![A man’s back bears raised red marks that spell out the words, “I LOVE YOU.”
This photograph was submitted anonymously but arrived with a heartwarming note attached. So heartwarming, in fact, that despite my own current solitude I audibly responded to myself reading it:
I’ve had a rough few weeks. A series of setbacks in my career and social life have made me feel very isolated and alone. In a moment of weakness, I asked my Girlfriend to show me that I am needed, that I am worth something to someone.
This was her answer.
It couldn’t have been more perfect. Her willingness to mark me proves her ownership of me. Her authority and acceptance of me as her property makes me worthwhile.
I love you בעלה.
For the monolingual, בעלה is the Hebrew word for “Mistress,” which is relevant because it gives her two roles: Girlfriend, and בעלה. Far from unusual, many relationships between two people have more than two roles. The monolith of “husband” and “wife,” or “boyfriend” and “girlfriend” or even simply “partner,” is a dramatic oversimplification, one that too often obscures relationships like “supporter,” “sounding board,” “buddy,” or even “cheerleader,” all of which and more are crucial for relationships to thrive.
Further, this is not an unusual concept, or even one the mainstream rejects. Yet its application to the realm of relationship choice is bizarrely downright taboo. I’m reminded of a recent email chain letter I received the other day, which read, in part:
When I was little, I used to believe in the concept of one best friend, And then I started to become a woman. And then I found out that if you allow your heart to open up, God would show you the best in many friends.
[…]
It may all be wrapped up in one woman, But for many, it’s wrapped up in several. One from 7th grade, One from high school, Several from the college years, A couple from old jobs…
Lots of people are so ready to accept the need for many friends. Why are they so eager to demonize the need for many loves, as a new Canadian law set to criminalize multi-partnered relationships with jail time up to 5 years seems to do? Similarly, many people readily accept that different people’s ideas of worth are different, often citing “one man’s trash is another man’s treasure,” but then turn right around and decry BDSM’ers notions of what makes us feel worthy of love.
When it comes to self-worth, love is not different than friendship. Both must play by the same rules: yours.
-maymay
Update (Dec. 27, 2010): Apparently someone thinks this post is anti-Semitic because I got the translation wrong. They say the Hebrew word doesn’t mean “Mistress,” but rather “Husband.” What they may not have realized is that I looked the word up in the dictionary (as they’d have seen if they bothered to look at the link the word points to, so even if I’m wrong about its meaning, I’m not a primary source) and that I’m Jewish. Further, while I’m no longer fluent in it, Hebrew was my first language. It seems I’m not the only one who may be jumping to conclusions based on incomplete information.](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lcd8ln3k5W1qzs83zo1_r3_500.jpg)
A man’s back bears raised red marks that spell out the words, “I LOVE YOU.”
This photograph was submitted anonymously but arrived with a heartwarming note attached. So heartwarming, in fact, that despite my own current solitude I audibly responded to myself reading it:
I’ve had a rough few weeks. A series of setbacks in my career and social life have made me feel very isolated and alone. In a moment of weakness, I asked my Girlfriend to show me that I am needed, that I am worth something to someone.
This was her answer.
It couldn’t have been more perfect. Her willingness to mark me proves her ownership of me. Her authority and acceptance of me as her property makes me worthwhile.
I love you בעלה.
For the monolingual, בעלה is the Hebrew word for “Mistress,” which is relevant because it gives her two roles: Girlfriend, and בעלה. Far from unusual, many relationships between two people have more than two roles. The monolith of “husband” and “wife,” or “boyfriend” and “girlfriend” or even simply “partner,” is a dramatic oversimplification, one that too often obscures relationships like “supporter,” “sounding board,” “buddy,” or even “cheerleader,” all of which and more are crucial for relationships to thrive.
Further, this is not an unusual concept, or even one the mainstream rejects. Yet its application to the realm of relationship choice is bizarrely downright taboo. I’m reminded of a recent email chain letter I received the other day, which read, in part:
When I was little,
I used to believe in the concept of one best friend,
And then I started to become a woman.
