Coming out as a submissive?

From the outside, our FLR/malesub identities look like 

(a) doting husband (already public) plus 

(b) kinky goings on (private).

The weird thing about being a submissive of my generation is that we've worked so hard to be invisible, but wish we weren't.

I don't mean visible in the "my mistress leads me on a leash to the shopping mall to buy her boots" way. 

I just mean ,"not invisible."

A (RL) friend of mine who's also in a female led relationship - sort of my fault, I think - put it this way: "Somebody other than just your partner has to know who you really are."

We both have fellow malesubs to talk to, but after the initial heart to heart, there's not much to really discuss. By the time you get this far into middle age, you know what you like and how to do it, and you're OK with wanting those things. Once in a while it's useful to compare technical notes, but that's that.

However, for both of us - him and I - it goes beyond sharing the secret with a handful of confidants. We'd like a space where we don't have to hide our identities.

But what would that safe space look like?

Both of us are in monogamous relationships, so it's not the same as being young and coming out so as to date kinkily. In fact, it's not clear what difference being more out would make. From the outside, our FLR/malesub identities look like (a) doting husband (already public) plus (b) kinky goings on (private).

So, most of our - Xena and my - friends already know that I revolve around her, keeping house, supporting her career and that I defer to her on most decisions. One or two find it sweetly amusing. If I told them that it's in my nature to do what Xena wants, they'd tell me that they already knew that and "So what?" If I told them about the discipline and the chastity, they'd tell me "Ewww" and "Too Much Information" or else "So what?" Or perhaps, "Good for you."

That last is what happened when my friend did out himself to some of his more broadminded friends: They basically said some supportive things, said they were happy for him and the conversation moved on.

I'm not sure I can see the benefit of doing the same. I'd still be doing Xena's bidding, and we wouldn't be talking about our sex lives. Day-to-day, everything would look the same.

What if another couple turned out to actually be like us? Still no real change because the dynamic stuff is all private, even if it isn't secret. 

(OK, I admit it, I like the idea of Xena having another dominant friend and them egging each other on. But really, nothing would have changed.)

That leaves the BDSM community, which just isn't our scene. Our kind of kink doesn't belong in club, and Xena isn't interested in learning "better domming skills". I'm also not comfortable with the idea of identifying as a submissive in the company of dominant men. A munch isn't an attractive prospect for similar reasons plus, again, there really isn't anything to talk about.

So though it would be nice to be out to more people, I'm not really sure what that would look like...

---

Learn how to how to walk the same Femdom path with your partner! 

GET THE "FOR HIM" MANUAL RIGHT NOW!
GET THE "FOR HER" MANUAL RIGHT NOW!

CLICK HERE to download my Femdom Erotica (all written while chaste!)

(For ebook format, 

Lulu or iTunes.)

Ask Giles: Is a Female Led Relationship is the submissive truly serving, or is it a trade?

In Ancient Rome, she'd still have to manage
her slave: give him orders, discipline him,
keep him in his place.

On Chastity Mansion, somebody asked: "Is it serving or is it a trade?"

I think it's quite common for dominant women to hide behind the idea of a trade for a long time before taking ownership of the FLR. However, it's only a trade in that all relationships are an implicit trade.

Our desire to serve comes from our submissive orientation. It's not some higher calling. So what we really want is particular role in a relationship.

The baseline proposition is then: "Let me be your slave and you can enjoy things unavailable in a normal relationship."

Ah, but kinky "slaves" require particular treatment! Isn't that a trade?

No because, if this were some dystopia - or Ancient Rome! - where a woman could simply purchase a personal slave, she'd still have to manage him: give him orders, discipline him, keep him in his place. There'd also be protocol so his presence didn't feel intrusive.

As long as the particular treatment  makes sense - has no over the top extras - then it's no more a trade than, say, adopting a dog and then having to feed, house and train it.

You could argue that, since he can get bored and pull the plug at any time, she will always feel as if it's a trade. However, from the start, he usually has more to lose than her. He's literally trapped by his own orientation. Over time, the roles just start to feel real and normal.

So though the mistress/slave relationship implies mutual obligations, I don't think it's an actual trade by any common meaning of the word. It certainly doesn't feel like one!

---

Learn how to how to walk the same Femdom path with your partner! 

GET THE "FOR HIM" MANUAL RIGHT NOW!
GET THE "FOR HER" MANUAL RIGHT NOW!

CLICK HERE to download my Femdom Erotica (all written while chaste!)

(For ebook format, 

Lulu or iTunes.)

What will Future Femdom be like?

I stand by my statement that "Femdom has no history".

The dominatrix has a history. She goes back to Summerian times at least. However, she was nicely shrink-wrapped and fire-walled in her temple precinct.

So if you insist, then, yes, Female Domination has a history, a tradition, but not the Female Dominant style of relationships. And since we can use "Femdom" to mean "a female dominant", I take that to be the core meaning:

Femdom: A relationship and/or erotic style in which the woman, her desires and needs, dominates.

What about Femdom's future history?