I can’t possibly be the only one who’s noticed that modern BDSM clearly favours the female partner — whether she be submissive or dominant. If in submission, her dominant tends to be loving, doting, and indulgent. Occasionally restrictive, if it seems to be in the submissive’s best interest. She gives over her power, just like the male submissive does, trusting and seeking to build greater intimacy with the dominant. The female submissive is rewarded for her submission, however, whereas it’s expected of the male submissive — especially if you’re dealing with a female supremacist-oriented sort of female domination dynamic. Then the male is practically treated as less than human, expected to serve without reward or gratitude, where the ultimate objective is to break down and subjugate their will. The female submissive is coddled, cherished and adored — the object of desire and affection. The male submissive is a degraded, denied, and defiled — simply regarded as an object. If anything, of contempt, or with no identity or value at all.
What kind of fuckery is this?
For one, it really does support my theory that the majority of dommes are angry feminists who have decided that men must pay — and hey, there’s a whole bunch of them out there that want this kind of abuse, so where’s the problem?
That’s the greater question. Where is the problem?
I’ll tell you one thing; when we attest that human slavery is atrocious in third world countries, but are perfectly accepting of consensual slavery without even examining its roots — Houston, we have a big problem.
Many different schools of thought exist for BDSM, and like anything academic, everyone’s certain that theirs is The One True Way. It’s becoming like a fucking religion. Oh, you’re doing it wrong — because it differs from how I do it. Yeah? Fuck you. Ever hear of tolerance? Freedom of expression? Well, look it up. Diversity of opinion and viewpoint is what keeps us from sinking into conformity and becoming myopia-drenched drones. Any group that declares that theirs is the only way to be is automatically suspect, in my book.
Ah, but did you detect the irony? It was subtle. In case you missed it, I’ll give you a chance to go back. (Don’t mention it.)
In evading ethnocentricity, i.e., proclaiming that slavery is a bad thing, we’re adopting certain worldviews held by specific societies. In our case, western civilisation, which has said that subjugating another human’s will to your own is a bad thing. Fucks people up. So, there’s a trick question inherently involved in what’s good, what’s bad, what’s acceptable, and what should be avoided. This requires claiming a particular view despite what the rest of the crowd with which you run might say, potentially being the odd one out. It traps you into making a decision, based upon your own subjective information, on a very controversial topic. I did that last year when discussing it at length with my former neighbour. (That same one, longer-time readers might recall, who owned a certain cat that was briefly in bondage. Oh, yeah. It’s worth the read.) I’d been on the fence about certain things that incited more intense reactions out of others. The super-hot buttons that can send a well-meaning debate into an ad hominem attack and, in some cases, never quite viewing that person the same way again. It involves some risk.
He and I were sharing our opinions, and, I, being the one always open to someone else’s point of view, had felt for quite some time like I was about ready to leap off the fence and make a choice regarding my take on consensual slavery, but hadn’t gotten there just yet. I mean, I knew plenty of submissives who’d been slaves that said it created the kind of bond they otherwise wouldn’t have had. There is something to be said for that kind of vulnerability and the intimacy it creates between members engaged in such precarious activities. But it seemed rather odd for me to think that consensual slavery was an okay thing while non-consensual slavery was a violation of human rights. Sure, context is everything — but what does that even have to do with it when you get down to it? Lots of teenage girls discovered that cutting was a means of making their inner emotional wounds visible to the outside world; something they could show to others and elicit real sympathy for, being that it’s tangible, not something abstract. ‘Oh, what’s that bandage for?’ is much more compelling than trying to detect another’s state of melancholy. (Especially for men.) Some of them discovered they were masochistic. The world-at-large said that pain was bad and should be avoided, but there was this subset of people that not only shared their need for pain, but wanted to cause them pain, too! Glory days! Real understanding! Empathy! Camaraderie! These people were just as (according to them) fucked up as they were! Together, they could bask in their shared fucked-upness and create a sense of community. Ahhhh.
