Dom in life, sub in bed
June 9, 2009 8:21 AM Subscribe
Dom in life, sub in bed - how to get over feeling like a hypocrite?
I'm a girl in my early twenties, in law school, and most of my life up to this point has been preparation for a successful career. Not to say I haven't had fun, but that was, and still is, one of my major goals in life. I'm a staunch feminist. I'm doing well and I have no real concerns about my professional future.
Just as a sidenote, I know that I can have these two sides to my personality and be happy with myself and I don't have to be exclusively one type of person in each realm of my life. I try not to be close-minded that way, but nevertheless something feels wrong.
My problem is how I reconcile that part of me, with the other, very different side of me. Sexually, I'm about as submissive as a person can get. I'm into BDSM, general D/s, and you could say anything related to "little girl" fetishes. I went through a phase when I was younger where I thought I was really screwed up and there was something wrong with me, but now I enjoy it immensely and have found someone who is absolutely amazing in relating to both of these sides.
Every now and again though, I feel like something is wrong. I have arguments about whether there are inherent differences between males and females and I refuse to believe that my femininity makes me less capable of being successful professional and being a good leader. And then this voice in my head always says "if only they knew what you like to do when you're alone at home."
My question is not about how to change anything. I don't. I was just wondering if anyone else has dealt with this particular issue and how they reconciled these conflicting attitudes in their minds. I just want to stop feeling like there is something "wrong" and just be able to pursue all my goals without feeling like a hypocrite.
I'm a girl in my early twenties, in law school, and most of my life up to this point has been preparation for a successful career. Not to say I haven't had fun, but that was, and still is, one of my major goals in life. I'm a staunch feminist. I'm doing well and I have no real concerns about my professional future.
Just as a sidenote, I know that I can have these two sides to my personality and be happy with myself and I don't have to be exclusively one type of person in each realm of my life. I try not to be close-minded that way, but nevertheless something feels wrong.
My problem is how I reconcile that part of me, with the other, very different side of me. Sexually, I'm about as submissive as a person can get. I'm into BDSM, general D/s, and you could say anything related to "little girl" fetishes. I went through a phase when I was younger where I thought I was really screwed up and there was something wrong with me, but now I enjoy it immensely and have found someone who is absolutely amazing in relating to both of these sides.
Every now and again though, I feel like something is wrong. I have arguments about whether there are inherent differences between males and females and I refuse to believe that my femininity makes me less capable of being successful professional and being a good leader. And then this voice in my head always says "if only they knew what you like to do when you're alone at home."
My question is not about how to change anything. I don't. I was just wondering if anyone else has dealt with this particular issue and how they reconciled these conflicting attitudes in their minds. I just want to stop feeling like there is something "wrong" and just be able to pursue all my goals without feeling like a hypocrite.
The stereotype for agressive, successful businessmen is sub. Are women really supposed to be that different?
posted by HFSH at 8:29 AM on June 9, 2009
posted by HFSH at 8:29 AM on June 9, 2009
You're in excellent company. This is so common as to be a cliche. Some pro dommes I know have a general rule of thumb (heh) — the more dominant and powerful the sub is in life, the more submissive when it comes to BDSM. Various hypotheses have been batted about, but one I have heard often is "I have to make so many decisions at work, I constantly have to be the one in charge. When I do this, someone else makes all of the decisions for me, and it's such a release."
View it less as hypocrisy and more as a counterbalance.
posted by adipocere at 8:31 AM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
View it less as hypocrisy and more as a counterbalance.
posted by adipocere at 8:31 AM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
If I had a dollar for every staunchly feminist woman I know who's also very submissive during sex, and who had to reconcile those sides of herself - well, I'd have enough for a sandwich.
posted by Tomorrowful at 8:32 AM on June 9, 2009
posted by Tomorrowful at 8:32 AM on June 9, 2009
It's a holdover from when we thought that women could be either "good" or "bad" and there was no middle ground. Feminism taught us that women can't possibly live up to such a ridiculous and imaginary standard. Sometimes you act this way, sometimes you act another way. That's how people are.
posted by amethysts at 8:32 AM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by amethysts at 8:32 AM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
Reminds me of the old (and I mean old) Enjoli commercials. Where the woman sang, "I can bring home the bacon..." (dressed as a power executive)..."fry it up in the pan..." (dressed as "housewife"..."and never, never, never let you forget you're a man" (dressed as a sex kitten).
There's nothing you need to change...other than what it really *means* to be a feminist.
posted by teg4rvn at 8:44 AM on June 9, 2009
There's nothing you need to change...other than what it really *means* to be a feminist.
posted by teg4rvn at 8:44 AM on June 9, 2009
> I have arguments about whether there are inherent differences between males and females and I refuse to believe that my femininity makes me less capable of being successful professional and being a good leader.
This seems to be a common line of thought: "If men and women are different, then the glass ceiling and lower female pay and patriarchal oppression would be a product of those differences... but that's crazy... so I refuse to believe that men and women are different!"
There are inherent differences between men and women, in terms of their bodies, brains, and sensory organs-- but these differences have absolutely zero bearing on female professional success and leadership ability.
