RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation

RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

LafayetteLady -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 9:22:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aynne88 Elisabella great question. I am absolutely dominant in my day to day life, with everyone. I am only submissive sexually. Even then, it takes the right person to bring that out. I'm just curious Aynne88....Are you saying you are only submissive in the sexual aspects of your relationship? Or are you submissive in all areas of your relationship with your significant other? Because in my day to day life, I also am completely dominant, but in my relationship with my partner, I'm completely submissive, both in and out of the "bedroom."

takemeforyourown -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 11:41:46 AM)
For me, it's a submissive personality trait that, when expressed sexually, is very fulfilling.

Madame4a -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 11:52:02 AM)
I think of my dominance as an orientation, but I don't necessarily think of it as a sexual orientation... I actually don't think of my homosexuality as a sexual orientation either, though everyone insists on refering to it that way... sex is a small part of all of it for me

wisdomtogive -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 12:16:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella Inspired by another thread that I don't want to take off topic - I made a comment about "submissive" being a sexual orientation, and someone else said that it was a personality trait, not a sexual orientation. Now I'm aware that there are people who might be into BDSM solely for nonsexual service reasons, but for the majority of people, dominant or submissive, it's sexual. The main reasons I'd say it's a sexual orientation are: 1. Participating in a romantic relationship that doesn't involve any sort of D/s or BDSM is unfulfilling. Absolutely not true in my case. The sex in my vanilla marriage was over the edge, without BDSM. 2. Many people have expressed that they wish they weren't into D/s yet were unable to find the same fulfillment in a vanilla relationship even though they had an overwhelming desire to change their sexual preferences I do believe I am not like most people then, for this has not been my experience either. 3. Motivations for the majority of BDSM activites are either sexual or sexualized, even without direct sexual contact the person feels a sexual rush or feels turned on. What do you all think? And obviously sexual orientation is a personality trait, but do you feel that D/s or BDSM leanings should be classified in that subcategory or do you think they are better considered a general personality trait separate from sexuality? I really don't look this as this or that,but I would guess for me more a personality trait. I don't feel it has much to do with my sexual drive.

lally2 -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 1:42:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Missokyst For submissive to be a sexual orientation one would have to submit to male or female if they took on a dominant role. I am submissive. To me it is a personality trait that is cued by someone who exhibits a dominant persona. For me personally, I have met more than a few dominant females.. heck I am one myself, but I find no iota of attraction or the need to submit. My sexuality is hetrosexual. excellent point, i completely agree with you, which is why its odd that i have a contradiction going on in me. i would submit to a Domme (of a certain type) some really warm, lovely women have written to me on the other side and i have found myself wishing i wasnt hetero on occasions. i love the gentleness of these women - though im sure they can be tough too - but their warmth and gentleness has really touched me and i can imagine that i could go there. but not sexually, im just not wired that way whatsoever. so i guess that sits me in the 'submission doesnt have to be sexual' camp. .... and yet, with a man, its totally sexual - hum! - ill go over there and sit on the fence..........................................................................[sm=ballchain.gif]

Elisabella -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 2:36:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Missokyst For submissive to be a sexual orientation one would have to submit to male or female if they took on a dominant role. Sexual orientation doesn't mean that you're open to anyone who comes along...otherwise being heterosexual would mean you would have to have sex with any man if they approached you. I don't think that people are limited to a single sexual orientation, it's possible to be a monogamous straight vanilla or a polyamorous bisexual switch.

Elisabella -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 2:40:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RCdc I agree that it can be an orientation, but I don't dig the 'sexual' ad on. I don't find it a personality trait, because traits are changable. People can be an orientation without having an act like BDSM to carry it out. I don't really get why you added 'sexual' onto it to be honest - maybe I am missing something? the.dark. I added 'sexual' because for most people who are D/s oriented it's a requirement of a fulfilling sex life. It's not that they require a specific sex act (and what specific sex act is required to be hetero or homosexual?) but rather they're attracted to sexual/romantic partners who tend to share that in common.

Elisabella -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 2:50:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Sexuality isn't a personality trait. I am heterosexual. It isn't part of my personality, I was born heterosexual. Someone who is homosexual didn't "develop" homosexual feelings, they were born that way. I'm not entirely sure that all aspects of personality are learned. Siblings near in age to one another often have very different personalities that show in the first year or two, before the child is able to fully socialize. I wouldn't think that being an innate trait disqualifies something from being a personality trait. quote: There are all kinds of different things to enjoy sexually, that doesn't make them personality traits. Someone who enjoys giving blow jobs, you don't classify their sexual orientation that way. It is just something they enjoy doing sexually. I enjoy anal sex, but I'm not classified as "anally oriented." There are black people who only date whites, and vice versa or people that only date people who share their race, ethnic or religious background. That isn't their sexual orientation though, is it? I'd consider it a sexual orientation if it was a requirement for a sexual relationship. Of course there are always one-offs - a woman who gets drunk in college and makes out with her best friend is still 'straight' if she views herself that way - but in general it's a fundamental sexual need. For me, I can't be in a committed romantic relationship with a man who isn't dominant sexually. Full stop. Trying to have a vanilla sex life would be about as fulfilling as trying to marry a woman and I'm just not wired that way. I think that people are mixing up D/s sexuality with D/s lifestyle here...I was trying to focus on D/s sexuality. I mean really, 'straight' is a lifestyle in the sense that marriage is more than just sex, and that being straight influences how you interact with other people who aren't your partner. People say "there's never a time when I'm not dominant" but I wonder then if there's ever a time they're not straight?

