are you a dom?

[WIPLASH]

A dominant is a ruler, but never a tyrant.
But to rule requires understanding, and understanding requires humility.
A dominant has pride, but never arrogance.
But pride requires dignity, and dignity requires humility.
A dominant commands respect, but never fear.
But respect requires serenity, and serenity requires humility.
A dominant employs strength, but never force.
But strength requires knowledge, and knowledge requires humility.
A dominant criticises, but never derides.
But criticism requires insight, and insight requires humility.
A dominant receives, but never takes.
But receiving requires giving, and giving requires humility.
A dominant completes, but never tries to alter.
But to complete one must be able to see what is there, not what is missing, and this most of all requires humility.

[Jennifer Williams]

Interesting perspective, certainly beautifully written. I think I agree with about half of that, for myself, though I wouldn't knock any of what you said as wrong.

[Ozme52]

One usually gives credit to the writer or a link to the original writing... or somehow ensures that no one thinks them the original author...

Like in this essay by Scott Daddy who attributes these very words to J. Mikael Togneri for his essay entitled "Seven Pillars of Dominance"

when they themselves are not... rather than let others presume the work to be ones own.

[Jennifer Williams]

Good point, that should be done.

[Archeon]

One usually gives credit to the writer or a link to the original writing... or somehow ensures that no one thinks them the original author...

Like in this essay by Scott Daddy who attributes these very words to J. Mikael Togneri for his essay entitled "Seven Pillars of Dominance"

when they themselves are not... rather than let others presume the work to be ones own.

You spent FAR FAR FAR too long researching that lol

[Archeon]

A dominant is a ruler, but never a tyrant.
Agreed

But to rule requires understanding, and understanding requires humility.
Somewhat Agree

A dominant has pride, but never arrogance.
Disagree, arrogance with foundation is fine.

But pride requires dignity, and dignity requires humility.
See point 2

A dominant commands respect, but never fear.
Disagree, I know plenty of subs who want fear inspired as part of their dynamic

But respect requires serenity, and serenity requires humility.
This is getting repetitive, see point 2 again

A dominant employs strength, but never force.
Disagree for the same reasons as my comments on fear

But strength requires knowledge, and knowledge requires humility.
...

A dominant criticises, but never derides.
Agree

But criticism requires insight, and insight requires humility.
100% agree

A dominant receives, but never takes.
Ok i'll buy this one

But receiving requires giving, and giving requires humility.
No, this is just factually wrong

A dominant completes, but never tries to alter.
Incorrect if both parties agree something needs to be altered

But to complete one must be able to see what is there, not what is missing, and this most of all requires humility.

Disagree for the same reason as above

I appreciate I am critiquing someone elses work, but figured I would as it was raised.

Regards,

Arch

[WIPLASH]

Hey i never i said i wrote this, It was emailed to me w/o any author. I just wanted to share this with all of you. I somewhat agree and disagree, The only thing that i agree with that we all need humility.

Wiplash

[Jennifer Williams]

Archeon, you put far more work into that response than I was willing to. I commend you.

[Ozme52]

Hey i never i said i wrote this, It was emailed to me w/o any author. I just wanted to share this with all of you. I somewhat agree and disagree, The only thing that i agree with that we all need humility.

Wiplash

Huh? The entire essay says all the traits require or derive from humility... So you either fully agree or fully disagree... and saying the only thing you agree with is that we all need humility implies you fully agree.

[Ozme52]

I, however, disagree that these traits derive from being humble. And I disagree that humilty is a requirement of a dominant.

Introspection? Yes.

Humilty? No.

I would submit (heheh) that the author is misusing the word humility.

[Lisais mine]

first, i would point out that Oz submits


I have to dissagree almost entirely. arrogance and confidence seem to be great aphrodisiacs to Submissives, and though the Dominant should always have his charge's best interests at heart, there is a quanity of use and abuse that may be required.

certianly a submissive must be totally rspected- that is the nature of any loving relationship- but sometimes, the dominant must act from the perspective of his or her own desires, therefore fufilling hte sub's need to be of service.

how many subs do sincerely desire to walk behind their dominant? i say that this would require a regal attitude.. which is by nature devoid of humility, and filledwith a sense of the knowledge that the Dominant knows what is best.

[sdgirl]

i must respectfully disagree, Lisaismine. Arrogance is not appealing. Confidence, strength, pride, yes. But arrogance, never.

[Ozme52]

first, i would point out that Oz submits

Yeah, I expected someone to comment on my HUGE vocabulary, which is a reflection of my HUGE lexi-GRAPHIC oratory organ.

[Ozme52]

I have to dissagree almost entirely. arrogance and confidence seem to be great aphrodisiacs to Submissives, and though the Dominant should always have his charge's best interests at heart, there is a quanity of use and abuse that may be required.

certianly a submissive must be totally rspected- that is the nature of any loving relationship- but sometimes, the dominant must act from the perspective of his or her own desires, therefore fufilling hte sub's need to be of service.

how many subs do sincerely desire to walk behind their dominant? i say that this would require a regal attitude.. which is by nature devoid of humility, and filledwith a sense of the knowledge that the Dominant knows what is best.

Correct, though I would call it confident arrogance.

[Ozme52]

i must respectfully disagree, Lisaismine. Arrogance is not appealing. Confidence, strength, pride, yes. But arrogance, never.

But "when properly viewed... everything is lewd."

thanx to Tom Lehrer for the use of the line.

[Guera]

i must respectfully disagree, Lisaismine. Arrogance is not appealing. Confidence, strength, pride, yes. But arrogance, never.

In your opinion. I think many subs would disagree, perhaps more males than females.

[Jennifer Williams]

I'll agree with pretend arrogance, maybe. "In-a-session" arrogance, sure. But real arrogance- the attitude that "I am truly better than you and you are a lesser human being than I am and therefore what you say and think and feel don't matter compared with me"...not so much.

[first, i would point out that Oz submits [/quote]

We're not in Kansas anymore, Toto.

[Guera]

I was thinking more of the attitude that "I am more important to me than you are to me, or that I do not need to have any accord with you to like you", as opposed to saying that "I am better than you". But I did look at the definition of arrogance in a a bunch of online dictionarys, and it seems that the idea of superiority and overbearing attitude are part of most definitions of arrogance. So I will have to come up with a better word.

Maybe pride, ego, impudence? It is possilbe for a dom/me to have a snotty attitude towards their sub, and it still be a very positive relationship, because the Dom/me is saying that it is ok for the sub to be their own person, and the Dom/me is secure both with themselves and with the sub reflecting well upon them. And the sub is secure that the Dom/me attitude is not dependant upon him/her acting or saying certian things.

[jeanne]

- but sometimes, the dominant must act from the perspective of his or her own desires, therefore fufilling the sub's need to be of service.

I believe that you hit the nail on the head here. My Owner has verbalized the very same concept to me, one that I wholeheartedly agree with. Thanks!