Dom vs. dominant, is there a difference?

[Rox_shybutcurious]

Rox...I could have written each of your posts. This is one of my conflicts...in every area of my life I'm quite alpha. I have to be...but this, most private intimate part of me screams to be dominated. I fight it. A lot (that Taurus in me as well).

~Angel

Hi Angel, it does feel better to know that somebody else is going through the same things. When bucking up against some of these strong personalities it makes me wonder how I can feel like I should classify myself more as a submissive. But I have no desire to dominate anybody. Lead maybe when there's a need. Take charge of something going on if there's nobody else to direct things better. Even have a confrontation if needed when I'm in charge. And I absolutely hate doing that, but sometimes it's necessarily. But when it comes to just being one on one with someone I respect I'd much rather let them lead.

Rox.

 

[CutieMouse]

Rox, I bumped a few threads (one in Talk, the other in Cafe) where people discuss daily Life in a "24/7" relationship.

The misconception that submissive sorts give up every single bit of their Life, or dominant types take change of everything right down to how one holds a fork, is pretty common, I think. That's one reason why I try to point out that it does tend to be more a steriotype, than a reality.

It is quite easy to loosely calssify someone as one or the other (submissive or dominant) based on behaviour... when I had an avatar up, someone once told me they felt I should change it, because it looked like an image a Domme would use, and impacted the "tone" read into my words. There are things about me that would make people swear I was submissive, and things that would make other people swear I was a Domme... in reality, I'm complexly me.

(As for the Taurus/Taurus thing... add on an almost 20 year age difference, a few thousand miles of separation, one party with decades in the Lifestyle, and the other with mostly book knowledge... and you get a deeply cherished Friendship, that is as maddening as it is rewarding. )

 

[Rox_shybutcurious]

in reality, I'm complexly me.

(As for the Taurus/Taurus thing... add on an almost 20 year age difference, a few thousand miles of separation, one party with decades in the Lifestyle, and the other with mostly book knowledge... and you get a deeply cherished Friendship, that is as maddening as it is rewarding. )

I like that "complexly me"..... And the Taurus/Taurus thing is very cool. Cherished Friendship gives me something to shoot for.


I also saw several older threads had been bumped up so I guess it's time for more research. Then I'm sure I'll have other questions...lolll.

Thanks,
Rox.

 

[Dark1ord6669]

I guess where my difficulty lies in this thought pattern is that when I was looking for the one to spend my life with, I would not have gone further if someone had said to me they were dominant in personality but didn't think of themselves as a Dom. I think I would have moved onto the next person thinking this person wasn't sure of who they were, or were not who I wanted to be with. For me it is the same as if you are a lawyer, doctor etc.,....whether you are employed in that position at an appointed time does not change that you have the skills for the job and are still that person the title describes. Make sense?

Catalina

Of course it makes sense, and actually a bit of the point I was trying (yet failing) to make. You might have the credentals to be a doctor, yet unless you're practicing you're not a doctor (to the full extent of the word.) You can't walk into any hospital and just start opperating. Some one has to entrust you to that job, so no you don't stop being who you are. But you're not *there* fully either.

Am I making myself clearer, in my thoughts?

As to who gives that title, would be you're parter.

 

[Auraka6669]

I'd have to disagree with your statement here. I can be what I feel I am in my core regardless of what anyone else thinks or labels me. If no one agrees that would in fact limit having someone else to enjoy that core self with however.

Fury

Hmmm. Let me once again say, That you can identify with being a PLY, but can't actively be one unless you are given the title of PLY (or viceversa)

I think that matches up with your feelings?

Also for whatever reason, I was logged in under my old nick... wtf.

 

[FurryFury]

Hmmm. Let me once again say, That you can identify with being a PLY, but can't actively be one unless you are given the title of PLY (or viceversa)

I think that matches up with your feelings?

Also for whatever reason, I was logged in under my old nick... wtf.

Point taken.

