Very very true.onceuponsirsstarrynight:It has been said many times and in many ways by many men who
Very very true.onceuponsirsstarrynight:It has been said many times and in many ways by many men who aspire to dominance that the reason for a relationship’s failure was because the submissive refused to be led. That she was not a “good enough submissive.” I’ve spent over a decade in the lifestyle now, and at this point I’ve learned enough that the phrase upsets my equilibrium. My frustration the product of an understanding of how deleterious the words can be, and how manipulative the act of uttering them is. That frustration or even perhaps that anger which arises in my soul is driven by an innate desire to protect. I know too well the pain that words can create has the potential to be paralyzing. They’re words that invalidate her effort, that belittle her fears, that arouse her anxiety. And unconsciously or not, is that not the intent? When we’re disappointed in our child, do we not question why ever they would do such a thing? Do we not question their actions hoping to instill in them a sense of shame? “How could they?” The fundamental flaw in laying the blame at those we seek to lead is that tools such as shame and embarrassment do not lead us any closer to our objectives. When we shame those we ought to be inspiring by the quality of our words and actions, we lead them down a path of self-doubt. A submissive flower does not bloom in the darkness of failure, it’s petals spread for those that gently coax and nurture it’s growth, those that guide it to life. It sheds it’s shell and opens only for those that envelope them in the warmth and light of love and forgiveness. There was a moment some years ago, back when I was a much younger and more foolish man than even I am now, when a moment of rare clarity struck me that these words were illogical. Laughably so. You see the inherent contradiction that exists here is that there can be no such thing as a “bad submissive.” When we think of what any person is, we come to understand that they are the product of their circumstances. Their education, their upbringing, their experiences. I am thirty one years of experience, of education. Equal measures of blessings, curses, education, successes, and failures. A unique blend of genetics and synaptic conditioning that make has arranged my synaptic bridges to interact with my neurons in ways that make me, me. Those synaptic responses are the results of the programming of our lives. The brilliant thing about the human mind of course is that we can be rewired, our human computer reprogrammed. We can be taught to react to stimuli in different ways. We learn, we grow, we evolve, and our specific species of animal does this better than any other. Almost any part of us can be altered. We can overcome our mental and emotional limitations, we can rise, strive, and conquer; ourselves, our worlds. So when a dominant tells a submissive that she isn’t, “a good enough submissive,” my mind quavers at the concept. How ever could such a thing as a “bad submissive” exist? Is the submissive not the product of her dominant’s teachings? Is she not the woman that his hands, those that love and those that correct, have melded? Does an artist look down at his tapestry and belittle it for having laid the brushstrokes inadequately? Is that not what I am, an artist that paints with love instead of oil? Has she not given herself to me, laid herself bare before me for my guidance and entrusted me with her growth? And in accepting this gift of life have I not also accepted responsibility for it’s cultivation? Does the farmer blame the crop that he sows? No, there is no such thing as a bad canvas, nor a bad seed. There are however poor artists and poor farmers; those that lay their strokes without care, or growers who fail to water their plant. So why would we deign to blame the submissive when she is merely a product of his tutelage, his guidance, his love, his discipline? When a dominant man says that she has been a “bad submissive,” is he not, in full disclosure, saying that he is a bad dominant? Has he not accepted full responsibility for the quality of his charge, and is he not admitting to negligence or ineffectiveness? In doing so is he not forsaking his duty, his ethics, his ethos? Surely submissives will err, such is the nature of humanity. But when I wake, to whom will I bestow the obligation of accountability? To the one I’ve aspired to lead? It is a matter of fundamental import wherein I must make a full accounting of my desires. Do I wish to be the man who demurs and deflects? Or do I aspire to be the man to whom she can entrust her bared soul? Could there ever be such a thing as a “bad submissive?” Are there not only ineffective dominants? -- source link