Originally posted by Finding_Fantasy
The purpose of being a submissive is to be submissive, not to play little mind games and act up to get what you want. That's called being childish, not submissive... and this is coming from myself as a submissive.

Topping from the bottom is in no way submissive. I do not understand this attitude of, I am submissive but you have to break me first. What? If you have to be broken into submission, you are not a submissive. If you are being broken into submission does that not mean that you are unwilling to be a submissive, to do things against your will? There for, in my opinion, would that make a submissive or a "victim"?

Just a thought or two from my brain. And keep in mind, these are my opinions.
Hmmm...*thinking*...not sure i wholly agree with you there FF. In terms of your first paragraph, although being submissive is about, well, being submissive (ooh, how perceptive of me! LOL), i don't believe that this rules out any element of experimenting with boundaries and having some degree of interplay with a dominant.

With regards to the second paragraph, although i totally agree that it is illogical that anyone truely submissive would need to be 'broken' as such, i think there is occasionally some degree of a dominant and a submissive adjusting to each other, or, even further, a dominant helping a submissive to realise, understand and enjoy their submissive nature. In my view, submissives are not necessarily (in fact, hardly ever) one dimensional people, and they are often extremely multi-facted individuals, and hence it can be difficult to 'come to terms' (for want of a much better and positive term) with their submissive desires...consequently a dominant doesn't so much 'break them', as help them...but it is essentially the same thing, just phrased differently.

Oh, also, if a submissive was too accepting of their submissivenes....would the dominant have to therefore by definition relinquish some of their dominance??

Interesting point though, very.

sl