Wednesday, July 9, 2008

How does the submissive reflect the energy of the dominant?

Greetings all,

One reader (seneca) asked a question in response to my post on the single submissive interacting with new potential partners. I thought I would answer it here.

Here is her question:

Could you please explain in more detail what you mean by the submissive reflecting the energy of the dominant? How does this happen, please? How can you tell that you have done so? Is it something that one does consciously? I'm afraid I fall into the second of the three groups you delineated so this does confuse me. I would appreciate it if you'd make this clearer for me.

Thank you for your question.

I wish I had a simple answer, or in fact any answer that seemed to make some concrete sense, but I do not. So, I will try and answer this by using my own personal experiences, and a bit of conjecture.

Down through the years I have noticed that if I am attracted to a woman, then it is almost a certainity that she is submissive in nature. There have been one or two small mistakes (and one rather large one), but overall my senses have directed me wisely.

Some men seem to be attracted to women of a certain body shape, others to women of certain ethnic backgrounds. Some men seem to be attracted to big tits, while others prefer a well packed booty. Some men simply like a woman in a short dress, or high heels, or with painted toes. Others may like the way she moves, or the way she speaks. All of these are rather obvious overt signs, which mean that it is pretty easy to decide if one is interested in the female or not. But what about submission? This is not something that a woman can easily display, like her body shape or an article of clothing.

To complicate things even further, frequently the women I have been attracted to were often not even aware that they had a submissive nature! At least not consciously. IOW – they were doing nothing overt to attract me. And yet they did.

And to add an even more mysterious layer of complexity to the issue, when I have questioned these women about if they were attracted to me, much of the time they will say that their first impression were not always possitive. I was often considered to be too short, or not muscular enough, or just not their normal “type.”

Yet, in a rather short amount of time after their first impression (let’s call it their second impression) they became highly attracted to me. And to make things all the more bizarre, in many of the cases, these women became attracted to me without having ever met me, seen a picture of me, or even heard my voice. More than a few woman have been attracted to me solely on the basis of the words I have written to them in emails.

Have I perhaps chased these women? Perhaps I hunted them forcing the strength of my power on them? Not really, I have never really been a “hunter” of women. The chase itself doesn’t interest me that much.

Segue: Many men and women say they find the “chase/hunting/capture” part of the romance/seduction process to be the most thrilling, and once they have made the catch (or been captured), they quickly become bored with their partner. I think this is because that this stage of the courtship allows one partner to play at being dominant “the hunter” and the other can assume a submissive stance. Both partners enjoy the natural erotic tension that must develop even if they are only “playing” at the D/s dynamic. This play process culminates (generally) in a sexual experience. While both partners bring a great deal of arousal into this interaction, they often do not, or cannot, bring their role (Dom or sub) from the play time, into the real time. Something prevents them from continuing their relative D/s roles. Perhaps it is because their true natures are revealed, and their relative energies do not match, and so they go their own ways. Perhaps it is because they are reluctant to follow the natural pathway, fearful of the consequences of assuming their true natures, and so they part. I know this does not apply to all one night stands, but I think it does account for a great number of them.

Now where was I?

I have no, or at least very little, interest in chasing females. While they do not “flock” to me (nor would I wish them to) I can’t say I have any complaints.

So, how are these women becoming attracted me? Or, put another way, what do I see in them that makes them attractive to me?

One more twist before I forget – sandra (my wife) can often pick out another submissive female even faster than I can, and she is always right. She is not attracted to them, but she does know them.

Segue: Recently sandra told me that she has for a very long time sensed an energy field that comes into existence when I am physically close to her. She describes it as oval shaped, surrounding the both of us. She says this energy feels very good to her, I believe the word she used was that it “completed” her. She also said that when I move away she senses it as a tangible loss. I do not make fun of this, even though I do not understand it. Over the years my first girl has demonstrated to me on more than one occasion that she has senses which I simply label as “witchy.” I believe other women have witchy powers as well. I do not, though I must say I do enjoy being close to my girl. So, if sandra says she feels it, than I know she does. I even tested her recently, and she passed with flying colours. However, I am not sure if this field she describes has anything to do with D/s or if it is more a manifestation of our love for each other, which is why I mention this in a seque.

Can I explain the process? No. I just know that there is something that a submissive female does attracts me. Call it her energy, or aura, or whatever. I see it, and I read it.

If I am interested in the girl (and in truth only a very few do), then I will normally try a simple test, like telling her to do something, or write something, or say something, or if she is physically present ask her to position herself in a certain way. I observe how she responds. Through this approach I can quickly identify if my first impression was correct.

The rest is fairly straightforward.

