Project August: Day 11 – Not a Theology Post

Well, I did realize early this morning that many Christians blogging about matters of Christian theology might take a dim view of my blog. Not that I care so much about their opinions, but I am really not interested in getting any preachy or hateful responses. So later I had the idea to go find a blog post about BDSM and Christianity. Long story short: Ugh. What I found was wholly uninspiring. So, I will pull out a reserve post (i.e. a post I was “holding in reserve,” so to speak, should I need it) on a non-Christian topic. And so on this Sunday, August 11, 2013, the topic for today is…

…the neediness of submissives.

The post to which I am responding today comes from The Bedroom Submissive. Under the header “Submissives Require” is a picture of a skinny, cute woman in what I would describe as a “please, Sir, come spank me” pose. Added to this photo is the sentence

Submissives require more attention and can be needier than the average person.

If we say the category of submissives includes all people with inherently submissive natures, then, yeah, I would guess that is generally true.

If, on the other hand, submissives is just those who submit within a D/s relationship, then I would say the quoted sentence above is not true.

Why would I say that? Because I can. Sorry. Seriously though, I would say that because I have seen more than a few supposedly “strong, independent” types who were more than a little obsessed with being the center of attention and/or quite needy. And no, I don’t just mean women.

You have probably met a few yourself, O reader. You know the type. They don’t need someone to define them they happily explain to anyone who will listen, but if you don’t like them then there must be something wrong with you. Or because they are the leader of a team project they take most of the credit after priding themselves on making sure every other team member contributed something.

Submissives (of the second category [the one of those who submit in a D/s relationship not leaders of team… oh you know what I mean]) at least usually recognize their neediness.

Ugh. This is coming out with more of a grumpy tone than I intended. In my defense I am working here on about two hours of sleep, a large dose of B6 and B12 vitamins (which is probably wearing off), and some caffeine (which is definitely wearing off).

So, speaking of need, I need some rest.

Wait… I have a blog I want people to read, and I am explaining that I need some rest. Uh-oh.

Um, so I don’t care if you read the blog, and no, really, I am just fine. I’ll be up for hours.

Wait, no, I do want you to read the blog but… um, I want it in a nonchalant and wholly confident way. Yeah, that’s it.

And I don’t need sleep or help getting sleep. I’m just a little tired. No big deal.

Whew.

I’m going to go… um… totally not take a nap. At all.

Until tomorrow. Good night Mrs. Calabash, wherever you are.

(Yes, I know. Another obscure cultural reference. It happens sometimes.)

ADDENDUM: This particular post is not among my best. I was not joking when I said I was writing it with only two hours of sleep and and a waning dose of vitamins and caffeine. So forgive me, please, O readers, for producing a post of lower quality. I will try to not let it happen again.

16 Responses to “Project August: Day 11 – Not a Theology Post”

  1. thedenigrationofonegirlinamillion Says:

    They require a higher level of care. There is a difference.

    • I would argue that submissives need a higher quality of attention and care than non-submitting vanilla folk, not a higher quantity of attention and care.

  2. LK 🐇 ?
    My post is true… For some.
    It’s not meant to be taken literally for every sub.
    Many of us are proud to be more needy… I submit to my Sir and it feeds me and me submitting to him feeds him…
    This exchange is motivated by my need…
    LK 🐇

    • Of that I have no doubt. I certainly meant no criticism of submissives or their needs. But as I said before, I think it is a quality issue, not a quantity issue. But I could be wrong. Would not be the first time that happened.

  3. I agree with what littlekaninchen wrote for this one reason only… and its simply. I been married to my husband for 33 years and during the last 31 years I gave my husband and son my all. I was the one that was always last in the whole picture living a vanilla life style. So now that I am in a D/s-M relationship yes I need that extra attention because my needs drive and feeds his dominant nature which in turn feeds my submissive nature.which brings us both front and center. Its to bad society in the vanilla world doesn’t understand how D/s concept brings a married couple closer together with open love, trust, honesty and respect for one another. I also believe the divorce rate in the vanilla marriage is high because the relationship between the spouses gets stagnant and boring which in turn causes one of them to want out of the marriage. So maybe wanting to be needed is worth it since I’m still married to the same man. Have a nice Day 🙂
    Lts♥

    • From my perspective, what you are saying supports my opinion. People in vanilla relationships are not, I think, less needy or less in need of attention. But they get by with a lesser quality of attention. In my opinion, the better quality attention in healthy D/s relationships is contributing factor to the (relatively) recent news that people in BDSM tend to have better mental health.

  4. All of these points have much merit. I think the problem arises when we are not honest with who we are and what we truly want. So many live lives that get dictating by the status quo. I think initially a new submissive does have more needs in that she doesn’t yet know her true limits and desires. Quality…absolutely, but quantity too. If she has been the one on the back burner for years her needs will be great at first. It’s like someone who has crossed the desert and all they can think about is water. I don’t care if you give me tap or mountain glacier; I just want the water and lots of it.

    Loved Jimmy Durante.

    • That is an excellent point. Quantity, I do concede, can be important. And as I said, if we are talking about all people with submissive natures, then I agree that submissives need more attention and are needier than other people. So yes, in that sense quantity is important. But I would argue that on this issue the difference between a healthy vanilla relationship and a healthy D/s relation is the quality of attention. That said, the difference between an unhealthy vanilla relationship and a healthy D/s relationship can involve a quantity of attention as well.

