Understanding Submission

[NativPrincess]

this was very informative

 

[DVS]

If you tell your mate to give you a blowjob and she does, are you submitting?

Submitting to the blowjob, sure, but that's not the kind of submission I'm talking about here. I'm not addressing do-er vs. do-ee but relative preferences instead.

As for sub vs. slave and labels in general, yeah, that's all part of the cultural dressing.

No, she's submitting to my demand for a blowjob.

This thread is full of people trying to explain and understand the do-er vs. do-ee relationships relating to submission. Twisting facts around just adds to the confusion.

 

[HeyItsDani]

No, she's submitting to my demand for a blowjob.

This.

The concept of submission is one of power dynamic & power differential, not one of do-er vs. do-ee. And clearly complying with a demand for a blowjob represents a submission to authority.

 

[JMohegan]

No, she's submitting to my demand for a blowjob.

This thread is full of people trying to explain and understand the do-er vs. do-ee relationships relating to submission. Twisting facts around just adds to the confusion.

You really don't understand the distinction I was making?

No matter. Call it what you will, DVS. And have a good weekend.

 

[JMohegan]

The concept of submission is one of power dynamic & power differential, not one of do-er vs. do-ee. And clearly complying with a demand for a blowjob represents a submission to authority.

I agree with your first sentence completely. In fact, that's my point.

But I may, or may not, agree with your 2nd sentence - depending on the circumstances.

Suppose I say to you: "Hey, Dani, it's a nice afternoon, take the dog for a walk." If you were planning to go for that walk anyway, would I really be exerting any power over your behavior? I don't think so.

 

[DVS]

You really don't understand the distinction I was making?

No matter. Call it what you will, DVS. And have a good weekend.

No, I don't understand. Maybe it's all semantics? You have a nice weekend, too.

 

[kiwi_submissive]

I agree with your first sentence completely. In fact, that's my point.

But I may, or may not, agree with your 2nd sentence - depending on the circumstances.

Suppose I say to you: "Hey, Dani, it's a nice afternoon, take the dog for a walk." If you were planning to go for that walk anyway, would I really be exerting any power over your behavior? I don't think so.

But you could exert power over that behaviour by telling her to go in a completely different route or that she must walk the dog for two hours when she was really planning on just a quick walk around the block.

 

[JMohegan]

But you could exert power over that behaviour by telling her to go in a completely different route or that she must walk the dog for two hours when she was really planning on just a quick walk around the block.

Right.

Exerting power over her behavior means we have differing preferences for what happens next, and my preference overrides hers.

 

[DVS]

You really don't understand the distinction I was making?

No matter. Call it what you will, DVS. And have a good weekend.

OK, if you are saying it's not submission if the person is already planning to do it anyway, I can understand that. If both parties enjoy the request/demand in question (i.e. blowjob, spanking, walk of the dog), nobody is "really" submitting, in the pure sense of the word.

But, aren't we all looking for that partner who mirrors what we are, to make that perfect sexual connection? While I do sometimes enjoy resistance in my partner, if she always had to be forced into submitting, it would get old pretty soon and the neighbors might call it rape.

 

[Curious_in_Cali]

Right.

Exerting power over her behavior means we have differing preferences for what happens next, and my preference overrides hers.

I don't think that I agree that there has to be a differing preference for power to be in play. If one pyl was planning to take a walk, but then was told to it I would think that it would change what the walk was and how it felt. The reason pyl was walking would change and thusly the experience of the task. Who and what pyl does it for is more how I see this act as one of submission, not the act itself. I find the why far more compelling than the what...which is how seemingly innocuous tasks like walking can be physically and mentally enthralling.

 

[JMohegan]

OK, if you are saying it's not submission if the person is already planning to do it anyway, I can understand that. If both parties enjoy the request/demand in question (i.e. blowjob, spanking, walk of the dog), nobody is "really" submitting, in the pure sense of the word.

But, aren't we all looking for that partner who mirrors what we are, to make that perfect sexual connection? While I do sometimes enjoy resistance in my partner, if she always had to be forced into submitting, it would get old pretty soon and the neighbors might call it rape.

Ok, good, the first paragraph here makes me think you get what I'm saying.

As for the second paragraph - force has no place in my concept of submission. I see it as a voluntary thing. Whether someone submits solely to please the one to whom he/she is submitting, or because the acquiescence itself gets him/her off, or simply to honor the commitment made as a fundamental construct of the relationship, whatever. Submission is a matter of choice.

