Response to Fur Sissy

Fur Sissy very kindly responded in detail to my posts on femdom relationships. Since he posted in the public comments, I think it's OK for me to use a full post to respond:

....While the breakdown of engaged and disengaged works on a fairly observational level of D/s interactions, the conflict caused by attempting to shift between positions has a few assumptions already made about the style of relationship. Namely, it seems to encompass either a relationship that began vanilla and evolved towards D/s undertones either willingly or unwillingly, a relationship that began vanilla and became D/s through pressure from the male, or a relationship with a foundation in D/s but without full agreement by one involved party.

The assumption is that relationship is primarily vanilla, and that the male sub is driving the femdom action by acting as "local guide". The lady top is open to play, but wouldn't identify as a fetishist, and has thought about it a lot less than her male partner. She may also be insecure or provisional in her role.

In your post "Getting the femdom action and trappings and still being "authentic"" you made the statement "The best way to experience your femdom fantasy is to find a spot where your darkside overlaps hers." and I agree 100% with this statement. In the BDSM scene this is generally a necessity for a fulfilling long-term romantic relationship to develop and you will find parties that consider the overlap first and foremost when evaluating partners. The courting process is much more difficult for submissive men seeking dominant women than any other demographic in the BDSM realm.

No shit!

However, I don't think its quite as bad as it could be. Our darksides reflect aspects of our light side personalities – there's this thing called Shop Window theory – so if you are really emotionally compatible with somebody, then there's a good chance of a lot of overlap. Hence my idea of the "Shadow Relationship".

I do think that many pre-negotiated D/s relationships end up in the "only one fully willing participant" scenario since men are usually the ones forced to compromise the most in these situations and they are likely to be placed in situations that stray far from their primary fetish fantasies.

Yes. Or at least a man's fantasies are likely to be more diverse than he can find reflected in any one woman. Also, a particular fetish may be a turn-off for the partner, even though the dynamic behind it is not an issue, e.g. she may be very happy to punish him, but not by forcing him to crossdress.

However, if both individuals have a nearly perfect fetish overlap, there are situations that can steer clear of said conflicts, unless the nature of those conflicts is also part of the overlap, e.g. a man who has a fetish for her withholding pleasurable situations from him. I can also foresee situations that will behave the same simply by having an extremely strict Mistress.

A very useful point! Some fetishes can be a by-product of lots of different types of relationship. If it's the "witholding" you enjoy, you can get that from almost any of the intimacy dynamics: EE & ED - she enjoys your frustration, DE & DD – she is completely indifferent to your frustration.

....Women are generally more likely to be honest with themselves about their own sexual desires (which is why they are less likely to develop "fetishes" in their most scientific definition). They are also often more willing to explore and initiate "kinky" sexual content. It does strike me as odd that even with this in mind there are so few Dominant Women out there but at the same time, I think that upbringing and societal norms have a bit to do with that. There's tons of women who are aggressive tops in the bedroom, but very few that classify themselves as Dommes.

I think your last sentence hits at the answer; sexually active women can do pretty much what they want. If they enjoy tease and denial, then they become appalling flirts. If they enjoy topping in the bedroom, they just take control of the drooling and grateful male. If they want to lie back and be served, they don't even have to ask. The experimentation fits into this context.

All this is very exciting for the participants, but not necessarily sustainable in a healthy long term relationship. The kind of BDSM I'm talking about is in part an attempt to create a reservation for all this bad female behaviour so it can continue to flourish in the shadows.

Going back to the other themes of these posts... a wild card comes to mind when it comes to D/s relationships. That wild card is "true love." True love describes situations where a party is a willing participant in activities they do not enjoy simply out of love for the other (this could be performed by either role). These situations can often steer clear of the conflicts you described.

I would theorise that "true love" always involves a lot of overlap in the darkside. There are still hazards if she is less familiar with the fetish world than he is. Also, both parties tend to be willing to play slightly more scripted roles – nothing wrong with that, it's just that I'm talking about how to establish spontaneous play.

In terms of pre-negotiated relationships, a lot of the potential source of conflicts can probably be traced towards the background of the Domme. If she is active in the BDSM scene she will likely have a very different view of things compared to a hardcore female supremacist. The BDSM scene Domme is much more likely to dole out enjoyable fetish interactions in a "fair" manner whereas the female supremacist is more likely to disregard his desires.

I can't pretend to speak with any direct knowledge of the fetish scene. I suspect that my intimacy map still applies, but that the waters are muddied by an extra layer of negotiation and tradeoffs.

However, I think part of what you're talking about relates to coping strategies. The female supremacist and the fantasist both have different and incompatible justifications for BDSM.

In regards to my own experiences I have been in 4 D/s relationships, 3 of which were pre-negotiated and the fourth was instigated by the Domme after beginning as a vanilla relationship. Each was a bit different, the first really flowing along with true love and non-fetish personality conflicts leading to its breakdown. One simply failed to connect deeply on both a fetish and personal level. One connected nearly perfectly on a fetish level but failed on a personal level. My current relationship has a partial overlap in fetishes and several personality conflicts. Overall our true conflicts rarely arose from lack of overlap in the fetish department but those relationships also weren't bound by marriage, legal bondage, etc.

Thanks for sharing this. These all seem to fit the pattern...