*nods*

Fury

 

[neonflux]

Rox_shybutcurious, Wow! I am blown away - 3 pages in only one day. A great question and a great thread! As a switch, I also view the question of taking on a role vs. expressing one's essential nature with a great deal of interest since I feel that I am able to be both Dominant and to submit in both my personal and professional/public lives...

Why would a person have to let go of being in charge of his or her Life, simply because he or she is labeled as submissive? I know Bandit continues to control her own finances, etc; Catalina is a successful professional woman- and a slave. When pressed, I identify mostly as submissive, and very much hold my own in everything from business dealings, to giving someone "the look" if they behave inappropriately around me.

Before I became formally involved in BDSM, I had a lover who was very powerful - makes business decisions that impact hundreds of people daily. He wanted to submit in the bedroom, to let go, to surrender... I also know people who are powerful Dom/mes who are assertive and self-confident always but are also very non-assuming in their professional lives. Regarding how many people see subs - we live in a culture it seems to me that doesn't value surrender and doesn't understand the strength of character it takes to consciously submit. One of the most amazingly powerful men I've ever met - emits the type of energy that reaches out and envelopes you - is a 100% submissive.

Some would attach certain standards as to what it means to be a Dom or not. I think it is easy to fall into that whole what is a "true" Dom and what is not argument. I have come to a decision that two things are true...

1. Just as someone can be a good, moderate or bad husband, so can they also be a good, moderate or bad Dom.

2. The only thing that is truly important in answering the question you have asked here about the difference between a Dom and dominant, is what to "you" consititues a person being a Dom. What character or standard do you feel a Dom should have. Because in the end, if you are seeking a Dom, then the only one you will feel truly comfortable in giving your submission to is one whom you can respect and trust.

I really have to agree with your first point. Concerning your second - and this question is sincere, not rhetorical, doesn't your second point really lead to the idea that a Dom/me must earn Her/His title in order to essentially "capture" the respect and surrender of a sub? Or would someone who found earning this type of respect difficult, perhaps because s/he was a bully (catalina's post below) still be a Domme if she considered herself to be? Or at that point would He only be Dominant?

Then there are also the ones who are domineering more so than dominating, and often fall into the alpha camp where they like to appear strong and in charge. They are ones to avoid as they don't have what it takes to be dominant or respect the submission of another. Bullying can so easily be confused with dominance.

One of the things that I am coming to understand about Topping (I don't consider myself anywhere close to being a Domme yet - I do think that's a title that must be earned), is the responsibility and mutuality of power. It seems to me, and I would really like your opinion on this, that true power lies much more in the honor of being given power rather than trying to seize it. The Dominant partner in a BDSM exchange has the responsibility for creating and holding the space within which the interaction takes place - it is the gift of the sub that s/he enters and then surrenders within it. And throughout the interaction, there is still an ongoing negotiation and exchange of power, one which it is the Dominant's responsibility to direct but always involves the conscious surrender of the submissive.

I don't know if this is because I'm a woman, or because I'm switch, but the most genuine exercise of power seems to me to take place within the context of an exchange that allows all parties to be themselves. In the public sphere, when I take on a leadership position, I am most effective when I give others power and they respect me enough to give it back to me.

I am a trainer (local, state and national level) and the act of Dominance within a scene reminds me very much of training, and I'm finding involves many of the same skills. My training technique is highly interactive, involving a type of "Socratic" exchange. I know what my learning objective is as a trainer, just as I know the general arch and direction I want for a scene when Topping. Yet, the people I am training all come with their own experiences, their own skills and their own areas of expertise. In the course of a training activity, I am most effective when I ask participants to share this and when I pay close attention to their strengths, thoughts, reactions. This does not mean I relinquish my responsibility to direct and mold the interactions. It seems to me that a good Dom/me must do the same - respect and interact with all that a submissive brings to the relationship and the power exchange...

Does this make any sense or am I just blathering???

