It's like a normal world, only weirder. Now with 100% more poetry!
How much power does the Sub actually hold?
I find the notion that Subs hold all of the power in a D/s relationship hilarious. Sure, they can stop proceedings at any moment should they decide that they've had enough - but so can the Dom. The Dominant being willing and able is equally as important as the Submissive giving them the green light. Plus, once you start to gain a deeper understanding of your partner's limits and turn-ons the frequency of red-lights should, in theory, drop to zero.
Any decent D/s couple should have a safeword. This seems a rather hypocritical thing for me to say really, as Cleri and I have never actually discussed safewords, however we both know how to communicate when something isn't right - which is basically the same thing. The Submissive tends to have ownership over the safeword just in case a scene goes too far for their liking, or they're in immediate danger and proceedings need to come to a halt. That's fine, any Sub should have that right.
However, saying that this right strips a Dom of any power in a scene is nonsense. For starters: a safeword is something not to be played with. Being too whimsical with your safewords can really damped the confidence of a Dom, and frankly damped their fun. Doms are often patronised by people telling them that 'there's a fine line beween being a Dom and an asshole', well misusing a safeword just to artificially gain control of a scene is called being an asshole.
In addition, how can stopping a scene be the same as controlling, or having power over, a scene? Sure you can stop things - but you can't then dictate what the Dom does to you and when and how etc. Sure you can give preferences and say what you're not in the mood for tonight, but start pushing too much influence over your Dom and you become less of a 'Sub' and more of a 'bottom'.
I would argue the two are very different. By definition a Sub is more-naturally malleable, dutiful, obedient, and more willing to leave others to make decisions. I'm certainly not going call them less decisive by nature, as this opens up a whole other problematic can of worms which certainly isn't for this blog. A 'bottom' is someone who's more of a receiver in sex - and bottoms can hold more power.
See, in my eyes a Sub is someone who is willing to be submissive. Someone who will do as asked or instructed because it's what their Dom wants. They are submissive to that particualr person, and aim to carry out their wishes. The ability for them to cry out 'BAGOOM!' [Cleri, I vote this to be our safeword] and end a scene has no bearing on their being submissive to their Dom, as their submission got them into that position in the first place, if that makes sense?
On top of this, what if the Dom says no? Can't a Dom assess a situation and go 'oooh, not my cup of tea'. Additionally, a Dom can choose how far they go in any given scene, making their limits just as valid as anyone else's.
I'd say that play-partners of any length of time should know best. They'll know each other and how they operate. I'd argue that the Submissive in that scenario would probably be someone who 'gets off' on fulfilling the wishes of their Dom. Tops and Bottoms (or givers and receivers as I like to call them) are the ones with a more complex power balance, but let's not muddle them up in the D/s scheme of things.
I'm not saying D/s is straightforward - it's anything but - but I get angry when people try to twist meanings to make some asinine point. Submissives hold very little singular power in their relationships. They hold the power to end things, but so does their Dom. The hold the power to start/stop scenes, but so does their Dom. They hold the power to speak and act freely should they wish, but so does their Dom.
However, if they're to call themselves Submissives, they probably shouldn't seek to hold the power to control their Dom.
{Probably slightly contraversial, I don't know. Needed it off my chest though. *breathes*}
Any decent D/s couple should have a safeword. This seems a rather hypocritical thing for me to say really, as Cleri and I have never actually discussed safewords, however we both know how to communicate when something isn't right - which is basically the same thing. The Submissive tends to have ownership over the safeword just in case a scene goes too far for their liking, or they're in immediate danger and proceedings need to come to a halt. That's fine, any Sub should have that right.
However, saying that this right strips a Dom of any power in a scene is nonsense. For starters: a safeword is something not to be played with. Being too whimsical with your safewords can really damped the confidence of a Dom, and frankly damped their fun. Doms are often patronised by people telling them that 'there's a fine line beween being a Dom and an asshole', well misusing a safeword just to artificially gain control of a scene is called being an asshole.
