Sl-ub-ottom

I've been contemplating the path I've taken, in terms of BDSM, to where I find myself now.  To make any sense of that, I need to rehash my meanderings through the various down-side labels that I've used for my part inside of power relationships.  Now, before anyone jumps all over me, I know that my view of all of that is particular to my experience, and it may not match up with your views.  I get that, and I'm really fine with it.  I am trying to sort my own path out here.  Not trying to be prescriptive.  So, if you can, try and be patient with me.  Or enter the conversation.  Or just click on to the next place.  It's all good.

In the BDSM bestiary, there are labels applied to roles and we are inclined to cuss and discuss the varieties of "beast" described  by all the words we use.  On the "down" side of the power based relational dynamic, we find (among a widely shaded pantheon of others) bottoms, submissves, and slaves.  In general, those three are viewed as nesting subsets; each part of the larger set that umbrellas over it.  Hence:

• All submissives are bottoms, but not all bottoms are submissive.
• All slaves are submissive, but not all submissives are slaves.

What else, one might be tempted to ask, is there to know?  Pick your "level," and you are ready to "play" at this thing we call BDSM.  Except, of course, it is never, ever that simple.  Well, maybe it is.  For some people.

We BDSM types borrowed the notion of "bottom" from the world of gay men, where the word "bottom" denotes the passive, receptive partner -- especially in anal/oral sex.  Appropriated by the, not-necessarily-gay, BDSM community, the term is generally understood to mean the passive and receptive partner:  the one who submits, suffers, obeys, serves.  In my experience, bottoms are BDSM players who take on the receptive role for a negotiated, pre-defined, agreed to period of time (a scene or an evening, or a weekend).  Some who enjoy the part of "bottom" play regularly with one or several partners who take on the role of "top."  It is a complementary relational arrangement that tends to work for both partners when they can reach a balanced understanding that allows them to play congenially.

The submissive is, most often, a bottom who enjoys giving up some measure of personal autonomy to a partner who will accept the responsibility for those parts of her/his life -- the dominant.  While it is common for bottoms to be passive within the context of BDSM play, the submissive's willingness to allow the dominant to control what happens may extend to a few or many parts of life.  "It is not just play," or, "I'm not just submissive in the bedroom," are the claims made by many submissives.  It is pretty easy, especially if one is new, young, or inexperienced, to believe that being submissive is a level up from being "just a bottom."

Slaves are those who are willing to turn over all of the control, within whatever negotiated limits may be specified at the beginning of the relationship, to become the property of a master.  No rights.  No property.  No options.  No way out.  Slavery is, arguably, the most extreme form of bottoming.  It is also, in some weirdly convoluted sense, the most prestigious manifestation of bottoming.

I came into the BDSM lifestyle, thinking that I might, maybe, possibly be submissive.  I wasn't all that comfortable with the idea.  It really didn't fit with my sense of who I'd worked very hard to be in my life, but it did seem to answer to something that I wanted in some deep, shame-filled, neglected part of my being.  So, I tried to learn how to be submissive.  I read a lot.  I corresponded on lists, trying to learn from those who seemed to know more than I did.  And I wrestled with my inner voices (and a cadre of inner demons) until I finally came to some kind of internal sense of peace over the whole business.  I submitted; giving up control; giving up choices; sinking into silence; swallowing the words and the ideas behind the words; making my mind to conform itself to another's.

And I kept reading, learning, or so I thought, learning to submit; learning to be a better submissive.  I steered a course that avoided the depths where it might be said that I was "topping from the bottom," and so, from day to day and week to week, I said less and less.  Pushed down the thinking that might have given rise to opinions and ideas that would run counter to those of the ones to whom I'd given control.  Except the thoughts were still there.  The ideas never really went away.  I was quiet on the surface while the chatter in my head pushed me further from the true connection that I sought.

Somewhere along the way, I came to believe that the "best" of the downside roles was that of "slave."  Now, in retrospect, I question who, exactly, I thought it would be "best" for.  For him?  It wasn't his idea; not in the beginning, and probably never once in all the time we practiced that particular mode of D/s relating.  I do not think that I was ever "slave" in his perceptions except when putting that notion out on the table might win him an argument; get me to acquiesce to whatever it was that he wanted in the moment.  For me?  For me the idea of belonging totally to someone meant a trade off -- I would give up all the rights given to any adult human if only...; if only doing that would give me safety and security and the assurance that I'd be wanted and treasured, cared for and protected.  The child I was wanted all of that, even as I made choices from the perspective of a grown woman.  He of course knew nothing of that bargain.  It was all in my head.  He never agreed to any of that.  Never made any of those commitments or promises.  That bit of negotiating never happened anywhere except in my own mind.  What came about later ought to really be laid at my door.  Negotiating is not a solitaire game.

