Authority Figures

A lot of people in the BDSM world think of Dominants as “authority figures”. Party on but YKINMK. For example, a Dominant might wear a uniform or represent a “Daddy,” “Teacher,” “Doctor,” “Policeman,” etc. I have only a passing interest in such notions myself. I think of “authority play” as more the B & D division of BDSM which is something that I will do if it is desired by him, but it doesn’t do anything for me personally. Thus, a relationship built on such a foundation isn’t likely to work for me.

Role play in general is only of passing interest to me. I prefer reality.

In my own positive relationships with authority, I like to think of myself as more of a value-added assistant or “teacher’s pet” who earns her way out of rigid rules by being helpful, pleasant, anticipatory, and otherwise not requiring micromanaging or rote for the sake of rote. That doesn’t mean that I’m never been dressed down when the situation calls for it only that I’m not courting such a reaction deliberately.

I like to be told what pleases him but not angrily or threateningly. Rather, I seek reward not punishment. For someone like me, punishment is to have attention withdrawn rather than negative attention inflicted. In fact I won’t get into a relationship if negative attention would appear to be the consequence of such a relationship. I can do better than that!

For me, a deep D/s connection requires Love foremost although of course respect may be a factor in developing that connection. Respect for a man’s intellectual authority based on his age, discipline, and experience may be a part of that respect. Learning from someone, for me, however tends to have less of an erotic charge than an intellectual one. Those drives tend to compete for energy in my person such that one side wins out over the other. I’m either learning or I’m in subspace, not both.

Rather, I think of authority as a form of service, which may well be a service I appreciate from a Dominant. I would hope that in those areas where I am somewhat of an authority myself that my service in those areas would also be appreciated.

Respect, for me, is what I give to someone with whom I have a voluntary association, such as an employer. Respect plus an erotic connection might be sufficient motivation for me to want to have sex with a man, or at least to venture down the path of exploring whether that’s what I want to do. It might even be a consequence of gratitude for service borne out of authority.

On the other hand, persons who crave power and authority over other people don’t generally cause me to respect those persons even if I may decide to obey on a non-erotic level. A lot of those persons are women. I think that the notion that there are men whose entire erotic charge comes from a woman obeying them, and these men represent the whole, is part of the delusion of “The Patriarchy”. Rather, it would appear that there are more women who get such a charge, even if the actual eroticism is often translated into nonsexual avenues. In other words, the motivations of “The Patriarchy” is a projection by Feminists and other power-hungry people.

Of course there are women who are erotically charged by obedience or being slavishly catered to, just not nearly enough to satisfy the demand for such women. Rather, money would appear to be a higher motivation today for most women than sex, as well as having other women obey them. For a lesbian that latter is all a part of the erotic charge but such a notion is not exclusive to lesbians.

When I am in service to a man I love and we are about to “play” then I tend to go into sort of a trance. That trance state is highly erotic to me as well as highly vulnerable. The last thing I want to do is get myself into an erotic trance and find that I am vulnerable to an “authority figure” who feels threatened by any manifestation of my personality or sense of self such as to desire to either mold it or suppress it.

I’m not that kind of submissive.

I know what I like and who I am and tend to disdain those who think they know those things better than I do. Therefore, the notion that my sexuality predisposes me to abuse from men is a fiction promoted by Feminists and other Cultural Marxists deluded by notions of sexual egalitarianism.


12 thoughts on “Authority Figures

  1. Pingback: Authority Figures –

  2. I can see your point of view but it appears to me that the DOM is unusual these days where every woman is coached into becoming a DOMME and taking over the reins of relationships in ways which suit only her.
    Am I right or wrong?

    • Dominant men are rare and elusive and it’s the fault of Feminism–both male and female adherents thereof. Then, when all the good men are gone, those left wonder why no one wants to play with them. “Submissives” who top from the bottom are a population way out of control–both men and women. They all want a Dominant-in-a-box and destroy the field for the rest of us. As for Dommes, there aren’t nearly enough of them. They are hugely in demand. Doesn’t matter that most don’t know what they’re doing. Those few that do can write their own ticket. I love Dommes because at least they distract from me all the men who desire that I top them. Meanwhile, the notion that not only that women know what they want so well that they all have to want the same thing, and therefore have to keep validating each other that they all want the same thing and isn’t that great is also ludicrous. Excuse me but I want to go throw something. No. Not a whip. Nobody get excited please.

