get 99% of their ideas about submissiveness and dominance. Let's talk about which cartoon or movie character they try to emulate because they represent someone they'd like to be. Let's talk about the common trappings of weakness and strength.

Why do subs like wearing girly panties? Well, when have you ever seen boxer briefs get associated with being done-to and doted on? I didn't come out of the birth canal believing that cock = authority. You've gotta be kidding me.

For the record, this sub prefers plain underwear in bed unless otherwise asked, and saves the girly panties for wearing under jeans. Thongs are only useful for getting spanked and paddled with.

This this this this this and this. Fuck.

Have we really got data that says subs are higher in oxytocin anyway, or are we just assuming that based on the way that subs like to PLAY with their brain chem?

Runners? Amateur boxers? All those other pain junkies, are you telling me they're super femme submissives or something? I think not.

I'm willing to be controversial and say that I think 99 percent of kink is socialization and how we butt up against it and warp the messages and selectively hear different parts of the messages.

 

[BiBunny]

The depiction of overt msubs is pretty consistent: they're fetishists who are only submissive in the context of the fetish.

There couldn't possibly be a reason for that, could there?

 

[Netzach]

If you don't think you have ever seen a kinked male character in a submissive position you're overlooking the important moments, the early ones, and I'm getting into uncomfortable verboten territory, but we all got warped SOMEwhere.

- none of those really early on icons are even doing overt sexual stuff, and you're absorbing some weird protosexual thing from kid TV. I'm sure that he-man masters of the universe has a lot to answer for.

I think most people's D/s holy shit! culture moments go back to the truth lasso if you're my age. There's no "only into it in an overtly fetishistic way" involved - it's all overt and in denial.

 

[KoPilot]

Yeah, people talk big about Wonder Woman, but how many times has Batman been tied up and suspended over a vat of sharks?

When I fantasize about unit 01 (like the awesomely pathetic dork I am), I don't need to pretend I'm a 14 year old boy with daddy issues to do it.

 

[BrightlyGo]

But what do you mean by "abandon"? Are you abandoning yourself?

in the noun sense: complete lack of inhibition. i'm sure you've heard subs say that being 'forced' makes them feel 'free' - it's freedom from their own inhibitions.

I don't actually believe that you can 100% please your partner and never yourself. There must be something positive for the cuckold/sub. What is it? Yes, the pleasure that they feel is there, but what is underlining that pleasure?

i've said before that we're paradoxes. You're right, i can't 100% please Her all the time and never myself. But i want to, and if i were to succeed, that would give me fulfillment, which is pleasure, which would undercut the accomplishment.

On some level, i think, one possible component of what makes a submissive is having a desire that you can literally /never/ fulfill - you only have to wrestle with that for so long before you realize that giving over control of your desires to another is a way out. Or, similarly, having desires that you feel you can't handle, yourself, that you can't be responsible for, or that you're ashamed of.

There couldn't possibly be a reason for that, could there?

Myths & stereotypes have there bases in fact, sure. But, no, all msubs are not the fetishists you see depicted: capable/successful & dominantly masculine outside the context of their fetish and ashamed of said fetish and generally paying to indulge it. Rather, i think, the depiction is one that is less threatening to society's concept of masculinity. A man who's still stereotypically masculine but has a shameful secret compulsion (that he pays or otherwise exercises traditional masculine power to indulge) does not undercut gender roles the way a man who is simply a submissive personality does.

I think most people's D/s holy shit! culture moments go back to the truth lasso if you're my age.

I must be close to your age. Actually, there was a lot of mind control in the old sci-fi/horror i watched as a kid before that, too. (OK, maybe i'm a little older, but i find i'm remembering Diana Rigg as Emma Peel, now that i'm thinking along those lines....)

Yeah, people talk big about Wonder Woman, but how many times has Batman been tied up and suspended over a vat of sharks?

Specifically sharks?



Now that i think of it, Robert Conrad got tied up quite a bit in Wild Wild West.

 

[Ruby_Atom]

I think that most subs, or people that call themselves subs, get a huge sense of satisfaction out of being paid attention to. If someone is forcing you to wear panties, then someone is watching you wear them. If you're licking cum someone is watching you do it. If you've been beaten to tears, someone was doing the beating on you. If you've been humiliated, someone was pointing and laughing... at you, you, you.

Totally yes! However, I think that goes both ways. The dominant partner is also getting attention, but not in same way.

I feel like the opposite end of the spectrum is two people having sex who are basically just using each other for mastrubation and aren't really into it.

Are kinky people just more attentive to one another? Of course it's true that there are also many very attentive vanilla lovers who pay plenty of attention to each other during sex and generally have a good time. However, I certainly hear a lot more complaints about uninspiring vanilla sex than kinky sex. It's not often you hear of someone say, "Gee, that was a pretty bland flogging session. I missed Antiques Roadshow for this?" or "He was so drunk he was putting nipple clamps on the bedsheets."

