Assumptions About BDSM

I grew up in the 1960's, and survived Catholic school.  Mine was a childhood filled with and defined by a whole lexicon of cliches and catch phrases, and I do find that I can dredge those up for just about any topic in the world...  So today's once-upon-a-time catch phrase comes down to me from a former elementary school teacher -- a Catholic nun, who lived in my child's world complete with a floor length black habit and veils and wimple...  Sister would sometimes look at the room full of us, and lay this old saw on the lot of us:

Remember that when you assume, you make an ass out of U and ME.

I was set off into that bit of pondering, by a recent comment made on my switching post: 

I understand switching for people who play at BDSM. But it always seemed to me that you really believe you are a slave and he really is your Master. No playing around. No games.  So it's hard for me to understand the switching thing in your particular relationship. Can you maybe elaborate on how you struggle to obey him in all things and strive to be his slave, etc., then put him in a submissive position to you, and then go back to being his slave again? 

The commenter was clearly not trying to be provocative or at all disrespectful, but was clearly curious, and I was struck by how much that set of queries reflects a whole range of ideas and assumptions about BDSM and the roles people take on within the lifestyle.
One of the hardest things about addressing an assumption is catching it when it occurs.  After all, our assumptions are our assumptions, and so we just assume that they are accurate -- if we think about them at all...  Since so much of what people know (or think they know) about BDSM comes from media that are purely fictional, or nearly so, much of the publicly held assumption set about the practices encompassed within the lifestyle is grounded in basic information that is simply unreliable and untrue.  So it is that we in the lifestyle continually have to explain that not all women are submissive nor are all men dominant.  Being into BDSM, in whatever form, doesn't mean that any one of us is sexually promiscuous, or sexually available -- even if that is the notion that is held by most of the people in the mainstream.  No matter what you read, there is no "one true way" to do any of this.  The various labels that we use and adopt to describe ourselves and our proclivities help us to talk with one another, but may not mean what anyone else thinks they mean, and they only tell you just a little bit about us, so don't assume that if you meet a Top or a masochist or a switch that you have a clear picture of that individual.

So, take a look at my commenter's assumptions --

1)  I understand switching for people who play at BDSM...  This bit points to a pretty ubiquitous view that is common inside the lifestyle and outside it as well.  Somehow there is this notion that it is either all or nothing.  That you are either "real" or you are a "player," and that to "play at" this makes you somehow "less."  I think its a sad and limiting view that precludes the variations in mood and intensity that are a very normal and lovely part of human relating.  That either / or dichotomy means that there is no room for those who might by times be playfully serious or seriously playful or playfully playful or seriously serious.  Whatever the descriptor that a person might attach to their most intimate relationship, wouldn't all of us point to times when we were in each of those modes?

 2)  Can you maybe elaborate on how you struggle to obey him in all things and strive to be his slave, etc.,...
Struggle and strive.  What a negative valance to put on what is, at its root, a relationship of love and devotion.  I have my struggles, to be sure, but I recall my very vanilla, and very typical mother struggling by times within the boundaries of her traditional marriage.  It is true that I lay my struggles and my doubts out here for the whole world to see, and perhaps to the person who looks in from outside it does seem as if it is all sturm und drang.  That is a function of my tendency toward self-absorption, melodrama, and overblown writing...  I do not struggle to be His slave.  I AM His slave.  The level of accomplishment that I achieve in the living of that chosen life varies from moment to moment and event to event, but it doesn't change the base level truth of who I am.

3) ...then put him in a submissive position to you,...
Ahhhh...  here's the ultimate "gotcha."  The assumption that a Dominant must forever and always maintain the authority of the position, and that if He should ever waiver or ever soften or ever step outside of the stereotype, then He would be not Dominant but submissive, is just silly.  Submissives are human.  Dominants are human.  People are as varied at the flowers, and there is no one right way to do it.  I've probably read at least a thousand accounts that referred to THE LOOK or THE VOICE that submissive women so often attribute to Dominant men, and I've seen THE LOOK and heard THE VOICE myself -- just not all the time.  Sometimes He is quiet, sometimes He is silly, sometimes He is preoccupied, sometimes He is sad, sometimes He is bored.  He doesn't have just one facet to His personality, and neither do I.   When I held Him in my arms and crooned little meaningless assurances into His ear when He wept with grief at the loss of His father, was I putting Him into a submissive position?  When I cleaned up His puke and wiped His ass while He recovered from abdominal surgery, did I place Him into a position of submission?  If I balance the checkbook and pay the bills, am I making Him submissive when I say, "No, we cannot afford to buy that this week...?"  There is no set of behaviors that make someone Dominant, and there are no prescribed behaviors that define submission either.  If He sometimes likes the sensations created by spanking, and if I willingly and competently allow Him to experience those sensations at my hand, who is Dominant and who is submissive? 

4) ...and then go back to being his slave again?
People continue to fall into this fallacy, that "being His slave" is a put on, something that I do and then do not do.  I am always His slave, no matter what I am doing or thinking or feeling.  Sometimes I am right here, at His side, pouring His drinks and fetching His slippers.  At other times, I am away, seemingly independent, working or shopping or performing some other task away from His sight and His immediate and direct control.  I remain His slave.  Sometimes I adore Him and think He is simply the grandest and finest Man it has ever been my privelege to know.  At other times I think He is the meanest, snarliest, foulest bastard on the planet.  I remain His slave.  Sometimes I am completely happy and secure and contented with the life we share.  At other times, I am restless and prickly and disatisfied.  I remain His slave.  That "always and all ways" line that He and I use is not just some cute throw away.  We mean it.  He means it, and so do I.  There is no "going back" to being His slave, because there is no "going away" from being His slave.  I don't think that is unique to our M/s dynamic.  I think there are people who develop vanilla and traditional relationships that exhibit those same kinds of constancy -- I've seen it, and I imagine I'm not the only one. 

Do not assume.  Do not assume you know who I am or who He is.  Do not assume that you know the all and all of any other human person.  Try, if you can, to take others at their word, to give others the benefit of the doubt, to believe that most of the people that you come across are doing the very, very best they possibly can.

swan

Guilt -- Roots?

Our family has, in the last few weeks/months, made the acquaintance of several people who are new to the lifestyle, curious about the lifestyle, or making a transition from one sort of BDSM practice (or perceived set of roles) to another. Our new friends comprise an interesting cross-section of people with a wide range of relational dynamics and desires. We don't pretend to have "answers," although we do gladly offer to share what we've learned along the way with anyone who has the patience to listen to us all babble on about what it is that we do.


There is so much that someone "new" to all of this wants/needs to know. For us, it really is a matter of listening carefully, responding openly, and then sharing the fruits of our journeying over the years.


One thing that has come up with a couple of these people is the notion that there is something about all of this that might/can/should engender guilt (or some similar emotion). There is a lot that fuels that reaction. It is based on a set of assumptions and social beliefs that are so convoluted, it can take weeks or months or even years to unravel it and begin to sort it all out. I don't pretend to be any kind of expert, but I do think that, until a person comes to terms with that set of assumptions and beliefs, it is very difficult to move forward into a healthy and joyful BDSM relationship dynamic.


So, let me see if I can get to some of the roots of this kind of guilty reaction...

I really believe that the most likely source of BDSM-related guilt is the connection between almost all of what constitutes BDSM and sex. I know and acknowledge that there is the sort of Dominance/submission relationship that is not specifically (or even remotely) sexual. There are relationships that are entirely and purely based on service. At least that is what I have heard and read. I've never personally met anyone involved in such a dynamic. Almost always, at some level, it is about sex/romance/love.


