Red Light, Green Light: A question on submission
I've been wondering about the word submissive. That someone could have the qualities of submissiveness without being interested in kink-styled submission (that is, being someone's submissive) and that likewise someone could have Dominant personality traits while also taking on the role of submissive in a BDSM-style relationship.
I read somewhere that obedience doesn't mean a willingness to be treated like a doormat. Rather, obedience comes from a willingness to listen, to understand, and a desire to express interest. The ability to discern and to follow a good leader. The ability to trust.
Maybe the larger scope of submissiveness is the same. Most people see submissiveness as a sign of weakness, of being without vision or motivation. But maybe submissiveness can be characterized in part by a desire to learn, and a desire to explore oneself with someone who is capable and trustworthy. May be submissiveness is an expression of power that doesn't need to exert itself.
Personally, I enjoy helping people self-actualize. I enjoy empowering others and helping them to see their ideal self in the mirror every day. watching them bridge the gap between who they are and who they could be is extremely fulfilling. In relationships, this desire often translates to taking a supportive position as much as possible, and also to being attentive to the small things that can so easily be taken for granted.
I don't think this aspect of myself Is explicitly submissive, but I do think it is an expression of my desire to foster self confidence and strength in others. The caveat Is that being a relatively dominant woman in other aspects of my life means that in relationships it is a relief not to have to be in a position of authority 24/7. That there is someone willing to look beyond my professional and relatively direct personality to find someone worth nourishing and pampering.
Being submissive for me means having this space to be soft and silly. I don't have to be in business mode all the time, And I can be attentive to my partner In a more feminine state of mind. Basically, it allows me to explore a side of myself that the rest of the world doesn't need to see.
But is this the same as being a submissive? Is having the quality of submissiveness or the desire to be submissive to a partner the same as engaging in a lifestyle characterized by a D/s dynamic?
My instinctive response is to say yes, but there are plenty of vanilla relationships that follow gender-constructed norms of dominance and submission. So what distinguishes these vanilla romances from something more intense?
For me, the main thing that sticks out with BDSM relationships versus vanilla ones is the intentionality and the creativity. There is such a clear focus on consent and safety, on proper care for one another, and on communication in BDSM primarily because of the depth to which one can explore their sexuality — ranging from light-hearted roleplay to the riskiness of edgeplay. Sex, fetish play, and physical intimacy also seemed to take a greater priority in these kinds of relationships than in vanilla ones.
So maybe, the difference between just being submissive and being a submissive is in part the commitment to one's own self exploration. The decision, that is, to take part in a kind of sexual adventure that can take one to one's limits. One can be submissive without establishing proper boundaries, setting safe words, or communicating fantasies. One can be submissive and still be abusive. One can be submissive and still be selfish.
So being a submissive does require more than just personality. It takes more than just a natural affinity or demure quality, but a willingness to devote time, effort, and openness to possibility presented by a Dom(me).
The mild-mannered nature that I think of when I hear the word submissive stands at odds with the role of “submissive” in a BDSM-styled relationship. Anyone can be a submissive If they choose to be, if they choose to commit themselves to the role. And fostering the qualities of submissiveness in oneself I imagine is just as much about practice and commitment.
I've only just begun to think about this question, the distance between having the qualities of someone in a role versus actually being in the role, but I find it fascinating. There are so many different forms of submission, in so many different forms of dominance as well, that peering into the complex depths of the question will only lead to more questions.
And I very much look forward to that.
