Recently I have started reading a book. It’s the current book at the online kinky bookclub. I’m not very far into the book, but so far I ‘m enjoying it more than the book before. In the beginning, as the main charaters are introduced, the submisive is described.
She is intelligent, intuitiove, aggressive and successful in all areas of her life. Yet, behind closed doors, she’s the opposite. So far, do good.
But then the dom has a theory:
I suspect a life composed of endles responsibilities contributed to her desire to give up control and truly let herself go.
That sentence made me mad. It’s a theory I had come across before and every time it rubs me the wrong way. I never could really say what it was that I found so appaling. I was personally offended by it. While I understand that this might fit to other submissives, but for me it never was true. It’s the same stereotype that successful males secretly, or not so secretly go to see a Domina.
When it comes to submissive women, as I identify myself, there are two main ideas, I came across.
Either it’s the successful woman, with a life full of responsibilities, who simply wants to not be in charge, but let go and have the dom be in charge.
Or it’s the quiet and shy woman, who needs to someone by her side, who will lead her – and hopefully empower her or she is happy to stay the way she is.
While I was very shy growing up, I also wanted to be more in the centre of attention. I never wanted to be the one to choose which movie we’d see watch with friends or what we’d have for dinner. But I think being shy and wanting others to make decisions for me was only part of me being that way.
Today I’m quite successful. I’m in charge of several project and enjoy telling people what I expect of and from them. I learnt that even people who are leaders or seem to be dominant also appreciate when they can simply have to follow instructions. I guess that is what makes those people good leaders. But I’m deviating.
Did my desire to be submissive or to submit change over time? Yes and no. Even when I didn’t have the right vocabulary to explain the desires I was feeling, I was submissive. So back when I was all shy and stuff. Today too I feel that need. There were years where other things were more important and I needed to work through things. During that time my desires were secondary.
Back to the submissive’s description in the book. It’s a characterisazion I have heard men use to describe me, or better yet explain my submissive desires to me. As I said before, I always found that very offensive and hurtful. I feel saying something like that implies that my successful, dominant, aggressive part of me is not real, or at least less me. It implies that both things are inseperably linked and if I am successful I need to have submission as an outlet.
If I take that a bit further, would that mean that not being any or all of the things the submissive is described as, one doesn’t have the desire to submit?
I don’t see my submissive side and the side with all the responsibilities as two sides of one coin. Both are a part of me, like many other things. But they are not interlinked.
Saying “I suspect a life composed of endles responsibilities contributed to her desire to give up control and truly let herself go” diminishes as well my submission as any other part of my life. I’m not submissive because I’m successful or intelligent or shy. I’m submissive because that’s part of me. I will lower my eyes, kneel in front of him and say “Yes Sir”. I will also stand in front a room of people, give a talk and be confident and lead.
For me it’s not a contradiction and shouldn’t ever be for anyone. But it seems that some people can’t grasp the idea that I or anyone else can be both and not use one to explain the other.