# Submissive Women



## VictoryOverFear (Mar 18, 2014)

Inspired by some recent 18+ discussions.


----------



## PressOnBrah (Feb 23, 2014)

I love submissive women. Why? I'm a high-test male that likes being in control. Plus, submissive women are willing to do more stuff.

****, if I can find a good submissive woman that I want to be with for a while, I'll go right ahead and get a vasectomy so I can go raw on her all day long.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

In what way? I'm guessing not sexually since this isn't in 18+


----------



## VictoryOverFear (Mar 18, 2014)

Persephone The Dread said:


> In what way? I'm guessing not sexually since this isn't in 18+


I mean sexually. I think we're allowed to talk about sex outside 18+, just no details and don't get obscene about it.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

Both then, I like the idea of both. I sort of think sometimes I mostly lean towards having a preference for being submissive, but then the other side seems appealing too when I think about it. I'm only imagining hypothetically though. I don't know in practise yet. I'm kind of imagining with someone I'm not anxious around too of course.


----------



## NVU (Jul 1, 2010)

I'd _lean_ towards non submissive but I don't really care to be honest. I guess feisty is sexy to me.


----------



## estse (Nov 18, 2003)

Never mind. Posting is not going to work today.


----------



## crimeclub (Nov 7, 2013)

They're both good so I guess it depends on the mood, but if I had to choose just one I supposed I'd want a submissive woman, I think me being submissive all the time would get boring, and it might also be a turn off to her if she had to wear the pants all the time.


----------



## NVU (Jul 1, 2010)

Wait.. So if I say I wouldn't like a submissive girl does that make me submissive? :? I wouldn't have thought so. My thinking was I wouldn't want a girl to just bowl over at my demands.


----------



## tieffers (Jan 26, 2013)

I think in theory I'd lean more toward being submissive, because I know I don't like taking charge in other areas of my life (not to say I'm not actively involved, however) and I'm a people-pleaser. 

I'm answering based on the assumption that power plays and alternative lifestyles, ahem, aren't implied in the question, because if they are, my answer would be neither.


----------



## diamondheart89 (Mar 21, 2011)

Where is the "both" option, or the "sometimes one, other times the other" option.


----------



## Barette (Jan 17, 2012)

I like to tie men down and remove their genitals.

But I'm a feminist, after all.


----------



## vicente (Nov 10, 2003)

The more feminist and bad***, the hotter I think a woman is, unless she wants to remove my genitals.

I get totally turned off by submissive women.


----------



## vivibe (Sep 25, 2013)

I'd prefer a submissive partner, for both males and females. I think I would be completely sexually incompatible with a dominant person. Which is weird considering my personality. Well, it's not like I'm saying I need to be a full-out dominatrix, lol. Just, the more "proactive" of the two, or "in the lead", or however you'd put it.


----------



## Yer Blues (Jul 31, 2013)

As long as I don't have to wear a ball gag?

Both.


----------



## UltraShy (Nov 8, 2003)

I'm a sadist, so I like masochistic women. That doesn't automatically mean submissive at all. In fact, many masochists are anything but submissive. They want someone to take control from them. Or they enjoy acting like total brats such that they deserve a severe punishment.


----------



## Gwynevere (Oct 6, 2013)

I think it's way more complicated and nuanced than the 2 options you've given.


----------



## will22 (Mar 28, 2011)

I'm a man and I'm anti-BDSM


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

I actually wasn't really thinking about vanilla when I wrote my comment, whenever someone says dominant or submissive my mind immediately goes to less vanilla. (well someone's mentioned bdsm all ready and then Yer Blues comment... So no point being vague anymore lol..) I don't think those options really work well outside of that either.


----------



## diamondheart89 (Mar 21, 2011)

Clarity's polar bear said:


> I was thinking about this earlier when viewing a thread about feminism. I was thinking back to my last relationship, and the numerous times when submissive activity by her acutely heightened my appreciation of her femininity, while simultaneously advancing other things forbidden to discussion.
> 
> I found this contrary to my attitudes at first, but then settled on the fact that it must've been behaviour that resided in an opportunistic abstraction layer. Adherence to her orthodox creed, while stratified conveniently in her mind, and while often used to dominate my own sexuality and self-worth, dictated methodologies contrasting with my own values and tolerances concerned with equality.
> 
> ...


