What a sub wears?

[Netzach]

People who get dripping wet when told to head out in a short skirt sans panties are people who get off on humiliation or already had a desire to dress that way. The D's orders just give them cover. A reason, or excuse, for doing so.

D-types who try to change the fundamental orientation of a partner are not going to succeed in the long run.

D-types who recognize and appreciate the essence and fundamental identity of a partner earn trust and loyalty for doing so.

On a related note, see this story. Very, very hot.

Thanks. Still brings me a massive warm fuzzy.

 

[Keroin]

I see "submissiveness" as a behavioral trait, manifested in the way one person responds to another. I also see it as person specific, like attraction or arousal.

As for the signals I'd be sending - my natural way of treating women I find attractive. That's it. It doesn't need a label or an explanation; she'll either respond well to me, as an individual, or not.

Synchronicity. Yes.

I am definitely filed under "Does not require a label". I am the last person in a room anyone would point to and say, "Oh, she's submissive". There is nothing about me, externally, that advertises this aspect of my personality. Off this board and in RL, it would take the most perceptive of men to recognize my submissive tendencies and extreme patience on their part to bring it to the surface where it can be played with. Not coincidentally, perceptiveness and patience are qualities I value highly, so I suppose I am advertising but not with leather or a corset or a collar.

Clothing is a non-issue for me, where my PYL is concerned. I would not feel a connection with, and therefore never submit to, a man who enjoyed dressing in any of the stereotypical BDSM gear, or expected me to dress that way.

For me, everything about this power dynamic is, as JM described it "person specific". If the synchronicity exists, (and it exists very rarely, in my case),then everything else falls into place and feels natural. If it does not, I'm not interested. I know this would be difficult for most people but I'm happy with my life and who I am inside my life, my kink is just the gravy on the mashed potatoes.

*Just made myself hungry*

This is not to suggest I don't consider the expression of my submissiveness important, only that I would never "settle".

As for the labels and the lifestyle and all that, they do serve a purpose but I think the trick is to see through them and let them go. To paraphrase someone very dear to me: "At first, the language and labels are comforting, as they let you know you're not alone in the universe, but after awhile you just want the universe to leave you alone."

I've heard a few mentions of "pressure" in regards to identifying oneself in BDSM, where does this pressure come from? Is it internal or external. I have never felt it, so I'm curious.

 

[Keroin]

Thanks. Still brings me a massive warm fuzzy.

As well it should. That was a beautiful story.

Love often comes in the form of the unexpected.

 

[MisterSir]

But the message I've been hearing in this thread is 'the submissive should do whatever the dominant demands, and should sublimate her own needs completely' with no reciprocal care or concern. And that isn't adult behaviour, on either side of the equation.

Yeah, see, this is exactly the problem I was trying to avoid, people reading what I say and taking something different away from it. Where do I talk about how I won't ever reciprocate or have any consideration? I'm not about to demand that a vegetarian get all dressed up in leather and bacon fat, but if I make a request that's not unfair, something that's not considered a limit, I expect it to be obeyed because if not, in what way is there submission?

Rather annoyingly, JM did that thing where somebody says what you're trying get across better. It is annoying, but there are worse things.

As a practical matter, in a relationship with me, "she should put my desires before hers" means: If I choose to, I have the right to make all of those decisions and she does not have the right to refuse. Sometimes she'll appreciate my decisions and sometimes she won't like them at all. But that's the deal she signs on for, and that's the way it goes. Not only do I expect her to comply, I expect her to do so without giving me shit.

I expect obedience, and I don't see that as a problem. Is that clear enough?

 

[Netzach]

See, I love the trimmings and theater of SM. Cosets, gloves, kneeling, obeisance, all that happy horseshit.

But on my terms, for the sensuous pleasure of such bodily disciplines. If there's a "dress code" I'm as liable to just throw on a suit and ignore it.

 

[CutieMouse]

See, I love the trimmings and theater of SM. Cosets, gloves, kneeling, obeisance, all that happy horseshit.

But on my terms, for the sensuous pleasure of such bodily disciplines. If there's a "dress code" I'm as liable to just throw on a suit and ignore it.

And I struggle with it, because I keep wondering in the back of my mind which is more important - the trappings, or me?

