What is a fake Dominant?

[chastef]

First post. Hello.

> But what power does a Dom have other than that which is surrendered to him?

I think I understand what you mean and it is true, but for myself I like a Dom who will push my limits, and cause me to surrender more. Not by force or constantly, but with understanding.

 

[Umekoshungi]

I know this is an old thread, but I really wanted to add to the topic of what a "fake dom" is IMO. IME, a real Dom/Domme respects his/her sub as a person. They follow your hard limits and respect all limits that are set (emotionally, physically, or otherwise) and in return earns the respect he/she deserves.

A "fake" Dom does nothing to earn respect, but still believes they are inherently deserving of admiration.

I agree with what was said earlier, something to the idea that "I am a toy, but not one to be abused and broken." Just because I give part of my self and my wants/needs to the care of another person does not mean that person should abuse them, or me.

 

[SecretOrchid]

a fake dominant is expressly interested in his desires and if the sub benefits okay but its not his concern or goal.

The fake dominant doesn't respect the "safe" word nor cares about leaving mental or physical pain on the sub.

The fake dominant doesn't care about the sub or the sub's gift of submission nor realize it should be cherished.

The fake dominant doesn't understand nor realize that happiness or true pleasure comes from the subs gift of giving her submission to him.

For me, if her cravings and desires are met through my bringing those to fulfillment then I receive great pleasure and satisfaction.

Very simply put, but I found this post really helpful.

 

[Perfect_Trust]

Originally posted by Fury

This first list of non "True Dom-ness" is based on my online experiences only.

A fake Dominant says things like this: "If you were a real submissive you'd
do _________."

Also says things to knock you down, attempt to take control or make you respond in ways desired by the so called Dom not because you've agreed to be that Dom's sub, or to wanting or liking that sort of thing, but just to see if he or she can.

They also often have NO real ideas of their own and look to you to come up with all of the ideas. IMO a Dom has to be creative in their own right to be "real." I entertain for a living. I don't mind doing what it takes to make a Dom I willingly take on happy, within my limits, but I am not going to do all the heavy lifting on the ideas end of the bargain.

A fake Dom claims experiences it becomes clear he or she doesn't actually have, because sooner or later, usually sooner, you see the holes in the fabric of the fiction they've created about themselves and the continuity problems.

A fake Dom wants to have cyber sex but forgets to put in the BDSM. Doh!

A fake Dom wants to jump right into you being "owned" by them that instant. Yet doesn't really seem to understand what that truly means to you. Furthermore he or she doesn't bother to ask or remember any volunteered information. In fact, he or she doesn't try to get to know you at all because, to them, you are just one of 20 or so they e-mailed or PM-ed that night hoping to get some cyber action and/or just an exchangeable set of fingers on a keyboard or a cyber cunt.

That kinda sums up my immediate thoughts/personal experience.

 

[VWSinger]

I just came across this thread and after reading (or skimming) all of the posts, I noted that one other possibility for "fake doms" was never mentioned. There are people who are sexual sadists, who get off on the infliction of physical pain but who have no desire whatsoever to dominate their partner in the sense that the BDSM community understands. This does not imply lack of consent, or even lack of caring for the partner. The idea of a submissive at his feet simply does not excite. Now the problem is, where is someone like this to turn, especially someone young or relatively inexperienced. He sees these classifieds, forums, chat rooms, ect. where women ask to be bound, beaten, tortured and he thinks that he is in heaven. He joins in and when they ask his inclination, he basically has to reply that he is a Dom, because he certainly is not a sub. You could say that he should have done more research first. Well, all of you who are into the lifestyle are having difficulty defiining a "true" Dom. How would our hypothetical sadist know that the sub is not simply a masochist who finds pleasure in pain (his sexual counterpart), but also wants to be dominated in the BDSM sense. Naturally any sub to meets him is going to be disappointed, but so is he.

 

[FungiUg]

I noted that one other possibility for "fake doms" was never mentioned. There are people who are sexual sadists, who get off on the infliction of physical pain but who have no desire whatsoever to dominate their partner in the sense that the BDSM community understands.

