Online BDSM Quizzes Might Be Full Of Shit? Say It Ain't So!

I love filling out online quizzes.
"Who were you in a past life?"
"What color is your aura?"
"What dog breed are you?"

Online quizzes are amusing, a good way to waste five minutes, and it's fun to share the results with friends (I'm a Doberman version of Socrates with a yellow aura, BTW. Whatever that means).

But, if there's one type of quiz I cannot stand, it's the ubiquitous BDSM quiz.
"Are you a Dom, Sub, or Switch?"
"How kinky are you?"
Would you make a "good" whatever?"

Some people do them (probably because of the time wasting and amusement factors), but there are a few who do them and take the results as holy gospel...

And the problem with these quizzes? They're mostly full of it ("it" being the steaming piles of excrement created by bovine animals), and anybody who has half a clue will agree... Though oddly, I've never seen anybody state why these quizzes should be taken with a grain of salt.

So! Here I am with a quiz I conveniently found online (all spelling and grammar errors are the author's) to illustrate why all these BDSM quizzes are pretty much worthless.

The "Are You A Good Submissive" Quiz
"Hi! And welcome to my Would You Be a Good Submissive Test. I'll be using advanced logic and knowledge to determine your true nature. Just be honest in your answers as the questions will be designed to reveal your true mental state."

1. When in a group of people deciding what to do, are you the:

Leader, no question

Discuss options and then follow

Quiet, following the others

All right. What does deciding what activity you and a group of pals want to engage in have to do with submission? Last time I checked I wasn't submitting to my friends. We don't have that sort of relationship. Sometimes I go along with what's decided, sometimes I decide... And neither of those decisions make me submissive or dominant.
(I picked option 2)

2. How would you classify yourself in terms of trying new things?

I'll try just about anything once

I might try something new

I am cautious about trying new things
I'm at a loss as to what this question says about submission. Are you submissive if you're "up for anything" or are you submissive if you're timid and reluctant to try new things? Me? I like new experiences so I'll try a lot of new things just to learn how I feel about them... But that has nothing to do with how I orient in a relationship.
(I picked option 1)



3. Which of the following classifies you?

Single

Married

Divorced

Widow
Huh? What does relationship status have to do with submitting? I'm guessing the author couldn't think of anything better to ask.
(I picked option 2, because I am)
　

4. At what age did you become sexually active?

10 to 14

15 to 20

21 to 26

27 and above
Someone please tell me what this has to do with being a good submissive. Please. Anybody?
(I picked option 2, and no- I wasn't jail bait)
　

5. How many committed relationships have you been in?

0 to 1

2 to 4

5 to 7

8 or more
So does being in a lot of relationships make you a good submissive, or does being in fewer relationships make you a good submissive? I'm missing the logic of this question (if it even exists).
(Option 2. I've had 3 serious, long term relationships)


6. How long does your typical relationship last in months?

1 to 3 months

4 to 7 months

8 to 12 months

13 months or more
Once more for the nose bleed seats... What does this have to do with how a person orients in their relationship?
(Option 4)


7. When growing up, was your mother the one who ruled your home?

Yes, she was the authority figure

No

I did not have a father figure
Is the quiz author going after some sort of Nurture Vs. Nature thing here? If so, does s/he realize that can go either way? That the child will either want to emulate the mother and become the authority figure or that it will grow up to be the partner preferring less authority? Also- There's the fact that many folks believe that nature has more to do with D/s orientation than nurture does.
(Option 1, and my folks were not at all kinky. I know because my mom talks to me about this sort of stuff... It's weird)


8. When you were a child, were you the one of the popular ones?

Yes, everyone loved to be around me

Not really popular, but I did have a circle of friends

I was a loner, not part of the in crowd

I did my own thing
Errr... So is a good submissive the lonely, reclusive outcast or the life of the party? I'm guessing the former as it fits with the Stupid Submissive Stereotype (that needs to die). Regardless, None of these things have anything to do with being dominant or submissive. I'm an outgoing, popular submissive and my Domly One is shy. Go figure.
(Option 2- I was popular enough)



9. In you’re past relationships, who controlled the finances?

My spouse or significant other

I did

We shared control
Another thing that has nothing to do with submission. Some submissives control the finances because they're better at finances than their partner is. Some submissives like their partner taking care of the finances. And some D/s relationships don't involve worries about finances.
(Option 2- My ex didn't care to have anything to do with the finances so that burden fell to me)


10. You are in a new relationship, your new significant other demands that you hand over your check every to them. They then give you a spending allowance and keep the rest. Would you:

Agree, they know what’s best

Say no way and leave the relationship

Try to convince them to share the finances but give in when they stand their ground
I'm betting that this person's idea of a "good" submissive would pick option 1. Sadly, their reasoning has to be based in poorly written erotica because it has nothing to do with reality, personal fiscal responsibility, or (wait for it...) being with your partner long enough to know that they will handle your finances responsibly.
(Option 2- Because if it's a new relationship and they're demanding this of me, I'm going to walk. Fuck that noise)


11. In an argument with your spouse or significant other, who would be the one to concede the argument?

Spouse or significant other

I did

It was pretty well evenly split
Whoever is in the wrong? Unless this person is equating submission with "spineless wimp who will just roll over and show their tender underbelly at the slightest hint of trouble"... Which is what I think they think.
(Option 3- Though we don't argue)


12. Let's say you and your spouse are trying to decide where to go for the evening, which would you say would be the most often result of the decision making process?

My spouse would get her way

I would put up a fight but then would do what she wanted

I’d put my foot down and we’d do what I wanted

We’d compromise on where we were going
Because obviously submissives shouldn't care about what they do or where they go. They shouldn't even express a preference.
FFS.
Some submissives like having their preferences heard and occasionally like doing what they prefer... Oh, the horror!
(Option 4- Cookie and I both like doing what the other person would like to do)
　

13. You are at work, would having a woman boss be a good thing to you?

If a woman, not applicable

Yes, like the idea

No, women aren’t to be a boss

Doesn’t matter to me
OK, this is definitely wank fodder material. It has absolutely nothing to do with submission.
(Option 1)
　

14. You are in bed with a significant other; they get very physical with you, slapping you, forcing you to please them. How would you react?

Love it, give me more!

I'd go along, but only so far

No way, I'd tell them to stop

It might be fun, but don't really know
But, but, but... What about negotiations and consent? Does the author realize that without those what s/he's describing is assault and/or rape? Do they also not realize that there's a difference between kinky fuckery and D/s (Ignore that, it was a theoretical question).
(Otpion 3 because, consent)


15. If a significant other told you that you were lousy in bed, how did you feel about it?

I was crushed

I was turned on

Never happened to me

Never happened to me, wish it had
Dafuq?
Seri-fucking-ously... What on Dog's green Earth does this have to do with submission? Having a humiliation fetish doesn't necessarily mean someone is submissive. Ugh!
(Option 3 *smirk*)


16. When having sex, are you more likely to be:

On top

On the bottom

We switch back and forth

Any way I want
Oh, I get it! Because some actions are inherently dominant or submissive... Which is another load of steaming large mammal droppings.
Also, am I the only one who thinks that it's a bit sad that the author only knows of two positions?
(Option 3, but with much more variety)
　

17. If given the choice, which would you prefer?

Having oral sex done to me

Giving someone oral sex

I think oral sex is disgusting

I'd rather be in a 69 position
Again with the inherently dominant or submissive acts. Doing something or having something done to you has nothing to do with D/s. If my Domly is licking my lady bits (giving) it's not because he's submissive, it's because he likes making me squeak.
(Option 2. I like making him squeak)


18. How would you react to this scenario? You are at a restaurant and notice a man and woman sitting at a nearby table. She is clearly in control of the man, treating him like he is expected to submit to her. (If you are a woman, switch the roles.)

I'd think he's a wimp, a real loser

I'd think that he's lucky to have a woman like that

I'd wish that I could be in his place, that my date would do that with me

I'd find it offensive that she would be doing that to him
You know what? If someone was putting on an obvious enough display of kink in a public place, I'd tell them to knock that shit off. I don't consent to be part of their scene/dynamic when I'm out for dinner, nor do any of the other diners at that establishment. Fuck them for being rude.
(Option 4- I find it offensive that they'd be rude enough to foist their kink off on non consenting viewers in a vanilla place)


19. If given the choice, would you prefer for your significant other to make decisions in your home?

Yes

No way

Maybe, some of the time
This might actually have something to do with submission! Holy hell! It's the first question to address the question the quiz asks!
(Option 1)


20. You are alone with your significant other in the bedroom, how would you like them to treat you in the bedroom?

Let me have my way with them

Have them tell me what they want me to do

Share our desire for each other in a equal basis

Tease me till I beg to get relief
And now we're back to confusing kinky fuckery with D/s...
Bottoming to your partner (preferring them to do the funs stuff to you) does not mean that you're submissive.
(Option 1 because I'm a submissive who likes to bottom during kinky fun times)


21. Your significant other want to tie you to the bed, do you:

Agree readily

Agree with some reservations

Say no way

Tell them that they can do whatever they want
Oi, quiz writer, liking to have kinky fun (topping or bottoming) doesn't have any bearing on orienting as a submissive or a dominant.
 (Option 1 because I'm a submissive who likes to bottom during kinky fun times)

22. Your partner wants to bring someone else into the bedroom with you two, how do you react?

Say no way!