As for the mirror, I look at it the other way around. That is to say, there's a limit to how much actual, "real" deferring a person can be expected to do before he/she's gonna walk. That limit varies from person to person, just as the desire to control varies. It's a matter of finding a good fit. (Along with personality, physical appeal, and ethical compatibility, of course.)

 

[JMohegan]

I don't think that I agree that there has to be a differing preference for power to be in play. If one pyl was planning to take a walk, but then was told to it I would think that it would change what the walk was and how it felt. The reason pyl was walking would change and thusly the experience of the task. Who and what pyl does it for is more how I see this act as one of submission, not the act itself. I find the why far more compelling than the what...which is how seemingly innocuous tasks like walking can be physically and mentally enthralling.

This is a bit abstract for me, but you seem to be talking about the power to arouse. Is that right?

If so, that's fine. But I assure you that power goes both ways.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I agree with your first sentence completely. In fact, that's my point.

But I may, or may not, agree with your 2nd sentence - depending on the circumstances.

Suppose I say to you: "Hey, Dani, it's a nice afternoon, take the dog for a walk." If you were planning to go for that walk anyway, would I really be exerting any power over your behavior? I don't think so.

So what? You gonna tell her; "You're not allowed to take the dog for a walk?"

Exerting power over her behavior means we have differing preferences for what happens next, and my preference overrides hers.

I would say that it means that if or when you have differing preferences, yours have precedent.

Unless you get a powerful boner over micromanagement. Which, ew.

 

[JMohegan]

So what? You gonna tell her; "You're not allowed to take the dog for a walk?"

I would say that it means that if or when you have differing preferences, yours have precedent.

Unless you get a powerful boner over micromanagement. Which, ew.

What's up with the hostility?

If or when is exactly what I meant. In my opinion, submission is defined in those moments when two people have differing opinions or preferences for what happens next, and one defers to the other.

As for my dog, he runs with me every day. Can't think of a single time when I've told someone to take a dog of mine for a walk, but yes - I actually have told someone not to take my dog out, because it would have interfered with my plans for a run.

 

[Stella_Omega]

no hostility, just-- I didn't read any sort of if or when in your statement.

 

[JMohegan]

no hostility, just-- I didn't read any sort of if or when in your statement.

Taken out of the context of the discussion in which it was written, sure - I can see why that was a confusing statement.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Taken out of the context of the discussion in which it was written, sure - I can see why that was a confusing statement.

I can't read words that aren't there to be read, dude

 

[JMohegan]

I can't read words that aren't there to be read, dude

You're so right dude. And no one expects you to.

 

[neci]

i don't understand the confusion!
the cock needs to be sucked.
it is sucked.

 

[JMohegan]

i don't understand the confusion!
the cock needs to be sucked.
it is sucked.

Words to live by!

That sums things up well.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Words to live by!

That sums things up well.

I'll drink to that! In fact, I'm buying. What's yours?

 

[MissHolly]

i don't understand the confusion!
the cock needs to be sucked.
it is sucked.

and even when it doesnt know it wants to be sucked...I can convince it otherwise!

 

[Stella_Omega]

and even when it doesnt know it wants to be sucked...I can convince it otherwise!

That's a wee bit dominating of you, Miss Holly!

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

That's a wee bit dominating of you, Miss Holly!

Sometimes we have to be, when it's for their own good

 

[BluebirdDreams]

The linked article has its merits but it also has a flawed foundation: the belief that to be BDSM, there must be both control and pain, discomfort, or restraint present in the relationship. This is simply not true. These are very common elements in BDSM relationships, but this idea dismisses the possibility that someone could submit to another without the presence of pain, discomfort or restraint. And yes, that does happen.

I'm still reading but I had to stop and agree with this. When I first learned about BDSM and D/s they were not combined. There was much backlash if you said "I'm a sub in BDSM" because D/s was "too vanilla" and wasn't included in the Bondage/Discipline/Sadism/Masochism. It wasn't until much later that it started to be added (I was not in the middle of the community, only it's fringes, so I don't know what prompted the start of the change or what finally cemented it).

In my world and understanding one can be a part of one or both, but BDSM and D/s(or M/s) are not mutually exclusive.

Again, this is from my own experience and understanding.