April 12, 2007...5:10 pm

I *Heart* Male Submission

Jump to Comments

Am I even talking about prodoms anymore? Okay, let’s box this bit off for now. [I think there is a problem there with them representing dom women in a way that means there's no direct connection between the hitty bit and the clitoral engorgement bit.] Okay. Done.And I don’t even care so much. God, you can’t just rule out prostitution from everything. Is showing a boy your knickers for a wine gum prostitution? Is giving a man a blow job because he did the washing up every night for a week prostitution? Is this blog prostitution? Am I only a bunch of Google adwords away from being a sexworker?

But anyway now I think what I’m most ragey about is the cultural archetype of the dom woman. An archetype which so happens to be a pro among other things. But there are a lot more problems with her than that.

Now, most people who belong to cultural archetypes are pissed off about it. Female doms are cultural archetypes, vicar are, hell’s angels are, effeminate gay men are. You know the people I mean. There the kinds of people who you could see in an advert for, say, a chocolate bar and that person would be dressed a certain way and act a certain way you get pretty quick what kind of person they were meant to be.

Dom women – dominatrixes – are cultural archetypes. Male doms and female subs aren’t.

Male subs are.

Here we are, look.

Pretty much if someone belongs to a group of people that you can dress up as for a fancy dress party then that person belongs to a cultural archetype.

But that jolity is the very best example of what looks back at up from the perception mirror. And here we have another *huge* problem with the way the media represents me and - probably more importantly - the people I like to hit with stuff.

2. I hate the way the media presents male subs even more than I hate the way it presents female doms
For just as the default dom woman is a pro, the default sub man is a client. A sub man in the media is always paying because the only dom women allowed in the media are pros.

At least these prodom women who represent me in the media are glamorous, sexually desirable creatures. They might not be my style, but they are pretty damn okay compared with some of the things you see in the media to represent male submissives. Nasty hooded cowering out of shape men. Faceless. Worthless and useless, sick and depraved; sacrificing their dignity - their humanity - on the altar of their cocks. Talk about unnegotiated humiliation.

It makes me sad that my favourite type of people in the whole damn world are debased like this. And, yeah, this post could go on all night as I weave in jokes about how I’d rather they were being debased by me and etc, etc, but really, that’s not the point. And even submissive men get to say, hey, being humiliated like this is not okay.

And sometimes I get to say that too. Because I have a vested interest in how the media and therefore society view sub men. Because some of the lies miss a bit and splash back and hit me.

Because, god, sometimes the media can portray the prodom women as so *contemptuous* of male submission. I hate it when the media give the impression that prodom women (and therefore *all* dom women) think male submission is some kind of problem that they are dutifully dealing with for the good of us all, some irritating pestilence that *sigh* has to be managed, but wouldn’t it be so much better if it would just, I don’t know, go away, or something.

I have been with submissive men who pretty much treated me like shit. I am happy to tell you over and over that they were utter fuckers. But I would never talk trash about their submission.

Submission is the most beautiful powerful gracious thing I have ever seen in my life. And I’ve met Cat Deeley. It is a Waterloo sunset and butterfly’s wings and the face of god (usual caveats apply to god reference.) And dom women, you know, real dom women fucking say this all the time. This is the one consistent thing I hear. But you know, that’s ’cause they’re dom women. Of course they like male submission.

But their voices don’t get heard in the wider world. We’ve covered this. Out there I feel, like the message is that liking male submission isn’t very dom-like. Getting turned on to the point of inarticulacy by a man just getting on his knees isn’t very dom-like.

The whole ice queen thing? What the fuck even *is* that.

*Society* is contemptuous of submissive men. (It is a kink that in fiction is punishable by death.) It’s probably more socially acceptable for a man to get on his knees to suck cock these days than to get on his knees to kiss a woman’s boots. And maybe these media images of worthless worms is where it comes from. Or fuels it. Or is fuelled by it. Or something. Whatever. It needs to stop. I *hate* that my culture (the narrow one and the wide one) hates submissive men; and that so many submissive men – as a result - hate themselves and that does not make being a dom woman any damn easier. Representing something a man secretly hates himself for wanting. Ouch, it burns.

I love male submission, you know, even at its most annoying. Truly, I do. Without it, I’d be in prison.

31 Comments

  • Yes, yes and yes. It doesn’t get any more refreshing then when you lay it out like that Bitchy.