Tell them you do not like the idea but go along with it

Tell them that you will do it for them

Hey, more the merry, right?
Ahhh... Because all "good" submissives enjoy having multiple partners, right?
Monogamy and polygamy (also being "open") doesn't have anything to do with authority exchange.
(Option 1 because we're monogamous)


23. In your most private thoughts, does the idea of someone else controlling your life, your pleasure appeal to you?

Yes

No

Sometimes
Oh! Here's the second question that's pertinent! Who has authority in the relationship! BINGO! Now you're talking about D/s!
(Option 1)


24. Have you ever been in a relationship with a dominating or controlling significant other?

Yes

No

Sometimes it was
Just when I was getting hopeful...
Dominating and controlling are adjectives, they don't necessarily describe someone who is a Dominant, they could just as easily describe some abusive assweasel, and I'm sure the author does not mean to imply that an abusive assweasel is any sort of respectable Dominant, right?
(Option 1, with consent and negotiation)



25. If you were involved in a relationship like that, did you find that you enjoyed being the submissive one?

Not applicable

Yes

No

Most of the time I did
(Option 1, with consent and negotiation)


26. Have you ever been restrained by your significant other?

Yes, was great!

Yes, but I did not really get into it

No

Wish they had tied me up
I'm done beating this dead horse. The author is never going to understand that there is a difference between kinky fuckery and D/s and that you can have one without the other.


27. If you were to be punished by a dominatrix, what should she use to keep you in line?

A severe spanking

Force me to clean her shoes with my tongue

Sit on my face until I beg for release

Refuse to see me or talk to me for three months
This implies that:
A) All submissive enjoy Funishment,
B) or want a punishment dynamic
C) That all "good" submissives will share those particular fetishes
(Option 3 because it was the closest thing to "Fuck this noise, Imma going home")
 


28. How often do you like to have sexual relations?

1 to 2 times a day would be great!

Once or twice a week would be fine

Once to three times a month

I don't need sexual relationships
There are loads of D/s relationships that do not include sex.
They can include sex, but they don't have to.
Sexual appetite has nothing to do with hoe submissive someone is.
Ugh!
(Option 2 was closest to what I'd prefer)


29. Have you ever had a toy used on you by a significant other?

Yes, I wanted them to use it

Yes, but I was not the one to suggest it

No

They wanted to use one, but I said no way
I give up.
 (Option 1 because I'm a submissive who likes to bottom during kinky fun times)

30. Of the following, how would you rate your tolerance to pain?

I cannot tolerate much pain

I can tolerate some pain, but not to extremes

Some pain is ok, but when I say stop, STOP!

Love feeling physical pain
Not all submissives are masochists.
Not all masochists are submissive.
Submission does not need to involve receiving pain, dominance does not have to involve inflicting pain.
(Option 3)


MY SCORE-
A Little Submissive, 19 submissive points- (Whatever that means)You are showing more submissive tendencies and you may want to explore those feelings further. They may be able to be drawn out by an intelligent dominatrix.

"A little submissive"...
And yet, here I am in a 24/7 D/s relationship that's about to head into its 7th year... But I might just need to visit a dominant to develop further as a sub.
Bwahahahahaha!

And this is why BDSM quizzes should be used for fun, not for informing a person of where they land in the Kinkyverse, because they're meaningless bits of fluff, often written by people who don't have any sort of clue, and for the most part have absolutely nothing to do with D/s.

The Myth of "The Traditions."

Traditions are nice things.
They help folks fee connected to one another, they bring people together, they help us connect with our pasts. Traditions serve an important role in society.

So, it's not surprising that the Kinkyverse wants to get in on the "tradition" action as well, and you can see it in a lot of places- Folks quote the traditions of the "Old Guard" or claim to follow "Leather" traditions. They claim to be a "traditional" Dom or sub (master and slave, top and bottom, etc). They've had traditional "training" or studied the "traditions" under Master-grand-High-Pooh-Bah Bob for eleventy billion years...

And that's cool. If they want to follow their "traditions" because it makes them happy? More power to them.

...Except there are some problems with "traditions". Some folks who get on their high traditional horse have a nasty tendency to bemoan the laissez faire attitude of "non-traditional" kinksters who are (undoubtedly) ruining the "scene" singlehandedly with their poo-pooing of the vaunted, high-holy traditions.

And there's this unpleasant thing that happens where their "traditions" are used as a cudgel to bash other "inferior" kinksters over their non consenting noggins.

And then there's the rather iffy "traditions" that nobody has ever head of that make you wonder if someone had a stanky brainfart and said to themselves, "Self! I think we ought to call this thing we want to do 'traditional'... Makes it sound all super-special-important instead of the stanky brainfart it really is!"

Now, bring a newbie into this steaming mess of "traditions" and unpleasant things start happening.

Formerly happy people start looking at the dynamic they've created for themselves (or are thinking about forming for themselves) and they begin thinking that this thing that previously sounded awesome to them (and probably was awesome for them) is no longer good enough.

Or they get the idea that they can't form the dynamic that they want because they have to follow some "traditional" way of doing things, so they settle for something unfulfilling or they give up on the Kinkyverse altogether.

Or they let themselves be talked into a dynamic that is unfulfilling or even dangerous by some Domly sort (or an abuser) who is just making shit up as he goes along and calling it "tradition" to give his desires weight that they wouldn't have otherwise.

That said- There's something important to think about when you see someone bemoaning nontraditional kinksters, or espousing some super-right traditional way of doing something...

Traditions are a myth.

Not because some specific areas or groups don't have their own traditions or values that they adhere to, because there are some long-running groups that do have enough cohesion and agreement among it's members to have formed traditions, but because none of those traditions will be recognized by every other group. There are no cohesive "traditions" for the entire Kinkyverse.

Even among one of the oldest kink communities in the US, the Gay Leather community which has been around since WWII, you're going to find different ways of doing things in different groups.

And to quote one of my favorite people on fet, because he's so damn well informed- "When you hear someone speaking of The Old Guard, or the ancient secret training houses of Europe, or whatever, at best, you are hearing some truths that were about some specific individuals or areas, and at worst, something they made up or lifted from some old porn they read, because there never was such a universally experienced or recognized thing going on. We are currently living in the Golden Age as far as leather and kink go, at least as far as community goes."

TL;DR- If you want to engage in something "traditional" because it fulfills some desire that you have... Super awesome! Get down with your traditional self. have at!

BUT... If you're being beat over the noggin with someone else's "traditions" feel free to laugh at them and ignore their ass-nuggetry. Traditions are a myth, at least in the "Well, everybody ever used to do it this way and this is the way it's supposed to be done because tradition" way.

Predators & Politeness: A post for Kinky AND Vanilla Ladies

First-  A bit of backstory on this one:
Almost a week ago this post appeared on Fetlife and made it's way to K&P: None of your fucking business.
The gist of the story is that a lady, enjoying a coffee at the mall on her own was approached by some creepy guy who asked her, "What's your name, sweetheart?"
She responded by telling him that her name was none of his fucking business, and the responders to that post went, well... Postal. Especially the guys.
Apparently a great many of the male respondents had issues with a woman replying to an unwelcomed advance with anything other than the prettiest of manners.

Today this response made it's way to K&P, and it's brilliant: Entitled asshats don't deserve politeness.
(That's not the real title, just my two cents, BTW)

In it the author (who is highly educated and who dealt with abusive and predatory behaviors in an official capacity) states, "See, in the world of a predator, polite behaviors are the characteristics of a ‘mark’, an easy victim. My studies repeatedly reported that women who walk with their heads down, dress conservatively, speak softly and are polite as in ‘old school’ polite are seen by predators as more likely victims. It’s a myth that the confident, loud or even sexily dressed women draw the predator. The loud woman who walks with her head up and appears confident is more likely to make a fuss. More trouble makes it harder for the abusive individual to get what they want."

And that makes sense, which brings me to the point of my bloggy thing:

When newbie subs enter the Kinkyverse they're often buried under and figurative mountain of polite, and far more often, impolite virtual advances. One of the questions they will end up asking is "How do I respond to a dom when I'm not interested?"

And without fail, they will get the answer "Respond politely and respectfully..."

That's not surprising. Loads of people think that just because some random Dudebro has given himself a title he deserves respect (he doesn't), and loads of folks think that the appropriate way to respond to an advance from a stranger is with politeness... There's a lot of social conditioning that comes into play here.

