The Five Common Types of Internet Dominants

[slavelucy]

{First Post at BDSM Library}

What if you don't fit in any of those categories?

i think it's entirely possible that you could be a combination of these types...or different (although most would carry shades of these types, i think). As well informed as TG is, it isn't a dominant bible you know! So, i wouldn't fret about it.

sl

[Tang]

I think one aspect is experience. Many people are exploring the BDSM aspect of their lives in isolation, and the internet provides an outlet from that. No-one is born all knowing, and it often takes years or decades to recognise one's own sexual tastes and even when you do it takes years more to hone them. I think some of these types come from people being inexperienced and not knowing how to handle situations. This is why a website like this is so useful.

I wonder if people see a change over time as the Dominant becomes more knowledgeable and gains experience of how to behave from discussion and from stories. Maybe conversely, it can breed inconsiderate habits, I never really encouraged capitalisation/minisculisation until I had read so many D/s stories with it in. I considered myself a true Dominant but for me, it was sufficient to say 'master' and 'I am your slave', these words carry weight however you type them. Whereas starting out dominants reading so many stories with 'Master' and 'i am your slave' come to feel unless they insist on that they are not a true Dominant.

I accept there are prats and morons out there who like shaking their dicks around in such forums. However, I think we also need to take into consideration that you do not become a highly experienced Dom or sub over night, it takes time and trial and error until you get it right.

[Curtis]

Good thought, Master Tang.

For slavelucy and Pistol (congratulations on your first post, Pistol -- you were up to six by the time I saw this): I think that Tourguide's being misinterpreted again. (At this point I'm considering applying for a job as Tourguide's translator.) If I've got this right, his "Five Common Types of Internet Dominants" is really a list of five types of poser dominants (or Dumbs, as Lord Thomas puts it so eloquently), and isn't intended to include everyone. The ones who aren't posers would be the 'normal dominants', which label distinguishes them from the 'internet dominants'. (If I'm wrong on that point, then the rest of this post should be considered invalid.)

Assuming that is the case, then I still have to disagree with Tourguide on two points: First, equating internet dominants to poser dominants just seems wrong on the face of it. Aren't you as likely to run into a poser dominant in real life as you are in cyber? Personally, I vote for calling them 'Dumbs'. It's short and to the point; Second, as you all know, I'm not a dominant in any way, shape or form, BUT if I was going to be one, I'd WANT to be a "Caregiver".

[Okay, I've sat here for five minutes trying to figure out how to follow up that last sentence without violating the Code of Conduct, and I can't do it; so, I'll just leave it there.]

[BDSM_Tourguide]

Assuming that is the case, then I still have to disagree with Tourguide on two points: First, equating internet dominants to poser dominants just seems wrong on the face of it. Aren't you as likely to run into a poser dominant in real life as you are in cyber?

A person is just as likely to be a poser offline as they are on, indeed. However, as this article is geared toward an internet crowd, I only mentioned internet poser types. I plan to do a follow up on this article (if I ever get the time to write anything ever again) and list the major types of real-life poser dominants, and another article listing qualities to look for in a dominant to make it easier to know if they are serious about BDSM, having a submisive, etc. I also plan to write an article about the distinctions in dominant "titles." I did one earlier, but I don't think it really went into the depth in which I wanted it to go. I'll have to look it over again before I decide whether or not to write this one.

[Tang]

Curtis, yes, I had that thought over the weekend, I was probably slightly mislead by the titling. Maybe I am looking for some outlines of what we should be aspiring to in good practice. There are certainly various types in any community one is part of, but if I thought they were all negative I would feel no interest in being part of that community.

Tourguide, what you propose sounds bang on what I am thinking of. That'll be great.

[e.b.]

Maybe I am looking for some outlines of what we should be aspiring to in good practice.

Tang,

Welcome to the forums! Your posts are good reads. There actually is a similar thread to what it sounds like you're looking for here: http://www.bdsmlibrary.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2129

Parts of the thread are a bit off-topic, but there are some excellent points about the qualities of a good dom.

eb