Is a submissive ‘easy’? Who on earth wants easy?

I love reading the dommes on Twitter “moan” about the submissive men who show up in their DM’s or twitter-wake and say that they will do anything for them, be their slaves, wish to be chained and caged under their houses, whatever.  My favourite part is the musing and banter between them about why any of them would want such a thing in the first place.  Indeed.

Boys, it isn’t about you.  I say that without a hint of criticism (or hypocrisy) as I have been there too (well, sort of, but not really).  I love the book by Rika called Uniquely Rika, which was the best guide I came across on how to be a worthwhile submissive written by a dominant woman.  And I got to her via one of my favourite online femdom bloggers, the informative, incredibly articulate, and oh-so-sultry voiced Ferns, author of the Domme Chronicles….do check them out if you wish to explore this further—after all, why get the info second hand when you can crawl your way to the source?  On your knees, boys!

I have had lot’s of wonderful female companionship lately.  Some of it kinky, thank goodness, and quite a lot of it vanilla.  I haven’t figured out how to explain myself well enough to vanilla people yet, though I do feel duty bound to keep trying.  But hashing my way through the stereotypes each time is a bit tiring…though shame on me for not finding an articulate way of explaining the D/s dynamic in ways that don’t keep leading the listener back to the stereotypes.

The one that exercises me most, and which this post is about, is the idea that a submissive is “easy”.  I mean, what could be “easier” than “yes, Mistress,” all the time?  Truth.  It would be.  And outside of professional circles, I am not sure that anyone would even bother to take the time to understand what’s under the bonnet with these boys…after all, if you are in a vanilla relationship and you are already in the “yes Mistress” mindset you are probably not a keeper.  

And as Rika so rightly points out, if you are a “submissive” but are desirous of submitting to your vanilla partner, being at least mildly conscious of topping from the bottom will tell you that it isn’t about you.  It is all about her.

But as a vanilla friend of mine who recently experienced my hospitality may have come to realise, hospitality is not submission, it is consideration, and that submission only comes to those who deserve to receive it.  That isn’t me saying she didn’t “deserve” it.  How snob would that be?  Awful.  No, definitely not.

But submission and Dominance are a dance.  They require two willing and enthusiastic partners.  Submission does not come without the presence of its partner.  And that’s a fact.  Dominance is a state of being, just as submission is.  They fit naturally together.  When a person who is not dominant exercises dominance it is either bullying or nagging.  When a person who is not submissive exercises the submissive arts, it is not obsequiousness or anything else other than perhaps good manners.  Maybe excessive on either side, but the excess is wide of the mark.  

Let’s go from the general to the personal and then back again.  If a woman mistakes me serving her breakfast in bed, pampering her, looking after her well-being, bringing her coffee at the crack of dawn each day, whatever, as submission, she is mistaken.  I do this because I am solicitous.  Submission is different.  It requires sublimation of the self.  I’ll only do that for someone who sees me, considers me, not only knows where it comes from, but who respects and appreciates its origin.  Anyone else will meet a wall.

“I don’t think of you as submissive at all,” she might say.  And indeed, I am not.  I am dominant in all aspects of my life.  Fully in control, in command.  But if there is someone, perhaps it can only ever be one person, who considers me, knows me, knows of my yearning to serve, and who holds that door open for me, I will go in there and inhabit that space for her and for her alone.  Everything else is just being polite.

And then sooner or later, the person who knows I am a slave finds that I might be a willful slave, or a disobedient slave…no, not at all.  I am just not your slave.

And no, this is not me saying you are domme enough, or do you deserve it, no.  It simply requires someone who is comfortable enough in her own skin, comfortable enough in her own dominance, and who is understanding and similarly needing to be understood, that the dance can begin.

Men go straight to the sexual, to the trappings of dominance.  I’ve been there.  That is where the misunderstandings likely come from.  Women don’t seem to make the same mistake.  Both submissive and dominant women seem to appreciate the rich tapestry that such a dynamic represents.  Okay, the sexual bits are very exciting.  For both sexes, for both sides of the slash.  But women do complexity better.  That’s not a criticism of men (for once), but rather an admonition to the male, whether dominant or submissive, to consider the rest of the landscape that a power dynamic involves, and what being true to your nature really means.

Whether you are dominant or submissive, it means first and foremost, being attentive to your partner.  And in a power dynamic this is even more important than in a vanilla relationship, because the stakes are higher, the risks of getting hurt are higher, and because both parties need more.  That’s why its there in the first place.

It is a person who doesn’t appreciate the subtleties of that point who might find either party “easy” in this sense.  Since when is “attentive” easy?  It is bloody difficult.  And the street goes two way.  As my favourite lifestyle domme has noted, what matters is equity…both parties have to bring equal equity to a relationship.  My experience suggest that this holds even in the pro-client context.  Perhaps in all human interaction.  Or it won’t last.

And when someone explicitly is outside of that, either because they are too “easy” or its converse, they are not on the same game…and as a result, the game is over before it starts.  It may just be all due to a misunderstanding, but in a way, that’s okay, because a misunderstanding in this context is tantamount to saying “we are incompatible”.

Let’s not go into the politics of why it is women who seem to be more capable of saying this than men.  But perhaps it is that in the end women have more choice when it comes to sexual partners than men do.  In general, women are more able to exercise “power” in the choice, which is perhaps the founding reason for the patriarchy…but that is another post, another day, another lifetime.

Being “submissive” when it is comfortable is not the same as when it hurts, or when it goes against the grain. Of course one can only do that with someone who speaks that language, who sees it and recognises it, and is grateful for it. Otherwise it is like a party with no participants, the tree falling soundlessly in the forest. And the submissive party will find someone else.

I feel the same about protocol. Protocol is a theatrical representation of the power dynamic. I understand that many people are into it. It’s not my thing, but getting to know a domme who is “into” protocol is going to be an interesting experience for me. And therein lies the grain…the person to whom we submit gets it all. Other people, people who happen to be Dommes, or Doms, or just random people, get a base level of respect, consideration, but nothing more.

In the meantime, if you are submissive, don’t be “easy”, be pleasing.  And if you are vanilla, don’t mistake “pleasing” for “easy”.  It only feels similar until it is withdrawn.  And if you are a domme already, well, you know.  And bless you for it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s