I agree completely with you about the eye contact. It sends a message loud and clear. I wouldn't describe my boyfriend as particularly dominant, but he has the eye thing down. I find it eerie how someone who knows me so intimately can catch my eyes and make me blush.

Of course in a situation like you described above I'm sure I would have said: "Yes sir" and kept my job secure, but as soon as the customer left you can bet I'd tell a co-worker what an arrogant ass he was. Any submissive reaction accomplished by the eye contact would have been immediately squelched by asking for such a response. Though I hate to admit it would probably have the long term effect of me calling every gentleman who walked in "sir" for a very long time so as not to risk further correction and embarassment.

But are you saying she sustains the eye contact or not?

I know when I look at my guy for any length of time when he is being firm or just expressing his power subtley I become shy and my head tilts down. My hearts racing and then I start to fiddle with my hands to tug at my lip.

If he isen't upset with me I may peek at him with my head still down. If he is upset my head automatically falls and I would find it very difficult to look at him even when he told me to.

Come to think of this I think I may have unconsciously done this to test dominance in others before.

I would say a scenario in which one is trying to tell if a girl is submissive would be to sustain that eye contact and see if she became shy while still checking to see if he was looking.

I do agree that eye contact is a powerful way to observe the dynamic of dominance and submission in a relationship. But I didn't quite understand how to measure the results of your "test." If she keeps looking, she is submissive? If she looks away, she is also submissive? Confusing.

But the truth is people are different. Some women would show submissiveness by maintaining eye contact, others by not doing so. Other women may maintain (or not); but it could convey the exact opposite of submission.

As for the sample conversation, I do not think that whether a woman would call a man Sir (especially a man who she had recently met, as you alleged)... is any indication of her submissiveness or lack thereof. I have been with my man for nine months now; and I still don't call him Sir except on rare occasions. It doesn't mean I'm not submissive to him. It's just not natural for us.

So I agree with Tevemer's sentiments. There is no fool proof way to know whether a woman is submissive or not, without discussing it. It is possible to partake in a little give and take -- to get a feeling of where the situation might stand. But until one or both of you are comfortable enough to bring the subject out in the open, there is far too much left to speculation.

~HollyCakes

I agree with Tevemer, finding a "foolproof" way of locating a submissive woman is impossible. People are so different, I doubt eye contact can be used as sole evidence of whether or not a lady is indeed submissive.

That being said, I find eye contact incredibly erotic and effective. D also has a power over me I have never experienced before. This power and control is evidenced by his ability to melt me with just a few seconds of eye contact. I have an email from D, recounting the first time we met:
“You held my gaze for a second before averting your eyes downward. I was pleased to see that you did this while letting a hint of a smile cross those risque lips. My feeling was that you were strong-willed, and yet comfortable in letting go to me, in a matter of minutes of our meeting.”
It’s true, when I first looked in his eyes, I had to look away... They were so strong and captivating. They made me blush with excitement! I didn’t know what else to do. I love it when he locks eyes with me, reminding me that he is in charge of his little girl.

When I met D, I was just ending a rather unpleasant relationship. I won’t go into detail, but my ex did indeed demand that I call him Sir. When I told D about this, he said to me, “I will never have you call me Sir, do you understand?” I was so overly pleased with this declaration, and I still am. Being forced to call someone Sir seems more of an ego stroke for the man than a proclamation of submission from the woman. Things I do of my own volition are far more powerful and meaningful than things I am forced to do.

I took a class that taught how to "read" another by their eyes and body language.
Looking down - hiding something and looking left - lying. Looking up - attempt to recall. To my amazement it's accurate but not foolproof.

I use my eyes to tease and flirt. (Wink)
I use my eyes to say "Don't even." (Intense stare)
My eyes say a lot about me but there's no way they would tell you I could be submisive.

When I say "yes sir" it's out of respect not submission.

I can appreciate how difficult it is to render the nuances and flavor of our silent exchanges and there are some good efforts here. But there is a certain bathos in the start-up piece: are we looking to tumble or tumble-dry? Like "ill refutable", phonetically close but a bit unclear on the concept, it works in a goofy sort of way but it falls flat if we think you were grasping for "irrefutable".

Part of the problem here is that as soon as we describe these interactions, we introduce the Cartesian theatricalism of that inner witness and observer: inevitably this all comes off as manipulative, directed, and staged. I expect strong women would laugh out loud at used car salesmen putting on the moves. (I am not suggesting that this is at work here. How could I possibly know? I am saying the recounting itself robs authenticity) Yet, the lived actuality is better rendered, at least for me, as “I don’t know how it happens but this is what happens” or “this is what comes out of me”, in the same sense that authentic, spontaneous “foreplay” is best captured by “oh, this is what my hands are wanting and doing now”—being a surprise to oneself, not following some script.

We humans are astonishingly subtle face readers. There are hints to a dedicated module within devoted to face recognition and face reading. There is a fascinating and growing literature on emotional intelligence and our native powers of agency detection, what some term “folk psychology”.

Much of what we are trying to capture here in “glance analysis” is very culture-specific. I fear that in the States this “yes, sir” business would be answered even more rudely than Louise suggests, a scenario with a smacking soundtrack. It sounds more to me like a southern states or military man speaking to his son.

