Different Types of Subs

[dr_mabeuse]

Yeah, okay, we could do this for doms too. I know there are different types of doms. They could be rated the same way. Why not?

I understand where I pissed some people off with this because it seems like I'm trying to grade people like meat or show dogs, but that's really not what I want to do at all. What really interests me is why we do BDSM, and whether we all do it for the same reason, and what reasons we do it for. Everyone has their own reason, but I have a theory (well, a hypthesis, eally) that there are a handful of basic different "styles" of BDSM - between 3 and 6 - and that people get into it because they fall into one of these basic types.

It's just a hypothesis at this point, not even a theory, but if you're a type A sub, say, then you have to find a Type A dom, because a type B won't work for you, and if you're a type B sub, then a type A dom won't work for you. So this hypothesis has some consequences that could be important. If it's true.

So I'm trying to get an idea of how many types of subs there might be. That's all. Not trying to score you for comparison sake. I could have started with doms too. I didn't, though, because I thought subs would be more introspective.

 

[catalina_francisco]

No, not at all. I'm hampered by the lack of terminology here. I was trying to specify those subs who are so dependent upon their doms that they can't make a move without them. '24/7' was the closest term that came to mind.

OK, then you might escape with your skin still intact. Not sure rating works well as we have seen often here when the popular scale that keeps popping up is brought out again for discussion by someone who just discovered it online and thinks it will provide an easy fix to categorising anyone remotely submissive.

For us I am a 24/7 TPE slave without limits which translated briefly means I have given up the right to have any limits of my own, am owned, and cannot leave....all fairly standard. What isn't so standard to what many think of when they see the word slave is that I am expected to carry a lot of responsibility in terms of my service to him. Part of that is handling the finances because he hates dealing with that and doesn't see why he should have to when he has a slave who has loads of experience in making a very little amount of money go an extraordinary long way...so he earns the money and I make sure the bills are paid on time, that his salary payment is correct each month, budget what is left for general things like food and household expenditure. He has final say in how it is spent and saved, but for the most part he is happy with what I have done and sees no reason to bother himself with it. Of course, if I mess up, it is also my responsibility to answer for it.

On top of that I do most of everything else that needs doing including renovations (light and heavy) leaving him free to work and come home and relax in whatever way takes his fancy. I get up before him every morning and prepare his clothes, breakfast, pack his laptop, lay out phone/keys/wallet, and then remind him of anything special like a meeting he has on for the day. There are no times off, though if I am extremely ill and he is feeling generous he may tell me to go rest for awhile, or cook dinner if he feels like it, but he may just as easily expect me to continue working. I have also acted as his chauffeur for work (hmmm, driving hundreds of kms every day in all types of weather including snow which I had never even seen before) and will again in the future...oh, and he once had a very badly ingrown toenail which he ordered me to cut out...damned thing required my cutting his toe open down to the bone (yuk) and then extracting pieces of toenail which I have no idea how they got there, cutting out the ingrown nail, and then putting the toe back together and handling all dressing and cleaning of it until it was completely healed and sealed up again....and no, I have no formal nursing experience. LOL, when he wants to threaten me for fun, he brings it up again and says it is feeling like it might need reopening...works wonders, I will do just about anything to get out of doing that again!!

So yes, he wants me to be able to take charge, in fact relies on it....and be able to occupy myself, as long as I remember who is really in charge and has the final word in all things. My mother mentioned this morning that I also have the patience of a saint...she says I get it from her mother and also my father's sister, both ladies who didn't get ruffled over anything apparently, just carried on and got things done quietly and effectively.

Self esteem is much better than it ever was...obedience is something I strive for at all times, but I am only human and he does sometimes give me some huge challenges, so it varies in degree at the moment, but usually eventuates in obedience once all difficulties have been taken into account and worked with.

Catalina

 

[Daddyslilpet]

I think you will find that trying to "categorize" submissives by personality type just won't work successfully. Besides the fact that many submissives tend to get very defensive (as you may have already noted by this thread) when they feel that they are being compared to other submissives. (No offense meant there it is just a fact, I do it too as a knee jerk reaction sometimes.)

