Something I read in the thread below about liking DATY (HATE that term!) gave me pause:

"I do not want a partner, in or outside of the hobby, who does anything from a position of trying to please or worship me. i like a man to be a man...to freely and without shame or guilt take what he wants, make it all about him"

Albeit, the lady who wrote this specifically stated that she was overwhelmingly a submissive, and that it is what felt best for her, but I am curious if many women DEEP DOWN feel the same way...that a "real" man should be this way, and whether they would respond more intensely, from a primal state, if a man they cared about or a client they felt comfortable with was this way.

I know what my own experiences are, and I don't want to prejudice the responses by them...and PLEASE, GUYS...this is a question for the LADIES ONLY.  I'm just curious to hear how you all feel about this.

I am sure every woman has her own definitions about what makes a "real" man... and I'm sure every man has his own definitions, too.

To me, a real man doesn't "take what he wants" or "make it all about him," though I respect the other lady's right to her feelings and thoughts.

For me, a real man -- hell, a real *person*, male or female -- is not only aware of what they want, and confident about their right and ability to state their desires clearly... but also finds happiness, and takes pleasure in, finding out about what others like and desire, and helping them achieve that.

Part of the reason I am in this business is because I take personal pleasure and satisfaction in helping others feel good, in helping them explore their fantasies and desires. It makes me happy, and it turns me on, too.

In my experience, there are many men who are of like mind, who also enjoy giving pleasure, and who have discovered that, in the process of giving, they also receive.

I have certainly had clients who wanted nothing more than for me to focus utterly on them, and their pleasure... and I was happy to do so.

But I also felt that they (and, by extension, myself) were missing out on a deeper experience. Self-centered sex, while certainly loads of fun (pardon the pun), is nothing but a purely physical experience, IMO. To me, it seems merely a short step or two away from masturbating.

I guess I believe that the whole purpose of lovemaking is that there are two people there, two people with their own desires and wants. I think it's wonderful to be assertive and let your partner know exactly what you desire and just how hot you are... but it's even hotter to have your partner let you know just how hot they are for *you*, and making you hot!

There is a definite excitement when a lover is very assertive -- not agressive, but definitely letting you know you're in for a wild, passionate time. But the best lovers I've had, by far, have showed me that intense passion in ways calculated to make me feel equally as good.

I apologize for the long post. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that real men, and real women, do what feels good to them, and the hell with how anyone else defines them.

xxxooo
Beverly ;-*

Very well said Beverly.

As a "Ladyboy"  here's how I feel.

My provider position often requires me to take the dominate role, so I do find I occasionally enjoy being with a man who knows what he wants and how to "take" it.

I'm not so much into like the sub bdsm role anymore (I like the fantasy of pain, but not particularly the reality...) but I find I do enjoy being "controlled" once in awhile.  Maybe having my hands held down while I get plowed real good.

But I think each relationship is different and the partners have to find what they both enjoy.  What works for someone one time, may not work with another, or even with the same person another time.

Hugs,
TS Jamie

I eat quiche.

Thank you very much.  8o)

but referring back to your original post, I don't think it's an issue of women feeling differently "deep down".

A lot of what people think is from social conditioning and it's hard work to break free from that in order to know yourself on a deeper level. Are many women submissive by nature? Probably not, but surely through conditioning, it might seem to be the case.

For me, a "real" man is one who meets me eye-to-eye first. And then we can decide whether to exchange power or not. As Beverly stated, we each have our own definitions as to what is "womanly" or "manly". Frankly, I find men who are in touch with their femininity, as I am in touch with my masculinity, more "manly" than those in denial of their inner woman. But that's just me.