The real point is this: You have figured out what brings you pleasure-- the mental and physical and relational qualities of subbing-- and you are aggressively, determinedly, confidently moving to obtain more of what brings you pleasure... all of which, in a larger sense, seems pretty dom and powerful and strong to me.
posted by darth_tedious at 8:48 AM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
This seems to be a common line of thought: "If men and women are different, then the glass ceiling and lower female pay and patriarchal oppression would be a product of those differences... but that's crazy... so I refuse to believe that men and women are different!"
There are inherent differences between men and women, in terms of their bodies, brains, and sensory organs-- but these differences have absolutely zero bearing on female professional success and leadership ability.
The real point is this: You have figured out what brings you pleasure-- the mental and physical and relational qualities of subbing-- and you are aggressively, determinedly, confidently moving to obtain more of what brings you pleasure... all of which, in a larger sense, seems pretty dom and powerful and strong to me.
posted by darth_tedious at 8:48 AM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
Sex is very, very personal for everyone, and there are no hard-and-fast rules when it comes to what "normal" is, even for a given "type" of person. As long as what you do makes you happy, and the other person (or people) in the room who are participating are also participating in a way that makes them happy, then you're good. If that means you're submissive, and your partner(s) are down with that, then great - you have no problem so far as I can see. If that means you're submissive only on alternate Wednesdays, also great. If that means you need to have a toy chicken in the room just to observe, and you find a partner who also thinks it's cool, go for it.
As a friend of mine once said, "hell, wiring is weird." There pretty much is no hard-and-fast rule for what is "normal". It's better for you to identify "what works for me specifically," and find people who also dig it than for you to fret about "what does it say about me that I'm submissive?" All it means about you, honestly, is "this is just the way I'm wired when it comes to sex. No big."
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 8:59 AM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
As a friend of mine once said, "hell, wiring is weird." There pretty much is no hard-and-fast rule for what is "normal". It's better for you to identify "what works for me specifically," and find people who also dig it than for you to fret about "what does it say about me that I'm submissive?" All it means about you, honestly, is "this is just the way I'm wired when it comes to sex. No big."
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 8:59 AM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
What you're talking about here is balance. And what you're describing is very, very common - I can count tens or hundreds of people i've met with similar stories. Stick with what makes you happy.
posted by arimathea at 9:00 AM on June 9, 2009
posted by arimathea at 9:00 AM on June 9, 2009
Hi, anon: While I haven't had to deal personally with the phenomenon you're describing, I've certainly known (and, I hope, helped) a few people through it.
First, good for you for being content in your kink. There's a lot of people who struggle in just accepting that, and hide it forever from those they love. Having conquered that, you're having a problem reconciling the entirely capable woman you are in public from what turns you on in private. I call it "vestigial shame", or "the invisible scarlet letter".
I think you're encountering the dichotomy that many submissives do: "I'm so in control in my public life. But having someone else in control of aspects of my private life makes me a hypocrite, and less than perfect."
The truth is, everyone has a private life that is their release, their balm, and their hiding place, from spending the weekend dressed in your PJs to the porn stash to what you like to do in bed. And everyone fears that somehow that behavior will "leak through" to their public life, to reveal them to be weak, flawed, indulgent creatures.
In fact, that private release, whatever form it takes - the train set in the basement, the electric guitar, or the bondage gear in the closet - allows them to cope in their work and the demands placed on their lives. It's an oasis. It makes you better at what you do.
Can you imagine the type of person you'd have to become in order to be in control all the time? Would you even like that person? Do you really want to bring your work environment, and its associated persona, home to bed?
If the answer is "of course not", then reconcile your private behavior - which is absolutely no-one's business or interest but your own, and your partner's - with your public life by reframing your submissive behavior (which comes out only in its appropriate time and context) as your release, your escape, or your reward.
This has nothing to do with being male or female, or gender norms. This has everything to do with being a complete person, with embracing and accepting every part of yourself that contributes to who you want to be: even the parts that appear contradictory.
posted by Bora Horza Gobuchul at 9:00 AM on June 9, 2009 [5 favorites]
First, good for you for being content in your kink. There's a lot of people who struggle in just accepting that, and hide it forever from those they love. Having conquered that, you're having a problem reconciling the entirely capable woman you are in public from what turns you on in private. I call it "vestigial shame", or "the invisible scarlet letter".
I think you're encountering the dichotomy that many submissives do: "I'm so in control in my public life. But having someone else in control of aspects of my private life makes me a hypocrite, and less than perfect."
The truth is, everyone has a private life that is their release, their balm, and their hiding place, from spending the weekend dressed in your PJs to the porn stash to what you like to do in bed. And everyone fears that somehow that behavior will "leak through" to their public life, to reveal them to be weak, flawed, indulgent creatures.
In fact, that private release, whatever form it takes - the train set in the basement, the electric guitar, or the bondage gear in the closet - allows them to cope in their work and the demands placed on their lives. It's an oasis. It makes you better at what you do.
Can you imagine the type of person you'd have to become in order to be in control all the time? Would you even like that person? Do you really want to bring your work environment, and its associated persona, home to bed?
If the answer is "of course not", then reconcile your private behavior - which is absolutely no-one's business or interest but your own, and your partner's - with your public life by reframing your submissive behavior (which comes out only in its appropriate time and context) as your release, your escape, or your reward.
