natural order?

[intelligencenazi]

My disjointed 2 cents...

Personally, I disagree with the idea that men are naturally dominant and women submissive, especially due to evolution. I think it has a lot more to do with environment. Plus I've known too many women who are extremely dominant both in and out of the bedroom to think that they're somehow biologically programmed to be submissive. If being dominant or submissive IS a biological thing and encoded in our genes, I find it impossible to believe that it's seperated along gender lines. Perhaps I'm rambling, and I apologize if I am. It's certainly something to think about, but I might end up putting off any in-depth consideration until after the holidays!

 

[dolf]

interesting points here.

being a switch myself i feel that it is just as natural a part of me to dominate as it is to submit...different men trigger different reactions.

i think there is a pack like structure trying to to express....
xx

 

[TNRkitect2b]

Well to be honest, I felt like it was an idea that bore discussion, so I pursued it. I am not sure that it solely due to evolution either. This thread seems to be helping me figure out what it is not rather than what it is, so eventually we might hit upon the answer.

since we know that instinctual behavior tends towards specific roles for each gender, would the simple act of being placed in a non-traditional role multiple times help engender the necessary traits of that role? In other words, If you have to assume control of say, your family or relationship due to a lack of authority figure, once you assumed that role, would you not soon start to exhibit the dominant qualities of that position?

 

[TNRkitect2b]

And what of those people who are very domineering and powerful in their daily, public lives, yet in private have the need to be released from that responsibility and submit themselves to another?

 

[Betticus]

I think that there is a lot of natural order pack mentality going on with us people.

Like with Lions and Wolves.

Some are naturally dominant and some aren't. Then after that you can add in the myriad and vast influences of society, gender, environment, etc...

 

[dolf]

obviously we are a combination of nature and nurture.
some genetic behavioural traits are hereditory but with genetics there are always wild cards.

ty tiger for making me think of plague the mutations in dna that create people who are immune to certain diseases strengthen the species as a whole. perhaps the strong sub/Dom urges are something like that?

this is way to complex to do justice to in one thread but the input is helping me to clarify my own thoughts a little and amend some of my thinking.

xx

 

[Betticus]

We seem to be a subculture here that just isn't trying to hide our animalistic nature behind a veneer of civilization.

In real life I get along with just about anyone but I am also the alpha male. If anyone comes even close to my level I will feel or sense it and then it becomes a tense situation.

I have a comfort level with other males that I like to maintain. If someone pushes my limits even if it is unknowingly I will do something to set them under me on the food chain. I will either straight up put them on their knees or I will use some kind of psychological manipulation to make them my bitch.

This is unless of course they are intelligent and confident but at the same time they are reserved and respectful. Then we will get along like the best of friends.

If someone disrespects me or my girls though. Their ass is going to be mine, one way or another. It's not something I can help and it might get me killed some day but there it is.

 

[ownedsubgal]

i admit i do believe in the natural order theory, but i also feel that many people (dom women, sub men, for example) fall outside this natural order. i don't view Men and women as equals, i do think we have our places and natural roles. societal or cultural conditioning did not make me who i am, however i do think such conditioning is why there seem to be fewer and fewer of those of us who fall inside the natural orer, and why the D/s lifestyle is seen as some sort of "alternative" lifestyle.

many times i wished i had been born in another time or place, where my Master and i could be free to be ourselves, where we wouldn't be the oddballs or freaks, where the norm was more like us. but popular western society tells us that it is wrong for a woman to submit to a Man...it is wrong for a Man to be in control...and anyone who doesn't fall in line with that, or at least pretend to, is thrown off to the fringes of society. i was raised in a household where it was drilled into my head by my mother, that i needed to be independent, strong, business career-minded, and not need a man for anything. yet i could see in her relationship with my Father just how tragically off her thinking was....and in my heart, in my soul, submission has always felt right to me. that is something that i was born with, without a doubt. perhaps my sexual perversions may be due to things that happened to me throughout life (nurture)...but the fact that i am submissive is just mother nature.

 

[Netzach]

but popular western society tells us that it is wrong for a woman to submit to a Man...it is wrong for a Man to be in control...and anyone who doesn't fall in line with that, or at least pretend to, is thrown off to the fringes of society

I didn't get this memo. It's certainly not encouraged for me to be in control of my relationship, and if we're too open about that M gets to wear fun labels like "pussy" or "wimp." Which he's not in the least, he's one of the most courageous men I've ever met in my life and I'd stack him against a pile of Doms for courage. Takes some major nuts to not care what anyone thinks.

Like I said, I think the message, is be submissive but not too much. Be assertive but not too much. If you dont fit into some meduim non-threatening to the status quo (or one that might deprive the workforce of a warm body, God forbid!) you're pretty screwed.