Wait, there are some ‘G’s missing. This is not ‘Ahh’. This is ‘Agghh!’ While a sense of kinship and community is central to everyone’s need for affiliation, (y’know, that part of you that ‘has to belong’ — unless you’ve accidentally had it switched off by traumatic events in your past; for which, don’t worry — you’re hardly alone) when you’re taking something negative and then saying, ‘hey, it’s okay, because I do it, too‘ — well, you remember the old adage that two wrongs don’t make a right. They don’t. Too many people seek a sense of understanding, companionship and community in places where they’re most likely to find it. Why? Because it’s logical. But, let’s face it folks. Needle-play is not cross-stitch. Even if they do involve the same tools. Sometimes more members just add greater depth and scope to the already-present fucked-upness.
Ahem. Charles Manson, anyone?
No, I’m not likening kinksters to serial killers. Rather, just trying to drive home the point that a sense of community is not all that’s needed. The group has to have a healthy purpose to start with. Are kinksters healthy? Eh, it depends. Some people come from shitty childhoods, scared to death of the world, and find others in kind who go off and have confusing and abusive relationships where one ends up in the hospital and the other is given a restraining order as a thanks for their participation. Others end up aware that things didn’t quite go as planned in ye days of olde, find others who are equally introspective, and go on attempting to form healthy bonds — relationships and marriages alike — where they can begin the cycle again, or decide that it’s best for everyone to not go beyond themselves. (Hey, some figure that it’s just best to end it there. And, depending, sometimes it is. But very few — if any — are truly hopeless. At least, in my view. Maybe I’m still optimistic.)
But the truth of the matter? Most of us are fucked-up. Otherwise, we wouldn’t need this stuff to begin with. Go to any BDSM club, and it feels like kink is something that’s far more prevalent than it is.
But the numbers are somewhat surprising.
In general, there’s an overwhelming number of submissive women, and quite a few dominant men. (Though, some of my dear friends would argue — and demand I tell them where, because they’re not finding them. But more on that later.) The truth is, they’re the second largest population. After that? Submissive men. And after that — dominant women. Which may or may not be female dominants.
Okay, now I’m just getting semantical. ( … Or am I?)
A dominant male is not a male dominant. (Say, what?) For the purposes of most studies, a dominant man is a different population than a male dominant. What’s the difference? One is openly identifying as kinky. (Yeah, guess which one.) So. When you hear a bunch of talk about ‘dominant men’ just know that they may not be male dominants. (I know, I know. Fucking semantics. But here in the field of psychology, we use them to separate one potentially different population from another for the purpose of organising our data and being able to draw conclusions by mixing and matching variables. It’s great fun!) In recent times, with kink becoming much more popular since someone (probably Cosmo or Maxim) said, ‘hey, a bunch more couples are kinky than you think!’ it’s become somewhat en vogue to come out of the kink closet. (I said somewhat. Personal experience dictates that discretion should not be disregarded or caution thrown to the wind. If you decide to proclaim your kink to someone who’s strictly vanilla, well, remember that warning about someone never quite viewing you the same? Yeah.) Especially the men. Lots and lots of inwardly dommy, but not kinky, men have decided to pick up the whip in hopes it’ll get them hot chicks, and allow them to be manly. (With much chest-puffery.) But in pursuit of the bigger and better O, that in itself can lead to a whole new world of problems.
I’ve known plenty of dominant men to be domineering men; and quite a few, actually, to be embarrassed of their deep need for submission, which, of course, they deny entirely, instead embarking upon a difficult (and often dangerous) path of overcompensation and further denial. Bad for everyone involved. This is, unfortunately, where we encounter wife-batterers, chauvinists, and abusive guys in general. Not always of the (immediate) opinion that women should be pregnant-and-barefoot-in-the-kitchen, either; some may masque their need to compensate for their own general lack of self-esteem in declarations of egalitarianism. They’re about as far from a good male dominant as you can possibly get. No love here. No appreciation, respect, or affection here.
So, if the difference in semantics is presence of kink in preference of sexual activity, then submissive women aren’t necessarily looking to submit. Really, they’re more vanilla woman who enjoy a bodice-ripper every now and then, like a heavily-masculine man, want to be taken care of, and identify with more traditional feminine roles. To be chased; not to give it. Doted upon, rather than needing to dote. Less of a desire to be of service than being taken charge of with some firmness by a man who’s earned her trust. May like to be tied up, but nothing crazy. Typically, not into pain.
