(no subject)
Dec. 9th, 2018 01:59 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
the_ragnarokthis concept has been conceived by takiki16 and ![[tumblr.com profile]](https://www.tumblr.com/favicon.ico)
bemusedlybespectacled, then i squeed about it a bunch with findundergrounddragoutofwater and, well.
so basically the idea is that in the D/s au there's this division - in the original concept it was only a thing for super rich americans, butfindundergrounddragoutofwater and i expanded it to be a general society thing - where subs are divided to upstairs and downstairs subs.
upstairs subs are pretty. they are decorative and highly mannered and presentable. they are status symbols.
downstairs subs take the heavy punishment and do the heavy labor. they are the ones who get shared with other doms/households. they can serve as whipping boys/girls for upstairs subs.
if going for the wider-society thing, one can postulate subs who are sort of "in between", ones that became more common with the rise of the middle class - stairwell subs, who do white collar jobs.
to get fandom-specific, the original idea contained some nice Leverage headcanons, centralizing on downstairs sub Eliot who has strongly internalized the upstairs/downstairs division - of course he's the one who'll take the punishment, would it be better to let some pretty, delicate upstairs sub take it instead of him? and please let us consider: some upstairs sub catching Eliot's eye before he's about to be punished, the upstairs sub looking concerned if not horrified, and Eliot smiling to set them at ease.
other leverage character headcanons include Hardison who believes all subs should be upstairs subs; Parker who often goes undercover as an upstairs sub, but has a lot of experiences with doms treating her like a downstairs sub; and nonsexual mommy dom Sophie. and stairwell sub Nate.
for POI, there is a plethora of possible readings: John of course sees himself as a downstairs sub in a way very similar to Eliot. Harold can be a dom, or a stairwell sub, or made to be an upstairs sub and going slowly insane with boredom. (He can organize parties and pick nice outfits with the best of them!)
another thought we had was - upstairs subs are not supposed to have sex with anyone but their dom, they don't get shared, but they might have nonsexual romance with other upstairs subs and have that treated as cute and nonthreatening. So upstairs sub harold having courtly love with Grace, the upstairs sub from next door - consider john going on hands and knees so Harold can climb over him and kiss Grace through a window.
takiki16 and so basically the idea is that in the D/s au there's this division - in the original concept it was only a thing for super rich americans, but
upstairs subs are pretty. they are decorative and highly mannered and presentable. they are status symbols.
downstairs subs take the heavy punishment and do the heavy labor. they are the ones who get shared with other doms/households. they can serve as whipping boys/girls for upstairs subs.
if going for the wider-society thing, one can postulate subs who are sort of "in between", ones that became more common with the rise of the middle class - stairwell subs, who do white collar jobs.
to get fandom-specific, the original idea contained some nice Leverage headcanons, centralizing on downstairs sub Eliot who has strongly internalized the upstairs/downstairs division - of course he's the one who'll take the punishment, would it be better to let some pretty, delicate upstairs sub take it instead of him? and please let us consider: some upstairs sub catching Eliot's eye before he's about to be punished, the upstairs sub looking concerned if not horrified, and Eliot smiling to set them at ease.
other leverage character headcanons include Hardison who believes all subs should be upstairs subs; Parker who often goes undercover as an upstairs sub, but has a lot of experiences with doms treating her like a downstairs sub; and nonsexual mommy dom Sophie. and stairwell sub Nate.
for POI, there is a plethora of possible readings: John of course sees himself as a downstairs sub in a way very similar to Eliot. Harold can be a dom, or a stairwell sub, or made to be an upstairs sub and going slowly insane with boredom. (He can organize parties and pick nice outfits with the best of them!)
another thought we had was - upstairs subs are not supposed to have sex with anyone but their dom, they don't get shared, but they might have nonsexual romance with other upstairs subs and have that treated as cute and nonthreatening. So upstairs sub harold having courtly love with Grace, the upstairs sub from next door - consider john going on hands and knees so Harold can climb over him and kiss Grace through a window.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-09 12:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-09 12:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-09 12:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 06:18 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-09 06:42 pm (UTC)I think
If you conceive of this system as being a universal sub-class system that subs could use to express identity, rather than a way for a few rich abusive doms to divide a private harem, I was thinking that it is less about subs being *trained* into a category, and more about categories that sub eventually end up in as a result of their own kink and play preferences?
