for this article from the Bitch Magazine blog. I don't agree with a lot of the opinions the blogger references, but this isn't new when it comes to such discussions. This blogger is right that there is a wealth of anti-submissive talk amongst anti-BDSM feminists, largely because, IMO, they don't understand empowered submission. (Also, because they often assume that submissives are women!).
Here's my take: When a boxer steps into a ring, knowing they are about to be pummeled, they have chosen the pummeling -- or at least the risk of it. Similarly, when a submissive enters a scene, they choose to. And they also own the safe word. In fact, they are in more control than the boxer, we might argue, because of the social pressure and the lack of a safe word. The submissive chooses every moment of the scene, whereas the consensual dom is less likely to be in the driving seat. But boxing it's a useful analogy for illustrating that empowered submission is not the "giving up" of anything. It is the wielding of power in order to gain pleasure or triumph. It is the intention of resilience and the strength of transforming pain into delight.
Imagine if we all transformed our pains into delights. How much fear would we have?
As a switch, I can also attest that being a dominant can feel like a much riskier affair. The thought that I might push my partner too far is a real fear; but my goodness, the closeness that such trust can bring is mindblowing. All the more reason, however, to carefully construct and plan scenes beforehand if you don't know your chosen partner. One-time BDSM is not something I've done in my life, so I can't really comment in detail on this. But for me, I do feel that submission, when it is consensual, feels safer than domination. No less enjoyable, however! There are riches in both ways of being.