Female submissives, on the other hand, have a need to be of service, (as we know), may also be masochistic, and desire a strong, male dominant to whom they can belong. They’ll then go to great lengths to seek his approval, appreciation, love and affection, wishing to make him her whole world, and feeling otherwise lost if he isn’t at its centre. (Which he digs anyway, so it all works out.) If he’s sadistic, she’ll accept the pain he puts her through because it’s what he wants, and she wants what he wants. Her identity is a bit subsumed within his own, however, she’s not a slave. She can say, ‘hold up, yo,’ at any time, and he has to well, abide. In short, subs can call ‘red’ and end the proceedings. Slaves have forfeited this right. (Which will bring me back to the question of whether or not such things are even healthy. But we’ll revisit that later.)
Next in population popularity is the submissive man. Really, he may just enjoy it when his woman takes charge, may be a bit shy and unable to start things off himself, or he may actually be kinky. I know few submissive men who aren’t also male submissives. More than the prior categories, these two seem to overlap quite a bit. There’s a danger in it, too. A submissive man may marry a submissive woman, or even a dominant woman. But, as you will soon learn, a dominant woman is not necessarily a domme.
Dominant women, the smallest population, are pretty rare. Don’t quote me, but the last I heard, the ratio was something like 7 to 1 — but it’s probably more. (I love to back my statistics up, so, data to come.) In this population, I’ve noticed there are also a lot of similarities. It’s not uncommon for a dominant woman to find her a whip in her hand and contemplate the possibility of donning the leather and latex, too. She’s far more likely than a submissive woman to explore the possibilities. Some go so far as to start testing men in their immediate sphere to see if they seem more submissive or dominant. She’ll subconsciously begin topping the submissive ones, and either finding a newly felt respect for the dominant men — or just butting heads. A power struggle can emerge where there was initially none. In her rediscovering the potential depths of her own personal power, she can’t help but take it for a test-drive. Sometimes, she’ll find those of like-mind and compatible kink. Other times, she’ll just end up embroiled in a heated battle for control.
It stands to reason that no one is actually born a submissive or a dominant. But there are patterns that present as early as childhood that may predispose one to go toward one end of the spectrum or another. And, of course, you’ve got those who enjoyed both getting tied up and then immediately tying up others. Maybe they’re just experimental — but they’re probably switches. (True switches — which are, in my opinion, an even smaller population. But I digress.) So while we’re not identifying as kinksters right out of the gate, there’s enough indication we may find ourselves at one end of the cane eventually. I’ll break it down for you.
What typically makes a dominant woman who may later identify as a domme?
* Need for power and control
* Need for organisation, order, and structure; will enforce it readily
* Bossy, domineering, sometimes flippant personality
* A tendency to better identify with male friends, colleagues, and relatives; tomboy-ishness
* Sarcastic, dry, less nonsensical or whimsical nature; more serious in youth
* Upbringing involving female-led household or prominent female figure in power
* Relationships involving submissive men or where their personality dominated their partners’
* Not very outwardly emotional; poker-faces; hard-to-read, tendency to intellectualise
* Rebellious side not-often-indulged; can lead to dramatic bursts and a need to impose her will
* May entertain mild delusions that she’s more powerful than she really is due to a need to be powerful
* Could be compensating for some issues with her own self-esteem
And what’s the basic profile for submissive man who may eventually identify as a male submissive?
