|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Who is “adom442?” Like the great philosopher, Popeye, “I yam what I yam.” I make my own path, so I don't fit the stereotype of a “Dominant.” I'm committed to being true to who I am, and I'm not willing to compromise on that by trying to live up to anyone's idea of a Dominant save mine. Why would I? Why would anyone hobble who they are to try to fit a stereotype?!
In the relationship I seek, I will be the final arbiter in all that we do, but only a fool doesn't listen to his partner. She will serve us both as “torch bearer.” She'll cast light on decisions by sharing her perspectives, and she'll trust that I'll listen to her and consider what she says. She'll also be able to trust that my decisions will always be what I believe will be best for both of us. That doesn't mean that we'll always do as she wishes, and it doesn't even mean that I'll always be right, but she will also know that if I'm wrong in a decision, then I'll be quick to recognize it, and I'll change our course.
I'm looking for a woman who is interested in a D/s relationship because she believes that she would be happiest in a D/s relationship. I don't want to find a woman who can't manage her life and needs a D/s relationship. I want to find a woman who believes that having an exchange of authority with the right partner can make a relationship even better than it could have been with that same right partner in a “vanilla” relationship.
I also want a woman who's not afraid to explore her sexuality and isn't afraid to explore different types and facets of BDSM play. What we do takes sexuality to a whole different incredible level, and I don't want me or her to be denied that joy. I want someone who won't be afraid to let me lead us into the kinds of evenings that will leave us both unable to form complete sentences until we've come down from the sexual and BDSM experiences we've shared.
I wonder – Will she read this? Will she have the courage to strike out on that journey? Yes, I think she will. If a woman reads this and wants what I describe, then if she's someone I want to know, she won't just fantasize; she will act and contact me.
|
|
|
|
|
I wish I didn't feel the need to make the next few journal entries. If everyone in our community had honor and integrity then there would be no reason for me to make them, but that's not the case.
I've been a part of a discussion in a Yahoo BDSM group about lying. I want to share some (edited) contributions that I made to that discussion. In the next few entries I'll be talking about how I react to people lying about me and mine, the cost to soul and spirit that liars pay when they lie, red flags to look for that are indications of lying, and personality types that are often associated with liars.
First, how I react when people lie about me and mine:
If anyone ever hears someone gossiping or talking shit about me or mine, please consider that a personal invitation from me to come and talk with me privately.
What is the best way to deal with a situation like this? One person in the discussion said, " the top being a dom in the community, has everyone's ear, and so gets to broadcast his 'side' of things." I don't think it's a good idea to let rumors spread unchallenged , but as another person said, "it's a harder road to travel but try always to take the high road."
Is it possible to challenge the rumors and still take the "high road?" First, I would want everyone to know that they would be welcome to come and talk with me privately about anything they'd heard. I would respond to any allegation frankly and honestly without lashing out at the source of the rumor. Maybe that would give me a chance to air "my side of things" without having to sink to the level of the person "broadcasting" their side of things. I think it would be hard to sit by and only talk about the situation with the people who came to me privately. I'd want to loudly present my side to anyone who'd listen, but that would add to the drama. The people who cared about the situation would want to hear my side as well, and so they would come to me. Some people wouldn't care about either side, so why bother them? Others might only want to hear one side, but would you really care about what someone thinks who wouldn't take the time to hear both sides?
I said I'd respond to allegations, but that's all I'd do. I would present the facts as I knew them that led to the allegation, and leave it to the person who came to me to draw their own conclusions. Also, I wouldn't "spill the beans" about everything that I thought led to the allegation or talk shit about the person who was making the allegation. I wouldn't bring out a list of the things that were being said about me; I'd only respond to the allegation that someone asked about. I wouldn't say, "Here's the truth about that issue, and I've been told I've also been accused of three other things, so while we're talking let me fill you in on other things you may hear about me."
|
|
|
|
|
When you finally have to accept that someone has been lying to you, you're angry; you feel violated, and you want to get even. I know that's how I've felt when people have lied to me and I've caught them doing it. Perhaps karma is already dealing with the person even as they're lying.