This has nothing to do with being male or female, or gender norms. This has everything to do with being a complete person, with embracing and accepting every part of yourself that contributes to who you want to be: even the parts that appear contradictory.
posted by Bora Horza Gobuchul at 9:00 AM on June 9, 2009 [5 favorites]
Everyone's already said it, but: this is an extremely common (almost cliché) dynamic in BDSM, and absolutely nothing to be ashamed of. :) Enjoy it!
posted by teresci at 9:08 AM on June 9, 2009
posted by teresci at 9:08 AM on June 9, 2009
I dunno. It seems sort of anti-feminist to me to assume that sexual submissiveness has anything to do with being female.
Instead, feminism is all about embracing who you are and seeking to celebrate the choices you're making regardless of gender and expected norms. Does your submissiveness make you feel happy? Is it the right choice for you? Then good--celebrate it. As long as you're doing that, you don't have to worry about losing your feminist-club membership card.
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 9:21 AM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
Instead, feminism is all about embracing who you are and seeking to celebrate the choices you're making regardless of gender and expected norms. Does your submissiveness make you feel happy? Is it the right choice for you? Then good--celebrate it. As long as you're doing that, you don't have to worry about losing your feminist-club membership card.
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 9:21 AM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
Nthing what everyone else said: far from weird, you're probably in the majority. Most submissives I've known were very headstrong and "bossy" in their normal life, in fact.
And if you're spending all your non-bed time always being in charge, it's not a big shock that you enjoy "playing" something different. Otherwise it would be like work, right?
(I organize work people for a living. I've always hated being put "in charge" of organizing the bowling league or the surprise party or something that should be "fun" for me. Probably a less sexy version of the same need for release.)
posted by rokusan at 9:23 AM on June 9, 2009
And if you're spending all your non-bed time always being in charge, it's not a big shock that you enjoy "playing" something different. Otherwise it would be like work, right?
(I organize work people for a living. I've always hated being put "in charge" of organizing the bowling league or the surprise party or something that should be "fun" for me. Probably a less sexy version of the same need for release.)
posted by rokusan at 9:23 AM on June 9, 2009
You say you're a feminist- but what kind of a feminist? If you want academic justification for what everyone else has already said up-thread, go for Post Structural feminism. Challenge all the categories and find that gender liberation can only occur once these oppressive categories about what is feminine and what is masculine are eliminated such that genuine and diverse human expression can emerge.
posted by kch at 9:51 AM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by kch at 9:51 AM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
Oh, and it's the existence of these oppressive and normative categories that is making you feel like a hypocrite, and these feelings are maintaining your oppression. That's the post structuralist feminist approach to this, anyway.
posted by kch at 9:53 AM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by kch at 9:53 AM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]
I dunno. It seems sort of anti-feminist to me to assume that sexual submissiveness has anything to do with being female.
It's a message that's reinforced so much by popular culture.
And of course, it's not really true (like so many of said messages). OP, I know lots of men who are subs, and many of them are forceful, aggressive people in all other arenas of their lives. There's no reason the same shouldn't be true of women.
The other factor is that, in addition to popular culture, there are quite a few assholes within BDSM culture who spin yarns about how "submission is natural for women because women are naturally submissive to the ALPHA MALE blah blah Gor blah blah." Which is offputting, I'd imagine, when you're a sub woman looking for a dom man who understands that this is about getting off, not about creating some kind of pornotopia where ponytailed sysadmins are worshipped as gods.
posted by Sidhedevil at 10:11 AM on June 9, 2009 [7 favorites]
It's a message that's reinforced so much by popular culture.
And of course, it's not really true (like so many of said messages). OP, I know lots of men who are subs, and many of them are forceful, aggressive people in all other arenas of their lives. There's no reason the same shouldn't be true of women.
The other factor is that, in addition to popular culture, there are quite a few assholes within BDSM culture who spin yarns about how "submission is natural for women because women are naturally submissive to the ALPHA MALE blah blah Gor blah blah." Which is offputting, I'd imagine, when you're a sub woman looking for a dom man who understands that this is about getting off, not about creating some kind of pornotopia where ponytailed sysadmins are worshipped as gods.
posted by Sidhedevil at 10:11 AM on June 9, 2009 [7 favorites]
And then this voice in my head always says "if only they knew what you like to do when you're alone at home."
Nobody cares. Really. Unless they're very backward and repressed, in which case you probably don't care much about their opinion.
You're, presumably, doing what you enjoy in the bedroom (even if it's under the auspices of following your partner's orders). Submission requires active consent even if you foster the illusion of non-consent (e.g. rape play). Therefore you are ultimately the agent of your own sexuality. You choose your partner. You choose to consent to activities X, Y, and Z. You can choose to stop at any time. I am dominant to my husband, and although I nominally have control, he has the power to stop the scene on a dime with one word.
Free agency in sexuality is part and parcel of feminism, no?
posted by desjardins at 10:42 AM on June 9, 2009
Nobody cares. Really. Unless they're very backward and repressed, in which case you probably don't care much about their opinion.