 

[Abraxas Winterlight]

And I struggle with it, because I keep wondering in the back of my mind which is more important - the trappings, or me?

without the submissive it's just laundry

 

[ZRT]

without the submissive it's just laundry

Exactly.

The biggest question is: do you have the ability to have satisfying relationships? If yes, then fuck it, go on and do your thing. If not, you have more issues to resolve than 'where do I fit in the BDSM dictionary?', and need to work on those issues.

 

[Abraxas Winterlight]

& to be honest, if I am micro-managing what a person wears down to their socks then that person better be 3 & my child.

if I have a scene planned out then yes, I will dictate it (i'm not going to cut her good clothes off her!!! might get smothered with a pillow! ), but she's a adult & I treat her as such.

 

[eastern sun]

And I struggle with it, because I keep wondering in the back of my mind which is more important - the trappings, or me?

Of course you are more important, CutieMouse.

But a lot of people use the trappings to mediate the interaction. And some hide behind them. There are a lot of people too who get fixated on the idea of the relationship, or the fantasy of the relationship, and the real person is just too "messy."

 

[midwestyankee]

And I struggle with it, because I keep wondering in the back of my mind which is more important - the trappings, or me?

CM, I would be profoundly surprised if you could truly be you in the leather trappings. Wearing a corset beneath a gorgeously styled item from the 50s? That's an entirely different story, and on you that's no longer trappings.

 

[Netzach]

And I struggle with it, because I keep wondering in the back of my mind which is more important - the trappings, or me?

I find I can usually tell fairly quickly whether it's my boots that are drawing the worship, me or me in them. I'm ok with the latter two. I'm even OK with the first, some of my boots are just that hot. It's not a basis for lasting relationships, but it's decent enough evening's flirtation.

If I'm interested in serious engagement, well - I'm hardly going to take that bit of pleasure off the table for myself. However I have a feeling you can relate to someone who laces and dresses for herself, for fun.

 

[rida]

See, I love the trimmings and theater of SM. Cosets, gloves, kneeling, obeisance, all that happy horseshit.

But on my terms, for the sensuous pleasure of such bodily disciplines. If there's a "dress code" I'm as liable to just throw on a suit and ignore it.

Bad-ass to the core: my way or my way

And I struggle with it, because I keep wondering in the back of my mind which is more important - the trappings, or me?

Prefacing that without the pyl, a PYL can only Dominate his/her imaginary friends, it should be a given that the pyl has an intrinsic value.

Now that being put aside, the answer is: it depend on the PYL you are finding yourself. If you want to be more important than the trapping, find a PYL on that side of the spectrum. If you get off on being less important than the trappings, find a PYL on the other side. And if you enjoy the uncertainty of never knowing exactly how valuable you are, than find yourself a capricious PYL. Ultimately, it is all a question of finding the right match, synchornicity and all.

The problem I see mostly when it comes to mismatching relationships (vanilla or BDSM), is when one side project a persona that is not their true self, when they are trying to sell themselves as apples when they are cherries. Sometime is just out of lack of self-awareness, and others out of wanting to be A, instead of accepting to be B.

I went on a tangent, and I'm not implying that it applies to you, CM.

 

[Netzach]

Prefacing that without the pyl, a PYL can only Dominate his/her imaginary friends, it should be a given that the pyl has an intrinsic value.

Now that being put aside, the answer is: it depend on the PYL you are finding yourself. If you want to be more important than the trapping, find a PYL on that side of the spectrum. If you get off on being less important than the trappings, find a PYL on the other side. And if you enjoy the uncertainty of never knowing exactly how valuable you are, than find yourself a capricious PYL. Ultimately, it is all a question of finding the right match, synchornicity and all.

The problem I see mostly when it comes to mismatching relationships (vanilla or BDSM), is when one side project a persona that is not their true self, when they are trying to sell themselves as apples when they are cherries. Sometime is just out of lack of self-awareness, and others out of wanting to be A, instead of accepting to be B.

I went on a tangent, and I'm not implying that it applies to you, CM.

Beautifully put.

 

[bethpage]

I will say that any woman who did expect me to order her in the sartorial department would be opening up some seriously interesting avenues for my sadism to express itself. Not in the 'fun-humiliating' kind of way either, but more in the 'bunny slippers and cocktail dresses look hilarious together' kind of way.

That is absolutely fabulous.

