I am interested to hear of Ms Scarlet’s coining the word Uxo; good to have a short word describing so much.
The term uxo was also something that made me stop and think when reading Ms Scarlett's blog. I am not sure if I have fully grasped the meaning but as far as I have come to understand it is a term that has been coined to describe a male who is REALLY SUBMISSIVE in the true sense of being submissive, instead of being submissive in the way males have understood it when talking about submissive to women.
Males have understood being submissive to women as a kind of play that is being played by the rules the male "submissive" has made, with stopwords and the chance of always saying no. That is the famous topping from the bottom that has put off women for so long. So when hearing or reading the term submissive women think always of this male fantasy game and loose all interest.
In contrast an uxo is a male who is really submissive, which means he has no rights, he has nothing to say, the boundaries are set by the dominant female and by no one else and he has to show total obedience, whether he likes it or not.
An uxo is in effect a slave. So why not call him a slave? There are, as far as I have understood, two differences. The first is that the uxo has made a voluntary decision to become a slave. He is not hunted down and forced at gunpoint into slavery but he is asked "Do you want domination my way or no domination at all?" and when he said "your way" he became an uxo. The second difference is that an uxo can leave if the wants, in contrast to a real slave.
Home
Search
Contact
Login
Register