I am not "a Domme" or "a sub", and definitely not a slave.
I am a free woman with a generally dominant personality, who lives by
Gorean principles and philosophies in real life, and also engages in
BDSM activities.
I tend to be "toppy" toward those on the more submissive end of the
continuum, though I do usually at least defer to free men, and will
conditionally submit to those who are dominant, unless they give me a reason to withdraw such.
I've been meaning to write this for quite a while now, for various reasons.
Apparently, the "switch" moniker is very confusing to some people, so I will go into detail here about what it does - and doesn't - mean, in my case.
We'll start with the "doesn'ts", since those seem to be the most oft misunderstood.
"Switch" does NOT mean:
I go back and forth from free to slave.
- I will do/be/play whatever role you are seeking
- my role within any specific D/s dynamic is flexible
- I "switch" between being/identifying as dominant or submissive depending on my mood, the day, the phase of the moon, or any other whims.
"Switch DOES mean (for me)
- I enjoy both "topping" and "bottoming" in BDSM activities/scenes, regardless of D/s involvement (or lack thereof) at various times and with different people.
- I respond in different ways to different people or types of people - Some people trip the dominant trigger, some trip the submission trigger, and some people do neither. That's just the way I'm wired. Telling me what I "should" do, or trying to demand, cajole, whine, bitch, or otherwise manipulate me into relating to you in your desired manner will backfire. Badly!
For a more in-depth look at the topic...
The word, "switch", for me, is only a label for convenience. It doesn't encapsulate who or what I AM.I am a strong woman with a dominant personality and submissive tendencies.
I believe in the natural order of things (more on that in a future post), and that D/s is not a clear cut, either/or sort of thing. Rather, dominance and submission are character traits on a continuum, which vary from person to person, with every person falling somewhere on the scale, creating somewhat of a hierarchy.
That means that a single person may be submissive or subordinate to some, whilst outranking or being dominant to others, at the same time.
It was recently compared by someone in a discussion to that of a wolf pack. I tend to agree with that allegory.
A pack will have an alpha male and, generally, an alpha female. The alpha female is the boss bitch, and she is dominant over the rest of the pack, but, she is still submissive to the alpha male, with whom the buck stops. She is still very much free to do as she wishes, and no one had best mess with her unless they are ready and willing to attempt to fight her, and potentially her mate, but she yields to him, because it is how they are biologically wired. The same is true, I believe, with humans.
Another comparison is that to serving in the Armed Forces.
A Drill Instructor is God to the recruits in their platoon, but if an Officer is on deck, that same Sgt. (or whatever) damn well better snap to attention and salute along with those recruits, and the C.O. (Commanding Officer) merits same from all of the aforementioned, going on up the chain of command right up to the Commandant, and then the Commander in Chief himself.
In neither of those comparisons, does an individual bounce between two or more separate "roles". They occupy their given role, and interact with others and the rest of the world accordingly, depending on those others' respective roles. They don't have to transition from one "mindset" to another, because they know their place in the larger scheme of things, and everything just flows naturally from there.
It is simply a fact that there are more than two "ranks" in life, and in nature.
I will not separate out my dominant and submissive traits into separate "personas". They are not. I am me. I am a whole, integrated, complete person, with many different facets. I choose to embrace that.
Neither will I "dumb down", pretend to be less than, submit, or pretend to submit to anyone, simply by virtue of their gender, status, or because they claim a certain title or position. I will start out being respectful to others, and will defer, to a degree, and maintain a submissive attitude with free men as long as they don't give me reason to do otherwise. From there, they will either earn my respect, and the added deference that may accompany it, or they will earn... something less, and I will do my best to at least remain civil, so long as they can avoid pushing me too far.
Do not mistake a respectful demeanor, good manners, polite deference, or knowing my place in the natural order of things for outright submission. There is a distinct difference, and making assumptions is an unwise idea.
Though I may serve women on rare occasions, as required by circumstance or as ordered by a man/men to whom I am in service or submitted, I do not submit to women. No, it's not "fair". Neither is it (as has been accused on multiple occasions), "discrimination", any more than having a specific sexual orientation is "discrimination". It simply is how I am wired.
My submissive tendencies are most often likely to be triggered by strong, dominant men, and I will, in general, tend to be more deferential to such men. It takes a man who is more dominant than I - along with being someone who I trust implicitly, like, and possibly love - to earn my actual submission.
If you read this far and are interested in more about my thoughts on D/s from the s side, click this link.