I don't think very many people can escape the socialization that teaches us that lying is wrong. That means that the liar has already sacrificed his or her self respect. They can work hard not to be held in contempt within the community, but they can't hide from themselves. They know they're liars, and they have to live with that knowledge.
I also asked myself why would someone lie? It's because they must. They lack the competence to achieve their goals and maintain their integrity. Liars have one thing in common; they aren't able to get what they want on their own merits - They're failures.
There's a sad side to my realizations. Perhaps liars aren't deserving of pity, but they are pathetic. Rather than face their inadequacies and spend their time getting to the point that they can achieve what they want in life, they've given up on themselves.
I've come to two conclusions. If you ever find yourself in the position of having had someone lie to you, be glad you found out because the person lying to you has exposed themselves as being incompetent and a failure. Also, realize that liars hide it, but deep within themselves they have to live with the knowledge of their incompetence and their contempt of who they truly are.
|
|
|
|
|
I hold people who identify as Dominants to high standards of honesty and integrity because they are assuming responsibility for others. Now I want to share some of the things I would consider red flags because lying "Dominants" cast a pall over our whole way of life, and deserve to be exposed for what they are.
I went to a presentation at this year's Southeast LeatherFest titled "Transparency at the Top: It is a Two-Way Street" that's relevant to this conversation. The premise of the presentation is that there's a benefit to the Dominant being open with his or her submissive partner. This can be difficult for some because it means letting your partner see who you truly are rather than trying to project an "air of dominance," but if who you truly are is someone who's comfortable being the dominant partner in the relationship, then really there's little or no risk, and the benefits are more than worth the effort. Your partner will gain trust in you, and come to know you're not lying because they will have the information they need to confirm that you're a person of your word.
People say that knowledge is power, and some may withhold information from their submissive partners as a means of maintaining the power dynamic, but that would be a red flag for me on more than one level. First, why would they need to withhold information to maintain the dynamic? Secondly, what information are they withholding? Maybe what's being withheld would expose lies that have been and are being told. I don't think withholding information is synonymous with lying, but I would consider it a red flag.
Look for consistency - especially in the details. If I present myself as a gentleman who always opens doors for my submissive partner, then I'm going to be doing it consistently - not just when I remember that I've said that as a way to ingratiate myself with her. Consistency should be there across the passage of time also, so having a good memory is a tool for spotting people who play loose with the truth. For example, if this month I say I'm compassionate towards people who've encountered hard times in their lives, next month I'm not going to be always saying that people who are in trouble brought it onto themselves and deserve no compassion.
Look for congruency in words and actions. For example, If I lambaste one of your past relationship partners when you tell me that he was irresponsible, then you're not going to see me shirking my responsibilities and trying to blame others for my mistakes later. Instead, I'll admit my mistakes, and I'll accept the onus of correcting the situation. If I'm not willing to own my mistakes and I blame others instead, I'm not just being irresponsible; I'm lying, and the fact that I'm lying to myself also doesn't diminish the fact that I'm still lying.
|
|
|
|
|
I looked around a bit on the internet and found a couple of resources that describe personality types that are often associated with lying. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders lists "Narcissistic Personality Disorder" as one of the choices for diagnosis by mental health professionals. Symptoms of this disorder include showing arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes, having a sense of entitlement, and having a grandiose sense of self-importance. A person with this disorder lacks empathy, is interpersonally exploitative, and believes that he or she is "special" and unique.
All Dominants may have traces of narcissism in their personalities, but I don't think we as a group all suffer from NPD. It's easy to imagine though that someone who is suffering from NPD and is who is also kinky could be drawn to our community. Lying isn't listed as a symptom of NPD, but it's easy to extrapolate that it could be. This person could easily imagine themselves so "special" that honor and integrity are irrelevant for them - those would be concerns for "lesser Dom/mes."
