Yesterday an unintentionally interesting thread happened in one of the groups I belong to on Fet. It started out as a snark-fest aimed at the painfully annoying folks who wave around the "Natural Submissive" label as a badge of honor to make themselves feel superior and then moved on to a discussion about people who do genuinely feel that they're just naturally submissive (like someone might be naturally inclined to be a good singer).
So as I was reading this thread I noticed something that I found interesting- Most of the folks who self identified as a "natural" were those who expressed that they had a desire to serve or please others their entire lives. Those folks with a submissive personality type.
That makes a certain amount of sense. If you feel that way for as long as you can remember it's going to feel natural to you because that's just how you are, and if you also have the orientation to be the submissive partner... Well, what's going to feel more natural than having a relationship dynamic that aligns neatly with your personality. It may just be a continuation of the person you've always known you were.
Then I began thinking about orientation by itself.
There are plenty of submissives who do not have submissive personalities (I'm one of them) but who are wired to be the submissive partner in their relationships.
You rarely, if ever, see the "natural" label applied to these folks, even though it could be argued that orientation is just as natural as personality- And perhaps more so. Personality can be altered either by will or by outside influence, but orientation is hard-wiring (must ponder this thought more...).
Anyways.
I started thinking about why orientation submissives don't generally use the "natural" label. I know I never have, it's never occurred to me to do so.
And I wonder if it's because there may be a conflict between having a more assertive personality and a desire to submit within a relationship... Sometimes it just doesn't feel all that natural, especially when a person has had this assertive, more dominant personality for years and years and then when they start dating and start forming intimate relationships, then the hard-wiring finally makes itself known.
I suppose there might be a bit of an identity crisis in there somewhere: The personality says, "Sorry pal, this isn't who we are" while the wiring is responding with "Wanna bet?"
I guess it also doesn't help in this crisis that "natural" is applied to people unlike ourselves (ourselves being assertive P, submissive O), so what are we left with? Well, we're certainly not natural according to the generalizations so that must make us unnatural and unnatural is something to fight against.
Now I'm wondering if it wouldn't perhaps be helpful if more Assertive Personality- submissive Orientation folks were to apply the "natural" label to themselves?
Would it be helpful for newbies to hear "Yep. I have an assertive personality and I naturally orient as the submissive partner in a relationship. I am naturally submissive, just in a different way."
Would that concept help with the identity struggle?
I'm not sure, but I guess it is just a continuation of a concept that helped me a great deal when I was struggling with making sense out of these seemingly warring factions within myself.
The concept was Personality and Orientation and that neither of those things were the same-
A person could have a submissive P and could or could not orient as a submissive in a relationship.
A person could have an assertive P and could or could not orient as a submissive in a relationship.
One had nothing to do with the other, so perhaps expanding on that, that any personality and orientation combination is NATURAL would be beneficial...
I don't know. I don't think the idea is quite as fleshed out as I'd like it to be, but maybe it's a start.
EDIT TO ADD:
This is part of the on-going discussion, and I'm going to tack it on here because it's also part of this-
Someone Else- Whatever is wrong with being submissive in general, not just by conscious choice, not just towards that one special person or those several special people?
Me- That's a continuation of what I'm thinking about and driving towards- Orientation isn't a conscious choice, not for submission, not for sexuality, not for gender... Much like personality it's just who someone is.
And maybe folks don't see it as natural (or innate, also a good word) because there is a selection process involved, but then natural selection is natural, all species select for the best possible mate... And if that orientation hard-wiring doesn't kick in until the right partner has been selected?
But still, once the right partner is there, it's not a choice. Not for me anyways.
No comments:
Post a Comment