but in a context where the type and amount of treatment I receive is in my control, as a sub.
I laugh because… to me? My sub, sub to my switch?
You are only in control of essentially what you can trick me into doing. And I tend to be a rather quick learner. Either that or what you can literally force me into doing. You better either figure out one of those… or … learn my rules. >;D
Safe words, of course, for emergency stop, but… that’s it.
I revel in the extremely direct and obvious control… but I make the rules of it… very simple. That. That is how I train a sub. You actually have to control or utilize yourself, really, mostly… and in so doing… I become essentially entirely predictable, a ‘solved game’. Sub and dom then cease to actually make sense as distinct and consistent concepts.
So this is kind of the antithesis of at least what I percieve as ‘patriarchy’. It is straightforward and obvious… not… taken for granted, via unspoken rules. It is ‘total’ and domineering… but it is also totally undoable, reversible.
Quite literally, I’ll give you what you want, but only if you play my game, and in so doing, you kind of have to learn to think and act as I do.
Is that … manipulation, or communication?
… I don’t know. Both? Is that feminine, masucline? Both, Other? Don’t know, but it is generally quite enjoyable.
I am forcing or encouraging a condition that makes each of us both subject and object of the other, to the other.
Eitherway, my psychosexual analysis of myself is… i yearn for a kind of connection on a level that is… not commonly achieved.
My own kind of ‘disasterpiece’, hahah!
Nonetheless, your perspective/style is… interesting. Somewhat relatable, somewhat alien, to me.
I don’t understand the desire to be … degraded, or used… but I do understand your inversion of it. Makes sense.
Likewise, I, a bi switch dude, have no desire to be degraded, by a woman… or anyone, really.
But I do understand that if you are always wearing the mask of ‘competent powerful leader man’… the exact opposite of this is deviant and thus secretly desirable/enjoyable.
I guess uh… case in point: Kristi Noem’s husband. Who has been… basically socially cucked, (literally being cucked aside, or ancillary) by his much more socially powerful and influential wife, if he subscribes to stereotypical patriarchichal societal and family roles/norms.
Results in ‘well then I guess I have to be the hyper stereotypical bimbo/trophy wife, because she is clearly the man of the house’.
A sexist way of humilating himself. … Ironically, still very self centered.
Hah!
I laugh because… to me? My sub, sub to my switch?
You are only in control of essentially what you can trick me into doing. And I tend to be a rather quick learner. Either that or what you can literally force me into doing. You better either figure out one of those… or … learn my rules. >;D
Safe words, of course, for emergency stop, but… that’s it.
I revel in the extremely direct and obvious control… but I make the rules of it… very simple. That. That is how I train a sub. You actually have to control or utilize yourself, really, mostly… and in so doing… I become essentially entirely predictable, a ‘solved game’. Sub and dom then cease to actually make sense as distinct and consistent concepts.
So this is kind of the antithesis of at least what I percieve as ‘patriarchy’. It is straightforward and obvious… not… taken for granted, via unspoken rules. It is ‘total’ and domineering… but it is also totally undoable, reversible.
Quite literally, I’ll give you what you want, but only if you play my game, and in so doing, you kind of have to learn to think and act as I do.
Is that … manipulation, or communication?
… I don’t know. Both? Is that feminine, masucline? Both, Other? Don’t know, but it is generally quite enjoyable.
I am forcing or encouraging a condition that makes each of us both subject and object of the other, to the other.
Eitherway, my psychosexual analysis of myself is… i yearn for a kind of connection on a level that is… not commonly achieved.
My own kind of ‘disasterpiece’, hahah!
Nonetheless, your perspective/style is… interesting. Somewhat relatable, somewhat alien, to me.
I don’t understand the desire to be … degraded, or used… but I do understand your inversion of it. Makes sense.
Likewise, I, a bi switch dude, have no desire to be degraded, by a woman… or anyone, really.
But I do understand that if you are always wearing the mask of ‘competent powerful leader man’… the exact opposite of this is deviant and thus secretly desirable/enjoyable.
I guess uh… case in point: Kristi Noem’s husband. Who has been… basically socially cucked, (literally being cucked aside, or ancillary) by his much more socially powerful and influential wife, if he subscribes to stereotypical patriarchichal societal and family roles/norms.
Results in ‘well then I guess I have to be the hyper stereotypical bimbo/trophy wife, because she is clearly the man of the house’.
A sexist way of humilating himself. … Ironically, still very self centered.