  3. I would argue that they are not rare but are actually elusive.
    Dominant men find an odd landscape in modern society. They want to exercise their mindset in public but modern propriety prevents it. I can’t tell you the number of times I have wanted to backhand a woman who in her go grrl uppity-ness gets in my face. But alas I can only counter with amused mastery and attention deprivation. Modern sensibilities do not allow me to take a woman I care about in hand and teach her the discipline she is obviously craving.
    It is rare to find someone who can take discipline and keep her mouth shut about her near spiritual experiences. Rarer still to find a woman who can take a D/s relationship and still be a part of the modern world.
    And those that do decide to try the lifestyle within their modern world view rarely take the training to compartmentalize. Thus we get to the neo-sub pseudo-feminist topping from the bottom types.
    Frankly, I am now more into teaching the vanilla to kink and dealing with the training learning curve. Good experienced subs are either collared or have slouched down into topping from the bottom behaviors. And therefore are not worth the time investment to break again.

    • Backhanding a woman who gets in your face is not generally a measure of self-control or self-mastery.

      Standards of who is considered “Dominant” continue to decline.

      Meanwhile, squeaky wheels maintain a hold of the narrative.

  4. In my experience, most Doms/Dommes are suffering from a huge disconnect between their real lives in which they control very little and their BDSM persona in which they “haven’t got a submissive bone in their bodies.”

    I can feel for the real ones who are doing it right and whose real life and private lives match up – because it’s not easy to always be on top. I can remember as an XO in the Army, coming home with the feeling, “I have been thinking for 250 people all day long and I don’t want to make one more f-ing decision today.”

    And then there is the endless array of subbies who, unless they are getting your whole attention and effort constantly, feel they are being neglected and act out in order to restore what they think is the proper balance. Those are a lot of work; more work than I’d be willing to do.

    In my opinion, having a sub should make the D’s life simpler, easier, and more enjoyable. If it doesn’t, the equation is off somehow.

    • That is so true. What you are saying is exactly what I advocate.

      It would seem to me that an awful lot of “civilization” creates sort of a “learned helplessness” in women, which is mistakenly called “submissiveness”. Hardworking man needs to be catered to to possibly include allowing him to just be alone, doing whatever he needs to do to “decompress” from work. She, meanwhile, can be making up a nice dinner, which ideally can be kept warm, etc., just in case he’s feeling frisky. Or engaging in some form of self-improvement. I think a lot of male submissives and transwomen have a better handle on this than female heterosexual submissives.

      While on one hand it would seem that television raises female anxiety level (and therefore perhaps she should restrain herself from partaking), while meanwhile sports television provides a lot of men needed decompression. (For Axel, on the other hand, he liked watching some porn/perving online while decompressing, which, truthfully, I think is healthier than most of today’s spectator sports, but, I digress).

      Being a “Dom-in-a-box” is a service and after a long day, expecting a man to service a “submissive” female is some sort of delusion brought about by learned helplessness, in my opinion.

      • I think it’s also partly the result of the whole SSC culture/concept which has left a lot of people interested in such things with the idea that the sub is actually in control in spite of the outward appearance of things.

        It looks just like a chicken – but it’s really a duck!

      • SSC: Safe, Sane, and Consensual. What a crock. Safe: Not it’s not safe. Sane: Are you kidding? Of course it’s not sane. Sanity is overrated in the bedroom. Consensual is the only one that makes sense but if the parties believe what they’re doing is “Safe” and “Sane” then how are they equipped to “consent”? That’s statutory rape–assuming that one party has some sense of responsibility, which is saying a lot.

        Of course if losers are trying to lure children into the scene, explaining that it’s all a great big kindergarten party is one way to do that. A good reason to keep such things behind closed doors.

        Too late though. The cat’s out of the bag. Hence Caprizchka decided to leave “the scene” for the most part and take her act to the streets. I’ll go right back in the closet as soon as my job is done, whenever that is.

        RACK: Risk-Aware, Consensual Kink. Risk-Aware and Consensual are a redundancy but I can live with that. Kink = Not “Normal”. Hooray for non-normalcy.

        One of my favorite “Kink” inspirations is Jonathan Livingston Seagull by Richard Bach.

        Speaking of which, of course a sub can leave. There’s the control. Don’t top from the bottom. Leave. Not fun? Not happy? No rainbows and ponies? There’s the door.

        “If you love someone, set them free. If they come back they’re yours; if they don’t they never were.”–Jonathan Livingston Seagull by Richard Bach.

        Speaking of luring children (literally or figuratively) into the scene by persuading them that they’re in charge, that’s what predatory lesbians and closet submissives do. An awful lot of them have made themselves into the Safe, Sane, and Consensual Feminist “Dom/Domme” of record, so that they can “train” a bottom into being their perfect “Dom/Domme in a box”.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s