 |
| doulos |
There are many ways of having fun with our desires and all ways are valid for different people in different circumstances. However, when I first came onto the scene led by my desires to explore power exchange, I imagined that I would eventually fit such an exploration into a relationship of love, caring and sharing - similar to how vanilla relationships are meant to look. At least on the outside
. I did not see any inconsistency between male submission and serious loving monogamous relationships.
This is not how everyone sees it. Indeed, it would seem from my limited perspective that it is actually a relatively new idea in the fetish scene. Male submissive desires were considered inconsistent with traditional relationships. Settling down with a Dominant woman, moving in together, meeting each other's parents and eventually even starting a family has not seemed to be on the cards very often in the past. Instead, such desires were contained within relationships specific to them - frequently through commercial transactions or, more ambiguously, through an attractive adventurous woman being provided with financial support in order to live independently of a husband and fulfill a man's darker desires. We can speculate that the dual use of the word "Mistress" as a title for a Dominant woman and a woman, other than a man's wife, who engages in sexual relations with him, has its origins in this sort of arrangement. A mistress is not always a fetish mistress, but fetishism has often been contained within a mistress style relationship.
Today with women able to get rewarding work almost as much as men and thereby having many paths to financial independence, this sort of arrangement has become outdated. A man who falls in love with a woman other than his wife is more likely to have a straightforward affair or get a divorce. Due to income inequality decreasing, keeping a mistress is now rather too expensive for all but men with very high-powered jobs. The "Mistress" form of relationship remains in the fetish scene as a remnant of a bygone era when only vanilla sexuality was acceptable in polite society. For those who can't resolve their submissive fantasies with the reality of a straightforward relationship.
Or is it?
There are straightforward and upfront professional dommes on the scene who keep their private relationships seperate from their clients. But surrounding that area of the scene seems sometimes to be a penumbra of pseudo-financial or pseudo-commercial femdommes. Individuals who have an attitude that retains the acquisitive nature of the Mistresses of the past by demanding gifts, in tribute and various other ways, and consider that to be the major test of the strength of someone's submission. Not wishing to judge how people choose to conduct their affairs with mutually consenting adults, it must still be acknowledged that this is a far cry from the paradigm of seeking an intimate and loving relationship with a male submssive. Which is the sort of the relationship that, in my experience, the "genuine" male sub (if they exist at all) is looking for.
What I fear is that the old ways of containing fetishism within the compartment of a transaction are being transferred to the next generation of people on the scene. A friend of mine described how she arrived on the scene years ago and felt moderately coerced to set a price of some sort on her playing with people. Because price was the assumed value of her dominance. Within that perpective (shared by men and women), with the majority of people charging for play, her not charging would not be interpreted as being interested in intimate dominance, but merely as giving away favours for free!
As women discover their dominance and enter the scene, whatever their intentions as to relationships, they immediately notice two things:
1. There are an AWFUL lot of male subs interested in the scene.
2. There are already many men and women eager to set a price on their dominance.
Generally, when faced with (1), one can imagine a woman interested in a relationship to look around for someone most suited to them. Or if they are polyamorous, being open to two or three who are available. Indeed there are those who do just that. But there are others, who seeing how easy it is to set a price on what they do in this context, might be tempted into doing so and leave the prospect of an intimate relationship by the wayside or don't realise that setting a price will preclude that serious relationship from happening.
I think that is a shame. If it is happening.
