Soft Dominance Discussion

[liqueur]

You seem to choose not to get it.

This

 

[Primalex]

You seem to choose not to get it.

Well, you seem to ignore that the topic is not submission, but dominance.

Her Dominance excites me. I do not fear Her. I adore Her and seek Her attention, touch, teasing, approval, AND feminine authority.

So you seek her approval but you are not afraid of her disapproval?

 

[NancyPan]

Well, you seem to ignore that the topic is not submission, but dominance.

Don’t be silly. There is little pleasure in submission without Dominance.What I think you choose not to understand (or accept, I’m not sure which) is that some of us simply enjoy the pleasure of submitting. It has nothing to do with fear (although of course there are some fear junkies out there).

So you seek her approval but you are not afraid of her disapproval?

I do not “fear” her by any stretch of the imagination. I am confident in Her love for me and trust that She would never knowingly hurt me. I am very troubled by Her disapproval or disappointment, but I am not afraid of Her. I know that, if I do disappoint Her, She will correct me and give me an opportunity to to improve and learn. She leads much more with carrots than sticks.

 

[Blake83]

It's all very individual...like for me I would never be comfortable degrading a woman or anything that borders on the threat or act of causing harm. That said, I know there are people out there who may thrive on those - both as doms and subs...absolutely no judgement from me, but I know it's just not my particular style.

To me, it's all about about the power dynamic and an element of obediance/subservience in the pursuit of pleasure, for both sides. That can be emotional, verbal, or physical and most often a mix of them all. All of those can be just as much a part of "soft dominance" as they would be what I'll term "hard dominance" which I think is where the stereotype often leads people when they think about d/s dynamics.

Again, just from my perspective, I think the softer side of d/s for me takes the focus off of the objectifying, degrading, etc. often just for the sake of it and puts a focus back on the power dynamic in dare I say a more sensual way which I like. It's also always a sliding scale and communication is key to determine where on the spectrum of "soft" to "hard" the dynamic will be for a given encounter or relationship.

End of the day, different strokes for different folks...as long as it's built on a strong foundation of trust and caring, to each their own!

 

[justyouraveragedaniel]

I tend to lean more towards a soft domme when I'm in a dynamic with a male...
Well... Certain men.

I'm not into sph, or degrading...
I like to do a little orgasm control, but since I myself have a kink for a man orgasming.. I'm not into denial...

I feel like there is such a big distinction between orgasm control and orgasm denial that often gets overlooked. Surely, denial is a part of that. But I like giving up control--maybe that means I'm denied, maybe that means I cum. The point is, that whatever my cock is permitted to do, is because the person controlling it wants that to happen.

 

[NancyPan]

I feel like there is such a big distinction between orgasm control and orgasm denial that often gets overlooked. Surely, denial is a part of that. But I like giving up control--maybe that means I'm denied, maybe that means I cum. The point is, that whatever my cock is permitted to do, is because the person controlling it wants that to happen.

Entirely agree. Knowing that She decides when I orgasm has made a significant ifference in our relationship in many ways. It has become very important to me that it is Her decision when I deserve it, and sometimes She tells me that She wants my focus entirely on Her, so I know not to even hope for a release. Her forbidding any unsupervised (or unauthorized) masturbation has also been very powerful. Perhaps it is obvious, but this dynamic would not work if I could jerk off whenever I desired.

 

[average_red]

How does the Stockholm syndrome fit in there then?

I will get to Stockholm in due time.

Part of the problem is that you are not using useful/meaningful definitions.

What is a vanilla relationship? Odds are if your society has marriages that average 30+ years there is very little difference between soft Dom and vanilla, but if a 10 year anniversary is considered an accomplishment, there is probably a vast number of differences between soft Dom and vanilla relationships.