Anyway, I feel like I'm rambling. JustADom, humans are complex beings in both biology and psychology. It's not so simple to boil down behaviour and desires to one or two hormones.

(I'm a sub and I don't care for panties and I only lick cum if I have to!)

 

[pedal_dew]

Totally yes! However, I think that goes both ways. The dominant partner is also getting attention, but not in same way.

I feel like the opposite end of the spectrum is two people having sex who are basically just using each other for mastrubation and aren't really into it.

Are kinky people just more attentive to one another? Of course it's true that there are also many very attentive vanilla lovers who pay plenty of attention to each other during sex and generally have a good time. However, I certainly hear a lot more complaints about uninspiring vanilla sex than kinky sex. It's not often you hear of someone say, "Gee, that was a pretty bland flogging session. I missed Antiques Roadshow for this?" or "He was so drunk he was putting nipple clamps on the bedsheets."

Anyway, I feel like I'm rambling. JustADom, humans are complex beings in both biology and psychology. It's not so simple to boil down behaviour and desires to one or two hormones.

(I'm a sub and I don't care for panties and I only lick cum if I have to!)

I agree with Ruby_Atom. It's not so simple as what hormone is in play. For me, it's all about attention, the exchange thereof, and its levels of intensity that participants pass through in the course of a session. You do raise a great question, JustADom: what is the actual pleasure derived in any one slice of this? As a sub, I'm totally baffled as to the answer, but I know it can be intense, and ts absence causes yearning for it.

 

[JustADom]

Runners? Amateur boxers? All those other pain junkies, are you telling me they're super femme submissives or something? I think not.

I'm willing to be controversial and say that I think 99 percent of kink is socialization and how we butt up against it and warp the messages and selectively hear different parts of the messages.

There's actually an interesting research in neuroscience, that apparently, the masochists actually fused their pain centers in their brains with their pleasure centers, in their "critical periods", their childhoods. So they actually feel pleasure when they're feeling pain, but they don't stop feeling pain, they still feel pain immensely.

When you think about it, that's messed up. You thought that they were feeling pleasure, but actually, they were also feeling immense pain. How do you feel about that knowing that, as a dom?

in the noun sense: complete lack of inhibition. i'm sure you've heard subs say that being 'forced' makes them feel 'free' - it's freedom from their own inhibitions.

Oh interesting... I wasn't aware of that noun definition.

 

[Ruby_Atom]

There's actually an interesting research in neuroscience, that apparently, the masochists actually fused their pain centers in their brains with their pleasure centers, in their "critical periods", their childhoods. So they actually feel pleasure when they're feeling pain, but they don't stop feeling pain, they still feel pain immensely.

When you think about it, that's messed up. You thought that they were feeling pleasure, but actually, they were also feeling immense pain. How do you feel about that knowing that, as a dom?

I don't think it's news to anyone that masochists feel pain as pain, not pleasure.

 

[JustADom]

Well, isn't that kind of fucked up? I generally wouldn't wish anyone to feel genuine pain.

 

[Ruby_Atom]

Well, isn't that kind of fucked up? I generally wouldn't wish anyone to feel genuine pain.

Typically a sadist would enjoy causing pain. Not every dominant is a sadist, but it's certainly not uncommon. If it doesn't float your boat, then don't do it. This is all still about consensual activities. The idea is to not actually harm anyone. If you don't like receiving pain, then it's probably a bad idea to pair up with a sadist. If you are a dominant and don't like to cause pain to others, then don't do it.

 

[LallyH]

Well, isn't that kind of fucked up? I generally wouldn't wish anyone to feel genuine pain.

I enjoy receiving a certain level of pain and if I had an hour or two to spare, I could explain in detail why that is. I don't consider myself or my reactions fucked up in the slightest.

If you don't want inflict pain, then just don't do it.

Also, a lot of 'sadists' do not derive pleasure purely from inflicting pain, but from the knowledge that their masochist partner is having a thoroughly nice time floating off into subspace as a result of their ministrations.

 

[JustADom]

Typically a sadist would enjoy causing pain. Not every dominant is a sadist, but it's certainly not uncommon.

Well I certainly hope that no one is a genuine sadist, if they are then they have a problem. Sure I can be sadistic, but I justified that under the notion that the subs were really feeling pleasure, not pain. Knowing this changes everything. I'm not sure about doing anything to the sub anymore.

I enjoy receiving a certain level of pain and if I had an hour or two to spare, I could explain in detail why that is. I don't consider myself or my reactions fucked up in the slightest.

Oh, I wouldn't say that you or your response are fucked up, no. I do think that it's fucked up to cause genuine pain to yourself or others. It's fucked up that they're not really "enjoying" it, but they're actually feeling immense pain, but also with a mix of pleasure.