Power is sexy. Power is erotic. Power is hot. If I give my power, if it is taken and used to move me in ways I cannot control or direct, that can give my partner and I, both, a huge arena in which to explore our sexual natures.


What makes that so difficult for so many of us is that we mostly come from a social background that tells us (from the time we are very small) that sex is bad, sick, wrong, crude, vulgar, dirty, perverted, nasty, disgusting, ... It is so disgusting in fact, that it must absolutely be saved for the marriage relationship (huh?). Even then, it must only be engaged in within certain very tightly defined boundaries. Anything that is outside of the approved sexual expression list, is cause for extreme guilt.

Much of that is driven by traditional religious dogma and convention. I know that my own Roman Catholic upbringing was pervaded with messages that made it clear to me what was considered "good, Christian" behavior for a girl and/or woman, and what was outside that boundary. The church told me not to be sexual, not to enjoy sex, not to seek out sex, not to display my sexual nature, not to entertain my sexual desires. The church taught me that I could aspire to no higher vocation for my life than to follow the path of sexless, life-long chastity, but that, if I simply had to succumb to the lures of SEX, a church-sanctioned marriage was the only way to do that and still be OK. Even then, the church emphasized that I was to engage in sex for one purpose only -- that of procreation. If I wasn't willing to become pregnant and bear children, I was taught that there was no justification for sex. It is a mean and nasty sort of theology.

Even outside the church, there were a myriad of messages about what it meant to step outside the sexual norms. It was common, in my adolescence, for girls who flirted with sex to be saddled with the perjorative labels which identified them as irretrievably fallen from grace: slut, whore, floozy, tramp, loose, cock tease... And I am old enough to remember friends who took the risks, found themselves pregnant, and were then "sent away" to bear their "shame" in secret.


So that was the background for my coming of age sexually -- the air we all breathed in the years of my childhood, adolescence, and young adulthood. I know that it is nominally a newer world where those judgements are less common or at least less vitriolic, but I believe that they are still there, although less overt. I certainly hear them in the language my students use -- even when they seem completely unaware of the implications of what they say to one another.

But there is more. Because we are not just talking about a little good old fashioned, roll-in-the-hay sex. We are talking about BDSM. We are thinking in terms of sadomasochism, bondage, Dominance and submission, discipline, humiliation, objectification, and a whole range of kinks. It is all so -- well, perverse. Isn't it? That question continues to be raised. The labels continue to be applied. Never mind that BDSM has been removed from the list of paraphilias listed in the DSM-V. A pretty cursory Internet search will turn up plenty of references that will lead one to question the state of one's mental stability -- "what the hell is wrong with me?! Why can't I just be normal." I know I've asked that question more than once.


And then there is the fact that what it is that we do can land one in all sorts of social trouble. People find themselves unemployed, arrested, in child custody battles. To come to be generally known as a BDSM practitioner can lead directly to the role of social parriah. It is the rare practitioner in the lifestyle that finds it possible to share much about their life with friends, family, co-workers, worship community, teachers at their child's school, or health care providers. There are those who, by whatever circumstance, are able to be "out" in varying degrees, but for many, following a lifestyle path, means spending a good part of one's life in disguise. That has its own crippling side-effects.

Too, for many of us there is the expectation that modern-day feminism places on us -- to be strong, to be independent, to take care of ourselves, to follow our own paths. I know. I am a feminist. I've fought the battles for years, and believe the foundational doctines of that religion: that women are different than men, but ought to be treated as political, social, and economic equals; that all men and women deserve equal access to the opportunities within our society; that no one ought to be relegated to the background on the basis of their gender... A strong femininst ethic can seem to stand at odds with a personal inclination toward submission and/or masochism. How do you fit those two together with any kind of integrity?



That's a heavy load, and it is, by no means, an exhaustive list. Many of us grapple, at some level, with a set of stories that bear a resemblance to that set of "notions." And, then, we turn up with a personal understanding of "who we are" that drives us into an exploration of lifestyle SM and D/s or M/s. Talk about cognitive dissonance! So what can be done, to wind through the thickets and find some sort of peace and personal comfort with who we are as sexual/erotic beings within that context?



Every person is going to have their own set of solutions and answers. Here are a few of mine:



1) Religion/spirituality -- I was already on a path of discovery in my spiritual life by the time I began to actively explore BDSM. I already knew that, for me at least, the set of beliefs that I'd been taught as a child did not work for me as an adult. That isn't always the case as people come into the lifestyle. So, one of the first steps to take, if personal faith is in conflict with sexual drives is to evaluate systematically and carefully. I believe it is helpful to honestly and openly ask questions:

• What do I believe?
• Why do I believe this?
• Where did I acquire this belief?
• Is there any reasonable, logical foundation to the things that I believe?
• Have I ever "fact checked" any of the stories I was told as a child?
• How would my life be different if I came to relinquish the belief system that I have held to from my youth?
• What is the value of this belief system in my life?
• Does my sense of who I am rest irretrievably on my adhering to this set of beliefs?

Next, I believe that it is necessary, when one chooses to practice BDSM, to make friends with the bodies we occupy. One of my favorite authors, Kathleen Norris, wrote in her book Dakota, about the importance of personal geography -- the value of a sense of personal rootedness. Just as coming to a sense of attachment and belonging to a place, I believe it is necessary to become attached to and rooted to our personal, physical selves. Our bodies are, for each and all of us, our ultimate and essential personal geography. We live nowhere except that we live in our own skins. We may not be able, for a variety of reasons, to be "out" to friends, family, co-workers, and the other inhabitants of our lives, but we simply must come "out" to ourselves. To find the contours and topography of our own sexual selves brings us into self-acceptance and a loving celebration of our own glory as part of the creation. Acknowledging the gifts we have been given, embracing the uniqueness of our sensual expression brings our hearts and minds and bodies into alignment with one another. None of that can change the way the outside world views us, but it can go a long way to making the words we tell to ourselves be affirming and positive.

The social stigma of what it is that we do is a reality and a fact. It is unfortunate. It is not fair or just. It can be dealt with and managed. It is important to make pro-active, self-determined decisions about what it is that we share with those who are not into the lifestyle. No one NEEDS to know about our interior lives. For some, it is healthy to be very open and honest about their internal lifestyle dynamics. Each one who can go openly into the world, educating and advocating, clears the path to a more open future for all of us. Still, it should be by choice and with care that we share who we are with those who might not understand. Know that such sharing can have benefits, but may also have real costs. Choose carefully what you share and with whom.

As for the political drumbeat of feminism. I sincerely believe it need not be a philosophy that lives in conflict with the choice to engage in personal power dynamics. Without personal power to lay on the table, the power exchange becomes pretty meaningless. There is nothing weak about choosing a path that deliberately explores the nature of power, how it might be balanced, and what it means to relinquish it. We choose to explore and live at the outer edges of the human sexual/erotic experience. It is a choice that requires great courage and personal strength.

The trick, through it all, is to come to this with awareness, personal integrity, courage, and openess. It is possible to live healthy, happy and whole in the midst of the lifestyle -- nevermind what the rest of all those people might say.

swan

How to Begin

We keep track of the statistics for this little bit of cyberspace using StatCounter. We do watch our stats go up and down, and we sometimes scratch our heads in utter amazement at what it is that brings people here. It isn't always, or even often, clear at all.



Overnight, we had someone find their way to The Heron Clan by typing in a Google search looking for "what should I ask my Master before I give my submission." We came up, among the other hits for that query, because of what I wrote here about the differences between BDSM and Domestic Discipline. I can't imagine that, if the seeker was looking for advice about how to negotiate ahead of entering into a D/s or M/s dynamic, that they found what they were looking for. I don't believe I've ever even come close to discussing or addressing that topic area.



