There are a couple of really prevalent patterns I've come across in the blogs I've checked out. One of them (usually in conjunction with the capitalization patterns I addressed previously) is the constant referral to "Master" (less commonly, "Mistress") and a strongly conveyed perception of that person being the center of the world. This seems like it's something of a given in BDSM couples. Master is Master and Master makes the rules and decides how the relationship is and how life is and how the couple works. Master doesn't like it when you wear clothes like that, so you don't. Master decides when and where and how the sex will be. In some cases, the submissive will give up their personal lives down to the smallest details: what they wear, what they eat, what errands they run, how they cut their hair... Some households are built on intricate sets of rules. Some submissives aren't allowed to sit on the furniture. Some submissives regularly eat out of bowls on the floor. I think I've inadvertently addressed a couple of aspects here, namely strict rule structures and the degree of power exchange exhibited in some couples. But when I say "power exchange" I'm afraid I'm being inaccurate, because what I see a lot of is submissives giving up all of their power to their partners.
DW and I talk about a lot of things together. We've talked about how much D/s we want to bring outside of our sex life, what (if any) "lifestyle rules" we might want to apply to our relationship, what our preferences and limits are, how much pain I like, and whether or not (and how hard) I would let him push my limits. While he was here, we sat down and did a BDSM checklist... for the second time. We discussed every item on it, how I rated it and why, and compared my answers to those I had given before our play relationship had even kicked off. All of this is based on exchange. I get the impression sometimes that submissives aren't "supposed" to have this sort of exchange with their partners. Like... they're supposed to just submit and trust that their dominant knows what's best for them. And, even if their dominant doesn't know what's best, they do what they're told because it is expected and demanded.
I guess, for some people, the one-sided dynamic works. I've read plenty of entries by submissives who take great pleasure and joy in serving their Masters and Mistresses and who will do anything asked of them and be glad for it. Perhaps, in a way, part of that is similar to the way I take pleasure in withstanding pain from beatings; even if you don't quite like what's being done, you like that you can take it. Or you like it because you take pleasure in pleasing your partner. I can understand this. I derive a great deal of pleasure from pleasing my dominant, and sometimes it's even better than doing things that please me. It just... feels really good, knowing that I've pleased him in some way. But, at the same time, for all that he has license to do to me and ask of me and expect from me, I don't think there is a single thing that I see as his "right." It isn't his right to force me to have sex in a way I'm not comfortable with. It isn't his right to use the violet wand on me if I tell him I'm not okay with it. It isn't his right to tell me I can't sleep in the bed. There is just what I give. This is not the same as topping from the bottom, at all. It's not about making demands on my dominant. This is about having respect for your partner. I don't believe that "my place" is under him or at his feet, but I might keep myself there sometimes because I am comfortable placing him above me. It's like an understanding that I am submissive to him because he has earned that from me, and because he has similar views I know that in a similar sense I have earned his dominance.
I read somewhere that there's a phrase making the rounds that goes something like, "A sub with a safeword is just a domme on her knees." I... can't tell you how against this I am. This isn't me being a "cranky sub." This is, again, about having respect for your partner. I don't like dominants who complain about submissives with "senses of entitlement" or whatever... because when I hear about philosophies that extol the virtues of taking the safeword away from the submissive, I feel like a certain disregard is being paid to the fact that your submissive is a person. I like to think that the majority of D/s couples talk as much as DW and I and have as much mutual respect as we do. But I feel like such an ideal is somewhat incompatible with the (prevalent?) viewpoint that the dominant has the right to do whatever he/she wants to do to their submissive, whenever they want to do it, without discussion. As long as there is an understanding that both parties want that kind of totally restrictive relationship, well, that's their call. If you're a submissive who doesn't want any say over what happens with your body, or who likes having your day fully planned out by someone else, or who very simply feels comfort in handing over all of your control to a partner who you trust, that's fine. That's a personal decision. Some submissives find this liberating. Some find it comforting. Some just need this sort of thing in their lives.
But I can't help wondering... if I put "restrictions" on my dominant because I have hard limits that can't be crossed, because I can only take a certain intensity of caning, or because there are things that just plain make me uncomfortable, would I be perceived in "the scene" as a bad submissive? If I insist on a safeword, am I not "hardcore" enough? Does that mean that I don't trust my partner? Am I "out of line" because my dominant and I have conversations about our desires and limits as equals? I am starting to feel like maybe some people would say so. I think that some people's vision of "a submissive" is that type that will kneel without question and do whatever is demanded of him/her, without discussion (DW described this type pretty well a few entries back). See... I belong to DW. What I mean by that is a little bit difficult to qualify, but the statement itself feels very true to me. And, though I say he doesn't have "rights" with me, he has acquired privileges that won't go away unless our relationship dissolves. The fact that I call it a "privilege" doesn't mean I'm trying to sneak-domme him or tell him what to do. It just means that I chose him to be my dominant, and if he were to do something to violate my trust in him he wouldn't be entitled to anything from me just from his say-so. In the same way, the trust I have in him doesn't mean that I would feel 100% safe if he said I couldn't have a safeword anymore. I am not a domme on my knees... I am a submissive who has boundaries and needs a surefire way to tell her dominant if he has crossed one. I have never yet had to use a safeword in a scene, and unless we get into serious boundary-pushing I doubt I will need to use it with him. Still, I would never be okay with not having the option. And, in the event that I haven't mentioned it already, he has no control whatsoever over who my friends are, how often I see them, whether or not I go out, what I eat, how I dress, or what I do with my hair. In these regards I take requests and suggestions, but not demands. How about that? Does that diminish my standing in the eyes of the "BDSM community" as a submissive?
I feel that this entry is somehow incomplete, but I'm not sure how else to say what I mean. I guess it's something along the lines of: In being more-or-less bombarded with ideas about how submissives are supposed to be, I start feeling a half-sense of "UR DOIN IT RONG." And... I really don't think I am. I don't feel like being my own person is incompatible with pursuing a D/s relationship with my boyfriend, and I don't feel like clear discussions of boundaries and comfort zones are in violation of the "who gets to be on top" rule. I would love to hear other people's thoughts on this. And, if there is anything you would like to see expanded on, let me know.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment