The following is an essay with regards to the "natural order" and my beliefs with regards to it.

This is a topic that has inspired a great deal of thought in me throughout the years I have been owned by my Master. I have found that my views have changed since first embarking on my journey and I am grateful that they have.

Having spent the past 4 and a half years interacting with a great many who believe in the natural order (Goreans) and those who are proponents of the male dom/fem sub lifestyles, I have learned a lot about what they define as the natural order. While spending an equal amount of time interacting with those from the BDSM lifestyles, I have learned a great deal about diversity and the nature of the individual.

In my own life, I am more comfortable in deference to men. I, as the woman that I am, do not feel comfortable when being served by a man - not because I think it is wrong, but rather because I feel that I (the individual) belong at his feet, not vice versa. It is what is natural to me. :)

The Natural Order as presented by both Goreans and those who are like-minded to that type of philosophy states that men are the naturally dominant gender and that women, in their most natural state, would be submissive to men. I have found that many people who endorse the natural order take it a few steps further, also, with the belief that a woman's place is in the home, etc. and that the Equal Rights Amendment was a bad thing, and that submissive males and dominant females are just confused people who have "strayed from the path" so to speak. I have even heard it to go so far as to say that a woman cannot have honor, nor should she ever voice her opinion unless it is in the eyes of men, worded respectfully.

I have never been a very strong advocate of the "my way or the highway" mindset and as such believe that while being submissive to males is natural for me, it may not be natural or right for everyone else.

To me, physical strength does not equate dominance. Any person with brute strength can force a weaker person to their knees. This is not an example of a person being dominant in the right sense of the word; it is a person being domineering. To me, dominance is a quality that is intangible. It is something that is exhibited in other areas, i.e. emotional, mental and spiritual. I recall dating a man who was much shorter and smaller than me and to be honest, I could have probably kicked his ass and forced him to his knees if I had wanted to. It wasn't his physical strength that caused me to want to be at his feet but rather the qualities of his personality and his presence that did so and throughout the entire relationship, I remained "at his feet" in the figurative sense without even knowing what D/s was.

Along those same lines, I know many dominant women who are simply that - dominant. For them to be submissive would go against their own personal nature. They are happy and they thrive in their dominance. I also know men who are amazing slaves. They serve their owners, be it master or mistress,  with boundless passion and drive yet they are not weak. They are no more or less masculine than the dominant males that I know and to be dominant to their partner would feel unnatural to them as well. While being a domme is not my nature or what I would feel comfortable participating in I can recognize that it can be natural for other individuals.

Then there is my sister and her partner. My sister is a submissive woman to her lesbian partner who is a dominant woman. Trust me, her partner doesn't have that inclination to submit. They are very happy and fulfilled in their lives, doing what is the most natural for them. Who am I to say that they are wrong? They're just two people that love each other - one is dominant, one is submissive.

As mentioned above, there are proponents of the natural order that take it a step further. I have known women who were "disgusted" that other women formed their own football league to play the game amongst other women because "it is a man's sport" and "how dare they?" I felt, on the contrary, that it was perfectly acceptable. They liked football and they formed a pro league to play the sport. Now, if they had demanded to join the NFL and were not of equal playing caliber as the men on the team, then I would have found it wrong. I do not believe that exceptions should be made for females or males so that they may participate in something they are not individually suited for but I do believe that if they have the requirements and can perform equally as well as each other, then a woman should not be restricted from performing in predominantly male areas that they are fully capable of doing and excelling in and vice versa.

I have known both men and women who believe that it would be better to go back to the way things were before women had equal rights. I have often invited them to read of the atrocities committed against women before they were considered to be equal to men in the eyes of the law. I remind them of the film, "The Color Purple" where Whoopi Goldberg's character was given no choice and was handed over to another man like chattel to be married to him with little or no thought to the life she would be subjected to. That life was full of severe beatings and abuse and yet she could do nothing to change it. It was, in many areas, perfectly acceptable for women to be beaten to near death back then and if they complained to the law or to society in general, they would more often than not, be told that it was their own fault. If they retaliated in kind, they were criminals. Women in the workplace who excelled at their chosen profession would receive often as little as half the pay as a man, even if their abilities were proven to be above their male co-workers and often they were subject to unwanted attentions of men and if they wanted to "keep their job" then they had to put up with it. Keep in mind, I am not offering that this was the norm, but it was allowed to happen. In speaking with older relatives and friends long since gone, I learned through their first-hand retelling of their own tales both extremes of a woman's life back then. Both the unjustly horrific and the beautiful.

To me, if the world were to be forced to live under this "Natural Order" or to revert to more primitive times, then my right to choose to whom I submitted might very well no longer be in place. If I were required to submit to the will of all men, then where would my choices go? All men in the world are not strong of mind and spirit. They are not all worthy of my submission simply because they are men. Had I been forced to submit to all of the prior men in my life I would probably be dead or in prison by now.

It is a joy, to me, that I was afforded the right to have chosen the man to whom I have given myself and in turn, he now chooses those others to whom I will submit. A philosophy does not determine that, nor does a law or a society. By surrendering to him the ultimate choice was mine.

I am a strong, intelligent, and proud woman who has the right to choose to whom I give that submission or surrender. Because I have that option, I believe that all people of all genders and sexual orientations should have that choice also - the choice to be true to their own nature and to do it freely, without the restrictions of society and others in the lifestyle who demand acceptance for their own choices, yet will not offer the same in kind to others who choose differently. To me it isn't about being politically correct but about doing the right thing, period. My own conscience, personal ethics and nature could not allow me to be any other way.

I think that in the broad scheme of things, when it comes to our earliest primal nature and physical aspects that the male is generally the physically and sexually dominant species, however, I do not believe that there is "one true way" or "one true nature" for *all* people; especially in today's evolved society. The joy of the human race, to me, is the diversity and individuality found within it. I have often said that the traits of the masculine and feminine (note, I use masculine and feminine rather than male and female) are like the teeth in a zipper. In general, their weaknesses and strengths seem to fit opposite each other so that when put together; they become a cohesive, singular unit. Each one offering the abundance of strength in one area where the other has a deficit of the same trait. The teeth in the zipper are not the same for all who are a part of that cohesive, balanced type of relationship. Strengths and weaknesses vary from person to person. To me, neither male nor female is above the other, better or worse than the other or superior or inferior but rather very different. Apples and oranges in a big bowl of fruit *grin*. (and then again, there are different types of apples and oranges too! *grin*)

So while the philosophy of the natural order is natural for me and to many people with whom I associate with, I can and do recognize that
it is not natural for everyone and I dig those people too.