    Ofcoarse I can only really see it from my side of the whip, but I also so submission as a wonderful thing even if I can only appreciate it when it’s being done by a lady.

    The *ice queen* thing has always rubbed me up the wrong way because it just feels so false. Yes I’m a Male-Dom not a Fem-Dom but being a part of that world, I can fully appreciate how agravating it must be for you.

    It’s also bugs the crap outta me that Male-Doms are largely ignored by the media, like they, along with subfems don’t exist or something… grrr… angry Tony.

    Also - Cat Deeley would make an excellent subfem.

  • Bitchy,
    Do you think it could have anything to do with roles that some may still feel are relevant within society? Some still believe that men have to be the ‘big, strong, silent’ types that have to take care of the ‘little woman’ and aren’t allowed to show any frailty for fear of being weak? Perhaps they would identify that men who submit are being weak because they are allowing women to take charge and have control?

    And, as for the scorn that some professional Domme women have towards male submissives, could this not be some sort of historical stereotype that has perpetuated itself within the professional community? Perhaps, these professionals (for lack of a better term) learned of this or were trained this way for doing their job? Could they believe that this is part of the package their clients want?

    I don’t claim to know very much on this matter, honestly. It’s a very thought provoking topic to be sure.

  • Firstly, thank you, Bitchy, for writing this out because a lot of it mirrors how I feel about the situation, being one of these non-self-hating male subs that something of an anomoly in my scene.

    However…

    It’s also bugs the crap outta me that Male-Doms are largely ignored by the media, like they, along with subfems don’t exist or something… grrr… angry

    …as Tony reiterates, I don’t think the image of male doms or female subs is lacking by any means at all. Especially not in mainstream media.

    Here’s the thing: “normal” sex is supposed to be female subs and male doms. That is, this is the “natural order of things” and so every sex act is portrayed with the man in power. It’s the “weird” sex that gets reversed to the female dominant image. So when the media—or even the BDSM scene itself—wants to portray a more perverse, more extreme, more edge-play, more anything image, they use the fem dom and the male sub as a symbol of that.

    End observation. I’ll let readers draw their own conclusions.

    And by the way, you have me writing more comments on your blog than I’m writing posts in mine, now. :P

  • Now, it’s late, and I’m drunk, but… you rock. For all your self-proclaimed bitchiness you have a lot of compassion in you. That’s a good thing.

  • Christ Jones, you do live in the UK-right? take a look at this world white men,of a certain background run this country. Always have, probably always will. They may like to pay some leather/pvc type dominatrix to thrash them for a while but that is sweet relief to the crap they have to put up with from their wives. I personally would love to go a few rounds with Tony B or John Prescott. Female domination is a fantasy, some men pay for it and I know you think I am some kind of city boy thug, but think of your own failings and then think of the countries that have had female leaders. Consider those countries with your feminist hat, rather than your dom hat and tell me how womens rights have progressed under female leadership. I will start you off with a few countries that have had female leaders: UK, (natch), Sri Lanka, Phillipines, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia and I am not sure but didn’t India have a female president. I am not criticising these leaders in any way, the male leaders were equally poor in all these countries but the idea that women can achieve a more utopian society rankles with me. I have worked with women earning $5m plus a year and when the sitution turned against them they were far more whiney than you profess to be. Just read the last interview on Bloomberg with Imelda Marcos to see what I am talking about. A woman who was complicit in condeming her country to endless poverty and all she can talk about is fashion and beauty!

  • Bitchy, thank you for a glorious, thoughtful read. And for working Waterloo sunsets, the face of god, Dominatrixes, and vicars into the same post.

    You are so right about the shallowness of the cultural archtypes applied to dominant females and submissive males.

    No doubt society is protecting itself from the perceived darkness lurking right outside its door.

    Imagine the chaos if male submissives were revealed not as clients, cowering and out of shape, but as confident and accomplished societal participants who happen to find (blessed) fulfillment in a certain context when their hard earned power is stripped away.

    It’s the idea of the submissive male as Normal that society protects itself from with this paper thin archtype.

    Love the blog.

  • As regards cultural archetypes, I think ones do exist for mandoms and subgirls. I don’t think their pervasiveness is on par with the Ilsa-Strixian ice queens (GIS her for pictures of ponytails that look painful) and Pulp-Fiction-esque gimp slaveboys, but they do exist.