Waitaminnit... You're a Taurus/Gemini pairing? <low whistle> Which wall do you guys bang your heads into when your innate traits run into each other?
(Speaking as a Taurus with an unhealthy obsession with Scorpios... )

As a Gemini who thinks her Taurus sister is the cat's meow - she is my favorite person in the world and my closest confidant and we have actually shared an apartment quite successfully - I think that Taurians and Gemini's make a great pair

Neon

 

[nymphee]

This has just really cleared something up for me Neon, thank you so much x

Of course, it doesn't appy to everything- St_George is hugely assertive both in public and in private. I think I'm learning quickly hot utterly impossible it is to pigeonhole people, as many people there are in compliance with the rules, there will allways be those who ride roughshod over them!

 

[catalina_francisco]

Waitaminnit... You're a Taurus/Gemini pairing? <low whistle> Which wall do you guys bang your heads into when your innate traits run into each other?

(Speaking as a Taurus with an unhealthy obsession with Scorpios... )

LOL, we try to remain civil and discuss things like adults.....when that fails at the first post we rant and rave and then discuss like adults....good thing is we are both aware of our weaknesses and shortcomings and can admit to them and look to the other to help us cope with them in a more productive way, most days anyway.

Catalina

 

[catalina_francisco]

Try being a Taurus in Love with a Taurus.

LOL, it is often advised to avoid your own sign in terms of romance...but sometimes it can work great.

Catalina

 

[onyxvixen]

I don't know if this is because I'm a woman, or because I'm switch, but the most genuine exercise of power seems to me to take place within the context of an exchange that allows all parties to be themselves.

Yep, that's the key I think. I am a Domme and therefore Dominant within that role. I only dominate those who have willingly relinquished power to me because it's what they want and need. I only dominate the willing and only within their tolerance and according to their needs as well as my own. I have no interest in converting nilla women or attempting to be dominant in other aspects of my life.

In my day to day life I am confident and assertive but not the the detriment of anyone around me. Indeed, the dominant streak in me will often see me take the less assertive protectively under my wing. I do have a pet hate though for those who make excuses for everything and compound their own low self worth through failure. Those who won't pull their weight and lean too hard on others.

I manage a busy business centre in London and do have to be consistently authoritative with my staff. On the other hand I sometimes have to bite my tongue and be quite nauseatingly obsequious to important clients. For me it's all a means to an end and I never cede self respect or tolerate abuse. I agree with Catalina that bullying is not dominance, just as true respect is earned through respecting others.

 

[Rox_shybutcurious]

Rox_shybutcurious, Wow! I am blown away - 3 pages in only one day. A great question and a great thread!

Thanks Neon, I've read a lot of your posts and found a lot of useful information there. This turned into much more than I expected and has given me a lot to think about. Clarified some things for me and then sent me into more research on other things.

I don't know if this is because I'm a woman, or because I'm switch, but the most genuine exercise of power seems to me to take place within the context of an exchange that allows all parties to be themselves.
Neon

I think this is another misconception I'm learning to correct as I read more. That in a D/s relationship a sub is considered more a reflection of his/her Dom/me than their own person. And maybe for some that is the case. It seems there are as many variables as there are partipants. It can make things harder to figure out in some ways while a little easier in others.

Rox.

 

[SpectreT]

I am a trainer (local, state and national level) and the act of Dominance within a scene reminds me very much of training, and I'm finding involves many of the same skills. My training technique is highly interactive, involving a type of "Socratic" exchange. I know what my learning objective is as a trainer, just as I know the general arch and direction I want for a scene when Topping. Yet, the people I am training all come with their own experiences, their own skills and their own areas of expertise. In the course of a training activity, I am most effective when I ask participants to share this and when I pay close attention to their strengths, thoughts, reactions. This does not mean I relinquish my responsibility to direct and mold the interactions. It seems to me that a good Dom/me must do the same - respect and interact with all that a submissive brings to the relationship and the power exchange...

Does this make any sense or am I just blathering???

Makes perfect sense to me - but I'm a swich who's been middle management and training professionals for a large portion of my working life, so I think it's more of a commonality of experience thing.