One fact remains, submissives are people first and foremost, and as such will have the usual personality traits that most people have. We are also unique individuals... no two will ever be alike in all ways. Therefore your "charts" will do you no good in the long run. (Just saying ) However if you have time to kill and really want to put the effort into it, by all means go right ahead.

For myself, I am... me. Not exactly sure how I'd "label" myself anymore if I were so inclined because honestly I've come to realize that labels mean more to everyone else than they do to me. All I really care about is enjoying the journey with my Husband and being His.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I think you will find that trying to "categorize" submissives by personality type just won't work successfully. Besides the fact that many submissives tend to get very defensive (as you may have already noted by this thread) when they feel that they are being compared to other submissives. (No offense meant there it is just a fact, I do it too as a knee jerk reaction sometimes.)

One fact remains, submissives are people first and foremost, and as such will have the usual personality traits that most people have. We are also unique individuals... no two will ever be alike in all ways. Therefore your "charts" will do you no good in the long run. (Just saying ) However if you have time to kill and really want to put the effort into it, by all means go right ahead.

For myself, I am... me. Not exactly sure how I'd "label" myself anymore if I were so inclined because honestly I've come to realize that labels mean more to everyone else than they do to me. All I really care about is enjoying the journey with my Husband and being His.

Maybe I could best explain it this way— I started a thread on whipping, asking people what emotions they thought they were expressing when they used a whip. I honestly thought that most doms generally felt what I felt, which is kind of a male possessiveness and rage, a kind of "King-Kongness" if you will. I was surprised to find that I was in the minority. Most doms don't feel that at all. Most feel they're asserting their right to control and showing their dominance. So there was proof right there that there are different kinds of doms. but I already knew that just from being one and looking around.

But it made me think. In my career in real life and online, there are subs I've really hit it off with and subs who things didn't work out as well with, who I just didn't click with when it seems like I should have. Maybe it was due to a Type mismatch. Maybe not all subs &/or doms are the same and looking for the same thing. Maybe there are Types, and as I thought about it, I did seem to start to see a pattern.

I could divide the subs I've had experience with into two broad types. I called them "givers" and "takers", rather arbitrarily (they're bad names, I admit). I called the first type "givers" because they seemed to like giving themselves. They responded to my whipping anger by getting sexually excited. They reacted to punishment as if it were a physical sacrifice on their part, a sacrifice for love. Givers were the ones I clicked with. What they seemed to be seeking in the BDSM relationship was permission or coercion to express their own sexuality.

The second class were the Takers and I can't say as much about them because I didn't work as well with them, though I knew that they had very successful relationships with other doms. They didn't seem to be into the big, stormy emotions as I was but more into long, sustained control. They required more finesse and attention. They responded to punishment not just as sacrifice but as an inner experience in which they journeyed into themselves. What they seemed to be looking for in BDSM was a kind of breaking down of inhibitions or breaking down of some internal barriers.

It was almost as if the Givers were passion driven and the Takers were love-driven, but I didn't know enough to say that yet. It could also be that some of the differences were just differences in personality, again, I'm not sure.

And then there were slaves, who seemed motivated by something different than either the givers or takers, so it seemed like there were at least 3 types of sub, and I was wondering if there might be more, or whether this classification had any validity at all.

So it's not a matter of one being better than another any more than a cat's better than a dog. It just seemed that, in the wide world of subs and doms, there must be some classification that we'd fall under, and it would probably be based oin what we're trying to get out of BDSM and how we go about trying to get it.

I might add that I chose asking this question of subs rather than doms for several reasons. One was, as I said, I thought subs might be more introspective. But another reason was, I already knew there were different kinds of doms, and I know there's a lot, a hell of a lot, everything from the aggressive vanilla lover to the outright woman-hating misogynist sadist who calls himself a dom, and that was a can of worms I really didn't want to open.

 

[reignophelia]

Hmm...

I do see something wrong with other people placing labels on me, and thus - expecting certain things from me, or thinking that they know all about me.
I don't have a problem with someone asking me if and how I identify with a certain aspect of myself.

I could say that I identify as a sub leaning switch.

I would be annoyed if someone said "oh, she's a sub, I know exactly what that's about."

When really there are many varieties and types.

Pondering...

I'll let you know if and when I come to some sort of conclusion.

