I will say that the direction of this site has changed considerably, since I came 3 years ago. Back then, the mood was much lighter, folks expressed themselves more freely, and the theme of "exploration" was more prevalent.
Now, the mood seems more muted, if not darker. This site has become more Read more… of an "Ask Ann Landers" discussion about bad/failed relationships. The deconstructionists seem to rule the convos. Most of the truly experienced kinksters have either left, or simply don't post anymore. I see very little in the way of exploration. I don't know what happened. The energy just seemed to die.

"Cis" tends to sound pejorative. Many folks are offended by that term.

The biggest question is one of trust. Do you trust him well enough to "let go"---put your self totally in his hands? True trust is extremely empowering. Still, this is not something that can happen right away. It takes time to develop this kind of relationship.

Reading these posts, I can't help but consider how fortuitous it is to be older. My heavy involvement in The Scene came in the stone-age, pre-internet era of the1990's. Once a week, I would attend a BSDM event at a local underground nightclub. Though such events usually lasted until 3:00 AM, I Read more… would try to duck-out just after Midnight. I would explain that I needed to be at work in the morning---you know, having to pay those pesky bills.
I was in the electronic repair industry. So, there were never any "morality" conflicts with my job. My coworkers never knew of my "other" life, though a couple may have suspected. Ironically, it was my fellow kinksters that gave me the most flack, for having to leave early, to deal with "work".
Around 1995, the repair shop where I worked, closed its doors, and I was laid-off. After that, I went into business for myself. No more potential conflicts. I could stay up as late as I wanted. Not long after, I was drafted to host a nightclub show. Kink was now paying some of those bills!

Very interesting discussion. I have HFA (High Functioning Autism) and I have discovered some interesting facts about it. The general assumption is that folks with HFA can't read people. It has been said the we can't pick up "non-verbal cues", like facial expressions, voice inflections, body Read more… language, etc...
My experience in the BDSM Scene has taught me that nothing could be farther from the truth. Consider another oft-quoted truism---that those with HFA have a laser-like focus. It is this focus that allows those with HFA to see right through people. The apparent "inability" to read people, comes from seeing multiple conflicting layers at once. This can be very confusing, and may be dismissed as just "noise". Those with HFA often avoid eye-contact, because it can be "information overload". Imagine a person's entire life story being suddenly downloaded into your brain---too quickly to process. That much info, that fast, can actually be painful. Ironically, it was the training and discipline of BDSM, that allowed me to process all of this, and have some perspective of the multiple layers that I was seeing.

Honestly, in all my years, I never used a pick-up line. Communication through eye contact and body language seemed more effective and less threatening.
On that note, there is one pick-up line that a lot of guys have joked about using. It is so common, that I am surprised that no one has mentioned Read more… it: "If I told you that you had a great body, would you hold it against me?"
A bit off-topic: I had a lady friend who once hinted how she would love to see a diamond for her birthday. So, I took her to a ballgame.

There is a lot over overlap in the imagery and symbolism of the Goth and BDSM cultures. That said, the two cultures are quite different. The similarities are purely superficial. In fact, I have encountered a lot of Goth folks, who are actually repulsed by leather and fetish wear. There really Read more… is no correlation.
I recall encountering the same question back in the mid-to-late 80's, with the Heavy-Metal "head bangers". Fetish wear (leather/rubber) was almost a universal dress code for "Metal" concerts. Yet, this had almost nothing to do with true fetish. The dress was meant more as a spit-in-the-face to "The Establishment". "Fetish" makes the "vanilla" world cringe---hence, the appeal of its "shock value". I suspect that a lot of this was inherited from the "Punk" scene, a decade earlier.

Truly, there is no single answer to this query---I can only speak for myself. In my early years, I never thought of myself as "dominant". It turned-out to be an inborn trait. This personal trait caused a lot of conflicts with "vanilla society". I have always been hyper-observant---seeing and Read more… reading people's innermost desires an motivations. For years, I had no idea that was seeing more than I should. My replies and reactions to such things caused nothing but trouble---things that I mistakenly thought were "obvious to everyone". I was shunned and marginalized. Even as a kid, I was expelled from three different schools. And, later, "employment" proved constantly problematic.
As a result, in the 'vanilla" world, I tend to be a quiet loner. I cannot live in a big city---where folks are forever categorized and prioritized. City folks are constantly climbing over each other, to be the one on top. Such places are toxic to me. My mind gets overwhelmed with everyone's secrets, motivations, and fears. I see nothing but miserable souls in the urban vanilla world---where everyone is shoved into some tiny, conformity box, in which they don't really fit. I have a spirit that must be forever free.
Still, no one can survive being truly alone. So, I was faced with a paradox. I tried joining various hobby clubs. Yet, my mere presence would cause the hierarchy of such clubs to mysteriously disintegrate, for reasons that I could never understand. I began to think that I would never have a place in human society.
It wasn't until I encountered the BDSM Scene, that I found any answers. My taste for leather brought me in contact with "The Scene" in my mid-to-late 20's. In the beginning, I assumed that I was a submissive. Yet, in "play", I was always shoved into the dominant role. This confused me, until I realized that was keeping the dominant ladies at arm's-length (so to speak). It was as deep, instinctual reaction, like backing away from a hot flame, or the edge of a cliff. Later, during professional training, I had to play the submissive, as part of that training. This was to gain empathy and understanding. It took a lot of deep meditation, to successfully complete this part of the training. Still, I learned a lot, and I will forever appreciate this phase of my education.
As for expressing my own fantasies, there are varied reasons why that doesn't happen. For one, as a "pro", I saw myself more in the role of a taxi driver. The client would state her desired destination, and I was in charge of deciding how to get there. My pleasure came from the energy that I received from fulfilling her secret fantasy. For that moment, nothing existed outside of my sphere of influence. It was just the two of us. I felt everything that she felt. We were of one mind, and my own desires were irrelevant. I had never received such appreciation from the vanilla world.
As for why Doms don't write erotic fiction, that may be a question better asked of modern society. In today's atmosphere, the tale of a man dominating a woman could be too easily branded as, "toxic masculinity". It would leave one open to vitriolic attacks from the easily offended. I have considered reversing the gender roles in such fiction. However, that would raise its own set of problems---like giving the wrong public impression about one's self. It is part of the trap of being a Dom---having to constantly maintain that public persona.
Yes, every Dom/me has a submissive side. It's just that their own dominant nature keeps that side suppressed. Many Dom/mes will simply deny that part of their nature. Others though (whether consciously or unconsciously) have learned to use it as a tool. Fetish clothing is often a perfect example. Many Doms (myself included) love the feeling of tight, restrictive leather or rubber, and/or extreme, punitive boots. In my case, I feel that I am imprisoning and tormenting my submissive side. Release cannot come until I have successfully completed the scene with my sub. In many ways, this internal feeling is unconsciously transmitted to my sub, enhancing the scene. As I mentioned: "Of One Mind".
Anyway, I hope that this provides some insight.

I too, have occasionally glanced at profiles, just to see what someone is about. They may have stated something interesting in a discussion, and I checked their profile, to get a better idea of their perspective. Any interesting fetish-wear in a profile pic, will also pique my curiosity.
Still, I Read more… use profile checks quite sparingly. As others have mentioned, there is the fear of "giving the wrong idea." Just because someone glances at a profile, it doesn't mean that they are interested, or that they are "perving". I used to wonder about the folks who came to my profile (I still get one or two looks every day). However, I soon realized that most were likely, just glancing to see what I was about. Many were the same folks who had commented to one of my thread posts.
Still, I didn't know that the "Quick Kink" feature would count browsing as a "visit". This would explain a lot. From time to time, the site algorithm will cause the site to load directly to the Quick Kink page. I assume that this is done to promote the feature. However, if the same person is always at the top of the quick-kink ranking, they may get constant reports of visits by me, when I never went to their page. If so, the designers of this site need to fix that feature. How many folks have been blocked, for something that they never did?
Personally, I have never used the Quick Kink feature. The search criteria are way too broad (pun not intended). On most profiles, folks have selected categories of "Kinks & Fetishes". Perhaps, a similar selection of categories could be added to the "filter" criteria.