The modern sub personality.
It’s time for a (r)evolution in our community and I think that this revolution should revolve around better defining the roles, rules and ideologies to which we are all subject. And I think that we should start with the term “sub.”
I understand that the term “submissive” coincides with the Mendelian profile of a person who exhibits submissive tendencies; this profile suggests,
“Origin: Compliant (C) submissive types are those in whom the trait of aggression is profoundly suppressed by genetic and/or environmental factors (notation A=).
In these types, the trait A is profoundly suppressed, so that whatever the circumstance, subs tend not to exhibit aggressive behavior in social situations. They can exhibit the aggressive A-rage, but this is very rare. Compliant submissive types typically tend to be very introverted and seek a lifestyle involving little responsibility and much protection. Sexually promiscuous individuals are very vulnerable and have a strong tendency to masochistic behavior.” (Quote from NPA Personality Theory A.M Benis © 2008 )
While the references to protection, vulnerability and masochistic behavior may be applicable to a large swath of those that consider themselves submissives, I don’t feel that the bulk of the profile is applicable to this specific demographic. I think upon further examination we will see that the bulk of this profile doesn't apply to those in our community.
Let’s start with aggression. There exists an idea that all subs are doormats who don’t have the right or ability to stand up for themselves. I think a lot of this idea stems from the Mendelian profile and is perpetuated by the type of romantic novel that depicts the wilting flower waiting to be ravaged; I am not saying that this person doesn't exist, but I honestly would equate them with having a victim mentality and not the complex emotional and sexual range needed to a contributing member of a D/s relationship or our community. In this day and age people use the term “submissive” to denote their interpersonal sexual wants, needs and desires, not normally to denote who they are as a human being. Since I have been in this lifestyle (11 + years) I have met A,B, and D list Actors Athletes, Comedians, Lawyers, Fortune 500 executives, professional fighters, etc… that enjoy yielding to another. So that kind of blows away the introverted concept.
I feel that subs, at their essence are closer to Venetian courtesans like Veronica Franco or Japanese Geisha like Kamagiku. As is the case with those iconic people, subs do not need to be docile, introverted or subservient. Those icons were/are talented and skilled individuals who honed their skills in order to be of service to the person to whom
they dedicated their life and loyalty. So I think the term “sub” should be synonymous with “subject to the authority of another” and “submissive profile.” I think that in doing this not only will subs find their designation as a source of pride, but it will also give subs a sense of personage and belonging. It will recognize and honor their place not only in their D/s relationship but in the community. But more than anything else it may change the minds of some dominants who feel they can treat people with contempt, disrespect, malice and a reckless disregard for a sub’s physical, mental or emotional well-being just because they wore the title “sub.” Changing this term also means that we are clearly outlining a power structure that places responsibility and accountability square on the shoulders of the authority figure (which in this case is the Dominant).
I know it doesn't seem like this has to be explained in this way, but all too often I have seen Dominants and would-be Masters try to shirk their duties and/or obligations to their sub all because they feel that they don’t know what their responsibility to the sub is or they feel that the sub is going to be too passive to hold them accountable. The authoritarian (Dominant / Master) has to understand that the submissive is making a decision to be subject to them; the authoritarian has to do the same thing. I think the positive aspects of adopting this “sub” title outweigh the minuses and for those that have a submissive personality, you are free to continue to use the term. For all those that don’t feel it fits… let’s start the revolution… What do you think?
O
{Orpheus Black is a sex educator specializing in Poly, D/s and M/s Dynamics. He is also a, professional and lifestyle Dominant, and alternative lifestyle speaker in Los Angeles. For more information on classes or speaking engagements please email him at orpheusandindigo@gmail.com}
 |
| Gregor Mendel 1822 - 1884 |
“Origin: Compliant (C) submissive types are those in whom the trait of aggression is profoundly suppressed by genetic and/or environmental factors (notation A=).
In these types, the trait A is profoundly suppressed, so that whatever the circumstance, subs tend not to exhibit aggressive behavior in social situations. They can exhibit the aggressive A-rage, but this is very rare. Compliant submissive types typically tend to be very introverted and seek a lifestyle involving little responsibility and much protection. Sexually promiscuous individuals are very vulnerable and have a strong tendency to masochistic behavior.” (Quote from NPA Personality Theory A.M Benis © 2008 )
While the references to protection, vulnerability and masochistic behavior may be applicable to a large swath of those that consider themselves submissives, I don’t feel that the bulk of the profile is applicable to this specific demographic. I think upon further examination we will see that the bulk of this profile doesn't apply to those in our community.
Let’s start with aggression. There exists an idea that all subs are doormats who don’t have the right or ability to stand up for themselves. I think a lot of this idea stems from the Mendelian profile and is perpetuated by the type of romantic novel that depicts the wilting flower waiting to be ravaged; I am not saying that this person doesn't exist, but I honestly would equate them with having a victim mentality and not the complex emotional and sexual range needed to a contributing member of a D/s relationship or our community. In this day and age people use the term “submissive” to denote their interpersonal sexual wants, needs and desires, not normally to denote who they are as a human being. Since I have been in this lifestyle (11 + years) I have met A,B, and D list Actors Athletes, Comedians, Lawyers, Fortune 500 executives, professional fighters, etc… that enjoy yielding to another. So that kind of blows away the introverted concept.
 |
| "No one before you my husband not even I."- My Geish |
they dedicated their life and loyalty. So I think the term “sub” should be synonymous with “subject to the authority of another” and “submissive profile.” I think that in doing this not only will subs find their designation as a source of pride, but it will also give subs a sense of personage and belonging. It will recognize and honor their place not only in their D/s relationship but in the community. But more than anything else it may change the minds of some dominants who feel they can treat people with contempt, disrespect, malice and a reckless disregard for a sub’s physical, mental or emotional well-being just because they wore the title “sub.” Changing this term also means that we are clearly outlining a power structure that places responsibility and accountability square on the shoulders of the authority figure (which in this case is the Dominant).
I know it doesn't seem like this has to be explained in this way, but all too often I have seen Dominants and would-be Masters try to shirk their duties and/or obligations to their sub all because they feel that they don’t know what their responsibility to the sub is or they feel that the sub is going to be too passive to hold them accountable. The authoritarian (Dominant / Master) has to understand that the submissive is making a decision to be subject to them; the authoritarian has to do the same thing. I think the positive aspects of adopting this “sub” title outweigh the minuses and for those that have a submissive personality, you are free to continue to use the term. For all those that don’t feel it fits… let’s start the revolution… What do you think?
O
{Orpheus Black is a sex educator specializing in Poly, D/s and M/s Dynamics. He is also a, professional and lifestyle Dominant, and alternative lifestyle speaker in Los Angeles. For more information on classes or speaking engagements please email him at orpheusandindigo@gmail.com}
