Jan 242013
 

Hey submissives… yeah, you. I’m talking to you.

If you’ve started talking to a Dom/me or if you’re “under consideration,” you have some work to do. You can’t just sit around being considered and waiting to be decided on. Consideration works both ways, so while you’re being considered, you need to do some considering too.

Consider your potential dominant at least as much as she/he considers you. Consider their experience and judgment, their ability and willingness to facilitate your safety, security, fulfillment, and overall happiness. Consider whether their personality, goals, and values match well with yours.

While you’re waiting for your potential dominant to decide whether or not your good enough for them, you need to decide whether your potential dominant is good enough for you.

Amazing submissives don’t grow on trees. A dominant can’t simply “get” an amazing submissive just because she or he wants one. To get one of those amazing submissives, a dominant should be ready and willing to prove that she/he is an equally amazing dominant. You wouldn’t submit to just anyone, would you? You want a great dominant, so you’re willing to prove your a great submissive. I want a great submissive, so I’m eager to prove I’m a great dominant.

(And this is where I make it all about me…)

Let’s say I’m your potential dominant. Hypothetically.

I want to see if you’re right for me, so yeah, I’m “considering” you. But I also want you to know how fucking amazing I am, and that means you have to consider me.

I want you to be damn sure you’re aware of just how fucking awesome I am because it’s important to me that you value and appreciate me. So, get to know me. Consider me. Decide that you want me because I’m fucking awesome.

If you don’t take the time to consider, if you don’t actively choose me, that means you either don’t know who I am or you don’t care. If you give trust me before I’ve earned it, or if you submit before I prove myself worthy of your submission, then your submission is something you’d give to anyone. If it’s something you’d give away easily or indiscriminately, then it isn’t worth much to you, and it certainly isn’t worth much to me.

So, you have work to do, dammit.

Ultimately, the dynamic is something both partners both have to figure out, negotiate, and agree to… together. The dominant doesn’t get to decide all by themselves, and the dominant shouldn’t HAVE to decide all by themselves. I don’t just want to choose you. I want to be chosen, and that means you have to choose me, too.

 

  19 Responses to “consider me”

  1. [Quote] “and the dominant shouldn’t HAVE to decide all by themselves”.

    This is part of the paradox of D and s labels that I have been thinking about while in the quandary of trying to apply it to my relationship. I will probably link to this post for someting I am currently writing on this quandary since it is partially solved in my mind.

    Now about the quote. If the dominant had to make 100% of the decision, then they would actually be serving the submissive in that the submissive would then me relieved of all decision making. Otherwise they would be giving the sbmissive some decision making part, this loosing true dominance. Either way there cannot be true dominance.

    I agree with your viewpoint of this is not a great way to proceed for a submissive, but I am simply noting that the statement is a good one for the paradox of being dominant or submissive. Is it really even possible to truly be either in every single way all the time? Semantically it does not seem so…

    • @Roy: “This is part of the paradox of D and s labels that I have been thinking about while in the quandary of trying to apply it to my relationship.”

      The dissonance I think you’re describing isn’t a paradox — it’s a binary opposition. The mistake is in thinking that on one side, there’s 100% “dominant” and on the other side, 100% submissive. That’s not possible, nor is it useful. Binary oppositions aren’t practical in human experience. Heck… they aren’t real. There’s no “pure” anything.

      “Now about the quote. If the dominant had to make 100% of the decision, then they would actually be serving the submissive in that the submissive would then me relieved of all decision making. Otherwise they would be giving the sbmissive some decision making part, this loosing true dominance. Either way there cannot be true dominance.”

      Meh. I guess so, if you consider dominating a “service” to the submissive, then the whole power balance flip flops. And so what? Let’s say dominance is a service to the submissive. Then what? Then nothing. This is part of the reason that the faulty belief in binaries isn’t helpful or productive.

      As for “true dominance,” meh, and double meh. I don’t know what “true dominance” is, nor do you, nor does anyone. It’s not a useful concept in theorizing D/s dynamics.

      “Is it really even possible to truly be either in every single way all the time?”

      Exactly!!! You hit the nail on the head — there is no 100% dominant, nor is there any 100% submissive. The binary doesn’t exist in practice. It only exists in theory where it serves no use other than to fuck up our relationships when we think we are falling short of some ideal that’s impossible to practice in real life.

      • I’m impressed. Binary opposition. I just looked up the concept and although I sort of understood it at a conceptual level I had never heard that specific term. It is perfect for this thought stream. Thanks for teaching me that. The comment was really me just thinking out loud as things clicked in my mind at a deeper level somewhere in my intuitive and emotional layers. Really I owe a lot of the epiphany to this blog and things you have said in this and other posts. Very helpful. And thanks for the grace in your response.

        • @Roy: “although I sort of understood it at a conceptual level I had never heard that specific term.”

          Yes! In some strange way, I think that’s proof that it’s a valid thought/concept, and proof that it’s useful for thinking through these sorts of cognitive dissonances. :)

          “The comment was really me just thinking out loud as things clicked in my mind at a deeper level somewhere in my intuitive and emotional layers”

          Ha! That’s how it starts… then you fall down a cultural theory/gender studies/ideological rabbit hole and we won’t hear from you again for weeks! (I’ll probably see you there… I fall down rabbit holes all the time!) :)

          “Really I owe a lot of the epiphany to this blog and things you have said in this and other posts. Very helpful. And thanks for the grace in your response.”

          I SO appreciate your comment, and I wish I could take credit, but what’s here is just me fitting my own personal experiences together with what I’ve read and what I believe. What I do here sounds like exactly what you’re doing. :)

          As for “binaries,” it’s a really useful concept in thinking through lots of stuff — gender, sexuality, personality, position, role, etc. It’s one of those things most of us “know,” but we don’t have a name for. I’m glad you found the name. :)

          Best to you!

