I Wonder Oh I Wonder
So, Blacksilk has posed me a question that I feel deserved more consideration than a comment box can offer. I’ll give it my best shot. If any readers have a question they would like to ask – go ahead. It may even lead to a post of its own as this particular one has done!
Do you ever wonder why you’re so submissive?
I have a few ideas. There’s a general debate between nature and nurture. Are you naturally submissive due to your genes? Or has it been conditioned into you by your upbringing and/or treatment by others? It’s a fairly common theory that tars lots of different behaviours with the same brush (Spent an age discussing this theory in regards to Caliban in The Tempest - was he born bad, or was it Prospero that made him so?). Personally if I were to ascribe to this I would say it was my nurturing.
See, I’m the youngest in the family. The baby. The youngest of a large family, predominantly of girls. I was also the product of a second marriage for both of my parents – and possibly unexpected due to their being a little more mature in years when I arrived. Due to the fact that it was a second marriage, most of my siblings had fledged already and I was left in a curious situation of being brought up in an only child environment. This all left me to depend a lot more on those around me rather than to fend for myself as I imagine I may have had to fight for my individuality more if I had brothers and sisters around me.
Leading to me not having a terribly independent streak, only surfacing in the latter years of adolescence. Take that a step further into sexual maturity and it is, I feel, a strong explanation for the submissive that is inherent within me.
But, you say. What about the love of the scratching and dom-ing of Mister?
I lay down the card of childhood once more – The only child gets her way more often than not.
A second, different theory of why I and people are submissive is that of the world of work. You know the deal – All those executives in big wig jobs just love to pay those Dominatrixes extortionate amounts to lick their PVC-clad boots and whatnot because they seek it as a balancing in their mental scales. Or something like that. In relation to yours truly, this can apply to a certain extent also.
Where I work, I have responsibility. I have duties. It’s fair to say some of the people there look up to me. I like to kick back and leave that behind when I pass over the threshold back to my dearest, darling Man. The pressure at work is something I don’t like to bring home and being sexually submissive and leaving the keys firmly in Mister’s hand is a way to escape that. The fact that he naturally falls into it kinda helps. He knows the effort I put in and worry at times I go through and he looks after me. He sends me to bed when I come home exhausted. I catch him looking at me, forehead creased in concern after my eyes open from a tired, nose-pinching squint. The bear-hug welcomes and enveloping cuddles last thing at night. It all leads to a relationship where his ‘looking after-ness’ translates into to the bedroom as him being in charge and making the decisions for me. For the majority of the time, of course, not 100%. 75% perhaps. I don’t know – numbers have never been my forte.
But, of course, theories can be bunkum.
I am submissive most of all because I enjoy it. It gets me off. It gets him off too. And of course it has much to do with the man I am with. I wouldn’t know for sure, as I haven’t been with anyone else, but who knows, if faced with another partner, I may be the one calling the shots and then too, it would be because I would be having a bloody good time doing it. Sex is subjective. Each to their own. That’s why it’s so fun. No one good screw is the same as another. There are two people here that make up the balance of submission and dominance and whatever the weighting, neither would go through with any of it if uncomfortable.
When we play those roles, live the labels of D/s (eugh at all the capitalisation protocol that goes on, but hey ho) I feel I am being me when I am subbing. When we switch, I know that although I am having the best of fun, it is a rôle, a character I put on. Mantle of the Domme. It is part of me, but not who I am. I am ultimately the submissive. When he draws near me, he exudes the air of subtle dominance that melts me in moments. As when I am in control, and I loosen his ties (if that’s how we’ve been going), it can take him a millisecond in which to overcome me and I have lost myself to him. And again note, I have to be in charge with the use of implements – the whip, the bonds, the wax. He needs nothing. Just him alone is all it takes. I give him everything when I am subbing. My heart. My body. My all.
I thank him once more for making me see what it is that makes up Me. Pandorah, the Inner Minx, Real Life Her.
Whoever I am, I am his. And that thrills me.
Rose said,
January 10, 2009 at 10:57 pm
Beautiful, Pandorah…
I think everyone would have their own list of things they could link the tendencies to be a submissive. I have my own list, as you have seen…
But those last two lines pretty much sum up why anyone would want to be a submissive, in my opinion……
As I said, simply beautiful, dear…
The Drinker said,
January 11, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Thoughtful and well-articulated as always.
I have always thought that labels are somewhat unhelpful; as you say yourself it gets you off. And that’s the main thing. But it is not always submission which pleases you, so you do whatever does please you in that moment. And so you are not a submissive entirely. But you are not dominant entirely either. So what are you? You are his.
Similarly, ILB describes himself as vanilla, but since we’ve been together a whole lotta light kink malarkey has been enjoyed. Not always, but some times. And the implicit semantic of vanilla as boring is also an unhelpful label – most of my best orgasms have come from missionary, so it could never be described as boring.
I have been told that I am submissive in the bedroom (definitely not outside of it hehe!), but often I will tell him what I want, what I want to role play, for example, even if I am asking for him to be in charge, and want to be submissive, that is still me proactively essentially demanding what I want. Therefore, not submissive?
I can’t think of anything to ask you. What did you have for lunch?
xx
ladypandorah said,
January 11, 2009 at 9:30 pm
Rose ~ Thank you, you have made me smile today – and nice to see you around my little blog!
