More on the Spheres of Dominance

After some comments from a trusted friend, I rethought the Spheres of Dominance model a bit and decided that a Venn diagram would be more appropriate because each of these spheres does interact with the other ones in at some moderate amount.

I suppose how much you feel the interaction of the individual spheres depends on your world view, religion, etc.  While I agree they aren't entirely divorced from one another I'd say that someone's bedroom proclivities has very little to do with how they function in the public world but probably much more to do with how they interact in private relationships.

Perhaps if Christian fundamentalists drew this diagram it would look more like a concentric circle diagram with all circles completely contained within the others.  They frequently argue that what happens in the bedroom and private realm will destroy all of society if it doesn't fit their neat and tidy 1950's nuclear family model, whether or not that's actually biblically supported is another matter entirely.

I think most of us liberals would say that for example gay marriage would only affect society in a positive way as it would promote more tolerance of differences.  We could say the same for kink acceptance as well.

Anyway, to be continued...

Penis Obsession

I read a very interesting interview on SubmissiveProud of what he calls a "Fierce Feminist".  She says about misconceptions about dominant women: "That we are as enamored with your penis [and the control of it] as you are. There are of course variances from woman to woman but I have never met a woman, vanilla or otherwise, who really gave a lot of thought to her man's penis without first being prompted by her male partner... Men do more than enough of that sort of obsessing for the both of them."  I couldn't agree more!  Every sub I talk to wants to know what I want to do with their penis.  This gets back to my post about men setting the tone for the expectations of a dominant woman and how, I think, men see submission as a sexual act and women see it as meekness, humbleness.

According to Mirriam-Webster submission is the following:

1. a : a legal agreement to submit to the decision of arbitrators & b : an act of submitting something (as for consideration or inspection); also : something submitted (as a manuscript)
2. : the condition of being submissive, humble, or compliant
3. : an act of submitting to the authority or control of another

Here is the problem.  I think men see submission as partly definition number one with the "act of submitting something" for consideration, inspection & definition number three the "act of submitting to control" and that something is their anatomy.  While men aren't understanding the definition wrong, they aren't really offering most of us women something we really care about.  Yes, of course, we prefer a man not spend all day wanking or thinking about sex with other women.  Certainly, we want say over the amount and types of sex we explore in the bedroom.  Do we really want to monitor your penis all day?  No.


I had the recent ex wear a chastity device to work.  I didn't really need worry that he was porking someone at the office but the device just made it so I don't need to even think about that possibility.  I could then think even less about penis than I already did... not much at all.  And while I did enjoy occasionally teasing him with it on,  it wasn't to cause him pain for my benefit.  It was most a test of my attractiveness.  So I got news for the boys, I made it all about me and not you.


Submission for most women is mostly definition number two: meekness, humbleness.  When we want a submissive man, we are seeking for a man to be humble and compliant.  And while some see penis control as a means to that end, I feel that that doesn't really work in the long run.  I really don't think penis has anything to do with it.  The penis-oriented submission is what men like for arousal purposes.  They are tickling their own pickle with the idea of submitting their penis for inspection, rejection, and abuse.  They aren't learning how to be better men because of it.  They are only getting what they want: to get off.


The pro-domme/pr0n industry is catering to this fantasy.  The guys that wank to this stuff most often go back to "their normal selves" once the wanking is done.  They keep thinking if the abuse was a little longer or the penis control was more constant in their lives that they can carry this pickle tickle into their daily lives and the arousal state will be longer and more intense.  Do you see anything in there about what they want to do for the women they claim to worship?  Nope.  Why?  They aren't worshipping women.  They are worshipping the arousal state and the object that provides it.  And I chose the word "object" very carefully.


So I argue that M/s relationships cannot, most often, provide women with the submission they are seeking from men simply because it isn't genuine.  Even if they do all the things that she asks of him, the intention is not there.  The intention is for himself primarily.  


We don't need to settle for this as I saw many do on She Makes the Rules.  I completely disagree that women get one thing and men get another and that's okay.  It's not okay to live disingenuous lives.  Men need to learn what true humbleness is and that no amount of paddling is going to create it.  And if they aren't interested without the kink/penis element, then they aren't submissive and should stop pretending for it to be.  


I actually had some guy tell me that he saw submissiveness as a sexual-orientation.  That about sums it up for me.  Ladies, we are often barking up the wrong tree and it is hard many times to tell whether you are dealing with a masochist or true submissive.  Believe me, I know.  I think, in general, we need to stop seeking men on places like collarme, even if we do have some kink interests.  The right man will be open to bedroom things as well.  It's far better that he not come to the table with that being his primary reason for looking for a relationship in the first place.

D/s as a Spiritual Path

It's not a new concept to talk about bdsm as a spiritual path.  People have made the connection between the pain mystics inflict upon themselves in the form of self-flagellation and the headspace that pain inflicted upon subs by a dom/me.  I'd like to take this a step further though.

If pain in the sexual context is akin to mysticism then the path of my version of D/s is closer to Buddhism or Bhakti Tantra.  Realizing that we are really part of a great Oneness, losing the self into that Oneness, and serving that Oneness every moment of every day sounds a lot like Buddhism, no?  The difference is that instead of meditation there is service to another, which could be closer to Bhakti Tantra.  If I just spouted a bunch of gibberish to you then hang I'm about to explain this better.

Buddhism, also called The Way, is a spiritual path that is about recognizing our Oneness with Buddha Consciousness, or a collective oneness with the universe.  The idea is to lose the self to this oneness.  That is the goal.... to give into losing your identity in favor of this nirvana state of Oneness.  Buddhism is called The Way because it is direct instructions for how to achieve this... Unfortunately, trying to read the symbolism of another culture is lot like translating the rosetta stone... Very few have the tools.

Hinduism is what Buddhism comes from.  The goals of the two religions are almost identical.  What Buddha did differently is take away all the god-related stuff and focused solely on the a practice that worked on the inside of the person.  Hinduism conversely embraces several different practices including religious devotion to reach the same goal.  Instead of trying to explain the immensity that is Hinduism I want to focus on the practices that I feel are relevant.

Bhakti means devotion or participation.  It is the active devotional relationship with the Absolute through ritual and service.  It doesn't seem in behavior a lot different than Christian devotion to Jesus.  The difference here is that the goals are different.  You can't become one with Jesus in the Christian tradition. That would probably be considered blasphemy (except to Gnostics).  The devotional service for Christians is both the means and the end.  In Hinduism, however, the Bhakta (the adherent) becomes one with god through this activity.

If you've had any exposure to Tantra it's probably either as the kama sutra and it's unusual and acrobatic love-making positions or perhaps it's the hyper sexed-up, how-to type manual for how to have the best orgasms.  Tantra is way more than either of these things.  Tantra is a spiritual path, first and foremost.  It honors primarily the divine feminine and the gurus (teachers) are all female.

I don't want to go into great depth here about the ins and outs of real Tantra in this post.  What I want to do instead is give a brief spiritual base for the type of relationship I seek.  I seek Oneness with my partner.  I want to initiate him onto that path.  I want to act as teacher, guide, and mother... and that is in a way a form of service in return.  I want him to take the role of servant and lover, to live in service of our unity.