 

[Netzach]

Working a a prodomme, you have to be very sensitive to the "tell" a man will let slip, and you have to have classifications for the subs,slaves,masochists, fetishists, and whatnot that come your way.

I would ask questions that I thought would break down that person's motivation in as short a time possible so that I could class him and get on with it.

I enjoy flexibility in and of itself in my relationships. I don't think I learned that as a pro, but I think that's what allowed me to function at all as a pro, that I had a wealth of flexibility as to whom and what I could enjoy. But identifying motivation and responding to that accordingly, mutually, is a huge chunk of that.

It always kind of bums me out when I think people are being overly "fixed" about what works and won't and what motivates and doesn't. Same scene, same person, another day - can be a lifetime of difference.

 

[Homburg]

I could divide the subs I've had experience with into two broad types. I called them "givers" and "takers", rather arbitrarily (they're bad names, I admit). I called the first type "givers" because they seemed to like giving themselves. They responded to my whipping anger by getting sexually excited. They reacted to punishment as if it were a physical sacrifice on their part, a sacrifice for love. Givers were the ones I clicked with. What they seemed to be seeking in the BDSM relationship was permission or coercion to express their own sexuality.

The second class were the Takers and I can't say as much about them because I didn't work as well with them, though I knew that they had very successful relationships with other doms. They didn't seem to be into the big, stormy emotions as I was but more into long, sustained control. They required more finesse and attention. They responded to punishment not just as sacrifice but as an inner experience in which they journeyed into themselves. What they seemed to be looking for in BDSM was a kind of breaking down of inhibitions or breaking down of some internal barriers.

It was almost as if the Givers were passion driven and the Takers were love-driven, but I didn't know enough to say that yet. It could also be that some of the differences were just differences in personality, again, I'm not sure.

I think there's something here, something valid, but you've not laid your finger on it just yet. I'm trying to wrap my brain around the disconnect, and see if I can get it to click, but I'm not bridging the gap either. There's something here, and I can almost see it.

Good stuff, doc, and I am interested quite a bit.

I think my problem is that, in my personal case, my own recent experience was with two women that I would apply those labels two, yet their motivations were different. The one that I describe as a "giver" is love-driven, while the other that I would describe as a "taker" was more passion-driven. This is as a person though, and the "giving" and "taking" describes more of my own reaction to them.

With "v", I feel energised after a session. I am awake, aware, alive. She gives of herself willingly and completely, and submits to me out of love and deep need to submit. She makes herself open and available for me purely. Scenes are not generally draining of my emotions.

With "w", scenes were frequently exhausting, and I was emotionally subdued at the end. Exultant, certainly, as they were deeply satisfying, but she took from me. She drank deeply and passionately of what we shared, and frequently commented that I did all the work. In retrospect, I did do the vast majority of it, but I see submission as "work" as well, and she inspired me in many ways, "work" in itself. To an extent, she was love-driven, but I saw her more basal desires being purely passionate.

It is probably just my own experience colouring my perceptions, but I guess I see the labels reversed. If you switched the love/passion axis with those labels and descriptions, it might make more sense to me. "Givers" love, and love deeply, while "takers" seem more passionate, at least in my own experience.

--

As to the reactions of subs, there's a bit much defensiveness to allow such things. I think categorisation may seem a bit depersonalising to some, and many submissives are depersonalised enough as is (between slave numbers, pet names , derogatory and dispersonal speech, etc). Further depersonalisation via categorisation may strike them as being a bit too much.

In short, Master may call them "girl", but everyone else had better damned well use their name. That one area in which they submit is compensated for elsewhere in resentment at the idea. Or it could just as easily be, er, reverse-possessiveness. Garbage term, but I can't come up with a better one. In short, he owns me, you don't. He can categorise me, you can't.

There is also a deep deep psychological significance to naming. When one names something, power is being declared over that something. If I can change your name, I am showing great power over you. Labelling is vastly important to the human psyche, and labels such as these are names, however broad the brush is that you are using to apply the name.