There's also a lot of entitlement from some (I'm not going to say ALL) guys when it comes to unwelcome advances.
Those guys get really pissy when confronted with the fact that their advances might not be welcome and that a woman has the right to rebuff that advance in whatever way she sees fit. They think that just because they managed to make their way over to a random woman and managed to open their yap to make noises come out, she's obligated to respond nicely to them.

"If I've drummed up enough courage to approach you, the least you can do is be nice to me..."

Because: Entitlement.

And because guys just don't understand what it's like to be a girl, minding her own business, only to have some dudebro who thinks he's entitled to her time come and hit on/"compliment"/whatever her because that's what he wants (so who care if she doesn't want that).

And never mind the fact that there are some guys won't take a polite "no thanks" for an answer and see that polite turn-down as a soft "yes" to their unwelcome advances.

All of that brings me to this:

There are quite a few unpleasant people in the Kinkyverse, just like there are quite a few unpleasant people in Vanillaland, and those people- The ones who ping your Gut's internal Creep Radar? They don't deserve a "polite and respectful" decline. They deserve whatever you feel you need to say to get them to leave you the fuck alone, and if that response is "None of your fucking business" or "Leave me the fuck alone"? You have every right to say that. How they feel about it? It's not your problem.

Make a fuss if you need to.

(and seriously, if you're a member of Fet, go read that brilliant post).

Consent in BDSM Vs Consent in Fifty Shades of Grey

Consent, in the context of Vanilla (non-kinky) life is usually a pretty straight forward thing.

If someone says "Yes" they are consenting to an activity.
If someone says "No" they do not consent to that activity.

It's pretty simple, right?

And I suspect that's why, in Fifty Shades of Grey, the issue of consent as it's practiced in The Kinkyverse is a little (or a lot) misunderstood.

In the books and movies, Ana says "Yes" at one point and that one yes is being used to excuse Christian's inexcusable behavior. That one "Yes" is the reason some people outside the Kinkyverse are saying, "It's not abuse, it's consensual kink!"

The problem is- That's not how consent works in the Kinkyverse. There are shades of consent, and probably far more than fifty of them.

Our consent is a highly complex issue, and using Ana as an example, a great many responsible, educated kinksters would not count her wishy-washy "Yes" as consent. Why?

Well, first because Christian is asking for something called Blanket Consent. It's the type of consent that applies to everything that may be asked of a person in a relationship, and is usually reserved for people who know what they're getting into or people who have been practicing their relationship dynamic for some time. Nobody worth their beans would request blanket consent from a newbie because a newbie cannot make that sort of informed decision.

A newbie, who knows nothing, cannot give informed consent, so if Ana can't give her consent because she lacks the information to make a wise choice, that "Yes" is null and void.

Informed consent is what kinksters should be aiming for (and as much as I hate saying "should" about anything, I'll make an exception for this because it's that important).

Informed consent doesn't just mean that you simply know what a butt plug is, to use Ana again as an example.
It means that you understand and accept the risks involved in playing with that certain toy and finding those risks acceptable you still agree to play with that toy. The same goes for any BDSM play or practices a person might participate in- Informed consent means that you know exactly what it is you're agreeing to and you understand and accept all of the risks that may be involved in what you're agreeing to, and you still want to give your consent.

Which moves us on to another point in the consent discussion- Wanting to consent.

First, someone has to freely agree to something for it to be considered consent.
What this means is that with no outside influence or pressure they decide that what they are agreeing to is what they want.
Ana's consent was not freely given in the books. Often when she agreed to something it was because Christian was threatening her with something else that she found even less pleasant than what was about to happen.
It's not consent if there is coercion involved (the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats).

Second is the really wanting bit- I like to call it Enthusiastic Consent.
"Eh, I guess I'll do this kink thing because otherwise I might end up a spinster with 50 grey cats" isn't really enthusiastic, is it?
"I guess I'll do this kinky thing because if I don't he'll dump me." doesn't sound all that enthusiastic either, does it?
It kind of sounds like that person is choosing what they consider to be the least bad thing of two pretty shitty things, not like someone who is consenting because "Hey, this kink thing sounds lie it'll be a hell of a lot of fun and WOOOoooOO! I want to play!"

And you know, there are plenty of people who consent to kinky play they're not all that thrilled about because they want to please their partner, but even then it's not a "Eh" kind of consent, it's a "Woo! He's going to be so happy and that makes me happy! Wooo!" or a thing that they find adds to their fulfillment in other ways.

Poor Ana never has a "Woo!" moment about consenting to kink. It's all kind of sad and makes her feel bad about herself and she doesn't want it. She doesn't want to submit...

So what kind of consent is that?

Kink really should contribute to a person feeling good about their relationship, the other person in that relationship, and themselves. The people in that relationship- ALL the people involved- Should be giving informed, enthusiastic consent to the play and the dynamic they are planning on instituting in that relationship.

And finally, one of the most troubling aspects of consent in 50SoG...

Revoking Consent.

Any type of consent, even blanket consent, can be revoked at any time.

At one point in the book Christian enters Ana's home and proceeds to... Chastise? Punish? Threaten? her in her bedroom.
Ana says "No."
Readers know that what she's referring to is the idea that she may have stinky feet. Christian DOES NOT know this as he cannot hear her thoughts. He heard "no" and what did he do? He didn't stop. In the books this is portrayed as "Dominance"... It's NOT.

A boy heard "no" the other day when reenacting a scene from Fifty Shades with a lady friend, he didn't stop, and in real life that has some pretty nasty words associated with it- Assault and Rape.

Once someone revokes their consent- With whatever words they chose to say (No, Stop, Red, Whatever), you STOP and after you stop you communicate about why your partner felt you needed to stop.

When consent is removed you are no longer participating in consensual kinky fun times with your enthusiastic, consenting partner. What you're doing is assaulting them in a way that can be persecuted by law enforcement officials.

And honestly, this is only the tip of the iceburg when it comes to consent in the Kinkyverse. The nuances and shades of it are so complex that even for experienced kinksters it can get confusing... So I don't really blame the Vanilla folks for not understanding it. They can't be expected to know what they don't know.

But... It's not that hard to learn the basics either.

If Predatory 'doms" Wrote Notes:

Dear s-type Person.

I'm a complete stranger to you. I don't know you and I don't care about you. In fact, I care so little for you that if your teeth were on fire I wouldn't piss on your gums to put them out.

I don't know your name.
I don't know what your life is like.
I don't know what responsibilities you have, what your hopes and dreams are, or what value system you use to define the parameters of your actions.
I don't know any of that, and again, I don't care.

Because here's the thing- I see that you have applied an s-type label to yourself and to me that makes you fair game (and easy prey). And I'm really hoping that you know fuck-all about this BDSM thing because the more you know the less likely it'll be that I can take advantage of you.

I'm really hoping you're a straight-off-the-boat newb because when I tell you that I'm your D-type you'll be too ignorant and confused to tell me to get lost, and instead you'll just do whatever I say because I am, after-all the D-type and you're just the s-type, and I can prey on that confusion and insecurity by dangling the words real and true before you:
"A REAL submissive never says no"
"A TRUE submissive does whatever her dominant says"

And you'll fall for it. Hey, odds are good that even if you're not a newb you'll still fall for it. Nobody likes feeling insecure and I can and will use that. I'm a manipulative, self-serving jackass like that... Good thing manipulative, self-serving jackasses are really popular right now thanks to that movie and those books.

So, now that we've got that covered I'll tell you how this is going to go:
I'm now your D-type (because I say so) and you're my s-type.
I'm not going to bother to talk to you about limits, negotiations, compatibility, or communication because those things really put a damper on my game.
And if you bring them up?
I'll shoot you down or give you the silent treatment and you'll learn your lesson.
I'm going to tell you to do stupid, dangerous things, and you're going to do them.
I'm going to tell you that I want to be put on your bank accounts, I want your PIN numbers, I want you to send me risqué (or down-right filthy) pictures and videos... I may or may not share these with friends (for free or for profit). I may or may not use them to blackmail you.
I'll probably share you with my friends (for free or for profit).
I'll definitely have you do shit that would probably get you fired from your job/ get your kids taken away/ cause your entire community to ridicule or abhor you if they ever found out about it.
I might even want them to find out about it.

I have a lot of fun things planed for us.
(and yes, I know your little s-type heart just went pitter-pat because I used the word "us"... Too bad it means squat).

So...
I don't know you, I don't care about you, but you'll submit because if you don't you're not a real & true submissive, and if you question you're not a real & true submissive, and if you listen to the advice of other more experienced submissives or try to learn things on your own it means you doubt me and that's not real & true submissive behavior.

And if I ever actually said any of this you might get a clue... But you might not. But just in case I'll tone it down a bit when I actually do message you- You'll never see me coming.

