Why is it that the most sexually submissive women I have ever met have not self-identified as submissive, nor did they have the faintest clue about BDSM as such?  Does the mere knowledge and/or experience in the BDSM "world" cause some shift in a woman's outlook on the subject?  Just wondering.

Addendum to 9/2/2013 entry: If one speaks about one's self in the third person using the self-assigned "play" name. 

Another instant headache: "I am a sensual person which means my responses are emotional reactions"

HELLO!!! NEWSFLASH!!! The senses and emotions are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS ENTIRELY. They can be connected at times but, come on.

When a person is already that mixed up it is basically impossible to even communicate rationally with them.

While it may be fun for a woman to act like a bitch for a while as today's fashion is: "fierce", contentious, and arrogant, it ain't gonna do any good in regards getting a real man. Most men are relatively simple and want a peer level relationship with a woman. There aint no reason to be with such a woman. A woman is made to be soft, nurturing, and feminine. Why do you think many US men seek out foreign women? Because those foreign women have not been indoctrinated with the notion that the world (read: men) owe them anything. Many or most of them do not resent being made a woman and embrace the differences between themselves and men. They are not trying to turn themselves into men, nor do they have a problem when a man acts like a man, in direct contrast to many US women. Not sure if I have posted this quote in any other of my journal posts so here goes (if again I apologize): Americans "...expect nothing bad ever to happen, when the rest of the world expects only bad to happen. And they are not disappointed." One of the phrases women in the US have been instilled with is: "If you find the right man, then you will be happy." Simple if-then logic statement, right? So what happens to a woman who has the right man and is still unhappy? It is the man's fault and he's got to go. Talk about self fulfilling prophecy.

     Decided to include an easily understood analogy to this whole lifestyle/sexual identity thing. I am a man, male, XY genome, the whole enchilada . I CAN decide to live a lifestyle as a woman, I CAN (attempt to) act as a woman, and I CAN  (attempt to) dress and appear like a woman, and even if I were to be surgically altered to present externally as a woman, I will NEVER BE a woman. Any attempt of a 'lifestyle' as a woman is a falsehood. 

     By extension, could I ACT as a wimpy POS male sub? Sure. It is called ACTING. Say the right things "Yes mistress", kow-tow and grovel to her, and maybe even pull it off. I can be put into bondage. I can be put in a cock cage, latex body suit, saran wrap, or whatever, but I will NEVER EVER be a sexual submissive.

     For those of us who actually take the time and energy (and have the wherewithal to do so) to analyze WHY one has the sexual tendencies that one does, there are clear reasons (at least as far as the DSM IV has to say) I have developed the sexual identity as a dominant.

    It is rampant these days for people to stamp themselves with a label that they WANT to be, rather than what they actually are or alternatively label themselves with something as a means to an end. This can end only in tears (so to speak).

Lifestyle: While many seem to use lifestyle as a high order noun for their participation in any form they choose of BDSM, a lifestyle is, after all, subject to choice. The word lifestyle says nothing about the psychology(ies) involved which, generally speaking, is fixed by environment, experience,  or evolution and the interplay of psychologies is the real goal of a BDSM partnership, not an act.

The line between real and make-believe: If one has a "play" name, e.g. DragonSlayer or DemonDomme and one introduces ones self as such, if one plays dress-up to effect one's BDSM "play" persona, if one considers BDSM as impersonal anonymous performance art, if BDSM is a social club for one to attend, if one sells (or buys) BDSM activity, attention, or affection, if one needs training to do what apparently doesn't come naturally to one, or if one has a place-holder "play" partner whilst waiting for the "right one" to come along, these are strong indicators that the desires and/or motivations involved are not sincerely intrinsic but affectations for one's self-centered amusement and are, as such, a facade. Someone who is real is not going to be buying or selling parts of one's self, needs no moniker, no costume, no training, nor any stage on which to express and/or act upon those innate feelings and further, those who possess such realism eschew such artifice. Isn't "play" the opposite of real? Why, yes it is. But, as those described above might say, "Don't bother me with the details, I can make it up as I go along AND call it anything I like". Beware.

Another existential question: Are people deluded before posting themselves on Collarme or as a result thereof? Because there it is pretty much endemic here.

Hello ladies/people of California. The state in which we live extends some 780 miles between it's Northern and Southern borders. and roughly 250 miles wide. This site lumps all of us into one with no differentiation if region. With a false or even misleading location in your profile the distance between interested parties might be too far to contemplate. There aren't really any personal safety issues from providing an approximate location, so how about it y'all?