I like this idea, and I think there could be something valuable that comes out of it, but I also understand the resistance to it. Ask any two submissives to define "slave", "submissive", "24/7", etc and you will get two different answers. Ask a whole BBS full of submissives to define those terms and you may well get a virtual bar brawl. And, in this case, you can substitute any group of people for "submissive" and it will frequently be true. It is the nature of the issue in that these topics are deeply personal, each person is likely to have very different definitions from her neighbour, and, because they are so personal and important to each individual, they hold to these definitions strongly.

 

[His_pita]

I could divide the subs I've had experience with into two broad types. I called them "givers" and "takers", rather arbitrarily (they're bad names, I admit).

I called the first type "givers" because they seemed to like giving themselves. They responded to my whipping anger by getting sexually excited. They reacted to punishment as if it were a physical sacrifice on their part, a sacrifice for love.

The second class were the Takers and I can't say as much about them because I didn't work as well with them, though I knew that they had very successful relationships with other doms. They didn't seem to be into the big, stormy emotions as I was but more into long, sustained control. They required more finesse and attention. They responded to punishment not just as sacrifice but as an inner experience in which they journeyed into themselves. What they seemed to be looking for in BDSM was a kind of breaking down of inhibitions or breaking down of some internal barriers.

It was almost as if the Givers were passion driven and the Takers were love-driven, but I didn't know enough to say that yet. It could also be that some of the differences were just differences in personality, again, I'm not sure.

If I had to put myself in the categories that you put forth, I would say I'm a little of each; a giver and a taker. Mostly a Taker because I am love-driven in my submission. Today, I identify as a conditional slave/little gurl. I say today because I'm a woman and subject to changing my mind at any given moment.

As a Taker, I rely heavily on my dominant in his daddy role to help me with the internal barriers and the breaking down of my inhibitions. He helps me to grow and gives me the nurturing I require. It's with my Daddy that I can be vulnerable and know that he will protect me. He gives me the attention and control that I need to thrive.

As a Giver, I get to submit all my passionate sexual energy and engage in my masochistic desires. My Joe has written about the hard edge that lives in many dominants. This might be the same thing as the anger you write about. Anyway, when he needs to use me that way or use me for any reason, I willingly submit. It makes me feel wanted in a deep almost primal way, and it meets my submissive needs to be used by him.

Whippings and beatings are often highly sexual for me. Even if the immediate act of causing me pain doesn't cause sexual arousal the aftercare most definitely does. For us BDSM is highly erotic and is one of the primary reasons we do it. The other reason of course is his need to control and my need to submit.

 

[HB1965]

Honestly I don't think that you can necessarily classify types of submissives just as I don't believe you can classify types of Doms. I don't think it works that way. Over the years I've seen general characteristics in both, but each was different in their own way. In saying what you have dr. m, I just as easily conclude that, whether you realize it or not, you have gone looking for certain characterisitics in the subs you've had.

 

[VelvetDarkness]

In short, Master may call them "girl", but everyone else had better damned well use their name. That one area in which they submit is compensated for elsewhere in resentment at the idea. Or it could just as easily be, er, reverse-possessiveness. Garbage term, but I can't come up with a better one. In short, he owns me, you don't. He can categorise me, you can't.

I identify with this paragraph strongly. Throughout all the discussion that goes on in this forum everyone is always wary of appearing to judge another's kink. It's why we have developed diplomatic non-definitions like PYL/pyl and disclaimers like IMO, IME and YMMV. Also, just as a D/s relationship goes through changes as it develops so do the PYL/pyl's definitions of themselves and each other. A few months ago I would have said I was a sub and now I can categorically state that I am a slave. The transition from one to the other is gradual and sometimes it's unclear when you mentally crossed the line that allows you to give yourself up as the property of another. Added to that, I am my Master's first submissive. He didn't feel like a Master at first because of his inexperience and it felt appropriate to us that I called him Sir. Now it's Master more often and always during any form of sexual play.

There is also a deep deep psychological significance to naming. When one names something, power is being declared over that something. If I can change your name, I am showing great power over you. Labelling is vastly important to the human psyche, and labels such as these are names, however broad the brush is that you are using to apply the name.

It is true that the labels Master pins on me according to his mood affect me deeply. When he's feeling loving and romantic I'm his pet, his submissive or his slave. Those moments make my service feel validated. At other times I'm his fucktoy or his filthy little whore. This affects me because I know that, at that moment, I am no more or less in the world than a channel for his lust and whatever he demands of me I give to the outer limit of my mental and physical strength.

