Submissive men? Submissive man? What's the difference? Words Matter.

Often when discussing this thing we all do, or more specifically our individual versions of this thing we do, a conversation is doomed from the beginning because of an overall generalized description of things, people, groups, men, women, etc., as if one person or scenario can adequately describe all situations or people that share, on any level, the same moniker.

A lovely sentiment like the one above is a case in point.  Although I agree with the words, and it precisely describes my relationship with Mistress K., it also can be interpreted by some as describing all submissive "men".  Is the use of the "men" nefarious that way or intentional to overly generalize?  I think not.  I think it was intended to be what I described it as ... a lovely sentiment.  

Each of us are different.  As individuals and in our respective roles within our relationships.  I try to always remember that when commenting, or otherwise being involved in a conversation about people and things.  Not just in this thing we do, but in all aspects of life.  For example, ALL men that are submissive are not the same.  Me for example.  Clearly I am a submissive man but the difference from others is that my submission is solely in the context of my marriage and is an acknowledged role that I cherish with respect to Mistress K.

Does that also mean that I am submissive in nature otherwise?  I'm not.  Does it mean that I am submissive to all women just because they are a woman?  No, it doesn't.  There are just as many idiot women as there are men.  I respect (or not) all people, men or women, based on who they are, how they treat people, their honor and integrity.  In fact, in all aspects of my life other than my submission to my wife, I am what most people would define as dominant.  I love to lead and mentor people.  I love to teach others how advance their lives with honor, integrity, hard work and the other obvious characteristics that any reasonable person would agree are necessary in life.  Would I be able to live my life my way and be effective as a leader or mentor to others if they knew I get spanked or pegged by wife, or that she decides when, how and even if I have an orgasm, or that she decides solely when sex will happen and how, or perhaps even someday with whom?  I doubt it.  

Sure there are many examples of how "all men" and "all women" are and behave, and the conversations that arise out of such matters will often turn into a giant pissing contest because there are inevitably men or women that have been lumped into such a vague generalization, that the narrative doesn't apply to truthfully.  Sometimes those people take exception, even get offended at being thought of, or even defined in such a general fashion.  The same thing happens in politics.  Clearly there are those that will defend to the death that one party is evil and the other party is the opposite of evil.  So much so in fact that when a dipshit politician fucks up, the thing about them that matters the most is whether there is a (D) or a (R) associated with their name.  Foes of whatever party is involved will use that dipshit politician as "proof" that all other (D)'s or (R) share the same characteristics.  It's ridiculous, and worse, it's harmful.  Do the respective party leaders know this?  Of course they.  The know it very well and use it to their advantage.

Every person does what they do and with who they do it with for reasons that are exclusive to them.  Assuming each of them seeks happiness and joy in their lives, and assuming they have no intention of imposing their shit on other people, I will wholeheartedly support them in the "works for them" situation.

Words matter.  Be impeccable with your words, both when uttering them and hearing others say them.  Thanks for listening.  I'd love to know your thoughts.