Who genderised dominant? (Why do we need Domme?)

[FungiUg]

Okay, one of you evil bastards own up... who decided that the word "dominant" only refers to males? I mean, there's nothing in the word that implies that.

It's not contradictory to have a female dominant, nor is it over explanatory to have a male dominant. So why is there an assumption that if I refer to a "Dom" (as an abbreviation of dominant) that I am refering to a male? Why must I type the abomination of "Dom/me" to be inclusive? If I wanted to be exclusive, I would write "male dom" or even "male dominant"

On the flip side we have submissive. Fortunately, they seem to be okay. A submissive can be male or female, so it is joyfully non-exclusive.

So why oh why do we have to go on thinking that Doms must be male?

 

[Daddyslilpet]

You know I've often wondered the same thing myself. It doesn't make sense to me either.

(side note... nice to see ya around )

 

[Netzach]

Not merely gendered but fake french.

I hate it.

 

[DeservingBitch]

It's not contradictory to have a female dominant, nor is it over explanatory to have a male dominant. So why is there an assumption that if I refer to a "Dom" (as an abbreviation of dominant) that I am refering to a male?

Of course being a woman and being dominant are not contradictory. But there is a very real and common assumption in our societies that being dominant is a characteristic exclusive to men. From there, it make sense I think to emphasize the gender of the Dominant.

Also, when the gender is not specified, we (as a society) tend to assume that the person being referred to is a man. Basically, man tend to be the 'default'. So when you combined 1) the tendency to assume the 'default' to be a man to 2) a characteristic (dominant) which is commonly associated with masculinity, you have a sort of 'double' assumption in favor of the person being a man.

I actually kind of like the 'frenchisization' of the term. I always find it cute when anglos use french terms or expressions as a way to sound more 'classy' or something. Like kids using big words they don't understand. But then, I'm a french snob.

 

[sister76]

When I say Dom I don't refer to a specific gender, although mine is a man. I'd rather just type that than type out "Dom/Domme."

 

[FungiUg]

Of course being a woman and being dominant are not contradictory. But there is a very real and common assumption in our societies that being dominant is a characteristic exclusive to men. From there, it make sense I think to emphasize the gender of the Dominant.

Okay, I will give you that point. But you're gonna have to fight for the next one!

Also, when the gender is not specified, we (as a society) tend to assume that the person being referred to is a man.

If that were true, then wouldn't we also assume that "submissive" is a man? Do we need a balancing female genderised submissive term? (submissivette?)

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I suppose it was bound to happen: The feminization of BDSM.

 

[HottieMama]

If that were true, then wouldn't we also assume that "submissive" is a man? Do we need a balancing female genderised submissive term? (submissivette?)

No..because i think in society as a whole being submissive is generally attributed to women because many people still consider submissiveness weak...and historically women have been the weaker sex. If we look at the Bible for example, "submissiveness" is only discussed in the context of women. "A woman shall submit to her husband."

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

HOTTIEMAMA

Birth control is what's responsible for changing the power dynamics. Before 1965? women spent most of their adult lives pregnant. There were always dominant single women, but they were a small minority.

 

[CutieMouse]

HOTTIEMAMA

Birth control is what's responsible for changing the power dynamics. Before 1965? women spent most of their adult lives pregnant. There were always dominant single women, but they were a small minority.

Actually birth control options were known (in the Americas) as early as the 1830s - there are records of various combinations of powders available at the local drug store, which were used as a post coital douche (to disrupt the Ph of the vagina/kill sperm), as well as instructions for a rather primitive form of "the sponge". Abortions (although controversial and in the gray area of legality) were openly advertised in newspapers, as well.

Women have always had the option of controlling their own lives... those meeting the steriotypical definition of a "single dominant woman" might be in the minority, but I would argue women have had far more power throughout history than most would like us to believe...

As for the Dom / domme argument, I have no clue as to why there need be a distinction. At one of the first conferences I attended, there was a woman who lead a rather interesting lecture on psychological BDSM, who identified as a Master, and was married to a gay male slave.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

CUTIEMOUSE

Birth control has been around forever, but the fact is it had insignificant impact on reproduction until the PILL came along. I mean, everyone has a cousin with two heads, but one head is the general rule.

 

[RJMasters]

No..because i think in society as a whole being submissive is generally attributed to women because many people still consider submissiveness weak...and historically women have been the weaker sex. If we look at the Bible for example, "submissiveness" is only discussed in the context of women. "A woman shall submit to her husband."

Point of order....

Actually in the same passage it mentions that slaves should submit to their masters as well.

But no one likes to talk about that.

 

[WriterDom]

It simplifies things. Dom and Domme are easier than male Dom and female Dom. But if a Domme wants to be called Dom or a Cherry Coke that's fine with me.

 

[A Desert Rose]

It simplifies things. Dom and Domme are easier than male Dom and female Dom. But if a Domme wants to be called Dom or a Cherry Coke that's fine with me.

aaaaaaaaaahahahahahah. The best belly laugh I've had this week!!!!

Cherry Coke... aaaaahahhahahahahah!!!!

And the best part is... I can actually HEAR you saying this. LMAO




Okay. You've won me over. I'm all for Dom to include male AND female. It's too much typing to do the 'dom forward slash me' stuff.

 

[JMohegan]

I put this in the same category as Hispanic vs. Latino/a, or Native American vs. Indian.

Domme, FemDom, Dom, D-type, whatever.

Tell me which you prefer, and I'll use it. One way or the other, I honestly don't care.

 

[RJMasters]

HOTTIEMAMA

Birth control is what's responsible for changing the power dynamics. Before 1965? women spent most of their adult lives pregnant. There were always dominant single women, but they were a small minority.

