Approach to Dominance

[Anchorsaway]

I'm very much interested in the psychology of how and why people do the things they do. To those ends, Master Exiled and I were having a discussion a few days ago revolving around the two most basic approaches to Dominance, as I see it. Sure there are myriad branches and ways, but all of them can be categorized into two very broad methodologies:

1) Mold the Submissive to suit the needs of the Dominant.

2) The Dominant alters their approach to the submissive.

*note* yes, even if someone is going for #1 it requires modification to meet the starting point of the submissive.

To me, both methodologies are equally valid and have their place. I think I wish there were a NAME for this that was regularly used as often as Master/Dominant/Top, slave/submissive, little, bottom etc.

Why does it matter, and how does it impact the dynamic?

1) When a dominant seeks to treat the submissive largely as a piece of modeling clay and he has this vision that may or may not changeover time and he seeks to slowly (or quickly) adjust her to suit that vision this is beautiful. (imho) However, it isnt for every submissive. It alters who you are, if done well, permanently. In my experience it creates a bond that is very very hard to break. Those things about you that were imprinted or altered are very much a mark of that dominant as real if not tangible as a tattoo or scar. For other submissives if they run across the WRONG Dominant it can be outright *dangerous*

2) When the dominant seeks to understand the submissive and her own personal and life goals. He seeks to help her put voice to the things she wishes to accomplish be they personal, professional, sexual, or other. Then he uses his methods to see that she meets these. He revels in her growth and holds her accountable for her successes and failures. This is also valid dominance though to me, I think his mark is int he goals reached. This has its place and I'd argue NECESSITY in a girl who has yet to identify who she IS within her own submission.

Why is it important to know and discuss this to determine compatibility before entering into a D/s dynamic?
Consider how the following scenario would play out differently for the two approaches:
1)
A) a submissive enters into a new relationship with a dominant and they set about a start. He decides to inform her that from now on she is required to edge X number of times a day, kneel in corner time at least X minutes a day, write a submissive's journal on a topic of his choice, and then before she goes to bed beg his permission to cum. She is not to contact him until that time.

psychology: He does so because he enjoys having her at a state of heightened arousal, in a submissive mind space, and he wishes her to learn to be communicative about her thoughts and feelings while still learning to be silent and patient.


B)a Dom has a huge fascination with a concept that had been a limit for the submissive in question. Over time he educates her on the topic, they discuss the reasons it is a limit for her (for sake of argument is it an aversion not a trigger). They discuss why it is a fascination for him. After a time he requests that she reconsider whether it is a hard limit or soft limit. They do some experimental work on it and finally requests that she try X thing "for him."


Psychology: He had an interest. He needed that interest met. More than that the huge turn on is that he was able to move her from limit to done * for him*.

2)
A) a submissive enters into a relationship with a new dominant and they sit down to discuss rules. He questions her and her life and finds out that she has trouble with expressing her feelings. She also has never done anything as far as physical actions that have made her feel terribly submissive, but the idea turns her on. Lastly, she has really repressed herself sexually for the last few years to the point she has trouble coming to orgasm. So he decides that she is required to edge X number of times a day, kneel in corner time at least X minutes a day, write a submissive's journal on a topic of his choice, and then before she goes to bed beg his permission to cum.

Psychology: While the ACTIONS are the same, it is the intent... the motivation behind them that changed. He derives pleasure from seeing her make progress on the things in her life he and she identified as needing improvement.

B) A submissive has a HUGE fear of X thing, but it is such a fear that it controls her life. It impacts her in a real way. Having this fear lessened would improve some aspect of her life. Over time he educates her on the topic, they discuss the reasons it is a limit for her (for sake of argument is it an aversion not a trigger). They discuss why it is a fascination for him. After a time he requests that she reconsider whether it is a hard limit or soft limit. They do some experimental work on it and finally requests that she try X thing "for him." She succeeds because he helped her.

Psychology: He is pleased with her for facing this fear for him. He also positively improved her life by helping her over this fear.


Hopefully those two scenarios demonstrate how the end result may be the same, but it is the psychology behind it that leads to two radically different scenarios.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So... talk to me.
Do you see a difference?
Does one mindset speak to you?
How?
What do you think about the other?
Is it as important as I think it is to be on the same page?
Do you discuss it with D/s partners?
Any other thoughts?