You're, presumably, doing what you enjoy in the bedroom (even if it's under the auspices of following your partner's orders). Submission requires active consent even if you foster the illusion of non-consent (e.g. rape play). Therefore you are ultimately the agent of your own sexuality. You choose your partner. You choose to consent to activities X, Y, and Z. You can choose to stop at any time. I am dominant to my husband, and although I nominally have control, he has the power to stop the scene on a dime with one word.
Free agency in sexuality is part and parcel of feminism, no?
posted by desjardins at 10:42 AM on June 9, 2009
Being a good submissive requires an enormous amount of strength, courage and self-respect. Give yourself credit for that.
(As a matter of fact, it's entirely possible that it's these very same qualities that make you a good leader and a good sub. The fact that you're giving orders in one case, and taking them in the other, doesn't change the fact that you're showing strength of character in both cases.)
posted by nebulawindphone at 11:41 AM on June 9, 2009
(As a matter of fact, it's entirely possible that it's these very same qualities that make you a good leader and a good sub. The fact that you're giving orders in one case, and taking them in the other, doesn't change the fact that you're showing strength of character in both cases.)
posted by nebulawindphone at 11:41 AM on June 9, 2009
Having just graduated from law school myself, let me tell you that what you're experiencing is far from unusual. I've known several fellow law student women, both inside and outside the context of a relationship, who were simultaneously entirely confident professionally and unquestionably submissive in bed. The degree to which they were comfortable talking about and acting out their submissive tendencies was largely based on their own sexual experience and awareness of/comfort with kink, but the underlying pattern was definitely there.
People are complicated, and sex is just about the most complicated thing about us. If one feels no tension in this area, one may well be insufficiently self-reflective. If anything, that tension serves to heighten and intensify the experience on many levels. And just because something can from a certain perspective seem contradictory does not mean that from another perspective that same thing cannot make perfect sense.
Thus far for reiterating what other people have said. My bit of "value-added" here would be to suggest that your biggest challenge will probably finding people with whom you can share your proclivities without exposing yourself to professional embarrassment. For all its liberal political leanings, the legal profession is pretty damned conservative almost across the board when it comes to stuff like this. A certain amount of discretion is probably in order, and your anonymous posting would seem to indicate that you're aware of this. Be comfortable with yourself--I'd share BitterOldPunk's assessment that you sound perfectly well-adjusted to me--but watch your ass, as it were.
posted by valkyryn at 12:20 PM on June 9, 2009
People are complicated, and sex is just about the most complicated thing about us. If one feels no tension in this area, one may well be insufficiently self-reflective. If anything, that tension serves to heighten and intensify the experience on many levels. And just because something can from a certain perspective seem contradictory does not mean that from another perspective that same thing cannot make perfect sense.
Thus far for reiterating what other people have said. My bit of "value-added" here would be to suggest that your biggest challenge will probably finding people with whom you can share your proclivities without exposing yourself to professional embarrassment. For all its liberal political leanings, the legal profession is pretty damned conservative almost across the board when it comes to stuff like this. A certain amount of discretion is probably in order, and your anonymous posting would seem to indicate that you're aware of this. Be comfortable with yourself--I'd share BitterOldPunk's assessment that you sound perfectly well-adjusted to me--but watch your ass, as it were.
posted by valkyryn at 12:20 PM on June 9, 2009
What the first few commenters said. (I stopped reading after there.) Not only is this common, in some sense it's true to form. The sub is really the person running things in anything but the kinkiest of kinky sex. I also think it's vastly more common. I've known of slightly kinky couples who have had serious friction over who gets to be the sub.
Also, really, sex is such a ridiculous thing, do you really want your identity for less ridiculous things affected by your preferences in bed?
posted by paultopia at 1:55 PM on June 9, 2009
Also, really, sex is such a ridiculous thing, do you really want your identity for less ridiculous things affected by your preferences in bed?
posted by paultopia at 1:55 PM on June 9, 2009
anon: My question is not about how to change anything. I don't. I was just wondering if anyone else has dealt with this particular issue and how they reconciled these conflicting attitudes in their minds. I just want to stop feeling like there is something "wrong" and just be able to pursue all my goals without feeling like a hypocrite.
There are a lot of people here telling you what you already know, and what you've said in the question: that there's nothing morally wrong with you and with the way you are. This is an obvious point, especially in these days when we are judged by society on the time it takes us to rush to validate and accept people; everybody's knee-jerk reaction to any question about why we feel a certain thing or why we desire a specific sexual way these days will invariably be: you're okay! There's nothing wrong with the way you feel and the desires you have!
Ninety-nine per cent of the time, everybody is right; and they're obviously right in this case, as you well know. So I won't waste any more of your time on that.
The reason I've gone over it, however, is because I want to point out that, while you're right that, as you're clearly aware, you aren't doing anything morally wrong, you're absolutely correct to feel as though there's something “wrong” about the way you are living. In our time, we're so concerned with doing away with the mores that have caused so much painful shame in the past (a perfectly good goal) that we often don't realize that the whole point isn't just to get past good and evil; it's to get beyond good and evil.
You are feeling spiritual dissonance. You are wondering whether you're being true to yourself in changing so dramatically in the bedroom and out of the bedroom. At the risk of frightening people who are more concerned with just getting past morality, I would say that you're right to wonder: if your personality changes so dramatically when you walk through the door between your bedroom and the rest of your life, then one or both of those personas is probably an expression of something you aren't conscious of, something under the surface.