Sincerely,
Lord High Dommypants.
Master of 23 slaves
Dom of 4 submissives
Owner of 15 pets
Daddy to 3 babygirls

Graduate of UberSupreme Dom Skool
Trainer, mentor, and super-accredited guy.
(You can trust me)
 
I only wish they were this obvious, but they're not so for Dog's sake GO LEARN A CLUE!

***This refreshed rant brought to you courtesy of the bajillion newbies who have joined Fet in the past few days, the predators who are having a heyday with the influx, and the "OMG! WHAT DO I DOOooooOOOoOo? My new "Dom" says..." posts all over the effing place. Eff that movie. Eff it right in the effing arse with an unlubed cinder bock. GAH!.

BDSM Code Words, Ambiguity, & Safety

Yesterday, a lady came into the Submissive Women's forum I frequent with an issue:
On previous occasions she and her partner had discussed anal play and she had expressed a disinterest in it, I believe her exact words to her partner were "I'm not interested in that."

For most folks, I would hope, that would be a pretty clear indication not to pursue anal play, but her partner decided that while she was spacing to fiddle with her bum... She is, to say the least, unhappy and feels that he might have broken her trust.

Many people advised the OP to make anal play a hard limit.

Today, another lady started a thread questioning why "I'm not interested" wasn't enough and why someone should have to make something a hard limit to have their reluctance to participate in an unwanted activity respected.

It started me thinking.

There's an idea floating around in the Kinkyverse that "no" doesn't always mean "no." We sometimes have safe words so that we can participate in play where we want to protest or say "no" without play stopping. Sometimes play won't stop until a safe word has been used. Safe words and the sometimes-ambiguity of "no" is such a big deal that there are a plethora of blogs written about it... A BDSM code word is required to stop play.

So we've got this idea that plain English isn't serious and we need to use a code word to express how serious a "no" actually is.

Thinking more, I wondered if the "no doesn't always mean no so have a safe word" school of thought might be affecting other plain-spoken communication. Communication your average submissive would expect to be heard and respected by a partner?

It's not impossible to imagine that someone who is hung up on safe words and play involving protest might view "Hard Limit" in the same light... "I'm not interested in that" could be seen as a faux protest to that person, leaving them with the feeling that it's OK to try that activity because they didn't hear the unambiguous "Hard Limit" code word to indicate that anal play was definitely off the table.

The code word makes what previously would have been seen as clear communication ambiguous.

It's really effing complicated.

But I suppose having heard about it, it's something that s-types and D-types should be aware of, and discuss before playing, because having your butthole diddled while spacing is a pretty tame activity when compared to some of the shit we can say "I'm not interested in that" about.

So...

S-types, just to be safe, it might be a good idea that you communicate to a new partner that when you express a disinterest in something you mean it. That disinterest is a hard limit until you say other wise, "I am not interested in that, it is a hard limit."

D-types, also to be safe, it might be a good idea if you ask a new partner how serious they are when they express a disinterest in something without calling it a hard limit. It might be protest play, but it might not... And if it's not? If you go ahead without consent, you both might end up feeling pretty awful about whatever happened. Nobody wants that.

Real & True BDSM Frustration

Yesterday, out of curiosity, I trolled FB (of all places) for groups geared towards submission. I found one, labeled as a "help group" or some such thing and decided, "What the hell, Squeaky. We've got nothing better to do (other than playing Farm Saga), let's join this here groupie thinger." So I joined, got approved, it was a closed group, and began reading.

Five minutes in and I just wanted to start banging my head against my keyboard until my skull ruptured and my brains spilled out. The only reason I refrained was because Cookie would be traumatized, and I didn't want to traumatize him. I like Cookie.

It's all very One True Way, Thou Shalt Not Sub Any Way But Thy One Twue Way, Amen-ish.

And I know it's meant to be helpful- I know that... But really, how helpful is it when you're offering newbies only one perspective and everybody in the group parrots your Holy Grail of BDSM?

There's a note about collars taken from someone else's blog, outlining the various "meanings" of collars (including one that I'd never heard of in my 18 years of doing WIITWD) and how EVERYBODY doing D/s believes and agrees with the author because it's Real & True...

No mention of the fact that not everybody uses collars, that some folks only view them as another toy in the box (even deeply committed We-Own-A-Home-Have-Kids-And-Dogs-Together-And-Are-Married people), not all people follow the "stages" of collaring...

There was a note about how to recognize a "Profound Submissive" (even if they didn't know they were a "profound submissive"...

And I read it and thought... OK, maybe that's someone who is extremely submissive in both personality and orientation, but it could just as easily be someone who had a profoundly submissive personality and had no interest in D/s, someone who had such horrible issues enforcing boundaries and standing up for themselves that perhaps therapy might help, or someone who had suffered through years of abuse and had no sense of self left... It just seemed rather shady to label that person and treat them like a submissive when that might not be who they are or how they want to be treated.

There were notes on "Rules for Submissives" (My favorite was "Be Humble" followed closely by "Respect and obey your top and expect punishment if you don't." Never mind that not all dynamics include punishment).

A Note on how to be a real Dom (Including rules for All Doms).

Something about etiquette to observe during a munch- A MUNCH! About the most Vanilla kinky gathering one can go to where there is no "etiquette" because it's in a public, vanilla space and Dog forbid we squick the 'Nillas!

*************************sigh*
So I doubt I'll last there very long. I won't quit- Someone has to pipe up and say "Hey, the only right way to do it is the way that works for you and your partner/s..." and I have the feeling that will go over like a fart in church.

Until then, it just reminds me why I write this bloggy thing. So there's another perspective available for the folks who feel that they have to shoe-horn themselves into someone else's idea of Real & True BDSM and end up being frustrated, unfulfilled, and possibly harmed because that R&T idea isn't a good fit for them.

S&M and D/s and Stupid Stereotypes

S&M
Sadism & Masochism.
Sadists & Masochists.
People who enjoy inflicting pain & People who enjoy having pain inflicted on them.

I like S&M. Really dig it. It's awesome.
I relish the idea of having some happily squirming person at the end of whatever hitty-whappy-beaty toy I'm wielding...

*Insert needle screeching across a vinyl record here.*

Yeah, I'm a sadist.
I'm also a submissive.
And I bet a few brains just broke with that revelation, didn't they?

Submissives are the folks who get off on pain, right? That's what every single bit of erotica and pornography claims anyways. It's such a pervasive stereotype that people pretty much automatically assume that submissive equals masochist.

And that sucks.

It sucks for the submissives who don't enjoy painful play because when they're new and uninformed they've got this stupid stereotype dictating their behavior. They've got this idea that in order to "Do It Right" they have to put up with play that doesn't interest them or that they don't enjoy, because submissives are masochists.

It sucks for the new dominants who don't enjoy inflicting pain but who have seen that stereotype as well- Doms are sadists. All Doms, all the time, everywhere. To be a proper, real and true Dom, you've got to beat the hell out of your submissive.

It sucks for the tops and bottoms who have no interest in D/s because if they just like feeling pain it's automatically implied that they're submissive and if they like dealing out pain then they must be a Dom, even if all they want is the play and no authority exchange.

So here's the low-down on painful, kinky play-

S&M has nothing to do with what side of the D/s slash you fall on.

Some submissives are masochists.
Some submissives are sadists.
Some submissives want nothing to do with doling out or receiving pain.

Some Dominants are masochists.
Some Dominants are sadists.
Some Dominants want nothing to do with doling out or receiving pain.

Some masochists are submissive.
Some masochists are dominant.
Some masochists want nothing to do with authority transfer.

Some sadists are submissive.
Some sadists are dominant.
Some sadists want nothing to do with authority transfer.

See how that works? What side of the slash a person falls on can have nothing to do with how they feel about S&M. In the same vein, what side of the ampersand a person falls on can have nothing to do with how they feel about authority transfer.

And I thought about this today because I ended up on a pretty well read blog that was going on and on about how all submissives love pain and how they all get off on it and how it's their duty to participate in pain play because they are submissives... And it annoyed me.

It annoyed me because that person was talking out of her ass and needed to get off the internet before she got someone hurt in a bad way with her Real & True tripe. It annoyed me because she obviously didn't have an original thought in her silly, vapid little head, and was parroting shit from popular porn and erotica. It annoyed me because it was being presented as "true" when it was anything but.

So I vented.
I can do that, what with it being my blog and all.

And hopefully, somewhere out there, a new submissive won't feel like she has to endure unwanted painful play, or a new Dom can happly get his bum smacked, or a new top or bottom won't feel like they have to get suckered into a D/s relationship, because now they know better.

*Cue 80's PSA tune: "The more you know... Knowledge is power!"*

Dominants Suffer From Truism Too.

I don't usually dissect posts about dominants. They're not the focus of my interests, I'm more about the s-type side of things and the stuff that affects our lives... Which makes sense because that's the side of the slash I have experience on. Write what you know and all that.

Then! I found the post I'm about to eviscerate here in a few minutes and I thought to myself, "Self, we're really doing the decent domly sorts a disservice by not sticking up for them when we stumble upon stupid shit that dictates what they have to do to be true. We really should be pointing out how the True shit hurts those on the other side of the slash as much as it hurts us. Folks should know that there is no one specific thing (or a list of them) that makes a domly "true."

And submissive folks should know that what makes for a "True" dom doesn't necessarily make that guy "right for you." Which is far more important in my book.


True Doms Do XYZ!
a post by: Some Blathering Douchecanoe.
(And no, sorry, I'm not driving traffic towards this guys inane drivel. No link)
My thoughts in Mauve. Mauve is today's color of annoyance.

A Dominant Should Be
… everything to his submissive.
Encouraging someone to have such a limited view of life is not cool. Nobody should be anybody's everything. A) Because it's impossible and B) it's unhealthy to depend or expect that much from another human being. It's an unfair burden to place on someone's shoulders.

A Dominant is a lover, a teacher, a caretaker, a father-figure, a rock.
A dominant is those things ONLY if he agrees to be those things. Not all doms have an interest in being those things and not all submissives want their d-type partner to be those things. Some of us are fully capable of educating ourselves, we already have dads or father figures and don't want/need another, and rocks are a dime a dozen... Unless we're talking about emeralds or The Rock. I hear he cooks.

A submissive needs things from her Dom, some need the removal of certain life responsibilities, some need someone to help them fix their lives, some need someone to tell them exactly what to do and when.
Hrmph.
Poor domly guys, all saddled with irresponsible, broken, directionless adults because that's what you MUST put up with if you want to be True... S-type ladies, don't do this to a guy. It's not fair to expect someone else to have to handle your shit for you.

No matter what you need as a submissive, a true Dom will step up and do what needs to be done, because that’s what a Dom should do.
No. A dom will do what a dom has agreed to do for his partner. And sure, a lot of partners will go above and beyond for someone they care about no matter what their label- But it's not something to expect all the time, no matter what. Especially if that's not what the D-type partner has consented to. There is no "should" when it comes to what happens in relationships.

When entering into a Dom/sub relationship, the Dom should be assessing what your needs are as a submissive. This assessment helps him determine if he is able to give you what you need and if you are willing to give him what he needs.
Ok, I can't actually find fault with this line of reasoning, except as it applies to everything else above.

No matter how you look at it, submissive people are broken, and before anyone jumps on their soap box I will say this is not a bad thing.
*Trots out high horse, soap boxes are for wussies*
Bullshit, uninformed blog writer with an extremely skewed and unflattering view of submissives.

Submissives are broken because they can’t function to the best of their ability without a Dom.
Oh, FFS!
This line of tripe again... Some PEOPLE have a hard time functioning at full capacity without someone else there to back them up. This is not a trait shared only by those who identify as submissive, nor is it something only submissives suffer from.

Some cannot handle the responsibility of Money management or bill paying, so they are always broke or in a really bad place financially. Some cannot seem to manage their time properly, some are overly selfish and cannot be responsible in doing what needs to be done and not what they want to do for their own selfish needs. Some abuse alcohol or drugs to escape their troubles in life which just causes more issues in their life, a never ending cycle. Some don’t take the risks they need to in order to succeed, and some just sit on the sidelines and just watch life pass them by.
D-types suffer from these as well.
Some s-types manage their relationship's finances as a service because they're better with money than their dominant partner.
Some s-types act as their dom's executive assistant, planning his day, reminding him of appointments, ensuring he's on time.
Some dominants are pretty selfish people- Or have you just not been on Fetlife any time in the past 6 years?
Some dominants have addiction issues or use other forms of escapism.
Some are life's wall flowers.
Nothing in this paragraph of stupid is a trait that afflicts only submissives. These are problems anybody can have, no matter what their label.

In short, the submissive is not living up to her full potential and sadly never will because she does not have the ability to make the changes she needs to make (otherwise she wouldn’t be in this position in her life).
Again, you're taking problems any person can have and saying that they only afflict one specific segment of the population- Complete and utter BS.


A submissive needs someone to do this for her, to take control of these “problems” in her life and do what needs to be done to help fix the issues. This is where the Dom steps in … the true Dom will be able to recognize the issues and build a plan in order to resolve them. When I say resolve, do not take that as a definition for “fix permanently”, because it rarely happens. A submissive is “broken” for a reason, it is not something that can be fixed with 2 months or years of work.
What I mean by “fixing” the issue is the Dom is the fix, his control is the fix. If you have issues paying your bills on time or are always too broke to function in life, the Dom steps in and controls that. For example, if you are always spending your money buying everything you want but know you can’t afford, the Dom steps in and puts a stop to that. The Dom gives you an allowance or a set budget, the Dom approves or denies your every purchase. The Dom steps up and helps you stay in control, the Dom is essentially the “fix” for your problem. Even after time, if you remove the Dom, the sub will usually revert (in some form) back to the way things were because the “fix” for the issue is no longer there, the control.
A) No. If a person has these issues they need to pull on their grown-up undies and sort their own shit out.
B) Expecting someone to fix your shit for you is immature and selfish in the extreme.
C) Nobody is obligated to carry the burden of another person's problems unless they choose to.
D) Dominants are not obligated to do any of this without first consenting to it, especially if they have no interest in a partner who is a "fixer-upper."

No two subs are the same so there is no one way to fix everything but the true Dom will be able to figure out a plan and implement it no matter what the issues are.
Unless he has no interest in that. Not all dominants want to take responsibility for a grown adult who should be taking responsibility for their own lives and problems. Someone who is unwilling to shoulder that burden is no less true than someone who is.

The Dom will become the submissive’s control point, the control she needs in order to grow and live up to her full potential. What it all comes down to in the end is Control … the control, the Dom’s control is the fix and this fits in with my other topic of writing about why the Dom needs to be in control of his own life first before ever attempting to control the life of another person.
A Dominant should be everything the submissive needs him to be … in order to help her become everything she can be …
No, no, no.
Adults need to be in control of themselves, period.
If you cannot control yourself, how can you submit?
If you can't control yourself how can you hope to control someone else?
Ugh. This tripe (which is an insult to tripe everywhere) is making my head hurt.

So the submissive should be … everything the Dom wants her to be, to show the appreciation for him being everything she needs him to be …
Why does this feel like Grade A manipulation?

no matter what, Dom/sub is give and take and it has to be in order for it to function properly. A sub should always appreciate and remind herself of everything the Dom is doing for her by being the “fix” for her issues and the Dom should always appreciate that they sub is giving him that control and is offering him what he wants, her ultimate submission.
Oh. Because it is.
In exchange for all that fixing the d-type now gets to expect (and receive) everything his domly little heart could require. And why do I get the feeling that shows of the submissive's appreciation would include doing things on her hard limit list for this guy?

When it’s all said and done, both should be everything the other needs them to be.
No.
When all is said and done, both partner should be exactly what they've agreed to be.
If the dominant partner has not agreed to be his submissive's life coach, therapist, day planner, financial service expert, administrative assistant, teacher, dog walker, father figure... HE DOES NOT HAVE TO BE.
Having no interest in being an enabler does not make him untrue, it makes him incompatible with a submissive who is looking for that in her partner. That's it.

Ugh. Who knew you guys had it so rough?
I feel bad for you all.

BTW subs- D/s is NOT therapy. If you have issues you know you need help with? Hire a therapist. Employ a life coach. Don't expect some poor schmuck with a title to fix the issues you're unwilling to fix yourself. Tat's unfair to him and a recipe for relationship disaster for you both.

Acceptance, Approval, and being "Judgmental As Fuck."

Are any of you guys old enough to remember the good old days when you could say something like "The word 'Daddy' squicks the hell out of me" and nobody batted an eye because you were obviously making a statement that only applied to you and it wasn't an indictment of anybody else who did use that word in their relationship?

Man, those were the days, back before the PC Police came storming into the scene and everybody got so damn prickly and began insisting that we all (everybody, everywhere) had to not only accept their kinks (Damnit! Accept them! Now!) but approve of them as well, and nobody was ever supposed to say anything that could ever be construed as negative.

Sigh.

I suppose the "acceptance" movement must have started off as a reasonable thing, once upon a time. It was probably just this pleasant idea that although you (general you) might not care for a particular activity or you might not want to employ that activity in your relationship, other folks did like that thing and so it was pretty shitty to make negative statements about the people who practiced that activity based solely on your negative perceptions of it (whew! that was a mouthful....*snicker*)

In short: YKINMYATOK- Your Kink Is Not My Kink And That's OK.

You'd think that acceptance, and the popular (if lengthy) acronym would be enough. You'd think that someone saying, "Well, I don't care for X but if you like X, that's cool" would be enough. That acceptance that you have the right to do whatever you want in your relationship no matter how another person feels about it would be plenty.

Sadly, it's not, and the proof of that is all over the Kinkyverse.

Take a harmless question from a newbie as an example: "How do you feel about addressing someone as "Daddy" or being addressed that way?"

Some folks say the like using that label for themselves or their partner. Cool.
Some folks say they don't like using that label for themselves or their partner. Cool.
Someone comes along and explains why they don't care to use that label as it makes them feel icky and squicky and OMFD! End Of The World! Judger! Non-acceptance person! How dare you explain why you don't like that word!? Don't you know that your lack of acceptance might hurt someone's little feelers!

The specific response was, "Total turn off. It was one of my criteria for screening Doms - if they called themself a Daddy Dom, I wouldn't respond. It makes me think of paedophilia and incest."

Me? I read than and I think, "Ok, so that's why that person doesn't care to use that label in her relationship. I can see how someone might feel that way about using that label in their relationship."

The Prickly and the PC Police read that and they hear a condemnation of anybody who likes using that word. They hear, "If YOU use that word it means YOU are into pedophilia and incest and that makes YOU a horrible person!" And then they start shouting about acceptance and judgment and how making a making a statement about your preferences for your relationship is the exact same thing as trashing someone who makes different choices in their relationship.

There's this prevailing attitude that states that the only opinion you're allowed to express is a positive one, otherwise? You're judging.

Personally, I think that idea is a bad one. People need to know that there are others who do not enjoy certain activities or labels and why they don't enjoy them so they can make informed choices. Imagine how hard that would be if the only opinions you hear about something you don't like are positive ones? How will that make you feel? Like there's got to be something wrong with you or that you're not Doing It Right if you don't share those opinions?

It can be tough enough figuring out what you think should be or should not be acceptable behavior or activities in your relationship when you're a newbie. I figure it would be near impossible to figure out what you wanted to accept in your relationship if the only views concerning those things were ones that said everything is and should be acceptable to and approved by you.

Acceptance and approval are not the same thing, and that's a point the Prickly and the PC Police need to understand.

I accept the fact that you have every right to partake in play that I have no interest in.
I accept the fact that people partake in play that I do not understand.
I accept the fact that I have no right to dictate what is acceptable in your relationship.
That's acceptance.

However, there's also approval.
You do not need my approval to engage in play I do not like or understand.

I get the idea that folks think they're one in the same, but they're not.
I can accept that folks like play or labels I do not approve of in my own relationship.
I can accept that folks dislike play or labels that I approve of in my relationship.
My relationship, my approval or disapproval of certain things for my relationship, has absolutely no bearing on your relationship or the fact that I accept how different we all are.

Expressing disapproval of something or why you might disapprove of something is not the same thing as lack of acceptance, it's not judging, and it would be nice to see folks understand the distinction instead of being so eager to start throwing "judgment" accusations when most of the time no judgment has been made.

The Super-Uber Guru D-type & "Homework"

Insomnia sucks.
It sucks so hard that if it were able to manifest in some physical form it would be able to suck a monkey through fifty feet of garden hose.
I really don't enjoy it despite the amusing mental image (or terrifying, if you happen to be a monkey).

But since I am a fan of Monty Python and I enjoy whistling I am deciding to always look on the bright side of life (insert whistling here).

I now have even more hours in my supremely uneventful day full of hours to stroll about the Kinkyverse searching for blog fodder, and having so much time means I no longer find myself limited to reading new stuff! Oh no! Now I get to dig deep into the archives of Fet and Google to see what sorts of silliness I can unearth.

Today Gem: The DIY Submissive.
(Or- The Lazy, Non Communicative Dom)

"I am very new to the world of BDSM, and have been told by a perspective Dom to do my research and homework. What do you enjoy most? What are the components of a D/s relationship? What all does it entail?"

It's not that I find the questions themselves to be so out of the ordinary, they're perfectly reasonable questions for any newbie to have. A newbie is totally justified in her curiosity about what activities others find enjoyable, what things are part of a D/s relationship, and what those things can mean. Super understandable to ask more experienced folks about this sort of stuff.

What I don't understand is the D-type who can't answer those questions- Or even more strangely, won't answer those questions for a prospective partner. I mean, they're the one who should be able to provide the most accurate answers, yeah?

Us helpful sorts, we can answer some of those questions with a lot of generalizations and things that our relationships include, but we can't exactly tell a newbie what her prospective D-type will enjoy or what she can expect from a relationship with him... Because: We're not him.

So it makes me wonder; Why is this type of question so common?

Is it because newbies might not be sure what questions they should be asking a prospective dominant?
What type of activities do you enjoy?
What do you feel are the components of a D/s relationship?
What do those things mean?

Is it because they think they're not supposed to ask a prospective dominant questions or expect that person to answer their questions?
Helpful hint: You can and they should.

Or is it (as I suspect) a case of Extreme Laziness, Reluctance/Inability to Communicate, or Cluelessness on the part of the D-type? Because I can't fathom why anybody who is looking for a partner would tell the person they're interested in to go ask a bunch of strangers for the answer.

If you were to start talking to a vanilla guy and asked him "So, what will a relationship with you look like" you'd probably head for the hills or laugh your ass off if her told you to go ask other people in that sort of relationship what to expect. So why is it totally kopasetic when a D-type pulls this stunt?

Maybe I could understand it if this was some Hollywood movie where the submissive MC was on some epic quest to find themselves and the answer to the universe's biggest question (42), and they seek the knowledge of some Super-Uber Guru D-Type Dude... But the MC has script writers on her side and is guaranteed a positive outcome- In 120 minutes or less, even.

But in real life? No.

Meh. I babble.

Returning to the Three Likeliest Culprits...

Cluelessness is sorta-excusable. I'm able to get my head around the idea that someone who is new might not want to admit to a lack of knowledge (because D-type know everything, ever, yo), and treat a newbie sub's questions like a search to find the holy grail... "Seek and ye shall find, grasshopper." Or, "Go do your homework and report back to me with notes I can crib from."

Extreme Laziness... Ehhhh. I'm not so sure I'd want to be in a relationship with someone who couldn't be bothered to explain the relationship I could expect to have with them. I don't know about you guys, but a lack of effort like that would make me wonder if that person was even into me. Or, worse yet, what parts of a relationship would also suffer because of that laziness. "Meh. Go tie yourself up. I'll be there in a minute. As soon as I can get off the couch... Uh, go get me a pop first, though."

Reluctance/Inability to Communicate- Ok, so it can be hard sometimes to express kinky desires to someone else. I've been around the block a time or two and I can still blush like a school girl when suggesting something new to Cookie )something he teases me mercilessly for, that pooka)... But communication is a rather important thing in any relationship, perhaps even more so in a D/s one if you want to get your needs met. "Um. What do I want to do? Uh... Go ask the internet." Kind of seems like a hit-or-miss proposition there because in all likelihood, the internet isn't going to give the answer you're hoping to get.

So yeah. I don't understand the Super-Uber Guru D-Type Dude method here, and like I said, I have a few miles on me here in the Kinkyverse. I can usually ferret out any whiff of logic an idea might possess, and all I'm sniffing here is something fishy.

I guess now I should insert something helpful for the newbie s-types...

Ok, got it.

Since it's not at all logical or helpful for a newbie to be expected to use the helpful denizens of the Kinkyverse to answer any questions she may have about a relationship with a prospective partner, what is a newbie to do?

Personally, I'd ask "Why is it that you cannot answer those questions for me?"
How the prospective D-type answered would tell me a lot about them as a person-
Getting all growly because how dare I ask them...
Some excuse about homework or an assignment or any other deflective BS...
Pretty much any answer except an honest. straight-forward answer would convince me that my time would be better spent elsewhere and with someone who was capable of answering relatively simple questions.

What you choose to do in this situation- That's up to you.

Slaves Can't Say No.

Being a painfully literal person sucks sometimes.
Like when I'm involved in a discussion about the differences between a submissive and a slave (BTW, I think the only quantifiable difference is the amount of letters it takes to spell each word), and someone comes along and says, "Well, a slave can't say no."

And then my brain, who is a great big jerk, gets this mental image of someone desperately trying to form the word "no" and speak it, but it's just not working for them.

"Nnnnn... NNNNnnnnn! Nuh, nuh, Nuuuuuuuh... Oh, fuck it."

Plus, there's that super twitchy feeling I get when people lay down gross generalizations and inaccurate information like it's the holy gospel of kinky truth. Just thinking about it is making my right eyelid spasm.

*twitch, twitch, twitch*

Slaves, like most people capable of speaking words out loud can say no just as well as anybody else, and for those who can't actually speak- Well, I figure that sign language would work just as well. Unless maybe they're tied up. Or wearing mittens. Mittens might interfere with that sort of thing...

Anyways, back to the point (if I have one. I might not. I'm out of diet Dew and have had to settle for a vastly inferior diet Pepsi this morning. It's just not cutting it).

Slaves can say no.
They're just as able of saying no as a over-tired toddler faced with an unwanted nap.

Whether they choose to use that word or not in their own personal relationship dynamic- That is an entirely different story.

And! I think it's one worth mentioning because as a blanket statement, the idea that if someone identifies as a slave means that they are never able to say no to something... It's an idea that can get new people into a world of hurt (and not the fun, kinky kind of hurt). When you tell a newbie who wants to identify as a slave that "a slave can't say no" you're creating a paradigm that allows for the potential of really bad shit to happen. Hell, even just mildly bad shit which could just result in an experience that would demolish any interest they might have had in WIITWD.

When you say "A slave can't say no" to a newbie, they don't understand that the lack of "no" in that relationship is the product of (hopefully) a great deal of negotiation over limits and boundaries and a massive amount of trust between a slave and her master that has been established over time. And even then, even if "no" has been negotiated out of the relationship, there are probably instances where it could still be used. The nuances are lost on that new person because odds are really good their only experience of BDSM to that point is crappy erotica and porn.

What they hear instead is literally what you're saying, that they can't say no. Ever. No matter what.

Then, the predatory or uninformed D-types come along and reinforce that idea with their manipulative "Good S-types Don't" drivel, they read the incredibly stupid lists dictating what Real & True s-types do, and common sense takes a flying leap out the nearest window.

Slaves can say "no".

I would strongly encourage anybody who identifies as a slave to refrain from giving up the ability to say no in their relationship until you know someone so well that there is no doubt in your mind that they would ever tell you to do something you would need to say no to.

That's the distinction left out in the generalization- People who say that they can't say no to their master are not saying that they're incapable of speaking the word, they're saying that the relationship they've built has such a solid foundation of trust that they don't need to say no.

They're saying that they've either negotiated "no" out of the equation by agreeing to a consensual non-consent (CNC) dynamic OR that there's no way in hell their partner would ever demand something of them that they would have to refuse. They know their partner well enough to know that he would never order them to cut off their arm or kill a dog or any of the horrible things that would elicit the use of "no." They are certain that their partner knows them well enough that he knows what orders would require a "no" answer, and he doesn't demand those things.

That kind of relationship isn't something that happens in a few messages over Skype or whatever kinky website you're using. Those are things that are established slowly, over time. Lots and lots of time.

So hang on to your "no" until you've built a relationship where you won't need to use it.

And feel free to use it on any nitwit who tries to tell you right off the bat that you can't tell him no. He deserves it... That, and a swift kick in the ass.

On Condoms & Insistance of Their Usage

I'm a lucky girl.
Cookie and I are fluid bonded, monogamous, and the only time we use condoms is when I'm ovulating (because three Junior Sqeakies are more than plenty). So protection isn't really something that's on my radar, it's not something I think about except when I'm putting Cookie's socks away and I move the box-o-rubbers. And even then it's kind of like, "Eh. That's feeling pretty light. I should probably get some more cock wrap the next time I'm at Meijer's."

Condoms are not something I've written about, and I probably should have because it's a topic that comes up pretty often in regards to newbie submissive ladies. Most often in questions that start something like this:

"My new Dom says a true submissive doesn't insist on using condoms..."

And that's a pretty shitty thing to have to worry about, right? That looking after your physical health might make you some sort of Untrue or that you have to abandon safety precautions because some nitwit with a self appointed title says so. Pretty effing shitty. Newbies have enough on their plates without worrying about the moronic and potentially dangerous dictates of manipulative DimDoms.

So, condoms-

They're a pain in the ass, very few people enjoy using them, and some men (and women) have been trying to weasel their way out of using them for ages. There are a million and one excuses for not using them ranging from the painfully moronic ("You can't get pregnant the first time") to the whiney and self serving ("But baby, it just doesn't feel as nice") to blatant lies ("Of course I'm clean") and anything else a person can think of saying to get out of sticking a cock in a bit of latex.

In Vanilla Land we've been trained to recognize those excuses for what they are- Bullshit. Any self respecting Sex Ed class teaches that condoms, although they don't eliminate all risk, do mitigate that risk and bring it down to a level most safety-minded folks are willing to accept.

But then folks wander into the Kinkyverse and all that education falls by the wayside with one stupid dictate- "My new Dom said..."

Suddenly, just because some nitwit who's given himself a meaningless title says "True subs wouldn't make their Dom use a rubber!" some newbies begin to doubt their right to insist on practicing safer sex. They might think that because this guys says so, everything they've learned previous to this moment has to take a back seat to the dictates of New Dom because, Dom.

Point blank: It doesn't.

Title or no title an excuse is an excuse, and that's all this No Condom BS is- A self serving excuse from a manipulative man-child who wants to put his peepee inside you with no thought about your health.

Yes, you can insist on condom usage until you decide to fluid bond with a partner. You can tell him, "No glove, no love." You can walk out the door and not look back if he keeps bitching about something that millions of men do every day. You do NOT have to fuck him bareback just because he says so (unless that's what you want and agree to do).

Of course saying "No glove, no love" might mean that Mr. Domly Charming might cut and run- Just like he can't force you to have sex without a condom, you can't force him to have sex with a condom, so it's up to you to decide if he's such a great catch that you're willing to call it quits.

Personally though- I wouldn't consider someone who rated their momentary pleasure to be more important than my health to be the guy of my dreams. But that's me and you're you. Your choices don't have to be the same as mine, but at least you know that you have choices. You don't have to have unprotected sex just because some ninny who doesn't want to wear a rubber is whining at you and trying to use the True Sub Excuse to get his way.

The Natural Submissive (Personality Vs. Orientation)

Yesterday an unintentionally interesting thread happened in one of the groups I belong to on Fet. It started out as a snark-fest aimed at the painfully annoying folks who wave around the "Natural Submissive" label as a badge of honor to make themselves feel superior and then moved on to a discussion about people who do genuinely feel that they're just naturally submissive (like someone might be naturally inclined to be a good singer).

So as I was reading this thread I noticed something that I found interesting- Most of the folks who self identified as a "natural" were those who expressed that they had a desire to serve or please others their entire lives. Those folks with a submissive personality type.

That makes a certain amount of sense. If you feel that way for as long as you can remember it's going to feel natural to you because that's just how you are, and if you also have the orientation to be the submissive partner... Well, what's going to feel more natural than having a relationship dynamic that aligns neatly with your personality. It may just be a continuation of the person you've always known you were.

Then I began thinking about orientation by itself.

There are plenty of submissives who do not have submissive personalities (I'm one of them) but who are wired to be the submissive partner in their relationships.

You rarely, if ever, see the "natural" label applied to these folks, even though it could be argued that orientation is just as natural as personality- And perhaps more so. Personality can be altered either by will or by outside influence, but orientation is hard-wiring (must ponder this thought more...).

Anyways.

I started thinking about why orientation submissives don't generally use the "natural" label. I know I never have, it's never occurred to me to do so.

And I wonder if it's because there may be a conflict between having a more assertive personality and a desire to submit within a relationship... Sometimes it just doesn't feel all that natural, especially when a person has had this assertive, more dominant personality for years and years and then when they start dating and start forming intimate relationships, then the hard-wiring finally makes itself known.

I suppose there might be a bit of an identity crisis in there somewhere: The personality says, "Sorry pal, this isn't who we are" while the wiring is responding with "Wanna bet?"

I guess it also doesn't help in this crisis that "natural" is applied to people unlike ourselves (ourselves being assertive P, submissive O), so what are we left with? Well, we're certainly not natural according to the generalizations so that must make us unnatural and unnatural is something to fight against.

Now I'm wondering if it wouldn't perhaps be helpful if more Assertive Personality- submissive Orientation folks were to apply the "natural" label to themselves?

Would it be helpful for newbies to hear "Yep. I have an assertive personality and I naturally orient as the submissive partner in a relationship. I am naturally submissive, just in a different way."

Would that concept help with the identity struggle?

I'm not sure, but I guess it is just a continuation of a concept that helped me a great deal when I was struggling with making sense out of these seemingly warring factions within myself.

The concept was Personality and Orientation and that neither of those things were the same-
A person could have a submissive P and could or could not orient as a submissive in a relationship.
A person could have an assertive P and could or could not orient as a submissive in a relationship.
One had nothing to do with the other, so perhaps expanding on that, that any personality and orientation combination is NATURAL would be beneficial...

I don't know. I don't think the idea is quite as fleshed out as I'd like it to be, but maybe it's a start.

EDIT TO ADD:
This is part of the on-going discussion, and I'm going to tack it on here because it's also part of this-

Someone Else- Whatever is wrong with being submissive in general, not just by conscious choice, not just towards that one special person or those several special people?
Me- That's a continuation of what I'm thinking about and driving towards- Orientation isn't a conscious choice, not for submission, not for sexuality, not for gender... Much like personality it's just who someone is.
And maybe folks don't see it as natural (or innate, also a good word) because there is a selection process involved, but then natural selection is natural, all species select for the best possible mate... And if that orientation hard-wiring doesn't kick in until the right partner has been selected?
But still, once the right partner is there, it's not a choice. Not for me anyways.