          (This comment made my day! Thank you!)

  2. My pet peeve is the assumption that “submissive” means “passive.” Thanks, D, for the kick in the butt, do your homework pep talk. P.S. I think you’re so awesome.

    • @Heather: “pet peeve is the assumption that “submissive” means “passive.””

      Yes. Yes, and more yes. Well stated, and so freaking true.

  3. @HC – Sorry I got carried away over thinking things…I get excited doing that.

    Oh, and when I said “the paradox of D” I didn’t mean the blog author, I was referring to the general symbol.

    • @Roy: “when I said “the paradox of D” I didn’t mean the blog author, I was referring to the general symbol.”

      Ha! I understood that… but now I’m wondering what the paradox of “me” would be. :)

  4. Well said, the chooing or consideration should go both ways. I’m a firm believer in the best things in life don’t come easy and that takes work.

    • @SouthernSir: “I’m a firm believer in the best things in life don’t come easy and that takes work.”

      More true than not. :)

  5. Don’t don’t let’s start, this is the worst part…

    Sometimes I D/s so weird. Usually when you like someone you get to know them, get to like them, maybe they start liking you too. You start to try and spend time with each other, date, and then when you’ve locked down that you two like each other and have something here then *thats* when you start discussing sex. But with D/s sex, or at least play, seems to be in the immediate forefront. “Do my sexual interests match up with yours? Hmm, check, check, check, check, alright, all in order, would you like to start learning about me as a person now?”

    It feels so backwards. I know plenty of people play without direct romantic intentions, but D/s can be pretty intense and emotional and intimate. It’s hard to not build up strong feelings. It’s not enough to just check the boxes and get to it. People get frustrated and they start wanting it so much that they’re wiling to forgo some, let’s say considerations, that they probably wouldn’t normally. And by people I mean me included. I’ve jumped for *something* when I thought it was it or nothing. In general this is not advisable.

    There’s no good short cuts. If it’s going to be such an important part of you then you have to put some value and care into it. Doms, subs… once the roles are understood and both parties are interested in getting to know each other, maybe it’s best to do just that, without any D/s pressure. Well, maybe some pointed flirting.

    • @aartichoke: “It feels so backwards. I know plenty of people play without direct romantic intentions, but D/s can be pretty intense and emotional and intimate. It’s hard to not build up strong feelings.”

      It feels non-traditional to me, but not at all backwards. Sure, D/s play can be emotional and intense, and then after that intensity, I imagine lots of people feel they aren’t compatible romantically.

      BUT… the reverse is true too. You can build a relationship without sex that’s emotional and intense, but then you have sex, and then realize you aren’t compatible.

      I’ve had good relationships that started traditionally, then we had great sex, and the relationship was a good one. I’ve also had relationships that started really well traditionally, and then bad sex killed it. I’ve also had relationships that started with great sex, then we got to know each other, and had a great relationship. I’ve had relationships founded on great sex, but when we got to know each other, the whole thing fell apart.

      What’s meaningful for me is that a more lasting relationship needs both intellectual and sexual compatibility. Actually, in thinking about it, I should say that for me, those two elements can’t be separated. I need intellectual stimulation that facilitates sexual stimulation, and vice versa. Anyway, I find it more useful to think of them as two parts of the same whole. Since I don’t see sex as “sacred,” it doesn’t much matter whether the relationship starts with sex or starts more traditionally.

      “both parties are interested in getting to know each other, maybe it’s best to do just that, without any D/s pressure.”

      I think this CAN be true for some individuals in some relationships, but certainly not for everyone. Without the D/s vibe when we were first getting to know each other, J wouldn’t have been interested in me, and I don’t know that I would have been as interested in him. If there hadn’t been some D/s overtones there, we would have missed out on a great relationship.

  6. I am fond of telling (warning) potential property owners, “If you cannot seduce my mind, I fear fucking my body will prove to be a waste of your precious efforts.”

  7. Personally I have never liked the term ‘being considered’ simply because it implies a passive role on the part of the submissive and also implies that only the Dom has to give consent for the relationship to move forward. A D/s relationship is a mutual exploration of each others opposing and yet complimenting desires.

    Mollyxxx

    • Well said, Molly. A D/s relationship isn’t a dictatorship — it requires one party to willingly submit in some way or another. In that regard, a D/s relationship is a partnership. A dominant can’t dominate all by her or himself — it takes two.

  8. It’s by accident I came across this submission – exactly one year since it was posted! And by indirect way of ‘Your’ most recent entry (J’s actually) then via GeekDomme Susannah Clary. She seems to be quite a thoughtful Lass and prizes the cerebral approach. As the Maitre D at London’s finest FemDom club, ‘Pedestal’, I shudder at the crass approach some subs make towards Dommes. You kind of wonder how they function in ‘nilla life. Is it down to being unsettled in the face of gloriously confident and dominant women? Or are they genuinely that stupid? It really is about taking the time and having the patience to know someone properly – without affecting airs and graces or cheesy chat up lines. The fact that posts like this are still required show that the message hasn’t sunken into the heads of certain men. Oh dear.

    • Is it down to being unsettled in the face of gloriously confident and dominant women? Or are they genuinely that stupid?

      I think part of the problem is porn and part of it is pop culture. In porn, the dominants are inhuman (but so are the subs), and in pop culture, women are generally objectified, so there’s that.

      Plus, there’s the wank factor — people just think about the immediate, getting their needs met, etc. They don’t think much farther than release.

      And of course, there’s the general stupidity you mentioned. I think that plays a big role, too (sadly!).

  9. I have read every word you wrote down very interesting you take you seriously and you enjoy living life to the fullest Ian a Vinalla but my submissive side runs wild through my body

 Leave a Reply