Respect and Trust

There is a set of assumptions that many in the lifestyle make about how Dominants come to be "respected," and about whether it is possible/advisable to "trust" a Dominant who has somehow LOST our respect (as if it were a wayward sock). It is a thought construct that sets me off everytime I encounter it.

I see this from a (perhaps) different perspective. I think the notions of "respect" and "trust" are used far too casually within our community, and then the words are hurled around as a tool or weapon to make a point or support a position.

Some descriptions of the ways that I think these words are most aptly used:

I believe that "respect" is rightly founded on a deep awareness and appreciation of the character of a person. Being Dominant is probably a personality trait, but being a decent human being doesn't have to be. I know a lot of people, but my respect is given to very few. I reserve my respect for people who demonstrate that they are high quality. A person of character will be honest, responsible, considerate, fair, persistent, courageous, patient, self-disciplined, confident, and compassionate. None of those qualities will necessarily confer anything approaching perfection or infallibility, but they will generally result in a temperament that is steady, sure, and dependable. To tag onto a point made by my good friend, morningstar, the way to determine whether a Dominant is worthy of respect is to spend enough time to actually come to know them well.

The concept of "trust" in relationships is often misunderstood, and so the word is misused. Trust is not a commodity to be given or taken away based on how we feel in the moment, nor is it some fragile bauble that may easily be broken.

If we are both mature and wise, we may decide to trust or not to trust in very much the same way as we choose to invest our financial capital -- or not. When I make a financial investment, I do that after careful consideration. By the time I put my hard-earned dollars into an investment option, I've studied carefully, researched the alternatives, considered what level of risk I am willing to tolerate, and made a judgement about the suitability of the particular investment vehicle. Once I've decided, I'm committed. I understand that, while my investment may have ups and downs, it is seldom profitable to put my dollars in and take them out based on short term market volatility.

In the same way, when I choose to place my trust in a certain individual, it is precisely because I have done the work that allows me to know the person to whom I am making that committment. If I expect the relationship to grow and remain healthy for the long term, and if I am mature and wise, I continue to make the choice to trust regardless of the day to day ups and downs of the relationship. Assuming that I chose wisely in the beginning, that trust becomes the warp and woof of the relational tapestry; and if it is carefully and consistently done, the relationship will thrive even though the poor, flawed humans inside of it are, by definition, less than perfect.

So, to the question... The Dominant partner is worthy of respect because of the quality of their character. They may exhibit normal human weaknesses, and occasionally (or even regularly) fall short of perfect, and they remain worthy of respect. There is no way for such a person to "lose our respect" assuming their character remains intact. Engaging in relationship with such a person will require us to make the investment of our trust faithfully and steadily and diligently even when our emotions and fears and whims and wishes might tell us to do otherwise.

swan