Consider this a bump (not that this discussion needs it!) because this post has absolutely no value otherwise!!

 

[clock1]

And I struggle with it, because I keep wondering in the back of my mind which is more important - the trappings, or me?

"you" are always more important. The view, the touch, the interactions are all enhancements to the person. Anything less is intricate masterbation. I observed an (unintentional) scene once where the gaze was below the waist. The "object" said, "I'm up here."

I would have liked to be in his shoes, as she had exquisite eyes. Yes, the whole package was alluring, and she had to have known it while dressing, yet perhaps it was a test to see who recognized where she really was.

The point is in a real relationship (and perhaps even quick visits) it should always be about the people, you, me, we.

 

[rida]

Beautifully put.

Thanks

 

[00Syd]

I've heard a few mentions of "pressure" in regards to identifying oneself in BDSM, where does this pressure come from? Is it internal or external. I have never felt it, so I'm curious.

I would say both, but for me, the pressure to identify myself has nothing to do with BDSM specifically. This just comes from my being a naturally curious, self-analyzing, over-thinking sort of a person. I also enjoy words, and the meanings they hold, the way they can be used, and the sheer fact that they can convey so much meaning to other people. These two things (self-reflexivity and a love of words) give me a very strong desire to ID myself.

Of course when thrown into the context of BDSM, finding the words to describe myself becomes much more difficult. It would seem like it would be easier because there are less words to choose from, but that actually makes it more difficult. The few words that do hold meanings that apply to me, also hold meanings that do not apply to me at all, which makes me feel as if I have no vocabulary at all that applies to myself. It often feels like there are no words that I AM, only words that I'M NOT.

It's frustrating.

 

[00Syd]

Also, no offence to everyone, and rock on with your bad selves, and this is just me being somewhat peeved with myself, and yes this is a rant, and all of those other good don't-jump-on-me-for-this qualifiers, but...

[rant]

God I hate it when obedience is expected by every goddamn person and enjoyed by everyone else because the last thing I ever feel a desire to be is "obediant" like some fucking dog and I don't want people to expect that from me but then at the same time what the hell else am I supposed to be? FUCKKKKKKK

[/rant]

Please, by all means, feel free to resume normal conversation...

P.S. maybe its just the terminology that bugs me. Maybe if we found some other word that doesn't make me want to claw faces I'd sit more comfortably in my own shoes.

 

[00Syd]

Also, if it wasn't readily apparent, I'm very frustrated with myself. Please excuse whatever annoying things I may say tonight as the tired and angry ramblings of an emotionally masochistic and confused traveler.

 

[midwestyankee]

Also, if it wasn't readily apparent, I'm very frustrated with myself. Please excuse whatever annoying things I may say tonight as the tired and angry ramblings of an emotionally masochistic and confused traveler.

Syd, would you describe yourself as being compliant as long as you're with the right dominant partner? When I think about what I like in a partner, it's not so much obedience as compliance. I insist on a certain act, one that we both know is in bounds for her personality and within her limits, and I expect her to comply. To me, obedience smacks of a degree of control that is entirely different from what I aspire to have with a partner. Compliance, on the other hand, seems to come from a place of agreement and partnership.

 

[00Syd]

Syd, would you describe yourself as being compliant as long as you're with the right dominant partner? When I think about what I like in a partner, it's not so much obedience as compliance. I insist on a certain act, one that we both know is in bounds for her personality and within her limits, and I expect her to comply. To me, obedience smacks of a degree of control that is entirely different from what I aspire to have with a partner. Compliance, on the other hand, seems to come from a place of agreement and partnership.

I guess I'm compliant, but if asked (or told, or whatever) to do something that I don't want to do, I won't be at all happy about it, wven when with the "right" person. I'll complain and moan and then I FEEL BAD ABOUT IT. And what the fuck, you know? If that's just not the type of person I am then why should I feel bad. Fuck.

Like recently this happened. I was asked to do stuff I wasn't super thrilled to do, but I complied but made it clear that I wasn't happy and then HE felt bad and stopped everything and told me that he felt like he fucked up but then I felt bad because shouldn't I just be happily complying? Or if I'm not happy, shouldn't I just suck it up? And CLEARLY this is all just problems stemming from both of our ideas of the way we both should be and act and all of this layered on bullshit. And I feel completely closed in and trapped by all of this. I'm so frustrated. GRRRAAGHHHHHhhhhhh

Maybe I should just stop complying and make him force me. That would stop me from feeling bad when I don't enjoy it.