This is fairly self explanatory because in order for a relationship to last you need two things: A power exchange to determine how conflicts will be resolved in a reliable manner, and mutual benefit to ensure that both parties are willing to put in the effort to stay. The simplest way to provide both is to assign one person both authority over the other, and responsibility for the other. That is the "essence" of a soft Dom relationship; authority and responsibility joined properly.... Only difference is that the soft Dom relationship allows both parties to openly negotiate their needs, and possibly their EXTREME needs within those boundaries. I know a vanilla couple married for 60 years and the husband only put his foot down twice. Meanwhile a soft Dom/sub with brat tamer/brat tendencies may need to put his food down twice in a single week, because they ENJOY playing with the extremes of what could otherwise be seen as a normal relationship. Soft Dom is almost an extreme version of a traditional husband, twisted to focus on particular dynamics, or the reversal of those dynamics.

Your interpretation of fear is also just about useless.

Firstly, the simple fact that you can lose something that you want is not fear, it is just an expression of preference. Me following through with my commitments because I "fear" breaking my word, or a sub who obeys me out of a "fear" that she will disappoint me is ENTIRELY different from an employee who obeys me from fear that I will have him or his family killed. They might be the same word, but they are very different concepts.

Secondly Stockholm syndrome is actually a method of REMOVING fear. The subjects empathize with their captors as a method to gain the sympathy, and therefore better treatment, safety, and security from their captors. It is however a GENUINE conversion. The captives genuinely become invested in the well-being of their captors and stop feeling any fear of their captors, and will continue to support their captors even when they are set free. Stockholm syndrome is not based on fear, it is based on empathy, although the empathy was probably based on fear, the fear burned away and left only empathy.

 

[Primalex]

Odds are if your society has marriages that average 30+ years there is very little difference between soft Dom and vanilla, but if a 10 year anniversary is considered an accomplishment, there is probably a vast number of differences between soft Dom and vanilla relationships.

Uhm. Marriage longevity as proxy for relationship quality or relationship structure is pretty questionable. But yay, if there is a vast number of differences, let's focus on those 10 years and less.

A power exchange to determine how conflicts will be resolved in a reliable manner, and mutual benefit to ensure that both parties are willing to put in the effort to stay. The simplest way to provide both is to assign one person both authority over the other, and responsibility for the other. That is the "essence" of a soft Dom relationship

I'm confused.

Is the "hard Dom" relationship then the more complex way to provide both? And what is the hard Dom missing? Authority? Responsibility?

Meanwhile a soft Dom/sub with brat tamer/brat tendencies may need to put his food down twice in a single week

How is this still soft? And I'm not sure if we have met the same kind of brats, because the brats I know will say:"Awwwe, I hope you didn't hurt your foot while putting it down. Now go and make me a sandwich."

to assign one person both authority over the other [...] is the "essence" of a soft Dom relationship
[...]
Only difference is that the soft Dom relationship allows both parties to openly negotiate their needs

If negotiation determines the outcome, in what sense is one partner the authority over the other? This contradicts itself.

Sorry, but I don't buy your argument. You argue that lasting relationships require a power exchange in which one person has authority to resolve conflicts. Why doesn't mutual decision-making, negotiated compromise, or domain-specific leadership based upon competence satisfy that requirement? And which of these is mutually exclusive with a soft Dom relationship?

Me following through with my commitments because I "fear" breaking my word, or a sub who obeys me out of a "fear" that she will disappoint me is ENTIRELY different from an employee who obeys me from fear that I will have him or his family killed. They might be the same word, but they are very different concepts.

They are not different concepts, you are just changing the magnitude and the morality.

Secondly Stockholm syndrome is actually a method of REMOVING fear. The subjects empathize with their captors as a method to gain the sympathy, and therefore better treatment, safety, and security from their captors. It is however a GENUINE conversion. The captives genuinely become invested in the well-being of their captors and stop feeling any fear of their captors, and will continue to support their captors even when they are set free. Stockholm syndrome is not based on fear, it is based on empathy, although the empathy was probably based on fear, the fear burned away and left only empathy.

Well, I have bad news for you, but you just argued my point that devotion can grow from fear.