Which brings me back around to the "beginning;" if it can be said that bottoming is the "beginning" of all of it.  I have never spent any time bottoming.  It seems to me now, that bottoming is purer if not simpler than its more laden corollaries.  I do not pretend to be any sort of expert at bottoming.  Just bottoming.  I am new to this.  I bottom when he is willing to top; and I do it for me.  Just me.  And I do not feel guilty or selfish about that.  Surprisingly.  I think, when he is choosing to top, he is doing it mostly for him.  The way he wants to do it.  He may be aware of what is happening on my end, but it really isn't his concern.  He is involved, in the event, with getting what he wants out of it all.  As am I.  I used to white knuckle my way through sessions because it was all about him, and for me to SAY anything about what I liked or didn't like or wanted or didn't want -- all of that fell into the realm of "topping from the bottom."  So, he topped, and got whatever he got out of it.  And I suffered.  Because I was trying to be a good submissive; a good slave.  Now, I bottom.  I play because I like to play, and if it gets too intense or there is some part of it that is not good, I say so -- because I want what I want.  Too.

I still take care of him on a number of levels.  I still listen to what he wants and needs.  I still treat him with respect and love.  He still watches what he wants to watch on television, and he seldom thinks to ask me about that.  And that is OK.  With him and with me.  There at those bits of submission and slavery that work for us, and I don't feel the need to reject those parts of who we are.  But it is just the fact that some of that was wrong for us.  Unhealthy for us.  Destructive for us.  Better gone -- a bit of interpersonal history to be noted and recognized and left to move on along the currents of time.

Perhaps it is true in BDSM as in other facets of our lives, that none of us are all one thing or another.  Most of us are conglomerations, mixtures, combos, collages that are built of the parts that work from the ideas and experiences that we encounter along the way.  Spiritually, politically, physically, sexually, intellectually, personally, inter-personally, we take what works; what fits, and leave the rest behind.  I've tried on the trappings of submission and slavery.  For a time, I claimed those labels for myself.  No more.  At present, the best I will claim is to be some mixture of the subsets:  slave, submissive, bottom -- sl-ub-ottom.

What's Your Role?

I think that one of the biggest misconceptions; one of the biggest fallacies about the BDSM lifestyle concerns "roles."  We tend to fall into and then perpetuate the foolish notion that people take on or fulfill or live a particular role within their relationship -- and then that's it!  Submissive, Dominant, Switch, Top, Bottom, Master, Slave, whatever; we too often fall into the trap of one word labels and descriptions.  It doesn't work; can't work.  We are, each of us, multi-faceted humans -- and we each play a variety of roles in our own lives and in the lives of those to whom we relate.

I've played lots of roles in 57 years:  child, daughter, first-born, big sister, cousin, classmate, student, best friend, geeky kid, nerdy kid, girl friend, college girl, fiance, lover, wife, sister-in-law, daughter-in-law, bridesmaid, parent, mom, job-seeker, employee, co-worker, boss lady, teacher, grandmother, seeker, divorcee, sister-heart, bottom, submissive, slave, top, switch...  I look at that list and I realize that there are very few of those labels that are a single thing either.  Each of those "roles" contain a whole host of ways of being within that context. Who has ever been just a parent, for example?  Doesn't that one include things like coach, and confidant, and cook, and disciplinarian, and advocate, and tutor, and...?

Yes, I've worn plenty of hats along the way.  Right now, though, as we go through the rehab and recovery from this knee replacement -- I am coach and cheerleader and, let us not forget ... chauffeur.  We think He would be just fine to drive, now that He's off all the prescription pain medications.  His right leg is just fine, after all.  But for now, I remain, as I have been through these last four weeks, His personal driver.  Just call me, "James."

swan

A New Stage

It may be time to come to grips with the reality of time and age.  He is 63.  I am 57.  We have bodies that creak and and joints that hurt.  We have to pay attention to what we eat and when we exercise and how much time we sleep.  Some nights, maybe even most nights, we eat dinner, clean up the dishes, and then sit down, side by side on the couch, and sleep through whatever it is that is on the television.