    In fact, I’d go so far as to say that the normative force of the stereotype shows through clearly in people like Brick. It’s where you get moronic statements about male dominance being “natural” that wouldn’t hold up for a second if not for the existence of an archetypal dominant male. Stare, cringing, at Gorean culture for other examples of gross maledom-stereotype endorsement on the grounds of natural order.

    In its own way, I feel like this archetype is a bit more insidious, because rather than being presented as an archetype of deviance, the dominant male archetype blurs over into the archetype of the testosterone-drenched alpha male. Male subs get the harsh rap because they are failing to live up to the dominant male they “ought” to be.

    Our Halloween costume is even more bizarre. We get the outfit of Old Guard leathermen, or occasionally Fascist regalia. The first is absurd, and the second (while admittedly pretty sharp) is a bit dodgy in its overtones.

  • can think of a good name
    April 13, 2007 at 3:35 pm

    There was that film ‘Secretary’ that came out featuring the buding relationship between a FemaleSub and a MaleDom.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0274812/

    So the media is not totally skewed towards the ProFemDom. But that was a recent film so maybe the tide is turning as we speak.

    Anyway did u watch the film? Did u like it? Is it another in your dvd collection?

    Also there was a disturbing French film with a MaleDom in where the FemSub shot him at the end at an orgy because he used her up and got bored with her. But that was very late night channel 4 and i cant remember the name of the film.

  • Can I just say… slightly off subject I know… but I really hate the whole Vicar cultural archytype.

    I really don’t like it.

    More than that I hate the fact I have to live up to it just to earn a living. I believe Kierkegaard called the clergy prostitutes of eternity. Oh yes!

    I did a photo shoot the other day and the guy was saying stuff like “OK….great! Now put you head up. That’s it. Bigger smile. Now turn towards me. Lovely. Now look prayerful and holy.”

    WHAT???! WHAT THE FUCK IS THAT????

    How do you look holy and prayerful? That’s the equivilent of “That’s it, growl at me!” if he was doing a Bitchy Jones shoot.

    We also had to drive a couple of miles down the road so I could stand next to a stone cross. Cos all Vicar’s do that, all the time.

    Still at least he didn’t tell me the camera loved me.

  • It’s me. At last. I know, what time do I call this?

    Thanks for the comments. I won’t answer everyone individually today, ’cause even I know when it’s too late.

    I think the stuff about mandoms and femsubs is interesting. Why aren’t they archetypes? Is it because to be one you have deviate from soceital norms? Are you norms, mr sirs? And, uh, girls?

    I have seen Secretary. I like James Spader. But, you know, *my* way.

    And, Yellow, ahahaha. I think *you* should growl. No more mr nice vicar. (You okay for tea there, by the way?)

    BJ x

  • I’ve only heared of the Secretary as a film about a girl who self harms but haven’t seen it - I’m a bit confussed now?

  • I’d like to weigh in and suggest that it’s acceptable in society for women to be strong, confident and even dominant in their careers and relationships. Media always portrays women as being strong, confident and decisive - primarily because women are the biggest consumers of products - and advertising doesn’t want them to look/feel/be perceived as weak or even deferential to men.

    Male submission, however, is never openly accepted or approved of by media/society as anything other than kink-related sexual behavior.

    There really is a double-standard here: it’s ok for women to assert themselves and be independent, hard-charging, confident and dominant [as it is for men] but males submitting to women in relationships is just sex play or worse. There’s no societal appreciation or value on male submission. The only grouping with an appreciation for straight submissive men are dominant females.

  • Vampyra, it’s the same film. The girl in question gets over her self-harm in part by deliberately putting herself in the way of the ire of her ever-so-subtly dominant employer.

  • But surely thats not getting over self harm that is just using a person as your tool instead of an inanimate object?

    Apologies, I am a bit confussed over the over lap of these two realms at the moment anyway - is it common for there to be such an over lap?

    p.s. thanks for the explanation!

  • John

    I think this might be a case of seeing the oppression you feel yourself more clearly than that directed at others. I don’t deny that submissive men are treated like shit - but strong assertive women don’t exactly live in a rose garden. Having a career or being sexually assertive are viewed very, very badly. Take, for example, Samatha in Sex and the City - a women who took what she wanted from men sexually - in the end she’s the one who is punished withe breast cancer.