To fill in a questionnaire or a set of percentages for things and be told I'm 80% giving sub and 20% cum-hungry taker and therefore a category C slave would therefore be totally meaningless to me. I would attach no significance to that label.

I like this idea, and I think there could be something valuable that comes out of it, but I also understand the resistance to it. Ask any two submissives to define "slave", "submissive", "24/7", etc and you will get two different answers. Ask a whole BBS full of submissives to define those terms and you may well get a virtual bar brawl. And, in this case, you can substitute any group of people for "submissive" and it will frequently be true. It is the nature of the issue in that these topics are deeply personal, each person is likely to have very different definitions from her neighbour, and, because they are so personal and important to each individual, they hold to these definitions strongly.

This is also true. I know that I identify as a slave because Master has a contract of ownership in which I relinquished most of my rights. There are a couple of things I have not thrown into our power exchange and Master agrees wholeheartedly. I retain the use of my safeword if a scene becomes too much. I had toyed with the idea of handing my limits to him but I have epilepsy and on occasion need to halt a scene without hesitation, Master decided that I should still have that power. We also agreed that as his property, Master has a duty of care towards me. If the relationship ever became systematically abusive (not that we ever think it will but forever is a very long time) the contract is null and void. I have the power to tear it up and walk away or suspend it for a time if I ever reach the point where I am that unhappy with the dynamic. Those are my only outs and we both consider it as personally binding as a marriage certificate.

But that's just me. Catalina is a slave who has no safewords or get out clauses. Many who identify as slaves have no formal agreement. Some are purely sex slaves whom others might view as bottoms. There are no absolutes. Measuring or categorizing submissiveness is a like biological science - for every rule there are any number of exceptional cases who break them.

 

[RhymeFairy]

Everyone does BDSM their own way, but there are some generalities that can be made, and I find these terribly interesting. I wanted to see if we can do any generalizing about types of submissives, or maybe just talk about how we'd go about doing such a classification. I've got science fever.

We already make a feeble attempt at classification when we talk about painsluts or cumsluts or slaves - subs who respond to pain or sexual pleasure or who like to serve another. I know I get along especially well with subs who aren't of the 24/7 variety, who are quite independent away from the bedroom and who respond to a certain amount of violence and roughness. I don't know what you'd call these kind of women though. In my mind I kind of call them "givers" because they seem to like having sex taken from them

It would be nice if there were some sort of scale that rated subs on various traits: obedience, independence, self-esteem, pain threshold, patience, etc. etc. What other things would you add to such a scale? I especially need input from subs on this, on how you view what you give and what you do.

Have you noticed significant differences in what you want and bring to a relationship that set you apart or make you similar to other subs and that would allow generalization?

I love pleasure, given to me. I'm not really into pain, honestly. I've seen enough of that in my life without taking it BACK into my personal life. BUT I do like a sub as you do, that not only gives but is independent when I am not present.

This would and should include, standing up for themselves in all circumstances. Also, knowing the only place for submissiveness is in My domain and My presence.

I also like, to be given pleasure, the same as everyone does, I suppose. BUT, I do not want it given to the extent to where I feel as if it's given because I am the higher presence. I demand it to be given because I am worthy of worship and love. The same goes for my sub. He is there because I feel something for him, need him, wanna taste his need for me as well as my ownfor him.

