Late Night Thoughts on submission

(I wrote this late last night but my internet went down)

To be honest, I'm not sure how much longer I will be blogging for.  The vibe isn't there anymore.  I love to read, write, and discuss ideas, but I don't feel like my ideas are applicable or representative anymore in today's environment.

As those who have been long-time readers know, I draw a lot of inspiration from outside sources.  Reading other blogs.  Discussion groups and forums.  Random things.  Comments.  Emails.  I've honestly been spending more time reading on Wordpress than on Blogger lately as it's just more active.  I've also been reading a lot more F/m blogs and interacting with dominants and submissives of both genders in the past couple of months.

There are a number of recurring views that keep surfacing and they continue to throw me for a loop.  Mostly because they feel very incomplete... or inaccurate... or both... or like a hybrid mish-mash of ideas out there.  When it comes to Femdom there have always sort of been two roads to travel.  The more common one when I was getting started was the consensual BDSM route and that path had the potential to evolve into 24/7 lifestyle D/s, TPE, and the like in its most extreme forms.  The other path was what I see as the predecessor to the "current" use of the term FLR, namely from authors such as Elise Sutton, Georgeann Cross, Lady Misato, and the like (back when I first discovered this side of things the term FLR wasn't yet in use).  For ease, I will refer to them as the BDSM path and the FLR path.

These schools of thought are quite different on a fundamental level.  The BDSM path was focused on consent, informed decision-making, mutual pleasure, compatible fits, respecting negotiated limits, and the like.  While things could and frequently would evolve into a much more intense state of D/s, this was known to be in the minority of Femdom relationships.

The FLR path was originally targeted at vanilla women.  It frequently talked about using sexual control and manipulation techniques to "enslave" a male, correct and modify his behavior, "train" him to perform chores and service, and so on, without him even knowing it.  Find out his secret desires and exploit them.  Make him addicted to her and she can continuously dangle the carrot and steer him however she pleases.  Do this long enough and he may be reduced to a life of servitude.

If you go back 10+ years, the BDSM crowd found this approach rather appalling.  However, there has always been a shortage of available Dommes to single subs and the FLR approach was a much much much easier "sell" to a vanilla partner.  If you have a vivid imagination you can probably picture Billy Mays shouting on an infomercial "Take control!  He'll mow the lawn!  He'll do the laundry!  He'll pee sitting down!  With just three easy steps you'll have him wrapped around your little finger and going down on you for hours on end!"

In a lot of ways this solved the confidence problem.  It removed the notion of "I have to be a leather-clad dominatrix" and replaced it with "I do what I want."  I don't see anything wrong with this.  I think in a lot of ways that is how Femdom should be.   It's really weird though because it feels like the worlds have merged but not in a clean way.  The BDSM-path was always very big upon responsibility, looking out for a sub's well-being, and the like.  There was an understanding of the sub's cycles, when aftercare was necessary, and their conflicting emotional states that would regularly arise. What I am gathering now is a trend in thinking of "a sub shouldn't need that."  That turns my world upside down.

I would probably be able to groove with it more easily if not for the fact that most Femdom blogs I read that allude to this tend to be unhappy.  In the not unhappy cases, when I read them I can picture Billy Mays shouting the words at me.   All in all I tend to struggle to differentiate between "a sub shouldn't need that" and "I don't want to have to do that."

This leads me to the second half.  Interacting with a number of subs lately I am finding a striking number of subs that claim to be submissive all the time.  I'm like, wow, really?  Back in the day they used to call those people doormats.  It doesn't take long to realize after hearing them complain and talk about the things that they hate, all the limits that they have, how inflexible they are on certain things, and so on, that they aren't submissive all the time, they have just convinced themselves of that.  Cue Billy Mays.  I even find this happening a lot from brand new subs that discovered the lifestyle two weeks ago.  "I don't need to learn anything because I love to please."  Problem solved, guaranteed success.  Yes, I'm vomiting sarcasm right now as I try to picture someone actually being submissive all the time.  There are people that are neat freaks, those that like to stay busy, those that like to be helpful, useful, pleasing, and so on, but I don't equate those qualities as being submissive.  To me, submissive means that you submit to the will of another.  That is, you disempower yourself and allow someone else to hold power over you.

I am an opinionated son of a bitch.  I rant and rave.  I am passionate about a hell of a lot of things.  I fight for what I believe in.  I make sure to learn enough about something before trying to argue for (or against) it. I am fine stating it outright, I am not submissive all the time.  I do not submit to just anyone.  I believe my submission has value.  When I submit I offer all of myself.  I only submit to someone that is special and dear to my heart, that I trust, respect, and love deeply.

The twist comes in that this creates a dual persona.  I have the version of myself that I show to the world, lean on in times of crisis, use for problem solving, and dealing with humanity in general.  Then there is my submissive side: romantic, passionate, vulnerable, sensitive, devoted, and sincere.  I guard this side of myself from the world.  I show it only to someone that is very special to me.

The problem with duality is that it is one or the other.  I am my alpha self OR I am my submissive self.  While my alpha self may still exert politeness, courtesy, and manners, there is a distinct difference between choosing to do something and NEEDING to do something.  To feel submissive is a need of mine.  If it wasn't a need I would have abandoned it long ago because life is a lot more difficult this way.  I consider my submissive side to be the best parts of me.  While my alpha side may reluctantly go along with something, my submissive side is excited and eager to do the same thing.

It is a binary switch that is set to either alpha or sub.

For years I felt this was the common way about most male subs.  We have one face we show in public and the submissive face we save for behind closed doors.  One of the major flaws of this design is that the sub can't always control where the switch is set.  While it's possible to pop into alpha mode as needed, it isn't always as easy to switch back into sub mode.  Thankfully, dominance tends to work quite well for flipping the switch to sub mode.   I always sort of felt that most people saw things this way.

I don't know.  If not for a handful of people that have continued to dialog with me on these views I would probably feel like a stranger in a strange land.

Wanna buy some Mighty Putty?