Now, you're perfectly free to continue to live this way, but you asked this question because, and I emphasize this because it's important, you feel as though there's something wrong about this. You aren't coming out and saying it, but it sounds as though you feel as though one of these personas is not as ‘true’ as the other—as though one of these personas is faking it. Which is a better indication than anything else that you say; you feel as though there's a dissonance. That means there probably is.
And I know that this is difficult to accept, but the heart, the spirit, while not an obligation, is a priority, a necessity and a fair and noble aim. We're eager in our time to see all human beings as equal in every way; this is an aspect of our democracy. Since some people are in complete control of their libidos and other people have no sexual control whatsoever, we feel obligated to believe that our sexuality is utterly beyond our control and that our desires are an abstract constant with us from birth until death. But while they are obscure our desires have roots, sources in our lives, sources that are sometimes clear and sometimes obscure. It always seems frightening to accept this, because to do so we have to contemplate the fact that we have some agency, some control over what we desire, and whenever we have some agency we worry about whether we should feel ashamed of what we are. It makes the situation much tidier when we tell ourselves we have no control—that way, we don't have to face our deeper selves—but it isn't true, and this lie we tell ourselves holds us back from spiritual advancement. There is, of course, no moral obligation for us to advance ourselves spiritually; the only reason one should try is because spiritual advancement affords us greater pleasure and satisfaction than anything else in the world.
The truth, which isn't as ugly as we're afraid it will be, is that sexual desire is often a sublimated or masked desire for something else. Your desire to submit sexually may reflect a larger desire to be gentler and more submissive in life. Frankly, that's understandable; our society, still quite sexist, expects certain ridiculous things of women, one of which is a comical and caricatured degree of false submissiveness and false fragility, and it takes an extraordinary degree of willfullness and vigorous force to to stand up to that—and (I probably don't have to tell you) especially in such a testosterone-laced environment as law school.
That's the easy, simple answer, however. The fact is that sex is often not simply a sublimated form of our everyday desires so much as a truer form of our deepest, most hidden desires. Sex runs to the core of our very natures. The fact that sex is sometimes an expression of deeper desires doesn't negate it or remove its force; understanding the currents running under the surface makes it more fulfilling, not less. The way you live your daily life can just as easliy be an expression of your desires, perhaps your desire not to be hurt or not to be subjugated.
If there's a conflict between the way you live and the way you have sex, then that's because two desires have come into conflict. The two desires in your life which have come into conflict are the desire to control and dominate relationships and the desire to submit and give up all control. The desire to submit to a strong and penetrating and unapologetically perfect man, to a just, righteous and courageous leader, to that which is truly and completely good and fine, is a desire which runs deep within the human soul, an erotic desire. A whole religion, with millions of adherents around the world, adopts as its very core this desire; and a look at its own state in today's world is enough to demonstrate clearly how difficult it is to reconcile the desire to submit with the desire not to be forced to submit.
posted by koeselitz at 3:01 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
There are a lot of people here telling you what you already know, and what you've said in the question: that there's nothing morally wrong with you and with the way you are. This is an obvious point, especially in these days when we are judged by society on the time it takes us to rush to validate and accept people; everybody's knee-jerk reaction to any question about why we feel a certain thing or why we desire a specific sexual way these days will invariably be: you're okay! There's nothing wrong with the way you feel and the desires you have!
Ninety-nine per cent of the time, everybody is right; and they're obviously right in this case, as you well know. So I won't waste any more of your time on that.
The reason I've gone over it, however, is because I want to point out that, while you're right that, as you're clearly aware, you aren't doing anything morally wrong, you're absolutely correct to feel as though there's something “wrong” about the way you are living. In our time, we're so concerned with doing away with the mores that have caused so much painful shame in the past (a perfectly good goal) that we often don't realize that the whole point isn't just to get past good and evil; it's to get beyond good and evil.
You are feeling spiritual dissonance. You are wondering whether you're being true to yourself in changing so dramatically in the bedroom and out of the bedroom. At the risk of frightening people who are more concerned with just getting past morality, I would say that you're right to wonder: if your personality changes so dramatically when you walk through the door between your bedroom and the rest of your life, then one or both of those personas is probably an expression of something you aren't conscious of, something under the surface.
Now, you're perfectly free to continue to live this way, but you asked this question because, and I emphasize this because it's important, you feel as though there's something wrong about this. You aren't coming out and saying it, but it sounds as though you feel as though one of these personas is not as ‘true’ as the other—as though one of these personas is faking it. Which is a better indication than anything else that you say; you feel as though there's a dissonance. That means there probably is.
And I know that this is difficult to accept, but the heart, the spirit, while not an obligation, is a priority, a necessity and a fair and noble aim. We're eager in our time to see all human beings as equal in every way; this is an aspect of our democracy. Since some people are in complete control of their libidos and other people have no sexual control whatsoever, we feel obligated to believe that our sexuality is utterly beyond our control and that our desires are an abstract constant with us from birth until death. But while they are obscure our desires have roots, sources in our lives, sources that are sometimes clear and sometimes obscure. It always seems frightening to accept this, because to do so we have to contemplate the fact that we have some agency, some control over what we desire, and whenever we have some agency we worry about whether we should feel ashamed of what we are. It makes the situation much tidier when we tell ourselves we have no control—that way, we don't have to face our deeper selves—but it isn't true, and this lie we tell ourselves holds us back from spiritual advancement. There is, of course, no moral obligation for us to advance ourselves spiritually; the only reason one should try is because spiritual advancement affords us greater pleasure and satisfaction than anything else in the world.