I feel like I'm reading a thesis. :sus Is this real life? What are words? How does language work? :tiptoe


----------



## housebunny (Oct 22, 2010)

Does anybody else see that horrible thing up in the corner ad? "Eat this, never diet again." I'd rather diet the rest of my life than eat that thing.


----------



## Ape in space (May 31, 2010)

I'm not sure which way to answer. I want a physically submissive woman, but not necessarily submissive in other ways. For example, I would be fine with someone who was a bit naggy or smothering, but I would want her to let me protect her and stuff and be appreciative of my muscles and masculinity. It would be like she is the princess who has fallen in love with her bodyguard (me) - I am at her command but I'm still physically stronger than her.

If we're going into fantasy / role-playing territory, I have several fantasies having to do with dominance/submissiveness (but I don't like BDSM - it's too 'formalized' for my taste).

For example, I have one fantasy where I grant a girlfriend exclusive rights to my reproductive organs, and she can demand them any time she wants. (This isn't so farfetched, really... I might actually do this.)

Another one is where I imagine her as a hot Roman lady and me as one of her gladiators, and she commands me to 'satisfy' her because I'm so valiant and hunky. There's another one where it's the exact opposite, where I'm a Roman guy and she's a slave girl that I've obtained from the market, and she is of course very eager to please her new master.

Dear god, I need a girlfriend.... :sigh


----------



## Mr Bacon (Mar 10, 2012)

The pleasure lies in the mixes. But generally speaking, I prefer them submissive.


----------



## sad vlad (Nov 9, 2013)

Submissive is fine.


----------



## lisbeth (May 18, 2012)

This thread feels so wrong outside of 18+. Stop this. It burns.

Can't we just talk about nice guys and male virginity or something.


----------



## nubly (Nov 2, 2006)

Submissive can mean something entire different in the BDSM world than what you're thinking.


----------



## nubly (Nov 2, 2006)

housebunny said:


> Does anybody else see that horrible thing up in the corner ad? "Eat this, never diet again." I'd rather diet the rest of my life than eat that thing.


Looks like a vulva.


----------



## arnie (Jan 24, 2012)

Gwynevere said:


> I think it's way more complicated and nuanced than the 2 options you've given.


Not really. Men socialize in a hierarchy. They are all trying to establish dominance and one up each other. Women socialize by trying to build consensus in a group.

You can see this in the different ways men and women have conversations:

Women in conversations today use language for Intimacy, hence Tannen's term "rapport-talk." Girls are socialized as children to believe that "talk is the glue that holds relationships together" (Tannen, p. 85), so that as *adults conversations for women are "negotiations for closeness in which people try to seek and give confirmation and support, and to reach consensus"* (Tannen, p. 25). Conversation is for Community; the woman is an individual in a network of connections.

For men, conversations today are for Information, thus "report-talk." Men negotiate to maintain the upper hand in a conversation and protect themselves from others' perceived attempts to put them down. Boys learn in childhood to maintain relationships primarily through their activities, so *conversation for adult males becomes a Contest; a man is an individual in a hierarchical social order "in which he [is] either one-up or one-down" *(Tannen, p. 24).






That's why aggressive women get labelled as "*****y" It's not an attractive trait for women. A dominant woman would make a man feel like he's competing with another man. It makes him feel emasculated. A relationship between two dominant people would never work. They would just be fighting and arguing over ever perceived offense.

A submissive women tries to avoid conflict. This means that men don't feel the need to be defensive and argumentative so they drop their anger and become much more empathetic. It's not a competition anymore, so men can now open up and talk much more amicably. It's not about one partner getting everything they want. In fact, a submissive woman makes a man much more sympathetic to her needs. It's about opening up communication so a better solution for everyone can be reached.

