Quote: Unfortunately I'm not really into dominating him - looking for advice.
Do you even know what you mean when you say "dominating"? Do you have enough experiences and examples and tried enough varied ways to know? My first piece of advice is to make it about what you can do, not what you can't. My second piece of advice is to, ahem, "calm the fuck down". What are you even freaking out about EXACTLY? I'm betting it's "not having a clue". What's more your BF is probably freaking out too. "I want you to control me but it's hard to say why and I want you to do it in your way because I'm worried about taking away your control which might result in depression and suicidal tendencies". That could be their thought process. It's often been mine.
It's easier to take action when GIVEN actions. Sounds like you might be "waiting" for him to make moves. But what about your own?
Quote: I'm so turned off by the idea of "telling him what to do" & "being in control".
Let me guess. You're concerned it has to translate to always being "bossy" and in "constant control" which gives the impression that things have to be a chore (it's actually been an issue with someone for me. Which is now no longer an issue with things happening). But by refusing to "inform" and giving "direction" that may be why things are a chore. Are you holding back? We're always in control. But there's also "flow". Flow might seem like a lack of control, but control can be very present with it. eg: "You let it happen". Control exists in everything we do. And if there's a lack of control then where is your choice? Just as importantly, where is THEIR choice? This might raise concerns with "decision making", but I'm about to cover that.
Quote: I want it to be mutual enjoyment & decision making.
Yes, but you have to give to get. Reciprocation. You're not the first to have such concerns. Once people with those concerns "took action" they end up having fun with me too. Despite assuming otherwise at first. But this is based on my response/reaction. They "direct" events. I go with the flow. I might state what I want/need. We might "arrange" things. But then they "get things to happen". By "taking action" (again, control). Inaction leads to apathy. Apathy is the bane of relationships (and other events). If you need to be constantly informed before taking action (which decision making all the time may cause) then this could result in stalling. Does your BF go with the "flow" of what you do? Long as they can inform you of their wants/needs you can simply give "direction". That doesn't mean you have to constantly give orders. That said if you want something done by him then "tell" can work better then "asking" (they might stall less and ALREADY want too. Asking too often can make people panic more). It simply means you do what you want and they don't complain. Likewise I would hope you go with their "flow" when they need you too as well. Instead of stalling and assuming the worst of a situation. It's what I mean when I say "worry less, do more." Even if the first few rounds don't go well you can adapt and tailor. You might want it to be mutual but it's about what you both give and get from each other as well. One event leading to the next (quickly as well as in the long run). There's a kind of "pattern". A good part of that pattern is not chickening out and going on about how bad things are the moment things get rocky (that can be an issue. "Ducking out the moment things aren't going well before giving a chance properly"). There has to be consistency. Sometimes things have to start bad before getting good. I mean, we're talking about doing new things here. It isn't going to go perfect at the start. You have to be realistic on that account.
Example: Let's say you buy someone a gift to make them happy without deciding together. But you already know the gift is something they'll like (they made it clear beforehand. Add showing how thoughtful you are). You "control" this situation. You brought the gift. You decided what the gift is. Of your own accord. And you do it to make someone happy. The rest is a matter of "How do they make me happy" or/and "This gives them a reason to make me happy back" (mutual). You just might get yours a little later. Likewise your BF might get "rewarded" for making it about you when you made it clear you want them too (through informing/orders). Maybe you told them to do something to amuse you. Try to think of "positive" examples instead of fixating on the negatives.
If some situation is going in a direction you don't want it too for whatever reason then that's where "orders" factors in. Likewise "How to make fun happen quicker". The alternative is the situation going in a direction you don't want it too. If someone is slow tell them to speed up. Or vice versa. If someone is being too romantic and you want them to "fuck you already" then state as such. No one has to do as they're told and everyone has a choice. But if people don't listen and look after you then you'll be more bothered by that. Make your main concern "not informing". And perhaps "asking too much". If someone is always asked it can leave room for doubt. They might think "Is this ok to do or not". An "order" is more direct. "This is happening". Unless otherwise refused. Instead of thinking of "orders" think of "telling". Instructing. Informing. "Direction" is more down to WHAT you do. With the other simply going along with the "flow". eg: You might walk over to a bench but your BF joins you, unasked for but not unwelcome. Or you could STATE (not ask) "Join me if you want". Which gives a choice (the purpose of asking). More extreme examples would be pinning someone down yet casually being flirty and they flirt back despite the tension, of which would be controlled (by them as much as you. They choose not to freak out). Because if tension isn't controlled that can result in uncontrolled lashing out (from one side or the other). It might sound like that situation needs "more" control but if you do the same thing often enough it becomes more "instinct". Which is why an elite soldier won't hesitate in performing battlefield tactics (aiming, taking cover, etc). They've done it enough to have it "automated". But they can also let loose and be silly as heck and have a good time without being serious when they're not "in the moment". it's all down to case by case. What the situation calls for. Chances are you're generalizing without context. Which results in confusion leading to said freaking out.
Likewise, with D/s, like a soldier that's just been recruited you might have to stumble fall and fail 100 times before having that kind of ability. But any time you do it's something to learn from. But this doesn't just happen in D/s. It's already happening. Each time you ask, tell, even move without a word. And it's all very much about control, or the lack of ability to be in it. Or otherwise letting things happen (and this often happens without a choice being made. Can be good or bad, depending. Again, context). The last two areas with control (that comes to mind) is "lashing out" (unhealthy) and letting a bad situation happen (which can involve being lazy and difficult on purpose). That can happen because someone fears the worst. People often make their own fear through needles worrying (fear itself). When there was likely nothing to worry about in the first place. Comes back to "stalling".
So above all else, before anything else, control your "freaking out". I say it again. CONTROL that. Or it controls you. And I do not think you wan't to have the situation decided because of your lack of ability to remain calm. Either get that control or learn how. Because if you can't then you have more to worry about then your BF.