Blog Archives

30 Days of Dominance Question 1: Does your Dominance have a label?

Day 1 – Does your Dominance – either what you practice or what you strive for – have a label? Do you view your preferred Dominant style as Taken in Hand, Domestic Discipline, Top/bottom, Dominant/submissive, Master/slave, Owner/pet, or some other description or combination? If you do not use a label, why?

I prefer an Owner/slave style, Dominant/submissive, or Top/bottom style depending on what context I’m in. I have my slave/fiance Edward, but we have an open relationship in which I’m free to play with others. I like topping and bottoming to other people sometimes, and might at some point have another Dominant/submissive relationship with someone else, but doubt I would ever have another slave. I enjoy both the novelty of playing with new people in public and the intimacy of playing with my well-used slave in private.

As far as labels themselves go, they can be useful, but also limiting. As I’ve discussed, ‘dominant’ and ‘submissive’ can be heavily loaded terms. ‘Dominant’ is taken to mean masculine, sadistic, assertive, penetrator, while ‘submissive’ is taken to mean feminine, masochistic, meek, and penetrated. When I say that I am Dominant and my slave’s Owner I mean that I give my slave orders and he follows them. This is true whether I order him to put his chastity device on, give me a massage, fuck me, bite me, cuddle with me, kneel before me, bring me my scalpel so I can carve my name into his chest, or cane me. We use labels, but do not let them dictate our relationship.

We will be entering lockdown mode in 5…4…3…2…1

I have mentioned that I would never put a sub in permanent chastity, but this does not mean that I have no interest in chastity play. Right now my slave lives a shortish plane ride away from me. This has a lot of cons. However, it does enable me to put him into chastity without taunting myself any more than I do normally when I cannot indulge in his physical presence. My usual problem with chastity is that I want him just as much as he wants me, and his cock is one of my favorite parts of him. Thus, when he’s in chastity, I kind of feel like I am too (I know, I know, I still get to masturbate and receive digital and oral pleasure, but after awhile I just really want his cock). We are allowed to see other people, but I generally don’t when he’s around. We have threesomes on occasion, but that’s about it.

Image

My slave in the CB6000…mmmm….

When we’re in separate places, it’s a horse of a different color. I am more likely to have sex with others on my own, and I can’t have any part of his body anyways. Thus, I get to really tease him – tease him till his cock strains against its plastic cage trying to get hard – while I am teased no more than usual. This is the first time I’ve put him into a chastity device (though there’s been plenty of orgasm denial), so it will be interesting to see how it goes. I will be sure to keep you updated!

D/s and Polyamoury: Incompatible or merely strange bedfellows?

I consider myself to be polyamorous. I’ve actually had open relationships for the most part since I started having sex. However, I’ve never successfully been in two concurrent love-type relationships. There have been a few times when I’ve dated two or three people simultaneously and cared a great deal about all of them, but I’ve only had a maximum of one person at a time to whom I say “I love you”. Being poly isn’t easy. I’m not one of these fortunate people who was born without a jealous bone in their body. I’ve always been quite confident about what I mean to my loves, but I still get a dull ache sometimes when I think of them with others, particularly others I don’t know well.

This causes some interesting quirks when working towards ownership. I enjoy a rather intense style of domination. I like the idea of having a 24/7 relationship. I would like, eventually, to own someone; I’d like to have a slave. This is antithetical to the polyamorous ideal that people are not possessions. It’s one thing to think of a submissive and I choosing a third partner together, but the idea of them independently finding and dating another that I don’t know or necessarily like poses a problem when everything is supposed to go my way (and their way through my consideration of our needs and wants). This is rather selfish, but when FT was in love with someone I’d never met before it made him feel less mine. I don’t know what to do with that.

You can always do the, “we only date people once our mate approves of them” or “my primary partner has veto power”. But that just seems unrealistic for several reasons: a) poly people often come with other lovers who they already care a great deal about; b) telling a person who treasures freedom, “no, you can’t have them” often causes them to fixate on said person; and c) limiting who my partner can and cannot date feels like a betrayal of my poly sensibilities.

So how do you give freedom and enslavement simultaneously? I think ultimately it comes down to different layers of the relationship. First you’re friends, then lovers, then partners, then Dom(me)/sub. All the other layers have to be functioning for the exterior layer to work. Poly is more on the partner level (or boyfriend/girlfriend, but I wanted something more gender neutral). The Dom(me) can’t force a relationship style on the submissive. That’s the kind of thing that has to be agreed upon and consented to, and can ruin a relationship if both parties are not honest about their wants and needs with regards to it.

The only problem with this is that it can tamper with the suspension of disbelief. Living a 24/7 relationship is allowing a fantasy to become, for the most part, a reality. However, the reality has to come before the fantasy in importance. This does not take away one’s love of the fantasy though, and reminders that ultimately both individuals are equal can be somewhat annoying. So what do you do? Well, the Dom(me) learning to feel compersion would certainly help, so that they would actually enjoy the sub’s being with others rather than merely tolerating it. Alternatively both parties could be limited to dating others as a couple. Or you can have an unequal arrangement that the sub is actually happy with: cuckold fetishists, for example, wouldn’t mind a totally unequal arrangement, but it’s not unequal in that they are still thoroughly enjoying it.

What kind of arrangements have you all come up with? Enjoyed? Hated? Do you experience compersion? Did it happen automatically or did it take some sort of practice?