As a Gemini who thinks her Taurus sister is the cat's meow - she is my favorite person in the world and my closest confidant and we have actually shared an apartment quite successfully - I think that Taurians and Gemini's make a great pair

Neon

Just saying - that kind of pairing gives (a dominant) Taurus a lot of opportunity to be straight-up evil, and (a submissive) Gemini a lot of opportunity to drive their Taurus batshit, purely unintentionally. Worst pairing I ever saw involving a fellow Taurus was Cancer, though.

And as to me, I believe I've mentioned before, if I find a person somehow magnetic and electrifying face to face, I don't even need to ask. Odds are they're a Scorpio. And everyone tells me that's a "begging for trouble" kind of astrological pairing, as in hide the crockery and tell your neighbors to invest in earplugs, the arguments and the sex are both loud and destructive to the local environment.

And the Taurus/Taurus thing? I've only ever had to deal with it professionally. We got along fine on a personal level, but professionally, I drove my boss nuts, and he drove me nuts, as we both expected very different things from my job. That job only lasted two years.

 

[neonflux]

And as to me, I believe I've mentioned before, if I find a person somehow magnetic and electrifying face to face, I don't even need to ask. Odds are they're a Scorpio. And everyone tells me that's a "begging for trouble" kind of astrological pairing, as in hide the crockery and tell your neighbors to invest in earplugs, the arguments and the sex are both loud and destructive to the local environment.

And the Taurus/Taurus thing? I've only ever had to deal with it professionally. We got along fine on a personal level, but professionally, I drove my boss nuts, and he drove me nuts, as we both expected very different things from my job. That job only lasted two years.

OK, your comment about Scorpios had me LOL!!! Want another really bad pairing?!?!?! Try a Gemini and a Virgo (my ex who stopped talking to me when she realized I was dating again). If I am immediately turned on by someone in that "electric" way you just mentioned, hands down they're a Virgo - and I can guarantee that we will make each other miserable.

Oh, being with my own? For the first time in my life, my primary is also a Gemini - it is absolutely luxurious

 

[nymphee]

I'm almost scared to ask but, does anyone have an oppinion on Taurus/Saggitarius?

 

[FurryFury]

I'm beginning to feel as if I'm reading Cosmopolitan Magazine's bedside astrology guide again. LOL.

Do y'all really believe this stuff?

Asks the Scorpio.

Fury

 

[nymphee]

Not really, but I think it's interesting from a fictional point of view.

(the Tattler horoscope is usually quite good though)

 

[SpectreT]

I'm beginning to feel as if I'm reading Cosmopolitan Magazine's bedside astrology guide again. LOL.

Do y'all really believe this stuff?

Asks the Scorpio.

Fury

Yes and no. There are certain personality traits that tend to clump around birthdates in certain zodiac signs - many people read about their particular sun sign's common personality traits and recognize themselves more or less. But I don't think it's "the stars", and I don't think your future or best course of action can be so easily predicted.

I'll pick on the one I know best: Taurus, and the person I know best: me.

Taureans tend towards stubbornness, territoriality, and hedonism. We also tend towards bluntness. Personally, I'm about as subtle as a cement truck, most of the time. People think of placid Ferdinand the bull, but that ain't the whole case. We've got a dark side. Taureans tend towards posessiveness, and miserly ways as well. Sure, we'll spend a small fortune on a comfortable, showy car or the perfect bed, but that's to indulge our own vanity and need for comfort. To quote a book, Taurus can never get enough attention, comfort, food, rest or sex. When I was talking about the earplugs and the crockery, the Taurus is doing the bellowing and throwing stuff in the argument. Raging Bull is more than just a movie title. Famous Taureans: Sigmund Freud (same birthday as me - show of hands, any who are surprised by the coincidence of over analytical sex-obsessed guys being born on the same month/day) Tom Bergeron, George Clooney, Cher

 

[FurryFury]

Yes and no. There are certain personality traits that tend to clump around birthdates in certain zodiac signs - many people read about their particular sun sign's common personality traits and recognize themselves more or less. But I don't think it's "the stars", and I don't think your future or best course of action can be so easily predicted.