(although please subject this to as many darker interpretations as you want, where the dom controls more in categorization because i am a dumpster fire of angst)
Like...as subs begin the growing up process in this BDSM AU, and start actually coming of age in terms of puberty and sex and learning about play, they will eventually end up in one category or another by their preferences. Subs who become upstairs subs tend to prefer play that puts them at the center of positive romantic control and attention. They want to sleep IN the bed, rather than at the foot or on the floor. They generally do not prefer long periods of denial, or intense pain/impact play. If painplay or more intense kink is involved, their dom is right there with them at every step, whispering sweet nothings and telling them how cute and pretty and lovely they are. Think sugar baby rather than footstool, lapdog vs. guard dog.
Downstairs subs tend to correlate more with play that proves how much they can take for their dom, if that makes sense? Downstairs subs more commonly have humiliation or objectification kinks. They're the ones sleeping on the floor or at the foot of the bed, the one kneeling beside the chair in a dungeon rather than sitting in their dom's lap. Doms can be affectionate with their downstairs sub, but its less constant sweet fluff and more a firm hand at the end of a scene and a significant "good job, you did so well for me, let's go clean up." A lot more service subbing in the actual service (manual labor) sense, more likelihood of service topping or bottoming for an upstairs sub at a dom's orders.
Depending on region and culture and other things, subs are generally expected to have "chosen" or gravitated to upstairs/downstairs by a certain age, and reflect that in their body language so other subs and doms know how to be polite with them. Subs who do not choose are generally stigmatized as spinsters who cannot get doms to play with them for a variety of reasons
no subject
Date: 2018-12-09 06:57 pm (UTC)also consider: subs who can't neatly be categorized. hard masochists who hate humiliation! disabled hard masochists who can't do the physical service expected of downstairs subs! a sadist sub who aims to be upstairs in hopes she'll be allowed to hurt the downstairs subs?
also i am forever stuck on a downstairs sub whose main kink is self-sacrifice in favor of upstairs subs. yes i will harp on this forever.
also also also i am Here for spinster subs.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-09 07:16 pm (UTC)I think in this universe there are plenty of subs who don't want to conform to the binaries or systems available for them? (which brings us back to the population demographics of more subs than doms). Depending on what (if any) role gender and class stereotypes play, I can see very status-concerned parents pushing their sub child to be an upstairs sub, to see certain kinks and certain styles of dom as positive and others as negative. (Would kinkshaming exist in this universe, where EVERYTHING is kinky?). And then the child dutifully goes along, and ends up as a pampered upstairs sub on the arm of some millionaire, stifled and unfulfilled and maybe wanting the catharsis of effort and service in a different way.
Or, alternatively, a downstairs sub who's been beaten and pushed around because they look big and strong and can take it, but they secretly want to be done up in silk and lace and treated like a princess.
And maybe it wouldn't be unheard of in this universe for a sub to switch floors, although it's not common? Something more permanent than an upstairs sub getting "sent downstairs" for downstairs subs to play with as a punishment. I'm imagining more progressive-ish romcoms about upstairs subs who take a stroll on the "wild side," and decide to be downstairs subs, or downstairs subs who Just Want A Little More From Life, and hallmark channel their way into being upstairs subs for a rich and handsom dom. But in reality, when your sub Aunt Karen decides to have a midlife crisis and change floors, it's a little jarring and maybe embarrassing (depending on your neighborhood) for the family.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-09 07:24 pm (UTC)also mb there's social pressure, if you're an old enough sub and you haven't found a dom, to switch floors in hopes of better luck?
i wonder about stereotypes. like how ageism impacts stereotypes - if you're older, does that mean you're likelier to be seen as upstairs bc you're more frail and can't handle downstairs? or as downstairs, bc you're perceived as less presentable? maybe older subs are all pushed into the stairwell. or the attic.
ooh, another concept that
no subject
Date: 2018-12-09 07:49 pm (UTC)Re: ageism: in a society where the central integer is power exchange, I can see ageism maybe mattering a little bit less in terms of classification? Like...older subs are generally expected to kneel less, do less intense play across the board cuz physical things. But an old sub who has been downstairs all their life will still be a downstairs sub in terms of the etiquette people use with them, and in terms of their relationship with their dom. But maybe instead of kneeling on the floor in a club, their dom would pull up a chair so they can sit quietly, head down behind their dom.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 08:44 am (UTC)Also with respect to aging now having images of elderly upstairs subs, all still perfect fashion and poise like you see in some irl photos etc...
