I used to think that dominance and submission were on a continuum:

And people fell somewhere along this line:

Now, after many conversations on the topic, really exploring my switchy side, understanding what it means to truly submit, and interacting with those who submit on different levels while simultaneously being dominant, I see submission and dominance more as concurrent sliders on a audio board:

Example 1

A submissive may be a very dominant (leading) person, willing to take responsibility, and able to, while simultaneously DESIRING to let that go strongly, making him/her very submissive at the right times or with the right person.

Example 2

A dominant, who has no submission whatsoever may still be above-average in dominance, and still not as dominant as that submissive:

This leads me to a more tolerant way of looking at titles and dynamics, understanding the fluidity of humans, and their desire for a leader, or a follower, or a partner that has the right mix at the best levels to blend harmoniously.

Thoughts?

I should say this thought is not all mine. It was posited to me as a seed of an idea originally by ColdHearted about this time last year. I just now got around to putting it into words and images.