I demand respect but want him to be respectful of himself as well as others. I do not think I am an ordinary Dom. No pain, except light coercion and a whole lotta give and take. I am kind, loving and generous with myself, I can ask no more of my partner. This is .... My thoughts on this matter. In short. Stand up, be proud and above all respect yourself as well as your Dom/Master.


~~~jus sayin'

 

[Daddyslilpet]

Maybe I could best explain it this way—

<sniped for brevity>

..., and that was a can of worms I really didn't want to open.

I snipped your post so as not to repost the whole thing (anyone wanting to re-read it can go back up there and do so...lol).

I think I get what you're trying to do, but you do seem to be not quite able to explain it adequately. I think what you are trying to find out is if submissives follow the same personality traits as Dominants do. The answer is yes. You'll find that just because someone aligns themself as a submissive that does not automatically make them a weak individual without a brain or thought in their head that their Dominant didn't put there first.

As a matter of fact a great many submissives are quite dominant in their lives outside of the BDSM realm of things (i.e. the workforce, running of a household, raising of children, etc.). I believe that this is why many of us tend to get a little pissy when we feel we are being "rated" or "compared" to other submissives. Like I said before, we are each and every one of us a unique individual with her/his own way of doing things. What a boring world this would be if we were all alike I'd say.

Sounds to me like you like to analyze things though and that's fine too I suppose. Again, have at it if that's what you enjoy.

 

[StrapFantasy]

Hmm...

I do see something wrong with other people placing labels on me, and thus - expecting certain things from me, or thinking that they know all about me.
I don't have a problem with someone asking me if and how I identify with a certain aspect of myself.

I could say that I identify as a sub leaning switch.

I would be annoyed if someone said "oh, she's a sub, I know exactly what that's about."

When really there are many varieties and types.

Pondering...

I'll let you know if and when I come to some sort of conclusion.

Nobody has enough information to place a label on me, so there will always be something wrong with it in my view. I'll venture to say few people (there's probably someone out there who does!) like being categorized, labeled or stereotyped. Yet at the same time, we each feel some need to know where we fit in, and we have a desire to find our peers, so to speak. We want to understand ourselves, and I think having others agree ("Yeah, you're a sub.") serves as a kind of verification that we're drawing the right conclusions. Maybe it feels like acceptance into the group?

The reason I looked at this thread was because I'm not sure if I'm a sub or not. I can relate to a good many sub traits (for lack of a better term), yet there are so many others I cannot identify with at all. I didn't come here looking to slap a label on anyone else - or myself for that matter. I don't really care to be called a sub at all, if that's what I am. I came here to hopefully read something that would help me understand myself better, and perhaps find people who have been through the same process of self-exploration so I can learn from them.

Do I belong on this board? Are these people who think and feel as I do? Can they understand me and I, them? Do we share enough to help each other and perhaps learn a few things about ourselves? That's the paradox of categories and labels.

So, maybe when we ask 'what kind of', what we really mean is, "Are you like me?" Or, "Are you someone compatible with me?"

 

[reignophelia]

Nobody has enough information to place a label on me, so there will always be something wrong with it in my view. I'll venture to say few people (there's probably someone out there who does!) like being categorized, labeled or stereotyped. Yet at the same time, we each feel some need to know where we fit in, and we have a desire to find our peers, so to speak. We want to understand ourselves, and I think having others agree ("Yeah, you're a sub.") serves as a kind of verification that we're drawing the right conclusions. Maybe it feels like acceptance into the group?

The reason I looked at this thread was because I'm not sure if I'm a sub or not. I can relate to a good many sub traits (for lack of a better term), yet there are so many others I cannot identify with at all. I didn't come here looking to slap a label on anyone else - or myself for that matter. I don't really care to be called a sub at all, if that's what I am. I came here to hopefully read something that would help me understand myself better, and perhaps find people who have been through the same process of self-exploration so I can learn from them.

Do I belong on this board? Are these people who think and feel as I do? Can they understand me and I, them? Do we share enough to help each other and perhaps learn a few things about ourselves? That's the paradox of categories and labels.

So, maybe when we ask 'what kind of', what we really mean is, "Are you like me?" Or, "Are you someone compatible with me?"