ETA: Maybe I should just start my own thread. I've been hijacking this one like no other.

ETA Pt. 2: But I don't like starting threads. grr.

 

[JMohegan]

I would say both, but for me, the pressure to identify myself has nothing to do with BDSM specifically. This just comes from my being a naturally curious, self-analyzing, over-thinking sort of a person. I also enjoy words, and the meanings they hold, the way they can be used, and the sheer fact that they can convey so much meaning to other people. These two things (self-reflexivity and a love of words) give me a very strong desire to ID myself.

Of course when thrown into the context of BDSM, finding the words to describe myself becomes much more difficult. It would seem like it would be easier because there are less words to choose from, but that actually makes it more difficult. The few words that do hold meanings that apply to me, also hold meanings that do not apply to me at all, which makes me feel as if I have no vocabulary at all that applies to myself. It often feels like there are no words that I AM, only words that I'M NOT.

It's frustrating.

If the vocabulary seems inadequate, start making stuff up. Personally, I've always found it helpful to focus on the tangible to get across what I appreciate and expect from a personal relationship.

Do you get turned on by 'wrists held against the wall, he's leaning down over you, you're going nowhere and he's taking what he wants with his mouth' type of sexual encounters? Then maybe describe yourself as a "wrists against the wall girl."

Do you have a strong desire to present in a way reflective of your own creativity and self-identity? Hair, make-up, dress? Then maybe describe yourself as a "fiercely independent dresser."

When you've got a date on Saturday night, do you appreciate someone else making the decisions as to where you'll go and what you'll do? Or, do you like to be the one to make those decisions? Do you appreciate negotiation and compromise? Taking turns? Pick a shorthand way to describe whichever best fits.

Leaving aside extremes at the end of the spectrum, the truth is that the overwhelming majority of those who ID as submissive may properly be described as "fiercely independent something."

You seem to be focusing on the times when s-types say they obey with no question. Pay closer attention to the times when they say things like, "Oh, well, he knows I'm just better with the children, so he'd never try to tell me what to do if it impacts them" or "Haha, master knows I'd get really pissed off if he ever tried to change my food/fingernails/way I load the dishwasher, so he doesn't" or "Master knows how smart I am and admires my career, and he values his property's ability to function so well that he'd never interfere in that."

In nearly every case, there are carve-outs. Areas where the personality or proclivities or skills of the s mean that she remains fiercely independent with regard to that part of her life. I guess the question that I've got for you, Syd, is this. Are there any areas in which you appreciate control by a partner? If so, which ones?

 

[Netzach]

Syd, would you describe yourself as being compliant as long as you're with the right dominant partner? When I think about what I like in a partner, it's not so much obedience as compliance. I insist on a certain act, one that we both know is in bounds for her personality and within her limits, and I expect her to comply. To me, obedience smacks of a degree of control that is entirely different from what I aspire to have with a partner. Compliance, on the other hand, seems to come from a place of agreement and partnership.

This is my feeling about it. Obedience can feel like a really shitty word, if I just apply it to myself without context, I wind up thinking "no fuck no."

With the appropriate LOCUS though, well, it would have to be really damn inconvenient and really damn outside my personal boundaries for me to care to defend my position with T. Frankly, most of the time "obedience" is just a very natural concern with whether he's pleased or not. Acceptance is more like it, really. It's not because I want to roll over and obey like a well trained dog, it's just a lack of investment in doing anything he doesn't want simply because I can, ha ha. If anything it's just kind of chill, more than "submissive." And that level of relaxedness extends both ways. "Can I blindfold you and dress you in my slip and put this up your ass?" "Sure." Really it's just not a big deal, we're explorers in the same expedition.

FWIW though this is not a primary relationship, so it retains a kind of idyllic sexual focus that more mundane relationships don't. If I had to raise children or clean house with the man, I'm sure there'd be more conflict. Still.

 

[00Syd]

I guess the question that I've got for you, Syd, is this. Are there any areas in which you appreciate control by a partner? If so, which ones?

Not that I can think of.

But at the same time, I'm not really in a place where I could even consider handing over control of anything to anyone, really, anyway. So who the hell knows.