What’s it like being a sub ?

[un****]

Hiya guys and girls I’ve always been curious what it’s like to be a sub because from a doms prospective you have the aftercare the punishment the reassurance. As a Dom I’ve always wounded what’s it like from a subs prospect When they see daddy/Dom dominating them xx

[Deleted Member]

It's just one word for me: freedom. I can just be free to be smol, knowing that I'm safe. Personally I need alot of reassurance, yet to find a Daddy Dom who can put up with me. Punishments are quite fun and slightly scary. I get off on it!

[ge****]

That's like asking what's it like being a dominant the other way round -they're mindsets and therefore difficult to define/describe and it will vary not only from submissive to submissive, but also possibly for an individual submissive based on the individual dominant they are with

[Deleted Member]

Aftercare should work both ways! All parties involved should check in and provide aftercare.. Even after dom sessions I've checked in on my subs and broken everything down, discussed, really looked after them and they have done the same to me even though I was dom... Communication is key, you shouldn't be 'wounded' or left out at all! Maybe you need to re-communicate!

[SA****]

Try it out! Having a Sub's perspective could improve aftercare applying and also increases the foresight of the Dom/me when punishing and rewarding. It could also give a greater insight as to what aftercare you want for yourself as a Dom/me

[Deleted Member]

I can give you an answer that will be extremely specific to me. To me, it's a quiet. It's a state of readiness without any of the constant vigilance and awareness of my environment that I usually have (because I'm usually in control of my space). It's a reactiveness instead of an activeness, moving and doing as is desired of me instead of proactively to manoeuvre a situation.

[CopperKnob]

So, as a Dom, you don't receive aftercare or reassurance?

[Deleted Member]

A lot of the answers on here seem pedantic as hell. The guy is just trying to have a discussion.

[Deleted Member]

I have spent a LOT of time and effort, getting into the mind of a submissive. What Ive learned is, if its done right, its relaxing, and freeing to them.

The biggest thing that divides dominants and submissives is that D's generally produce and provide their own sense of validation from an internal source, whereas S's prefer it from an external source.

For an S, its nice to let go, relax, and have confidence that someone else is taking care of things.

The best analogy I have for it, is...

Imagine, going on a road trip in a big RV.

You arent driving, you arent planning anything, all you have to do is just help out with the cleaning when you get to each the destinations. Meanwhile you can sit in the back and enjoy the comfy ride.

The exchange is, comfort/security and not having to think about anything... for authority/control.

Some people want to be in control though, and their brains will go nuts without having some degree of awareness of things going on.These are the kind of people who would prefer to drive their own RV. (Dominants)

And those that would gladly sit in the back of an RV, and then help out with the cooking, cleaning, gas pumping, so long as someone else tells them what to do and where to do it, they are submissives.

[CopperKnob]

11 minutes ago, HouseofMinos said:

I have spent a LOT of time and effort, getting into the mind of a submissive. What Ive learned is, if its done right, its relaxing, and freeing to them.

The biggest thing that divides dominants and submissives is that D's generally produce and provide their own sense of validation from an internal source, whereas S's prefer it from an external source.

For an S, its nice to let go, relax, and have confidence that someone else is taking care of things.

The best analogy I have for it, is...

Imagine, going on a road trip in a big RV.

You arent driving, you arent planning anything, all you have to do is just help out with the cleaning when you get to each the destinations. Meanwhile you can sit in the back and enjoy the comfy ride.

The exchange is, comfort/security and not having to think about anything... for authority/control.

Some people want to be in control though, and their brains will go nuts without having some degree of awareness of things going on.These are the kind of people who would prefer to drive their own RV. (Dominants)

And those that would gladly sit in the back of an RV, and then help out with the cooking, cleaning, gas pumping, so long as someone else tells them what to do and where to do it, they are submissives.

"Hello 1920's, I know the Equality Act is 90years off but, I'd like my rights back".
.
I hear what you're trying to get across but I'm not sure that your analogy fits all stypes because, we're individuals.
There's plenty that stypes need and should be thinking about within a relationship, dynamic and with regards to general life. It's not a case of lying back and thinking of England.

[Deleted Member]

11 minutes ago, CopperKnob said:

"Hello 1920's, I know the Equality Act is 90years off but, I'd like my rights back".
.
I hear what you're trying to get across but I'm not sure that your analogy fits all stypes because, we're individuals.
There's plenty that stypes need and should be thinking about within a relationship, dynamic and with regards to general life. It's not a case of lying back and thinking of England.

Yeah you're talking about things like voting rights and sexual *** and thats NOT what I'm referring to.

[CopperKnob]

5 minutes ago, HouseofMinos said:

Yeah you're talking about things like voting rights and sexual *** and thats NOT what I'm referring to.

Nope, that's not all or even what I'm talking about.

[Deleted Member]

The Equality act? And thinking of England?

https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/19th-amendment#:~:text=Passed%20by%20Congress%20June%204,decades%20of%20agitation%20and%20protest.

