Some correspondence with a reader recently highlighted for me what is, of course, self-evident; that in the same way that my nature is submissive, his is dominant. In other words, he is a natural leader.
My youngest son recently undertook career-style testing. He had to do a test that lasted over three hours and when the report came back with the results it was astoundingly comprehensive. As we already knew, he has very strong skills in the creative sphere and possible careers were film producer or multi-media producer; that sort of thing. What surprised me slightly was that they inferred from the test results that he wasn't so much interested in leading as he was in being a strong team player.
When I thought about it, that's probably right. He does like things done in a particular way and he is a stickler for doing things very, very well; until he is satisfied with them. However, he isn't someone to insist on his own way when he has to consider other people. He's keen to listen to their point of view and to incorporate their ideas into the project, if he can. There are some things that he just does, regardless of what others think. He won't be without his special hat, and he's made various excuses to wear this hat at school. Remarkably, no teacher has had issue with his point of view. I think when you are a very easy kid to teach you can get away with little things.
I'd like to think that he is Prefect material because he is fully involved in school life and boys do admire him on various levels and he would be a very good role model. I think he wants that, although he hasn't said so. Certainly, he has a reputation as a great public speaker, a good actor; that sort of thing. We'll see. However, I have to agree he doesn't jump out at me as a leader in an overt way. Yet...if I were caught in a storm I'd like to have his intelligence along for the trip. I think he'd stay calm headed and he'd sort out what to do. It's a tricky thing to explain this aptitude for leadership!
When I was at school I was very, very good. That's not news to long time readers. I've mentioned that trait before. I wasn't at the school for my middle years but I was back again in the last two years of school. I wasn't made a Prefect and my close friends felt this to be a travesty of justice. However, you see, I didn't want to be a Prefect. I didn't want to have to tell girls to tie up their shoes and put their hats on. I didn't seek power. I just wanted to do my work and be involved in the activities that engaged me - like public speaking and writing. At no point have I wanted to lead and I wasn't at all bothered to not be a Prefect.
Here's a good example: My oldest son often got ear infections as a young boy. He has a very high pain threshold and I had to use my instincts to know if he had another ear infection or not because I couldn't rely on him telling me about the pain. So, on this day I said, "Well, do you think you should go to school or not? I am not sure..." and he responded, "You're the mother! What do you think?" Oh, yeah. It was up to me to make the decision. Duh!
Now, I can say without qualification that my eldest son was always meant to lead. At the age of three his pre-school teachers told me that he stood out as the leader and in his final year of school he was Captain of this and Captain of that. His friendship group called him "Daddy" and once he got into the workforce he quickly became a leader.
One of his very dearest friends now told me that he used to think him an "asshole" when he first knew him in their corporate life because he would just listen to people at work. Since he'd say nothing they'd keep on blathering, feeling that they had to impress him. People, including this current friend were a bit intimidated by him. When I mentioned this to my son, he said that, yes, he gave people the opportunity to speak and when they were finished, he gave them his opinion, which, yes, tended to be the final word. It wasn't a ploy; merely his way of operating at work. Needless to say, he has worked his way up the rungs of the ladder, ideally suited to leadership. It's nothing I've done. It's the way he came out.
My daughter came out feisty; terribly creative and strong willed with a very soft side. Her career is off and running now and she's incorporated her creative strengths with her ability to lead. I think in her relationship she's capable of being under her boyfriend's wing. Certainly, she's adjusted to him and when he said that she was welcome to be in a bad mood but not welcome to change his mood from a good one to a bad one, she changed. To her credit, she worked very hard on that.
My middle son is a do-er. He's got very, very strong interests and he goes ahead and involves himself in those. He's not at all interested in leadership at this point and he never really was. He's his own man, doing his own thing; not particularly worried what others are doing, unless they screw up what he is doing. I don't mean to say that he is easily led, because he absolutely is not. He's just not that phased about what other people think. I remember in grade 8 his English teacher asked him to represent the class in the year level public speaking competition but he declined; not interested in fame. Yet, in his own interests, he is very competitive. Remember Richard Burton? "I go my own way." That's my middle son.
I haven't even gone close to talking about the different styles of leadership. Some people demand that others follow. Some people cajole other people. Some people seduce; impress others; entice them; listen to everyone and then make a decision...and so on.
I can see a snake oil salesman coming a mile away. I can pick out those who are laying it on and who think they are something special. I'm not easily impressed by this sort of thing. I don't care if they have loads of money or power. I talk to them in the same way I talk to anyone else. If people are nice to me, I'm nice to them. I don't have a desire to lead and that pretty much takes away my cares about all sorts of things; although I do listen to my husband and children if something is not right with someone and make my assessment as to how they best deal with them. But, that's not leadership, that's just reading people.