Another resource describes "Right-wing Authoritarianism." Right-wing Authoritarians are more likely to use many double standards in their thinking and judgments and be hypocrites. I think you'd find lots of casuistry among this population. Casuistry is derived from the same root as the word case, and refers to arguing that some specific case is a justified exception to a rule or ethical requirement. These people may lie often because of extenuating circumstances, but they're not liars - Just ask them.
|
|
|
|
|
I've been discussing my last journal entry with some friends, and what follows is an excerpt from an e-mail I sent to one of them.
One of the ways this perspective has been useful is that it makes the different responsibilities of Dominant, Master, and Owner more explicit. I think of a Dominant as having a role much like a team captain in sports or a manager in corporate America. Dominants have more responsibility to be capable than Masters and Owners - His submissive is counting on him to lead a winning team. He also has to be grounded in the sense that he is responsible for finding the balance in his submissive's life between her pursuing common goals and becoming fulfilled by pursuing the goals that are hers alone.
I think Masters need a higher level of narcissism than either Dominants or Owners. In the Master / slave relationship, it really is all about him. The Master may also need to have a level of ambition that's greater than Dominants or Owners. His slave is going to measure herself by whether or not he achieves his goals. Now, there will be a diverse set of goals for different Masters, but all Masters probably need to have defined and coherent goals that they've communicated with their slaves. She'll throw herself into helping her Master achieve those goals, and his success will be the source of her fulfillment.
Owners have to care for their pets and keep them engaged in the relationship. Think about the family dog that tears up furniture when it's left alone in the house. The dog acts out because it's not engaged with the rest of the family when it's alone. The human pet needs to be engaged in the relationship too. Owners can provide that engagement by picking out what clothes his pet will wear, he'll likely order for her when they go out to a restaurant, and he'll make countless decisions for her. I talked to a woman a while back who wanted the Owner / pet relationship and didn't have a partner. She told me that she found watching television irritating because it reminded her that there was no one in her life who had told her what program to watch. |
|
|
|
|
Agitee, my obeisant socia, asked me to discuss the difference between submissives and slaves. Most people think that “sub” and “slave” are measures of submission or of limits. I have a different take on this than most people, so I decided to share my thoughts. I don’t mean to imply that my perspective is the only one on this subject, or that my perspective is better than any other. I DO believe that this perspective is an interesting one, and I believe that it’s as valid as any other. I’d love to know the thoughts of others on this.
Let’s look at what motivates submissives and slaves instead of focusing on levels of submission or limits. (I’ll frame this discussion in terms of the woman being submissive, but change the pronouns and the discussion will be just as valid for a male submissive or slave.) The submissive woman has goals in common with her Dominant, but she also has goals and ambitions that have nothing to do with him. She submits in the relationship because she trusts her partner to do as good or better job of helping the two of them achieve their common goals as she could. She also trusts his judgment in helping direct her in achieving those goals that are hers alone. In the case of a Dominant/submissive relationship, it’s critically important that she considers her partner as competent as she is, and ideally, she’d want him to be more competent than she is so that he can do a better job of directing her towards her goals than she could do.
What about slaves? Slaves get their fulfillment, their sense of purpose, from selfless service. A slave’s goal in life is to be there for their partner. She’s most fulfilled when her partner receives recognition rather than her. Remember the saying “behind every great man stands a great woman?” The slave is happiest when she’s the partner of a great man because that means she’s succeeded at being that great woman. If you pay attention, you’ll find slaves in the vanilla world. The woman at the awards banquet who’s beaming because her husband is receiving an award may well be a slave. Who knows how much she sacrificed to help him achieve his goals? Maybe she took control of the household and the children to free him to follow his dream. If her reward is seeing HIM succeed, then I’d say she’s a slave.