The truth, which isn't as ugly as we're afraid it will be, is that sexual desire is often a sublimated or masked desire for something else. Your desire to submit sexually may reflect a larger desire to be gentler and more submissive in life. Frankly, that's understandable; our society, still quite sexist, expects certain ridiculous things of women, one of which is a comical and caricatured degree of false submissiveness and false fragility, and it takes an extraordinary degree of willfullness and vigorous force to to stand up to that—and (I probably don't have to tell you) especially in such a testosterone-laced environment as law school.
That's the easy, simple answer, however. The fact is that sex is often not simply a sublimated form of our everyday desires so much as a truer form of our deepest, most hidden desires. Sex runs to the core of our very natures. The fact that sex is sometimes an expression of deeper desires doesn't negate it or remove its force; understanding the currents running under the surface makes it more fulfilling, not less. The way you live your daily life can just as easliy be an expression of your desires, perhaps your desire not to be hurt or not to be subjugated.
If there's a conflict between the way you live and the way you have sex, then that's because two desires have come into conflict. The two desires in your life which have come into conflict are the desire to control and dominate relationships and the desire to submit and give up all control. The desire to submit to a strong and penetrating and unapologetically perfect man, to a just, righteous and courageous leader, to that which is truly and completely good and fine, is a desire which runs deep within the human soul, an erotic desire. A whole religion, with millions of adherents around the world, adopts as its very core this desire; and a look at its own state in today's world is enough to demonstrate clearly how difficult it is to reconcile the desire to submit with the desire not to be forced to submit.
posted by koeselitz at 3:01 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
Carol Queen has an essay in Real Live Nude Girl where she talks about this; IIRC it's called something like "On Being Submissive, and Doing as You Damn Well Please." She makes a bunch of straightforward points, including the idea that big masculine execs have been known to be sexually submissive too--it's appealing to let someone else take control for a change after spending day after day being in a high-stress, high-powered leadership role. She talks about the appeal of acting like a little girl too. You might want to check it out. She's on facebook and there's a chance if you PMed her she'd take some time to respond to you; she seems that friendly and nice.
posted by ifjuly at 3:37 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by ifjuly at 3:37 PM on June 9, 2009
The desire to submit to a strong and penetrating and unapologetically perfect man to a just, righteous and courageous leader, to that which is truly and completely good and fine, is a desire which runs deep within the human soul, an erotic desire
I have no idea what you are talking about here, but I can't parse this in any way that it could possibly seem accurate. Some people want to sub to men, other people want to sub to women, still other people don't want to sub to anyone, ever.
There is no Mystical Dom Power inherent in the XY chromosome (or in any other definition of masculinity). And although the word "Islam" does, literally, mean "submission", it means submission to the will of God. God is not a man, and even if he were, he wouldn't be available for scenes.
posted by Sidhedevil at 3:43 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
I have no idea what you are talking about here, but I can't parse this in any way that it could possibly seem accurate. Some people want to sub to men, other people want to sub to women, still other people don't want to sub to anyone, ever.
There is no Mystical Dom Power inherent in the XY chromosome (or in any other definition of masculinity). And although the word "Islam" does, literally, mean "submission", it means submission to the will of God. God is not a man, and even if he were, he wouldn't be available for scenes.
posted by Sidhedevil at 3:43 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
BitterOldPunk makes the obvious point: You're in a role that powerful men have traditionally enjoyed. Can't see that as bad feminism in and of itself.
But let me add an additional perspective: do a power analysis on BDSM roles. Think about it for a moment; who defines the boundaries in a DS scenario? Who decides what levels of force and which scenarios are acceptable? Who has the safeword?
Is it the dom?
No. It's the sub. BDSM play is about power, but on a fundamental level it's about the illusion of power. The dom may have a lot of power in a given scenario, to make decisions about how it plays out, but ultimately that power is circumscribed by the sub's boundaries. This, incidentally, is why pushy/mouthy subs are so disliked - doms don't want their illusion of power subverted by a constant stream of instructions.
posted by rodgerd at 3:44 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
But let me add an additional perspective: do a power analysis on BDSM roles. Think about it for a moment; who defines the boundaries in a DS scenario? Who decides what levels of force and which scenarios are acceptable? Who has the safeword?
Is it the dom?
No. It's the sub. BDSM play is about power, but on a fundamental level it's about the illusion of power. The dom may have a lot of power in a given scenario, to make decisions about how it plays out, but ultimately that power is circumscribed by the sub's boundaries. This, incidentally, is why pushy/mouthy subs are so disliked - doms don't want their illusion of power subverted by a constant stream of instructions.
posted by rodgerd at 3:44 PM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]
This, incidentally, is why pushy/mouthy subs are so disliked - doms don't want their illusion of power subverted by a constant stream of instructions.