Modern feminism fails because it mandates that women become aggressive, dominant and *****y. It mandates that women behave more like men while trying to emasculate actual men which just makes both sexes more unhappy in relationships. A study called "Egalitarianism, Housework and Sexual Frequency in Marriage," which appeared in The American Sociological Review last year, surprised many, precisely because it went against the logical assumption that as marriages improve by becoming more equal, the sex in these marriages will improve, too. Instead, it found that when men did certain kinds of chores around the house, couples had less sex. Specifically, if men did all of what the researchers characterized as feminine chores like folding laundry, cooking or vacuuming - the kinds of things many women say they want their husbands to do - then couples had sex 1.5 fewer times per month than those with husbands who did what were considered masculine chores, like taking out the trash or fixing the car. It wasn't just the frequency that was affected, either - at least for the wives. The more traditional the division of labor, meaning the greater the husband's share of masculine chores compared with feminine ones, the greater his wife's reported sexual satisfaction.

*"The less gender differentiation, the less sexual desire." *

Personally, I don't think the actual work matters so much as it shows a correlation between the outcomes of marriages where there is more or less gender differentiation. It's the attitude and personality differences that have an effect. There's nothing wrong with men cooking dinner; it's the relationship dynamic between masculine and feminine energy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/magazine/does-a-more-equal-marriage-mean-less-sex.html?_r=0


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

^ you're thinking too hard this thread is about sex.


----------



## Barette (Jan 17, 2012)

If I drop my anger I don't become empathetic or communicative, the anger is still there. It just gets pushed down deep then comes out at random other times.

Anyone remember that amazing scene in Mad Men when Betty Draper shot her neighbor's birds? It's like that. If you have to be submissive and hide your feelings constantly, they don't disappear, they grow and then cause stress or reveal themselves at inappropriate times.

But god forbid we tell a man he's not an expert on women's workings (especially when he's rarely spoken to women---not that I even read arnie's entire post)


----------



## arnie (Jan 24, 2012)

Barette said:


> If you have to be submissive and hide your feelings constantly, they don't disappear, they grow and then cause stress or reveal themselves at inappropriate times.


No one said anything about hiding your feelings. The problem is translating those feeling into anger, aggression and competition.



Barette said:


> But god forbid we tell a man he's not an expert on women's workings (especially when he's rarely spoken to women---not that I even read arnie's entire post)


Problem? God forbid a man have an opinion on gender relations. That's something only women understand. Apologies for the mansplaining. :roll


----------



## Barette (Jan 17, 2012)




----------



## tbyrfan (Feb 24, 2011)

Barette said:


> If I drop my anger I don't become empathetic or communicative, the anger is still there. It just gets pushed down deep then comes out at random other times.
> 
> Anyone remember that amazing scene in Mad Men when Betty Draper shot her neighbor's birds? It's like that. If you have to be submissive and hide your feelings constantly, they don't disappear, they grow and then cause stress or reveal themselves at inappropriate times.


Some people just feel exhausted when they lash out at other people, and it isn't therapeutic for everyone. That doesn't stop me from speaking up if something bothers me, though. I've had to deal with a lot of very angry people at my job, and i've found that trying to calmly talk people through things works better than being sassy (although sassing a rude person on the phone can feel good sometimes). What I really hate is when people above me (like supervisors at work or professors) are condescending and rude. You want to stand up for yourself because it will make you feel better, but you don't want to get in trouble.


----------



## Barette (Jan 17, 2012)

tbyrfan said:


> Some people just feel exhausted when they lash out at other people, and it isn't therapeutic for everyone. That doesn't stop me from speaking up if something bothers me, though. I've had to deal with a lot of very angry people at my job, and i've found that trying to calmly talk people through things works better than being sassy (although sassing a rude person on the phone can feel good sometimes). What I really hate is when people above me (like supervisors at work or professors) are condescending and rude. You want to stand up for yourself because it will make you feel better, but you don't want to get in trouble.


In those cases being polite is definitely the easier way. In professional environments I've found it's pretty easy to remain amicable and business-like even when others are acting rude (but I've worked in a college and a retail job, the college one being even less professional than the retail one). Egos run rampant in jobs for whatever reason, at least in my experience. With bosses I totally hated that, and with customers too (presumed I was dumb because I worked in retail), but my retail job my bosses were so mean. But I was able to leave, thankfully. Talking to people calmly definitely does work better. But even if a customer was rude to me I'd just say "Okay, I'll be back to help you" then would not return or would be cartoonishly nice (with obvious venom beneath what I was saying). I don't like being a doormat, and I would equate being submissive in an argument to being a doormat. It's much easier to make snide comments and give side-eyes while being agreeable. I didn't lash out, but I didn't bend over backwards to keep the peace (not saying you do, but that's how I view being submissive in an argument).