In just a month, we will take note of the 10th anniversary of my arrival here to live with Tom and T; a full decade!  When I came here, I was on the upward learning curve of my BDSM orientation.  It may not be the case for everyone in the lifestyle, but for me, there have been stages to my growth within this sexual/erotic orientation.  The beginning places go way, way back into the years of my childhood and early adolescence; years when I dreamed and fantasized about control imposed from outside myself; years when I felt myself abandoned, unwanted, and unloved.  In those early years, my imaginings were about "belonging" to someone.  The frightened, lonely child that I was wanted only to be taken in, held close, and to know, finally, where "home" might be.

Getting started in the BDSM lifestyle was like landing in some magical wonderland.  I was like a kid in a candy store.  Every new experience made me eager for the next one.  I was like a sponge, soaking up all the sensations and adventures that were arrayed in front of me.  There was so much to see and do and feel and learn...

I wasn't as devil-may-care as some newcomers to the life are.  I explored, in those early days, with my husband at my side -- and having him there provided me with a margin of safety, and a buffer against the full "meat market" onslaught that sometimes washes over new, inexperienced, female submissives.  He kept me pretty safe.  Early on, I remember wondering about the spiral that I perceived ahead of me.  "What," I wondered, "would happen if I kept following the path of more intense, and more risky BDSM experience?  How far could I go along that path, and how would I know when I'd reached the end of the road?"  Even then, I had a vague uneasiness about the potential for reaching a point that was beyond my capacity to encompass it -- a point where what I craved tipped over into the realm of dangerous and crazy.

Then, I met Tom, and came to live here.  We were both hungry, ravenous, for the sensations that arose from sadomasochistic play.  We wrapped up in each other and we explored the boundaries and the edges of intimate power exchange.  We didn't discuss and we didn't negotiate.  We just went after it.  I reveled in the opportunity to finally fulfill the fantasies that had been held so close for so long.  He, I think, found His own joy in being partnered with someone who could match His own appetites.  It was a fierce and breathless time.  There was nothing subtle about what we did together; nothing gentle; nothing tender.  We devoured one another; demanding more and more and more from each other and from one another -- until, inevitably, the day came when there was nothing left to give.  I still feel that I hit the wall first; that it was me who ran out of runway.  I was the one who didn't have enough masochist to keep up with His sadist.  


Things happened.  Life happened.  Things changed, and over time, I was working to "meet my commitments; struggling to live up to the standards I'd set for myself as His "slave."  There was less and less joy in all of that.  It became work and sadness and bitterness.  And still we kept at it.  At some point, we found ourselves on a rocket that we couldn't get off of.  I think maybe He was more fulfilled in that part of the relationship than I was, but in retrospect, I wonder if that is true.  It might well be that He was as caught as I was.  We'd entered into the dance, and however miserable we were, we couldn't seem to stop.

And then everything crashed.  There was nothing quiet about our crashing.  Like so much of our lives, that was played here for all to see.  For good or bad, I was the initiator of that final, horrible break with what had gone before.  Whatever I intended, the changes that ensued, and the responses of "the system" broke the unspoken contract that had existed between He and I.  He was clear:  I'd acted in ways that completely abrogated my role as slave.  I'd broken our deal.  Through all the long months of treatment and aftercare, He experienced life as being out of His control, and as that was the truth for Him, there was no place for me to resume my accustomed "place" as His slave or His submissive.  I wanted things to resume their normal shape:  D/s and sadomasochism but without the addiction -- and that simplistic longing was impossible for a wide variety of reasons.

So, I engaged in therapy.  He engaged in therapy.  We lived side by side.  We loved, still, tenaciously but often with a sense of desperation.  There were days, many, many days, when the best we could do was exchange the forlorn assurances that we loved one another.  Dark days.

Now, today, with soul retrievals done, and reintegration of the retrieved soul fragments progressing, things feel softer, sweeter, gentler.  Nothing is as it was, and for all of the struggle of the last months, we are happy with what is.