People are often talking about this nature/nurture debate but when it comes to leadership qualities I tend to think either you have it or you don't have it. It was decided at birth. And if you don't have it, not to worry. There's pleasure in being submissive; at least, there is for me!
My youngest son recently undertook career-style testing. He had to do a test that lasted over three hours and when the report came back with the results it was astoundingly comprehensive. As we already knew, he has very strong skills in the creative sphere and possible careers were film producer or multi-media producer; that sort of thing. What surprised me slightly was that they inferred from the test results that he wasn't so much interested in leading as he was in being a strong team player.
When I thought about it, that's probably right. He does like things done in a particular way and he is a stickler for doing things very, very well; until he is satisfied with them. However, he isn't someone to insist on his own way when he has to consider other people. He's keen to listen to their point of view and to incorporate their ideas into the project, if he can. There are some things that he just does, regardless of what others think. He won't be without his special hat, and he's made various excuses to wear this hat at school. Remarkably, no teacher has had issue with his point of view. I think when you are a very easy kid to teach you can get away with little things.
I'd like to think that he is Prefect material because he is fully involved in school life and boys do admire him on various levels and he would be a very good role model. I think he wants that, although he hasn't said so. Certainly, he has a reputation as a great public speaker, a good actor; that sort of thing. We'll see. However, I have to agree he doesn't jump out at me as a leader in an overt way. Yet...if I were caught in a storm I'd like to have his intelligence along for the trip. I think he'd stay calm headed and he'd sort out what to do. It's a tricky thing to explain this aptitude for leadership!
When I was at school I was very, very good. That's not news to long time readers. I've mentioned that trait before. I wasn't at the school for my middle years but I was back again in the last two years of school. I wasn't made a Prefect and my close friends felt this to be a travesty of justice. However, you see, I didn't want to be a Prefect. I didn't want to have to tell girls to tie up their shoes and put their hats on. I didn't seek power. I just wanted to do my work and be involved in the activities that engaged me - like public speaking and writing. At no point have I wanted to lead and I wasn't at all bothered to not be a Prefect.
Here's a good example: My oldest son often got ear infections as a young boy. He has a very high pain threshold and I had to use my instincts to know if he had another ear infection or not because I couldn't rely on him telling me about the pain. So, on this day I said, "Well, do you think you should go to school or not? I am not sure..." and he responded, "You're the mother! What do you think?" Oh, yeah. It was up to me to make the decision. Duh!
Now, I can say without qualification that my eldest son was always meant to lead. At the age of three his pre-school teachers told me that he stood out as the leader and in his final year of school he was Captain of this and Captain of that. His friendship group called him "Daddy" and once he got into the workforce he quickly became a leader.
One of his very dearest friends now told me that he used to think him an "asshole" when he first knew him in their corporate life because he would just listen to people at work. Since he'd say nothing they'd keep on blathering, feeling that they had to impress him. People, including this current friend were a bit intimidated by him. When I mentioned this to my son, he said that, yes, he gave people the opportunity to speak and when they were finished, he gave them his opinion, which, yes, tended to be the final word. It wasn't a ploy; merely his way of operating at work. Needless to say, he has worked his way up the rungs of the ladder, ideally suited to leadership. It's nothing I've done. It's the way he came out.
My daughter came out feisty; terribly creative and strong willed with a very soft side. Her career is off and running now and she's incorporated her creative strengths with her ability to lead. I think in her relationship she's capable of being under her boyfriend's wing. Certainly, she's adjusted to him and when he said that she was welcome to be in a bad mood but not welcome to change his mood from a good one to a bad one, she changed. To her credit, she worked very hard on that.
My middle son is a do-er. He's got very, very strong interests and he goes ahead and involves himself in those. He's not at all interested in leadership at this point and he never really was. He's his own man, doing his own thing; not particularly worried what others are doing, unless they screw up what he is doing. I don't mean to say that he is easily led, because he absolutely is not. He's just not that phased about what other people think. I remember in grade 8 his English teacher asked him to represent the class in the year level public speaking competition but he declined; not interested in fame. Yet, in his own interests, he is very competitive. Remember Richard Burton? "I go my own way." That's my middle son.
I haven't even gone close to talking about the different styles of leadership. Some people demand that others follow. Some people cajole other people. Some people seduce; impress others; entice them; listen to everyone and then make a decision...and so on.
I can see a snake oil salesman coming a mile away. I can pick out those who are laying it on and who think they are something special. I'm not easily impressed by this sort of thing. I don't care if they have loads of money or power. I talk to them in the same way I talk to anyone else. If people are nice to me, I'm nice to them. I don't have a desire to lead and that pretty much takes away my cares about all sorts of things; although I do listen to my husband and children if something is not right with someone and make my assessment as to how they best deal with them. But, that's not leadership, that's just reading people.
