Today I would like to talk about traits. More specifically I would like to talk about how a lot of people seem to mix them up with each other, and how people link certain traits together.
Let's start with the basics. If we were to define a "trait", we would get something like: "a distinguishing quality or characteristic." Therefore a trait is something like being kind, being patience or enjoy a certain kind of music. It wouldn't be too far off to say that a personality consists of a whole bunch of traits that all act upon our decision making. This nature of a trait also means you can have conflicting traits, or rather, traits we perceive as conflicting.
Take for instance a person who we perceive as "strong", without going into more details with what "strong" means. If we also were to describe such a person as "dominant", they would go well together hand in hand, because people associate being dominant with being strong. But what happens when someone we perceive as "weak" also has a trait we see as "dominant"? Likewise, what happens when someone we perceive as "strong" has a "submissive" trait?
The best situation I can think of was a couple where the woman was submissive and the man dominant. They volunteered to share their experiences as a couple, and they therefore disclosed this information to their nearest friends, especially the woman's friends. The friends, who were not submissive at all did not understand why the woman did what she did. They described her as "independent and strong". In their minds, being submissive went against those two other traits, and as such it was an illogical decision for the woman to chose to be submissive.
But that's where they were wrong. Being submissive isn't exactly something you chose. The reason why so many of us are on this site, is because we were born with it, and we couldn't find common ground with a normal vanilla partner. In society, you are either being manipulated or abused if you willingly chose to submit, despite being strong and independent. The same goes for the dominant. If he is perceived to be dependent and weak, people are just not able to see him as a dominant, even though he can easily have all three traits all at once.
This is where the misunderstanding occurs. Traits are not something that follows abc logic. One doesn't necessarily mean that another similar trait follows. It's all a jumbled up mess, and sometimes it even seems random. And maybe that's the truth of it. It's random, and that's how every single person on this world can be seen as "unique", kind of like a fingerprint. But the human mind loves logic and putting things together in boxes. That's why society has that view on the couple, and that's why the friends can't accept that their strong, independent friend is a submissive.
In truth, I would suggest that certain traits we have drive us to be a certain way. Just like how emotions guide us onto a certain path, having a preference, meaning a trait, will eventually lead you to want to explore in that direction. By this I mean that, if you are dominant, no matter what else you are, you will naturally enjoy and seek out situations where you can let out your dominant side. It will feel good in a way that is hard to understand for a person that doesn't have that particular trait. You've probably seen people do something where you thought: "that is so boring." And to you it might very well be. If that person were to try and describe the joy and pleasure they get from doing it, it would be hard for you to follow unless you also had some trait that compelled you to do something you really enjoyed.
Experiences like that tend to be the best way to describe traits and why you wish to follow them. That's probably also the reason why society has this contorted view of what is right or wrong, because when something isn't "right", you typically discard it or throw it away without trying to understand it. The only people who could understand a person who thoroughly enjoys doing something, is a person who also thoroughly enjoys doing something else or maybe even the same. That is why it is so freeing to get together in a place like this, where we can all share together in our common traits.
But back to what this means for a submissive and a dominant. Since I feel I've talked more about the submissive, I want to start with the dominant. Imagine again a dominant who is perceived as weak. This person could very well be the most experienced and skilled dom in existence, but because of being perceived as weak, you may not want him as a dom. I obviously cannot speak for the submissive community, but I think most subs would definitely prefer to have a "strong" dom compared to a weak dom. But what if this dom could bring out the absolute best in you? What if this dom, despite being perceived as weak, could make you the best person you could ever be? The struggle for such dominants, who are not allowed to show weakness, is that they are not necessarily the big strong or confident type. They are human like the rest of us, and they have doubts like the rest of us. A dom is not a super human, nor does he need to be. And sometimes the "weak" doms are the ones who actually understand weakness the best. They understand why things are hard and why things go wrong. They understand how to be optimistic, because they go through everyday trying to stay afloat. Such a dom might have a fundamental understanding of how to help improve a person, that they would make an excellent dominant.
Compare that to a submissive, and with society's view that subs are "weak", what if we look at a "strong" sub? I don't know if I only speak for myself, but for me, a "strong" sub is preferable, and I'll try to explain why. If you were to pick a servant, someone to obey you, the best choice would be the most capable and skilled servant there is, correct? If you had a sub that could do every single order perfectly and carry themselves in a way that would make you proud, they would be an ideal sub. But if you think of a "strong" sub, you will probably also go: "Why would a sub like that listen/serve you, if you are weaker?" This is again associating different traits with each other. Just because a person seem to appear to be a certain way, they may secretly crave something else entirely. How many stories haven't there been about dominant and confident bosses who secretly want to be submissive? How many stories of the timid, frail and shy character, that turns out to be a dominant monster?
As such, I want to finish off my blog post by repeating the main points of my rantings. Traits, such as "strong", "weak", "dominant" and "submissive" don't necessarily follow a logical pattern. It is a random assortment you get, and it's important not to "judge a book by it's cover." You need to try and experience how other people feel instead of dismissing them, as dismissal will lead to an ignorant world. Therefore, try your best to learn about the whole person before deciding what kind of person they are, and who knows, you might find something you really like.
As always, this is just a theory, and I hope it sparked some thoughts for discussion. Have a nice day!
2 years ago. February 23, 2022 at 9:03 AM