I don't know the shape of our lifestyle expression going forward.  I know the toys still all occupy their accustomed place.  I know we still fall into SM play, switching back and forth, often laughing with delight as we enjoy the sensations that we can evoke with each other.  I know He is not "dominant" in the sense of issuing orders, making rules, and meting out punishments -- but then that never was the stuff of our days.  He still has, when He chooses to, a voice and a tone and an inflection that demands obedience -- and generally when He makes that sound, things go exactly as they would have before "the troubles."  I know that I have no list of chores, and yet I continue to do the things that I have always done for Him and for us -- the things that work to make life run smoothly and easily.  It is the same -- only different.

When I underwent a hysterectomy, seven years ago, my life changed radically in ways I never anticipated.  The aftermath of the surgery left me "sexually unresponsive," and I feared I might live out my days without the joy of sexual pleasures that I'd taken for granted before surgery.  I spent many, many angry and bitter months -- blaming the surgeon and hating my life.  And then, slowly and softly, I began to learn my way to something that was undeniably different, but good in a way that my more easy, youthful sexiness never knew.   I've learned, over the last seven years, to follow hidden and secret pathways to my body's sexual triggers.  I've learned that I am no less sexual than I was even as I need to be more attentive and more deliberate and more invested in my own joy.  I've learned that when I manage to "take advantage" of Him, and find my way to my own  ecstasy -- rudely paying no attention at all to "His needs," things work out for both of us -- and we arrive together at the point of release, flushed, breathless, and completely amazed.  That's not the juicy, throbbing sex of my earlier life, but it is somehow more wondrous precisely because it is so elusive.

Maybe what we've come to now, is a kind of power-based relationship that is more subtle and more sweet than what we once enjoyed.  Maybe what we will be doing now is the work of defining how to balance power between us -- without leaving either of us "powerless" or without a voice.  Maybe we will learn to play with the energies we can harness and use them to meet our desires in some more flexible way than we knew previously.  What we have now doesn't fit in any sort of box.  It has no easy label, and clearly the mainstream BDSM community would reject our (and especially my) use of any of the commonly used labels.  I'm not interested in engaging in some sort of campaign to restore myself to "true" slave-hood.  If that part of my life is gone, then it is.  So be it.  What lies ahead is completely mysterious to me.  This should be an interesting journey.

swan

Who's Who and What's What?

The recent conversations about "roles" and "orientations" within the BDSM lifestyle points to what is a pretty pervasive blurring of the meanings of the various labels we use to describe who we are and what we do.  Describing and explaining or defining our various proclivities and permutations is not something new.  Lots of this kind of work has been done by others -- nearly all of it better than what I'll manage to put together.  Perspectives on this subject vary depending on gender and orientation.  The gay leather community looks at it in somewhat different terms than het folks do.  The graphic that I've used here, and some of the technical inspiration for this post are from Linguessa.  I'm not sure how much clarity I can add to this perennial discussion, but here goes...

Notice that the graphic is 2-dimensional.  It includes three power orientations:  Dominant, switch, and submissive.  Too, it considers three ways of being sexual or erotic:  Top, switch, bottom.  Given the limits of the format, it does not include any reference to the spectrum of sadomasochistic sexual expression, so there is no consideration of the components that might be characterized as sadist, vanilla, and masochist.

Simply, the labels Top, switch, and bottom, refer to sexual preferences, and in some contexts refer to the very literal sexual positioning of the partners.  It is language that does not originate in the BDSM community, but has its roots in the gay community.  In that context, the top is the person who "gives" and the bottom is the one who "receives."  The word "top" does not describe which partner is more dominant or more masculine (although it sometimes equates to "husband"), and the word "bottom" does not necessarily indicate which partner is more submissive or more effeminate (although it might equate to "wife").  When talking about gay sex, it is more usual to refer to someone who "goes either way" as versatile rather than calling them a switch although the terms are used interchangeably.  Whatever the sexual activity, whether it be some form of intercourse, or some form of sadomasochism, or some sort of sensual/pleasure oriented interaction, if one partner initiates and directs the action and another is receptive and follows the lead, then there is a "Top" and a "bottom."   

Every human interaction also includes power dynamics.  Within the BDSM community, people tend to identify the power and energy flows within their relationships, and sometimes they deliberately manipulate those dynamics for the mutual gratification of the partners.  In that context, the labels that people use are intended to describe who takes and holds the power and who relinquishes power.  Hence, a Dominant receives the power and is given the right to control within the relationship, while a submissive voluntarily gives up the power and control.  There is no prescribed set of activities which might encompass or manifest this power exchange.  BDSM includes a wide range of possible practices that allow individual partners to explore the ebbs and flow of power between them. 