And then I found out that if you allow your heart to open up,
God would show you the best in many friends.[…]
It may all be wrapped up in one woman, But for many, it’s wrapped up in several.
One from 7th grade,
One from high school,
Several from the college years,
A couple from old jobs…
Lots of people are so ready to accept the need for many friends. Why are they so eager to demonize the need for many loves, as a new Canadian law set to criminalize multi-partnered relationships with jail time up to 5 years seems to do? Similarly, many people readily accept that different people’s ideas of worth are different, often citing “one man’s trash is another man’s treasure,” but then turn right around and decry BDSM’ers notions of what makes us feel worthy of love.
When it comes to self-worth, love is not different than friendship. Both must play by the same rules: yours.
Update (Dec. 27, 2010): Apparently someone thinks this post is anti-Semitic because I got the translation wrong. They say the Hebrew word doesn’t mean “Mistress,” but rather “Husband.” What they may not have realized is that I looked the word up in the dictionary (as they’d have seen if they bothered to look at the link the word points to, so even if I’m wrong about its meaning, I’m not a primary source) and that I’m Jewish. Further, while I’m no longer fluent in it, Hebrew was my first language. It seems I’m not the only one who may be jumping to conclusions based on incomplete information.
One man licks the stomach of another whose hands remain at his sides, near the back of unbuttoned jeans slipping down his hips.
The anonymous contributor who suggested this photograph offered a delightfully unexpected interpretation:
Despite the men not being my ‘type’, I find myself coming back to this photo again and again. I think it’s because the man whose face you can see seems like the top to me—there’s a stillness to the other man, with his hands on the backs of his thighs, like he was told not to move or touch and had to hold onto himself to make sure he didn’t do either. The look on the other man’s face is also beautiful to me; he might be looking up (usually a submissive position in most porn) but he seems fierce and watchful.
It’s interesting to note that “watchful” can accurately describe both so-called submissive and dominant behavior. Can “fierce”? I think so; the man on the right has what appears to be a scar on his side, and if that man is the submissive partner, then of the two, his body is showing more grit.
Reversing assumptions is a precious skill; compassion and empathy are circumscribed without it. Although I first assumed submissiveness in the man whose face we can see because of the way he is licking the other model, once I understood the alternative possibility, I noticed that the man doing the licking is the active partner here. And, as our anonymous contributor correctly states, since the man doing the licking is in the stereotypically submissive position, if he is the submissive partner, then it’s his activeness itself that queers this image.
So much for a simple narrative.
In the glow of sunlight, a shirtless man on his back locks eyes with his clothed partner looking down at him.
Dylan sent in this photograph with the following note:
This is a photo of myself and my partner Cedar. A friend shot a series of photos for us on a winter morning in Cedar’s bedroom. I love the look on his face as he looks up at me: honest, willing, open, attentive and very turned on.
I am a genderqueer boy (ftm), and Cedar is cisgender. The degree to which C.’s being came through in the photos is remarkable to me—his expressiveness was encouraged, not restricted, by the presence of the camera.
While I presume a power dynamic was palpable for Dylan or Cedar in the moment, it’s extremely subtle for me as a viewer. Nevertheless, it’s there, in Cedar’s splayed arms, in his nakedness contrasted with Dylan’s being clothed, in their eyes and, especially, in their mouths. Even from this angle, Dylan’s lips seem sharp and piercing while Cedar’s seem flush and parting. (Also, wow, he has pretty lips.)
So the camera, as useful and remarkable a tool as it is, has its limits, because the photograph alone is extremely soft spoken about Cedar’s submissive stance here. That’s where Dylan’s note comes in: realizing Dylan is genderqueer adds a whole new layer of implication on an already somewhat ambiguously gendered photograph. Now we also see Dylan’s travel, begun where the hegemony says sexual power cannot exist—the female and the feminine—and ending in a place of sexual domination, which the hegemony says only men can obtain. Cedar’s submission, in that light, is all the more transgressive—and all the more accepting.