Perhaps there is something to that, however I have always traced back the huge turn when the men went off to war and women stepped up to fill in jobs at factories all around the country. Thus proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that women could do most jobs that men could do. When the men return, the women had positions, finacial power, and sense of being able to make their own destiny.

The governemnt actually pushed this right along under the guise they were all for women's rights, but in reality they just like the idea of a two income household because it put more money in the coffers.

I don't think any one single thing was it, I think it was more a collective of events which spanned many years that lead to the natural conclusion of women becoming independant or maybe better said having a choice whether to be dependant upon a man. In a greater sense, one could argue that in older days of yester year, where no technology existed, there was much more demand for men workers which created a dependancy of it own. Technology has in many ways leveled the playing field(in a general sense).

As far as the pill is concerned I agree that this was yet just another step which empowered women to be able to take control of another aspect of their lives.

IMO however, the biggest form of control was economic in nature, hence when women entered the workforce, to me that is by far the most important turning point.

----------

One thing I do agree with CM is that women had more control than what is understood. Perhaps not in the typical sense, but they certainly held a lot of influence with the men in their lives. This type of influential control is not talked about a lot, but the saying..behind a great man is a great women is not just a silly phrase.

I doubt very seriously a bunch of men in business suits somewhere got together and assigned society's roles. It is more my belief that women took on roles like education, social and cultrual events, and family matters, most likely because they dared not leave it to men to handle such matters. Women had a much larger role in the shaping of mainstream society than most will want to acknowledge.

 

[A Desert Rose]

I put this in the same category as Hispanic vs. Latino/a, or Native American vs. Indian.

Domme, FemDom, Dom, D-type, whatever.

Tell me which you prefer, and I'll use it. One way or the other, I honestly don't care.

This reminds me of what Cym used to call herself... Masofemsubwitchydem card carrying member... I think... of somethingerother...

LMAO

 

[CutieMouse]

One thing I do agree with CM is that women had more control than what is understood. Perhaps not in the typical sense, but they certainly held a lot of influence with the men in their lives. This type of influential control is not talked about a lot, but the saying..behind a great man is a great women is not just a silly phrase.

Otherwise known (in CutieMouse's world) as "The Church would fall into ruin if it weren't for the nuns" theory.

 

[DeservingBitch]

Okay, I will give you that point. But you're gonna have to fight for the next one!


If that were true, then wouldn't we also assume that "submissive" is a man? Do we need a balancing female genderised submissive term? (submissivette?)

If you re-read the sentence you quoted me on, I said that when the gender is *not* specified, we tend to assume the default to be a man. But submissive is a characteristic commonly associated to women. Submissive in this case act as a specification of the gender (wrongly or not).

To clarify, my point was that we tend to assume the 'default' to be male. Then, depending on characteristics, traits, attributes, etc.specified about the person being referred to, (such as dominant or submissive), we tend to make assumptions on their gender based on whether those characteristic are usually associated with masculinity or femininity. In the case of 'dominant', which is a trait usually associated with masculinity, there is then a sort of 'double-assumption' in favor of the person being male.

I'm not sure i clarified my point.

 

[RJMasters]

Otherwise known (in CutieMouse's world) as "The Church would fall into ruin if it weren't for the nuns" theory.

An old coger once told me that the only difference between a church and a saloon was the women. I laughed until I realized just how true that statement tends to be.

 

[serijules]

I like it. I still SAY "Dom", but it's just easier online for people to instantly know that my owner is female by me typing Domme, as very few people ever assume otherwise. So I like knowing that right off the bat people know I belong to another female.

It works, what's not to like. *shrugs*

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

RJMASTERS

Your hypothesis is terrific except for the fact that Rosie the Riveter got knocked up just as soon as Johnny came marching home from the war. Baby Boomers.

 

[Netzach]

Holy cow - case in point.

One seems to be able to use the word Dominant in relation to men without a giant examination of gender roles through Western Civ.

There have always been women who were the pants to a greater degree than their society wants them to be at first blush. I think this is what we're talking about - what happens with closed doors and no one looking too hard. It's not the norm, but it's not some freakish aberration. I'm sure we can think of a few familial role models, most of us, who fit this mold.

I just don't like the term because I don't like the *nounification" of dominant, let alone the gendering of it much. I use the term, much as I may not like it, because it's in the vernacular and understood.

Hm. One is "a" lesbian, normally but one doesn't run around stating "I am a gay" - It's interesting to ponder how what you do became what you are, and the nuances that don't seem to put things in a hierarchy, really.

 

[midwestyankee]

RJMASTERS

Your hypothesis is terrific except for the fact that Rosie the Riveter got knocked up just as soon as Johnny came marching home from the war. Baby Boomers.

This is irrelevant. Rosie the Riveter proved that women were the equals of men in the last remaining enclave of perceived male-only superiority: the factory floor in heavy industry. What happened afterwards is irrelevant because Rosie didn't get pregnant until the horse was out of the barn (or the P-51 Mustang was on the airstrip).

 

[Netzach]

And unless Johnny had a really good job, it's statistically likely that Rosie went back to the office as a bookkeeper or back to the store as a shop girl the minute there was a kid old enough to watch another kid.

The dual income household has always been the blue collar reality.

I reiterate, pretty darn irrelevant to most of the subsequent questions. We're talking about contemporary women with enough sexual liberation in their lives to even know WTF "bdsm" is, and not think it's going to eat their children. So how she got that way, well we can examine it, but honestly, why? It's here, it's where we're at.

There are men who get off on deliberate power dynamics from the top end, chosen or found, in relationships. There are women who get off on same. Sometimes it's useful to indicate that you're talking about women specifically, but why resort to cutesy invented nouns? Dominant adj. n.
Type it out. Just a few more letters. Then that pesky gender issue goes away.