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...

Spheres of Dominance

(My model.  Please give credit where credit is due.  Thank you.)

Model for the Spheres of Dominance.

As I understand it, there are three spheres of in which dominance can play a role: public, private, and bedroom.  Within these three spheres you find the majority of views of where male or female leadership should reside.

Public, represented by the brown sphere, is the realm of public social behavior.  It includes legal and social treatment of both genders.  Currently, one would say that in the United States currently male is still the dominant (in all spheres really).  While laws have been changed to make things more equal there are continually forces that want to overturn them and socially men just still have the upper hand.

Private, represented by the blue sphere, is the realm of personal loving relationships.  Again, most often men are assumed to be leader in the home although more and more women are stepping up the plate to change this.  It's still a man's world and plenty of women, particularly religious ones, are eager to give up their rightful control in favor of lack of responsibility.  Vile, frankly.

Bedroom, represented by the red sphere, is exactly what it sounds like.  It's who is the aggressor in the bedroom.  This is very much a toss up.  Plenty of people who are dominant in their public life choose to let go of that in the bedroom and play the opposite role.  Plenty are the same in every sphere.  It depends.  It's, of course, traditional for the man to take the lead in this arena but plenty of guys today like an aggressive woman, bdsm or not.

Now for me, I'm interested in the private sphere primarily, even and above the bedroom sphere.  While yes I am aggressive in the bedroom it and would prefer both spheres to be in charge of, not having the bedroom would not affect my behavior in the private sphere.... they are completely separate in my opinion.

So ideally, the yellow line represents what I control versus the matriarchy femdom types, represented by the green line, that seek to impose female leadership in every sphere or the bedroom only types that are merely kinksters, sensation players, etc.

Further, I'd like to add here that while I intend to lead my home I do not have an agenda to turn all spheres into matriarchy nor do I seek to make all households look like my ideal.  I firmly believe that my dominance is part of my nature and that everyone's nature is their own to figure out: self-determination.  I do no intend to advocate imposing my beliefs or what's right for me on others.  I think that's a foolhardy endeavor.

That said, in all situations where I have seen female led households they have functioned better and the relationship has lasted longer and with more happiness... but my sample size is small.  :)

Lastly, it is my opinion that the world would function a lot better if the genders were equally represented in the government.  I believe that men have made a giant mess just like they do in a home when left to their own devices.... Women are far under-represented and I do believe that in an equal society we'd be far more functional as a species.

Let's Talk About Kink

While I don't think that D/s is or should be centered around sex, that does not at all mean that I am not sex positive or unadventurous. In my 35 years, I've done more than most people do in their whole lives.... and I did that before 30. I'm not repressed. I have no hidden desires. If I'm at all interested in trying something, I try it. It's just not a big deal.

Most of what I like in the kink realm is centered around ownership/vulnerabiliy. I liken my ownership interests to the Hindu signs of marriage on a woman. For those that are not familiar, there are items that a Hindu wife is supposed to wear depending on the region to show that she is taken. They often include some of the following: sindoor, mangalsutra, bangles, toe rings, and anklets. It doesn't matter if you don't know what a sindoor is. What matters is that I like my own version of signs that a man is mine.

This might include a chastity device while he is away from me, a jewelry style collar that can be worn all the times, a tattoo, and of course upon marriage a wedding band (Yes, I want to marry my sub.). To me, a wedding band by itself is far too easy to slip off. I want a man to want to feel possessed by me.

Beyond this, I like to be the primary aggressor in the bedroom.  No, I don't expect him to lie there like a dead fish.  I want active participation.  I just want to be the one that throws him against the wall, holds his neck, and proceeds to play with an ear or a nipple.  I want to smother him with my breasts or vulva.  There's nothing sexier than a man coated in my juices.

I'm also okay with a bit of bondage.  This ties (pun intended) back into the vulnerability that I seek emotionally.  It doesn't work if the only time he can be vulnerable to me is when he is strapped to the bed.  It has to be a physical component of an already vulnerable position.

I've done the strap-on thing.  I was okay with it.  There is a bit of a power high from it but doesn't get me off.  I think this is one of those things that's better in the mind than in reality.  I don't like this idea of "using" a man sexually.  I get the psychology here but you are more likely to get that with another man than with a woman.  We just don't have the equipment for that.

So yes, I have interest in *some* kink.  It just isn't on the level of hermaphrodite hentai (ROTFL).  Like any woman I want to be wanted, and in my case I want him to be willing to offer far more in devotion than a vanilla man would.

My Vision

What does the word "union" mean to you?  To me it is what love ought to be.  The joining of two people on many different levels.  Physical can only carry you so far.  There has to be emotional and mental connections as well.  Ideally, both partners would understand each other well enough that they can tell what each other is thinking without a word.  

I want a union over which I am the guardian and ruler.  I want to be entrusted with the health and well-being of the relationship and rule over my partner.  Trust is a key word here.  We all know that submission is something that must be freely given and that submission must be based on trust and faith....and to me, preferably love and admiration.  Well, it's one thing to trust someone in the bedroom for a brief duration of play and something else to trust someone to rule you as a person.

This requires something many "subs" are not capable of being: selfless.  It also requires a certain amount of dependency that men have a really hard time with.  If you expect to be fully autonomous while being in a relationship, you are not the type I am looking for at all.

I want a symbiotic relationship.  Where both partners can be truly open and free to share their feelings and accept the love and affection of the other.  I want to be trusted to be let inside to see the frightened, helpless creature he hides away from the rest of the world.  I want to be able to share that part of me as well and to know that we can count on each other to cradle each other when needed.

Yes, I'm comfortable being the strong one most of the time.  I can carry that burden with ease and grace. I can move mountains for the one who will love me completely.  I just need to be able to be emotional and sensitive.... the way I really am.  I need to be appreciated and reassured.  I need to be listened to and treated with respect.

I don't need a knight in shining armor that hides his feelings and provides physical comforts for me.  While yes, physical comforts are fine and dandy... but they are only half the man I need.  The emotional comes first.  Without that the rest is hollow.