Kink and religion (II): What do you see as the pros and cons of your religious background?

Welcome to the second of four parts of our interview/chat on kink and religion. To see the first part go here.

What do you see as the pros and cons of your religious background?

Delving into Deviance (a.k.a. Dev):

Emerging from my religious background was a slow process for me. I’ve only really acknowledged that I am no longer Christian in the past year or two. So I’ve been reviewing what I considered benefits and what would be easier if things had been different. Christianity still influences me. I’m eternally optimistic.  I try to see the best in people, and love my neighbor as myself. I’ve tried to keep the good and let the bad go. Jesus’ teachings have a lot of wisdom in them even if the bible is often used to beat people over the head.

So pros:

1) my outlook on life and other people,

 2) my acceptance that I’m not like everyone else and that’s not a bad thing, and

3) I think it’s actually made my sex life better.

The first I’ve explained already.

The second is interesting. As a fundamentalist Christian you are (or at least my congregation was) taught that you’re going to be different. Basically, if you are fitting in too much, you’re doing it wrong. So once I stuck out because I didn’t have sex or drink or swear, and now I stick out because I love talking about sex, won’t accept traditional gender roles, and just do things a bit differently than most people.

The third point is the most relevant. I had a vow of chastity. As I questioned Christianity and drifted away from it I forsook that vow, when I was 19, about the same time I started exploring BDSM. While that vow gave me some sexual hangups for awhile, I feel like it also helped me in some ways. As a teenager I didn’t have sex. My genitals were off-limits. However, I was very curious, so I would watch the Sunday Night Sex Show, Bliss, and other late-night television on Oxygen. That was a better sex-ed program than anything available in schools.

By the time I started having sex I knew much more about my own body and my lover’s than I would have at 16. I also had time to be more comfortable and confident about myself. Furthermore, I think it made me a better lover. I spent years at each ‘base’ before moving on to the next one – 3 years just kissing, 2 years kissing and fondling the upper body, 2 years on manual sex, 3 years on oral sex and BDSM, and then the big straight sex occurred. I orgasmed from pain before I orgasmed from a cock. I think that’s pretty cool.

So what about the cons?

Well, a lot of heartache. My boyfriend likened my relationship with God to feelings of romantic love. And indeed it was like that; God was my first love. The closer I felt to him, the more at peace I was with my life. But then I fell in love with a woman at the age of 15 and I didn’t know what to do. I tried to pray the gay away. No dice. Then I had to deal with the mind fuck that what I felt for my first girlfriend felt like being close to God. With her by my side, nothing could go wrong for too long. She was the most beautiful thing I’d ever experienced; how could that be against God’s will? Every Sunday I looked up bible verses about homosexuality as I sat in church. There are none about women, but the bible often says ‘men’ when it means everyone, so I thought that was a cop-out. For a few years I felt my life was coming apart at the seams. I didn’t know what to trust anymore.

At age 17 I’d decided to accept my bisexuality, and questioned everything else. I basically scrapped what I had been taught and started all over again. I think that’s what left me so open-minded. However, I did still have hang-ups sexually. I cried the first time I touched a cock and the first time I had oral sex. My logic could say one thing, but sometimes my emotions said another. I feel sorry for my first boyfriend in university. He was a really great guy and we spent a lot of time naked together, but he was still a virgin (no oral or penile-vaginal sex) when we were through six months later. My experience with him helped me decide that the whole chastity thing was silly.

Now I’m a very uninhibited lover, and the only remaining vestige of sexual guilt is that I stll have trouble with penile-vaginal sex with  men I don’t love. I can have oral sex with whomever I like and it doesn’t phase me, but traditional man-woman sex was so associated with my future husband that it’s hard even now for me to treat it casually. Is that a bad thing? I’m not entirely sure. But it makes it difficult to realize my fantasy of having a line of men with hard-ons fuck me till I tire of them and say, “Next!”

Dishevelled Domina’s (a.k.a. DD) response to Dev:

I really identify with your comment that you are very uninhibited in general, and also that you mentioned some residual effects regarding intimacy reservations too.

It is an interesting combination; hard to understand, or explain.
Does the thought of multiples seriously appeal to you?

Dev’s response:

My lack of inhibition tends to be with a partner I trust. I’m still always a little nervous about having sex (particularly penetrative) with new people. I think this is partially because I don’t want to be perceived negatively, and until I know the other person a bit better I can’t know what they’re thinking. 

The thought of multiples does indeed appeal to me. Given the above, I’m not sure they could be complete strangers. However, maybe I’ll eventually have enough friends/former/occasional lovers that it could be arranged with people I know and love. I feel like it would be a display of sexual empowerment and would bring me a great deal of pleasure. I’d be in charge the whole time.

tomio’s response to Dev:

      “I used to have a vow of chastity.”

This stuff became a fad after I was an adult, thankfully. But chastity was simply expected, unless one was married. I think my congregation would have looked on it as being similar to taking a vow to breath air. The internet didn’t exist yet – most people still saw cable TV as a luxury. I do remember watching an actual rape scene in a movie on HBO and experienced one of my first erections (not THE first, but it was one of the first ten, I’d guess). I knew it was wrong to be turned on by such things and I actually answered the altar call that week and begged God not to send me to Hell for it. I think I was nine. Maybe ten.