 

[Scooter58]

I just clicked into this thread by mistake, read a little bit and realized I’m not smart enough to be here. I thought I was a deep thinker but I’m a total novice in here.
I’m going to quietly slip out the back door.

 

[Emma_O]

"...Call it what you want. If it works for you, it doesn't need a box or a strict set of rules..."

Wisest thing I think I've read here in these forums yet. And it need not refer to just the dom/sub thing, or even anything sexual. It could be about relationships, or just life in general.

 

[Emma_O]

"...I place greater emphasis on emotional and psychological control...I'm more adept at...emotional manipulation to reinforce the sub's obedience..."

I realize I paraphrased your post. You had it more dressed up with niceties in your original post, but the underlying theme still seems apparent. By dressing it up in your post, it is almost as if you're trying to manipulate the readers here in much the same way you might manipulate your sub. And it spooks me. Maybe I shouldn't even bother to post to this thread, or on this particular board, but for some reason, this post struck a very dissonant chord with me. I felt compelled. Maybe it is the subtle sense of pride you seemed to take in psychologically and emotionally controlling another. I don't think the dom/sub thing would ever be for me, in any shape or form. But to each their own.

 

[BillyWalrus]

"...I place greater emphasis on emotional and psychological control...I'm more adept at...emotional manipulation to reinforce the sub's obedience..."

I realize I paraphrased your post. You had it more dressed up with niceties in your original post, but the underlying theme still seems apparent. By dressing it up in your post, it is almost as if you're trying to manipulate the readers here in much the same way you might manipulate your sub. And it spooks me. Maybe I shouldn't even bother to post to this thread, or on this particular board, but for some reason, this post struck a very dissonant chord with me. I felt compelled. Maybe it is the subtle sense of pride you seemed to take in psychologically and emotionally controlling another. I don't think the dom/sub thing would ever be for me, in any shape or form. But to each their own.

I hope you don't ever feel that you can't express your POV. I may not agree with you all the time but I like reading what you have to say.

 

[average_red]

...

That was a masterful troll good sir, and if I had been in a better mood I would have absolutely swallowed the hook on it. Well done, you almost had me.

 

[average_red]

"... And it spooks me. Maybe I shouldn't even bother to post to this thread, or on this particular board, but for some reason, this post struck a very dissonant chord with me. I felt compelled. Maybe it is the subtle sense of pride you seemed to take in psychologically and emotionally controlling another. I don't think the dom/sub thing would ever be for me, in any shape or form. But to each their own.

Actually, that strong of an emotional reaction, and the types of emotions indicates a remarkable possibility that you might rather enjoy experimenting with the dynamic, so this might very much be the place for you... Hang around for a while, see how it affects you.

In the end manipulation of anything, a tool, an instrument, an animal, and even a person, is only judged by the effects it causes... Regardless, please feel free to continue hanging around and posting here.

 

[Shortstroke56]

I am in a Female Led Marriage, and have accepted (needed) my Wife’s leadership for many years. Her Dominance would definitely fit the description of “soft dominance” given here. It is never mean, but is definitely strict and intolerant of disrespect or disobedience. She frequently uses terms of endearment and will give directives in the form of requests (even though She knows I will of course comply.) “Honey, would you please fold the laundry and straighten out my panty drawer when you are done cleaning the bathrooms.”

She does use erotic humiliation because She knows it excites me. She chooses to say or do things that arouse me as both rewards and motivation, but also because it amuses Her to use Her feminine power to tease me. “You have been such a good panty boy. I’m thinking about letting you have pussy. Tell me why you think you deserve it.”

I desire Her approval and fear Her disapproval.

Well said.

 

[ToPleaseHim]

That was a masterful troll good sir, and if I had been in a better mood I would have absolutely swallowed the hook on it. Well done, you almost had me.

His points make a ton of sense to me and they are well-stated. Why would you step out of the fascinating conversation by calling his efforts “trolling?”