Thanks for sharing this with us.
![Kneeling naked on the floor, a muscular man whose wrists and ankles are shackled bows his head.
This old photograph was suggested by Olga. One of the first things that I noticed were the man’s shackles and the fact that they were broken. What would perhaps imply resistance in a different context seems to accentuate acceptance and submission in this one.
Olga’s observations focused on the model himself, and are incredibly detailed:
There are two things that enchant me most in this photo. First, the lines of the figure: the perfectly round curve from neck to waist, another perfectly round curve of buttocks, smooth thighs, and then all the rest of the muscles. There’s a lot of attention paid to the female body in our culture, but I find the male body as enticing in all its living, breathing harmony, and this picture is a brilliant example.
Second, the pose. Of course, this kneeling pose with the curved back holds my eye: this is what I like to see as a dominant woman. This strong, big man, in a submissive pose, is a beautiful sight[…]. But the most enticing detail of this pose is the way his hands are turned palms up. He doesn’t lean on them, and it adds a lot of tension in the pose he holds. He offers them open and defenseless. I can’t help but think about what can be done with his hands, how they can be put to use in service, or how they can be tortured. His hands are his gift of service, as is his entire body and his entire self.
Curating imagery like this has taught me a lot, mostly because many of the images people suggest offer fascinating insights into their relationship with power, and especially how it interrelates with their understanding of gender. Here, Olga’s description clearly shows that other people’s dogmatic interpretations of what is or is not submissive, what is or is not dominant, and especially what is or is not manly, have no power over one’s own sexual desires unless one lets them. And frankly, yes, as a submissive man, I no longer see any reason to let anyone else dictate my sexuality to me.
-maymay](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l9k736UjW81qzs83zo1_r2_500.jpg)
Kneeling naked on the floor, a muscular man whose wrists and ankles are shackled bows his head.
This old photograph was suggested by Olga. One of the first things that I noticed were the man’s shackles and the fact that they were broken. What would perhaps imply resistance in a different context seems to accentuate acceptance and submission in this one.
Olga’s observations focused on the model himself, and are incredibly detailed:
There are two things that enchant me most in this photo. First, the lines of the figure: the perfectly round curve from neck to waist, another perfectly round curve of buttocks, smooth thighs, and then all the rest of the muscles. There’s a lot of attention paid to the female body in our culture, but I find the male body as enticing in all its living, breathing harmony, and this picture is a brilliant example.
Second, the pose. Of course, this kneeling pose with the curved back holds my eye: this is what I like to see as a dominant woman. This strong, big man, in a submissive pose, is a beautiful sight[…]. But the most enticing detail of this pose is the way his hands are turned palms up. He doesn’t lean on them, and it adds a lot of tension in the pose he holds. He offers them open and defenseless. I can’t help but think about what can be done with his hands, how they can be put to use in service, or how they can be tortured. His hands are his gift of service, as is his entire body and his entire self.
Curating imagery like this has taught me a lot, mostly because many of the images people suggest offer fascinating insights into their relationship with power, and especially how it interrelates with their understanding of gender. Here, Olga’s description clearly shows that other people’s dogmatic interpretations of what is or is not submissive, what is or is not dominant, and especially what is or is not manly, have no power over one’s own sexual desires unless one lets them. And frankly, yes, as a submissive man, I no longer see any reason to let anyone else dictate my sexuality to me.
A naked man stands before a clothed woman, holding her sides gently as she squeezes his ass with her hands and presses herself against him.
This photograph was suggested by Ranai, whose description I can only describe as incredibly sexy:
I admire the self-control it takes to be a submissive lover. To be alert for instructions, to listen to what the other wants in the throes of passion, and transform it into action. To keep going, and going, or change pace at a moment’s notice. To open up and offer one’s body to something painful or uncomfortable, when there’s a conflicting instinct to curl up and protect oneself. To be gentle even while the other is being rough, and to give it hard and fast when hard and fast is called for.
The picture tells a story of deliberately chosen inequality in action. She already digs her nails into his backside with abandon, enjoying it when she feels him flinch. He still touches her only lightly, as he has not yet been told to do more.
I love seeing the beautiful hair on this man’s legs and arms. I hope he has a hairy chest too. Hair, for me, is a joy to see and touch: it’s one aspect of my own physical preferences.
Ranai makes me wish I was better at emotive writing, however my skill lies in analytics and as such I often feel ill-equipped to discuss the emotionality of such pictures. Thankfully, Ranai perfectly describes not only the challenge but also the essential drive of submissive sexuality, for me: to open up when there’s a conflicting instinct to curl, to be gentle when confronted with force, and to treat others not as I would be treated but as they would have me treat them.
But to limit such things to sex play seems ludicrously wasteful, and one need not look hard to see applications of this in all sorts of places. This is unsurprising, as sexuality is ultimately a language, full of idioms and expressions, along with awkward moments of miscommunication when we’re still learning.
Anyway, Ranai also offered this really encouraging note:
P.S. Hi maymay, I’m seeing more and more Male Submission Art pictures used by people as journal icons and discussion forum avatars. This is a pleasant change in the making. Yay!
Yes, very much yay! I’ve been noticing this, too. I actually think this is incredibly important, because it begins to inch towards more equitable representation of men and women in the media, both social media and, hopefully one day, mainstream media.
Attribution update: I received a very nice note from the photographer of this image, Michael Berkowitz:
I’m happy to see people finding my work of interest and I appreciate the exposure…. Also, it’s good to see your site and what images you have in your archive, what your audience wants to see. I can try to include more of that type of image when I’m shooting. Also, to those who like my style and are in the NYC area, I am available for commissions. Thanks.
Michael can also be found as mjbw39 on DeviantArt.com.
Sometimes in my excitement and eagerness to take all of your body, offered so deliciously and temptingly, I pinch and squeeze, aroughness born of hunger.
Never for a second allow this to fool you into thinking you have similar license. UnlessI tell you I want it rough you better handle me like hand-woven silk, else you will regret it. Touch me gently or I’ll not let you touch me at all.
![Bound with rope at the wrists and ankles, a naked man lays limp in the arms of a larger woman who holds him by his waist and collar high above her head.
Here’s a captivating image, suggested by Pimmie, who wrote:
I have a picture for you by the Dutch photographer Erwin Olaf called Powerlifting.
I love the little details in this artwork, like the placing of the woman’s hands. She holds the man’s weight up on two very vulnerable spots on his body. Her dominance speaks from the look on her face alone. And I love her body shape in this context; a powerful stance on delicate shoes. [I love t]he surrender in the man’s pose.
The overall impression of this picture, for me, is of a woman showing her prey or catch.
“Surrender” is so often linked with failure or loss, things that are in turn associated with negative connotations of “submission.” But surrender is also, and simply, the cessation of resistance. It can be an act of acceptance or an embrace; not a failure to assert, but an action motivated by the desire to explore or, sometimes, to relax.
Compositionally, I’m conflicted about posting this image here because the subject is ambiguous; is the photo more about her, or him? Ultimately, of course, they both contribute to it. Interestingly, according to Wikipedia, one of [Erwin Olaf’s] early photographs was once expelled from a show on the basis of not containing nudity. Clearly, any criteria may always cut both ways.
-maymay](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l7znirxOvS1qzs83zo1_500.jpg)
Bound with rope at the wrists and ankles, a naked man lays limp in the arms of a larger woman who holds him by his waist and collar high above her head.
Here’s a captivating image, suggested by Pimmie, who wrote:
I have a picture for you by the Dutch photographer Erwin Olaf called Powerlifting.
I love the little details in this artwork, like the placing of the woman’s hands. She holds the man’s weight up on two very vulnerable spots on his body. Her dominance speaks from the look on her face alone. And I love her body shape in this context; a powerful stance on delicate shoes. [I love t]he surrender in the man’s pose.
The overall impression of this picture, for me, is of a woman showing her prey or catch.
“Surrender” is so often linked with failure or loss, things that are in turn associated with negative connotations of “submission.” But surrender is also, and simply, the cessation of resistance. It can be an act of acceptance or an embrace; not a failure to assert, but an action motivated by the desire to explore or, sometimes, to relax.
Compositionally, I’m conflicted about posting this image here because the subject is ambiguous; is the photo more about her, or him? Ultimately, of course, they both contribute to it. Interestingly, according to Wikipedia, one of [Erwin Olaf’s] early photographs was once expelled from a show on the basis of not containing nudity.
Clearly, any criteria may always cut both ways.
A naked man tied in full-body natural-colored hemp rope bondage lays among an assortment of earth-toned and red pillows.
I’m mildly colorblind and so images that use color as a primary means of expression are often difficult for me to understand or wholly appreciate. However, I enjoy this photograph because this man’s beard is colored similarly to my own, and while he seems to be shaven near his genitals I imagine the redness of his beard still reflects his natural coloring. My bright red pubic hair is the lightest hair on my body. Maybe that’s meaningful.
It’s so, so hard for me to look at pictures like this these days. They make me crave what I see and, like magic, they seem somehow possible for others and just out of my reach. That hurts so much. I wish I were a poet so I wouldn’t have to use so many words to describe how I feel.
Maybe I’ll just use less words and more trust from now on. All I’ve got left is hope.
(via artistryofmale.blogspot.com)
A large man smiles in obvious delight, enjoying the sensation of two clothespins on his nipples.
Peter suggested this awesome photograph, and wrote:
On the rare occasions that a submissive male is portrayed, he is usually depicted as skinny, young, effeminate and shy. I love this picture because it does not fit in any of those clichés.
I would add only one more cliché, perhaps the most important of all: that submission is portrayed as something undesired and undesireable. That cliché is the most insulting, dangerous, and untrue of all.
Submission is freedom, and can be healing if you let it be. It’s okay to want permission to be what, who, and how you are, connected with another or with yourself by a resonance of your own making. Like a tuning fork, loud and insistent but audible only once grounded with a force that you embrace.
It’s okay to want such permission, even if you don’t need it. Because, actually, you don’t need permission from anyone but yourself.
A British Prime Minister kneels to kiss the hand of the Queen of England.
When I first looked at this picture that Faelyn suggested, I didn’t really know what to make of it. I mean, from my irreverent perspective, the stuffy British government isn’t exactly good wank material. But context is important, and the note Faelyn sent along with the image is gripping:
On the surface, the femdom het aspect of things is pretty obvious. It goes deeper than mere appearances, though.
Arguably the most important relationship arc in The Queen is between the fictionalized characters of Tony Blair and Elizabeth II. The story begins with his election as a young and charming Prime Minister in the mid-90s. She’s unimpressed with his newer, touchy-feely approach to governance. He’s thrown off by the formalities of his position: he thinks of himself as an elected politician, and has to adjust to the idea that officially/symbolically he serves her.
There’s a magnificent scene early on where he learns to kneel to her and, rather than declaring himself PM or asking for it, wait for her to grant him the right to run what is officially her government. It’s uncomfortable and they both leave as soon as possible. As the story progresses, however, he comes to really want to serve her, and she learns to accept his service. The second kneeling scene is a thing of beauty—she’s upset, he’s conciliatory—and afterward they stay together to talk, having created a bond.
I spend a lot of time looking for crypto-femdom het relationships in media and this is by far one of my favorites (with Daniel Craig as Bond/Judy Dench as M coming in a close second…).
Narratives like this are everywhere, not because they are inherently part of the act, but because you—the viewer—imbue the act with your narrative. Wherever you go, you’ll see mirrors of your most authentic feelings. The tragedy is that you are so often told not to embrace them.
Faelyn also sent a kind note, for which I am very grateful:
Thank you so much for your web presence! This site and your blog have been an enormous help to me as I’ve been figuring out the nature of my own desires and trying to handle them ethically/sensibly.
Thanks, Faelyn. That really does mean a lot.