So to answer your question from my personal pov, there is not a great deal the woman can do one way or the other to reflect her energy to me. Either she will interest me or she will not, and there will not be a great deal she can do one way or the other to influence my decision.

Of course, I like to think of myself as a fairly well-developed dominant. This whole process becomes much challenging when dealing with a dominant man who is not even aware of his nature which I suspect is much more the usual case.

I haven’t really answered the question yet, but I think I need to take a rest now. I shall finish this up later.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Mr. Cross

I just read the blog of a submissive woman who recalled a formal dinner where she was approached by a man, who focussed in on her, ignoring her partner. She says she thinks it was because she was the only girl there dressed frivolously and with some breast exposed. She said that he manipulated the conversation to reveal the woman that she was, and that in hindsight by ignoring his rudeness she played into his trap.

It sounded like a cautionary tale to me. The sub reflected the energy of the dom, but not in a good way.

Respectfully
Rob

Anonymous said...

i feel there was a great deal of verbiage here and little substance -just enough to make it sound legit. ths is true of most of the posts i have read that you have written. there is much much more to the D/s scene than you imply - this is your personal take on things and not representative of many many Doms out there of many years of experience, even more than yours - and in the real world. So sorry to see your personal point of view presented as gospel and for the self imposed limits your view imposes on your learning.

Mackenzie Cross said...

Greetings,

You are of course at liberty to form any conclusions you wish. I have never claimed to be a spokeperson for the community, or even to have any special knowledge beyond my own experiences.

All this having been said, I find your comment to lack any substance whatsoever. You do not refute any particular point. You do not state your objection beyond the vaguest of generalities. You do not even provide any counter/alternative views.

It is very easy to lob small grenades from the safety of an anonymous ID. If you have something to say, then say it. Otherwise, I really can't take your comments seriously at all.

Be seeing you,

Anonymous said...

i do not dispute a point because generally - you make no points. That is MY point. And by presuming to 'teach' and 'train' submissives for any purpose but your own use implies you believe your point of view should be disseminated to others. Beyond sexual or performance technique and familiarity, there is nothing a teacher can 'train' on as each submissive must 'learn' from their own Dom, not someone else. To presume to 'teach' is beyond your scope unless the sub is yours. The only reason i would not 'lob small greandes' would be if i was engaged in a battle - but it is not worth battling someone of so fixed a perspective and so limited a view of D/s. You have missed the mark, and while entitled to your views, you should not have the audacity to 'teach'[ anyone but your own. pity the novice who gets caught in such a onesided view of things.

Mackenzie Cross said...

Greetings,

>>i do not dispute a point because generally...<<

My reply turned out to be rather long. I therefore have started a new post on it. You may reply if you wish there.

felicia said...

Greetings Mr. Cross,

I find the whole idea of the energy of D/s to be fascinating. There is more to the nature of the world than is obvious and detectible to our five senses. This is a good thing as it will prompt humanity to pursue scientific research! If this was not the case, then x-rays and radios would never have been invented.

I'd like to comment on Rob's retelling of the submissive at the dinner party.

The persuasive power of a Dominant is quite amazing, and for the unaware, fairly dangerous. It can be almost impossible for some submissive women to say no to a Dominant man. For these girls some guidance/training/mentoring can quite literally save them.

Rob is right, it is a cautionary tale. But as there will always be unaware, the irresponsible or the amoral dominants out there, it’s up to the submissive to get the help needed to defend against unwanted and unworthy control.

I do hope that you will continue your comments on energy.

Thank you.

The Cougar Project said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Cross:

If I may, I would like to pick up on a thread from the previous comment; that alpha males are not PC. Well I suppose by definition an alpha male is not PC in our society. But if one is looking for an alpha male I don't think that looking for a very non PC guy is going to be much use. In my experience alpha males/dominant men can be charming, witty, and extremely solicitous of a woman in public. It is only when someone crosses them that their dominance becomes obvious out there in the big wide world, since they don't suffer fools easily, and they want things done their way.

Perhaps I misunderstood the comment. You did make a LOT of points in the one comment, and hopefully it will generate more discussion....

Rob

Mackenzie Cross said...

Greetings Rob,

Thank you for your comment.

>> But if one is looking for an alpha male I don't think that looking for a very non PC guy is going to be much use.<<

I would agree. Just because many alpha males may not be PC, does not mean that all males who are not PC are therefore alpha. However, I also believe that there are many latent dominant males in our society who have been conditioned to suppress their natural inclinations under the weight of having to be PC. Too, one need not be an alpha male to be strongly dominant. There are many dominant males who may not be the leaders of the pack. There is nothing, imo, inconsistent in this statement. It is just that alpha males tend to be very strongly dominant.

Be seeing you,

MC

Anonymous said...

Hello MacKenzie,

This is your “fan club” again.
In response to your comment: “…I do not consider myself an expert or scholar in the areas of sexuality or D/s relationships. What I write is based on my own experiences, my own thinking, and what I have observed over the years. Others may have rather different experiences. So, rather than taking my word as gospel, I much prefer when people use it as either a starting point for their own journey...”

Please be assured that we are quite aware you are not a “professional” expert, counselor or therapist. For a variety of reasons, our group shuns formal therapy and single-source expertise, and we’re not searching for a professional prescription or a diagnosis from anyone, just experienced guidance on how to effectively reach one ourselves using a consensus-of-opinion approach. So fear not, we are not taking your word as gospel. We don’t take anyone’s word as gospel.

When we named you our “favorite sexuality expert”, we actually meant several things having nothing to do with your opinions per se. Although we find a great deal to recommend the validity of your observations (and more on that later), we don’t necessarily concur with your all of your opinions (indeed in several cases, our nonoccurrence is quite vehement).

First, we meant that we find your views appealing and very useful in our discussions simply because you express them and their underlying issues so damn nicely. You employ a spare, logical manner we find very compatible to our own overall intellectual style. You’ve participated in several similar discussions online, and unlike so many other contributors, seem to insist upon and make such precise distinctions and analysis yourself.

Second, based on the personality characteristics we’ve gleaned from your writings, we have identified you as an excellent manifestation of the actualized, or as you put it “well-developed”, dominant male. While we are the first to admit we’re appallingly ignorant in the subject of sexuality and its fulfillment, we are, by dent of our collective professional and socio-economic backgrounds, quite clear re the persona of the actualized dominant male (and no, ladies, it’s not always a pretty picture).

For instance, you are not PC, and we all know for a fact that the actualized dominant is not PC, except when it suits him and never within spitting range. “The less PC, the more dominant” is a handy determinant that should go into today’s current crop of “Stalking the Alpha Male” field guides…along with the curiously missing section “Now that you have properly identified an Alpha Male, do you really (think hard, girl) want one?" Ah, but that’s another topic... Within our own group, we pretty much run the gamut from “oh yes, Master, please” to “take out the trash NOW”, with a lot of uncertainty in between, but at least our eyes are wide open with regard to the players, and we’re betting you’re one of them.

The point is that we are willing to give your observations and opinions concerning dominance considerable credence because you not only correctly describe dominance and its related issues, you also appear to be actually dominant yourself. So we consider you an “expert”, perhaps even in spite of yourself.

Finally, in our experience the dominant male rarely holds still for more than glancing observation. So while we may be able to properly identify dominant males and predict their behavior, the underlying rationale for their behavior is still largely mysterious to us. For example, the male concepts of “ownership” and “leadership by will” are a mite puzzling to us. Oh, we can extrapolate, deduce and intellectualize such concepts, but we’ve problems empathizing with them, and empathy is indeed a curious requirement for feminine understanding. You’ve placed yourself “under glass” with your blog and make a nice study specimen. We truly appreciate your allowing us a peek into your psyche.

So, please take all this as a conscious absolution of responsibility and allow us our opinion.

As for your July posts, we all found them very helpful and serendipitously timely for our current discussions re dating strategies and recognition of mutual attraction.

We found ourselves in complete agreement with you on these topics. We would go even farther by stating unequivocally that the efficaciousness of hunting alpha males is highly questionable and that actual capture is laughable. The only fruitful products of alpha stalking are subject familiarization and habitat identification, followed by a probabilistic increase of attracting an alpha due to increased alpha density. Otherwise, just sit still, act like prey (i.e. submissive), and nature will take its course.

(As an aside, we’ve found the female theme of “I want a dominant man” to be quite pervasive in all sectors of the sexuality info-world these days – it’s not exclusive to the D/s community and appears to be growing in overall popularity. This is one reason why we predict you’ll be a hot commodity in the near future by the way. Right now, popular culture seems to have romanticized the dominant male past all useful recognition giving pseudo-dominants the lead, but everyone will wise up eventually.)

So once again, please keep up your fine blogging (we’re very sorry you’ve been absent again), and thank you, and all of your commentators, for sharing all of these nifty insights.

P.S. In response to your comment: “… perhaps someday in the future I will have an opportunity to share some correspondences with them either as a group or one-one, as the case may be.”

We would all very much welcome the opportunity for additional correspondence with you - and you'd probably love to get our wordy asses off your blog. We’d love to hire you as a group information resource. Please give some thought to this proposition. Are private emails to your blog address acceptable from us?

Cross Purposes via RSS. Subscribe now!

Lijit Search