I think that's what the Dr. was trying to get at. I don't mind the question if he's asking how I identify. I also don't think he ever meant to offend, or make anyone feel like an insect in a bottle - him the little boy poking you with a stick. I think he's just genuinely curious and trying to figure himself out as well.

As far as self exploration goes, I think that's really the beauty of BDSM. It's such a broad topic with many facets. You really can identify with people who are different from you, and even become part of a "group" while still maintaining your individuality.

I don't ever want to be completely done exploring - I get bored easily.

Good luck to you in your journey. There are many wonderful people around here who are well spoken and definitely have opinions.


-R

 

[Softouch911]

You didn't ask for D-type input, M, but I agree with you that there are types -- though I'm not sure I'm much help from that point on. Some thoughts:

"Submissives" and "Dominants" may react negatively to the idea of being labelled any more specifically than by those two terms (maybe "Switch" could be added) because BDSM attracts as a way to express individuality. We like to feel different, dammit.

That said, the most important characteristic in a submissive to me is independence, the more self-sufficient and fierce the better. I have unpleasant descriptions of the doormats who need a dominant's attention to take care of them part or full-time.

Finally, from the dominant perspective, I don't care how the personality is described. My interest is in how she relates to me -- and those "types" of submissive relationship can be described simply: a submissive can "serve" me through domestic, sexual/"play", and social interaction.

The 24/7 submissive serves in each of those areas.

Of course, others may have a different take ... this being BDSM & all.

Respectfully,
ST

 

[JMohegan]

That said, the most important characteristic in a submissive to me is independence, the more self-sufficient and fierce the better. I have unpleasant descriptions of the doormats who need a dominant's attention to take care of them part or full-time.

D/s works best for me as a symbiotic relationship, i.e., a relationship between two people in which each person is dependent upon and receives reinforcement from the other. We depend on each other for emotional support, fulfillment of needs, commitment to the boundaries and spirit of the relationship, etc.

Beyond that point, I share your view that self-sufficient and capable women are attractive, and have no desire to use D/s as a means of taking care of someone part or full-time.

However, I have spoken to some who embrace the view of D/s as a dynamic in which the s is dependent upon the D, either emotionally, physically, mentally, or all three, in a way that is fundamentally more profound than any dependence of the D on the s.

But I don't use "unpleasant descriptions" for the participants. It's just not my thing.

 

[Primalex]

Categories I can think of right now (everything just being examples):

Devotion
The amount of situations/areas the sub wants to be led/controlled. Low rating: bedroom only f.e., high rating: unwilling/unable to live on her own

Intensity
The level of devotion within her selected area. Low rating: Will accept orders unwillingly, high rating: will give her personality up

Humbleness
The preferred level of expressing her status. Low rating: no special expression, medium rating: prefers to address the master with Sir, does not look at the master high rating: tattoos, collar in public

Pain tolerance
self explanatory

Obedience
The intensity of the devotion to dominant persons in general. Low rating: will try to take control or challenge, high rating: accepts the control of dominant persons instantly

Affiliation
The intensity of the affiliation with a particular master. Low rating: will accept orders from any master, high rating: will only accept orders from her master

Examples:

A "pornstar gangbang slut for events" could be rated like:
Devotion: Low
Intensity: varies
Humbleness: Low
Pain tolerance: Low-Medium
Obedience: High
Affiliation: Low

A traditional monogamous vanilla relationship:
Devotion: Very Low
Intensity: varies (Pisces tend to be high)
Humbleness: Low
Pain tolerance: Low
Obedience: Low-Medium
Affiliation: High

A traditional (?) D/s relationship:
Devotion: Medium-High
Intensity: Medium-High
Humbleness: Medium
Pain tolerance: Low-Medium
Obedience: Medium
Affiliation: High


Just my 2 cents.

 

[alexanna]

Doesn't seem like the subs here get any more up in arms than many people do about any personality test. People get just as upset about Meyers Briggs.

Personally I think they are a cool way to START to get to know someone or to know perhaps how to approach getting to know them better. I think the threat is felt when people feel their "results" will be taken as the totality of who they are but doesn't seem like anyone here is doing that.

Will Dom's start making subs take a test to see whether they are worth pursuing? Companies that make you take a quasi personality test before hiring really piss me off. Mostly because I ALWAYS fail! How rude!

And I'd like to be like Pita. Two subs in one. I bet lots of subs are this way. The thought of being a nurtured little girl ALL the time and never just getting a beating because he wants to seems like a real drag.

 

[Pythoness]

outright woman-hating misogynist sadist who calls himself a dom, and that was a can of worms I really didn't want to open.