 

[graceanne]

i admit i do believe in the natural order theory, but i also feel that many people (dom women, sub men, for example) fall outside this natural order. i don't view Men and women as equals, i do think we have our places and natural roles. societal or cultural conditioning did not make me who i am, however i do think such conditioning is why there seem to be fewer and fewer of those of us who fall inside the natural orer, and why the D/s lifestyle is seen as some sort of "alternative" lifestyle.

many times i wished i had been born in another time or place, where my Master and i could be free to be ourselves, where we wouldn't be the oddballs or freaks, where the norm was more like us. but popular western society tells us that it is wrong for a woman to submit to a Man...it is wrong for a Man to be in control...and anyone who doesn't fall in line with that, or at least pretend to, is thrown off to the fringes of society. i was raised in a household where it was drilled into my head by my mother, that i needed to be independent, strong, business career-minded, and not need a man for anything. yet i could see in her relationship with my Father just how tragically off her thinking was....and in my heart, in my soul, submission has always felt right to me. that is something that i was born with, without a doubt. perhaps my sexual perversions may be due to things that happened to me throughout life (nurture)...but the fact that i am submissive is just mother nature.

OSG's post reminded me of another tangent of mine - I'm not looking for an argument, or to pick on you OSG, I just quoted so that people would see why I brought this up, ok?

I think that men and women are equal but not the same. And I think that's a very important difference. Society is trying to make it so that women and men are the same, thinking that that'll help the equality issue, but it doesn't work that way. Nothing is going to change that we are totally different. Even in the womb, our brains develop in a different order. (In females brains the communication area develops first, in males the problem solving.)

I think that women were made, physically and emotionally, (as a rule - ok - there are always exceptions so please don't jump down my throat) to be the submissive. We're smaller, and less strong. We (again usually) bond during sex, we are made to have children to nurture them, and that quite often shows in our relationships with men. We are designed to be nurturers. Men are designed to be protectors and providers. To do both of those they need to be more aggressive and bossy. A man who isn't quite often gets walked all over, and therefore isn't that good of a protector/provider.

I think that's its possible for women to take the protector/provider role, just as it's possible for the man to take the nurturer, that's cause humans are adaptable and capable of doing that which isn't natural. Also, it can be fit into our natural roles. As a mother, I know that for my children to thrive they must be protected. If my husband can't do it, I can and will. As a father, my husband knows that my children won't thrive unless they are nurtured, so if I can't he can and will.

I think that the reason more and more people are heading for (or secretly dreaming of) D/s relationships is that with society being what it is, we aren't getting what we need from our daily roles. Women are, in some cases, having to work and provide. And it's been proven that we (as women) can do it, but we aren't happy. We're told we can have it all, but I don't want it all. I don't want to have to be the nurturer and the provider/protector, and I don't think that men do either. (Speaking of which - hats off to single parents around the world, everything you do - it awes me.)

 

[graceanne]

but popular western society tells us that it is wrong for a woman to submit to a Man...it is wrong for a Man to be in control...and anyone who doesn't fall in line with that, or at least pretend to, is thrown off to the fringes of society

I didn't get this memo. It's certainly not encouraged for me to be in control of my relationship, and if we're too open about that M gets to wear fun labels like "pussy" or "wimp." Which he's not in the least, he's one of the most courageous men I've ever met in my life and I'd stack him against a pile of Doms for courage. Takes some major nuts to not care what anyone thinks.

Like I said, I think the message, is be submissive but not too much. Be assertive but not too much. If you dont fit into some meduim non-threatening to the status quo (or one that might deprive the workforce of a warm body, God forbid!) you're pretty screwed.

I think that modern society says it's wrong for anyone to submit to another. If it's a woman we're in trouble cause of the feminists, but there are some pretty derogatory names for submissive men. (pussy whipped, hen pecked, etc.) As I said above society wants us all to be the same.

 

[ownedsubgal]

but popular western society tells us that it is wrong for a woman to submit to a Man...it is wrong for a Man to be in control...and anyone who doesn't fall in line with that, or at least pretend to, is thrown off to the fringes of society

I didn't get this memo. It's certainly not encouraged for me to be in control of my relationship, and if we're too open about that M gets to wear fun labels like "pussy" or "wimp." Which he's not in the least, he's one of the most courageous men I've ever met in my life and I'd stack him against a pile of Doms for courage. Takes some major nuts to not care what anyone thinks.

Like I said, I think the message, is be submissive but not too much. Be assertive but not too much. If you dont fit into some meduim non-threatening to the status quo (or one that might deprive the workforce of a warm body, God forbid!) you're pretty screwed.

hmm i can understand what you mean. i do not think that it is encouraged in popular western society for women to be in charge, nor do i think it's encouraged for men to be openly submissive. that is not what i was saying. i was simply focusing on the fact that a woman who submits to her Man, or a Man who is in control of the relationship, do not fall in with the current popular society's view of what's proper and good. a Dominant Man is an abuser...a submissive woman, a doormat. but likewise yes, a woman who is "too" aggressive and controlling will often be labelled "bitch", and a man who submits to such a woman a "punk" or "pussy". i think graceanne makes a good point...it does seem that we're all, male and female, supposed to be the same....equal power, equal control, and fit all the same roles equally well...which isn't just silly but completely impossible, and a major reason why (imho) so many "normal" vanilla relationships are so troubled, fraught with friction and power struggles and people fighting to be something they were not meant to be, and forgetting where we come from.