* Powerful need to be controlled, guided, and influenced by an accepted, respected female figure
* Feminine-influence growing up; need to please women and have their approval and affection; mama’s boy; sisters
* Desire to be the object of affection and desire; contemplates what it’d be like to be in the female’s role, but not female
* Helpful, responsible, supportive, with a strong need for affiliation and a sense of belonging
* Less forceful, outwardly masculine | OR | secure in their sexuality with less of a need to ‘declare their masculinity’
* Easily makes friends with women, but tend to be ‘The Friend’ more than ‘The Lover’ (because they’re submissive, too)
* Less likely to be submissive in earlier years with a high-powered career; but may become submissive because of it
* May feel very uncomfortable with submission; depending upon cultural, religious, and other societal norms
* Make extremely doting daddies who are sure to end up with a Daddy’s Girl who he delightfully spoils; (he can’t say no)
* May let their needs go unmet if not under careful guidance of the dominant partner; (the stronger-willed ones won’t)
* Seeks security, to build a strong relationship, to be taken care of, and experience the more traditional female role
* Anti-boat-rockers; compliant, often yes-men
* May be masochistic with a need to punish himself for some transgression that may or may not be rational or real
- Ooh! It’s disclaimer-time! Of course, it’s important to note all of the aforementioned are personal observations I’ve made in my life, my practise, and in the scene in my experience. I’m not saying they’re necessarily valid, or that everyone fits any of the categories. These are my opinion and what I’ve personally, or second-handedly, witnessed.
So, yeah.
In the scene, however, a funky thing happens. Male submissives seem more prominent (along with female submissives, too) with male dominants being the next in popularity, and, still lastly — female dominants.
So, my friends do have a point when they bemoan the seeming lack of male doms. They do exist — like female dominants. But like female gamers, eh, they’re rarer. And they’re a hell of a lot less rare than dommes. I can’t say why, because it’s foreign to me, but for some reason, we’re just a smaller number than the rest. Which, again, baffles me. I don’t quite get it, and every time someone tells me just how rare we are, I shake my head. But, I believe it, because I have very few domme friends. And! When I asked those dommy women in my life if they were indeed dommes? … Subs! All of ‘em! I couldn’t believe it! So, yeah, the statistics are obviously credible; which is why when I find a domme I truly like and respect, I tell her. It’s a very valuable sisterhood, and there aren’t many members.
Sigh.
But, moving on.
Let’s define dominance. To me, dominance is nothing more than the ability to hold power over another. It can be stolen or gifted, depending upon the individuals involved and the circumstances. If stolen, well, it had better be consensual — which then makes it ‘stolen’, and we start getting into the bullshit realm of ‘consensual non-consent’ and ‘non-concensual consent’ — and all that nonsense. Then all kinds of definitions — generally and legally as well — become obscured and confused. What’s rape? Hell, what’s abuse? If the submissive craves violation and violence, and you grant him or her that, then what’s the boundary? Where are the lines drawn? Who the fuck draws them? The dom / me? The submissive? Both?
I’m going to go for both. The reason I have a problem with femdom as it (at least, seems to me) is currently defined and practised is because it’s so different from maledom, in that the treatment of the submissive isn’t even remotely similar. And we wonder why there’s this sudden surge of men craving ‘sensual domination’ ? It’s because they’re sick of getting whacked, treated like shit, and expected to want more! Would you like that? (Okay, not a question for the masochists. Disregard.) All the non-masochists: would you like that?
Yeah, I wouldn’t either. Funny thing is, as much as this was always my plan, I got sidetracked. Why? Because it’s difficult (and lonely) being a pioneer. Paving a road where there isn’t one is hella rough. Much easier to follow along in others’ footsteps down the beaten path. After awhile, being so different can make one question if you’re just being so for the sake of it or if you really have a purpose. It took a good half a year, but I wasn’t actually, absolutely sure. I began to ask myself: well, fuck, if this is how the dommes do it, surely — just like stereotypes contain nougats of truth — there’s got to be something to it. Right?
Wrong.
Well, at least, in my opinion. And, y’know what? I’m not embarrassed to say that it took my own submissive, my wonderful, loving, dedicated, been-through-hell-and-worse (with others and with me, too, though hopefully not as bad) boyfriend to remind me of that simple, but oh-so-important fact.
‘Say you’re the sub,’ he began, which inwardly made me cringe. (I’m the World’s Worst Submissive — in case you didn’t know. Yeah. Title’s already gone. I won it. Deal.)
So, I’m the sub, I’m thinking. This is going to be interesting …
‘What do you want?’
Is this a trick question? I blink, and then respond. (Seems kinda obvious, but a lot of truth is.) ‘ … A … tten … tion … ?’