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 06:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 08:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 08:49 am (UTC)People getting rude comments like 'what do you even do in bed??' or 'when are you going to get a real relationship', or implications that your partner must be suppressing their needs and you're wronging them.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-09 07:01 pm (UTC)If a dom has both an upstairs sub and a downstairs sub with them, frex, it would be socially acceptable for another dom to come up and speak a little bit with the upstairs sub a bit, remark on how cute and pretty they are (always subject to their dom's rules, of course). It would NOT be okay for the other dom to try and touch the upstairs sub (other than little things like chucking them under the chin or kissing their hand), or to play with them or discipline them. Upstairs subs are traditionally Not For Sharing.
Downstairs subs, on the other hand, are traditionally For Sharing, if sharing is happening. Dom A, approaching Dom B who has an upstairs and a downstairs sub with them, would consider it good etiquette not to notice the downstairs sub at all unless its in terms of "bring me another glass," or Dom B saying "you can use their mouth if you want." And then there is my BULLETPROOF kink, which is that downstairs subs are whipping boys for upstairs ones. So if there is any kind of honor code protocol where mistakes are made, and now for some reason I, another dom, get to punish one of your subs, the downstairs one is the one everyone expects to get belted.
(I'm envisioning a lot of historical romances where the villainous dom kidnaps the upstairs sub, and the social taboo being broken is part of the villainy. Also imagining a lot of sub/sub romance stories between upstairs and downstairs, where the whipping boy aspect being over-used by the dom creates a lot of the nobility and the dramatic angst)
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 08:42 am (UTC)Talking through the worldbuilding and all I had def been thinking of this as a social place thing rather than an identity/preference thing (which doesn't mean the second thing is any less of a valid thing to go into etc!). But now thinking about like - that verse in modern times and some subs in some areas totally starting to somewhat *engage with it* as an identity/preference thing.
And then like - people who don't fit into the binary, like other people were saying, and also in more societal ways - hard masochists who want to be secretaries, someone who wants to do manual labor but then come home and be pampered... And some places being more accepting and some being all 'no you can't be that way', and the defaults still affecting people even in more accepting places.
And then other people being like 'how dare you use these oppressive categories as 'fun' identities' or 'you're wasting time arguing about that when instead we should be focused on domism and how doms are still keeping us out of all these *other* jobs and things'.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 08:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 08:54 am (UTC)I swear i should have checked cross-usernames and realized that before
iF YOU ARE SEEING ANYTHING SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN, I have cribbed an embarrassing amount of your worldbuilding in my own D/S fantasies for other fandoms, and i am glad you are here, for any iteration whatsoever of D/S systems
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 09:04 am (UTC)Yeah, it's me. And I don't think I wrote the usename thing anywhere (and no worries even if I had!)
Aw, eee! Omg! Thank you! Thank you for saying! (And, um, would totally be interested in checking these things out, if you have them around!)
Eee :D
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 10:54 pm (UTC)But figuring out both of them is super fun, and I like your idea that there is a more modern movement to take the social-place staircase system and view it as an identity-choice system.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 12:28 am (UTC)Cuz I’m wondering...two upstairs subs starting a romance would be fine in this verse, presumably. But the only relationships that receive formal legal or cultural/social validation are dom-sub ones? And a dom might be okay with another upstairs sub visiting theirs, but then again they might not. And they DEFINITELY wouldn’t be okay with a downstairs sub coming around at night trying to paw at their pet through the window.
SO...in the window kissing scenario...would either Grace, Harold, or John face consequences for this? Because Harold and Grace might not get punished, but John definitely will if they get caught...