This is a broad and often incorrect generalization. It happens to be true in my case, but I've known many a male dominant who absolutely prizes an assertive sub whom he must "tame." I would go so far as to say that most male dominants I've known - excepting the GOR weirdos - are not threatened at all by a strong, feminist woman, and they would be confused by the OP's perceived conflict.
posted by desjardins at 4:03 PM on June 9, 2009
This is a broad and often incorrect generalization. It happens to be true in my case, but I've known many a male dominant who absolutely prizes an assertive sub whom he must "tame." I would go so far as to say that most male dominants I've known - excepting the GOR weirdos - are not threatened at all by a strong, feminist woman, and they would be confused by the OP's perceived conflict.
posted by desjardins at 4:03 PM on June 9, 2009
And I know that this is difficult to accept, but the heart, the spirit, while not an obligation, is a priority, a necessity and a fair and noble aim. We're eager in our time to see all human beings as equal in every way; this is an aspect of our democracy. Since some people are in complete control of their libidos and other people have no sexual control whatsoever, we feel obligated to believe that our sexuality is utterly beyond our control and that our desires are an abstract constant with us from birth until death. But while they are obscure our desires have roots, sources in our lives, sources that are sometimes clear and sometimes obscure....
....um....
....what?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:45 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
....um....
....what?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:45 PM on June 9, 2009 [2 favorites]
EmpressCallipygos: ....um........what?
Sorry; my writing can get abnormally dense and ridiculously verbose sometimes.
I'm into breasts because I wasn't breast-fed, and also because I have strange maternal issues having to do with the fact that my mom's a basket-case. Because of my religious upbringing and spiritual entanglements with public shame, I derive some pleasure from obscene language. Heck, I know a guy whose homosexuality is largely an expression of his fondness for brotherhood and masculine kinship. Michel Foucault liked bondage because he thought it provided a great environment to seek the “limit experience’ of the line between pleasure and pain.
There are reasons why behind almost all of our sexual predilections if we're only willing ask the question; but instead most of us find it more comfortable to say to ourselves, “well, I'm into latex, I was born that way and I'll always be that way and that's that” because it's safer to tell ourselves that our desires are beyond our control—because some part of us still fears that we will have to justify the desires we may have had some part in creating.
Weirdly enough, I was thinking about the book Capitalism and Schizophrenia: Anti-Œdipus when I wrote that last comment, so it's no wonder it came out all jargony and convoluted. Still an interesting book, anyway, if you're into that sort of thing.
posted by koeselitz at 5:15 PM on June 9, 2009
Sorry; my writing can get abnormally dense and ridiculously verbose sometimes.
I'm into breasts because I wasn't breast-fed, and also because I have strange maternal issues having to do with the fact that my mom's a basket-case. Because of my religious upbringing and spiritual entanglements with public shame, I derive some pleasure from obscene language. Heck, I know a guy whose homosexuality is largely an expression of his fondness for brotherhood and masculine kinship. Michel Foucault liked bondage because he thought it provided a great environment to seek the “limit experience’ of the line between pleasure and pain.
There are reasons why behind almost all of our sexual predilections if we're only willing ask the question; but instead most of us find it more comfortable to say to ourselves, “well, I'm into latex, I was born that way and I'll always be that way and that's that” because it's safer to tell ourselves that our desires are beyond our control—because some part of us still fears that we will have to justify the desires we may have had some part in creating.
Weirdly enough, I was thinking about the book Capitalism and Schizophrenia: Anti-Œdipus when I wrote that last comment, so it's no wonder it came out all jargony and convoluted. Still an interesting book, anyway, if you're into that sort of thing.
posted by koeselitz at 5:15 PM on June 9, 2009
I'm into breasts because I wasn't breast-fed...There are reasons why behind almost all of our sexual predilections if we're only willing ask the question
You say "reasons why," I say "post-hoc Just-So stories".
And what was with the Taliban nonsense?
posted by Sidhedevil at 6:24 PM on June 9, 2009 [4 favorites]
You say "reasons why," I say "post-hoc Just-So stories".
And what was with the Taliban nonsense?
posted by Sidhedevil at 6:24 PM on June 9, 2009 [4 favorites]
You're fine. Nothing about feminism excludes being sexually submissive - if someone tells you otherwise, don't subscribe to their particular brand of feminism.
posted by SassHat at 6:28 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by SassHat at 6:28 PM on June 9, 2009
There are reasons why behind almost all of our sexual predilections if we're only willing ask the question; but instead most of us find it more comfortable to say to ourselves, “well, I'm into latex, I was born that way and I'll always be that way and that's that” because it's safer to tell ourselves that our desires are beyond our control—because some part of us still fears that we will have to justify the desires we may have had some part in creating.
Interestingly, I learned quite the opposite in my human sexuality class -- that it is the over-analysis of what we are doing and trying to parse whether or not those desires are "normal" that is itself causing us the distress, and by simply just accepting that we is what we is, we can finally get out of our own ways and just go ahead and be that way. Attempts to 'control' our own desires are actually more like attempts to suppress these desires because we have been told that those desires were "wrong", and trying to ferret out the reasons for them is only an exercise we pursue if for some reason we think there is something wrong with them and we want to change them -- when what is deemed "right" and "wrong" is a societal construct which can change anyway.