Since each person in a relationship will have some natural inclination to locate along the continuum between top and bottom AND also along the continuum from dominant to submissive, it is possible to find Dominants who are also inclined to bottom, and submissives who act in the role of top.  Too, there really are those who readily, easily, and regularly switch.  The strict and rigid delineations that are commonly described in most people's ordinary discourse about the lifestyle are not nearly as solid as we sometimes thing that they are.  There are people who are naturally at the extremes of the scales, and others who tend to fall more along the middle of the range. 

Add the variants from the sadomasochistic axis to the mix, and things get even more complex and, perhaps, more interesting.  I've known masochists who were entirely toppy in their play style, and sadists who tended toward the submissive end of things.  There are no end of variants and gradations.  Once again, the labels help us to communicate, but only if we insist that the labels are "aids to understanding" and not the whole story.  Ever.

swan

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

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

Words -- Master/slave, Ownership, Power Exchange

Words.

As long as I have done this, people have wrestled and wrangled over the meanings and definitions of terms and words. There's a raging debate going on about the nature of "true" Dominance and submission on a list that I read right now. Another conversation is trying to sort out the differences, if there are any, between "Owners" and "Masters" and "Daddys."

I am of a mixed mind about this. I believe that words have power. Words can shape our thinking and our perceptions. I like words that can be used with precision and intention to structure meaning. I think that we use words to communicate, and that when we are clear about what we mean when we use a particular word or expression, it makes it easier for us all to talk reasonably about what it is that we do. On the other hand, I've seen the labels used far too often as clubs to bash people over the head, create stratification, elevate gurus, and solidify factionalization where there didn't need to be any. So, I know that words can be used to harm. So, here's some of what I've been thinking about some of those kinds of things:

I dislike "One-True-Way-Ism." Whether we are talking about BDSM, or religion, or politics, or cooking, or fitness, or fishing, or how to sort socks, I hate it when someone tries to tell me that their way is THE way and my way is therefore, by definition, not THE way. My way (or more correctly, His way) is THE way for me, and if you have some issue with that, then I don't actually have any reason to waste my breath talking to you. I am continually bemused, as I read and converse with people in "cyberia" who have a few months of experience (maybe), and then put themselves out as the judge of everything and everyone. If there is one thing that I've learned along the way, it is that I know way more questions than I do answers at this point. About all I can offer, by way of wisdom, for the most part anymore, is a series of inquiries into what people have tried, what they've found so far that works and doesn't work, and where they would like to explore next... beyond that, I'm happy to share stories, always with the caveat that it is all "MY" story, and may have nothing at all to do with anyone else's experience or reality.

He and I say that what we do is Master/slave. That is the description of our relational power dynamic that seems to fit. It is not a thing that we set out to create or achieve. It is something that evolved for us as we spent time together. We came, over time, to accept that description of what was the reality between the two of us. Our M/s dynamic is, generally, very informal, without many specific protocols, although there are situations where we are much more formal with one another. I refer to Him in writing as "Master" mostly because it is simple. At home, I use His name, or I call Him "Sir," or "Dear" or "Honey." We seldom use the term "Owner," although He will express that T and I are "His" or "His property." Clearly, there is an understanding of ownership within our dynamic.

I'm not sure exactly what the delineation between "Owner" and "Master" is. If I check the definitions, I find that an owner has the right of possession or title, whereas the word master seems to imply a level of expertise or skill or finesse -- as in master swordsman, headmaster, masterpiece... When I consider the two in that context, it makes the two words fit our dynamic like layers. He "owns" me in the sense that He has the right of possession over me, and He is my Master because He has the skills and knowledge that is required to manage the complex and challenging process of shaping, managing, and maintaining me (optimally) in His service.

For us, it began and remains about the power exchange -- the energy that flows between and through us when we consciously and deliberately take our individual and collective power and choose how to use it for our mutual pleasure and benefit. We channel that and balance it and work with it together. It takes awareness and understanding and deliberate choice. It is about creating intentional inequities that spark the flow of energy and drive our desires forward. It is powered by our continual care for one another and scaffolded by our trust in ourselves and in each other.

swan