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 02:52 am (UTC)I'm intrigued by the idea of it being a society-wide thing, though my thought is that you'd still need more than one sub for there to be a clear upstairs-downstairs division – what is upstairs if there is no downstairs to contrast? – which would necessitate being able to "afford" multiple subs. So even having the division at all is a status symbol, in that poorer doms are only in a relationship with one person and can't imagine having multiple ones, let alone ones that aren't supposed to work and just sit around looking pretty (a roommate or romantic partner who does nothing around the house? IN THIS ECONOMY?). Most relationships are probably not as cleanly striated, and involve elements of both (ex: a middle-class dom/sub couple doing some heavy painplay together but then go about their white collar jobs elsewhere).
Thus I can see it being more dom-driven than sub-driven, at least in theory, since the dom has to both choose to have multiple subs and also choose particular people to fit those roles. In reality it is probably more complex, with certain subs deliberately seeking out certain partners or acting a certain way in order to be "assigned" upstairs/downstairs. I can see some in-universe romcoms where the comedic element is that the dom thinks that he's organized the household according to his wishes, when secretly his two subs have decided for themselves who will be upstairs and downstairs and are letting him think that it's his own idea.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 03:32 am (UTC)I think that, like BB and theragnarokd mentioned, for upstairs/downstairs to be sustainable in society at all you'd need at least a 2/1 sub/dom ratio in the general population, or alternatively have a class structure where having the staircase system at all is a status symbol
(especially if upstairs/downstairs isn't just a submissive thing, but also a predictor of what kind of job you have and what kind of income you have. I don't know if upstairs subs are all sugar babies lounging around at home - they might have white collar or traditionally non-manual jobs that put a lot of emphasis on appearance/deportment).
If we're assuming that subs outnumber doms, then I'm picturing a society where non-sexual dominance is much more of a thing. It's BDSM AU, so the basic assumption is that everyone wants to be in a 24/7 d/s relationship, and subs might just band together around doms to create households out of desire and necessity? And upstairs/downstairs evolved over history out of a combination of common collections of inherent kink preferences, unfortunate stereotypes, sub/sub romance trends, and humans in power finding it beneficial to create more power striations among the humans beneath them.
But then there's the version where this system is universally known and expected, but there/s more of a 1/1 sub/dom ratio and only the rich can afford to actually USE upstairs/downstairs as applied to multiple subs. The line between...say middle class and upper middle class (???) might be a household with two subs.
of course, all this depends on upstairs/downstairs being boxes assigned to people, rather than an inherent quality of the "kind" of submissive you are.
And dammit, now I'm thinking about the US tax final I should be studying for, bc TAX CONSEQUENCES FOR MARRIED COUPLES FILING JOINTLY
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 03:46 am (UTC)Also, thought: upstairs/downstairs can be a status symbol reserved only for the rich but also be emulated by the lower classes despite it practically necessitating great wealth. Consider working- and middle-class people who buy knock-off Louboutin heels or Coach bags to appear richer: while lower-class D/s couples might not be able to afford two subs in fact, a lower-class sub might dress like an upstairs sub (ex: clothes that are pretty but not practical) to give the appearance of wealth.
