Frequently i am perplexed by the suggestion that a submissive person is, somehow, a lesser person, or a weaker person, or a person who is less than fully developed in their personality. Exactly how this idea came about i have no idea but i wonder if perhaps there was some moment in the tortured history of the vernacular that a simple minded person couldn't distinguish between submissive, subservient, subordinate, and substandard and muddled up their adjectives. Another possibility is that many people have gotten into the habit of applying one-word labels to themselves and to other people and since we are all complex creatures it is inevitable that those labels are going to diminish in usefulness as more people employ them.

All of this may be of no importance. Except for the fact that as the result of this linguistic confusion; there is no small number of people who find so-called submissive inclinations within themselves and express them; are then accosted because they don't conform to some standard of aspiration or behavior that has unknown origins and very little authority beyond being fashionable. Others seem to be lambasted with accusations of inferiority and are then tormented by assorted self-doubts about their own motives, worth and mental stability.

Before i go any, further i would like to apologize in advance for any of the following that sounds like a lecture from somebody who thinks they have the definitive opinion on a subject. When i finally get to Summerland i will no doubt be made aware of all of my errors and have the rest of eternity in which to find them funny but, for now and for whatever it is worth, here is my take on being submissive.

The first point that i believe needs to be recognized is that within this context, submission is an action initiated by the submissive and not something imposed upon them. What is it that the submissive is giving of herself to her Master?

She submits whatever she chooses to submit. This is important to grasp. Submission is a state of activity, not of passivity and hence is the result of a choice that the submissive made. Submission is therefore totally unlike being a slave. A submissive gives something of her own volition while the slave has something extracted from her contrary to her own desire. My submission is something i choose to give or withhold but being a slave is something that somebody else does to one regardless of her preference or choice.

What is it that the submissive has to offer in a M/s relationship? She chooses to submit to her Master her talents, her energy, her material resources, and her body. If she has no energy, no talents, and no resources then she cannot offer those things to her Master. Which means she can only offer her body (and in some M/s relationships that works). Talents in this context does not just mean things like the ability to prepare a meal, wash clothes, manage a household, and meeting Master’s sexual appetite ”smiles” i so love kinky bdsm sex. It includes talents such as patience, charm, selflessness, kindness, tact, a smile, empathy, and the ability to hold an intelligent conversation.

So, what does it mean to submit your resources, talents or energy to your Master? For me, it means that i allow the use of my resources, talents and energies to be directed or guided by Master SSA. This might involve explicit direction in the sense of an instruction being given and then obeyed or it might involve implicit direction, in the sense that i, the submissive use my own understanding and prior knowledge to attempt to anticipate the needs or requirements of Master SSA and to meet those needs and requirements without any explicit instruction being given. Neither approach is right or wrong. Submission is something that i do (rather than something that is done to me), it can be easier or harder according to my talents, character, and mood.

By now it should, if i haven't waffled too much, becoming clear to the simple-minded and adjectively challenged detractor, that submission, far from being a sign of weak character and mental deficiency, is actually a sign of strength and virtue. The submissive by definition, is a highly competent, talented, person with a lot to give and the strength of character to do the giving even when circumstances are less than ideal. Most people simply are not capable of being very submissive either because they have not bothered to develop any worthwhile talents or attributes of character, or because they are too full of their own pride, selfishness, and egotism to be able to consistently give anything of value to anybody else.

With the foregoing in mind, i hope it has become increasingly obvious; that not only is there no contradiction or paradox in the fact that intelligent, dynamic and competent women would want to be submissive, on the contrary, that is exactly what one should expect. Such women have much to give and the ability to see the desirability of giving it. Of course, real life is never so simple and any attempt to describe real life with mere words is almost certainly doomed to failure. In addition to all of the foregoing, i think we do ourselves no favors by applying labels either to ourselves or to others.

i consider submissiveness to be an attitude that leads to a course of action chosen and performed by the submissive and it is something that is done best by those with much to give. Exactly what a submissive submits will depend on what personal skills and qualities that submissive has developed and which of these they choose to offer. Since submission is the practical outworking of a choice, it follows that strong, competent, capable people submit, not because they are forced to do so (which would in any case be a contradiction in terms) but because they can. There is nothing weak or degrading about a submissive choosing to allow her talents and energies to be directed by somebody else however, on the contrary, such submission is a generous and powerful gift but also a gift, which only the strong and virtuous can give consistently.