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/close_one%27s_eyes_and_think_of_England

Literally voting rights, and sexual ***. Please dont mischaracterize what Im saying with such dramatic comparisons.

[CopperKnob]

7 minutes ago, HouseofMinos said:

The Equality act? And thinking of England?

https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/19th-amendment#:~:text=Passed%20by%20Congress%20June%204,decades%20of%20agitation%20and%20protest.

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/close_one%27s_eyes_and_think_of_England

Literally voting rights, and sexual ***. Please dont mischaracterize what Im saying with such dramatic comparisons.

Thanks for the link. I work with the Equality Act every day though and I can assure you that that's not all it's about

[Deleted Member]

4 hours ago, HouseofMinos said:

I have spent a LOT of time and effort, getting into the mind of a submissive. What Ive learned is, if its done right, its relaxing, and freeing to them.

The biggest thing that divides dominants and submissives is that D's generally produce and provide their own sense of validation from an internal source, whereas S's prefer it from an external source.

For an S, its nice to let go, relax, and have confidence that someone else is taking care of things.

The best analogy I have for it, is...

Imagine, going on a road trip in a big RV.

You arent driving, you arent planning anything, all you have to do is just help out with the cleaning when you get to each the destinations. Meanwhile you can sit in the back and enjoy the comfy ride.

The exchange is, comfort/security and not having to think about anything... for authority/control.

Some people want to be in control though, and their brains will go nuts without having some degree of awareness of things going on.These are the kind of people who would prefer to drive their own RV. (Dominants)

And those that would gladly sit in the back of an RV, and then help out with the cooking, cleaning, gas pumping, so long as someone else tells them what to do and where to do it, they are submissives.

The problem with your analogy tome is that you classify people as Dominants and submissives as tho we are one or the other. As tho they are solid labels we hang around our necks. Were we on a real life road trip, I'd be the one driving the rv. I'd be the one with the route planned. I'd be the one with the tickets for all activities booked and paid for under my name. I'd be the one delegating tasks for cooking, cleaning etc. And then, later, I'd be the one on my knees taking instruction bc I just did fucking everything and it's time for my switch off.

Your post appears to come from a presumption that submissives are submissive. I am submissive to a specific person within a specific sphere of my choosing.

[CopperKnob]

22 minutes ago, Lady_Char said:

The problem with your analogy tome is that you classify people as Dominants and submissives as tho we are one or the other. As tho they are solid labels we hang around our necks. Were we on a real life road trip, I'd be the one driving the rv. I'd be the one with the route planned. I'd be the one with the tickets for all activities booked and paid for under my name. I'd be the one delegating tasks for cooking, cleaning etc. And then, later, I'd be the one on my knees taking instruction bc I just did fucking everything and it's time for my switch off.

Your post appears to come from a presumption that submissives are submissive. I am submissive to a specific person within a specific sphere of my choosing.

👏👏👏

[Deleted Member]

34 minutes ago, Lady_Char said:

The problem with your analogy tome is that you classify people as Dominants and submissives as tho we are one or the other. As tho they are solid labels we hang around our necks. Were we on a real life road trip, I'd be the one driving the rv. I'd be the one with the route planned. I'd be the one with the tickets for all activities booked and paid for under my name. I'd be the one delegating tasks for cooking, cleaning etc. And then, later, I'd be the one on my knees taking instruction bc I just did fucking everything and it's time for my switch off.

Your post appears to come from a presumption that submissives are submissive. I am submissive to a specific person within a specific sphere of my choosing.

In my opinion, submissives ARE submissive.

Whatever layers of social conditioning we layer on top of that in order to function, pay our bills, survive, be safe, and all of that, doesnt change who you are when you're naked in your bathroom, alone, with your thoughts, realxing in the bathtub. It doesnt change what makes you happy. It doesnt change who someone is in their core. It doesnt change the way their brain is wired to require certain external stimuli in order to get their serotonin, oxytocin, and dopamine. A person's life is a complex and adaptable thing.

The analogy I used was crude, because I had to use a crude analogy to try and help someone asking their question to understand that certain mindset when they arent used to knowing it for themselves. Seeing from the submissive's perspective when a D is dominating them. Yes if we are to accept the multiple nuances of control, theoretically a submissive could very well be the man throwing 300lb. stacks at the gym, or could be the CEO of a fortune 500 company.

But what a person does with their life is not always in alignment with what makes them happy... and in order to stay on topic, thats what I chose to focus on, the mindset of someone who is focusing primarily on what drives them in an intimate relationship. The naked self.

The analogy was supposed to evoke certain emotions, a certain vibe, and that vibe can be then translated to anything really, now that someone CAN see through those eyes.

In short, picking apart the analogy for technicalities misses the point the analogy was trying to make in the first place. An analogy doesnt have to be 100% accurate, it just has to be accurate enough to get the overall message across. Thats why its an analogy.