Also, re: taxes: I'm picturing very rich doms claiming their upstairs subs as dependents but downstairs subs filing separately. XD
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 06:10 am (UTC)I like the idea that only the rich can afford multiple subs. If it is a class thing, and "downstairs" subs are constructed more as domestic servants are in real-world societies... hmm. Well, first off, you don't have as much of a service-based economy because social reproductive labor is being done mostly within the family. I think there's less of a "middle class" as we think of it in the West and a more clear distinction between upper class and working class, where upper class households have multiple subs who don't work outside the home, and lower class households are one dom/one sub and usually both have to do wage labor most of the time and have more significant intergenerational and community ties to get things like child care handled. Possibly to support this there's state funded child care from a young age... for the working class of course, taught by working class teachers, because both upstairs and downstairs subs have a role in childrearing and older kids go to private school. Hmm, is being a downstairs sub a method of class mobility for the lower class, maybe the only one? Are there rules about who the genetic parents of children are supposed to be, and are there rules about who in the family is considered a parent socially? This is super interesting to me as a highly stratified society where the rich control the economy and have larger households and more formal D/s. They don't even necessarily have jobs per se, maybe there aren't as many white collar jobs in this economy. They own businesses or investments and make their money that way, so probably rich doms and upstairs subs are both doing work to manage that but not being paid a wage for it and not having a boss.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 10:57 pm (UTC)Speaking of rules re: genetic children and parents...I'm wondering how the staircase system of subs might affect or be inspired by things like royalty, and kings who had queens and then mistresses, with both of them occupying roles in court. It isn't an exact parallel, cuz downstairs subs wouldn't be expected to get the kind of behind-the-throne respect that king's mistresses would get, but...huh.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 11:03 pm (UTC)All bedframes might just be built with the expectation of bondage, but would there be things like leash hooks everywhere? Would a really posh place put recesses for pillows beside the chairs, so that high class subs don't have to kneel for long boring society events on the marble floor? Would there be designated play/punishment rooms in every building? To what extent is all space "dungeon space," and how are subs you claim for sex different than those who are just in your household because in this iteration there are more subs than doms?
no subject
Date: 2018-12-11 09:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-12 02:30 am (UTC)But re: Sex Things, and public play: maybe in a BDSM AU, where it is assumed that everyone has an inherent desire to be in a 24/7 power exchange relationshp, kink is less strongly correlated with SEX specifically in people's minds, and more strongly correlated with ROMANCE?
Like...maybe having your sub give you oral sex in the middle of the sidewalk might not be acceptable, but people would wear collars openly all the time (leashes only for formal events). Nudity and genitalia might not be acceptable in public, but a sub kneeling for their dom outside might be the equivalent of a couple holding hands outside. More a sign of intimacy, less an overt sexual act.
Sex is still something people generally expect in relationships, but kink is more widely seen as non-sexual and appropriate to practice in public, with specific things being dependent on region and culture.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-13 07:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-14 06:50 am (UTC)I..,hm.
I’m just spitballing here, but maybe, in a world where some people have given up very deep control of aspects of their lives to other people, there would be a stronger taboo against speaking to subs who were out with their doms before asking permission?
Like in our world, if I see a couple, I assume I can talk to both of them no problem. But in a BDSM AU, depending on the formality of the event or how the relationship presented, I might not consider it good etiquette to speak to the sub without addressing their dom first?
Societal stuff!
Date: 2018-12-11 12:43 am (UTC)In the way I was thinking, historically dom and sub are generally things you discern, while upstairs and downstairs sub are social categories you’re raised into.
Historically, going back to the middle ages, nobles basically only raise-children-as and take-as-subs upstairs subs. (In general, upstairs and downstairs subs are raised pretty differently). They’re nobles; the status and fanciness is the important thing for them, they don’t generally have to worry about monetary support issues, you wouldn’t harshly punish a sub from an important family who might get mad at you, etc.
Peasants mostly raise and take downstairs subs - they need all their children working, they need everyone in the household working. (Downstairs subs don’t have the supporting thing going on; they work, and in fact might be sent out to work for other people and bring back money also, when applicable).
Some peasants with enough to try this and a sub child they think is suited to it might try raising a child as an upstairs sub that someone just rich enough to want one of those might want. That’s a status boost and a connection for the family (and probably a bit of money come to think - I think with upstairs subs you did the give-their-family-money-for-them thing).
People who might be somewhat better off - craftspeople, tradespeople, etc - can want upstairs subs to show off how they’re well off and high status enough for that. But they can also want downstairs subs to help with the work and with bringing in money. (And in at least some cases they might take downstairs subs early in their career when they’re not well established, and if they get successful take an upstairs sub also). This group {oh hm} is most of the reason why ‘downstairs’ and ‘upstairs’ become these categories, rather than it just being a case of ‘peasants and nobles do different things with their subs’.