I'd hate to label someone like that with the word "fake". Rather, I think that's a good example of the limitations of labels: the implication being that because one is sadistic, one must also be dominant. I do know we have had discussions about masochistic dominants (like to be in control and like to be hurt) as another example. I wouldn't refer to either of those as fake.

To me, fakery is about pretending to be something you are not. So yes, if someone who is purely a sadist (not that anyone is purely anything, but I'm sure you take what I mean) pretends to be dominant as well, then yes, that would qualify as a "fake". That's sad, and as you say it would be disappointing, but I think it's part of the process of learning to be honest about what you really are so that you can find someone with whom you are compatible.

The good news is that BDSM is rich enough that people can usually find what they are looking for. Even "pure sadists".

For me, learning to be honest with myself and others is the key, and hence aiming for the win/win. So if I am honest about what I am and what I am not, about what I want and about what I don't want, then I have less chance of being disappointed when I finally do meet someone who fits with that. And similarly the other way around.

What I don't understand is why honesty is so hard and fakery is so common. If there's one community that should be accepting of how people really are, it's our community. So why is it people are still afraid to admit to who they really are and what they really want?

 

[catalina_francisco]

What I don't understand is why honesty is so hard and fakery is so common. If there's one community that should be accepting of how people really are, it's our community. So why is it people are still afraid to admit to who they really are and what they really want?

Honestly? I think a lot of it comes down to people being more hung up on being accepted and liked than being comfortable in their own skin and willing to live it. Many tend to think if something turns them on it must be bad, deviant etc., and so will turn others off, or not be compatible with anyone else, so the alternative seems to be to pretend to be someone else and hope somehow magic makes it all work out alright. Too many possibilities for it to not, to attract me.

Catalina

 

[FungiUg]

I think a lot of it comes down to people being more hung up on being accepted and liked than being comfortable in their own skin and willing to live it.

You could well be right. I think there's also an element of having to learn who we are, and that requires experimenting and getting it wrong at times.

 

[catalina_francisco]

You could well be right. I think there's also an element of having to learn who we are, and that requires experimenting and getting it wrong at times.

True, but how many do we see here alone who have decided D/s is the only relationship they are going to be happy in, and yet they insist on only looking in the mainstream pool for a future partner and hoping it all works out the way they would hope without them telling the other person what they are really into beside romantic dinners, walks on the beach at sunset and raising 2.5 children in perfect bliss? Then when it doesn't work they are surprised and often begin the same process all over again!!

Catalina

 

[FungiUg]

True, but how many do we see here alone who have decided D/s is the only relationship they are going to be happy in, and yet they insist on only looking in the mainstream pool for a future partner and hoping it all works out the way they would hope without them telling the other person what they are really into beside romantic dinners, walks on the beach at sunset and raising 2.5 children in perfect bliss? Then when it doesn't work they are surprised and often begin the same process all over again!!

Catalina

Sorry, had to quote the lot there.

Yeah, it does happen all too frequently. I don't think that's anything to do with BDSM, that's just human nature in general. People fall into patterns of behaivour, and struggle to break them. I mean, we all know (or know of) people who go from one abusive or unhappy relationship to another, irrespective of whether it's vanilla or some other flavour (mmm, maple and walnut...)

So in your example, it's almost fake vanilla, rather than "fake Dom". But I think the same rules would apply coming back the other way. I do know that sometimes BDSM has a reputation of being a way to get easy, kinky sex. Personally, I've never noticed anything "easy" about it. But maybe that's a reason?

 

[catalina_francisco]

Sorry, had to quote the lot there.

Yeah, it does happen all too frequently. I don't think that's anything to do with BDSM, that's just human nature in general. People fall into patterns of behaivour, and struggle to break them. I mean, we all know (or know of) people who go from one abusive or unhappy relationship to another, irrespective of whether it's vanilla or some other flavour (mmm, maple and walnut...)