I am not clear that I am the person who ought to talk about this, given my experience. All I can do is reconstruct the path that brought me to this life. Perhaps there is something in the story that others might find instructive.



It was the month of March; exactly this time of the year, six years ago. We'd known each other, at that point for a little over two years. Mostly, our contact was by IM, email, and long-distance phone calls -- because I was living in Denver, Colorado, and He and T were here in Ohio. We would travel, one way or the other, to visit and play, usually several times a year, but ours was a long-distance relationship.



We'd already declared our love for one another, and weathered the storms that were the result of that revelation. We'd come together, as a "quad" at the new year to make the final decision that would bring us together as a "family." We understood that we were moving to make that a reality.



We hadn't set a date. We hadn't discussed timing.



That day, in March, He and I were IM'ing, and I was running down a litany of perfectly sensible and rational reasons why it would be "at least" two years before we could reasonably make the move. After all, I told Him, there was a lot to do...



I will always remember the words as they blinked across my screen: "Do you think that we will live forever? Get here to me this summer!"



And, I did exactly that. I sold my home; quit my teaching job; said goodbyes to the grown children and my mother; packed all the household goods that I didn't sell; and separated from the few friends that had shared my path to that point. Just a bit more than 24 hours after the last children walked out of my classroom in Colorado that first week in June, we pulled up out in front of the apartment complex where He and T were living, and where we had rented the apartment next door to theirs.



I don't recall that there was any negotiation to that process. He said, "come," and I obeyed. There was huge eagerness between us, but very little in the way of conversation about our respective expectations for the relationship that we were creating. I remember asking, once, about what "sex" would be like between He and I -- a question which He answered with absolute candor and honesty.



We thought we knew what we were doing. Neither of us were "children." We were of a certain age. We'd played together a few times by then, and we'd talked and talked and talked. We were dreadfully, irretrievably, ridiculously in love.



So, clearly, I am no expert at the business of submissives negotiating with Dominants in the beginning stages of a power exchange dynamic. I've seen negotiations carried out to a rather remarkable degree of precision before people entered into short-term scenes in my local public dungeon. I've surely read a whole lot of advice on the subject. In practice, it wasn't like that for me with Him. I'm not clear, that if I had it to do over again, I'd do it a whole lot differently. There is all that "theory," and then there is the reality of what is at stake when you make this kind of move. I'm not convinced that you can really "negotiate" the entry into this kind of dynamic -- anymore than you can negotiate the final step over the edge of a cliff.



If I'd asked questions then; if I'd tried to come up with some list of "limits" or "requirements," I think I would have been entirely caught up in the "physical" implications of our pending arrangement. It would have been the kind of thing that comes up on "check lists" like one finds on sites that try to provide BDSM information for beginners: what and how much and how often and how hard and on and on. I would have seen, and possibly tried to address, what was within the scope of my vision. It would have been grotesquely inadequate in terms of trying to define the life that I was about to step into.



I can't imagine. I can't imagine Him being anything but amused (or perhaps mildly annoyed) by me attempting to define the life that He was calling me into with Him. He was utterly sure and completely in control at that point. My submission was not something that He needed me to "give" to Him. He had the vision for us together, and He would have it in exactly the form that He could see in His mind's eye. So, part of me believes that if the question is "what has to be in place between us before I agree to give my submission?" there is already an issue of whether the Dominant partner is ready to assume that control.



I suppose that, if I had the gift of prescience that would have allowed me to see into the future, I'd have asked:

• What will we do to mitigate the unavoidable impacts of aging and health changes on our life together?




• How will You help me and guide me through the emotions that I'll encounter when/as You become "bored" with me (as You surely will) and seek to create relationships beyond just "us?"




• How will we find the strength together to withstand all the unexpected and uncontrollable vagaries of living our lives day to day?




• How will you shelter me and us from the impacts of social sanction and isolation related to our lifestyle?

Those are the far more piercing questions that might have been asked. I doubt very much that He'd have been able to answer those "look into the future and tell me it will always be OK" questions with any kind of specificity or accuracy. The only truthful answers to those kinds of quetions have to fall into the "I don't know" realm.



So. No answer to what questions one ought to ask a Dominant or a Master ahead of deciding to enter a power-based relationship dynamic. The only advice that I can come up with, six years later, is to reach for a level of self-awareness that makes it seem "right" for you personally to follow the path that lies at your feet, aware that there are hurdles and chasms ahead that you cannot see or predict. There is no way to eliminate the risks; no way to prevent the disasters and challenges that will come up along the way; no way to measure the ratio of joy to sorrow that might be your portion. In the end, it is His tag line that seems to offer the best advice: "Go confidently in the direction of your dreams. Live the life you've imagined."



swan

You are My Slave

We've talked (He and I), more than once, about the dilemmas presented when there is "love" included in the BDSM equation.

As "things" have evolved between us in the last couple of years, and the intensity of our "play" has shifted, He has spoken of the conversation that He engages in within His own mind about wanting to fulfill His sadistic desires while, simultaneously, being reluctant to hurt me... He is genuinely torn. I suspect that He is not the first Dominant to find walking that path confusing at best.

As for me, the reality of my slavery is generally pretty lightly held in our world. There are no set protocols. Life is pretty fluid. It has been fairly easy for me to slip into believing that because He loves me as my Master, that is the same thing as being "in love" with me in a romantic sense.

The truth is that our relationship lives on two levels, but the core of who we are is always going to be rooted in the fact that He is "Master," and I am "slave." It is important that I not forget that reality, if this realtionship is going to proceed smoothly and calmly along the path that is best for the two of us.

Forgetting put us at odds with each other this last weekend. It was not a happy time in the House of Heron.

Most of the regular readers here know that I struggle with the "poly-ness" which is Master's natural bent. His desire and preference is to have multitudes of play partners, and He actively seeks those people out. There is no shortage of "fodder" in that arena. In the "vanilla" poly world (is there such a thing?), there are all sorts of rules and understandings and pretty little platitudes. People talk about honesty and keeping partners "on the same page" and all kinds of sort of "equal opportunity" stuff. But that's vanilla poly.

We aren't vanilla poly.

He trolls, and He links up, and He makes His arrangements how and as He will, and He doesn't feel any particular need or requirement to share any of that with me. Why should He? I am the slave. That's His view. Makes absolute sense to Him.

They show up in the stat counts, because He sends them here. I can see them. And He gets all excited and "weird" sounding with me. So I "know" about them. Except I don't. And if I ask, He tells me "not happening." And I get crazy, because I can't tell what is real and what isn't.

Pisses me off.

Except that He has made it clear: "You are my slave. I am the Master. I will communicate with whomever I please -- spank whomever I please. Whenever, however, wherever I choose. You will behave, in that context, exactly as I tell you to behave. You will not practice emotional blackmail. You are mine." Backed up words and commands with the kind of impact that He believes drives His message home.

So.

I will be backing up. Backing off. Learning this anew or again or whatever. It isn't about what I want or what I like or how I feel. It is about Him. Message received.

Slave. Leave the emotional "stuff" at the door. Obey and serve. There will always be a place within Master's love for that slave. Without that, He will only be bewildered at what it is that I think I am doing here...

swan

Slave

It is, as I sometimes forget, language that is challenging. Regardless of the context, it is a stretch, in our modern world, to simply declare that someone is a "slave." The word is evocative and loaded with a great number of connotations, most of them "negative" for the vast majority of people.


So, it is not especially surprising to encounter people who react strongly to the fact that I self-identify as a slave. That is exactly what I have been experiencing in the last several weeks. A variety of strong reactions to that language. The responses have been intense enough and frequent enough to cause me to ponder what it is that there is in my experience and choice that can be given or explained that would make it any more accessible.


I live within a relational power exchange that is commonly called Master/slave (sometimes called TPE, APE, Ownership relationships, etc.). The dynamic is, in simple terms, an agreement between us, that ultimate control is His. I have exactly the level of choice in any given situation that He opts to allow me. It is a power dynamic that is entirely voluntary in the sense that we both entered into this consensually and with a full understanding of what the relationship demanded of each of us.

The issue of consent is crucial if one is to understand how erotic slavery works.

Consider that in any sort of intimate relationship (not just BDSM ones) the issue of "consent" will arise. When we create intimacy with another person, we are continually faced with situations in which we must either choose to give consent or determine whether consent has actually been given. Regardless of whether we are talking about having sex or deciding to attend the opera together, if we are going to create a viable partnership, we must get to the point where we come to know how to give and get consent. Understanding how we arrive at consent, and what the conditions are for that consent to occur, can help to make it easier to move toward an understanding of the foundation for consensual Master/slave relationships as well.

A characteristic of healthy relational intimacy is that it is mutual, uncoerced, and consenting. Consent can be defined as present if four conditions are met. These conditions are not absolutes, but the more they are present, the greater the chance that both parties are consenting.

Condition #1: Both people are fully conscious. That would imply that both parties are in complete possession of their faculties -- not impaired in their ability to make reasonable and informed judgments -- not drunk or under the influence of drugs. Sane ( or mostly so).


Condition #2: Both people are equally free to act. The ability to consent implies that one is free to choose to not consent or to change one’s mind. It is essential, especially in the beginning of a relationship that there be open and clear communication that would forestall the potential for coercive situations to develop prior to full consent being established.


Condition # 3: Both parties have clearly communicated their intent.


Condition#4: Both persons are positive and sincere in their desires. Honesty is the basis of a healthy relationship. Insincerity makes it impossible for the other person to respond with integrity and clarity.


In July of 2002, when He put His blade to my flesh, and cut His initials in my left shoulder, it was with full consent and full knowledge on both our parts. We knew, insofar as it was possible for us to know, what it was that we were doing on that night. We had clearly communicated our intent to one another, both of us were entirely and utterly conscious, and neither of us were in any sense being coerced. I don't believe any two people have ever been more positive or more sincere in their desires than the two of us were that night. He placed the marks of His ownership on my body, but only revealed what already existed in my heart and mind. The conditions of consent were met -- fully and completely.



Of course, the beginning of a Master/slave relationship is only ... the beginning. Beginnings of things are often the easiest. I am held within the most benevolent of control dynamics. There are very few that I know, who claim the title "slave," who have the degree of latitude that I enjoy. Still, the reality is that I have no control that is not "given" to me. I sometimes bump up against that reality at the most inopportune times -- and I almost never fail to be surprised by those bumps. Whatever degree of latitude that is normally mine, if it is suddenly reduced, I find that exceptionally difficult. Imagine!



Because, I do. Still. Years later. I still must, cope with my reactions and responses to having my wants and desires thwarted, when that occasionally happens. I must still accommodate having my proud nature challenged. I must still remember and remind myself that I am His -- no longer my own. The move to the other is very quick and very much ingrained. It is a conscious thing to remain where I declared (on that July night) that it was my intent and desire to be.



Which leads me to consider the difference between "intent and desire" and "aspiration." It was my intent and desire to become His. I had no aspiration to somehow achieve a particular status within the lifestyle. And make no mistake about it, there are those who aspire to "super-slavehood." For some, becoming the quintessential "fantasy" or maybe "literary" BDSM slave is a goal toward which they strive, and for which they yearn. It fires their erotic imaginations and drives their seeking. They long for rules and flourishes and rituals that will announce and manifest their "slavery" to all who behold them. That was never what I looked to create in joining my life to His.



The slavery which I embrace is centered and focused on being and becoming what He would have me be. It does not "look" like what I read about in the BDSM stories. It has Him at its heart and center. So. There are very few rules; hardly any protocols; none of the fancy do-dads that the dreamers imagine slavery gets made of. It is about making a life with Him and for Him -- because that is the point. When I am at my best, as His property, He and I are utterly in tune with one another, and my slavery serves Him and enhances His life and brings us both a kind of peace and contentment that is simple and straightforward and fulfilling.

More and more, as we both age, as life and living make the kinds of demands on our time and energy that they do, I ponder how close we have seemed to veered toward the "vanilla" side of things. Except that I absolutely know that there is no truth in that. Our roots are deep nowadays. The seasons of our life flow from day to day and month to month, and there are surely ebbs and flows in the outward manifestations of our M/s dynamic. Structurally, though, we are solid with one another. We find out way to the touchstones that connect us, even in the midst of busy and difficult days. We take simple pleasure in knowing that there are secure understandings and absolute assurance between us. These things give us strength so that we can work together to make our lives work and be ready, whenever there is space for it, to tumble into the joyful celebration of our full identities with one another. Then, oh then, the whips and paddles come out, and I joyfully wear my collar, and the marks that He makes in my flesh speak of the truth that we build through all the other days, when the work of being for one another is far less sexy or flashy, but lays down the foundation upon which we stand in those glorious moments when we can simply soar away together.



swan

Bargains

There has been all sorts of talk around the circle, lately, about being "gracious" and "graceful" in the doing of this thing we are all trying to do -- this following of the path of submission and slavery. Most who read here, and most that I read are either engaged in, or at least interested in, the path of relational power exchange, and for most, there is at least some component of personal service to that dynamic. The proportional mix may vary from person to person, but read the "ingredient list," and you will find service in there somewhere.



For almost all of us though, that "service" component isn't the thing that really fires our rockets. We will mostly testify that it makes us happy if He is happy, contented, satisfied, comfortable, and all of that... and I don't doubt the veracity of that because I feel the same way. However, I know from personal experience that living on a steady diet of cooking, cleaning, ironing, shopping, filing, on and on and on -- leaves me feeling strung out and pallid after awhile. Unsatisfied. Starved. Stretched thin.



I understand that I serve just as well when I present a perfectly ironed shirt as I do when I bend over for a beating, but without some balance between the two, I'll begin to wither. And, frankly, no amount of self-talk about being "gracious" and "graceful" is going to change the fact. Because, while I claim the title of "slave," the truth is that, in coming to this relationship, I made a bargain (just as I did in my marriage -- just as everyone does entering into intimate relationship). Whether we know it or not, and whether we openly acknowledge it or not, the bargains we make about our relationships, are held intensely in our hearts and psyches. There is no need for detailed negotiation or ink to make that be the reality.



When I married, at the tender age of 19, I was negotiating for things like safety and security -- refuge from the alcoholic hell that was the home I grew up in. I didn't know who or what I was, and so I didn't have the information I needed to negotiate well for what I really needed. I really didn't know what I brought to the bargain, and I didn't make a good deal for myself. I didn't get what I thought I was getting, and I didn't get what I really needed either. It took me almost 28 years to understand that I needed to break the deal and start some new negotiations.

I subscribe to Jack Rinella's weekly column. It comes to my e-mail, and it always gives me something to think about. The last one was entitled, "Don't Let It Stop," and it dealt with the subject of ongoing negotiations between long-term partners. Rinella writes:

Sometimes, there is this myth that players who are experienced with each other don't need to negotiate ... Negotiation, no matter how thorough it is, is based on the here and now. In spite of how much we may resist the facts, it remains that the"there and later" will be different. Over time each and everyone of us will change, as will our partners and the myriad circumstances in which we will find ourselves. Inevitable as it is we can still be surprised by change. As resistant as we maybe to it, it never ceases. We will age by the very fact that time continues. Aging may bring wisdom or folly, expertise or failure. Over time our bodies, minds, and emotions will evolve. There is no stopping the graying of hair, the weakening of muscles, or the growing diminishment of our senses...

However we might fantasize all of this, or might have thought of it at some beginning point, that constant fact of change and evolution is the simple reality. None of us, Master or slave, is today, as we were a day or a month or a year ago. Physical, emotional, intellectual needs and abilities and potentials shift, and if we are wise, we must move with them. As partners, we need to renegotiate the bargains we make.

A very real and powerful part of walking this path is our ability and willingness to go, naked, into the depths of our own souls, to seek out the truth of who we are and offer it to one another. That is the best of our bargaining. We simply must be willing to know and understand what it is that we bring to the negotiations, and then make the very best bargain that we are able. There is nothing at all contrary in doing that. That is the epitome and essence of power exchange. That is the best of what we do with and for one anoher.

swan

It is Called "Sadism"

It all began innocently enough. A question was posed on a listserve that Master participates in (He has far more tolerance for this sort of thing than I do). The group identifies as a D/s Newcomers list, and the questioner asked if there was anyone who actually identified as a "sadist." Master responded like this:

I am an absolutely totally unrepentant sadist whose "infliction of choice" is spanking and related arts. I've never met a woman under the age of seventy I didn't want to spank...not as they want to be spanked so it will "feel good" to them, but as I enjoy it. Nothing is better than when my partner feels hysterically desperate to do anything to stop the blistering she is receiving and has absolutely no way to bring the spanking she is receiving under her control (other than her safe word and, alas, nothing is happening toher that is "unsafe" and she knows if she safes inappropriately she'll be even more severely punished.) I love being a sadist. I was born to it.

That was a couple of weeks ago. It really didn't cause much comment or reaction; one of those tidbits that gets dropped into the giant pond of online discourse and vanishes with hardly a ripple... At least, that was the way things stood until a person (who has apparently been "too busy" to keep up with things) checked back in in the last couple of days and came across His comments. This person, who identifies as "sweetiesub" but who shall be known for the remainder of this piece as "Little Miss Know It All," became seriously incensed and horrified over Master's description of His sadistic practice, and took it upon herself to set Him, and everyone else on the list straight. There has been quite an amazing dialog between them, and I have just been left shaking my head. I'm including the dialog, pretty much unedited, for your edification... I only wish I could convey to you the tone of voice that I hear when I read what she writes...

