Byrdie(switch female){rl only} |
6 years ago •
May 13, 2018
6 years ago •
May 13, 2018
Byrdie(switch female){rl only} • May 13, 2018
I'm not a submissive male, but I will share how the manliness factor has been explained to me:
A lot of men will intentionally sign up for the arm forces - not drafted - and consent to be ordered, bossed, and to submit. Now, there's a lot about patriotism, but they could just go into politics for that and miss the bossing. Are military men any less "manly" because they consent to be bossed? Similarly, knights in Ye Olden Tymes would compete for the chance to be a Queen's champion and take orders to go do things for her. This is a guy who would often be walking around with a sharp sword and would occasionally put on armor either for battle or to go out on a field to risk getting himself killed for the amusement of the Court. Are knights to be considered less "manly" because they were competing for the status of being bossed by royalty of any gender? Butlers and other male house staff intentionally enter a life of service to be bossed by gentry or rich people, doing fairly nasty or intimate chores for them. They often used to be born into a life of service, and some still are and consider it a proud part of the family lineage. Are they any less "manly" for doing so? If we trade pay for emotional and physical intimacy, is that where the "manly" factor gets odd for you? The trust, vulnerability, and willingness to put aside ones preferences - not needs, not triggers, not boundaries, not negotiated requirements - for another takes a very special and strong type of person, no matter what their gender. I think that the difference between a submissive person and a dominant one has nothing to do with manliness so much as it has to do with what gives the person in question joy. |
|