So in your example, it's almost fake vanilla, rather than "fake Dom". But I think the same rules would apply coming back the other way. I do know that sometimes BDSM has a reputation of being a way to get easy, kinky sex. Personally, I've never noticed anything "easy" about it. But maybe that's a reason?

So true, and no, I wouldn't think it easy either.

Catalina

 

[Blushing Bottom]

Extreme Feminism and the conservative silverback male gorilla have no place in my world.

Well put, rather loquacious in fact.

Doesn't a "fake" Dom automatically become a "real" Dom when he has a submissive at his feet?

You're joking right? Be the cave....you are the cave.

 

[Homburg]

I just came across this thread and after reading (or skimming) all of the posts, I noted that one other possibility for "fake doms" was never mentioned. There are people who are sexual sadists, who get off on the infliction of physical pain but who have no desire whatsoever to dominate their partner in the sense that the BDSM community understands.

This is a "Top". Someone who is interested in the physical side of BDSM from the standpoint of one who gives pain, bondage, etc. And I would personally say that a pretty damned fair number of folks that call themselves dominant are more top than anything else.

I can't say all that much more about the topic. I realise that my viewpoint is a bit skewed. Far too many of the folks that call themselves "Dominant" are role-players in my eyes. They're tops or domineering control freaks to be sure, but not what I would look at and think "Dominant". (Not saying that this is a majority, nor will I attempt to come up with some sort of pointless ratio. One is too many IMO.)

 

[BiBunny]

This is a "Top". Someone who is interested in the physical side of BDSM from the standpoint of one who gives pain, bondage, etc. And I would personally say that a pretty damned fair number of folks that call themselves dominant are more top than anything else.

I can't say all that much more about the topic. I realise that my viewpoint is a bit skewed. Far too many of the folks that call themselves "Dominant" are role-players in my eyes. They're tops or domineering control freaks to be sure, but not what I would look at and think "Dominant". (Not saying that this is a majority, nor will I attempt to come up with some sort of pointless ratio. One is too many IMO.)

The reverse of that is the dominant (or dominant wannabe) type who calls himself a sadist and really isn't. Lemme tell you, there are scads of those, too.

/end hijack

 

[_kiana_]

Labels labels labels labels! Gah!

There are people who are sexual sadists, who get off on the infliction of physical pain but who have no desire whatsoever to dominate their partner in the sense that the BDSM community understands.

I think this is mostly a problem with the labels we need to have to help with communication that ends up hindering communication.

"Dominant" and "submissive" are the most common labels in BDSM and D/s. Everyone basically gets lumped into one or the other when they aren't necessarily part of that group. There simply isn't enough use of the labels Top, bottom, sadist, masochist, etc as groups in their own right. And it encompasses a lot of what's been said. People want to feel accepted so they use Dominant or submissive. Or because not enough people use the alternative and more descriptive labels, new people don't learn what they are soon enough. It ends up with people who aren't really compatible trying to get together and losing time/energy, possibly getting feelings hurt. I don't think that necessarily makes people "fake." If they're doing it on purpose, sure. But I don't think that is what's happening with the majority.

But then, that's the reason I separate D/s from BDSM. They are connected but not the same at all.

~kiana

 

[intothewoods]

Hmm, I get nervous when people begin to play therapist with nothing as far as experience and training to back up what they see as rearranging who a person is and feeling it is better. Even with training and experience, it is not an easy thing to pull off, and certainly is not coming from a place where the therapist decides they know the person better than themselves or that person does. Of course, if you read the sites, a lot promote this idea that a good Dom/me knows their submissive to that extent and is better than any therapist...unfortunately, it is not something which is usually based on fact as much as ego boosting.

Catalina

This is a great post.

 

[faeriefire]

so confusing

"Dominant" and "submissive" are the most common labels in BDSM and D/s. Everyone basically gets lumped into one or the other when they aren't necessarily part of that group. There simply isn't enough use of the labels Top, bottom, sadist, masochist, etc as groups in their own right.

