Slavery -- More Questions

Sara, in commenting on the post I wrote on slavery, asked the following question --

at the risk of being a complete irritant to you...I have another question. I could say much of the same as you have above, if you substituted 'wife' for 'slave'. How/why is the term 'slave' more appropriate than wife/lover, or sub, if it is in the context of a P.E. relationship? Is there something very different in the experience? I assume that he is not expected to take your wants into account, only his own, and yet that is not true, because he does, and you have chosen that sort of man. Just asking...?

To begin with, Sara, let me just say that questions posed like this are in no way irritating. I am happy to engage in this sort of dialog with anyone who, as you so clearly seem to, sincerely wants to understand the things that I write about. There is never any need to apologize for asking questions in this sort of tone -- honest curiosity is more than welcome here.


I also sincerely appreciate the thoughtfulness that has been part of the dialog that you have engaged in with me. I am most grateful for the pace of your conversation with me. There is a slow, pondering, steadiness to this conversation that I like. It takes out the kind of heated, knee-jerkiness that so often characterizes exchanges in cyberspace. It feels to me like there is enough time for me to really consider and contemplate what I want to say without needing to respond immediately. This little bit of discussion is happening at a speed that is comfortable for me, and I am glad for that.

I think there is way too much to this discussion for me to be able to respond reasonably to your question in the context of a comment, so I hope you won't mind if I turn my response to you into a full blown post...


I believe that what is central to your question, Sara, is this: is there really anything significantly different in what I do, and call "slavery," and what any devoted, loving, and dedicated, wife might do for a husband?

It is a fair question. After all, much of what I do is indistinguishable from what might go on in any reasonably well ordered housewife's routine. I cook, I clean, I manage the laundry, I pay the bills, I keep track of the prescriptions, I participate in the family "events," I rub His back, I darn His socks, ... There is certainly nothing that hints of leather or chains in any of that. It could go on in the house next door. It is perfectly mundane. In every discernible respect, what I do, day by day, looks exactly like what any "wife/lover" might do.


So, why the use of a term that is provacative as "slave" surely is? What is it about the experience or the reality that makes it valid or valuable to distinguish my status and dynamic from that of any other domestic living arrangement with a label that is so heavily laden?

For me, it feels appropriate to use the word "slave" precisely because it is descriptive of what cannot be seen. The parts of my life that seem mundane are deceptive. Like the still, quiet surface of very, very deep waters, there is much that is not evident in the day to day routines, and seeming ordinariness that is apparent to the casual observer. I am not His wife. Even if I were His wife, even if I were to be "allowed" to become His wife in this society, I would remain His slave, and that entails an entirely different set of expectations than the husband/wife relationship.


It is difficult to try and explain that to people who don't almost "intuitively" understand it. It would have been nearly impossible to explain it to me before I experienced it -- even as I read about it during the earliest days of my explorations into this lifestyle. It has almost nothing to do with the overheated "fantasy" stuff of much of the BDSM "literature" -- that lurid sort of writing that is so easy to tumble over online and in porn shops.

I never intended or "meant" to end up being anyone's slave. I started out creating a Domestic Discipline relationship with my husband of many years (very much as you and Grant did), and in the beginning, we experienced many of the same benefits and surprisingly positive changes that you write about in your blog. In fact, if I go back to the archives of 1Domestic Discipline and 1Household Discipline, I can find things that I wrote there in the beginnings of my DD "life" that echo your words almost exactly. Slavery, as I experience it, was something that came to be a part of the experience that was true of what Master and I shared as we "grew into" our relationship with one another. Part of what I think makes it "different" from being "wife" or "lover" is that I might be described by some of those terms too (in some contexts), but that does not change or impact upon the reality of the Master/slave dynamic that remains between He and I. We love one another intensely and completely, and I am ALSO His slave. In some very real sense, the two relationships exist on separate planes from one another.

Awhile back, I spent time contemplating the "obligations and responsibilities" that a Master might incur in assuming the ownership of human property. I ended up writing several of sort of convoluted posts on the subject that are referenced here , here, and also here. The conclusion, from my perspective, was that while He might choose to care for me in various ways; might choose to "maintain" my well-being as if I were of great value to Him; He does not have any de facto obligation to do that by virtue of His ownership.

Ownership, on His part, and the corollary slavery on my part, create a relationship dynamic that begins and ends with Him. Everything about the relationship is defined by His vision and His energy and His intention. For us and for me, that turns out to include a great deal of love and tenderness and concern and attentiveness, BUT none of that is owed to me as a requirement of the committment that we made to each other within the agreement as Master and slave, and none of it is obligatory on His part. He can expect my complete dedication and absolute obedience without any regard for my wishes, desires, or happiness.

You might wonder, Sara, how that works in practice. What does that mean in practical terms. Simply, it means that I am His to use and command without explanation or negotiation. For example, whereas your dynamic might include spankings that occur for some "reason" which make sense within the context that you have both carefully negotiated and agreed upon, I am often spanked BECAUSE He wants to spank me; for the simple reason that He enjoys and gets pleasure from hurting me. If, in the moment, I get some sort of masochistic pleasure out of that as well, that is fine, but it is not His concern. That is, probably, the most prosaic or maybe most common example, but if I thought about it, I could come up with all kinds of similar situations where, in my world, the base-level assumption is that whatever He wants WILL happen regardless of what I might or might not want.

I think that, in most husband/wife relationships, and (from my perspective) in most Domestic Discipline style relationshps as well, there is an underlying motivation or "goal" that both parties will get there needs met and end up feeling happy, satisfied, and fulfilled -- at least most of the time. In the Master/slave dynamic, the assumption and the goal is that His life will be made easier and fuller by His ownership of the slave. In our household, He is very often sincerely appreciative of the efforts made to keep His life moving along smoothly. On the other hand, there are a thousand little things that happen in His wake each day, that He never really sees. They are the expected, assumed, continued, "air He breathes." He knows, that it is His "right" to have the things He wants, and He simply expects that to be in His life. Providing that is my role (and T's).

All of which probably brings up the question of "why?" Why would someone choose to enter deliberately and consciously, with intent and full awareness into this kind of relationship (because the choice is critical and essential)?

I don't know that I can offer you an adequate answer to that question. I think, for me, the sheer power and energy that I found in Master were very compelling in the beginning. There is a definite part of my makeup that craves and responds to power and control. Our move into M/s was more gradual than the route that many people take. We had time to come to learn a great deal about one another; time to talk and converse and become friends, play partners, and then lovers BEFORE we found ourselves contemplating the prospect of His ownership of me. By the time we had reached that juncture in our relatedness, the step into the dynamic was not as extreme as it might have otherwise been. We already knew each other very well. We already knew what we envisioned for ourselves. We were THERE. For us, it was really a matter of acknowledging what was already the reality.

It isn't a relational dynamic for everyone. It isn't, truthfully, even a relationship dynamic for very many. There are plenty of times when I find myself talking to myself and saying, "you're a slave -- just shut up and slave. It isn't supposed to be glamorous." Some compare it to a spiritual path, and it can feel that way by times. Some find it to be incredibly erotic, and there can surely be that element to it as well. It is my belief that it IS a personal path that, because it fits with a simple truth about who I am in my deepest core, can bring me to my very best self. It isn't easy. It requires a good deal of integrity and intellect and awareness and personal committment and discipline, but it is a way that, for me, matches and answers echoes in my soul.

swan