People are often talking about this nature/nurture debate but when it comes to leadership qualities I tend to think either you have it or you don't have it. It was decided at birth. And if you don't have it, not to worry. There's pleasure in being submissive; at least, there is for me!
I think this article is based on a false premise. Not all Dominants are born leaders and not all born leaders are Dominants. There is a well worn saying that the best leaders do not seek greatness, but greatness is thrust upon them. In other words, good leaders are not inherently self-serving. Leaders want the best for those around them. Good leaders serve their flock. This is, I believe at odds with the core motivation of D/s which is the desire for power exchange, the dominant being thrilled by the notion of being in control and manipulating their partner's behaviour. Leaders do not necessarily seek power. Leaders just want to champion a cause and look after others.
ReplyDeleteOf course, leaders must have the self confidence and conviction to carry a cause through to completion. They must care enough about their charges to be open and honest and fair about their shortcomings and to help them improve. But they must also be very open to their own failings and always be ready to take counsel. They must mentor and coach and inspire those who wish to follow them. They must have vision and insight and must learn to develop charisma in order to project that vision and inspire confidence in others. They must lead by example. They might be good at management and organization though that is really the realm of management rather than leadership. All of these fine traits can be applied to the sphere of D/s and I would suggest any Dominant should learn the skills and traits of leadership (and perhaps of management) to be ultimately successful in motivating his charges to perform. However leadership and domination are not synonymous, in my view.
Rollymo: I'm open to discussing this but in my mind there are leaders and there are dominants and there are dominants who are leaders and leaders who are dominants. I was using people I know well, all from the same family and fundamentally the same upbringing to argue that some people are born with leadership qualities and some are not. I don't think that being born a leader makes you a dominant necessarily but it is more likely probably than if you weren't born with leadership qualities, I suspect. I think another word for a Dominant is the leader of the couple. If one person has the final say, or guides the way/steers the course fundamentally, it's the Dominant/leader.
ReplyDeleteI'm confused. I don't think we are saying much different to one another, or are we?
Vesta: we are not too far apart, but the differences, though subtle, are pivotal in my view.
ReplyDeleteI think we are all born dominants in the sense of egocentricity - we all initially believe the entire universe revolves around ourselves - that's what being two years old is all about :) But over time many of us learn that the world doesn't work that way and the egocentricity falls away. What's left of that egocentricity when we enter adulthood is shaped by our experiences and the way we have internalized them. Those who MUST have their own way have had less of that ego worn away from their time as a toddler. Those who focus more on the feelings and needs of others have had more of it worn away. These are of course my views of the world and may not be shared by experts in the field.
Dominance is in my view the desire to impose one's ego on others and to shape one's environment and interactions according to that centralized view of the world. In the first person, it is about getting others to perform an act or make a sacrifice because the end result is good for ME.
Leadership on the other hand is about getting others to perform an act or make a sacrifice because the end result is good for THEM.
The techniques may be similar, but the underlying motivations and therefore the values associated are entirely different in my view.
Rollymo: Ahhhhh, ok. I completely concede that my point of view is based on my limited experience but my experience of dominance is that what is good for me is completely the point. That the dominant enjoys dominating is a given but in my experience it's about what is good for me, as well as being enjoyable for him. Hence, I tend to use the two words - dominant and leader - as complementary to one another. (I hope that makes sense. It's way past my bedtime and I'm super sleepy.)
ReplyDeleteVesta: yes that makes good sense. You have been fortunate to have experienced such good care. I don't wish to keep you from your bed any longer and am impressed by your lucidity at such a late hour. Many thanks again for a thought-provoking exchange. Sleep well!
ReplyDeleterollymo: I certainly do feel very fortunate. I've no doubt that there are people in the role of Dominant who don't take nearly as much care. I slept like a baby for a full eight hours; much needed. Thank you for your kind thoughts.
ReplyDeletePersonally I think that leaders are always dominant, what they are not is domineering. Those are two very different things. What interests me is that the goal that needs to be reached, is achieved in the best possible way. That might mean leading from the front, or it might mean guiding from the sidelines. On a task/people axis, a good dominant or leader sits in a completely central position. That position is one that is natural to a good dominant/leader, it is not the place a domineering individual chooses or understands.
ReplyDeleteGood dominants and leaders do not feel the need to domineer because they are very confident in themselves. Likewise they do not need external validation, hence are very likely to pass all plaudits on to the team. The domineering person lacks confidence and is a great seeker of external validation, thus tend towards self aggrandizement and self promotion. Not the traits of either a dominant or a good leader.
Just my thoughts obviously.