On the other hand, it was the 1970s. Largely because the Supreme Court found that the movie Deep Throat  was exploring a scientific and medical debate – whether or not women can have an orgasm. So while sex was still considered dirty and filthy and disgusting, there was also a sub-genre of preachers who actively taught that sex was a gift of God to be shared with your spouse…and proof that God wanted us to bond sexually was that women could have orgasms.

So, as I write this, I can see that in addition to the very badly mixed messages about sex, the only place I could even see a human body was in pornography. And I had to be VERY sneaky about finding that.

What do you see as the pros and cons of your religious background?

John:

Pro:  Parents and Grandparents..specifically, grandfather and father had a deep respect for how Jesus lived his life with regard to how to treat people that may have a different life outlook than you.  It  was instilled in me not to make snap judgement on how people live their lives but to look at the person themselves and learn from them and treat them with respect.
The biggest con is that church people tend to want to repress the fact that we were created as a sexual being and that sex is actually fun and not a duty and I happen to think that  a little experimentation before marriage is probably a good thing.

DD’s response to John:  

How much experimentation?
 
John’s response:

Experimentation or just trying to get into a girl’s pants? Mostly I think my own early experiences were driven by rebellion, followed by guilt.

What do you see as the pros and cons of your religious background?
tomio:
This isn’t such an easy question to answer. I had to put a lot of thought into it.
The pros:

In a word: Character. Evangelicals know how to stand up for what they believe is right. They know what they believe and they aren’t afraid to hurt a few feelings by being honest (and sometimes blunt, which is not the same thing).

While my understanding of “right” has evolved far beyond what I was taught as a child, I still find it impossible not to stand up for it. Perhaps my life would have been easier if my morality were more easily compromised…but the times when I did not stand for what is right are the times in my life that I regret the most. And those are also the times when I feel that I fell the farthest from my early teachings.

I’d also have to list the belief that everyone is worthy of being loved. Even me. That’s a hard one to learn. In fact, at forty-three, I’m still learning how to be loved. How to feel like I’m lovable.

A third point: I know how to be forgiven. That is one of the hardest things a person can do. To go to another and say, “I hurt you and I didn’t have to and it breaks my heart that I can never take away that hurt.” Then to hear them say, “It broke my heart when you did that…but neither you nor I will remember that hurt, because it is totally erased from my heart.”

That’s rough. That’s a spiritual kick in the balls (or ovaries) that’ll bring anyone to their knees. Because we know, deep down, we don’t deserve that kind of forgiveness. But love gives it to us anyway. If we are strong enough to accept it.

The final point: I learned a passionate hatred for injustice, and especially for people who abuse their authority for their own benefit.

The cons:
This is hard for me to talk about, at least without cracking a hundred thousand jokes.
I deal with pain through humor. But I’ll try to talk straight.
Fundamentalism is passed on by forcibly closing down an individual’s ability to think and reason for him- or herself. It is basically saying, “You can’t possibly believe this stuff to be true – but you better or you will be fed turd sandwiches at the buffet in the Hell Hilton.” The fucking guilt I felt simply for getting a hard-on was immense. Masturbation was always followed by a bout of such self-hate that it’s a million wonders I didn’t hurt myself because of it – and believe me, I looked at that verse that says “If you eye sins, it is better to pluck it out than to have your entire body burn…”

I was thirty-some-odd years old, in my second marriage, having fathered children, and I was so ridden with shame over my sexual needs – not desires, NEEDS – that I could not speak about them. Not to my wife (GOD NO!), not to a shrink, no one. So I simply shut down my sexuality. The problem is, someone forgot to tell my libido that…so I built this lonely fucking world where I spent hours every day (literally) looking at porn, masturbating, hating myself, repeat.

My evolution towards liberal Christianity means that I am simply not welcomed in the churches of my childhood friends and family. I’m cool with that, because they make no pretense of being open-minded and accepting. It’s all “my way or the highway” and I picked the highway a long time ago.

But it also puts me out of place with my liberal secular friends, who cannot understand why:

1) I arrive at the same place, or to the left of them, from such a vastly different route; and

2) why I cannot shut-up about my faith or leave it out of my discussions about politics and what is right/wrong.

I’m even more than a little out of place with my liberal Christian peers…I’ve come from too different a time and place to fully relate. That’s only partly the fault of fundamentalist religion…but it’s a part that continues to ache.

Submission, for me, is not just a kink. It is the way I am made, and when I submit to Mistress Delila, it is my supreme act of love. If the person I am and the love in my life are gifts of God; then accepting those things, embracing them, and being as completely and utterly submissive as I possibly can is not just an earthly thing, but a spiritual thing, as well. So disobeying Mistress would not just be a violation of Our commitments and the basic tenets of Our relationship and love…but it would be sinful.

A final, final point – Once I began to identify as a submissive man, I was actually able to come to terms with it through reinterpretation of scriptural examples. If we are supposed to emulate Jesus; then aren’t there many examples of him willfully lowering his station beneath those around him, and especially those he loved? “Greater love hath no man than this, to lay down his life for his friends.”

So if Jesus can live and die for the ones he loves, can I not also live and die for my Mistress and still be a good and Godly man? 

DD’s response to tomio:

How do you distinguish between a need and a desire?

tomio’s response: 

A desire is something a person wants, but does not suffer if it is denied to them – like ice cream. 

A need is something that a person not only wants, but suffers if it is not given – like food, water, safety, shelter.