I would myself be on the alert for a woman who held my eyes a bit longer than social decency might allow, with perhaps some warm wrinkles at the corners of hers, but then "submissiveness" doesn't quite capture what I'm after; my ballpark is more in the realm of "warm, spirited challenge". I do have a strong gaze but I think it’s generic; I just look people over closely, men and women. On the other hand, I do have a flavor of “male gaze” with women (I am unpaired and thus bedroom eyes are not committed to my one), but it is largely face-directed, considering the person, only background do I appreciate what you look like “without your shimmy on”.

I have had Brit colleagues who were very prone to womanly blush. Quite adorable. I think you folks have a social embarrassment thing going here that largely escapes Americans; we’re rather shameless and brazen, perhaps you’ve noticed. On the other hand, I do recall the finale to a café evening with colleagues: a British woman who gratuitously knelt before me to assist in zipping my jacket. Golly how fumbling and slow she was, perhaps because she was gazing up to my face rather than tending to business. Womanly wiles and subtle hints, indeed. (Yes, we thoroughly enjoyed each other)

To fellow in bar son-of-a-bitched, was her remark deprecatory or, perhaps, mildly admirative? I think I would have risked a smack and suggested that she might enjoy my "cockiness".

Whether men and women connect or not, a joy of our sociality is that we are male and female and I think we should do more to celebrate and make merry of that fact culturally, even if our appreciation of each other is to remain distant and somewhat abstract, for a society of persons, unsexed or uni-sexed, unhealthily dehumanizes. Opinions vary. I suspect, could be wrong, that those who take offense at expressions of these dimensions, are, going a bit overboard, in de Nile.

People around me are intimidated by me and i find it hard to continue conversations due to my eye contact. Thus i developed a fear of looking people in the eye or sustaining long eye contact. People avoid approaching me because of this. Also i find that people do things for you because they are compelled to do and its not from their hearts, if you know what i mean.

Though i have experienced what its effects are on women. Its not a bed of roses. Some become defensive others give you weird behaviour.

This is perhaps i have not learned how to wield it wisely as of yet.

Kaiser.

You guys don't understand anything about the eyes and socalizing with it. I don't have PhD and could tell you more about eye contact than any doctor or psychologist can.

Because they don't give off eye contact themselves. The eyes are the window to the soul (Saul stared intendly to the magician's eyes and he was blind.) Yes people are so scared of eye contact they personally avoid it (in subways, resturants, social gathering).

To me, eye contact is the sign of power, against wicked. All that talk when you look a person straight in the eyes, espically the opposite sex, let them know what you want and how you feel -- don't let shyness get you. Either you tell what you want with power and understanding or you be scared and don't get what you want.

I personally use and maintain eye contact. I use it as a sort of “friendly challenge” with those I speak with, whether male or female. When talking with someone, I will look into their eyes, keep a friendly smile on my face and secretly watch their reaction. Most people will give me a smile back, but not maintain the contact for more than 30 seconds. This gives me a feeling of mistrust. I do not like people that look away so quickly, it makes me feel they are hiding something from me. Now I am a bit on the suspicious side due to my personality quirks, but it is also amusing to me that people that I can sense have strong dominant traits, cannot match my eye contact. Some of the police officers I work with are over six foot five yet cannot make eye contact with me. This gives me the power in any interaction we have and I know it makes them uncomfortable. There are only a couple of men (read 2 men) out of all those that I see at work that can match me in the game. To these two, I can relax and tease, without fear of driving them off or upsetting them. We all know they maintain the power in the interactions between us and keep the “natural” dynamics flowing properly.

When looking for a romantic partner, I play the same game. I have posted in other places that I have very strong alpha traits and I know that I need a man with just as strong traits so that he can control me. The stare down is the first test I will give any man that approaches me. If he can meet me “eyes on” for an entire conversation, he will spark a physical interest in me. If not, I relegate him to “friend” status. I will not waste the time or energy on someone who is not going to be strong enough to be more take-charge than myself. What I find interesting is that many of these men that don’t pass my first test were the ones that usually initiated the challenge. They are used to people looking away from them first because of their status as “power players”. They obviously have not played in the big leagues yet. I come from a long line of high-dominance personality types and have no fear when challenged in such a way. I think it confuses people because when they first meet me, I look very petite for my height and tend to be quiet, smile a lot, and will be politely distant. Many of the people that later became friends stated they thought I was thoroughly stuck up when they first met me. I have to warm up to people before they will get to meet my “inner brat”. But to do that I have to trust you and if you cannot look me in the eyes when we are having a simple, non-threatening conversation, how can I trust you with the more personal ones? It is an interesting paradox that so many people find someone watching their eyes so closely feel so threatened.

As a nurse I have been extensively trained in facial expressions and body language to find clues to what is going on with a person’s body or mind. But I find the eyes to be the true indicator. It is truly the “doorway to the soul” and I have never met anyone that could lie with them. If you do not like meeting a person’s eyes in a conversation, that is fine. A lot of it depends on cultural beliefs, upbringing, past experiences, etc. But for me, I need to see what the other person is truly thinking, and for me this is my way to do so.

Libby