In addition, how can stopping a scene be the same as controlling, or having power over, a scene? Sure you can stop things - but you can't then dictate what the Dom does to you and when and how etc. Sure you can give preferences and say what you're not in the mood for tonight, but start pushing too much influence over your Dom and you become less of a 'Sub' and more of a 'bottom'.
I would argue the two are very different. By definition a Sub is more-naturally malleable, dutiful, obedient, and more willing to leave others to make decisions. I'm certainly not going call them less decisive by nature, as this opens up a whole other problematic can of worms which certainly isn't for this blog. A 'bottom' is someone who's more of a receiver in sex - and bottoms can hold more power.
See, in my eyes a Sub is someone who is willing to be submissive. Someone who will do as asked or instructed because it's what their Dom wants. They are submissive to that particualr person, and aim to carry out their wishes. The ability for them to cry out 'BAGOOM!' [Cleri, I vote this to be our safeword] and end a scene has no bearing on their being submissive to their Dom, as their submission got them into that position in the first place, if that makes sense?
On top of this, what if the Dom says no? Can't a Dom assess a situation and go 'oooh, not my cup of tea'. Additionally, a Dom can choose how far they go in any given scene, making their limits just as valid as anyone else's.
I'd say that play-partners of any length of time should know best. They'll know each other and how they operate. I'd argue that the Submissive in that scenario would probably be someone who 'gets off' on fulfilling the wishes of their Dom. Tops and Bottoms (or givers and receivers as I like to call them) are the ones with a more complex power balance, but let's not muddle them up in the D/s scheme of things.
I'm not saying D/s is straightforward - it's anything but - but I get angry when people try to twist meanings to make some asinine point. Submissives hold very little singular power in their relationships. They hold the power to end things, but so does their Dom. The hold the power to start/stop scenes, but so does their Dom. They hold the power to speak and act freely should they wish, but so does their Dom.
However, if they're to call themselves Submissives, they probably shouldn't seek to hold the power to control their Dom.
{Probably slightly contraversial, I don't know. Needed it off my chest though. *breathes*}
Total Comments 8
Comments
-
Ahaha, coincidentally I logged on less than a minute after you posted this, so I can confidently say that I was the first to read it!
As for my opinion on the matter, I believe a successful D/s relationship means that the sub has to submit their power to their Dom. What I see a lot of people argue is that the sub has the power to give over that control and maintain the integrity of that relinquished control. In that way, subs have power to be extremely disobedient. However, in this situation, can you really still call that a D/s relationship?Doing this is not only immature, but also painful to the poor Dom, whose ego is just shot.
As such, I believe that subs do have some form of power, as you've said. The power to say no, but in order to maintain the same D/s relationship (in the case of not-so-switchy relationships), subs must stick by their word. I believe that includes putting your faith in the light (ha, hearthstone reference), and really pushing to form a good relationship with tons of communication.
Well, I suppose that's my 2 cents on it.
As for the safeword, BAGOOM?! Oh jeez, our play sessions will turn into circus shows! I already imagine you with a high-pitched clown voice, we have a Kracken, and now I get to yell BAGOOM? If we can somehow get nuts involved, I'll concede to BAGOOM. :PPosted 02-15-2015 at 01:59 PM by Clerisyberry 
-
All good things in your blog aside (I see D/s as a very equal relationship in terms of the power exchange), I'm really stuck on your word choice of subservient as a definition of a submissive.
According to the Merriam Webster Dictionary, the first definition of subservient is, "useful in an inferior capacity." Also, "less important than something or someone else."Posted 02-15-2015 at 02:49 PM by eivins
-
Really? Chirst, I had the wrong definition in mind. That's getting changed for sure, thanks for pointing it out!Quote:Originally Posted by eivins
All good things in your blog aside (I see D/s as a very equal relationship in terms of the power exchange), I'm really stuck on your word choice of subservient as a definition of a submissive.