Sexually, in my case, I NEED a dominant partner…I genuinely suffer without one. I need, from time to time, to be hurt by my Lover. I need to be an object of desire and gratification. 
I desire bondage. I desire orgasm denial.
From the outside, I’m sure these things look quite similar and are hard, if not impossible, to distinguish. From the inside, there is an immense difference. 

What do you see as the pros and cons of your religious background?

Dishevelled Domina:

Pros~
 I was taught to systematically evaluate information and think critically from a very early age. This was taught to keep “the world” from deceiving us but turned out to be pretty useful in evaluating the words and actions of people within the church too. I also learned to stand strong for what I believe (via many inspiration stories) , and learned that lesson better than they intended too,  like when I told my former pastor’s wife that the reason I didn’t attend a Baptist church anymore was because my pastor taught me better.
I also learned some really good values about respecting and loving family, and mankind at large. In reference to the question Cain posed God in the seminal tale of jealousy and murder, “Am I my bother’s keeper?” most Christians would emphatically say that the correct answer is indeed, yes, we do bear a responsibility for our fellow man,  despite what their typical political and social positions would indicated.  I learned that other people truly matter, and how to live in a manner consistent with that belief.
Cons~
I don’t know of many people who understand my perspective, and even fewer that share it. I don’t know which upset my parents more; finding out I wasn’t a Republican, or finding out I wasn’t a Baptist.
The majority of people who grew up in similar circumstances seem to have either swallowed fundamentalism hook, line, and sinker, or alternately, to have rejected all religion entirely. My own stance is incomprehensible to both, as well as to those who are not religious at all or who have a different background.

There are other experiences I could claim were cons of my  background but every choice leads to the next and I cannot find it in my heart to disown the choices that have led me to the place I am today.  

tomio’s response to DD:

…like when I told my former pastor’s wife that the reason I didn’t attend a Baptist church anymore was because my pastor taught me better.”

I caused an entire adult Sunday School class to break out in spontaneous prayer when I refused to attend a Planned Parenthood picket, and insisted that Jesus would be INSIDE the place, praying for whoever needed service, and making sure their needs would be meet after they were done, whatever their choice was. Every single prayer during the service included some variation of the phrase, “Lord, be with those among us who cannot see the right and true path…” When the pastor wanted to talk to me after the service, I handed him the Bible and dared him to show me where the word “abortion” appeared. After half an hour of shooting down every tenuous connection he made, he sighed heavily and said, “I don’t think this congregation can serve your spiritual needs.” I laughed at him and said, “Funny, I don’t think it serves anyone’s spiritual needs. It’s just a political machine.”

       I don’t know which upset my parents more; finding out I wasn’t a Republican, or finding out I wasn’t a Baptist.

Those are two separate things? (Hey! A question!)

There are several family members that I no longer speak to. I don’t really miss them.

DD’s response:

Stirring the pot is a hobby of mine, but I try not to get too carried away. I have more success with that nowadays, since I’m not being constantly provoked!

John’s response to DD and tomio:

I agree with tomio and have experienced the same thing..being prayed over because I don’t see the truth.

Best religious themed bumper sticker in my mind was the one that said: 

Jesus was a liberal Jew.
Drives the conservatives I know batty when I mention that if you saw Jesus today you would automatically think he was a possible terrorist… dark skin, dark hair, and no halo.

The Makings of a Pain Slut

I recently decided to make FT into a pain slut. He’s pretty good at taking what I give him impact-play-wise, but, being the sadist I am, I’d like to go further. Eventually it gets to a point where it’s just too much for him. We don’t use a safe word, so I have to pay attention to when pushing further is going to be a step too far (though I recommend safe words for anyone starting out with a new partner; FT and I have been together for a good long while). So we’ve had a few annoying situations when I’ve had to stop when I felt like things were just starting to get interesting. This led me to thinking: perhaps I could train him to like pain more. I still want to hurt him in a way that he doesn’t always like, but having a higher pain tolerance and more of an erotic association with pain definitely helps one reach higher levels of pain without having to stop a scene.

Thus the process began. It started simply: slapping his inner thighs (hard) while giving him a hand job. That left some nice marks. Then came a scene that I’ll describe in detail because it’s nice for me to have a record of it:

I pushed his legs apart and locked him into the black ankle cuffs at each end of our spreader bar. I had strung the wrist restraints up so that they were hanging from the ceiling, and locked his wrists into them. He was at my mercy. He could not escape even if he wanted to. But of course, he didn’t want to. Yet. I started by warming him up – black suede flogger to start with; thuddy but soft sensations all over his back and ass. Eventually I hit him harder, packing quite a wallop but no sting.

Then a spanking. Smack, smack, smacksmacksmacksmack. Till I had a nice rosy bum to sink my nails into. The first noises were emitted. Then I brought out a harder leather flogger with which to bring the pain up to the next level. Thwack thwack thwack thwack – a nice steady pace with varying intensity against his torso and rear. Once he started wiggling away from me I knew I was getting somewhere. I walked around to face him. Kissed him deeply and then stood away so that he was falling towards me but couldn’t quite reach me because he was bound. His cock was beautifully dripping for me. I came up behind him, kissing his neck, and stroked his cock. I stroked him while spanking him, and stopped just before he came. Then the flogging recommenced.