Can I just say, as someone who is completely new to this that a week ago I thought all it took to be a sub was being beaten on and all it took to be a Dom was doing the beating? I don't know if that's the case for anyone who doesn't take the time to read and research, but I partially understand why there are so many 'fakers' out there on both ends of play. It seems like there's even a heirarchy on this board with everyone making assumptions about each other and what it takes to be true, real or genuine. My prior assumptions about a D/s relationship as exclusively sadistic didn't make BDSM at all appealing. It took reading a story about what I now consider a true D/s relationship (with give and take from both parties) to make me think there was something to BDSM and I should learn more.

Reading through this thread it seems that being real or a faker is partially determined by what comes from within that individual, but at the same time the people they interact with also label them positively or negatively. At the end of the day I have zero practical experience and I wonder how all the "real" folks out there got to where they are. Is there a period of training? Or is there just being a faker and finally figuring yourself out and wallah, you're real? Because everyone has a slightly different definition...and I'm still formulating mine Whew, a bit of rambling on my part...*grins*

faeriefire

 

[FungiUg]

Can I just say, as someone who is completely new to this that a week ago I thought all it took to be a sub was being beaten on and all it took to be a Dom was doing the beating?

I can see how you'd get that, even though the applicable labels there would be more likely masochist and sadist.

Reading through this thread it seems that being real or a faker is partially determined by what comes from within that individual, but at the same time the people they interact with also label them positively or negatively.

That's very well put. I'd say someone I personally would label as a faker is someone who is pretending to be something they are not. That could be because they are pretending or because I feel there are identifying with a label that doesn't apply, but in general more likely the former than the latter.

I wonder how all the "real" folks out there got to where they are. Is there a period of training? Or is there just being a faker and finally figuring yourself out and wallah, you're real?

Well, I'd probably use the term "education" rather than "training", since training implies a few things. But certainly, people I have spoken to who practice stuff that falls under the umbrella term "BDSM" have all gone through an education process.

For myself, I'm not sure I can look back and say "I was a faker". Actually, not entirely true: I managed to fake being monogamous in a marriage for 8 years. But with BDSM I would identify more with "newbie" rather than "faker". The strange thing is in many ways I still feel like a newbie.

Anyway, I'd say that we all have to learn this stuff: what we ourselves want and are capable of, and how that interacts with other people. And it's an ongoing process.

So to bring that back to the "fakers", they'd be the people who claim they already know it all and have it all sorted and are experts in everything, and that their way is the only real/true way, etc, etc. Whereas the real people that I respect tend to be more honest about their failings, inabilities and are willing to listen and learn.

So hopefully that's a little less confusing for you. On the other hand, it may be more confusing. I never claimed to be perfect!

 

[madetotakeit]

"Dominant" and "submissive" are the most common labels in BDSM and D/s. Everyone basically gets lumped into one or the other when they aren't necessarily part of that group. There simply isn't enough use of the labels Top, bottom, sadist, masochist, etc as groups in their own right.

This is true. As words they are something we are all familiar with the general concepts. Stay around on the board and there will be a label thread pop up. (It seems like we are about due. It has been over a month since this was rehashed. Gee it didn't take me long to get jaded to that.) Homburg has made some great arguments in other threads and I am seeing his view that most fall into the Top or bottom category yet go for the Dom and sub labels. Certainly not true for all, but...not going there. Let's just say that yes, labels cause derision and leave it at that.

Can I just say, as someone who is completely new to this that a week ago I thought all it took to be a sub was being beaten on and all it took to be a Dom was doing the beating? I don't know if that's the case for anyone who doesn't take the time to read and research, but I partially understand why there are so many 'fakers' out there on both ends of play. It seems like there's even a heirarchy on this board with everyone making assumptions about each other and what it takes to be true, real or genuine. My prior assumptions about a D/s relationship as exclusively sadistic didn't make BDSM at all appealing. It took reading a story about what I now consider a true D/s relationship (with give and take from both parties) to make me think there was something to BDSM and I should learn more.