That was kind of a tangent, sorry lol


----------



## Serephina (Apr 13, 2010)

Ape in space said:


> Dear god, I need a girlfriend.... :sigh


:haha


----------



## KelsKels (Oct 4, 2011)

I can be both.. although I prefer to be dominant. Problem is, so does my boyfriend. We switch frequently.


----------



## probably offline (Oct 8, 2012)

Another day of black and white thinking on SAS. Who could've guessed?


----------



## Serephina (Apr 13, 2010)

nubly said:


> Looks like a vulva.


*has obviously never seen a vulva before* :blank


----------



## AceEmoKid (Apr 27, 2012)

I'm non gender conforming and like to switch around. I'm not primarily dominant nor primarily submissive, but I would tease the idea (only sexually....not in other aspects such as the general relationship dynamics. I'm not archaic like that). Having equal reigns in bed sounds nicest, though.


----------



## Alas Babylon (Aug 28, 2012)

diamondheart89 said:


> I feel like I'm reading a thesis. :sus Is this real life? What are words? How does language work? :tiptoe


As I said in the 18+ discussion, Latinate lexical units provide ample terrain apropos sentence construction, maugre occasional difficulty vis-a-vis communicating sans established pronouns, prepositions, conjunctions, articles et cetera.

Ergo, writers employing Latinate lexicon apud elder Germanic lexicon biforn prolific vernacular vocabulary will produce work consternating to observers.


----------



## minimized (Nov 17, 2007)

You know, it's really the last thing I'm thinking about...


----------



## diamondheart89 (Mar 21, 2011)

Alas Babylon said:


> As I said in the 18+ discussion, Latinate lexical units provide ample terrain apropos sentence construction, maugre occasional difficulty vis-a-vis communicating sans established pronouns, prepositions, conjunctions, articles et cetera.
> 
> Ergo, writers employing Latinate lexicon apud elder Germanic lexicon biforn prolific vernacular vocabulary will produce work consternating to observers.


:nw So many large words in one post. This guy must know what he's talking about. I agree with everything you probably said.


----------



## prettyful (Mar 14, 2013)

men are submissive to me


----------



## komorikun (Jan 11, 2009)

I like it when men do what I say. When they know how to follow directions.


----------



## Alas Babylon (Aug 28, 2012)

diamondheart89 said:


> :nw So many large words in one post. This guy must know what he's talking about. I agree with everything you probably said.


:lol

I just love making sentences that are incessantly nauseating to read by using obscurer terms instead of common words.


----------



## Glass Child (Feb 28, 2013)

I never submit to people ahaha
It depends on my mood, maybe. Very difficult for my mind to form an opinion of how I'd react given the situation, it is too unfamiliar and unnatural from my current perspective.

But I'd probably be willing to do the majority of what I'm asked. Asexuality just clouds my thoughts on such subjects.


----------



## WillYouStopDave (Jul 14, 2013)

komorikun said:


> I like it when men do what I say. When they know how to follow directions.


 I knew it.


----------



## Raeden (Feb 8, 2013)

I'm getting a general implication from this thread that one must either completely passive or aggressive. Overall, I tend to be accommodating just because I'm largely indifferent to most things. However, I have no desire to be treated like someone's pet or submit to someone's every demand, but at the same time I'm not an angry or aggressive person, either.

I totally wouldn't mind if someone else wanted to be _my_ pet, though. :yes


----------



## lunarc (Feb 25, 2014)

Its a little difficult to answer. Its never just black and white. A totally submissive women would be a turn off. But I would prefer a women that leaned more to submissive.


----------



## Ntln (Apr 27, 2012)

This sounds cliche, but I'd like my partner to be my equal. Not submissive, not dominating. She wouldn't make me do anything I don't want, and if I was being unfair, I'd like her to tell me as well and stand up for herself. So, no, I don't like overly submissive women, but in all honesty, I'd prefer that to an overly dominant one.

Edit: Oh, you meant sexually..... Well uh, hopefully, it would be enjoyable for both, so uh, well actually the answer is more or less the same I guess


----------