After flogging came the riding crop. I made a lovely little arc of marks, framing his bum nicely. More edging followed. Then it was time for the caning. I decided on 20 this time. Ten for each cheek, and I wasn’t going to go easy on him. He counted out loud for me and made delicious noises as I went along – little yells, getting his breathing back to normal, guttural moans – mmmm. After ten I edged him again, getting him right to the tipping point and then stopping all contact before returning to his beating. The escalation was wonderful to watch. The tensing and relaxation, the little movements that some wouldn’t even notice. Finally, we reached 20. I stood naked before him and let our flesh slowly intermingle. Nipples first, then bellies, then thighs, then sexes, then mouths. He was totally spaced. 🙂 “What a good little pain slut you’re becoming”, I told him.

I took him out of his bindings and led him over to a chair. I sat down and then pulled him by the hips so that he was sitting in my lap. I kissed and bit the back of his neck, ran my fingernails down his thighs. I peered over his shoulder and enjoyed looking down at his body from a nearly first-person view. I sometimes have fantasies of being a man, so this is an angle that pleases me. I reached around and began jerking him off as I continued to bite and scratch. This time when he got to the edge and asked, “May I come please Sir?” I said yes, and he came emphatically over the floor.

I don’t remember much after that, however, I highly suspect we retired to bed for snuggles and then perhaps more shenanigans.

This is only the beginning of his training and I can’t wait to be back with him again to continue in person. At the moment we’re in separate countries once again. Any recommendations for long-distance training?

Biological determinism and D/s: Gendered archetypes, cuckolds, flower rooms, and penis-fencing

My boyfriend recently stumbled across a blog that claims that male submissiveness is not an evolved trait. It implies that male dominance and female submissiveness, on the other hand, are. While this post is really a load of bollocks and I debated whether to even dignify it with a response, I decided to do so because it made my boyfriend a bit worried that one day I’ll realise that I need a domly dom and not my wonderful, submissive boyfriend. This fear is compounded by the fact that I’ve switched a bit in the past and when we first got together, we only really expected to see each other for three months because I was leaving the country. However, we fell in love and decided to find a way to make it work. In just a few days time I’ll be with him after a few months of being away. 🙂

Enough of the pleasantries, back to the slaughter. This essay bastardizes a bastard science. Evolutionary psychology is a bit spurious to begin with. Some of it is comprised of legitimate findings, while some of it consists of surveys designed to find sex differences and bolster an antiquated notion of man as breadwinner and stud and woman as home-maker/baby-making-machine and coy (*cough* anything David Buss ever worked on *cough*). Even if we assume that the findings of evolutionary psychologists are legitimate (which to be fair some are), this essay bastardizes them. Here’s the gist of the author’s argument against male submissiveness being natural:

Even more fundamentally, why do females want to engage in extra-pair sex? (and risk losing their long term partner and his contribution.) They do this when a “fitter” (in terms of long term reproductive success) male comes along, that her genes will benefit from mixing with in her pool of offspring.

(This is a bit like the man who asked his wife, after seeing Indecent Proposal, “Would YOU sleep with Robert Redford for a million dollars?” She replied, “Yes, but they’d have to give me some time to come up with the money.”)

In these encounters, the man is of higher status in the “market” than the women, and he is exchanging his fitter genes in return for access to her womb (and the resources of the poor sap at home who is supporting her day in day out.) Consequently, he doesn’t need to submit to her, since he’s in something like a seller’s market.

And as I’ve outlined above, men in long term relationships supporting women and their offspring need to control them (at least as far as their sexual encounters with other men goes.) If they don’t, their line dies out, since other, higher status men, win out. (They are documentated cases of pre-industrial societies where 50% of each generation are offspring of the village chief, one way or another, so this danger is very real.)

For these reasons, we argue that male submissiveness is not an adaptive trait which has been selected for (that it “does not have a genetic basis” and is “not part of human nature”.)

This passage drastically conflates several concepts. Studies have shown that women are attracted to different men at different points in their menstrual cycles; more feminine male faces most of the time, and less feminine (but still not uber-masculine) faces during ovulation (when conception is most likely) (Penton-Voak et al., 1999). Evolutionary psychologists take this as an indication that the ideal mating strategy for women is to have a more feminine long-term partner, and occasionally cheat on them with a less feminine man when the likelihood of conception is high (because these less feminine men supposedly have ‘better’ genes). In fact, they argue that the reason why women have concealed ovulation now (we don’t have bright red swellings when we ovulate these days) is so that women can trick their long-term partners into raising another man’s child. Firstly, the study to which I’m referring did not look into dominance at all. Secondly, studies that have found some sort of dominance to be attractive have been looking into social dominance, not sexual dominance. Most of these are still based on perceptions of dominance when looking at pictures of faces. Even studies that have used behavioral displays simply involved things like competitiveness against other males. I hardly see how being sexually submissive to one female would make a man less competitive towards other males.

Contrary to the author’s misconceptions, a man can be assertive, confident, well-spoken, and attractive to potential partners….and be submissive to that special woman who makes him want to feel used. Keeping your long-term partner satisfied is an excellent method of mate retention. I highly recommend it. Plus, even if we took the author’s assumptions as truths: that ‘feminine’ meant ‘submissive’ (which it doesn’t), and that the jargon that evolutionary psychologists use when talking about dominance and submission mapped onto the BDSM scene (which it doesn’t) then women would be more attracted to submissive men three-fourths of the time, and would be more likely to have long-term relationships with submissive men. Even if one in five children were conceived through extra-pair copulations (which is about the current rate), that would still leave four out of five children as the offspring of submissive men. Congratulations. Your argument is totally bogus.

