Aren't women, by definition, submissive in nature?
- Thread starter WriterDom
- Start date
Ebonyfire said:
Maybe if men would not have beat and forced women into submission and let it be her choice....and respected that choice....submission would not have the connotations today that it does.....
Angry, small-minded men arrogant and stupid in their own"power" would not let the "lesser" minded women have a choice....a patriarchal society with men passing down their legacy of abuse generation after generation....
Disclaimer:
...hmmmm...I think I may have some unresolved man-anger issues.....lol
FurryFury
Addict of Sensation
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2005
- Posts
- 29,460
This all made a song run through my head. I thought I share it with you.
K.D. LANG lyrics - "Nowhere To Stand"
As things start to surface
Tears come on down
Scars of childhood
In a small town
Hurt she pushed inward
Starting to show
Now she'll do some talking
But he'll never know
Tables have turned now
With a child of her own
But she's blind to the difference
What's taught is that's known
Numbed by reaction
Stripped of the trust
A young heart is broken
Not aware that it's just
A family tradition
The strength of this land
Where what's right and wrong
Is the back of a hand
Turns girls into women
A boy to a man
But the rights of the children
Have nowhere to stand
Memories of children
Are written in stone
Some they get buried
Not to be shown
Still they do linger
Deep down inside
Like a seed that's been planted
And won't be denied
As things start to surface
Tears come on down
Scars of childhood
In a small town
Hurt she pushed inward
Starting to show
Now she'll do some talking
But he'll never know
Tables have turned now
With a child of her own
But she's blind to the difference
What's taught is that's known
Numbed by reaction
Stripped of the trust
A young heart is broken
Not aware that it's just
A family tradition
The strength of this land
Where what's right and wrong
Is the back of a hand
Turns girls into women
A boy to a man
But the rights of the children
Have nowhere to stand
Memories of children
Are written in stone
Some they get buried
Not to be shown
Still they do linger
Deep down inside
Like a seed that's been planted
And won't be denied
Ebonyfire
Ball Stretcher
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2002
- Posts
- 11,729
katteon said:
As most things, it has been about economics. Control the women and you control their money, and the children, which means you control the future.
I think that the bell curve holds here also. There would be a wide range of choices like there is in most things. Many women will never choose submission. Look at the amazons.
mytwocents
Experienced
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2007
- Posts
- 58
Forgetaboutit!
Last edited:
FurryFury
Addict of Sensation
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2005
- Posts
- 29,460
I think men figured out pretty quickly that they needed women to gather, cook and care for the kids. Those kids would one day be the next leaders, hunters and gatherers of the tribe. It's an interdependence, a symbiotic relationship that only becomes more powerful for one side or the other if both parties or an entire tribe goes along with it.
Men today don't just want to fuck, IMO. They want to have someone they can trust and share their thoughts with. They want to be fed, and cared for in many ways. It just might not always be so obvious to see as it is in women because society has tried to taint our perceptions otherwise.
Or I could be talking out of my ass and posting too late to make sense.
Men today don't just want to fuck, IMO. They want to have someone they can trust and share their thoughts with. They want to be fed, and cared for in many ways. It just might not always be so obvious to see as it is in women because society has tried to taint our perceptions otherwise.
Or I could be talking out of my ass and posting too late to make sense.
Esclava
10 Locks-Do U have keys?
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2004
- Posts
- 1,541
Wow ...
I hear the voices of LOTS of experience in this thread. Net and Eb ... well known voices of strong, Dominant women along with many other strong voices - both the new and not-so-new, Dominant and submissive - speaking of how nature, nurture and society have affected their lives. Plenty to think about and find some identification with.
IMO, I believe when people are comfortable in their own skin (sexual or otherwise), they will be what ever they want to be. If they feel comfortable in a Dominant skin, that's what will be displayed. If in a submissive skin, that's what you will see. And I also think having that comfort level leads to much less of the D/s drama which seems to surround those who are less secure in their identities. That's why you hear of those who command the board room, yet crave the hand of a Dominant when they're away from the job.
As a woman who was raised to believe that aggression AND assertion were bad, I hid the strong, independent woman who is considered a "B.I.T.C.H." according to many who know me now. Does that mean I am a Dominant? Personally, I just think it means I'm comfortable enough in my own skin to know what I need and desire in my life. And as someone I met very soon after I joined these boards told me, "Know yourself, know what you want - and don't settle for anything less." (I've not forgotten Your words, Francisco) - being a Babe In Total Control of Herself - suits me just fine, whether I'm Domming or submitting.
No - I don't believe women are submissive by nature. And by WHOSE definition???
Certainly not by many of the voices speaking out here. Be well all,
Esclava
Edited because it's late (or early) and my fingers are too sleepy to spell correctly!
I hear the voices of LOTS of experience in this thread. Net and Eb ... well known voices of strong, Dominant women along with many other strong voices - both the new and not-so-new, Dominant and submissive - speaking of how nature, nurture and society have affected their lives. Plenty to think about and find some identification with.
