First off, I always have mixed feelings about "orientation only" groups. It has only been here in Austin that I have enjoyed them and, if only on the surface, found them not to be the gossipy back stabbing competitive whorefest that most are (or at least have a reputation of being). Prior to my recent experiences though, I must admit "group only" events always seemed exclusionary, fear-based, and more akin to Real World type sniping and drama rather than Scooby Gang cooperation.

I recognize that there is enjoyment in being "with your own." The collective sense of community is very strong and there is certainly nothing wrong with being amongst people who have a common language, culture, and at least the same ball field of experience. The fact of Ds-type dynamics is at a mixed group, submissives who are with their dominants necessarily need to be attentive to what their dominants say and need. It can be really hard to have a conversation with someone if they have to disappear every few minutes to get someone a glass of water or make a check-in phone call.

While this is completely understandable (and I am hardly blameless in engaging and encouraging this sort of dynamic in public), it remains frustrating nonetheless. Going to an event solo frees everyone from that expectation to a large extent and they can focus (although I've found there is still a lot of interruption through cell phones- doms, please chill out!).

Hence, while I admit my mixed feelings about "orientation only" groups, ultimately I see them as a potentially positive thing for people to engage in and find good social connectivity through.

But I admit that I remain confused about classes that are labeled as "dom only" or "sub only" when discussing a relationship dynamic, or kink philosophy. It feels as if we are encouraging certain things/activities for only certain orientations. Why would we feel the need to have a discussion group on flogging ONLY for dominants? What about flogging do we feel the inclusion of submissives would somehow hinder or be more challenging? When having a discussion about the importance of consent, why would only subs be allowed in that group?

As a switch, I can attend ALL of those events. I can go to events as a dominant, I can go to events as a submissive. Even "luckier," my partner is a switch! So we can still go to events together no matter what particular orientation either of us may be expressing on any given day. Does our presence ruin whatever flavor that particular group was aiming for when hoping for a "sub only" attendance?

Because I am most certainly a dominant, as most certainly I am a submissive. If you are allowing "doms only" then as a submissive, I should, in theory, not be allowed to attend.

I am not complaining of course, I get to go to all events, regardless of orientation exclusion, and I get to go to them with my partner. But I think I am also a living example of how separating things by orientation really does not make sense on most levels.

I am the same person no matter where I am, or who I am around. We all know that a dominant is no less dominant whether he is holding a whip or lounging on the couch. My being a submissive to my partner has nothing to do with crossing a threshold into "the sub only zone." Trust me, I have attended many a "sub only" gathering completely as the dominant to my partner. So far, I have had no complaints. I respect the energy of those around me, and do not actively express that orientation in any obvious or overt way.

But to me that simply highlights the uselessness of dividing groups by orientation. I am the same person, with the same experiences, no matter where I go. And yet another person with exactly the same experiences as I would be denied access because they do not identify as a 'sub?'

What is the reason for this? At times I feel as if people are saying switches are insignificant and thus even if they are the "wrong orientation" it's not an issue if they are included. Or as if our dominance/submission is not "real enough" so it makes no difference if we are there. That we essentially pick up and take off our dominance or submission easier than a leather corset, so any impact we would have is minimal at best. We are non-entities and thus do not matter in the overall scheme.

But I do not want to project. Just because a lot of people happen to think and feel that way about switches does not necessarily mean that is the reason why it is ok for us to go to "orientation only" groups. The most common reaction I have had in Austin is "I just don't get it." While this is immensely better than fear, condemnation, ridicule, or disparagement- it is not really the warm embrace that a hot single submissive usually receives.

I would like to think that people recognize that it is not our actions or our personalities which have anything to do with our orientations. I would like to think it is because "orientation only" groups do not actually want to exclude people, but rather foster a particular sense of camaraderie based on orientation.

I wish I could grasp better the need for division and separation on so many levels. Even at the sub only group, being hetero focused, meetings are generally 90% female. My partner is male and he usually attends with me. After a night of comments such as "Not including you "X", but don't you hate how men always…?" my partner, being the witty perpetual delicate balancer he always is, leans over to talk directly to the other male in the room and says "Not including all the women here, but don't you hate how women always….?" The room roared with laughter and respect, but there was a touch of discomfort being faced with the fact that we had willingly involved ourselves in a lot of "group bashing" while discounting the minority.

Of course we all deserve private spaces to celebrate and embrace who we are. There can be no denying the power of commonality and a sense of belonging. But I think it is exceedingly important whenever a decision is made to "exclude" to understand exactly why we are making that choice and make sure it comes from a place of security, fulfillment, and positivity. When you choose to not allow dominants in your group, but allow switches (who are dominants), what message might that send? What are your reasons for that separation between switches and dominants?