Drinker ~ What a great comment! I can always trust on you! A while ago I too may have had the assumption that vanilla = boring. Very wrong of me. Labels are unhelpful and if you are categorised into a stereotype quite demoralising if that category is not what is socially deemed as exciting etc.
And lunch today was spent over at Mother’s. (Quite nice to live a 40 minute drive away from family – far enough away to escape, but not too far in order to visit when needed or wanted) We dined on a roasted fowl with all the trimmings. Yum. Followed by fruit salad/raspberries. Yum yum.
Pandorah x
The Drinker said,
January 13, 2009 at 6:53 pm
That’s tasty lunches.
I think my thing about labels extends into everything – I can clearly remember a time when saying you were into emo was actually quite cool. And then we all started justifying ourselves when emo became a style statement. I lovelovelove Death Cab For Cutie; they used to be emo, as emo is short for emotional music. Now emo means that sub punk poppy guitar wailing like My Chemical Romance. And boys in eyeliner. Which I am not anti per se…
Anyway, I suppose that labels are inevitable in a way – everyone categorises themselves in an us/them way, with labels being a good shorthand for many things, but if language is communication, then everyone has to know what you mean when you use a term. So, in that way, vanilla does mean boring, as the people that generally are vanilla would not need to categorise themselves as such (being largely unaware that there is such a kink community, believing themselves the norm), and so vanilla is usually a term of slight insult from the kink community to those they do, in fact, consider if not boring, then at the very least unadventurous. And there I baulk. I think I’m plenty adventurous, but there are the things which turn me on and the things which turn you on (vous, not tu, LadyP), and that’s all fine. So what do I term myself? Vanilla with codicils? With knobs on (hehehehe)?
xx
Elle said,
January 15, 2009 at 2:05 am
I’ve pondered this question as well. I have a post somewhere that talks about nature vs nurture. And I don’t think this question can ever be answered. It’s a little bit of both, I suspect, but I have a feeling nurture plays the larger role. If only because whenever we discuss this, we tend to talk about the things in our childhood which might explain us now, like you did in your post. But maybe the way we’re wired (nature) defines how our upbringing will affect us?
All that to say, I liked reading your thoughts about it!
ladypandorah said,
January 18, 2009 at 5:23 pm
Drinker ~ Ah…emo kids. Gotta love ‘em. Little dears. Rather affectionate in their way.
Elle ~ No, it never can be answered, but I feel the balance weighs more to the side of nurture. But then, it could all have been decided by a higher power, Fate/Destiny/the gods(esses)/Karma – or however one wishes to term it. That universal struggle (to quote a lovely author).
P x
Blacksilk said,
January 18, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Gosh, I’m sorry it’s taken so long for me to reply to this given I started it!
Submission is a a very good way to relax and let go so I can easily understand the high-powered non-sex life theory. I don’t really fit it but I get the idea that lots of people do. I do like being looked after though, so perhaps that’s a part of it.
As you say though, the label and the reasons are the fun parts. The fun part is where you want it done to you, he wants to do it and it gets done
I hear ya on the ‘Mantle of the Domme’ thing though, it made such a lot of sense to me. I’ve been thinking similar about myself for a while but having trouble defining or expressing it, what you said sums it up entirely though! Thanks for solving that for me! x
ladypandorah said,
January 19, 2009 at 8:55 pm
BS ~ Good to hear from ya. hehe. Don’t most people like to be looked after? It may not appear as such, but for those relationships that fall under the d/s thing, the one in control is being looked after in a way – being allowed to explore that side of themselves, the ‘permission’ that their significant other agrees to. It’s a two-way dialogue, and in that respect, the bottom looks after the top.
(and Mantle of the Domme – ah how I love to subvert things from childhood – ever played ‘Mantle of the Expert’ in school[English/Drama]? or was that just in my neck of the woods?)
Pandorah x
Blacksilk said,
January 23, 2009 at 8:43 pm
Can’t say I ever did, what was it? x
ladypandorah said,
January 23, 2009 at 10:22 pm
Basically hotseating by another alias.
Blacksilk said,
January 24, 2009 at 12:39 am
That’d be good if I knew what that was either…. I can sorta guess from connotations though
ladypandorah said,
January 24, 2009 at 12:41 am
Yeah, pretty straightforward. Assume a role and answer questions from the audience/class/whoever as that character.
Blacksilk said,
January 26, 2009 at 9:55 pm
Entirely random question that just came to me, did you ever do school nativity and what part(s) were you?
In my time I’ve been a star and both Mary and Joseph (though not at the same time, obviously). I think we ran out of boys
ladypandorah said,
January 27, 2009 at 1:04 am
Hehe.
Yes, in the obligatory Nativity. Mary one year and a king’s robe holder at another point. I would have played the Virgin twice, but I was due for a family trip to London, so what followed was me going through the paces whilst my best friend being the understudy trailed behind to see what she had to do. The tyke who was Joseph, not quite knowing what was going on, turned round as asked if she was the donkey.
My theatrical days are a little past it now, but I was a stalwart throughout Secondary School in as many productions as I could be. Just recently had a small increase in what has been lying dormant. Which is nice.