I'm very masochistic and one of my best friends and playmates is a sadist. He doesn't call himself a dom and he's certainly not a misogynist. He's one of the most genuinely caring and gentle people I know. He gets pleasure from giving consensual pain - and I get pleasure from having it given to me. And the fact that I enjoy pain and rough sex doesn't mean I want sex taken from me.

I'm good friends with a woman who calls herself a 24/7 slave. She's also a strong, independent woman.

I have a theory (well, a hypthesis, eally) that there are a handful of basic different "styles" of BDSM - between 3 and 6 - and that people get into it because they fall into one of these basic types.

I think there are as many different styles of BDSM as there are people who are into it. Whether vanilla or not, people are individuals, not types. No two people get into this for exactly same reasons because no two people are exactly alike.

Apologies if I'm coming across as overly pissy. I don't think you're being deliberately malicious but your generalizations are offensive to me and I had to vent so added in my two cents here.

 

[Primalex]

I think there are as many different styles of BDSM as there are people who are into it. Whether vanilla or not, people are individuals, not types. No two people get into this for exactly same reasons because no two people are exactly alike.

It's just a matter of how much you go into details. A chair is a chair, even though there are zillions of different types. Yes, not every chair is exactly like another chair. But this doesn't matter, when you are just categorizing furniture.

 

[StrapFantasy]

I think that's what the Dr. was trying to get at. I don't mind the question if he's asking how I identify. I also don't think he ever meant to offend, or make anyone feel like an insect in a bottle - him the little boy poking you with a stick. I think he's just genuinely curious and trying to figure himself out as well.

As far as self exploration goes, I think that's really the beauty of BDSM. It's such a broad topic with many facets. You really can identify with people who are different from you, and even become part of a "group" while still maintaining your individuality.

I don't ever want to be completely done exploring - I get bored easily.

Good luck to you in your journey. There are many wonderful people around here who are well spoken and definitely have opinions.


-R

I agree, I don't think he meant to offend and I certainly wasn't offended. If anything, I was drawn here by the potential to learn from a discussion of types.

Just as I reached a point in life where I thought I knew myself and had it all figured out, these unknowns started popping up everywhere. It frightened me at first - and still does to some degree - but I'm learning to embrace the unknowns. I'm beginning to enjoy exploring aspects of myself I never knew existed. I'm starting to feel as you do, that I don't ever want to be finished exploring.

Thank you for the kind words. I have every intention of enjoying the journey, wherever it might take me.

 

[DracnKitten]

I refrained from reading the other posts until I mae this one, since I wanted to think about myself without the influence of anything else.

If I had to talk about myself as a sub I don't think I would be a 24/7. I mean, in a way I am - I am almost always in sub-mode (as my hubby calls it). I want people ot make decisions for me, I like to submit to the will of others outside of sex, but there are moments -a nd particular decisions - that I prefer to have the pwoer to take control of msyelf. SOmetimes I feel that I am the only one that can do the job right. And I often feel the need to be able to care for msyelf - I desire teh ability to work and provide for my family. I do not want to be dependant on my husband.

I also react very well to aggression and violence, almost immediately becoming submissive. I push the limits if I don't feel as though I am being forced to submit sometimes. I like to get in trouble. I LOVE to be punished.

And yet I do submit willingly quite often. (How long it takes for me to intentionally misbehave again is a compeletely different question.)

I am generally obediant, unless I am pushing the limits.

I do, however, have very low self esteem. I feel ignored, or unseen a lot, and I think thats part of why I misbehave. I feel like I have to force myself to stand out in a Dmom's eye0 be it the way I dress or the way I behave (or misbehave).

And I am not very patient.

I guess Im a giver, because I want things taken from me. I'm a bit high-maintenance as I need so much attention, being clingy and needy. But on many occasions I contradict msyelf by "hiding in plain sight". As much as I ache for someone to notice me I will push myself back into a dark corner and wrap myself in whaever I can and just try NOT to be noticed.

So . . I think I kind of straddle mroe than one classification - I'm the unclassified. I doubt I'm unique, I'm just hard to explain, maybe less common.

All in all, this is probably the single WORST explanation ever, lol, since its jsut a mess. But I tried, and you can make of it what you will.

And now I'm going ot go back and read all the other posts

 

[Chris_Xavier]

i wondered this too but then i said, "fuck it", i'm not even going to bother explaining myself. Oh wait, was that an independent thought? I better go ask my Pyl if i'm allowed to think that

maybe that means i'm 23.5/7 slave


pet

You're not..