I'll pick on the one I know best: Taurus, and the person I know best: me.

Taureans tend towards stubbornness, territoriality, and hedonism. We also tend towards bluntness. Personally, I'm about as subtle as a cement truck, most of the time. People think of placid Ferdinand the bull, but that ain't the whole case. We've got a dark side. Taureans tend towards posessiveness, and miserly ways as well. Sure, we'll spend a small fortune on a comfortable, showy car or the perfect bed, but that's to indulge our own vanity and need for comfort. To quote a book, Taurus can never get enough attention, comfort, food, rest or sex. When I was talking about the earplugs and the crockery, the Taurus is doing the bellowing and throwing stuff in the argument. Raging Bull is more than just a movie title. Famous Taureans: Sigmund Freud (same birthday as me - show of hands, any who are surprised by the coincidence of over analytical sex-obsessed guys being born on the same month/day) Tom Bergeron, George Clooney, Cher

I'm certain you are very different from the evil fucking Taurus I was once miserably married to. I have a hard time believing in all of this stuff. When I read such things I can find something to fit me or anyone else in every birth sign.

Fury

 

[catalina_francisco]

Yes and no. There are certain personality traits that tend to clump around birthdates in certain zodiac signs - many people read about their particular sun sign's common personality traits and recognize themselves more or less. But I don't think it's "the stars", and I don't think your future or best course of action can be so easily predicted.

I'm with you as far as believing in similar traits etc., and from what I have read. astrology was actually mentioned in biblical texts before being removed by those who thought they knew better. There was a time in my teens and 20.s when I spent a lot more time studying it that I could tell people what sign they were after observing them for awhile....the interesting thing was I had a 100% score on getting it right so there must be something to it. All signs have a light and dark side, and as a Gemini, what I have found with my own sign is there is a difference between May born and June born Gemini's. A huge book I have which I hope to get into one day actually says each sign has three distinct groups based on when the people were born within the sign. It is a fascinating subject when studied with an open mind. LOL, let's face it, science is only now finding ways to prove some things civilizations have believed and practiced for hundreds of years and which scientists previously claimed could not be true because there was no basic scientific explanation for them.

Catalina

 

[angel_girl]

Hi Angel, it does feel better to know that somebody else is going through the same things. When bucking up against some of these strong personalities it makes me wonder how I can feel like I should classify myself more as a submissive. But I have no desire to dominate anybody. Lead maybe when there's a need. Take charge of something going on if there's nobody else to direct things better. Even have a confrontation if needed when I'm in charge. And I absolutely hate doing that, but sometimes it's necessarily. But when it comes to just being one on one with someone I respect I'd much rather let them lead.

Rox.

Exactly.

btw...are your pm's off?

 

[Rox_shybutcurious]

Exactly.

btw...are your pm's off?

I'm going with the blonde excuse and saying I have no idea. If you tried and didn't get through, probably. And it's probably cause I don't know how to turn them on. LOL I guess I'm still figure out how to work the boards. I'd be more than happy to fix that if someone would tell me how.

Thanks,
Rox.

 

[CutieMouse]

I'm beginning to feel as if I'm reading Cosmopolitan Magazine's bedside astrology guide again. LOL.

Do y'all really believe this stuff?

Asks the Scorpio.

Fury

Not really. But we're both stubborn as mules.

 

[Auraka6669]

I'm going with the blonde excuse and saying I have no idea. If you tried and didn't get through, probably. And it's probably cause I don't know how to turn them on. LOL I guess I'm still figure out how to work the boards. I'd be more than happy to fix that if someone would tell me how.

Thanks,
Rox.

Go to your "User CP" (control pannel) and click on "Edit options" and find the area with private messages. Click a box to activate them.

 

[Rox_shybutcurious]

Go to your "User CP" (control pannel) and click on "Edit options" and find the area with private messages. Click a box to activate them.

Thanks, I guess I didn't read through far enough on all my options. Somehow I thought it the default was "on". I've got it fixed now I think.

Rox.