Ding, ding, ding! I win! ‘Attention. Exactly. You want attention. Now, look. You’re important, but clearly you’re not. Because I have this to do, and well, that to do, and well, then I can get to you.’
Ooh, fuck. I see where this is heading. But he continues.
‘So, what is it you’re getting?’
This one isn’t hard in the intellectual sense. But it hurts like hell in the emotional one. ‘ … Ignored.’
‘Yeah!’ He says, and far from happy. Really, really hurt, though, he’s trying to hide it. As best he can, which isn’t that well. I don’t blame him. ‘Ignored! And how does that make you feel?’
I knew it. The thing is, we all know it. Dommes, submissives alike. We all know it. While the female submissive is on her bazillionth orgasm, the poor, maltreated, but being a right good sport male submissive is on his zeroeth. If he’s extremely lucky, his first. For the month. While the female submissive is being coaxed and praised and massaged and pushed and prided on her courage and strength of devotion, the male submissive is being told to ‘take it, bitch’, or, if he’s of the fortunate few, it’s his turn to be the furniture. Or eat out the domme who’s just finished fucking a man with, (as she’s proclaimed ad nauseum) a much larger cock than he has. It’s his duty to clean her up. At worst, the female submissive might be getting reamed on all fronts. (But, pssst — that’s because she likes it. Just in case you weren’t aware.)
At least, that’s what all the literature, spank material, and stereotypes want you to believe. That’s why a lot of men who are new to the scene and discovering it by way of maledom get a real eye-opener when they hear what’s in store for them if they sign up. A lot of the smart ones tell the scene to fuck off. But, unfortunately, there are also plenty of smart ones for whom the craving is too strong, the need too intense, and the desire too overwhelming. They try their hand anyway, and hope they don’t end up with one hell of a bad beat story. (Yeah, pun intended.)
In my experience, they always do.
That’s why, as far as I’m concerned, in my life, my relationship, and my practise, I’m not going to tread the same road the bulk of my fellow dommes have. I don’t need any more reassurance or revelation than the one I had last night, through the most simple means of discovery of all: placing yourself in another’s shoes. I talk to male submissives everyday. I hear their woes, needs, hopes, dreams, fears, desires, and pleas for the kind of life they don’t have, and want desperately. And yet, it wasn’t enough confirmation for me to realise that I was onto something by telling this whole traditional (‘Old Guard’, if you will) femdom to fuck off, and going my own way. I had to see it in the eyes of the man I love and cherish more than anything in this stupid, confusing, yet beautiful world. But, hey. I’m stubborn like that. Indecisive, but committed. Once my mind’s made up — that’s it. Thanks for playing. Have a nice day. Show’s over.
It’s not an end. It’s a beginning. I don’t need to be some stranger’s fantasy woman acting out the twisted evolution of his own childhood psychodramas. I’m a counselor. I can help them better understand themselves, where they’re going, how to be complete with the ones they’re with, or the one for whom they’re searching, and hopefully find some happiness in the process. It’s not the destination — it’s the journey. We forget that so easily. We get swayed by what everyone else is doing. I’ve got my feminist streak, and I’m all about girl-power. But you can’t so horribly abuse that which you love. Not really. You can be sadistic and enjoy the indulgence of darker desires, but there’s a massive difference between true hatred and exercising your need for abuse — either to inflict it, or experience it yourself — in a negotiated environment with one that you love. BDSM violence — or, ‘violence’ is never done out of hate. It’s out of love.
If it’s not, it’s abuse.
Word.
(Because I can’t think of anything more profound to end this ridiculously long essay, and that aforementioned wonderful boyfriend of mine has been incredibly patient in allowing me to finish this before I fuck him silly. And hard. And maybe he’ll cry, and maybe we’ll hit a point we’ve not even hit yet, where I’ll discover frightening things in me and he’ll reach new heights of vulnerability and together, unfathomable intimacy. But one thing’s for sure — it’ll be out of love.)
IN ADDENDUM …
You guys be interested in a Podcast on this subject? Then quit being a lazy fucker; write me and let me know. I’m not fucking psychic. (Well, not always.)