According to the Merriam Webster Dictionary, the first definition of subservient is, "useful in an inferior capacity." Also, "less important than something or someone else."Posted 02-15-2015 at 02:58 PM by An_Jon
-
I have always, since my introduction to the D/s dynamic, stated that Doms and subs are equally powerful in their relationships. Without both, the relationship does not exist, and both have the ability to walk away. Dominance and submission are opposites of the same coin, and it takes both to make the D/s work. So, the Dominant has just as much power as the submissive in the relationship. That's why it's an exchange.
Posted 02-15-2015 at 07:15 PM by Punishmyclit
-
An exchange doesn't mean 'equal'. When you exchange money it doesn't mean you both end up with the same amount, yet it takes two people to make a transaction.Quote:Originally Posted by Punishmyclit
I have always, since my introduction to the D/s dynamic, stated that Doms and subs are equally powerful in their relationships. Without both, the relationship does not exist, and both have the ability to walk away. Dominance and submission are opposites of the same coin, and it takes both to make the D/s work. So, the Dominant has just as much power as the submissive in the relationship. That's why it's an exchange.
The point of a D/s relationship is to give power to another, or to receive it. Therefore, in the relationship, the sub holds less power. The Dom has equal rights to starting/stopping things, but the sub forgoes their end of the power.
In other words, they exchange their power for whatever it is they get from the relationship - be it fulfillment, sexual desire, etc.Posted 02-16-2015 at 12:25 PM by An_Jon
-
I agree that both parties can say no and that it's not a good argument to say that subs have all the power. They don't!
But... a Dom doesn't have all the singular power either.
It's hard to explain, but it's about caring. When you care about your submissive, you give him/her so much power with that. A sub can care about the Dom, but that's a different kind of care. Not the looking-after kind that I mean. When a sub gets really sad doing something, a caring Dom will probably alter the play and the tasks. Not because the submissive refuses to submit, but because caring for him/her has given the sub power.
Also, BAGOOM made me think of Gollum shouting BAGGINS when he was tortured in Mordor. Was that his safeword?
Posted 02-16-2015 at 03:55 PM by drwarschauu
-
Precisely...the exchange isn't about equality, it's about fulfilling needs in a mutually beneficial relationship.Quote:Originally Posted by An_Jon
An exchange doesn't mean 'equal'. When you exchange money it doesn't mean you both end up with the same amount, yet it takes two people to make a transaction.
The point of a D/s relationship is to give power to another, or to receive it. Therefore, in the relationship, the sub holds less power. The Dom has equal rights to starting/stopping things, but the sub forgoes their end of the power.
In other words, they exchange their power for whatever it is they get from the relationship - be it fulfillment, sexual desire, etc.Posted 02-16-2015 at 05:04 PM by Punishmyclit
-
I don't believe that subs hold all the power or control in a d/s relationship, but I think that a lot of "dom" forget that subs do have SOME control. As a sub, I own my submission. Just because you are a dom, doesn't mean that you own me, or can dom me without me giving you that control over me. So when I have said the words "Subs are in control" I am mostly referring to being in control of my submission. I can stop or start my submission to somebody at anytime for any reason. No, I don't believe in using my safeword willy nilly (I actually have only used it less than 4 times in 8 months), but it is there if I need it.
I also agree with DrW's points about the submissive having control through their emotions and the Dom wanting to care for them. I would suffer for my sir if he asked me to, but it doesn't mean he is going to ask me to, because he knows that it isn't really what I want. That is a form of control. I also know that because he loves and cherishes me, my begging can sometimes pull at his heart strings and gives me a bit of control. I don't think this diminishes his power as my dom.
Overall I do agree with your points about subs and doms both having power in a relationship. I am of the belief, that that power is equal. But no, one party doesn't and can't control everything.Posted 02-17-2015 at 03:55 PM by Butterfly
