It took me a few hours to find out why I was bothered enough to write the post on Reluctant Dominance yesterday and why what I read originally was enough to sour my mood.
Well, the sour mood is firmly rooted in being too sensitive and/or frustration at some of the things people say. This topic had been on my mind for more than a week seeing as how it managed to surface itself on several blogs that I read. The too sensitive part had to do with how it was communicated to me during a comment exchange on one of those blogs.
Now that my feelings are in order and I can tell that my thoughts are rational, I'm finally able to convey what I had hoped to during that post before getting wrapped up in romantic idealism and tearing the fangs off.
The idea that dominance is done as a favor and caters only to a man's desires diminishes the value of submission.
I hold no malice towards women who after X years of marriage find out their husband had been hiding something major to them for several/many years. For those people, dominance as a favor is an understandable point of view.
However, I do not understand how a Domme who entered through conditional means would hold or communicate this point of view and have it yield successful long-term relationships.
If my submission is not special, why was I chosen?
If my submission is not special, why am I careful about who I offer it to?
If my submission is not special, why should I feel like I have any value in the relationship?
This point of view is very good at damaging a sub's psyche. It also passes over the path to developing deep bonds and loving devotion.
Am I missing the boat here or are these feelings reasonable?