Misconceptions plague BDSM. Personally I believe it has been that way since day one and will be until the last second. It's the nature of the beast. I accept that it is not universally understood. Truthfully if it were I'm not sure it would hold the appeal for many-and I include myself in that count on some level. Some want the bondage and the masochism, some want the domination and masochism...and they are all correct for that person. It is what you want it to be. Add your own flavors, pick your colors, however you put it just make it the ones that you want and all will be fine. When I first starting considering where I fall into this grand scheme, I wasn't sure how I felt about the harsher aspects. Years later, more understanding and finally having had just the slightest taste, I chuckle at the way I used to think. That's just me though, some never want that. For me, I would say I have a budding masochist in me that looking back was there all along just constantly ignored. You certainly don't have to like it to get your membership label.

Reading through this thread it seems that being real or a faker is partially determined by what comes from within that individual, but at the same time the people they interact with also label them positively or negatively. At the end of the day I have zero practical experience and I wonder how all the "real" folks out there got to where they are. Is there a period of training? Or is there just being a faker and finally figuring yourself out and wallah, you're real? Because everyone has a slightly different definition...and I'm still formulating mine Whew, a bit of rambling on my part...*grins*

faeriefire

I would say there is a hierarchy to the boards and you will get several different answers as to who sits at the top. From my observation I would have to say that those who I would say are in the top 10 spots are the ones least likely to be caught in a statement along the lines of "this is how I see it and therefore it must be the real way." Any such arrogance is usually shot down pretty quick, no arrows spared. Everyone's journey to how they got here is as unique as they are. The best way to get an idea is to dig through the threads and the library. There are gems of insight and wisdom spread throughout it, sometimes in the most unexpected places. I like FungiUg's term education over training. It seems more apropos. Training does imply other things and education comes before training begins, at least it should. Fakers are fakers...ones prone to deceit for personal benefit. There is no leather clad fairy that strikes you with its magical flogger and says, "You have been a good pretender, NOW you can proceed to the real thing." If you have it in you, on some level you know. Work on formulating your definition of you, that is the only one that counts anyway.

 

[bholderman]

Im a fake Dom, in fact Im still scratching my head as to how everyone got the impression I was one.

Sheesh, all I want to do is strap someone down to my table and "have dinner."

 

[Homburg]

Im a fake Dom, in fact Im still scratching my head as to how everyone got the impression I was one.

Sheesh, all I want to do is strap someone down to my table and "have dinner."

Brad, you're not a fake dom. You never claimed to be one.

 

[FungiUg]

Sheesh, all I want to do is strap someone down to my table and "have dinner."

Dom!

 

[faeriefire]

giving credit

I just thought I'd note that the first paragraph from my post above was not mine...it was from kiana in one of the earlier boxes. Grrr. Eventually I'll figure out this quote thing when posting.

 

[Evil_Geoff]

Being one of those "more of a sadist than a Dominant, per se" kinda guys, I don't have any problem dealing with the submissives so long as they're submitting to the pain I'm going to inflict on them. The rest of the stuff is icing on the cake as far as I'm concerned.

Until I reached the point where I was comfortable enough in my skin to accept that truth about myself though, I used the label "Dominant" while operating in the BDSM realm.

Not fake, just hadn't fully reached self awareness and acceptance. It's a silly little thing called growth. People do that from time to time.

 

[Homburg]

Being one of those "more of a sadist than a Dominant, per se" kinda guys, I don't have any problem dealing with the submissives so long as they're submitting to the pain I'm going to inflict on them. The rest of the stuff is icing on the cake as far as I'm concerned.

Until I reached the point where I was comfortable enough in my skin to accept that truth about myself though, I used the label "Dominant" while operating in the BDSM realm.

Not fake, just hadn't fully reached self awareness and acceptance. It's a silly little thing called growth. People do that from time to time.

Excellent post, EG. I've long called myself a work in progress. I hope to keep that work progressing too.