hi all, I've been back reading & catching up. I've been a bit too busy lately, and reading back-posts in the board has been both a diversion from other worries, *and* a point of contact (well, as far as contact on the Internet goes) with people who are doing more than leases, paint costs, electrical design costs, organizing dungeon cleaning/moving work parties, & keeping on top of twenty-seven levels of organizational issues! Not to sound overly important, it's just that everyone I am really close to is either involved in that (as I am too) or otherwise very busy. Many "fried" people. SO I've come back to try to divert my brain by catching up withNewcomers when I'm home. (I've also found fields of fireflies very therapeutic, at least until the Moon started to wax very Full.) Anyhoo. Did anyone else not pause to wonder what was meant in the below post? Can a person "safe inappropriately"? Does the dynamic of being punished more severely for safewording exist in anyone else's SM sessions? If this had been a description of a disciplinary action, aka punishment, would it have made more sense (as it would have to me)? (in D/s, Safewording during a punishment is really not an option unless one is being injured or having a severe freak-out whilst the D keeps on punishing.)
The concept that those with whom I practice BDSM follow is that a "safe" word is what it says. It is a word that is intended to keep one "safe." If a bottom partner is going blind, having chest pain, has lost sensation in her limbs, is unable to breathe, losing consciousness, or any other health and safety issue then the bottom partner is not only expected to use his/her safeword.....but is absolutely required to do so. The presumption is that the bottom partner has agreed to participate in a session of sadomasochism and realizes that means that pain is going to be inflicted on him or her. She has entrusted herself to her partner (i. e., me) and is entering into that session consensually and based upon a desire she has to experience what has been agreed to. It is also anticipated that the nature of what is to occur has been discussed and agreed to. In my sessions if one who has asked to receive pain then "safewords" not because they are in circumstances that are unsafe, but because they have decided that they now don't like what they agreed to, that is considered to be using a safeword inappropriately. The experiencing of pain when consensually playing with a sadist is not unsafe. Pain, in and of itself, is not unsafe. And yes, I do, and very much have punished women for using a safeword to end a session when there was nothing unsafe occurring to them. I have only once had someone safe appropriately. This is not because none of my partners have ever experienced health and safety threats during a scene, but because generally, I perceive those issues in my partners before they ever get to the point of "safewording," stop the scene, and do whatever is necessary to correct the situation. Quite frankly, if I get to the point where a partner has to "safeword" to head off a health/safety issue, I feel I have failed to practice appropriate empathic observation in the interest of my partner.
As a sadistic scene "issue", referring to her knowledge of inappropriately safewording to get out of the pain makes no sense to me ... and I play with sadists almost exclusively. I am a sadism-slut but pain does not always bring me pleasure, especially if I am being brought/pushed over the edge of my tolerance constantly in a scene.
As a sadistic scene issue using a safeword TO get out of pain makes absolutely no sense. If you want to avoid being subjected to the infliction of pain beyond your control then don't engage in sadomasochism. The infliction of pain beyond your control is the essence of the definition of bottoming in a sadomasochistic experience. If you want to have someone inflict pain on you in ways that you find to "feel good" for you, then hire yourself a "service top" who is not a sadist, and whose role is to serve you by creating your desired sensations as you control the scene. I'm a sadist. Your enjoyment of the pain in our scene (or not) is your responsibility. Not only do I not mind if you don't enjoy the pain. I enjoy it more if you do not. (There are certainly some times with my family members when I do play with them working to achieve mutual satisfaction, because it pleases me to, but then too, they do not safeword unless they are having a safety issue.) By the way much of the play I do is disciplinary style play and/or actual discipline. It is what I/we enjoy
Is this concept, incorporating the thought that a safeword if used might be "inappropriate," merely a different "play style" than mine &/or what I am used to in New England?
I'm a long standing practitioner and have had many partners from all over, including people from New England. There really is not a regional difference in this regard. I expect your style preference and perhaps experiential limitations have led you to these opinions.
I am not looking for universal condemnation of raheretic's choices.
How generous of you! I was so hoping you would not have me excommunicated by the National Association of Service Tops or something:)
For those he is involved with, this may be the "meat & potatoes" of any scene.
Yes, it is, and disgusting depraved perverts we are each and every one.
However when I read this I felt I was in quicksand, not understandingthe dynamics being referred to.
Expanding one's horizons is often feels that way.
Tom, you have misunderstood my point of view. Let me try to be between the two of us, since your misunderstanding is directed *to* me directly, in your reply. Anyone who wants to is welcome to read along.
I responded directly to you in that your original post was specifically about me and my described practice and questioned the degree of universal condemnation that should be sought of my practice.
My original post was *not* directed at you, but rather intended to inquire if others felt any similar lack of complete understanding to your view on inappropriately safewording. An appropriate question for a newcomers' group. Although I'm single & have not entered a service or submissive relationship in a longish while, I have sessioned to understand the general levels of what my body can tolerate & how I can process pain, and have learned a few things along the way about sustaining heavy bruising, & bleeding & scarring. I can offer more about the sadism my body has undergone, & which I've mentally processed, if anyone likes. First in response to your implications of my short comings in experience,
I never in anyway addressed shortcomings of yours in any way. I did say I suspect your perspectives are limited by your experience. All of our perspectives are limited by experience. I certainly, though very experienced, do not, nor would I ever, claim to know the experience of all or even most others. The fact is I know what I've experienced either directly or through learning from others. It has appeared at several points in both your posts that you are somehow far more omniscient and appear to believe you know the practices of huge numbers of people throughout significant regions of the world.
Tom: I session with sadists, though the ones I'm mutually interested in are by their nature actively interested in the positive responses a female body can have, as well as the sadistic pain responses. In other words, I do not session with sadists who'd never, in other moments with other partners, take pleasure in heightening the female hormonal reactions to body play.
I am glad for you and your partners that you have found mutually satisfying outlets for your sensual/erotic orientations. I must admit confusion in terms of what you are describing here. I'm likely being dense. I've read this sentence over several times and can get no sense of what you are trying to express.
IOW I don't session with people who are utterly dead to the appeal & rewards of pure pleasure, or whose degree of sadism simply leaves that out of the equation. I do session with men who get horny & hard from hurting me without having any sexual contact.
Would I assume that you are somehow categorizing me as being "dead to the appeal & rewards of pure pleasure"? And you have accused me of being condescending and judgmental!
I scene with sadists without sexual contact. What I get out of that is someone who's embraced the yin & yang of both sadism & their ability to invoke sexual desires, even if I never get to experience the latter side of the balance. What you describe regarding your sadism style is not only familiar to me, but familiar from firsthand experience, with the exception being the inclusion of punishment if I chose to end the activity. I don'tnormally suggest use of safewords, although I play with dominants who accept that they are de rigeur in a play environment & who do check if we are on the same page about them, so in a sense we do utilize safewords, though they don't come into use. I would be fine if they didn't ask about them, since I am certain already of the dominant's character & style, before asking/agreeing to session. My reply is taking a personal tack so far, because that is how your reply was designed - to suggest by implication & outright that I did not understand the realities of play with sadists.
There is nothing in my reply that in any way describes your understanding of play with sadists of any sort. You have in both your earlier post and in this one attempted to claim that since my BDSM practice is not one you are familiar with, it should be subjected to condemnation, is exploitive, is based on being dead to rewards of pleasure, and is unique to me and me alone, and contrary to the teachings of the entire East Coast of the United States. You must be awfully broadly experienced and hugely expertly knowledgeable to cast such judgments on others. And now you are claiming it was I who was condescending and offensive.
Now for the safeword issue. (Of interest to all, I'd think.) Why is it inappropriate to safeword to stop a session? 'Red' or whatever the strongest safeword may be, is the standard for:"Stop the session instantly, no more, not even one or two more, I need to get out of the scene,"
You'll get no argument from me. That is how I/we use safewords.
in my neck of the woods. Even if it all *is* synonymous for "I can't take any more."I find the "Red means stop what you are doing right now but don't endthe scene" safeword-style which some people use to be an inappropriate concept of safewording, but that is their choice. All that matters is that *they* understand what they are doing. (I even made it clear to all the readers in my post that the same variation of the standards might be true in your case.)
I don't find anyone's concept of safewording inappropriate for anyone other than for those with whom I am playing. If we have an informed agreement based on our relatedness that this is how we will play then that is what is appropriate for us. Quite frankly what others may think of the appropriateness of our choices is irrelevant. Likewise it is presumptuous in the extreme to decide whether or not others choices are appropriate of not.
But there *are* standards.
And who is it that sets these standards? I have been around this for decades and somehow have missed the BDSM Board of Arbiters who have established these standards you wish applied to the BDSM practice of me and mine.
The Red-means-the-session-ends standard's going to be the entry point for most newcomers into the world of sadomasochism.
I don't know how we got into this discussion of what is appropriate for new comers in the world of sadomasochism. I responded to a post asking if there were readers here who could identify with being termed a sadist. I made it clear that I wholeheartedly do identify as a sadist. In that response I described some very basic premises of my BDSM practice. That led to your attack. Certainly mentoring novitiates into "The Life" requires a developmental progression in learning to actualize their aspirations. I have mentored others and had the great good fortune to be mentored by some wonderfully experienced folks when I was new. But there was nothing in what I wrote, or in the request it was written in response to, that dealt with mentoring newbies regarding safewords or anything else. If our discussions may only use terms appropriate to the rankest new folks in response to any and all questions, the conversations here will need to change dramatically. The style of not allowing someone to use a safeword, & punishing them for it, is in all that I have ever heard or experienced, reserved to/for dedicated slaves to a specific family/house or dominant, never for general practice. (Except certain mysterious, off-the-BDSM-tourist-path Chateaus of Maledom/femalesub slavery which sound like extracts from The Story of O.)
Once again, why is it that your ".....all that I have ever heard or experienced," been exalted to a point that you may judge as appropriate or inappropriate the practice of others whose experience happens not to have been yours? I have encountered new practices at just about every one of the BDSM conferences I've attended over the years. I don't decide because they are not like anything I've heard of or experienced before, they must be wrong or inappropriate. Even if they would not be my choice, they are certainly appropriate for those who consensually choose them for themselves.
Not allowing safewords *at all* is something I understand. "D" is an example of someone who's often written a compelling treatise on this style, which has no safewords whatsoever. Punishment for safewording is something personal to you, and you've elaborated very well on it. Your explanation of how it means "safe" or"unsafe" is rational & clearly provides the context which your earlier post did not. So far so good. Your comments towards me about expanding my horizons was pure condescension, and IMO this should not happen in a newcomers' group.
Actually, no they were not condescending. The practice I've written about is not that rare, even if it is new to you. You expressed feeling a sinking feeling when you learned of this practice. It is not uncommon for people who first encounter a practice that is foreign to their experience to have similar feelings. It is also not uncommon particularly if that practice flies in the face of passionately held assumptions (and it would appear that my having made the mistake of describing my practice somehow violated some extremely passionately adhered to values of yours to warrant your vitriolic response) to develop reaction formation as a defense mechanism to attempt to resolve their resulting cognitive dissonance. There has been tremendous amounts of condescension in our correspondence, but it has not occurred on this end of the exchange.
We're all here to attract people & inform them.
Inform, yes, support certainly, but I see no reason to attract anyone........maybe the Christian right has us nailed. The evil BDSM'ers are out their trying to ensnare poor unsuspecting folk into lives of godless perversion:)


I'm not sure. I suspect the conversation that was sparked by all of that continues, and perhaps there are some who are actually getting "good" information out of all the nonsense

There's a part of me that is running an ongoing "lecture" in my head directed toward "Little Miss Know It All," giving her what I consider to be the benefit of my experience and wisdom as a lifestyle submissive and slave -- because, after all, I live this and I can point to dozens of places in her little diatribe where someone who claims to be "submissive" is way off the mark... The more reasonable, more (hopefully) mature, and graceful part of my brain is well aware how arrogant and inappropriate that would be.


So, maybe I'll use this little exchange to refresh the lessons that I knew or have learned along the way -- not for anyone else, but just for me:

• When someone says this is what I/we do, or this is how I/we am/are, I'll try to remember to listen carefully and openly. I'll watch myself for strong reactions that may lead me to make judgements that are grounded in my own biases and fears.

• I'll speak (and write), when I speak, respectfully and gently. I'll try to remember that the tone of my words can invite and welcome others to dialog -- or create distance and dissension.

• I'll be mindful that my experience is limited. I'll keep in mind that I am a learner, and that there may be others who have experiences that are beyond what I have seen, tried, experienced, or contemplated. When I encounter something new, I will recognize that I am seeing something that is outside my experience. I will feel free to explore and question things that I do not know or understand, but I will try to avoid moving to condemn or judge based on my own limitations.