There’s another lifestyle relationship that’s not talked about as much – the “pet.” Pets don’t want to do for themselves; they want their owners to take care of their needs. They can relax; they don’t have the onus of achieving goals they don’t share with their partners, and they don’t have to concern themselves with supporting the goals of their Masters. They are blissfully free of responsibilities. In return for having their needs taken care of, they’re – well, they’re pets! In return for releasing all responsibility they are there for whatever their owners wish for them. That could be maid, nanny, fuck toy, or it could be someone in corporate America. Yes, a pet could be a member of corporate America in the real world and want that total freedom from responsibility at home.
|
|
|
|
|
A submissive woman I’m corresponding with used the phrase “natural Dominant” several times, and I asked her to explain to me what she thought a “natural Dominant” was. Her answer was so insightful that I wanted to share it here and comment on it. She wrote:
“In my opinion, a Naturally Dominant man isn't One who has to "announce" to the world that He is. He just "is." He is responsible and honorable, takes care of His family and friends, provides direction, and [gives] advice based on His analysis of any given situation. He takes Leadership and Authority seriously, as His desire is to see growth “
There’s a woman named Agitee who is in my service while she continues to look for her life long partner. Agitee and I were friends for several months, and we had discussed many lifestyle issues in one another’s lives before she came to me one evening and asked to be formally in my service. She didn’t come to me because she had swooned from some affectation of dominance I had assumed. She asked to be in my service because over the course of time, she found that more and more she valued my perspectives on this lifestyle and she believed that my being a dominant force in her life would make her life better and more fulfilling. It wasn’t because she wanted a “Dom;” it was because she wanted me to become an even more dominant presence in her life, and her desire to serve me had grown to the point that any other way of relating to me felt unnatural to her.
I’ve encountered some “dominant men” who were so concerned with projecting their dominance that they seemed to wear it like an ill fitting suit, and I believe that they’re making an egregious mistake. Prior to Agitee’s request, I hadn’t even once tried to assume an air of “dominance” with her. If I had been doing that, I would not have consented to allow her to be in my service because she would have been wanting to serve a persona I was projecting rather than wanting to serve me. I think someone can maintain a façade for an evening or even for a few weeks during a courtship, but it can’t be maintained for the long term. Eventually, the burden of posturing becomes too great to continue. Then, the real person makes his appearance, and the submissive may come to realize that the real person may not be anyone they can serve.
I believe that much of the dominant posturing I see in our community is born of insecurity. If someone doesn’t believe that they’re worthy of having another in their service, then they won’t believe they can be true to who they are and find anyone who would want to serve them. Instead, their only recourse is to read a few books, watch others in the community, and then try to emulate what they see. In my opinion, a better use of their time would have been looking inside themselves to learn more of who they truly are and building the confidence to come to believe that they were indeed someone worthy of being served and of being in a position of authority in their relationships. |
|
|
|
|
Here’s an e-mail I received a few weeks ago from an angry Dominant:
“The whole idea of you going on and on about a relationship then adding in the word ‘play’ Makes me toss a red flag in the air if anyone asks my opinion of what you are projecting in this profile...[sic] Wannbe fake would sadly be the words I would use.”
When I read it, I realized that I’ve made several journal entries about relationships, but I’ve never said anything about play except for a passing reference in my introduction.
I think play is a VERY important part of our relationships. It’s an affirmation and celebration of the relationship and the nature of the relationship. There’s a point some motivational speakers make about a breakfast of ham and eggs. The chicken was “involved” in making the breakfast happen, but the pig was “committed.” Someone can call me Sir and do the “normal” things I tell them to do like prepare dinner for me, sit in the floor at my feet, and so forth, and these things will be evidence that they want to be involved in a D/s relationship. Now, consider this scenario: Suppose they’re willing to let me beat their ass until it’s covered with welts, and then they’ll get on their knees and look up at me with adoration in their eyes while I piss on them. In this second scenario, they wouldn’t just want to be involved; I could be pretty sure they were committed to being in a D/s relationship.