IMO, I believe when people are comfortable in their own skin (sexual or otherwise), they will be what ever they want to be. If they feel comfortable in a Dominant skin, that's what will be displayed. If in a submissive skin, that's what you will see. And I also think having that comfort level leads to much less of the D/s drama which seems to surround those who are less secure in their identities. That's why you hear of those who command the board room, yet crave the hand of a Dominant when they're away from the job.
As a woman who was raised to believe that aggression AND assertion were bad, I hid the strong, independent woman who is considered a "B.I.T.C.H." according to many who know me now. Does that mean I am a Dominant? Personally, I just think it means I'm comfortable enough in my own skin to know what I need and desire in my life. And as someone I met very soon after I joined these boards told me, "Know yourself, know what you want - and don't settle for anything less." (I've not forgotten Your words, Francisco) - being a Babe In Total Control of Herself - suits me just fine, whether I'm Domming or submitting.
No - I don't believe women are submissive by nature. And by WHOSE definition???
Certainly not by many of the voices speaking out here. Be well all,Esclava
Edited because it's late (or early) and my fingers are too sleepy to spell correctly!
Last edited:
Toa_lin
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2006
- Posts
- 875
Just my 2 cents. NOTE: Just my perspective on everything that follows, I could very easily be wrong.
But it seems to me there is no true diference between genders. Just that there APPEAR to be more submissives then Dominants. I see as many different reasons, wanting to escape reality by letting someone else take control. social image adhereance for women, social image rebellion for men. It feels like less work to SOME to be submissive. Others who like work feel it's more work to be submissive.
Others feel it's more acceptible to be submissive, others that it's easier to find a PYL then pyl (since there are a number of PYL's taking multiple pyl's, but I haven't heard of many pyl's taking multiple PYL's without issues occuring, again just my perspective). For alot of guys a more forward domineering women is often attractive, and then they just decide they like the life-style. The whole ideal most would rather be followers then leaders.
And then finally, it's also the fact submissives seem to be more open to saying what they are then Dominants are. Plus that women seem more open to admitting what they are then men are, hence the possibly falsified image that women are more often submissive.
So in the end, there's no way to truly judge if a sex is more one or the other, or if there's a trend to be more one then the other in the human race. ONe can only guess, and i jsut felt like providing my possible explanantions for any false ideals.
But it seems to me there is no true diference between genders. Just that there APPEAR to be more submissives then Dominants. I see as many different reasons, wanting to escape reality by letting someone else take control. social image adhereance for women, social image rebellion for men. It feels like less work to SOME to be submissive. Others who like work feel it's more work to be submissive.
Others feel it's more acceptible to be submissive, others that it's easier to find a PYL then pyl (since there are a number of PYL's taking multiple pyl's, but I haven't heard of many pyl's taking multiple PYL's without issues occuring, again just my perspective). For alot of guys a more forward domineering women is often attractive, and then they just decide they like the life-style. The whole ideal most would rather be followers then leaders.
And then finally, it's also the fact submissives seem to be more open to saying what they are then Dominants are. Plus that women seem more open to admitting what they are then men are, hence the possibly falsified image that women are more often submissive.
So in the end, there's no way to truly judge if a sex is more one or the other, or if there's a trend to be more one then the other in the human race. ONe can only guess, and i jsut felt like providing my possible explanantions for any false ideals.
mytwocents
Experienced
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2007
- Posts
- 58
FurryFury said:
I have yet to find any evidence supporting that claim.
mytwocents
Experienced
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2007
- Posts
- 58
Toa_lin said:
Forgetaboutit!
Last edited:
mytwocents
Experienced
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2007
- Posts
- 58
FurryFury said:Oh my!
Are you just the most wonderful person!
Thank you!
My pleasure. Truly.
ammre
ani and griselda's child
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2001
- Posts
- 1,168
I'd been avoiding this thread because it made my 4 years of gender/women studies go "AHHH WTF@(&*^%$" but i think I've finally just condensed all my thoughts to:
gender != sex.
The gender role of a woman is submissive, and the gender role of a man is supposed to be more dominant. Hence why submissive men are often scorned as not being "real" men even though their peepee's might be bigger then a lot of other "real" men, or when a woman who takes on more power and dominance is often called "dyke" or "bull dyke".
Gender is a social construct, sex is the genital alignment you were born with.
As for the male dom female sub thing... Well I'm on collar me and i specifically point out I'm only instrested in friends, dominant men, and dominant women, yet i still have a full bulk mail of submissive men. There are a lot out there. I think they are just a bit more reclusive.
gender != sex.
The gender role of a woman is submissive, and the gender role of a man is supposed to be more dominant. Hence why submissive men are often scorned as not being "real" men even though their peepee's might be bigger then a lot of other "real" men, or when a woman who takes on more power and dominance is often called "dyke" or "bull dyke".
Gender is a social construct, sex is the genital alignment you were born with.
As for the male dom female sub thing... Well I'm on collar me and i specifically point out I'm only instrested in friends, dominant men, and dominant women, yet i still have a full bulk mail of submissive men. There are a lot out there. I think they are just a bit more reclusive.