• I'll understand that not everyone lives, practices, plays, or relates in the same ways as I do. I will assume that there will be some "ways" that will be outside of the boundaries of my comfort zone. When that occurs, I will understand that I may choose to not participate or endorse without any need to attack or tear down.

swan

Showing His Dominance?

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

I'd Sure Like to Dom u...

I have, lately, been accosted by a Yahoo Messenger "visitor." He is golden retriever eager, and self-identifies as "dom." He found me, it seems, through one of the group lists that I am part of, and, when he chooses to initiate conversation, he always begins at what I would consider the 6-week point (and I'm not even going to address the cyber-speak which, in my humble opinion, marks a person as too lazy to engage in simple English discourse):

"are u married?

are u submissive?
are u permitted to play with others?
I sure would like to dom u."

I find that I want to take this poor would be "dom," and shake some sense into him. Because it is clear he has no sense at all of where he is missing the boat in that little monologue.

In the first place, that eager, puppy, tail-wagging, can I please sound just does not "get it." If you expect to sell someone on the story that you are a "dominant," then act the part. Step up and take control. Assume the mantle of authority and responsibility. Don't whine, wheedle, plead, and beg. It is unseemly and inappropriate. If you are going to grovel like a sissy-maid submissive, take it somewhere else.

Another bit of advice that I want to give the poor fellow is that he needs to learn about some basic manners and rules of engagement. I wonder that he doesn't seem to understand that it is extremely bad form to attempt to play with someone else's toys without permission. From the very first time he approached me with his desire to "dom me," I made it clear to him that I was "owned," not looking for another "dominant," and encouraged him to contact Master about his interest in playing with me. He did actually have a chat with Master who made it clear to him that I wasn't interested in playing with him, and also was clear that I wasn't "up for grabs." Anyway you slice it, he doesn't "have permission."

But... even if there was "permission;" even if there was some sort of desire for the potential of D/s play between this person and me, that would develop from a relationship. I would have to know something about this person. Master would have to know something about him. There would have to be some information that told us something more about him than the fact that he thinks that he is a dom. How is it possible that this character fails to understand that this might need to begin with something as simple as "getting to know each other?" Is it so difficult to conceptualize that something as intense and vulnerable as a D/s relationship might be founded on something more than 20 words on an IM screen -- especially when half of those words aren't even written in what looks like legitimate English (oops -- is my bias showing here)?

I think that we are pretty open and welcoming people. I imagine that someone in our local area who took the time to get to know us, and who let us get to know them; who presented themselves in our world as a multi-dimensional, well-brought-up, civilized, respectful human being with some integrity, might quite easily find themselves invited to dinner -- and perhaps be welcomed to join in some levels of "play." We are not shy. We play in public dungeons whenever we have the opportunity, and we've actively sought out and welcomed "friends" into our lives and homes. But, we don't play on street corners with strangers. What we do is not something that we do lightly or without sincere consideration. We don't engage in it without knowing who we are and we don't "mess" with those who demonstrate that they have no concept of the true nature of what it really is -- or who seem to have no interest in growing into that understanding. Too, for us, friendship is a precious and treasured gem and we take it quite seriously. If you want to be included in our circle, you need to act like a "friend," and not like some "smash and grab" thief who is only interested in taking what you think you want.

swan

Struggling to Give this one up

Everytime I think I have this business of being His "handled," I run smack into some other spot that puts me face to face with just how far I am from really releasing the control completely. Some little thing will come up where I still have a death grip on some part of life that feels like it ought to be MINE, and I get my back up in a heartbeat.

Like for instance...

Dreams and fantasies. If I've got hold of some fantasy, then (please note my pouty face) it is MY fantasy/dream, and I do not appreciate having it messed with -- thank you very much!

Which is exactly where things got interesting last weekend.

I woke up from a dream that felt sexy. I was turned on and feeling positive and hopeful about what we might be able to do with that in terms of playing together if we could tag onto those feelings. One of the things that I struggle with in terms of our SM is that it is (from my perspective) usually intense right from the start. I almost always feel as if I am scrambling to keep up and hold on. There is never anytime for me to "catch" up with it and get the benefit of the endorphins that might help me ride the wave. And there is very little that feels "sexy" within that context, so there is the emotional/intellectual "pleasure" of knowing that I'm submitting (and hopefully pleasing Him), but generally no physical or erotic pleasure.

So, as He woke up, I shared my dream with Him. It wasn't really complicated. I'd been dreaming of some small jaw-style hair clips being put onto my nipples and labia, and then as the pain of that built and built, I'd "slipped" into a spanking that was way more erotic than what I usually experience. It was, for me, a gateway fantasy -- an imagined pathway from small and building bits of pain up toward the more difficult levels where we usually play. Simple, I thought.

Right away, as soon as I'd spoken the words, He took off with it. First it was, that He would put the clips on me and then send me out to cut switches. Then He decided to paddle me first before starting in with the clips, and then again once they were on -- using one of the more wicked paddles in the arsenal.

It just made me angry. No slow entry. No gateway. Intensity right from the start. By the time we finally got to the clips, I was OVER IT. It wasn't going to be MY dream. It was His. He'd taken what I'd given Him and run off with it. AND that wasn't the end of it either. The clips would need to be removed by whipping them off...

I was hysterically frightened and furiously angry. At some point, I was full on in flight mode, slammed up against the far wall, defiantly refusing to have anything to do with it all. I did eventually get back into position and back in line, but there was no joy and nothing sexy left in the whole business. It was misery and torment and anguish and panic.

It has taken me most of the week to work it out. To understand that I don't get to have MY fantasies; don't get to expect to have some sort of soft, easy, lead in to sessions. It has been a week where I've whirled through the seemingly mundane stuff of my "normal" life while I chewed on what felt like the complete disaster of that encounter.

My initial reaction, after it was all over with, was that I just need to stop sharing my dreams and my fantasies. After all, it never goes well and I just end up disappointed and frustrated. I knew, even as I thought that thought, that it was falacious, but I needed to calm down and consider before I could get hold of the understanding that I don't have the RIGHT to expect that my dreams or fantasies will be played out as I like them just because I might want it that way. This, too, is His and not mine.

That is not easy to accept. I want to, sometimes, be helped into this; to be gentled along just a little. It feels grim and dismal to face a lifetime of sessions which will be mismatched to my "speed," and therefore almost always terribly difficult and distressing. Part of me wishes there were some option, some alternative, some fall back position.

And then I remember myself. Try to find the quiet place. Try to settle down and remember that it won't always end in disaster. Try to remind myself that there are the times when I do fly. And try to stay clear that it doesn't matter because it is all up to Him.

swan

Polyamory Observations #4

One thing that can be a challenge is that when you live a life that doesn't match up with social expectations or assumptions, you find that you don't fit anyplace. We encounter that phenomenon just about everyplace, and in almost every setting. It really just doesn't matter where we are or who we talk to. People who know us, in whatever context, and people who do not know us, make assumptions about us, that are almost never accurate. That can result in some interesting, and sometimes very awkward situations. We've gotten pretty good at bouncing with most of it, but it wears over time.