As noted, upstairs and downstairs subs tend to be raised pretty differently - no one’s going to want someone as an upstairs sub who’s been doing manual labor, who doesn’t know various upstairs sub skills, etc. So for families with sub kids they might raise one way or the other there’s kind of a decision making thing - upstairs subs who are taken by someone as such will be higher status and gain for the family, but they’re an economic loss for a while, and if no one ends up wanting to take them as upstairs sub then it stays this loss (and also like, sucks). And depending on how much someone might want an upstairs sub from your family for other reasons you get more or less leeway with respect to how good at the relevant things they have to be to have good prospects. So families tend to decide on this mix of factors (with how the specific kids feel about it being taken into account in various ways and to various amounts depending on the family).
—-
With the industrial revolution and the rise of the middle class, you get new middle class people also wanting upstairs subs again as this sign of their new position. But also some of them have more of this new job area that needs people - secretaries, someone to be at a store counter or host at a restaurant (waiters are downstairs subs), etc. (Also come to think, upstairs subs probably totally did things like embroidery and some sewing and things, and the need for that drops with industrialization). So you get this concept of stairwell subs - they’re working outside the home, but they’re still mostly like upstairs subs in a lot of ways, they go to work *with* their dom, and the idea put forth is basically that they’re still totally playing this role of decorative and status bestowing, but at their dom’s work rather than only at their home.
Re: Societal stuff!
Date: 2018-12-11 09:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-11 12:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 06:32 am (UTC)Also, John as the downstairs sub co-doms Harold and Grace decided would make a much better upstairs sub...
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 07:22 am (UTC)1) Switches are assumed (however unfairly) to default to being upstairs on account of being higher on the ladder relative to subs in general. This obviously ignores the switches who like deeper painplay and punishment and/or service as well as switches who prefer to dom, but all stereotypes ignore people who do not fit them.
2) Switches are pressured to "choose a side" (as they often are in real life!) and belitted by subs and doms alike as not having the strength of character and identity needed to REALLY fit in the usual formula, while switches who HAVE decided to do 24/7 domming or subbing are not considered "as good" as those that are fully dom or sub. Perhaps they might be happiest in [disdainful sniff] lower class relationships where upstairs/downstairs is not as prevalent.
3) Switches inherently blur the upstairs/downstairs binary (as well as the dom/sub binary!) and so any relationship with a switch in it will disrupt the usual formula. They would likely attract folks who also disrupt the usual formula (ex: sadistic subs), but even if they deliberately chose a normative dynamic, they'd still be different from straightforward dom/upstairs/downstairs relationships. For example: ordering an upstairs sub (who might be used to doling out punishment if the dom can't be bothered) to service top them.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 08:50 am (UTC)The movie gets kudos at Sundance, maybe wins a GLAAD award. The actress may or may not be a switch herself, and fandom discourse occurs
no subject
Date: 2018-12-10 08:59 am (UTC)At the time not sure I came up with much, but now thinking - so the social organization here doesn't seem to have much space for switches, which makes me think this might be one of the d/s aus that didn't have the concept of switches for a while, didn't recognize this as a thing, etc (the real life bdsm community totally having had and still having some issues with that...)
Possibly this is one of the verses where switches would tend to be classed as subs (basically with a 'if you want sub things at all you're a sub' idea), which might actually contribute more to the skewed dom:sub ratio.
And this leading to various sucky things for various people who were in fact actually switches. Also likely some of them parsing their feelings as desires to be an 'alpha sub' and direct other subs for their dom (both upstairs and downstairs might have things like that, from household organization stuff to workgangs for downstairs subs), or to be an upstairs sub ordering around downstairs subs, and putting it into that.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-12 02:34 am (UTC)Do you think that, in whatever universe where the staircase system of subs is used, the subs actually USE the words "upstairs/stairwell/downstairs?"
no subject
Date: 2018-12-18 04:35 am (UTC)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5FQdcuT-Xc
Lyrics: https://genius.com/Trace-adkins-happy-man-lyrics
And it is SUCH. A DOWNSTAIRS SUB SONG.
(and somehow now I just want a downstairs sub (PREFERRABLY ELIOT) singing this song for some reason or other. And there are some folks there who think AH YES, good and appropriate expression of downstairs love sentiments. And some folks who think that wow, maybe PROBLEMATIC for them to lean so hard into the traditional view of downstairs subs, they should be loved in their own way as well?)
(dealer's choice what the sub thinks)