RCdc -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 3:00:36 PM)
quote: It's not that they require a specific sex act (and what specific sex act is required to be hetero or homosexual?) The former, sex with the opposite sex to you, the latter, sex with the same sex? I do find that a bit of a sweeping statement though Elisabella and I guess I just don't equate submission as a sexual act and I know lots of people who would regard themselves as being submissive not because it gives them sexual gratification but it's the way their mind orientates - if that makes any sense? I mean, taking out the bin, or pulling carrots isn't particularly sexual and I wouldn't gain anything sexual from it. Pulling the carrots whilst naked might swing the sexual route mind![;)]Master would dig it! I'd love to see some research or even a poll here on something like this that could give a bit of an indication on the sexual relevance of domination and submission - although the poll would end up in random here and I don't think it would get the target audience it deserved in all honesty. the.dark.

peppermint -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 3:03:02 PM)
quote: While I agree that a great deal of BDSM can be sexual in nature, more often than not it is the power dynamic of their whole relationship that is dominant or submissive. The way the couple relates to each other on the whole is dominant or submissive, not simply who is in charge during sex. I agree wholeheartedly with you Lady. I am submissive and live 24/7 with Gary, the Dom in the relationship. However, strange as it might sound to many others, our sex life is really rather vanilla in activities. It is the every day power dynamic that makes our sex life wonderful for both of us, not any BDSM activity. Some people are submissive only behind the bedroom door. Others are submissive in day to day living. These two scenarios are not mutually exclusive, however, they can be.

Missokyst -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 6:28:02 PM)
Even discounting hetrosexuality, it would still be a personality trait to me, and not an orientation. I actually LOVE sex. I love that first feel of penetration and the suction feel that happens when the penis is withdrawn. Sex is satisfying for me whether or not someone is pulling my head back, or holding my hips as he grinds into me. I happen to possess an odd quirk in that, even though I am not submissive in general some men bring that out in me. For me, it is a personality trait. If it were my orientation I would have missed out on a lot of great sex, plenty of orgasms, some wonderful close and enjoyable times with a few men in my life. I see a lot of people who say "I don't enjoy sex without bdsm" and I wonder why they ever continued to have sex before they discovered bdsm. If I discovered that my lovers were "ho-hum", they would not have stayed in my life. Quite honestly I think most people enjoy regular sex, until they decide they have found something better. Having seen too many people drop back into regular sex after trying bdsm (and proclaiming it to be better), I think it is the newness and not the orientation that they enjoyed. quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella quote: ORIGINAL: Missokyst For submissive to be a sexual orientation one would have to submit to male or female if they took on a dominant role. Sexual orientation doesn't mean that you're open to anyone who comes along...otherwise being heterosexual would mean you would have to have sex with any man if they approached you. I don't think that people are limited to a single sexual orientation, it's possible to be a monogamous straight vanilla or a polyamorous bisexual switch.

dreamerdreaming -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 6:49:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: And obviously sexual orientation is a personality trait, but do you feel that D/s or BDSM leanings should be classified in that subcategory or do you think they are better considered a general personality trait separate from sexuality? this slave doesn't see it as an either/or proposition. one can be both or either and still identify as "submissive". Exactly, thank you! [:D] It can be one, the other, or both.

Elisabella -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 8:51:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RCdc I do find that a bit of a sweeping statement though Elisabella and I guess I just don't equate submission as a sexual act and I know lots of people who would regard themselves as being submissive not because it gives them sexual gratification but it's the way their mind orientates - if that makes any sense? I mean, taking out the bin, or pulling carrots isn't particularly sexual and I wouldn't gain anything sexual from it. Pulling the carrots whilst naked might swing the sexual route mind![;)]Master would dig it! That makes a lot of sense...reading a lot of replies I can see how for some it is a personality trait...for me though it's definitely a sexual orientation. I don't have a submissive personality and I don't enjoy submitting to someone outside of a sexual context, so I guess the answer would be that it's both, depending on the person.