Master recently described some significant part of how we experience this pervasive social circumstance in a piece He wrote on a local poly list that we participate with. It was midway through a conversation that began because someone had made the (relatively common) assumption that "poly" equates to "promiscuous." As the exchange went back and forth, with the clueless one insisting that it was ABOUT SEX, Master wrote:

"I think too, we wonder if we will successfully
match up with other poly folks. We wonder if our relationship, a heterosexual
committed 24/7 poly V BDSM M/s, D/s), DD lifestyle (vanilla translation: we
three live together in our home in a straight Mf relationship, with a defined
authority structure, and we like to bind each other up and spank erotically and
disciplinarily, among other expressions of fun, excitement, and intimacy:)We'd
like to have friends with whom we can be who we are without pretext. We would
too like to be able to help others who are exploring polyamory. I don't think
that answers we've found for us are necessarily generalizable to others. I have
seen too much, especially in the BDSM community, of folks who feel that because
they have been active in a lifestyle for years, they must therefore be "experts"
and "teachers" of others. On the other hand I/we would frequently have liked to
have had others with whom we could have related, confided, observed, and learned
from (either by emulating them, or saying "that would never work for us") We
know for us as we began our family, and as we continue for that matter (we've
been together about 7 years now-- 2 years long distance and about 5 years living
together....and we expect to be together the rest of our lives), there are very
few resources or supports, to assist us, and we suspect, others, as we/they
encounter life challenges. We have the same life challenges as any middle-aged
family of suburban professionals.............it's just they are all different
with the addition of the poly dynamic superimposed on a world with a presumption
of dyadic heterosexual monogamy. Many of our challenges are not romantic/erotic
(although if you've read our Blog, you know we have those too) but are health
related, legal, professional, social, recreational, spiritual (no we are not
looking for a church:), etc. I'm always interested that discussions of polyamory
always seem to become about sex. Now don't get me wrong. I get it. I know that
the primary thing that makes poly different from monogamy is that there are more
than two adults who are intimately involved in relationship. Paraphrasing the
Clinton campaign, "It's the sex stupid." I'm far from oblivious to that fact,
nor am I a prude. We're very experienced, have played publicly in BDSM dungeons
and conferences, and even demonstrated some amazingly intimate sexual variations
with audiences, so it's not that we want to repress that major aspect of our
lives and our unique intentional relationship. The fact that we are poly doesn't
mean we want to play with you or become romantically involved. The fact too that
we are not inherently "available" doesn't mean it is unimaginable that life
could evolve to include intimate play or more in depth relationship with others
too. (How's that for simple clarity?:)Last November we took all three cars to
the tire store (all new in 2004 and so now getting worn). People find it odd I
have three cars and two women who drive them:) or at least that is the
perception they have. I am rather medically informed because of my educational
background and profession. We have interesting times with health care
professionals when I go to both T's and s's Dr. appointments. S recently went to
a new gynecologist who does not permit men to accompany patients to the exam
room. This won't be a long term medical relationship. All of life's challenges
are different and have extra-normal dynamics within a poly lifestyle. It would
be good to share information with others dealing with them."

I think that describes what it is to be a family that doesn't fit. We run into the "square peg" phenomenon all the time. There are several issues for us, really. When you talk about "poly, " you may have to deal with some or all of them. They all are founded in basic assumptions and expectations which, in turn, lead to biases.

The first set of assumptions that we find are the most obvious, and the ones that we expected from the beginning. These are the social/legal norms related to relational numerosity. The simple reality is that our society assumes, from the moment each of us arrives on this speck of dust, that we will live out our adult lives in one of two numerical relational formulations: we will either pair off, two-by-two, or we will remain single (or else return by times to that state). We learn it as we hear the fairy tale stories of our childhood. We absorb it in the "romantic/lusty" music that we are immersed in as young adults. The messages are pervasive throughout the entertainment industry. Inescapable. So, we do not fit the mold. We are NOT paired. We are NOT coupled. We are NOT two. And we are also NOT single.

Three is just not a number that is expected. Anywhere. It makes life complicated, and sometimes just comical. Some examples:

• We go out for a meal, and the wait person most often looks at the bunch of us quizzically and then gives up and asks, "Will this be one check or two?"


• There is absolutely no way to list two partners or beneficiaries or spouses on an insurance form or emergency contact form or next of kin blank space when you are filling out that sort of documentation.


• When we travel, we have to make sure we question hotel reservation clerks very carefully about the nature of hotel room sleeping accommodations. Two queen size beds work well. Two regular size beds can be made to work. One king-size bed will not work very well. We need more than the usual complement of bath towels that a hotel room offers; more than two water glasses, more complementary soap/shampoo, etc.


• Business give away prizes and complementary passes and the like in even numbered increments -- two's and sometimes four's (but never three's).


• In the medical care realm, there is ALWAYS an issue when two of us show up to accompany a third to an appointment or a procedure or a surgery. In medicine, humans are dealt with in pairs. So it is written.

We were prepared, sort of, for the number thing. It seems obvious. What we did not anticipate, and what has been almost as difficult for us to handle has been the set of challenges that have arisen for our household because of assumptions laid on us about gender relatedness in our family. There has come to be an expectation that to say that one is "poly" is equivalent to saying that one is also "gay" or "lesbian" or "bi-sexual." It is my belief that this is an expectation that has been in large part fostered within the "poly" community, although I think it creates a degree of anxiety/fear/prejudice outside our ranks. It happens that our triad is heterosexual. We have to explain that on an ongoing basis. People simply assume that T and I must be bi-sexual. We have come to understand that the liklihood is that a good deal of the remarkable acceptance that I find within Master's extended family is based on the probability that they believe that T and I are "involved." Somehow the family has an easier time conceiving that T and I might be sexually linked than they do imagining Master and I in the same way -- and they are way more OK with that notion. Conversely, my own mother's recoil from our arrangement may be largely founded in her own identical assumption. Too, we have noted more than once, a certain emotional recoil or whiplash response when would be "friends" first discover that their assumption about that orientation just wasn't true. It seems to go back to that "poly" is "sex" bias. People note that we are all together, and the image they form is that we must all be sexual with one another. How limited is our intimate vocabulary and how souless our relational imagination, that we cannot conceive of loving another without it necessarily being sex-based in every case.


At another level, other expectations creep into the picture. For me, this is the realm of the "availability" fallacy. When I came into the realization and recognition that it was possible to participate in and embrace more than one mature, loving, intimate relationship simultaneously, I found that to be healthy and good. I think that making the choices that led our family into this dynamic gave us the opportunity to love richly and joyously, and it allowed us to broaden our lives rather than narrow them. Making that choice, and doing the work to bring it to fruition does not mean that any one of us gave up our ability to be discriminating, sensible, intelligent, rational, or demanding in terms of what it is that we want or need from an emotional / intmate partner. If there is one thing that we have learned in doing this, it is that making good relationships work is a demanding and serious undertaking. It has its very definite rewards, but it is not simply a matter of genitals calling to one another from afar. So, I am continually stunned when I tell someone that I am poly, and I get that sort of "Do you wanna..." response that isn't anymore sophisticated than my 6th graders are managing these days. Excuse me? Or, and this is almost as annoying, the flip side of the coin, which is the one that goes: "you are already in a relationship, and I'm looking for sex, so I don't even have the time to talk to you." Call it the UNAVAILABILITY assumption. Our family is stable and committed. We are not "trolling" for partners. It doesn't mean that we wouldn't consider it if something happened. But it is real surely unlikely to happen if you assume either way without so much as a polite "Howdy, my name is _____________________." We all know what we have going for us, and we know what we bring to the table. IF we consider opening our hearts and our household, we'll be wanting to add a partner who enhances our lives and our loves.


Add the other oddities of who we are: a bit older, and into BDSM, and just a little bit outspoken, and prone to be left-leaning liberals, and who knows what all else, and well, we just don't fit anywhere much. Not that we couldn't, but you would have to get to know us; talk to us; learn about us, and let us learn about you -- it would be a little like building a relationship, or a friendship. That's how we got started with one another. That's how we think love grows.


swan