    Dom women are pretty negatively viewed in the wider world (we’re sexy bit we’re whores and we’re probably unfulfilled and sad) and even within kink itself.

    Not a double standard, so much as a double negative.

  • Vampyra

    This is interesting, but I am way out of my depth on the subject of self harm.

    I have known male and female masochists who have self harmed for enjoyment and other reasons. But I really don’t know about the conections.

    I am not sure what the film Secretary was trying to say, really. I was rewriting it my head, anyway!

  • Being me, *I* see strong and positive male submissives just *everywhere*.

    Went out to dinner with a girlfriend the other night and as far as *I* was concerned, the handsome waiter with the real Italian accent who was flirting with us while making sure we were pleased with everything (and,cough, upselling us to $36 bottles of wine), well that submissive eye thing he was doing, I was just *sure*.

    Who are people going to believe, the media, or *me*?

    It’s raining men, and I love them all. ;)

    E

  • “Take, for example, Samatha in Sex and the City - a women who took what she wanted from men sexually - in the end she’s the one who is punished withe breast cancer.”

    That right there, is an excellent example. The writers probably did it sub-conciously but they still did it nonetheless.

  • *Grrrrrrrrrr*

    Tee hee hee hee hee hee hee hee.

  • “Take, for example, Samatha in Sex and the City - a women who took what she wanted from men sexually - in the end she’s the one who is punished withe breast cancer.”

    Bitchy - that’s fiction and fantasy - not exactly what I’m speaking of. I do believe women are given more ‘passes’ in life to explore and re-make themselves than men.

    john

  • Vampyra, the point I’m going after is that I’m actually a bit leery of Secretary as an example of positive-or-even-neutral D/s relationship in the media.

    Again, I’m totally guilty of rewriting in my head into the positive spectacle I wanted to see at the time, but looking back I’m less sure of myself.

  • Well - I have added it to our film cue to see what I think of it anyway.

    Thanks.

  • I think what this shakes out to is that for people who don’t ‘get’ this, for whom it’s incomprehensible, it amounts to a label that obliterates anything else about that person.

    I have confidence and self-respect. I am not meek and mousy by any stretch of the imagination. I have power and purpose in life. I am almost certainly smarter than you. I have dared, failed, and persevered.

    I also (if, and only if, you are a female who has passed the legal age of consent in your jurisdiction, has not yet reached retirement age, and are at least moderately attractive to me) want to do your housework naked, lick you front and back, and hope you like me well enough to give me permission to masturbate for you.

    So if you met me, which statement are you going to remember?

  • Now that I reread that, I bet I’m going to get ripped to shreds…

  • Yellow, you are clearly a better dominatrix than me. You even did the heartless mirthless laughter at his tiny penis.

  • John

    I think fiction tells us a lot about how society views certain types of people. However, I think I see your point now. What is *okay* for men is narrower in terms of types of behaviour. But you surely can’t think that overall men have less freedom than women. Unless you live in one of those female supremacist utopia’s I hear so much about.

  • Joe

    I think what you are trying to say is that you are two different types of people that society seems to think are mutally exclusive.

    I think you’ll fiund yourself in good company here. Although most everyone who comments on this blog wants to be the smartest of them all, so you’ll have to go some if you want that crown.

  • So many comments here that state more eloquently what I’ve been trying to. Especially maymays’ quote about MaleDom FemSub sex being the “norm”.

    Has no one here that has seen Secretary noticed that James Spader’s characters ex-wife seemed to be dominant ? That would seem to point out that he is only dominant toward Maggie’s character due to her seemingly natural submissiveness.

    Has anyone read “Exit to Eden” ? Why is Elliot so freaked out by her fucking him in the ass ? It’s obvious by that point he has been penetrated by a man.

    I read recently that men judge masculinity on what other men think of them, which is surprising considering one would think they would worry more about what a woman thought. After all, who are they trying to get sex from ?

    And Bitchy, I would not think James Spader would fit your idea of a hunky male sub ?

  • I got far too puffed up with myself trying to make a point - apologies to all and every. I won’t do it again. Probably.

  • Off the top of my head Susan Sarandon in “Bull Durham” gave a perfect portrayal of a dominant woman.And she is married to a much younger man.Perhaps it comes naturally to her seeing as she was in “Thelma And Louise” too.

  • agitatedturmoil
    May 2, 2008 at 4:17 am

    mmmmmmmmmm James Spader

Leave a Reply