There are certain moral and ethical absolutes, yes, but outside of that...nobody else really cares why you've got a boob fetish, so what does knowing the source of it actually get you, aside from a party anecdote, really?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:06 PM on June 9, 2009
Interestingly, I learned quite the opposite in my human sexuality class -- that it is the over-analysis of what we are doing and trying to parse whether or not those desires are "normal" that is itself causing us the distress, and by simply just accepting that we is what we is, we can finally get out of our own ways and just go ahead and be that way. Attempts to 'control' our own desires are actually more like attempts to suppress these desires because we have been told that those desires were "wrong", and trying to ferret out the reasons for them is only an exercise we pursue if for some reason we think there is something wrong with them and we want to change them -- when what is deemed "right" and "wrong" is a societal construct which can change anyway.
There are certain moral and ethical absolutes, yes, but outside of that...nobody else really cares why you've got a boob fetish, so what does knowing the source of it actually get you, aside from a party anecdote, really?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:06 PM on June 9, 2009
Sorry. No derails here—if my comment was useless, well, again, sorry.
posted by koeselitz at 10:42 PM on June 9, 2009
posted by koeselitz at 10:42 PM on June 9, 2009
My question is not about how to change anything. I don't. I was just wondering if anyone else has dealt with this particular issue and how they reconciled these conflicting attitudes in their minds. I just want to stop feeling like there is something "wrong" and just be able to pursue all my goals without feeling like a hypocrite.
In case one more voice saying "this is normal, and ultimately no big deal" helps, here it is. You sound like pretty much every woman I've ever dated -- strong, smart, assertive, confident, feminist ... and submissive. All of them had to grapple with that, because there are such strong messages out there saying YOU ARE WRONG AND A BAD WOMAN!!!! for being that way.
On the one hand, you'll sometimes hear a very un-nuanced sort of feminism that can be harshly critical of many sexual choices by women, as in calling your submissiveness "false consciousness." But at the same time, you'll also hear anti-feminist criticisms of you being a strong woman who is taking on a public professional role in what used to be a purely male realm.
Meaning, if you spend all your time listening and trying to respond to the criticisms, imagined or real, you won't have any time to enjoy yourself or to find a solid and happy life that integrates what you like in bed with what you enjoy out in the world. The criticisms will always be there, and mostly say more about the critic than they do about you.
posted by Forktine at 6:12 AM on June 10, 2009
In case one more voice saying "this is normal, and ultimately no big deal" helps, here it is. You sound like pretty much every woman I've ever dated -- strong, smart, assertive, confident, feminist ... and submissive. All of them had to grapple with that, because there are such strong messages out there saying YOU ARE WRONG AND A BAD WOMAN!!!! for being that way.
On the one hand, you'll sometimes hear a very un-nuanced sort of feminism that can be harshly critical of many sexual choices by women, as in calling your submissiveness "false consciousness." But at the same time, you'll also hear anti-feminist criticisms of you being a strong woman who is taking on a public professional role in what used to be a purely male realm.
Meaning, if you spend all your time listening and trying to respond to the criticisms, imagined or real, you won't have any time to enjoy yourself or to find a solid and happy life that integrates what you like in bed with what you enjoy out in the world. The criticisms will always be there, and mostly say more about the critic than they do about you.
posted by Forktine at 6:12 AM on June 10, 2009
I refuse to believe that my femininity makes me less capable of being successful professional and being a good leader. And then this voice in my head always says "if only they knew what you like to do when you're alone at home."
What you do when you're alone (or with other consenting adults) at home doesn't have much to do with being a good leader. Why ever would it?
You seem very concerned with how other people would perceive this in what seems to be a rather self-centered way. Most people have things they do alone or with another person that they really would not like their professional colleagues to know about. Check some of the political sex scandals in the last few years if you need examples
You feel alone and out of place in this only because you don't know the secret lives of others.
posted by yohko at 5:33 PM on June 10, 2009
What you do when you're alone (or with other consenting adults) at home doesn't have much to do with being a good leader. Why ever would it?
You seem very concerned with how other people would perceive this in what seems to be a rather self-centered way. Most people have things they do alone or with another person that they really would not like their professional colleagues to know about. Check some of the political sex scandals in the last few years if you need examples
You feel alone and out of place in this only because you don't know the secret lives of others.
posted by yohko at 5:33 PM on June 10, 2009
A zen shrug - It is what it is - is the most useful tool I have found to cope with this.
Also look at it this way, you have a right to a private life, and everything and anything that can make you happy :)
posted by By The Grace of God at 5:58 PM on September 5, 2009
Also look at it this way, you have a right to a private life, and everything and anything that can make you happy :)
posted by By The Grace of God at 5:58 PM on September 5, 2009
Oh, another thing that helps if it's a politics related problem - your kinky people marc on the same marches and are part of the same political movement as GLBT people. (well there's some overlap anyway.) Read into the gay and lesbian literature about accepting yourself.
posted by By The Grace of God at 6:01 PM on September 5, 2009
posted by By The Grace of God at 6:01 PM on September 5, 2009
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by BitterOldPunk at 8:29 AM on June 9, 2009 [12 favorites]