Thursday, 6 October 2016

On thunderstorms, among other things

An edited version of a conversation I had with a friend. Think of it as a Socratic dialogue kind of a thing, but one that clarified certain things for me as well as - maybe - for him. The conversation was about male sub/ female dom dynamics but I think it applies to all D/s relationships and concerns the ''submissive mindset'' as such, whether male or female.

Friend (from now on, always marked in italics): "Can being with a sub jive with a woman's innate desire to be with a protector?

A sub to me isn't just a role, it's a mindset, a way of seeing oneself in the world. So if a crisis happens, a sub is more likely to freak out and depend on the Dom to help them through it. With that assumption in mind, can a woman who is usually physically smaller and seeks to partner with someone who can protect her, can she be with a sub? Can she rely on him to be there for her in a crisis? Can she rely on him to carry her and her children out of a burning building?"

SS: "This. Is. Utter. Bollocks."

"How so?"

"I'm assuming the guy is a functional adult. Although.... I need to make a caveat here. The caveat is about the "daddy/girl" dynamic, common in M/f but is not really at all common in F/m. I don't know anything about this, and it might be an exception. But apart from that, let's unpick this thing."

"Can a woman rely on a submissive guy to carry her out of a burning house?"

"Yes. Or no. As much as on a vanilla or a dominant one. The carrying-out-of-the-house-potential has nothing to do with submissiveness, especially sexual submissiveness, and everything to do with physical strength and physical courage. Oh, and relative size difference. None of which I would see as a correlate of submission."

 "What about mental toughness?"

" Mental toughness that's NOT physical courage?"

" Stereotypically it's guys who open pickle jars, fight for a woman's honor, savagely kill lions with their bare hands to protect and feed their women and her children.. In a thunderstorm it's comforting to have a "man" around, or so I heard."

"Pickle jars - grip. Physical strength. I definitely don't want anybody to fight for my honour, but that might be just me. I find it borderline offensive.

And yes, it's nice to have someone around in the thunderstorm. Ideally someone who's not scared, can enjoy it, and will be handy for picking up fallen branches and helping to fix the roof in the morning. But why would a submissive guy or a submissive woman for that matter be useless in a thunderstorm?

Again, I'm going back to the idea that I want a functional adult who, basically, likes and needs to be fucked and/or loved in a certain way."

"Wouldn't he typically be the scared one hiding beneath the domme's skirt?"

"No idea about the population but not to my knowledge. And skirts are not the best idea in thunderstorms."

"I guess I'm conflating submissive with wimp.  You're saying they don't necessarily go together."

"Yup.''

''As a side note, a lot of masochists -- including the submissive ones -- are tougher-than-average. And they often engage in other, non-sexual physically challenging or scary stuff. That is also, I believe, true for women."

''You can't exchange power if you have no power to exchange. The worthless worm kind of fantasy you see played by some online pros and the guys who snivel at their Internet feet is just that - a fantasy. And I doubt it appeals to that many dominant women even as a fantasy, and not at all as any kind of reality.''

''Why would anybody want a useless loser? A female or a male one?''


4 comments:

  1. "You can't exchange power if you have no power to exchange."

    And I would kill to have written that line. Spot on. Spot. On.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The most archetypal sub is Lancelot...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But of course!! I wonder if he was a masochistic bottom too, though..

      Delete
    2. But of course!! I wonder if he was a masochistic bottom too, though..

      Delete