Another Internet How-To List...

I like reposting (and adding to) things I find on the internet.
Why? Because sometimes it's horrid advice that I'm sharing and I point out why it's horrid, and sometimes it's sound advice that I like to expand on to provide multiple perspectives in one place. This is case of the latter- Pretty decent advice with additional commentary.


1. YOU are in charge of your own safety and happiness.
Although this is a power-exchange type of world, you do not give up your rights as a human being (unless that’s something you have negotiated) and ultimately the choice to remain in an unsafe or miserable situation is your own.
I actually prefer "Authority Exchange" as I feel it's more accurate, but beyond that- Hooray for someone else espousing personal responsibility! It is your job to keep yourself safe- Not mine, or your friend's or the community (whoever they are), or your partner's... YOURS.

Use safe words, use safe calls, call upon friends who you can trust. Consent does matter, but you can always withdraw consent.
Hey, wait... What happened to personal responsibility?
Safe words are great when they work, but they only work when your partner respects them.
And safe calls are just a starting point for the cops to come looking for your body... They don't actually keep you safe.

2. Dominants are not mind readers- in fact they rather suck at it, so be sure that you are stating your needs and your desires clearly.
Do not expect to get what you want or need if you’re not willing to open your mouth and ask for it. Always be willing to open up the line of communication BEFORE play and ASK or DISCUSS it.
Brilliant!
Too bad more folks can't seem to grasp this simple concept (nobody's a mind reader!), there would be a lot more fulfilling, happy relationships.

3. Know what you like.
Nothing is more frustrating than a dominant asking “what are you interested in” and getting a blank stare and an “ummm” in response.
Know what you like and what you don’t like. If you don’t know, figure it out. Attend an event where they do “tasters” of various kinks, contact a dominant you trust to show you things, or just plain ask. You need to know what you like or you are not going to be very happy and content with yourself or your dominant.
Additionally, merely thinking about different activities can help this process along. Do you think about it and squick? Then you might not want to try that activity. Does it sound interesting? Then you can probably move it to the "might want to try" column of your mental list. Then, think about them some more... is this something you would really like to try, or is it something that you'd just be happy fantasizing about?

4. Not every “top” or “dominant” or big letter person is trustworthy.
Just because they carry a big whip and wear a fancy hat doesn’t mean that you can trust them. Get references, listen to others, and trust your instincts. If something feels wrong or like a “red flag” trust yourself. You were given an instinct to protect yourself USE IT.
True that.
But references? One thing to keep in mind is the fact that nobody is going to have you contact a person who will give them a bad reference. Think about it- When you apply to a new job who do you have your prospective employer contact? People who will give you a glowing reference, or folks who will tell your prospective boss that you pick your nose while driving, punt kittens, and have been known to drink out of the milk carton?

5. Don’t top from below.
If you decide you are submissive, be the submissive- don’t try to weasel your way into being the de-facto top or to always get your way. It really does get to be all about the top. If you can’t handle that, maybe you are on the wrong end of the dynamic.
Errr... Actually, it's not always "all about the top."
If your needs are not being met and you're voicing a reasonable concern- That's honest communication. Anybody who tries to shut down honest communication with a TFTB accusation is a weenie.
And some (rare) D-types enjoy some difficulty...
To each their own.

6. Bottoming to someone is not the same as submitting to them forever.
Just because someone plays with you or allows you to serve them doesn’t mean that you belong to them. It might lead to something more, it might not. Don’t be a stalker about it!
That.
I don't know how many times I've seen some New & Excited Baby Seal announce to the world that "her new Dom..." when they're just play partners and there is no D/s dynamic, just sexy fun time T/b play. Don't be that person. It's not attractive. It's like going on one date and referring to the guy as your fiancé... Creepy.

7. If you agree to rules, procedures, responsibilities, etc, do not constantly renegotiate.
Agree to only what you are willing to do and then do that. If you can’t handle the agreement to begin with, don’t agree to it!
To be fair, sometimes renegotiating things often in the begining is good for the relationship to ensure that both or all parties get what they desire because really, few of us get it right, right away. It takes some trial and error.

8. Be honest about who you are.
Are you poly? Monogamous? Bi-sexual? HIV-positive? Got Herpes? Grow a spine and be honest about it. Don’t enter into a relationship trying to be something you are not. You’ll only end up miserable and hurting people. This goes back to knowing yourself and what you want or would like to try.
No argument there.

9. Don’t’ be afraid to say no!
Don’t be afraid to safe word. Don’t be afraid to withdraw consent.
Just don’t expect things to be all happy and wonderful and perfect after you do so. Saying no, safewording and withdrawing consent should be the beginning of a conversation, not the end of one. And if you aren’t willing to discuss it with the person directly, you sure as heck shouldn’t broadcast it publicly.
Again, no argument.
And I like that the author points out that saying "no" can have consequences.

10. Don’t compare yourself to others. 
Someone is always going to be more “slavey”, be able to take more pain, be more service oriented, be more accomplished, know more, or whatever. Deal with it. You are you and whoever you submit to should like you for YOU not for who they think you should be. If you can’t stand to be who you are and accept it and keep trying to play up to someone’s standards that aren’t yours then you will be miserable.
Word to your mother, yo.


11. Ask questions. Seriously ask people.
If you don’t know about something- ASK. If you want to know about a certain toy or type of play ASK (but not during a scene this is why you negotiate and communicate and talk and discuss it ahead of time). If you want someone to explain protocol to you, ASK. Attend classes, go to workshops, find a mentor, but please, ask questions. “No one ever told me” is a terrible excuse when there are a wealth of people willing to explain things if you’d just ask.
YES!
It frustrates me to no end when people act as if they have any excuse for ignorance when the internet if chock full of people willing to offer GREAT advice via forums, blogs, books, hell there's even BDSM advice on YouTube!

12. Sometimes submission sucks.
It sucks to put everyone else first and see to their needs before your own, but that’s part of the deal. Find a way to make yourself a priority every now and again to feed your own soul, but know that at the end of the day, the dominant is going to come first. It isn’t all rainbows and flowers with floggers and ball gags. There are days you will question your sanity in agreeing to live this way.
Well... Some of us don't put "everybody" first. Our D-types, probably most of the time, but not everybody, not by a long shot.
And, there are quite a few of us who have no desire to do something that's going to suck. Suck is not part of our relationship vocabulary (well, it might be, but not in reference to being miserable), altruism is not our cuppa, and we have no interest in being martyrs.
It's up to you to decide if you can live that way or if you need a partner who's going to make your needs and wants a priority.

13. You don’t have to like something in order to do it.
Sometimes it’s ok to do something you don’t like in order to please someone else, Just be honest about it. If you are taking the cane because you know it makes the dominant happy, be honest about that. It’s ok!
And you don't have to do something you dislike.
It may be a deal breaker for the other person if you don't, and you might have to chalk it up to incompatibility, but it's not a universal prerequisite of submission that you MUST do shit you don't like.

14. Perfection is not required.* You WILL fuck this up numerous times.
You will get yelled at, dressed down, ignored, put aside, punished and possibly even dismissed. You WILL forget something major, something minor or some rule. You will screw this up. Instead of worrying about every little potential mistake, do the best you can with what you have at all times. No one can fault you if you are trying your best. Especially not yourself.
OK, I'm having trouble with this one because some of us do not believe in punishment dynamics. We think "yelling" is counterproductive, ignoring is passive-aggressive BS, and dismissal for screwing up? Seriously? If someone is going to bail because you're not perfect from the get-go, let them. All three of those things (yelling, ignoring, dismissing) are childish, immature, and hallmarks of someone who cannot control themselves, much less a submissive partner.

15. Don’t trust a pretty smile, a big whip, or a big dick.
Just because someone looks the part of a “perfect dominant” doesn’t mean they know what they are doing. Clothes and toys don’t make a dominant effective. Having a whip in the bag doesn’t mean they know how to use it properly. Don’t trust appearances only, there’s always more than just what’s on the surface. There is much more to the book then it’s cover. Always know that!
BOOYAH!
D-types are just people!
Some people are trustworthy, some people are not, and someone giving themselves a title does not change that fact.

16. Don’t play with someone you’ve never seen play unless someone you trust has seen them play.You have no idea what you are getting into and you might be signing on for something that is not comfortable and could be potentially very dangerous to you! There are abusers, serial killers and manipulating people in this world so PLAY SAFE!
In all seriousness, this is a wee bit unrealistic because the majority of kinky folks? We don't play in public. We play at home. So how, exactly, are you going to watch those people play? And if they're private players your friend isn't likely to have seen them go at it... Also: See the "references" thing above.
This isn't rocket science.
If you don't know someone and you don't feel safe playing with them when you don't know them?
Wait until you know them. Problem solved.