| 24 Feb 07, 9:16 AM Platinum UK(W), 9 yrs |
A perceptive and timely post. The one to many economic driver distorts the type of relationship seen throughout D/s today from what one might otherwise expect. Many femdommes, in my experience, equate service with subtle financial support. Sub are to be honoured by being allowed to escort Mistress out for a day. Sub will drive his car with his fuel, paying any tolls or taxes and irrespective of the time etc taken to get to Mistresses door beforehand. Sub will give all his time and energy and then go away. If he is lucky She might feed him though he might end up paying for this as well. All for the pleasure of being the lucky sub out of the long line of those that could have been chosen to do so. A tale repeated every day in IC land. The real Domme will of course pay her share or even take responsibility for her charge on the day, have been there for sub when they needed their Mistress, developed and nurtured them lovingly and probably, will reward them at a later and more appropriate time. It does happen but the number of real, human and ethical Dommes is small and they get snapped up quickly. LOL The same dynamic of course works in reverse with femsubs and Doms. Pwincesses who seek strong, intelligent and experienced Doms. He must be attractive, financially secure (lol) and willing to commit to any level of relationship that she deems appropriate. If Sir is a good boy he'll be allowed to dress her up and take her out to show off his trophy at a club where, if she is in the mood, she might graciously allow him to play with her. And finally there are those that are trying to find something real and meaningful, where the power flow is internal and subtle, based on something deeper and far more human. They tend to get sneered at by those who are challenged by their mere existance, driven away from IC for whatever reason. They are still there, in the real world, doing D/s in their way for their reasons.
P | |
| 24 Feb 07, 9:19 AM Maugrim 6 yrs  |
I wish I had time to write a fuller reply, but generally that was a superb peice. Some sound observations, objectively expressed in way that does not sound derogatory to anyone is tough act on this topic. Nice post. - M. | |
| 24 Feb 07, 9:20 AM ladyM UK, 9 yrs |
I am on your side 100% about what a true relationship with a dominant women should mean. If you read my profile you will see why I say that. I tend not to use the names "mistress" or "domme" because I am neither. I am a dominant woman seeking a submissive man for a meaningful long term relationship and as you say, someone like me finding a submissive man for a relationship is hard to find because the majority of "subs" are like what you describe. It is a shame for the "minority" like myself who seek such a long term relationship and not just "play". I have been told to keep searching because "they are out there". Thank you for voicing what I have thought for a very long time.
Edited 24 Feb 07, 9:25 AM by ladyM | |
| 24 Feb 07, 9:24 AM ladyM UK, 9 yrs |
I totally agree with you. | |
| 24 Feb 07, 9:26 AM ladyM UK, 9 yrs |
I totally agree with you.
| |
| 24 Feb 07, 10:02 AM ThedaVamp UK, 6 yrs |
One of the reasons I adore you dear Doulos is because you are one of the few people I know who would use the word "penumbra" in a blog on IC and feel comfortable knowing that there are those out there who understand what you mean. Concepts such as 'time is money' seems to inflitrate much of these DS relationships, a mutation of the 80's conspicuous consumerism. In the vanilla world, there are still many of those who believe a man must pay for a dinner date or a night out, to impress the woman. I would personally be uncomfortable turning up at a friend's house for dinner or a party, without some form of contribution to the procedings - a bottle of wine, a dessert, flowers for the host/hostess. The same goes with intimate relationships. I like to spoil my friends, my partners and my subs when I can, and if financially I am unable to, there are always other things a person, or Dominant can do. It has nothing to do with the fact that I am Dominant, more to do with I'm uncomfortable with the idea that I might be being 'bought'. The contribution of time, effort, affection, honest communication and fun is generally enough of a payment to spend time in my company. I'd like to think I give of it generously, and I expect the same in return. That's my price. See Daddy? Sinners have soul too. Edited 24 Feb 07, 10:03 AM by ThedaVamp | |
| 24 Feb 07, 10:44 AM doulos UK(SW), 7 yrs |
Indeed. One of the issues about how men with submissive desires actually make up their mind to actually to go out and seek a Domme for a proper relationship, rather than making do with vanilla and trying to grab a little submission on the side.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." H. L. Mencken | |
| 24 Feb 07, 10:45 AM doulos UK(SW), 7 yrs |
oh, tigress, I know you'd understand !
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." H. L. Mencken | |
| 24 Feb 07, 10:48 AM bohemian 8 yrs |
What a wonderfully thought provoking blog doulos, more please! All along the ancient wastes the thin reflections spin, that gather up the time and tide at once we loved within... | |
| 24 Feb 07, 12:10 PM Divatje UK(W), 12 yrs |
Lovely post however ... boys who wish to engage with emotional D/s should stay out of the arena of professional D/s.
Diva |