Oh my goodness. Screen names and references to Fifty Shades of Grey. Fiction, and more specifically bad fiction, is no basis for a choice of sexual fulfillment. Get a grip people. I used to be fairly upbeat about the US but as time goes by and the more I see, I do believe the end draweth nigh. Wait a sec... all those Gorean references. Ugh.

OK time for another journal generality. I will use a cultural reference here for illustration. In an episode of Sex and the City, when Charlotte met her (first) husband the "girls" metaphorically referred to him as a taxi with it's light on. That is he was finally open to a 'real' relationship and that the first woman he met after that point was going to get the ride. The implication being that a man's normal condition is NOT open to a real relationship. My comment is that the tables have turned and in particular submissive women are in a defensive posture by default. Yes I know this is somewhat redundant of other journal entries I have made, but more a clarification thereof.

What is this? The Age of the Disgruntled False Slave? Most any self assigned slave profiles are merely an extended rant about how men suck and how much more superior they are than any man. So many inherent contradictions it is impossible to unwravel. Run away! Run away!

Almost wrote a comment to a fellow CM "member" this morning, had it halfway written but decided it is pointless to tell someone who is clearly delusional about themselves of their delusion. Unfortunately these days this self delusion of one's attributes, virtues, and worth is all too common.

What are you people STUPID? Can you read and understand an EULA? That is End User License Agreement for all you technically and/or linguistically challenged out there. Why do I mention an EULA? Well, when this website (or any other) tells you in their EULA that the web site owners can use any content (photographs, videos, profile narratives, journal, entries, chat content, etc.) posted by a user in any way they see fit  that is EXACTLY what they can do. That content, particularly erotic imagery, is normally used to promote the original site or sold to other sites for content. So there you go folks. Write disclaimers until you can't type any more, the disclaimers are not worth the electrons that are lighting the characters on your screen.

Why would ANY woman want a weak pussified wimpy POS submissive male? They are good for nothing. 

How does any woman, either domme or sub have some guy "screening" people for her without: A. realizing he is controlling her and B. without realizing that he wants to fuck her? No don't give me any BS about "friendly favors". Forget it. Get over it. Get real. Just saw a post from an alleged dominant female who has some male dom "screening" for her. WAKE UP! NO true dominant either male or female would allow this. A single misplaced dommy word can set me off. I am a dominant, get it?  Is it somehow impossible these days for many to self-evaluate accurately? They just write what sounds good? What a joke. My BS detector almost can't stand it anymore. 

If I never see another quotation of Anais Nin it will not be too soon. Overused, clicheed, and says nothing about one's self.

It is amazing how bad people's memories are. Truly. Morons who think they are smart are just the strangest creatures. Kinda like the worst drivers think they are actually the best drivers. Brings to mind a movie quote: "A man's got to know his limitations". Kinda like: "Know thyself". If one is not honest with one's self, how can one present one's self sincerely? Answer: One cannot.  

This aint no party, this aint no disco, this aint no fooling around.

Can't believe I have to do this again. Females who identify themselves as submissives or slaves that exhibit not one iota of grace, charm, or even femininity, who are the most defensive of women, who have obvious control issues, and who invariably attempt to top from the bottom are not acting like their stated role identification. If I as a male dominant acted opposite to my own orientation, that is, if I acted in a submissive, meek, and mild way, I would certainly be questioned on it or rejected because of it. Yet, we are supposed to be understanding of the sub woman's plight, that she has been walked on so many times by men, that she has been treated so badly by men that she has reason to be skeptical if not outright hostile toward them. Well, it was not I that treated you badly. It was not I who walked on you. It was not I that broke your heart after you said you would never let yourself feel like that again. So please ladies, do not lay the blame for all of your life's experiences and hurts on me. It is a new day. It is a new start. It is a chance to break the mold and get what you are looking for.

Mulling over the definition of 'submissive'. I already do expect a little topping from the bottom at least initially when dealing with a sub, but demanding and even bitchy behavior is not being submissive.

Style does not equal substance. Intelligence is difficult for the unintelligent to understand. Talk does not mean the speaker has the underlying frame of reference to offer a valid opinion.

Not a pagan. Not a hedonist. Seeking much more personal interaction than a bachnalian orgy.

My initial message to a woman might in fact be a "one liner". This might be about something she has written in her profile, her pic, or something I might find amusing or noteworthy. Within the bounds of internet sites, and with women receiving many more messages than to which they can possibly reply, it makes no sense for men to pour out their hearts in long winded prose. Better to just say Hello! and see if there is a mutual interest. Can I be verbose? Yes, often to a fault when it is more appropriate to do so.