Lifestyle. It’s not a lifestyle. DOMINANT isn’t something you just are, boss at work and boss at home and boss of the dog. submissive isn’t something you just are, all the time, always the little meek obedient one. It’s a game. It’s a game we play in the bedroom. You don’t get to tell me how to play. You don’t get to tell me that I’m not a real elf unless I’m an elf all the time because, well, yeah. Of course I’m not a real elf. I just like playing pretend. Of course I’m not a real DOM. I’m just playing pretend. There is no real DOM. Real doesn’t come into it, real is the wrong question. I’m not a paladin but I’m a damn good paladin when I want to be. I’m not a sub but I’m a damn good sub when I want to be. It’s a game. It’s a role. Nobody is really what they’re being. We’re just playing pretend.
This Is Not A Lifestyle Wednesday, Mar 17 2010
how things work and language 4:17 pm
Some Of My Parts 
Hello! I’ve been reading through your blog from the beginning and I came to this.
One of your more recent posts included an observation that:
“Kinky is my sexuality, and it is as close to inborn as makes no difference.”
And then in another post you wrote:
“And thus I come to feel that posting a submissive fantasy on a blog where I state upfront that I am a switch will result in my no longer being taken seriously. It will taint the dominant fantasies with unreality, and it will be proof that I am not ‘really’ a dominant person, I’m a sub who’s playacting. Or something equally daft.”
After that you wrote a post about how you didn’t like other people generalising you into being a high heel-wearing foot-fetishist fancier, in which you wrote:
“Don’t generalise your kink to me. It’s getting annoying.”
So like that, I’d feel good if you stopped generalising my sexuality into yours. Because the way I do it, I feel like my sexuality is with me always, never something I am pretending. I don’t feel like who I am in my relationship is something I can leave behind when sex is over.
I don’t rôle play hardly at all so I feel like who I am during sex is who I am all the time.
I don’t know whether you still agree with what you wrote here, or if I’m missing something you worked out later?
I very much want to give you a considered answer to this, so please forgive me if this takes a while.
This post is not well thought through. If I had been taking communication seriously when I posted it, it would have been very different.
I’m not sure there’s any way to expand upon this post to make it mean what I want it to mean, so I’m going to start over.
It is my perception that so-called 24/7 relationships or ‘lifestyle’ BDSM are regarded as the only kinds of kink worth doing. That is, anyone who confines their sexuality to the bedroom, or finds that their sexual enjoyment of power exchange does not generalise seamlessly into the rest of their life, is not truly kinky and can be justifiably looked down upon for this failing.
My own sexuality is, like yours, a part of who I am and cannot be left in the bedroom. However, the nature of that sexuality is such that I can be satisfied with any position in a hierarchy so long as that hierarchy exists. More than that, I get bored and frustrated when I am confined to a single status at all times. As a natural consequence of this, my current relationship is not explicitly heirarchical except when we agree to make it so for the purpose of having enjoyable sex.
I am frustrated with when I perceive to be a distaste and dislike for this aspect of my sexuality, and would like it if there were a more general acceptance that power exchange is still power exchange even when it is temporary.
In the original post I spoke as if everyone was like me and needed only to recognise this fact to make everything better. This is obviously incorrect.
For the most part, hierarchy arises out of the varying skills and attributes we have. D/s power exchange is no different, being based on our individual desires to hold a particular status. It does not correspond to a fundamental truth about our status or worth as human beings, but is a arrangement we agree to for mutual satisfaction. Submissive people are not less important or less worthy of attention and respect than dominant people. Any agreement to act as if they were is, in this sense, play-acting. However, conflating “dominant people aren’t really more important” with “nobody really experiences dominant desires” as I did in this post is inaccurate and unhelpful.
I am so pleased that you took so much care with your response, that means a lot to me. And I am absolutely delighted that your perspective on communication is evolving, that is fantastic. 🙂
There was one point you raised which I’d like to address (I’ve boldly italicised the words which grabbed me):
“It is my perception that so-called 24/7 relationships or ‘lifestyle’ BDSM are regarded as the only kinds of kink worth doing. That is, anyone who confines their sexuality to the bedroom, or finds that their sexual enjoyment of power exchange does not generalise seamlessly into the rest of their life, is not truly kinky and can be justifiably looked down upon for this failing. […] I am frustrated with when I perceive to be a distaste and dislike for this aspect of my sexuality, and would like it if there were a more general acceptance that power exchange is still power exchange even when it is temporary.”
Regarded by whom? The only kinds of kink worth doing for whom? Who says you’re not truly kinky? Who looks down on you? Who calls your sexuality a failing? Who expresses distaste and dislike for this aspect of your sexuality? Whom would you like to be more generally accepting?
This is a problem I encounter frequently. Other people’s prejudices can definitely impact unpleasantly on those they target, and I know from personal experience how very giganimously that sucks. Whomever you’re describing sounds a lot like my One True Way definition, which I recently updated to broaden it a bit.
My perspective is that other people’s prejudices only reflect on them, not their targets. In addition to One True Way, I think my wannabe definition describes very well what those people are doing to you. I’m guessing they probably use the term “wannabe” against people as well, do they?
I’d hazard a further guess that these are people in your local scene, and they’re doing their best to marginalise you because you recognise their outlook as the Holy Fuckwit Gospel of Crapness. Your existence doesn’t validate them, so they invalidate you. Charming, but typical, unfortunately.
If other people think your tastes and style is not for them, then great, they can do something else instead. However, no matter what crap they pontificate, their personal preferences only define what is valid and invalid *for them*. And your sexuality and sexual preferences are always going to be entirely valid for *you*. If they behave disrespectfully, then however much it hurts that’s still not your failing, it’s theirs.
In my view there is absolutely no need to apologise for or justify or defend your sexuality, because it exists and therefore it is valid.
I think your problem here is not your sexuality, it’s prejudiced fuckwits and their Holy Fuckwit Gospel of Crapness. You may possibly enjoy this post I wrote about my local scene marginalising me. 🙂
I hope that helped. I want to reiterate again how much I appreciate the time and effort you invested to address my query so comprehensively. That was very validating, thank you. 🙂