Elisabella -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 8:53:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Missokyst I see a lot of people who say "I don't enjoy sex without bdsm" and I wonder why they ever continued to have sex before they discovered bdsm. If I discovered that my lovers were "ho-hum", they would not have stayed in my life. Quite honestly I think most people enjoy regular sex, until they decide they have found something better. Having seen too many people drop back into regular sex after trying bdsm (and proclaiming it to be better), I think it is the newness and not the orientation that they enjoyed. I can only answer for myself but...I didn't. The few times I had sex with men who weren't dominant was way back when I started becoming sexually active, I didn't enjoy it and I only did it when I did because I felt that it was expected. I don't need kink to enjoy sex but I definitely need to feel like he is the dominant one in control, and if that's missing it's just going through the motions and to me it's terribly boring. I went for a couple years without sex in my late teens and didn't miss it at all, it was only when I started having "good sex" that my sexuality was awakened.

AlexandraLynch -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 9:07:12 PM)
I personally think that sexual orientation is a number of things which are orthogonal to each other. I am not polyamorous because I am bisexual. I am not kinky because I am polyamorous. Each is rather unrelated in origin to the others, but they do, of course, overlap in practice.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 11:46:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella I think that people are mixing up D/s sexuality with D/s lifestyle here...I was trying to focus on D/s sexuality. I mean really, 'straight' is a lifestyle in the sense that marriage is more than just sex, and that being straight influences how you interact with other people who aren't your partner. People say "there's never a time when I'm not dominant" but I wonder then if there's ever a time they're not straight? No, being "straight" is another term for being heterosexual. It means that they have sex with the opposite gender. I'm not sure exactly what you mean when you talk about being "straight" influencing how you interact with other people who aren't your partner. I interact with people as....people. Do I flirt with other men? Sometimes? Do I flirt with women? Nope. Being submissive sexually or dominant sexually dictates the types of activities you enjoy. Just like if you enjoy vibrators, blow jobs, covering your partner in chocolate sauce and licking it off. It describes a "style" of having sex.

Elisabella -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/11/2010 11:56:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady No, being "straight" is another term for being heterosexual. It means that they have sex with the opposite gender. I'm not sure exactly what you mean when you talk about being "straight" influencing how you interact with other people who aren't your partner. I interact with people as....people. Do I flirt with other men? Sometimes? Do I flirt with women? Nope. Well for me, being straight means that I tend to view men as attractive/unattractive and women as potential competition, on the basest of levels. I respond differently to a man I find attractive than to a man I don't find attractive, and I tend to view a very attractive woman with potential hostility from the start unless I have a reason to be put at ease. I doubt I'd have the same lens to look through if I weren't straight. quote: Being submissive sexually or dominant sexually dictates the types of activities you enjoy. Just like if you enjoy vibrators, blow jobs, covering your partner in chocolate sauce and licking it off. It describes a "style" of having sex. I'm not sure I agree with that, firstly because being attracted to dominance is about the partner rather than about the activity, and secondly because there's a difference between enjoying something, and enjoying something exclusively. Also what you're saying could be used for the more traditional sexual orientations, if exclusivity doesn't make the difference, you can say that having sex with men is just a sexual activity that someone enjoys. I guess it just bugs me that "sexual orientation" is limited to "which gender you enjoy having sex with" rather than any orientation that encompasses one's sexuality. It's not just about chromosomes.

NihilusZero -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/12/2010 3:50:31 AM)
submissive (noun) - sexual orientation; consciously chosen submissive (adjective) - personality trait; inherent The two don't need to be active in a person at once. Judging from various reflections of talks on the boards (which I have discussed with friends) it would seem, strangely, that many D-types favor a (n.) submissive who is actually not (adj.) submissive.

osf -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/12/2010 6:41:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero submissive (noun) - sexual orientation; consciously chosen submissive (adjective) - personality trait; inherent The two don't need to be active in a person at once. Judging from various reflections of talks on the boards (which I have discussed with friends) it would seem, strangely, that many D-types favor a (n.) submissive who is actually not (adj.) submissive. would seem to me you can potentially do more with an adjective than a noun

Aynne88 -> RE: Personality trait vs. Sexual orientation (3/12/2010 6:46:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady quote: ORIGINAL: Aynne88 Elisabella great question. I am absolutely dominant in my day to day life, with everyone. I am only submissive sexually. Even then, it takes the right person to bring that out. I'm just curious Aynne88....Are you saying you are only submissive in the sexual aspects of your relationship? Or are you submissive in all areas of your relationship with your significant other? Because in my day to day life, I also am completely dominant, but in my relationship with my partner, I'm completely submissive, both in and out of the "bedroom." Well, I attempt, but let's just say my compete submission to him is a work in progress.[;)]. It is definitely a male led relationship, but I can't just shut off that part of my personality as easily as others, and honeslty as long as he is in charge overall, he is fine with the dynamic. He knows how to reinforce my position if needed in an instant.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125