Redefining "Switch": Orientation-Fluidity

One of the first things you’re asked to identify is whether you’re a domme, sub or switch, in BDSM

I decided upon entering BDSM professionally that I was a domme. I wanted to let go of disempowering scripts and conditioning that tells women they need to be submissive and docile, and that dominance is a turn-off. I wanted to grow in my dominance and learn to call the shots. Some women who are dommes are purely dommes, meaning, in no circumstances do they switch or sub. I however, wanted to be more flexible and sometimes switched, subbed at the beginning of my career. After being in this profession for many years, it starts to leak into your identity in all other spaces. It becomes either an outlet, or a lived truth that coaxes out who you really are.

Still, for years, I had no idea what my “orientation” was outside of BDSM professionally. There was a period in which I identified with my “domme-only” peers and would never, ever put myself in any situation that required me being less than a domme. Because for some reason, there was a negative slant they ascribed to the sub position- of inferiority. I started to grow out of that as I began paving my own way in BDSM. They’re both just orientations that need each other to make a scene. I saw them as neutral. I also began craving a safe space to be submissive in my personal life, and began experimenting in that regard here and there. I knew that to be an even better domme, it was important to understand the headspace of the submissive too.

What I then came to discover was how complex, yet simple, this all is. I’m never strictly one or the other- there are times in life when my energy and body language may be communicating dominance, yet my speech and conscious behavior may be dictating submission. There are times when the opposite is true. Still, I was happy and relieved to have found clear outputs of behavior- when I was domming, I was in control. I had the power. I feel that when we don’t grant ourselves outlets to express all sides of our personality, we can oftentimes hinder our development and these traits leak out in strange, shadow-like ways. For instance, if you continually play the submissive role in life, then you may become controlling, manipulative, codependent, aggressive in covert ways.

The healthiest approach is embodying duality and understanding that not all circumstances are the same. I could respond to someone’s energy and demeanor in a certain way, but I won’t know what (dominance, submission) they bring out in me unless I’m present with them and engage with what they’re communicating on all levels. Sometimes gender roles can come into play here, but what I used to think were power dynamics that were strictly associated with gendered roles in vanilla contexts and BDSM role reversals, aren’t that related afterall. Especially after you play for a while, or you begin to strip away a lot of the gender expectations from your own life and allow yourself the room to breathe. I identify as a woman, but that doesn’t mean I have to act like how women are conditioned to be, to be one.

So that’s why I think it’s a good idea to reconsider the idea of switch. Switch to me lays out a binary- Submissive and dominant, and I switch from one to the other. Yes it grants more fluidity than the other roles that are locked in one way of associating with power and control, but I don’t believe that it needs to be a one or the other, an established binary. I prefer to look at it as a whole- a totality of traits that can be expressed simultaneously or one at a time. I’m not a switch. But I’m not just a domme either. I’m a dominant in work, in some ways dominant in life but, I can be many things at once and so can everyone.

Control

We're all some form of a control freak. That's what anxiety and worry are about- wanting to control the future in some way that elicits feelings of out of control-ness in the present. We plan. We micromanage. We try to control other people even in subtle ways. And yet, we still feel out of control most of the time. WHY?

Because this form of grasping for control is indicative of NOT having true control over the self. What's controlling the self are all these unconscious behaviors and patterns in our subconscious. When we bring these to light, to our conscious awareness, we then can control our actions, our reactions, our emotions, and when we change those actively, we also change the way others respond to us and ultimately our whole reality.

But why do we not want to reach full self-mastery? Because it's true commitment to the self. Most people don't want to know themselves that deeply. Most people never do. But if we dig deep and learn the roots and causes of what's ACTUALLY going on within us, we then have more of a sense of pure control which means we no longer need to control that which we CAN'T fundamentally control or change. This means we reduce our anxiety, our worries, our fears GREATLY. And once we do, well, we have more control to give over to people like me in safe spaces. That means we can get more of a sense of surrender. 

When we get a hold of ourselves, we allow others to hold us too.

 

Like Clay

"If you could mold me like clay, what would it look like in the end?" a potential slave asked me recently over tea.

"I can't give you a concrete answer because I don't know what it will look like in the end. With a piece of clay you have to examine the texture, the elasticity to see what it can realistically be shaped into. In the end, whatever form it takes is because both of us have molded it," I replied

I never approach anything with a rigid idea in mind. An honest assessment of what the other person can bring to the table is always the priority. Then I like things to be organic and I adapt to the situation accordingly. The final product is never all mine, it's ours. This personal philosophy might just be inherent in my personality or it might be influenced by all the Laozi I studied in Shanghai. You never want to be the rigid tree- that one gets broken first in any storm.

xAC

Photographs

I've modeled in a few photoshoots lately, making me more cognizant of different styles, connections between photographer/subject, and the role of the camera. Is the camera an extension of the photographer, a proxy, or is it treated as an object?

The process has helped me learn more about myself- what are fixed qualities about me that remain, despite adapting to different photographers? Perhaps this is a similar process a sub might undergo by seeing different dommes.

I've come to find that I naturally am either photographed in an intimate way, meaning very close up, very connected with few decorative elements OR in a very distanced way. There's rarely a middle ground. I feel this reflects my personality. You are either let in very close to me, or I keep you at a distance, emotionally and aesthetically. I find myself feeling most comfortable in sessions in either lingerie or latex.

The relationships also matter. Below are photos taken by a very close friend of mine. He captures my rawness, I drop my guard. I thought it'd be nice for you to see all the different sides of me, because I want to see all the different sides of you.