Have a nice day!
Bella

...since it was a comment of mine that sparked this question, i thought i should respond.

yes, i am a submissive by nature, however imo i am far from alone. i do sincerely believe that "deep down" in the very cores of who we are, most (not all) men are dominant natured, and most (not all) women are submissive natured. however it does not seem that way at all, especially in western culture, because of the way our society has conditioned us for generations now.

for instance, i was raised by my mother to be a strong, independent, take-charge woman, and to never allow a man to control me, never bow down to a man, etc. even as a child, all it took was casual observation of the relationships around me, starting with my own parents...to see that this model was just not right, and did not work. and then i looked at relationships like my aunt and uncle, where she was clearly submissive and unfailingly obedient to him, and where he was the head of the household, and they were both clearly happy, full of love, affection and lust for one another, even into their 60s.

unfortunately i think the feminist movement of the '60s and early '70s has done much to errode male-female relationships, not to mention humanity in general. little boys are raised to be subservient, pleading, femininely sensitive, and little girls are raised to be independent, demanding, ball-busting machines of emasculation. so then you have grown women who feel that men should worship the ground they walk on, and that a man should have to somehow earn the right to be with and keep them, and men who try their best to comply because it is oftentimes the only way a "modern" relationship can stay together. meanwhile many of these men are feeling stifled, conflicted, and guilty about their natural drives and needs, because Oprah and Dr. Phil tells them they should. *smh*

so yes, i encourage my "friends" to be selfish, to be free, to lose their inhibitions and shake off social conditions...they know that the time they spend with me is time when they can allow themselves to truly be a man, in every sense of the word, and not the servant, puppydog or altarboy that society (and often their wives) demand them to be outside of my doors.

Our social conditioning has been the opposite of what you describe. Patriarchal society (more often associated with monotheistic religion) is what has made men dominant. Go back and study some of the pre-historic cultural history and you will see this. During that time, women held more important decision-making roles in society and life was very different than it is today.

In most other animal species, it is the male who is decorated and colorful and has to work to get the females' attention in order to mate with her. Male bluebirds are blue, male cardinals are red, while the females are brown...the males do all sorts of showing off routines (and even fight with other males) to get the females' attention. In our culture, women bend over backwards with superficial tricks to get the males' attention.

Contrary to your assertions, boys are NOT raised to be "subservient, pleading, femininely sensitive", etc...  Spend some time in public schools with little boys and it will be glaringly evident that they are still being raised to be bullies, gay-bashers, and the like. I have done this and I speak from experience. It's frightening, actually, and one would like to think that times have changed, but they haven't.

If men were so subservient in American culture, why are women STILL making about $.75 to every man's dollar in the workforce? Why are there no women presidents, as there are in other countries? Where are all these men that you speak of?

In addition, "being a man, in every sense of the word" is simply your own perception and how you choose to define it. Not everyone agrees on what being a man "should" be and should be stated as opinion, not fact.


Finally, I want to be clear that I do not disagree in any way with a woman's choice or desire to be submissive to men. I have experienced both ends of the "power exchange" and can say from the heart that being submissive can be liberating, exhilarating, and intense. But it can be that way for men, too. But let us not be mistaken that the Feminist movement has actually changed anything. It's still, very clearly, a MAN'S WORLD.

Namaste

-- Modified on 7/30/2007 5:42:57 PM

The only reason a relationship in which a woman is submissive "works" is of the woman has to give up her sense of her value and self-worth.  What does it mean to say it "works?"

Petite's right, our society is sexist.  A woman who maintains her self-respect is not going easily to find a man who respects her.  If she is afraid of being alone, she will probably have to sacrifice her integrity and go with any guy she can get, even if he treats her like shit - and there are plenty of those guys around.

A man who treats a woman with respect and dignity, who sees a woman as his equal is not "subservient, pleading,..." but someone who is confident and has a sense of his own worth.  There is nothing wrong with sensitivity.  It's underrated among men and leads to a great deal of brutality.  Men, like women, are emotionally complex, and are not only driven by beer, pussy, sports and money.  Our culture would like to reduce men to this and it only makes us look like dangerous, emotionally-stunted children in adult bodies.  Really, what could be more insulting?  Most men buy into this shit, which creates a lot of problems for us, and for women.  I strongly believe that if we knew how to handle our emotions throughout our lives, we wouldn't have "mid-life crises."

I disagree that the feminist movement hasn't changed anything.  Without the movement, the research you mentioned would not have been done and we could not have made our arguments.  The idea that a woman is a human being and not just doormat would never have come from men.