The Flawed Assumptions of Evolutionary Psychology

Now let’s move on to some of the author’s claims that have less to do with his own misinterpretations, and more to do with the flawed assumptions of evolutionary psychology. The author states,

If a human male can control his long term sexual partner, he gains by being able to put resources into supporting her offspring with some confidence they are also his offspring. If this isn’t possible, then males and females become solitary rather than mated because it’s not in males’ interests to offer that support. The fact that humans, unlike many other species, haven’t lost this behaviour, shows that this confidence has largely been present during the period of human evolution.

The main crux of the author’s argument is that men are more willing to invest in a woman and her children if he is certain that the children are his own (which is an accurate portrayal of the idea of ‘paternity certainty’ in evo psych), and that male dominants are in a better position to do this, so they win. The problem is, while this assertion has been supported in post-industrial societies, there is no evidence that this inclination is evolved. In fact, research suggests the opposite.

The idea of ‘paternity certainty’ assumes a level of biological knowledge that was most likely not present in the Environment of Evolutionary Adaptedness (the time during which we evolved to our present state). During this time, the archaeological record suggests that humans were hunter-gatherers. Currently there are several hunter-gatherer societies, such as the Ache, in different parts of South America that believe in ‘partible paternity’. Partible paternity is the idea that several men can be the biological father to one child. In fact, it is believed that it is better for a child to have multiple fathers because each one can contribute different things: one might be a good hunter, the other might be a good dancer, another might be particularly handsome (Becker and Valentine, 2002). It has also been found that children with multiple fathers in such societies are more likely to survive. This has been corroborated in other species as well: for example, in baboons, if multiple males copulated with a female during her estrus, then more males are likely to defend the resulting infant, and these infants are more likely to survive (Hrdy, 2003). So, contrary to the author’s argument, a woman having sex with multiple men during her fertile window might actually improve mating success for both men and women.

Female Domination

The author also claims that there are no human societies led by women, and therefore implies that women must not be naturally dominant. There are no human societies that mirror the way that males attempt to control females by limiting their access to the outside world and chopping up their gentials so they can’t experience pleasure. However, there are and their have been matriarchal societies. A good example of this is the Mosuo of southern China, who still function today. Rather than having marriages, a woman (and any brothers and sisters she has) will live in her mother’s household her entire life. When a girl reaches sexual maturity, she is given her own room that opens both into the family courtyard and out to the street (called her ‘flower room’). She can have as many lovers as she wishes; the only rule is that they must be gone by morning. Any children she conceives will be raised in her household by her family – her mother, sisters, and brothers (Ryan & Jetha, 2010). Jealousy still exists, but Ryan and Jetha (2010) explain: “Openly expressed jealousy, for the Mosuo, is considered aggressive in its implied intrusion upon the sacred autonomy of another person, and is thus met with ridicule and shame” (p. 129). In this way, both men and women are free to have sex with whomever they like. Reproductive success is then based not on the ability to control another person, but rather on how pleasant interactions in a woman’s ‘flower room’ are.

I shall end this discourse with a thought experiment. Let’s say that we have evolved behavioral dispositions. The two species that are most closely related to us are the common chimpanzee and the pygmy chimpanzee, or bonobo. In the former, males are dominant: there is one alpha who has basically unlimited access to all females, and then there is a hierarchical chain that is highly correlated with number of copulations. Sex only really happens during estrus, which is a relatively small proportion of time. All sex is dorsal-ventral (‘doggie’-style). In the latter, females are dominant. All the adults have sex with each other, and sex occurs throughout the menstrual cycle. The range of sexual behaviors is much more diverse. Bonobos are the only other species to engage in sex face-to-face. They also engage in oral sex, manual sex, genito-genital rubbing (rubbing clitorises together), and ‘penis-fencing’ (rubbing cocks together). Which species would you rather be descended from? Which species’ sexual behavior sounds more like that of humans? In reality, we have descended from a common ancestor of both of these species. We have the potential to have societies like either of these, or something rather different from either. Genes do play a role in some of our cognitions, but the ecology and social history in which a society exists, as well as the separate experiences of individuals also play a hugely important role.

Good, Giving, Game…and Dominant

Some of the comments on my previous entry inspired me to write this one. Tab remarked:

I completely agree on your point about being a Dom just being the leader, and that acts do not make the Dom. I’m a male dominant who enjoys being fucked, even by women. Most people who know this about me find it confusing, especially in the BDSM community.

Maybe one day we’ll get over this idea that fucking means in charge.

Femdom is very weird for me, as it seems most femdom stuff is still geared to be pleasing to the men. It’s rare you see a woman dominating to get what she wants out of something, it’s just fulfilling another male fantasy.

I know a couple where the male sub likes to be used as furniture and completely ignored by the woman. The woman does it, but actually finds it a bit boring. It’s always confused me, because surely if he’s a sub then that means he should want what SHE wants to do to him? Not this fucked up idea of how she’s supposed to treat him, just how he can please her.

