Is submission really a gift?

The Thinker​(sadist male){NotLooking} • Oct 2, 2020

Oracle,

Of course, opinions vary. But for me, if I feel that I am being gifted sex, or submission, potentially out of pity as I am not needed anyway, I would feel lesser, and the engagement will not be fulfilling to me at all. I do not beg women so that they may gift me sex, or subs so that they may gift me their submission. I would rather go without. As a result, I have always stayed away from women who considred their submission to be a gift. I prefer to engage with women for whom submission is a need instead.

-Thinker

kajirasubm{On Hiatus } • Oct 2, 2020

two diverging roads:

A deep bonded relationship between both.

Or

A contractual scene.

In my definition, both are vastly different.

It depends upon what one is seeking.

Perhaps tender submission is seen as incredibly valued , because one has chosen to open themself mind, body and soul.

Whereas a Dominant might have more defined parameters.

The Dominant in essence, helps a woman's submission to blossom fully.
His Dominance is already a given.
She's opening up to him, both physically and emotionally.

So therein lies the bestowing of trust, respect, consensual.
This has the propensity to grow toward a deep love bond, or just kept as a signed contract between both.

The Thinker​(sadist male){NotLooking} • Oct 2, 2020

"Perhaps tender submission is seen as incredibly valued"

"His Dominance is already a given."

Therein lies the problem. I couldn't have said it better. Dominance is taken for granted, submission a rare treasure.

OraclePollon​(sub female){NotYours} • Oct 2, 2020

It takes all kinds of kinds. Personally, being put on a pedestal and worshipped is completely counter productive to what I need in a dynamic. But on the other end, because of balance, I do consider my submission a gift. I no longer have time for people who overlook all the acts of service I give as something to be taken for granted and never appreciated, or not given what I need because they are too preoccupied not recognizing what I commit to the lifestyle.

The Thinker​(sadist male){NotLooking} • Oct 2, 2020

If you are gifting your service, Oracle, with an expectation that will be appreciated and your needs fulfilled in return, perhaps it is not a gift after all?

shortylotus​(dom female) • Oct 3, 2020

Submission is the gift and dominance is the wrapping paper.

slavebilly​(sub male) • Oct 3, 2020

I am a submissive by nature. Its who I am. It's not a need!!! I submit to a Dom because Its who I am, not out of need! I give my submission out of love. It is a choice. I am submissive in every area of my life. For me it is not sexual, I can be satisfied without sexual submission (even though I enjoy it). I guess what I'm saying is I'm a full time sub not a sib only in the bedroom.

IowaDom​(dom male) • Oct 3, 2020

I never took the gift of submission to mean I come home early one day, and she hands me a box, "Lookie what I got you!" .. lol. Nor does it mean my physical or verbal actions alone have caused her to become obedient like a dog.

To me it means that this person has relinquished control to me, BECAUSE of who I am, because we have formed a bond of trust, and I have reached them, and they have reached me, on both a spiritual and physical level that they are compelled to submit to me, that they trust me implicitly with their physical and spiritual well being, and I am compelled by a genuine need to care for them, protect them, dominate them, have them for my own.

But that level of trust does not come in a can. It is, IMHO, an EARNED trust, earned through OUR actions, deeds, AND words ...together. Once that bond of trust is earned, only then can the Dominate truly assume control, and only then can the submissive truly allow themselves to be dominated. Without that primal bond of trust, this cannot happen in a pure sense.

To me, that is what the "gift of submission" is, and yes, should that bond of trust be violated, by either party sufficiently to dissolve that bond, so ends the D/s dynamic, and the right to do so resides in both of them.

anywho, just my 2 cents ....

Taramafor​(sub male) • Oct 4, 2020

I think you're confusing D/s with ownership. They're not the same thing.

What you're talking about is "Agreeing" to be a dom and a sub together. And even when people do agree on that not everyone (in fact probably most people) don't use contracts. Very many things actually rarely get agreed upon. The only reason it happens more often in D/s (ownership specifically just to be clear) is because it can be harder for things to "fall into place" so to speak. But sometimes it's also very easy. Depending on the company involved and wherever one or/and both let things happen. If a sub made their interest in a dom very clear then is an agreement needed? Or does the dom simply direct that sub when they made it clear they want to engage with the dom.

D/s is about "control". As well as "power". If you happen to be with someone and they're toying with you in all the ways you like, and it was never agreed upon yet you're having the time of your life, then that's D/s. If every need of yours is being met and then some then congrats, you found someone that doesn't hesitate with your happiness. Now you could argue they're "giving" but I don't see it that way. Because when I go out of my way to make someone happy I know there's at least a good chance I'LL get something out of it too. Though perhaps after I made it about them first. It's called incentive. The more you do for others the more likely they'll do things back. The more willing they'll be open to new things. And thus see to your needs back in return provided you're looking after theirs.

As for the topic, let's examine the context of "gift". First D/s in and of itself is more of a "symptom". At the end of the day these are labels. Of which can get generalised. For the purpose of this topic let's consider how people allow themselves to be controlled (and this can very easily happen without you even realising).

Some people won't hesitate to make you happy while also getting their own entertainment value out of it. If you think about it it's more of a "trade". They are making you happy, but are you making THEM happy? Ultimately it boils down to who's making the first move. Or, perhaps more accurately, talking someone into doing so.

If someone looks after your happiness quickly in a "giving" manner it's then on you to make sure you "engage back". I won't say "give" back because that would be a misnomer. It's more about reciprocation. The fact that they're doing things with you makes it more possible for you to engage back (and vice versa). It's a matter of someone taking action and then the other person giving a reaction. X happiness for Y's. Often people want theirs FIRST. But you know what they say. The more you give the more you get. It's those that don't hesitate with me that get me to do more with them. And I find I get others to do more with me after I made it about what they like first. It's incentive 101.

MariGold • Oct 4, 2020

I think if you want to hate on semantics, you can always find something to pick apart.

In a way you answered your own question, that you don't like gifts.

But I think from a submissive POV that submission in its very nature
is a gift and in the hands of the right dominant - which is the ultimate goal - the sub will flourish and the Dom will flourish, hence the
whole dynamic ideally is a give and take.