 

[AngelicAssassin]

I think that men and women are equal but not the same.

i don't agree. We're not equal, nor the same.

Pound for pound, and equal height:

• At best we've got 11 inch dicks,
• At worst, you've got A cups.

For sheer volume, you women win, hands ... wherever you damn well please.

 

[Netzach]

I have more in common with a man with an 8 inch cock, by these standards, than I do with Anna Nicole Smith.

 

[graceanne]

i don't agree. We're not equal, nor the same.

Pound for pound, and equal height:

• At best we've got 11 inch dicks,
• At worst, you've got A cups.

For sheer volume, you women win, hands ... wherever you damn well please.

Ok, I know I'm being dense, and I aplogize, but. . . what?

 

[Xelebes]

Spectra, extrema or class?

That is, does the dominance come in the form of a spectrum, in the form of extremes (a dichotomy) or a mere human construct in defining? I would think finding which one of these is the case that we describe dominance within our social/sexual relations might help us better realise what we are attempting to agree on.

...

Ok, I'm not sure if that makes sense.

 

[graceanne]

Spectra, extrema or class?

That is, does the dominance come in the form of a spectrum, in the form of extremes (a dichotomy) or a mere human construct in defining? I would think finding which one of these is the case that we describe dominance within our social/sexual relations might help us better realise what we are attempting to agree on.

...

Ok, I'm not sure if that makes sense.

me either

 

[Betticus]

What about the different types of Dominants? Where do the lines cross between the types? I know it's all individual and depends on the person but I see more than one kind of Dominant.

The pure alpha type that just is

The Disciplinarian

The Sadist

The Daddy

The Switch

There are more but I can't think of them right now. I'm just trying to say that natural order can account for a percentage of Dominants and then it starts to break down into other classes and styles.

 

[graceanne]

What about the different types of Dominants? Where do the lines cross between the types? I know it's all individual and depends on the person but I see more than one kind of Dominant.

The pure alpha type that just is

The Disciplinarian

The Sadist

The Daddy

The Switch

There are more but I can't think of them right now. I'm just trying to say that natural order can account for a percentage of Dominants and then it starts to break down into other classes and styles.

i think that can be put to nurture, not nature.

 

[caela]

Lord I hope no one takes my head off for this but here it goes anyway:

Personally I don't think that men and woman are at all equal because men and women aren't the same. It's that whole, comparing apples and oranges thing.

We're all human of course and we all deserve love, respect and kindness but does that make us all equal? For that matter what exactly does being equal mean? It seems like in modern society being equal means being the same and just where does that get us? In the case of people my own age (25) it seems to get us a bunch of boring guys that aren't quite sure if they are supposed to open the door for you like a gentleman and are scared of saying the wrong thing no matter what they say. The girls are just as bad. People just seem a lot less vivid when they are all trying to fit into some little "equal" mold.

O.k. sorry about the little rant, I actually meant to go somewhere with it but the phone range and my train of thought completely de-railed. If I remember where I wanted it to go I'll edit and take it there.

 

[Betticus]

I do the door opening. It is not negotiable. I have the fucking keys after all.

I also do all the hair pulling. Of course, I'm also bald. hmmmm?

 

[caela]

I do the door opening. It is not negotiable. I have the fucking keys after all.

I also do all the hair pulling. Of course, I'm also bald. hmmmm?

lol Betticus, you need to be careful with that bald head hun, she might not be able to pull your hair but she could leave claw marks. If she were anything like me I could almost guarantee that would happen.

gotta love a man that knows how to pull hair properly don't you???

 

[Betticus]

lol Betticus, you need to be careful with that bald head hun, she might not be able to pull your hair but she could leave claw marks. If she were anything like me I could almost guarantee that would happen.

gotta love a man that knows how to pull hair properly don't you???

Give me a few shots of hard liquor and I become indestructible. And seven feet tall. Enough of the pimp juice and I will actually dance.

 

[graceanne]

By saying that we are equal I'm saying that we are worth the same amount. As in 7 plus 5 is equal to 12 They are not the same number, but they are equal. We are all worthy of the same things. We are equal, humans, and no one is better or more worthy than than the other. Well, maybe but not cause of their gender.

 

[caela]

Give me a few shots of hard liquor and I become indestructible. And seven feet tall. Enough of the pimp juice and I will actually dance.

~Makes a note to get Betticus drunk if I ever see him in person, if only to see if he can actually dance.~