I don’t mean to imply that everyone (or even anyone) has to play this hard or that water sports are requisite for a “real” D/s relationship. Still, play shouldn’t be fake. Submitting to someone by letting them buy you dinner and give you flowers requires very little submission. I do think an important element of play is that the activity should sometimes be a stretch for the submissive. It lets both parties know that the submission is genuine – it’s something the submissive person wouldn’t do if he or she was not actually demonstrating true submission.
The most important aspect of play may well be the intimacy that’s born of complicity. Society at large is very judgmental about the things we do. To find a partner who will not only allow you to realize this part of yourself, but will also celebrate it and be a willing and enthusiastic complement to you is rare and special. That sharing of an aspect of ourselves that few others can understand requires that we trust one another more than many other couples do. The trust and openness that is requisite for play is also a unique opportunity that we in the lifestyle have for a profound bonding experience. |
|
|
|
|
Here's another discussion I joined very recently. The question was: "How important is feeling appreciated?"
My contribution to the discussion:
For me, it's extremely important, and I think it should be for others as well. I often turn to etymology for insight, and this time it was particularly rewarding. Appreciate comes from the Latin word, appretiare, that means "to set a price to" with an implicit understanding that the price is a high one.
There are two implications of this. The first is that I want my partner to appraise our involvement as having value - to recognize that it's worthy of a high price. I want her to value what I bring to the relationship, and I want to value what she brings as well. There's a pragmatic reason for this. I don't want either of us to be looking to "trade up." I don't want to be anyone's "Mr. Right Now" while she waits for Mr. Right, and I wouldn't do that to anyone either.
The second implication is that the high price is acknowledged. Relationships require effort on both parties' parts - D/s relationships no less than vanilla ones. I want her to know that she's worth the price of my doing what's best for us and worth the price of my effort to determine what that is.
I want her to be willing to put forth the effort to trust me when I say I'll do that for us, and I want her to be willing to believe that even when her submission is something that requires effort on her part. I want her to believe that effort (that price) is worth the reward of our relationship. |
|
|
|
|
I belong to a couple of BDSM discussion groups. One recent topic of conversation was "[Why doesn't] there doesn't seem to be many long term relationships in our community?"
Here's my response:
I think a few of the people attracted to this lifestyle are trying to compensate for other difficulties they have in life. There's the submissive who views submission as a means to escape the responsibilities that come from being an adult, and there are the dominants who view this as being their only chance of having anyone respect them.
Also, I think too many people romanticize this so much that they loose touch with reality. For the submissives, some view this the same as what I'll call the "romance novel rape fantasy." By that, I mean the dashingly handsome, strong, but considerate hero who forces the damsel to let him do all the things to her that she desperately wants him to do. The only "rape" involved is that he allows her to escape her culpability for what happens. That fantasy crumbles the first time her partner expects her to submit to something that she doesn't want to do herself.
Dominants are not without blame either. What could be better than to have someone who never questions you? Someone who's goal in life is to serve you and make your life heaven on earth? Well, the problem with this is that your relationship is not all about you just because you're "dominant." Your partner has feelings, needs, and wants, and you being dominant means you have the responsibility for looking after your partner's needs in addition to having him or her look after yours in ways that are meaningful to you. The way the two people meet one another's needs is not the same - hey, it is D/s - but, if the relationship is going to endure, then it's done - it's just done from either a dominant or submissive perspective.
The romance of this lifestyle causes people to make a simple, but egregious mistake. The lifestyle becomes more important than their partner. There's a phrase I've heard: "They're not in love; they're in love with being in love." A similar thing can happen in this community. When the lifestyle becomes more important than the choice of partner, then the choosing of the partner suffers. My opinion? This lifestyle should add to and fulfill the relationship - NOT be the relationship.
|
|
|
|
|
Someone asked me in an e-mail what BDSM act or activity brings you bliss? Here's my reply:
I'm not sure it qualifies as bliss, but one thing that's special to me is when someone assumes the onus of demonstrating their willingness and desire to submit to me. Two examples of what I mean:
We had had a general discussion about the concept of 'sp time.' A week or two later when we met for dinner, my cell phone rang four minutes before we were to meet. There was genuine concern in her voice when she said, 'Traffic is really bad. I apologize, but I may be several seconds late for dinner.'