When I read this I didn’t see anything particularly offensive about it, and liked hearing that a male dominant was embracing his love of being fucked. However, maymay brought this issue up:

I do want to point out that submission does not mean “he should want what SHE wants to do to him.” That may be a piece it for some people some of the time, but no one needs to make the mistake of believing submission is about sublimating a submissive person’s desires in favor of a dominant person’s, because then you’ve still just stolen the submissive person’s agency (regardless of their gender) by devaluing what they want and makes you more than a little bit of a stereotypical douche dom, and I won’t let anyone even remotely come close to doing that on a post that’s this good, like this one, without calling it out.

Tab then clarified what I assumed to be the case in the beginning:

You make a very good point, and I’m sorry if I came across that way. My story is a little close to home as I know the female partner really didn’t enjoy it, and being her friend I am very biased in her favour.

I personally find BDSM a time where both of you are trying to fulfil each others fantasies, so to have any sex where one person is uncomfortable is something I find distasteful. I get off on want- If someone doesn’t want me to do something or doesn’t want to do it to me I’m completely uninterested. I’m not in favour of sublimating a submissive person’s desire in favour of a doms, I’m in favour of everyone getting what they want, but never at the expense of the other person.

These comments bring up the important issue of how much a Dominant should be expected to respect the desires of their submissive. I am of the opinion that the submissive should not run the show, and this can easily become an issue between a female Dominant and male submissive because of the way the sexes are typically socialized. Dishevelled Domina expresses this sentiment well in her post, Power Exchange:

Guys, if your wife/girlfriend/roommate/landlady/boss/secretary/nurse/teacher, etc. etc. etc. is not dominating you the way you’ve seen it done in all those delightfully realistic porn movies, and then, one glorious day, you manage to talk her into dousing herself in baby powder and fighting her way into a tube of latex, or some other equally hideous getup that you’ve been fantasizing about, and then you have her spank you, assfuck you, and generally get you off exactly the way you pictured it, well,  ya know what?

You have all the power, and you are running the fuck. She is not dominating you.

If the supposed dominant is just doing everything that the supposed submissive wants and nothing more, I have trouble seeing how that could be considered domination. However, I do not think that we should then go to the other extreme and say that Dominants should not listen to their partners at all and should take no interest in their sexual fantasies and desires. In short, I think that one can be good, giving and game (GGG)…and still be Dominant. The concept of GGG was devised and popularized by Dan Savage who I highly recommend to any of my readers. As he summarizes,

GGG stands for “good, giving, and game,” which is what we should all strive to be for our sex partners. Think “good in bed,” “giving equal time and equal pleasure,” and “game for anything—within reason.”

Being Dominant doesn’t give you a get-out-of-GGG-free card. Let’s take anal sex as a personal example. My boyfriend loves penetrating women anally. When we got together, I had never experienced this before. My condition for previous, more vanilla, boyfriends had always been, “when you bend over and take something up your ass, I’ll be much more inclined to reciprocate”. This was not an empty statement in hopes to dissuade them from exploring my anus. I’ve wanted to fuck a guy up the ass since I was 18, and still a chastity-ring-wearing virgin. My fuck toy was more than willing to let me penetrate him once we became involved, and thus, I began considering returning the favor. We soon began experimenting with anal toys. At first it didn’t really do much for me, but was an interesting sensation that I was willing to keep on exploring for a bit. Then he put what I have dubbed ‘the Princess’ (see below) in me, and I started to see the light.

This toy was the beginning of my anal pleasure. With it, I discovered that I can   have g-spot orgasms through my ass; they are the most intense orgasms I’ve ever had. If I had let stubborn pride get in the way of sexual exploration, I would never have discovered this about myself. If I had felt like I couldn’t explore my submissive’s sexual interests just because they’re his, then I would have caused us both to miss out on experiences that increase our intimacy and bond. My sub now fucks me anally at my command. Luckily, his cock is just as good at stimulating my g-spot as this lovely toy. Being GGG pays off for everyone involved. However, if, after giving it a fair try (not just once), I was still not enjoying anal in the slightest, and found it painful and uncomfortable regardless of the implement used, then I would also have the right to cease doing that.

The next question is: would I have to stop fucking my sub up the ass if he really didn’t like it? Do I think that a submissive person’s desires should not be sublimated in favor of  Dom(me)’s? This is the trickier question in my mind. I enjoy my sub’s pain. I enjoy his distress. Furthermore, he enjoys it when I force him to do things that he does not enjoy. This gets into a rather confusing territory! Maymay does a good job of explaining this phenomena from the sub’s side.

I have raped FT before. This rape was consensual, but still not the same as the rape-play most people discuss where one person pretends not to want it while in reality they’re gagging for it. I have blanket consent to take FT when I want, where I want, and how I want, regardless of his desires in that moment. One day, I climbed on top of him and he asked me if he could go out for a cigarette. I said no. He said, “I’m seriously not in the mood, please let me go out for a cigarette”. I forced him down, sucked on his cock until it was hard enough for me to fuck, and then rode him until I was satisfied. He was a bit angry for a day or two, but in retrospect is hugely aroused  by this event (and secretly hopes it will happen again at some point). I don’t do this often, and would usually prefer that he want to do what I want to do. However, sometimes I just have an overwhelming urge to fuck him, will he, nil he, and then I plow forward. He consents to this, but will not always like it in the moment. It’s hard to make these kinds of judgements though. There’s a fine line between pushing just enough and pushing too far.