While I had hoped for more posts, several of these were just the sort of responses I had hoped for with this thread.  It is as interesting of a subject to me as the whole "Men are  unfaithful because of their genetic makeup, so they shouldn't be expected to be monogamous" discussion.

Thank you Beverly...Mr. Fisher is one lucky guy...and the ladies who agreed with you.  You are much like the women I have been fortunate enough to know and have loved in my life.

Thank you, lilli...I appreciate you chiming in on this, as yes, those were your words that sparked my initial thread, and I appreciate you sharing your viewpoint.  I have known several women who I feel had similar views as yours, either openly or  "deep down" (as their behavior supported it...one even had a name similar to yours), but I honestly felt the psychology of their beliefs was more situational than genetic.  I even see the potential for that in your response, but I'm not pushing an agenda here...just wanted to hear views.  I respect yours, and I hope that you are with people who you enjoy in that way.  I will say, though, that I don't view feminism as a cause of societal downfall as much as an effect of societal change that dates back much further than the 1960's.

Bella...boy do I wish you weren't on the opposite coast!  Namaste', indeed!  Do you have your brain registered, because it is a lethal weapon!

And credit where credit is due...dragonfly, in spite of the fact that I requested only posts from the ladies, you in many ways made the mode poignant post of all.  Your statements about sensitivity and the feminist movement were right on the mark, and the whole bit about the effect of our culture on the male "identity" was DOPE!  It is much easier to deal with people if they are classified, so we are surrounded by images of men in the manner you mentioned ("only driven by beer, pussy, sports and money") and images of women as vain, overbearing, agenda driven gold diggers.  While many in our culture have no problem with these or similar gender classifications (and in many ways, life is much simpler for those who cleave to "gender roles"), IMO, it is much more a reflection of how much our culture is driven by consumer issues than by what we are capable of as thinking, feeling beings.  

Thanks to those who posted...it was interesting.

hi petitebella...i think that perhaps some of your disagreement with my comments comes from a lack of clarification on my part. first, you will get no disagreement from me that politically, financially, our world is still very much male dominated. however when it comes to interpersonal relationships, in the west and in those societies heavily influenced by the west, women are encouraged to be the ones in control, to emasculate men, to not "need" men, etc. this is the trend of societal conditioning of the past 2, 3 generations. before that time, conditioning was very much the opposite, you are correct.

yes, there are plenty of sad little boys who grow up disrespecting, degrading and using women, and sad little girls who grow up feeling that they must tolerate anything in order to have a man, any man, in their lives. these realities do not change the overall shift i see in gender roles in general.

also, i wanted to clarify that imo being submissive is not a desire a choice, at least it is not that way for me. it is simply who i am and always have been, just like my brown eyes and the teardrop birthmark on my leg. i spent most of my life striving to fit in and be someone i was not, trying to play the role of the independent, self-sufficient, assertive woman, and failing miserably. finally i decided, this is who i am, i'm just going to accept it and only bother sharing my time and life with those who accept it as well.

lilli: my apologies for not including "by nature" along with "decision" or "choice". It takes a lot of courage to be who we really are.

Dragonfly: Wow! You said things I've said so many times before. I appreciate your honesty and ability to slice right through that issue. Thanks! Oh, and you're right, Feminism HAS brought about change, just not as much as I keep hoping for  

I once did a photo essay on the topic of violence against women stemming from society stifling mens' emotions or sensitivity. As women (who become mothers), we should take responsibility for this and watch how we raise our boys. I've been very fortunate to have always had egalitarian friendships with men. In my circle of friends, we've had co-ed bachelor/bachelorette parties and baby showers! We make our own rules and live in the way that feels right to us, regardless of societal rules and expectations. Again, I'm lucky.

Beverly: Again, thank you.

And thank you, Mr. Self-Destruct. I am not registered, but I am a metaphorical ninja (in my own mind). I get off on thinking and learning more than anything else. Well...I do love to make art and music, too...and I wanna surf someday...and climb big rocks...and...

Have a nice night, all.

Namaste,
Bella