I was talking to 'Jane Doe' on the phone one night, and we were having a spirited conversation - the kind where each person finds themselves saying 'Exactly! You completely understand what I'm talking about!' Then, I realized that time had gotten away from us and it was after eleven o'clock. I interrupted her and said, 'I just realized it's gotten late. I'm enjoying our conversation, but I have to work tomorrow.' I offhandedly added, 'Say goodnight, Jane.' She didn't say, 'Just let me finish this thought' or 'I've enjoyed our conversation.' Her voice softened, and the only thing she said was 'Goodnight, Jane.' |
|
|
|
|
My previous journal entry had examples of submissive women I've encountered who didn't make a good impression. It's only fair that I share an experience that did make a good impression.
One particular friend of mine who's a submissive woman offended me during a phone conversation not long ago. We both were having hectic weeks, and so we weren't able to talk more to clear things up for more than a week.
She sent me an e-mail saying that she had spent time reflecting on the conversation as I had asked of her, but she hadn't been able to remember saying anything that she thought would have upset me. Then, she said that she was looking forward to us being able to talk more because my being upset was enough evidence that she had done something. Then, she apologized for whatever it had been that she had said.
She's a special lady. |
|
|
|
|
A few months ago, someone asked me for advice about approaching and relating to a Dominant. As part of my advice, I shared some of my experiences with submissives I had met who didn't make a good impression. Here's what I wrote:
"One woman I talked with wanted submission so badly that it interfered with her ability to actually be submissive. I wanted to get to know who she was, not just that she was submissive. She was falling all over herself being submissive to the point that I could only see her submissiveness; she wouldn’t or couldn’t show me any other part of herself. At one point, I told her, “Stop calling me Sir for awhile, there’ll be plenty of time for that later on.” Her reply? “Yes, Sir. I’ll stop at once, Sir. I only want to please you, Sir.” She really only wanted to be submissive; the fact that she was talking to me was a coincidence. She didn’t want to be submissive to me, she would have been happy submitting to any man who identified himself as dominant. I wished her well in her journey in the lifestyle, and I moved on.
Another submissive woman I talked with was looking for someone to come riding in on his white horse, fix her, and fix her life for her. She told me how miserable she was, how much she hated having to make decisions and cope with life, and how much she wanted a man to take control of her and her life. She didn’t need a dominant man in her life; she needed a counselor.
Yet another woman I talked with had a laundry list of all the ways she wanted me to dominate her. She wanted me to order her food for her when we went out to eat, she wanted me to pick out her clothes for her whenever we went out, she wanted me to tell her what music to listen to and what television shows to watch. Sounds pretty submissive, doesn’t it? Notice that she never asked me what I wanted, or how I wanted my relationship with her to be. Instead, she TOLD ME how I was supposed to relate to her. I wished her well and I moved on."
|
|
|
|
|
I don't understand why this lifestyle is romanticized so much. I read entries here about "serving me, being obedient to me" all the time. I don't read entries about people wanting to have synergy with their partner.
Sure, I want to have a partner who will choose to be obedient - one who will enjoy serving me. But I want that to come to be because of the strength of the relationship, not because the other person is so enamored with the idea of service and obedience.
If it's done right, then the obedience and service is motivated - Ladies, you should obey and serve because it's how you show your partner you care about them and you're committed to the relationship. The D/s and the kinkiness should add to the relationship, not BE the relationship!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| Age: 23 |
| Arizona,
Arizona |
|
|
|
|
