Yet another question that appeared in the search terms is: “Why would it be hard for someone to be submissive?” Obviously I cannot know what is the intent of the person who asked that question. But it seems to me like a question from someone who thinks being a submissive is supposed to be easy. So let’s talk about that. Continue reading
Archive for Women
In my grazing of things across the intertubes, I came across a blog post titled “Struggling with My Submission”. It is a short post, so I will quote just a snippet here.
Lately, I have found myself envisioning being curled up at the feet of a Dom, and even having him stroke my hair. Or, I picture myself in a position where I’m offering myself to him. This scares the f— out of me!
The bold emphasis is in the original. Expletive edited by me for those who may not be used seeing that language.
Anyway, this is, I would say, a common reaction many women have to being and/or discovering they are submissive. While some people will claim that our culture still tells women they have to submit, that claim is not true. Our culture tells women they have to be strong and independent. From makeup ads to clothing ads to daytime talk shows to television series, and on and on, all preach that women are to be strong and independent. So when a woman discovers within herself a desire to submit, it is frightening.
It is frightening because it seems wrong. It also has to do with the nature of submission. Which is to say, submission requires trust, and to trust a man that much, when a great deal of our culture teaches women that dominant men are abusers or sexual predators or both, can seem frightening. And more than that, to submit is to be vulnerable. And that is often frightening in any circumstance.
This is one of the reasons why I believe being submissive is not something for the weak. Being submissive requires a reservoir of strength. And the more a woman seeks to submit to a Dominant, the deeper that reservoir needs to be.
The key is (and this is something anti-female-submission feminists miss) to know yourself. If the desire/need to serve is in your nature, if you can feel it in the core of your being, then you ought to examine that and ponder it. Grapple with it and understand it as best you can. Gradually that fear will erode and you will find the strength you need was within you all the time.
In my opinion, if a woman has a desire to submit, submission for her will be empowering. How? It will give her the opportunity to find happiness and to be the best person she can be. And as she finds her strength, she will be strong for others, not just for herself or her Dominant. And she will come to understand herself better, and that will help her be a better person in all area of her life.
So to submissive women I say, do not ever let fear stand in the way of understanding and exploring your submissive nature. You do not not have to be perfect. Just be you.
While taking a look around (at/for what you’ll just have to imagine) I came across a blog called In My Opinion. There I found a post wherein the author of said blog addresses the question “What makes a strong/powerful woman?” My only criticism is that the list of women she gave did not include anyone like Rose Wilder Lane or Isabel Paterson. But that maybe more my bias than hers.
Anyway, in the post the author says this:
While I write these words I can almost see my dad’s eyes rolling in my mind. I have never asked my dad if he thinks that men are dominant to women. I think I have never asked because I was unsure if I really wanted to know the answer. I love my dad with every part of my being but there is a HUGE generation gap between us (he is 74 and I am 33). Times have changed and our viewpoints just don’t seem to match up on a lot. He may never express it (which I respect him for) but I have a sneaking suspicion that my dad thinks the woman’s place is in the home….cooking, cleaning and taking care of children. This is what he knew for a large portion of his life…this was the role of most women at the time he was growing up. He has now raised a daughter that has none of those interests whatsoever. I was the child to always push the envelope and fight societal norms as hard as I could.
That made me smile a little bit. But also the mention of the word dominant brought to mind the fact that I am Dominant. Not for hire. I don’t do that. It’s just something I am. I am also tall, a fan of intelligent sci-fi and someone who enjoys fresh seafood. I have mentioned being a Dominant here before, but I don’t talk about it much because it is not a big deal. Anyway, so as the female author of the aforementioned post spoke of “the woman’s place,” I thought: it is where she wants it to be.
And then I thought: I wonder how many people could grasp that notion. A feminist Dominant. It seems not strange to me, but then, I am libertarian. Strange is subjective.
Being libertarian is perhaps the key there, I think. I believe in people being free to choose for themselves. Being Dominant does not mean I think all women should be subjugated. However fun that might be (kidding, sort of), I firmly believe people have to be free to discover themselves and make their own choices. Men, women, brown, pale, hetero, homo, bi, bald, even people who like the Hallmark channel.
But if I am a Dominant, doesn’t that mean I expect women to submit? Not unless she wants to. Some people like conflict. I prefer peace and liberty. I’m not saying for a woman who submits there are not rules or that there is no punishment for disobedience. Of course there is. What I am saying is that I will not force anyone to submit. Besides forcing someone to submit being unethical and generally immoral and probably illegal, my job is not to tell you what to want. I can help you figure that out, but I cannot define you. That is up to you.
Which is not to say I think the author of the aforementioned post is someone who would or should submit to a Dominant. I do not know enough about her to say. Besides which, this post is not about her. It is about my thoughts. So do not think I am commenting on her personally, because I am not.
So what about men being dominant? Some men are. Some men are not. Some women are dominant. Some are not. Some people learn dominant behavior. Some people are simply naturally dominant. Some people are naturally submissive. Neither is better than the other. Neither is truly stronger than the other. Both roles require strength to be performed well. Both require a willingness to listen and communicate honestly to be performed well.
Make no mistake, I am not talking about a guy who abuses his significant other and/or expects her to do everything while he does nothing. I’m talking about a relationship which elevates all parties involved. I’m talking about a healthy relationship involving trust, communication and honesty. I am talking about a relationship wherein the Dominant and the submissive each have responsibilities toward the other.
But perhaps I should leave further discussion of that for another time.
I was perusing through some articles over at The Spearhead, and I came across an article about the terms used in describing domestic violence perpetrated by men and by women. Apparently, according to someone named Lisa Larance, the founder of something called the RENEW program, men batter and women use force because only men use violence for long term control in a relationship. And apparently, according to Larance, women use violence to take “temporary control” of “chaotic or abusive or battering situations, rather than having the ability to effectively and truly coercivly control their partner.” She says so in a short radio interview available at the other end of this link.
Don’t misunderstand me. I am not in favor of beating up women. But let’s be clear here. Larance is essentially excusing a double standard by basically claiming that women who “use force” are justified in doing so. She claims this distinction is necessary to understand the differences in motivations of individuals who engage in domestic violence. How does classifying domestic violence based on gender help anyone to understand the individual motivations? If you want to understand the individual motivations, then you have to assess it on a case by case, i.e. individual, basis and not classify by gender before you have even met the person involved.
The kind of reasoning Larance uses is just plain ol’ ridiculous. The way she explains her argument indicates, to me, that she thinks even when women “use force” they are still the victims. She claims men “batter” for long term control of the partner while women “use force” to gain control of a situation. I am sure some women do. But let’s be clear. Larance is expressing, indirectly, prejudice against men and in favor of women. Even if you think she is justified to do so, it still a double standard. Which is to say, hypocrisy.
An alcoholic who drinks a lot of whiskey is not going to stop being an alcoholic if you get him to start drinking a lot of rum instead. Gender inequality is not solved with more gender inequality. If the goal is getting men and women to treat each other as individuals and not according to cultural gender roles, then let’s treat them that way. Setting up women as some sort of perpetual victim class who never “batter” ain’t gonna get you there. And just because you can cover over uncomfortable truths with word games does not mean you should.