Thanks for being civil in your response. I appreciate that.

[CopperKnob]

"theoretically a submissive could very well be the man throwing 300lb. stacks at the gym, or could be the CEO of a fortune 500 company"


The other difficulty with your analogy though is your very clear thinking on gender norms.
The female or NB or any other gender may be the CEO or throwing 300lb weights around at the gym

[Deleted Member]

One thing I should clarify, I dont consider being a submissive the same as being a bottom. I define them very much differently.

Im operating on the following:

A submissive is someone who gives up some degree of overall agency or authority.

A bottom is someone who simply is on the receiving end of a particular activity.

Someone could be a dominant bottom, like, getting a massage because they ordered their sub to give one, for example.

Someone could be a submissive top, someone who is ordered to drive an RV, for example.

[Deleted Member]

14 minutes ago, HouseofMinos said:

In my opinion, submissives ARE submissive.

Whatever layers of social conditioning we layer on top of that in order to function, pay our bills, survive, be safe, and all of that, doesnt change who you are when you're naked in your bathroom, alone, with your thoughts, realxing in the bathtub. It doesnt change what makes you happy. It doesnt change who someone is in their core. It doesnt change the way their brain is wired to require certain external stimuli in order to get their serotonin, oxytocin, and dopamine. A person's life is a complex and adaptable thing.

The analogy I used was crude, because I had to use a crude analogy to try and help someone asking their question to understand that certain mindset when they arent used to knowing it for themselves. Seeing from the submissive's perspective when a D is dominating them. Yes if we are to accept the multiple nuances of control, theoretically a submissive could very well be the man throwing 300lb. stacks at the gym, or could be the CEO of a fortune 500 company.

But what a person does with their life is not always in alignment with what makes them happy... and in order to stay on topic, thats what I chose to focus on, the mindset of someone who is focusing primarily on what drives them in an intimate relationship. The naked self.

The analogy was supposed to evoke certain emotions, a certain vibe, and that vibe can be then translated to anything really, now that someone CAN see through those eyes.

In short, picking apart the analogy for technicalities misses the point the analogy was trying to make in the first place. An analogy doesnt have to be 100% accurate, it just has to be accurate enough to get the overall message across. Thats why its an analogy.

Thanks for being civil in your response. I appreciate that.

I disagree with your very first statement. I am not a submissive person. Were you to challenge me in a vanilla world situation, my response would be instinctual confrontational. It wouldn't even occur to me to back down and bow to anyone's "Dominance". My response would be very much against the established social norms bc I won't be bound by politeness when someone is pushing me, so i don't buy that either. What I seek through submission is a quieting of my mind. And I do that through a Dominant because I won't let my guard down to anyone who can't match me. I think you need to reevaluate your presumptions.

[Deleted Member]

36 minutes ago, Lady_Char said:

I disagree with your very first statement. I am not a submissive person. Were you to challenge me in a vanilla world situation, my response would be instinctual confrontational. It wouldn't even occur to me to back down and bow to anyone's "Dominance". My response would be very much against the established social norms bc I won't be bound by politeness when someone is pushing me, so i don't buy that either. What I seek through submission is a quieting of my mind. And I do that through a Dominant because I won't let my guard down to anyone who can't match me. I think you need to reevaluate your presumptions.

"Were you to challenge me..."

Why would I challenge you in the first place? I never implied any sort of conflict. I am talking about the fulfillment of needs, just like you are.

"What I seek through submission is a quieting of my mind. And I do that through a Dominant..."

So we actually agree with each other. I dont know where all of this implied confrontation is coming from?

[Deleted Member]

A Dominant and a suvmissive are not enemies, trying desperately to win some kind of power struggle, whether vanilla or not.

They are a complimentary pair. And just like all dating, of course, you have to find someone you feel comfortable enough with to take that journey with, before it will bring you any happiness.

[Deleted Member]

Also, to be clear, just because someone is suvmissive does not mean they should submit to just anyone. Thats absolutely crazy to think that.

Being submissive has more to do with how your brain is wired in order to be happy. Its a very neurological thing, and doesnt by itself make any implications about who you should date or how you should carry out your life, nor does it *** you into any particular role in the world. Its just defines what sort of personality you have, underneath the socialized exterior.

Another analogy, the river flows a particular direction, but that doesnt stop you from deciding to swim upstream if you wish. The choice is still yours.

In the same way, 'being submissive' doesnt override your ability to decide for yourself what you want. It just sets a baseline.

The OP was asking, what would someone with that kind of state of mind FEEL when someone is dominating them... and just like you said, it brings you peace of mind, no more *** no more worries. And I agree with you. 🙂

[Deleted Member]

I really appreciate your points of view, thank you for the discussion.

[Deleted Member]

Not you specifically, you in general 🙄 My point was that I am not a submissive person and the evidence I gave was my reaction to challenge rather than retreat.