hey annie, sometimes I think everybody could solve their "true submissive" issue if they just understood that being submissive does not mean being a doormat. Submitting to one person does not mean you'll submit to every person on the known planet.

I think there are SOME people who call themselves dominants who are abusive human beings, who manage to find weak and easily manipulated submissives who will do whatever they say no matter what the cost to their emotional or physical health or safety.

I think further submissives who are insecure feel the need to prove they are "more" submissive than other submissives then we get into the "more submissive than you" game. Unfortunately I think sometimes this game is created or enhanced by an immature dominant who makes some passing comment about some random sub not being "good" or "well-behaved" or what the hell ever.

So then the sub in question eats up the attention and flattery of the fact that his/her dom considers him/her to be "good" or "well-behaved" over the other sub that isn't even his. (or hers as the case may be)

The ridiculous thing is...what it really comes down to is a "good sub" is really only "good" in relation to the dom she's with. There can be no empirical "good" or "true" submissive or slave or whatever.

If you are the most perfectly obedient wonderful uber sub in the world, but such behavior bores your dom, are you really the best in HIS eyes? No.

If you are a bratty mcbrat, but your dom likes that, then haven't you attained the goal of being a sub that is compatible to the dom in question?

We all have different tastes. To act as if all doms are appropriate for all subs or vice versa, or there is some kind of moral, dominant, or submissive failure going on, is a little silly. Yet this happens all the time.

At the end of the day I think it would be easier if subs just stood up and said, "I'll submit, but not to a moron." It could solve problems.

Or for a dom to say, "I like a bit of a brat sub" or "I don't personally prefer a brat" (or whatever variations people come up with.)

There really isn't a better or worse here, just what works for the couple (or in the case of more than just two people, the group) But because the mainstream social infrastructure doesn't hold up the "reality" of what we do, there seems to be a higher drive for acceptance in kink circles and unfortunately a lower incidence of self-actualization as everybody seeks to be a "true submissive" or "true dominant."

Which makes me remember why I had withdrawn to begin with from definitions of that way. Just saying one is "owned" without qualifiers seems so much easier.