The post that got me wondering is here.
Now, since I've read the post I've thought about it quite a bit.
My first reaction was - what's feminism got to do with anything?
And, after a great deal of thought, that's pretty much what I still think.
As a writer who has a lot of stories featureing dominant men and submissive women, I've come across the idea quite a few times before, and this post reminds me what confuses me about the idea a feminist can't be a submissive.
You see, I don't write about characters, male or female, who do what they do because they want to go back to traditional gender roles.
The women who offer a man their submission during the course of one of my stories don't do so because they are women, they do so because they are submissive. Just as in my m/m stories - one character usually ends up playing the submissive to the other man's dominant. I like writing about kinky people - dominance and submission is usually involved.
Sometimes the submission is purely sexual. One person enjoys wear handcuffs - another person enjoys handcuffing their lover - a good time was had by all. Outside the bedroom (althought perhaps I should say outside their sex life because my characters have never liked to limit themselves to specific locations when the urge strikes them) outside that they are as equal as any two people could be.
At other times the submission becomes a lifestyle choice and last 24/7. But again, it's about sex and psychology, it's not about women should be one way or men should be another.
I write female characters who were constructed to do a great many different things. Some have careers outside the home, some don't - just the same as the male characters. Some like to completly give up control, some just like a side order of power play with their orgasms. It's all about what works for an individual characters, not what I think should or does work for all women. I don't find my female characters are not inclind towards certain things because they are female.
I don't think of myself as a feminist, but I do think of myself who thinks gender is largely irrelevant. I like to look at each person as an individual and consider them that way.
I seem to have strayed quite a way from Brynn's original topic, which was all about Alphas after all.
So, are the men in my books Alpha males?
Some are. Sometimes that's a good thing, and sometimes it's one of the problems the characters in the book have to solve.
Some aren't alphas, they are just the men who are a perfect match to their lover. Because being perfect for someone isn't always about the same thing. Some of the men are strong, capable providers. Other characters are better served by having the strength of mind not to care who earns more.
Most of the dominant men are protective and possessive of their lover - but there again so are many of the submissive men and women in my books.
I suppose for me it can all be explained by the labels I write at the top of a spreadsheet. I don't write male or female, I write dominant or submissive - their gender doesn't really mean a lot to me.
Maybe I'm weird.
Anyway, I'm thining myself around in circles, so I'll leave it there and go on to other news.
No, wait a second. I forgot the classic example. The door. Who should open it?
Well, for me, that's simple - whoever gets to the door first opens it for the other person. Gender aside - it's just good manners not to let the door slam in someone else's face :)
Today I had several things on my to do list:
Send Whispers edits back to my editor - Done.
Send You First back to my editor - Done.
Submit Imperial Topaz to my editor - Done.
Attend rather pointless meeting - Done.
All in all a very productive day :)
Although, that said, I haven't actually done any real writing yet - better go and do that now.
Sleep well everyone.