In conclusion, I think that both partners need to be GGG, but due to the nature of the relationship, the submissive will often be expected to be somewhat more GGG than the Dominant. In reality though, that statement is troublesome. The Dominant is fulfilling the submissive’s sexual desires by sublimating the submissive’s desires under the Dominant’s. FT gets off on doing whatever I want sexually even if he isn’t enjoying it in that moment. I shall call this the submissive paradox. Does it make him any less submissive because he’s getting his desires fulfilled in this way? No. It makes it a non-abusive relationship. Dom(me)s and subs exist symbiotically. They have different, but compatible, needs and wants that are fulfilled by each other. When this relationship ceases to be symbiotic – the Dom(me) stops listening to the sub altogether or the sub tries to have their way all the time – the balance is broken and the relationship ceases to be D/s.

Peaks and troughs

Every relationship has its ups and downs, and I think a certain degree of this when it comes to the amount of domination one can fit into a relationship applies too. FT and I usually like to play on an almost daily basis, but life’s stresses have recently been getting in the way. He doesn’t feel like giving up control as much when he doesn’t feel in control to begin with, and I don’t always feel like taking control when I’ve had to be in control all day. Luckily we’re both a bit switchy (and I am very much a masochist), so on days like this I will tell him to beat me. “But you’re supposed to be the dominant!” some of you will think. Yes, I am, and that doesn’t change when I tell him to pick up the cane and make me cry. I tell him exactly what I want and I get it. Pain makes me laugh and cry and come, so why shouldn’t it be part of the range of behaviors I tell him to perform?

Of course, after being beaten, I tied him up, put an anal hook in his ass, strapped a cock to his face, and rode it till I squirted in his eyes. I’m definitely starting to see where men come from on facials. Leaving FT dripping in my come is delicious. It also rather easily takes him into subspace, which is when he is his most beautiful; all adorable, vulnerable, and utterly mine. After that I unlocked the cock from his face and then slowly lowered my cunt into his mouth. This is a position he’s very familiar with, and he knows what to do. After coming a few more times I decided it was his turn.

He groaned with relief as I took the anal hook out of his ass. I donned my strap-on and bent him over. I had recently gotten my fist into his ass for the first time, so I knew the porn-star-sized dildo I had would be no problem. A note about strap-on sex – it gets me off. I fantasized about it before I got into BDSM in any way. Before I had even had sex I was asking my then-boyfriend if he’d be willing to take a dildo up his ass. Furthermore, it makes me come and I love the hurt-pleasure looks it creates on FT’s face. So this day, I was going to enjoy hurting him with my cock – fucking him a little too hard and a little too long (with lots of lube mind you – his ass must remain fuckable and functioning). I warmed him up with my fingers, felt his prostate and his taint become harder under my touch. He breathed in amyl nitrate as I slid into him.

He was moaning almost from the beginning. I love making him moan, and only a good ass-fucking really does it. I grabbed his rope harness and his hips to pull his ass onto me as I fucked him from behind. As I thrust into him long and hard, the harness stimulated my clit as the straps rubbed against my labia and I came. He started touching himself, but I nixed that, telling him that he was going to have to beg me to stop first. He soon did of course. I allowed him to come, but then kept fucking him afterwords until he was really begging me to stop; a desperation in his voice that fueled my sadistic flames.

I pulled out of him, took my harness off, undid some of his bindings, and held him as he had his aftershocks (and I had mine) – little convulsions of post-orgasmic pleasure. I ran my fingers through his hair, kissed his forehead, and embraced him.

So, I have focused on the peaks, but we’ve been experiencing troughs lately too. However, in some ways this makes the peaks all the better. I think I still prefer more peaks though.

Orgasm Control

My fuck toy will be returning this week from being away for far too long. We’re both very excited. As the date grows closer, I’ve been thinking about the shape I’d like our relationship to take. We’re both kinky as hell and enjoy each others’ imaginations and various fetishes, but we’ve struggled a little with how far the D/s should go. I have a rather stressful job, so spending loads of time and mental energy supervising him just isn’t ideal, and it’s not really what he wants either. We like the idea of 24/7 D/s, but have decided to start with the bedroom and then go with what feels natural from there.

To aid me in my ponderings, I’ve been checking out other people’s blogs. I’ve found maymay’s, Tom Allen’s, and Thumper’s to be quite helpful. The latter two have a focus on male chastity (although Tom Allen often addresses other concepts), which, as I’ve mentioned, isn’t exactly what I want. However, Thumper’s post on the bliss of only ever enjoying orgasm with one’s partner struck a chord in me. Fuck toy and I enjoy control, but I don’t like putting him in chastity for too long because I enjoy his orgasms and I enjoy riding him for ages and then coming together. In fact, for his impending birthday I’m going to make him come till it hurts, and that’s a very exciting idea.

However, all of these are things that he can do with me. He’s not going to be allowed to come on his own anymore. That isn’t to say that he’ll come any less often or that he won’t be allowed to watch porn. Just that his orgasms always have to happen with me. Being so intimately tied in with his sexual pleasure will be fun. Just as Thumper’s said, I have no problem with men’s masturbatory habits generally. Masturbation isn’t a problem or anything. And sometimes, if I’m sleepy, I may allow him to simply masturbate beside me as I snuggle up to him. But always sharing that moment will, I think, be rather magical and deepen his submission.

Sometimes he won’t be allowed to come, and there will certainly be plenty of times that he doesn’t get to come as soon as he’d like too (I love edging). However, realistically, most days he will have an orgasm because I enjoy watching him in that moment. I love his face, his noises, his surrender. It’s beautiful.