      And just to be clear, I am not criticizing the needs of submissives. It is a part of what makes them special and ultimately so attractive and superior (in my opinion) to ordinary folk.

      • I see your point. But sometimes to make it healthy, quanity coupled with quality get a submissive to where she trusts implicitly. Transitioning from a vanilla marriage to a D/s marriage is a different dynamic than those who have long established themselves in those roles. Lk’s post reflects those considerations based on the entire context of her blog.

        • I am not disputing that. And that I took the statement out of the context of LK’s blog is a fair criticism. I, however, intended no criticism of LK or her blog.

  5. Xajow,

    Maybe it is I that is suffering from sleep deprivation. It is difficult for me to stay on point in your original post.

    Let us just focus on the original post to allow myself some direction.

    “strong, independent” types who were more than a little obsessed with being the center of attention and/or quite needy.”

    “They don’t need someone to define them they happily explain to anyone who will listen, but if you don’t like them then there must be something wrong with you.”

    Alright… I have met the same type of people that you have described here. My summation of your analysis would be that these people are conceded and narcissistic. So far I do not see the correlation to LK’s post. Lets continue…

    “Submissives (of the second category [the one of those who submit in a D/s relationship not leaders of team… oh you know what I mean]) at least usually recognize their neediness.”

    ))((Submissives… at least usually recognize their neediness.))((

    Now let me see that quote that was the catalyst for this post…

    “Submissives require more attention and can be needier than the average person.”

    If this statement was written by a submissive I would challenge that the two sentences say relatively the same things.

    The discussion in the comments that moves toward quality/quantity appears to me to have nothing to do with the original post. However, I would agree that both are vitally important in any relationship, vanilla or D/s-M.

    My perception of the quote when I read it…

    “Submissives require more attention”

    A Dominant should be more focused on everything that concerns him including his submissive. Her needs, her well-being, her happiness, her safety, her “everything” require his absolute attention. (more attention)

    “and can be needier”

    A Dominant by nature is the leader. The one that makes decisions and harbors the responsibility and accountability of not just the relationship but of the entire household in a D/s-M or D/s-LTR relationship. I will only speak of my own experiences but let me assure you that LK NEEDS me and my dominance now more than ever and I suspect that as we grow in our D/s she will continue to NEED my Dominance even more. (needier)

    Now to address the comments section…

    Both the vanilla and the D/s submissive require more attention… More of what kind of attention appears to be the discerning distinction.

    Both the vanilla and the D/s submissive are needier…
    However, there needs are completely different.

    Respectfully,

    Mr. Fox

    • Mr. Fox,

      First of all, I would argue that acting narcissistic and being emotionally needy are not mutually exclusive.

      Second, you argue a statement of mine and the statement from LK’s post say relatively the same thing. Yes, they do.

      Third, you say the discussion in the comments regarding quality/quantity has nothing to do with my post. That is probably true. The post was poorly made.

      Fourth, you say everything about a submissive requires a Dominant’s “absolute attention”. How then does the Dominant get anything else done?

      Fifth, I would argue that depending on and needing are not the same thing. So while your submissive no doubt needs very much your Dominance, that she depends on it more than before does not mean she needs it more than before.

      Sixth, for those who are submissive by nature, their needs are the same whether they are single, in a vanilla relationship, or a D/s relationship. The difference is varying degrees of how their needs are acknowledged and met.

      Seventh, I was never arguing that submissives are not needy or that they do not require more attention than others. The clarity of my argument was lost in incompleteness and in poor construction. What I intended to have argued is that not all submissives are in D/s relationships, but that they all need the higher quality of attention of a D/s relationship. And had I followed through with that as I should have, I would have also discussed that more attention does not always equal better attention, as in the case of hyper-possessive people and/or those who are so emotionally needy themselves that they figuratively smother the other person with an overwhelming amount of attention, however well-intentioned they might be. But my post failed, and for this I have already apologized.

      Eighth, I was also never arguing that LK was wrong in what her post asserted. And as I said before, I intended no criticism of LK or her blog. I certainly do not know LK enough to criticize her, and her blog I like very much, or I would not be a wordpress follower of it.

      In conclusion, for any confusion caused by my post I take all the blame, and even so, I stand by what I intended to say, even if no one else understood what that was.

      Now that is out of the way, thank you for a reasoned reply to the mess that was my post. I hope the poor quality of it has not soured you on the rest of my blog. I think you and LK have good blogs, and I enjoy reading them.

  6. Xajow,

    I appreciate your comprehensive response to my comment. I believe that I now have a better understanding of your post and its associated comments.

    Not to worry, you have not “soured” me at all toward your blog. I have enjoyed reading it for quite a while now and am sure to enjoy it in the future as well.

    I believe that having different points of view is beneficial to everyone providing that everyone conducts themselves with honor and integrity.

    If everyone always agreed we would never stretch our minds to consider other possibilities.

    Mr. Fox

    • Thank you for the kind words. And I have certainly appreciated the opportunity for discussion, even if I am slightly embarrassed that it was the poor quality of my post which brought it about.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: