When I first discovered the online kink community there was one phrase I read over and over used to describe D/s: Power Exchange.
Dominance and submission was described as an exchange of power where one partner has more power than the other in a relationship. This concept wasn't really something I thought much about because I wasn't aware that there were other terms used for the discrepancy of control people had in D/s relationships.
And honestly, it just wasn't a big deal. I wasn't actually in a relationship with a D/s dynamic (what with being married to Mr. Skim Milk and all) so it wasn't a concept I thought about- Who had more power. It didn't matter.
That changed when I met Cookie. I don't know if it had something to do with our decision to adopt a D/s dynamic in our relationship or if I was just at a point where power seemed to be a good thing to ponder, but ponder it I did and something just didn't feel right. You know that feeling, when something is just a bit off but you can't really put your finger on it? It was like that.
The vocabulary I possessed said that he had more power and I had less, but there was a problem. I didn't feel less powerful. I didn't fell that my capabilities were diminished, that I was less able to take action or make decisions... I was still a powerful person in my own right and it really didn't seem that he gained any power with our agreement, so I was at a loss.
Still not a big deal, one word didn't affect our relationship, except for the fact that it wasn't accurate to describe my experience.
Then I joined Fetlife and ran into a lady (incomparable Lucky Albatross who introduced me to this idea) who clarified this dissonance I was feeling- I believe it was in a post about who had more power, though it's been 4 years so memory may not be serving me right, and I think that what she said was something about not viewing D/s as an exchange of power, but instead viewing it as an Authority Exchange.
Instead of one partner having more power than the other, one partner had more authority than the other... For me, it was one of those light bulb moments. Here was this lady and she was putting her finger on the thing that had been bothering me. I still had all of my personal power, I was still a capable person, I was just giving my partner the authority to make decisions and assert his will.
To me this concept felt so much more accurate to describe my experience than saying that I was less powerful than my partner.
Long story short- This is why when I write I write about the Authority Exchange and not the more commonly accepted Power Exchange. I just feel that between the two words, this one is a more accurate description of the mechanism that drives D/s.
Though as an aside, I wonder why "power" was the word chosen to represent the thing that is at the core of most (if not all) D/s relationships. Think about it- it's kind of a vague word and really a bit difficult to describe when used to explain a personal relationship. It makes sense when applied to a person's ability to make people do something, like a king or the president, but that power is there because people don't really have much choice but to acquiesce - You do what you're told or you probably go to jail... In a relationship though, the Dominant partner doesn't have that power because it's a fully consensual agreement between two people whose power is equal...
I wonder why they didn't pick control, or authority right off the bat. Both of those words are (to my literal mind) more fitting.
Hmm.
...Just the stuff I think about at the end of my day, which has included at this point 2 liters of Diet Dew and 3 cupcakes from the input blog (Yeah, Cookie's slacking on his Domly Dieting Dictates. Slacker). I'm a little doofy at this point and definitely ready for sleep.
Tuesday, March 4, 2014
Someone made a helpful list (that I eviscerated. My bad).
I like to keep up on what other people are writing about. Partly because I like getting those little glimpses into another person's head and partly because it's a good idea to know what drivel is being spewed because that shit needs to be nipped in the bud.
So this morning I hit up Google to see what's happening in the Kinkyverse. This is what I found, bold is that writer's ideology, not bold is me. Snarking. A lot. Sorry, I tried to restrain myself (well, I didn't try very hard), but a person with common sense can only take so much of this One True Way stuff before they lose their patience.
Today I will be sharing the protocols normally reserved for 24/7 submissives and slaves.
Ooo... There are protocols normally reserved for 24/7 dynamics? Do tell!
Some of these will be fairly standard and have been taken from erotic fiction but some of these are very unique to the owner and should show you that deciding what the rules and protocols are should be the owner's decision.
Your use of "taken from erotic fiction" worries me because, yanno, fiction. Plus it's doubly worrisome that you're implying that rules are set only at the D-type's discretion... Have you not heard of negotiating?
I will be breaking up the requirements in different categories and in some instances, when something is clear I will not even use further explanation. It is my hope that this guide will help you enhance your submissive or slave's service to you.
I can barely contain my anticipatory glee.
In private/ At home with no one else present:
Slave should always remove clothing as soon as she/he gets home unless Master/ Mistress has laid out clothing for the slave or submissive to wear.
Always? As in without exception? You do realize that many of us have children, live in cold climates, or just don't do that sort of thing, right?
Slave should fold clothes neatly or place them in the laundry whenever he/ she gets undressed. Ok. I can't take exception to this one, dirty clothes strewn about the house is one of my pet peeves.
The slave or submissive is to kneel in present posture whenever the Master/ Mistress is due to arrive and wait quietly.
I have no idea what this is, but I do know that being naked and kneeling around here is going to result in some uncomfortable adventures in warding off curious dogs and their wet noses... How about I remain clothed and just sit on the couch?
Whenever the Master/ Mistress is present in a room, the slave must ask permission to enter in the following fashion: "Would it please you if your slave entered the room."
I can already hear Cookie laughing. In part because he would find this silly, but mostly because he would be amused that you're dictating what his submissive must do.
The slave will kneel in the room until the Master/ Mistress gives permission that he or she may move or proceed with cleaning.
Ooo. Cleaning. I'm sure that will be the first thing on his mind if I'm nakkie and kneeling- Having me clean something.
The slave or submissive will wear and gratefully accept any toys the Master/ Mistress chooses to insert or adorn her or him with while cleaning or in any other circumstance.
Cookie hasn't given me any toys! Does this mean he's doing it wrong? Is there a committee or something I can report him to? I'm feeling rather jilted here.
The slave will not speak unless spoken to and may request an opportunity to speak if there is something pressing to discuss during those periods of time when the Master/ Mistress commands silence.
This might work if it wasn't for the fact the he tends to like my nonstop chatter. He thinks I'm amusing, which is good because I think I'm amusing too.
The slave or submissive may request an opportunity to serve the Dominant in the following way: "Would it please you to have your slave serve you?"
Again, thanks for telling someone else's s-type what they "may" do. And, you know, this is just something to think about here- But plenty of D-types don't really enjoy that whole third person slavey-wavy talk thing... Might be a good idea to admit that there's no One True Way sometime soon.
The slave does not sleep with the Master/ Mistress unless it is the express wish of the owner and then this must be seen as a privilege. It can be taken away as a form of punishment.
Like hell it is or can. We're married we sleep together no matter what. Hard limit.
Oh, just in case you forgot: S-types are allowed to have limits.
The slave or submissive will always thank the Master/ Mistress for an opportunity to serve whether it was doing a chore or being flogged.
I actually do this. But it might not count because I'm kind of sarcastic about it... He laughs though, so it's all good.
The slave will keep their eyes averted unless it is the wish of the Master/ Mistress to have their slave look them in the eyes.
There's that absolute thing again... It's getting a bit old and we're not even halfway through this list.
The slave will address the Master/ Mistress not by their first name, but by the title preferred by that dominant.
I call Cookie by his first name. I also call him Dear, Sir Pooksalot, and You Fluffy-headed Manperson. We both fail, it seems. (also, if you're wondering, a "pooka" is what my eldest twin called poop. He couldn't pronounce poop so it came out sounding like pooka. We think it's funny)
In public/ At home with others present:
A slave will receive visitors at the door with whatever clothing the Master or Mistress commanded.
Or whatever I happen to be wearing at the time. Cookie doesn't dictate my wardrobe, and has no interest in dictating my wardrobe. Funny thing- I actually have more fashion sense than he does so he wears what I lay out for him. I dictate his wardrobe.
A slave will greet visitors in whatever way the Master/ Mistress commands - this may include just taking coats and putting them away, kissing the hand of the guest or kneeling in front of them.
Yeah... No.
A slave will not refer to anyone using his or her first name. A slave will use the title Sir or Ma'am combined with their name to differentiate and to make sure that he or she remembers her or his place.
Again, no. The only person who I would ever think of using a title on is the one person I submit to and have consented to submit to- My Domly One. And my place? It's on equal footing with every other human being on this planet.
A slave will serve every person with food and drinks as requested, kneeling to each as the food or drinks are presented.
Not happening. I have bad knees. Too many years of track.
A slave will not use furniture and will kneel on the floor until her or his services are required.
Like hell I'm not going to use a couch or chair I paid for, and I'm sure as heck not kneeling on the floor with my craptastic knees.
A slave will not speak unless spoken to.
Not our kink, but thanks for telling us it should be.
A slave will remain attentive to make sure that no one has to ask for additional food or drink. A slave should be ready before the command is issued.
If I got off on service this might be fun, but I don't. I'll do what a good hostess would do but if someone other than Cookie commands me to fetch them something they're going to be booted out of my home for being a rude, insufferable twat.
A slave must use high protocol when commanded to do so. This means that the slave will not use first person language when referring to him or herself and will address everyone present with the honorific given to those free.
Oh God.
Seriously, get off Second Life. We're ALL free in case you missed that whole Slavery Being Illegal In The USA thing. And I'll use high protocol when I agree to use it, it's that whole pesky consent thing.
Bathroom training:
A slave must always ask permission before using the bathroom or taking a shower.
Not happening. I don't get off on that, Cookie doesn't want to be pestered every time I need to wee or get clean... really. Please, some time soon point out that you don't have the monopoly on how dynamics ought to run and different people will have varying degrees of interest in the things mentioned here.
The bathroom door may never be closed in private, as a slave has no right to privacy.
Ew. Gross. Seriously not happening. And my shy bladder disagrees with you.
The slave must accept it calmly when the owner decides that a bathroom break will not be allowed at that very moment.
By "calmly" I'm guessing you don't mean wee on your D-type because I have a good idea that's what would happen if Cookie had the balls to tell me I couldn't use the potty room when I needed to.
Punishment/ Discipline:
Punishment and or discipline take precedence over any other command.
Not part of our dynamic, thanks.
A slave must show gratitude for punishment and or discipline.
Must? Boy, you really like dictating what other people do in their relationships don't you?
A slave must take correction gracefully and maintain a grateful presence around the house after the fact.
And if they haven't consented to it they can file assault charges and show grace and dignity in court.
A slave must confess to disobedience and take responsibility even when the dominant is not present and beg for punishment and or discipline.
Because that sort of thinking worked so well for our parents when we were children, right? Come on.
A slave must always maintain the punishment position in these cases.
There's a position for that? Is it like bending over or something? How well does that work when the punishment is writing lines or dusting the crown molding near the ceiling?
Sexual Service:
This si where it gets really good. And by "really good" I mean that there is absolutely no nod to the importance of consent when it comes to sexual activity and the rights someone has if someone forces them to have sex against their will- Also known as rape.
The slave must be available for sexual service whenever the dominant or his guests require it.
Or his guests?
Dear reader- I want to point out something here- The fact that the person demanding service of this nature identifies as a D-type does not protect them from rape charges. If you do not consent, they have no right to expect any sexual gratification from you. This is not a "must" it is a kink that requires consent, and it is despicable that it's stated as a must.
The slave must always be ready for any form of sexual service, which would mean that her or his body must be prepared in order to make it easy for the dominant or guests to use him or her.
Some folks enjoy this sort of thing, I enjoy being available to my Domly One... But not always. Being sick, bleeding like a stuck pig, having had a horrid day- Yeah. Those don't really foster a sexy-time feeling. They do however foster a "Get the hell away from me or I'll brain you with this leaded crystal bedside lamp" feeling.
The slave will not be allowed to have an orgasm without permission.
Funny. I'm allowed to have as many orgasms as I want whenever I want. So whose rule do I listen to here? The tripe from a random One True Way blog or my Domly One's dictates?
The slave will shave any body hair and maintain this at all times. Failure to do so will result in punishment.
We don't have a punishment dynamic.
The slave will be clean and pleasant to all the senses at all times.
Does this mean I can't fart? Because that's not very realistic. Sometimes the gas has to pass.
The slave is not allowed to touch her or his owner's property without permission in any sexual way.
Oddly enough, I've never actually felt the need to molest Cookie's car or X Box until this very moment...
These are but a few of the requirements that some slaves live by.
You really should have put more emphasis on SOME because this comes across as a One True Way Manifesto with a weak ass nod to YKINMKATOK. WEAK.
The list is extensive and could be lengthened quite easily.
Because it's not long enough? Sheesh. Plenty of people don't even have rules and regulations at all much less a list like this. Cookie only has one rule. One. He's the Boss. That's it, it's his trump card, his ace in the hole. Man. He'd shit bricks if he thought he had to create, manage, and keep track of all the potential infractions a lengthy list like this could create.
It is always a good idea to have requirements regarding online privileges and privacy, interaction with others not in the lifestyle, which would include hand signals etc.
No, it's not "always" a good idea. It's a good idea if that idea appeals to the people in a dynamic.
In the end it is the decision of the dominant what this list would include.
Please. Just stop. It is also the decision of the s-type if she wants to consent to the things included in a list like this.
My dominant makes me read my list of requirements daily to ensure that I do not fail in my service to him.
Good for you. My Dominant likes me to write snarky blogs in response to other blogs written by people who don't have the common sense to realize that their verbal outpourings have consequences. He seems to think that I have some responsibility to point out to the new and uninformed that there is no right or wrong way to do this, and the only things they "must" do are those things they agree to do... Too bad more folks don't realize that fact.
So this morning I hit up Google to see what's happening in the Kinkyverse. This is what I found, bold is that writer's ideology, not bold is me. Snarking. A lot. Sorry, I tried to restrain myself (well, I didn't try very hard), but a person with common sense can only take so much of this One True Way stuff before they lose their patience.
Today I will be sharing the protocols normally reserved for 24/7 submissives and slaves.
Ooo... There are protocols normally reserved for 24/7 dynamics? Do tell!
Some of these will be fairly standard and have been taken from erotic fiction but some of these are very unique to the owner and should show you that deciding what the rules and protocols are should be the owner's decision.
Your use of "taken from erotic fiction" worries me because, yanno, fiction. Plus it's doubly worrisome that you're implying that rules are set only at the D-type's discretion... Have you not heard of negotiating?
I will be breaking up the requirements in different categories and in some instances, when something is clear I will not even use further explanation. It is my hope that this guide will help you enhance your submissive or slave's service to you.
I can barely contain my anticipatory glee.
In private/ At home with no one else present:
Slave should always remove clothing as soon as she/he gets home unless Master/ Mistress has laid out clothing for the slave or submissive to wear.
Always? As in without exception? You do realize that many of us have children, live in cold climates, or just don't do that sort of thing, right?
Slave should fold clothes neatly or place them in the laundry whenever he/ she gets undressed. Ok. I can't take exception to this one, dirty clothes strewn about the house is one of my pet peeves.
The slave or submissive is to kneel in present posture whenever the Master/ Mistress is due to arrive and wait quietly.
I have no idea what this is, but I do know that being naked and kneeling around here is going to result in some uncomfortable adventures in warding off curious dogs and their wet noses... How about I remain clothed and just sit on the couch?
Whenever the Master/ Mistress is present in a room, the slave must ask permission to enter in the following fashion: "Would it please you if your slave entered the room."
I can already hear Cookie laughing. In part because he would find this silly, but mostly because he would be amused that you're dictating what his submissive must do.
The slave will kneel in the room until the Master/ Mistress gives permission that he or she may move or proceed with cleaning.
Ooo. Cleaning. I'm sure that will be the first thing on his mind if I'm nakkie and kneeling- Having me clean something.
The slave or submissive will wear and gratefully accept any toys the Master/ Mistress chooses to insert or adorn her or him with while cleaning or in any other circumstance.
Cookie hasn't given me any toys! Does this mean he's doing it wrong? Is there a committee or something I can report him to? I'm feeling rather jilted here.
The slave will not speak unless spoken to and may request an opportunity to speak if there is something pressing to discuss during those periods of time when the Master/ Mistress commands silence.
This might work if it wasn't for the fact the he tends to like my nonstop chatter. He thinks I'm amusing, which is good because I think I'm amusing too.
The slave or submissive may request an opportunity to serve the Dominant in the following way: "Would it please you to have your slave serve you?"
Again, thanks for telling someone else's s-type what they "may" do. And, you know, this is just something to think about here- But plenty of D-types don't really enjoy that whole third person slavey-wavy talk thing... Might be a good idea to admit that there's no One True Way sometime soon.
The slave does not sleep with the Master/ Mistress unless it is the express wish of the owner and then this must be seen as a privilege. It can be taken away as a form of punishment.
Like hell it is or can. We're married we sleep together no matter what. Hard limit.
Oh, just in case you forgot: S-types are allowed to have limits.
The slave or submissive will always thank the Master/ Mistress for an opportunity to serve whether it was doing a chore or being flogged.
I actually do this. But it might not count because I'm kind of sarcastic about it... He laughs though, so it's all good.
The slave will keep their eyes averted unless it is the wish of the Master/ Mistress to have their slave look them in the eyes.
There's that absolute thing again... It's getting a bit old and we're not even halfway through this list.
The slave will address the Master/ Mistress not by their first name, but by the title preferred by that dominant.
I call Cookie by his first name. I also call him Dear, Sir Pooksalot, and You Fluffy-headed Manperson. We both fail, it seems. (also, if you're wondering, a "pooka" is what my eldest twin called poop. He couldn't pronounce poop so it came out sounding like pooka. We think it's funny)
In public/ At home with others present:
A slave will receive visitors at the door with whatever clothing the Master or Mistress commanded.
Or whatever I happen to be wearing at the time. Cookie doesn't dictate my wardrobe, and has no interest in dictating my wardrobe. Funny thing- I actually have more fashion sense than he does so he wears what I lay out for him. I dictate his wardrobe.
A slave will greet visitors in whatever way the Master/ Mistress commands - this may include just taking coats and putting them away, kissing the hand of the guest or kneeling in front of them.
Yeah... No.
A slave will not refer to anyone using his or her first name. A slave will use the title Sir or Ma'am combined with their name to differentiate and to make sure that he or she remembers her or his place.
Again, no. The only person who I would ever think of using a title on is the one person I submit to and have consented to submit to- My Domly One. And my place? It's on equal footing with every other human being on this planet.
A slave will serve every person with food and drinks as requested, kneeling to each as the food or drinks are presented.
Not happening. I have bad knees. Too many years of track.
A slave will not use furniture and will kneel on the floor until her or his services are required.
Like hell I'm not going to use a couch or chair I paid for, and I'm sure as heck not kneeling on the floor with my craptastic knees.
A slave will not speak unless spoken to.
Not our kink, but thanks for telling us it should be.
A slave will remain attentive to make sure that no one has to ask for additional food or drink. A slave should be ready before the command is issued.
If I got off on service this might be fun, but I don't. I'll do what a good hostess would do but if someone other than Cookie commands me to fetch them something they're going to be booted out of my home for being a rude, insufferable twat.
A slave must use high protocol when commanded to do so. This means that the slave will not use first person language when referring to him or herself and will address everyone present with the honorific given to those free.
Oh God.
Seriously, get off Second Life. We're ALL free in case you missed that whole Slavery Being Illegal In The USA thing. And I'll use high protocol when I agree to use it, it's that whole pesky consent thing.
Bathroom training:
A slave must always ask permission before using the bathroom or taking a shower.
Not happening. I don't get off on that, Cookie doesn't want to be pestered every time I need to wee or get clean... really. Please, some time soon point out that you don't have the monopoly on how dynamics ought to run and different people will have varying degrees of interest in the things mentioned here.
The bathroom door may never be closed in private, as a slave has no right to privacy.
Ew. Gross. Seriously not happening. And my shy bladder disagrees with you.
The slave must accept it calmly when the owner decides that a bathroom break will not be allowed at that very moment.
By "calmly" I'm guessing you don't mean wee on your D-type because I have a good idea that's what would happen if Cookie had the balls to tell me I couldn't use the potty room when I needed to.
Punishment/ Discipline:
Punishment and or discipline take precedence over any other command.
Not part of our dynamic, thanks.
A slave must show gratitude for punishment and or discipline.
Must? Boy, you really like dictating what other people do in their relationships don't you?
A slave must take correction gracefully and maintain a grateful presence around the house after the fact.
And if they haven't consented to it they can file assault charges and show grace and dignity in court.
A slave must confess to disobedience and take responsibility even when the dominant is not present and beg for punishment and or discipline.
Because that sort of thinking worked so well for our parents when we were children, right? Come on.
A slave must always maintain the punishment position in these cases.
There's a position for that? Is it like bending over or something? How well does that work when the punishment is writing lines or dusting the crown molding near the ceiling?
Sexual Service:
This si where it gets really good. And by "really good" I mean that there is absolutely no nod to the importance of consent when it comes to sexual activity and the rights someone has if someone forces them to have sex against their will- Also known as rape.
The slave must be available for sexual service whenever the dominant or his guests require it.
Or his guests?
Dear reader- I want to point out something here- The fact that the person demanding service of this nature identifies as a D-type does not protect them from rape charges. If you do not consent, they have no right to expect any sexual gratification from you. This is not a "must" it is a kink that requires consent, and it is despicable that it's stated as a must.
The slave must always be ready for any form of sexual service, which would mean that her or his body must be prepared in order to make it easy for the dominant or guests to use him or her.
Some folks enjoy this sort of thing, I enjoy being available to my Domly One... But not always. Being sick, bleeding like a stuck pig, having had a horrid day- Yeah. Those don't really foster a sexy-time feeling. They do however foster a "Get the hell away from me or I'll brain you with this leaded crystal bedside lamp" feeling.
The slave will not be allowed to have an orgasm without permission.
Funny. I'm allowed to have as many orgasms as I want whenever I want. So whose rule do I listen to here? The tripe from a random One True Way blog or my Domly One's dictates?
The slave will shave any body hair and maintain this at all times. Failure to do so will result in punishment.
We don't have a punishment dynamic.
The slave will be clean and pleasant to all the senses at all times.
Does this mean I can't fart? Because that's not very realistic. Sometimes the gas has to pass.
The slave is not allowed to touch her or his owner's property without permission in any sexual way.
Oddly enough, I've never actually felt the need to molest Cookie's car or X Box until this very moment...
These are but a few of the requirements that some slaves live by.
You really should have put more emphasis on SOME because this comes across as a One True Way Manifesto with a weak ass nod to YKINMKATOK. WEAK.
The list is extensive and could be lengthened quite easily.
Because it's not long enough? Sheesh. Plenty of people don't even have rules and regulations at all much less a list like this. Cookie only has one rule. One. He's the Boss. That's it, it's his trump card, his ace in the hole. Man. He'd shit bricks if he thought he had to create, manage, and keep track of all the potential infractions a lengthy list like this could create.
It is always a good idea to have requirements regarding online privileges and privacy, interaction with others not in the lifestyle, which would include hand signals etc.
No, it's not "always" a good idea. It's a good idea if that idea appeals to the people in a dynamic.
In the end it is the decision of the dominant what this list would include.
Please. Just stop. It is also the decision of the s-type if she wants to consent to the things included in a list like this.
My dominant makes me read my list of requirements daily to ensure that I do not fail in my service to him.
Good for you. My Dominant likes me to write snarky blogs in response to other blogs written by people who don't have the common sense to realize that their verbal outpourings have consequences. He seems to think that I have some responsibility to point out to the new and uninformed that there is no right or wrong way to do this, and the only things they "must" do are those things they agree to do... Too bad more folks don't realize that fact.
Monday, March 3, 2014
Input welcome!
I'm at a bit of a loss.
Mostly I write about things that I think are important, and a lot of that stuff is triggered when I read a forum post or stumble upon another blog, so it's all a bit random.
The thing is, I'm not sure if what I'm writing has any value to anybody beyond me... Which is pretty much cause for an existential dilemma for a writer.
So I'd like to ask for your opinions.
I'd like to know if there's anything folks think I ought to be writing about.
I'd like some input so I can do better.
If anybody's willing to help a girl out that would be awesome.
Or you know, even if you just wanted to say "hi" or talk about the weather that would be cool too. Third shift is so incredibly dull.
And if you don't want to say "hi" here, I have an email address! At least I think I do... It might be squeakings@gmail.com (Yeah, my Domly Husband Person calls my writing "squeakings". I'm not sure if I should be insulted or not).
So please, amuse me, inspire me, tell me to go to hell in a hand basket... But I'd value your input. I really, really would.
And to thank you- A picture of a cupcake I baked last night (dark chocolate cupcake with white chocolate buttercream frosting and 70% cacao dark chocolate drizzle) . Which wouldn't be nearly as nice as an actual cupcake, but it's the best I can do. Recipe available on request.
Mostly I write about things that I think are important, and a lot of that stuff is triggered when I read a forum post or stumble upon another blog, so it's all a bit random.
The thing is, I'm not sure if what I'm writing has any value to anybody beyond me... Which is pretty much cause for an existential dilemma for a writer.
So I'd like to ask for your opinions.
I'd like to know if there's anything folks think I ought to be writing about.
I'd like some input so I can do better.
If anybody's willing to help a girl out that would be awesome.
Or you know, even if you just wanted to say "hi" or talk about the weather that would be cool too. Third shift is so incredibly dull.
And if you don't want to say "hi" here, I have an email address! At least I think I do... It might be squeakings@gmail.com (Yeah, my Domly Husband Person calls my writing "squeakings". I'm not sure if I should be insulted or not).
So please, amuse me, inspire me, tell me to go to hell in a hand basket... But I'd value your input. I really, really would.
And to thank you- A picture of a cupcake I baked last night (dark chocolate cupcake with white chocolate buttercream frosting and 70% cacao dark chocolate drizzle) . Which wouldn't be nearly as nice as an actual cupcake, but it's the best I can do. Recipe available on request.
How very enlightened of you (a small rant).
There's a group of kinksters that I like to call "The Enlightened Ones."
This might sound like a flattering thing of me to say, but taking into account that I tend to be a snarky bitch and I rarely flatter anybody but Cookie... It's not. Though I guess it might be a reasonable thing to assume seeing as most folks think of being enlightened equaling a higher state of being. You know, the sort of people who are so granola-crunchy, and lovey, and forgiving, and see the good in everything, and blah blah blah... Like the Dali Lama, but better.
These people are not him.
The Enlightened Ones are the kinksters who annoyingly have claimed to have moved beyond the petty feelings of jealousy, fear, insecurity, and other human failings to have reached a nearly transcendent version of Pure Kink (tm). They're the ones who like to get up on their high horses and ride roughshod over us less evolved kinksters- The monogamous ones, the not TPE M/s ones, anybody they consider inferior because we puny mortals cannot throw aside our social trappings, or limits, or what-have-have you to reach their glorified state of being.
And you know, if they kept their enlightened drivel to themselves, I wouldn't care. But they seem to take their views as an opportunity to make themselves feel better about themselves at the expense of everybody who isn't as enlightened as they are...
You're monogamous? How sad for you that you are not able to let your loved one share themselves and their love (and naughty bits) with other people. How selfish of you for limiting their experience in the Kinkyverse! If you were as enlightened as an Elightened One you wouldn't have such immature feelings as jealousy or insecurity and you wouldn't care if your partner went out and banged every woman (or man) in a 50 mile radius... And you'd definitely realize that monogamy is just a societal norm and that nobody is really monogamous or can be truly fulfilled in a monogamous relationship. You loser.
Oh, You're not in a 24/7, TPE, M/s (+M, +s, +s) relationship? How sad for you. It must suck being so incredibly fearful that you cannot trust your partner to make every single solitary decision for you. And how pathetic you are to not be willing to hand over all authority to them, and selfish! Don't forget how selfish you're being to limit their Domly experience... We, The Enlightened Ones, are so glad to have risen above such piddling needs for autonomy, because it makes us so much more superior to you... You faker.
Yeah. The Enlightened Ones just make me want to punch a puppy in the face. Which is so very not enlightened of me, but there it is. There's just something about their smug, condescending, my-shit-reeks-of roses-and-fresh-baked-bread-and-pie BS that makes me want to do violence to small, not-fully-formed, canines (not that I ever would, I love puppies, but still). And I realize how rotten that is of me, but I can't help it (what with not being enlightened and all)... I just try to avoid baby dogs whenever I'm visiting the forums in the Kinkyverse.
So to you Enlightened Ones out there- Please think of the puppies when you feel the urge to spew your condescending drivel all over our computer screens and just don't. We're all very happy that you've reached a place of trancendant kink but if you could just keep it to yourself from now on that would be great.
The puppies and I thank you.
This might sound like a flattering thing of me to say, but taking into account that I tend to be a snarky bitch and I rarely flatter anybody but Cookie... It's not. Though I guess it might be a reasonable thing to assume seeing as most folks think of being enlightened equaling a higher state of being. You know, the sort of people who are so granola-crunchy, and lovey, and forgiving, and see the good in everything, and blah blah blah... Like the Dali Lama, but better.
These people are not him.
The Enlightened Ones are the kinksters who annoyingly have claimed to have moved beyond the petty feelings of jealousy, fear, insecurity, and other human failings to have reached a nearly transcendent version of Pure Kink (tm). They're the ones who like to get up on their high horses and ride roughshod over us less evolved kinksters- The monogamous ones, the not TPE M/s ones, anybody they consider inferior because we puny mortals cannot throw aside our social trappings, or limits, or what-have-have you to reach their glorified state of being.
And you know, if they kept their enlightened drivel to themselves, I wouldn't care. But they seem to take their views as an opportunity to make themselves feel better about themselves at the expense of everybody who isn't as enlightened as they are...
You're monogamous? How sad for you that you are not able to let your loved one share themselves and their love (and naughty bits) with other people. How selfish of you for limiting their experience in the Kinkyverse! If you were as enlightened as an Elightened One you wouldn't have such immature feelings as jealousy or insecurity and you wouldn't care if your partner went out and banged every woman (or man) in a 50 mile radius... And you'd definitely realize that monogamy is just a societal norm and that nobody is really monogamous or can be truly fulfilled in a monogamous relationship. You loser.
Oh, You're not in a 24/7, TPE, M/s (+M, +s, +s) relationship? How sad for you. It must suck being so incredibly fearful that you cannot trust your partner to make every single solitary decision for you. And how pathetic you are to not be willing to hand over all authority to them, and selfish! Don't forget how selfish you're being to limit their Domly experience... We, The Enlightened Ones, are so glad to have risen above such piddling needs for autonomy, because it makes us so much more superior to you... You faker.
Yeah. The Enlightened Ones just make me want to punch a puppy in the face. Which is so very not enlightened of me, but there it is. There's just something about their smug, condescending, my-shit-reeks-of roses-and-fresh-baked-bread-and-pie BS that makes me want to do violence to small, not-fully-formed, canines (not that I ever would, I love puppies, but still). And I realize how rotten that is of me, but I can't help it (what with not being enlightened and all)... I just try to avoid baby dogs whenever I'm visiting the forums in the Kinkyverse.
So to you Enlightened Ones out there- Please think of the puppies when you feel the urge to spew your condescending drivel all over our computer screens and just don't. We're all very happy that you've reached a place of trancendant kink but if you could just keep it to yourself from now on that would be great.
The puppies and I thank you.
BDSM "Contracts"
We use contracts quite often in the Vanilla world, pretty much anything of great importance requires one- Marriage, buying a house, car, receiving a line of credit, adopting a child or pet, getting a job, hiring someone for a job... Contracts are an important part of life, of defining our rights, responsibilities, and ensuring that we have a legal right to compensation if the other party fails to live up to their end of the deal we've made.
Looking at that, it makes sense that a lot of people put quite a bit of stock in the use of contracts for a D/s relationship- And on one hand I understand how they can be a very useful tool for defining the parameters of a relationship. A contract could be a good way to outline expectations, responsibilities, and perhaps even consequences for negative behavior, and much like in Vanilla Land they can be useful for helping to define when someone isn't holding up their end of the bargain.
I think that the negotiation phase where both parties (or all, if there's more than two people involved) hash out what they do and do not want, what will and won't work for their relationship, and what things are important enough to include in a contract can be beneficial- But that's more because of the amount of communication that needs to happen, and communication is never a bad idea.
I also think that contracts can also be a helpful tool for immersion in the D/s fantasy of being "owned" (not offence meant, but the quotation marks are there because of slavery being illegal in a great many parts of the world it's not actually possible to own someone).
Contracts can be a good thing and a beneficial thing to the people who want to use them, especially if the contract leaves some room for growth and change that may happen if the relationship or people in it grow and change. Yay, contracts!
But then there's the other hand.
That hand holds the BDSM equivalent of shady loan sharks- The D-types who take advantage of Newbies. So this is the part where I point out a few things a newbie might find helpful when considering using a contract in their relationship.
The very most important thing to point out is this: A BDSM contract IS NOT a legally binding document. It carries ABLSOLUTELY NO LEGAL AUTHORITY. It CANNOT be enforced in a court of law and there are no legal penalties for breaking a BDSM contract. NONE.
A D-type who claims that you must do something because it's "in the contract", or that you cannot leave because "it's in the contract," or any other excuse that includes "because it's in the contract," is blowing hot air.
You CAN leave.
You DO NOT have to do something you don't consent to.
This might be a deal breaker for the relationship, but he cannot haul you into court and have a judge enforce the contract. Why? Because the premise of a BDSM contract, that you belong to another human being is illegal and a contract based on an illegal activity is null and void. Beyond that- Contracts are only a tool to define the parameters of a relationship BOTH parties consent to.
You have the right to negotiate the contents of a contract.
If a D-type sets a contract in front of you and demands that you sign, you're free to do that if you choose. But if the contract includes things that you are not comfortable with, that you do not want to do, or even just thing that for some reason won't work for you, you can say "There are some things in here that we need to talk about. There are some things I'd like to change before I sign this."
Someone who says "no" to that reasonable request is someone I would cut loose because that signifies to me that they do not have my, or our best interests in mind- They're only looking at what will benefit them. And I'm just not that big on selfish people or people who would want me to do something that might cause harm to me or our relationship.
You do not have to sign a contract right away, and it's a safe bet that signing right away isn't a good idea. (Disclaimer: It can and has worked out for some folks, I'm not saying it can't, but they're the exception to the rule. They don't prove it)
Sure, after a few weeks you might think that the guy is Mr. Domly Right- The play might be awesome, he might seem like a super great guy (and he could be), but how well do you really know him?
Many folks take BDSM contracts seriously. They take the relationship their forming with another person based on the contract seriously. A decent vanilla comparison might be an engagement and marriage- It's a serious commitment to another person. Would you marry someone within a few weeks of meeting them and without knowing who they really are when the New Relationship Energy has worn off and they're not on their best behavior?
Probably not. And much like the old vanilla saying, "Marry in haste, repent at leisure" can apply to a hasty wedding, the same thing can apply to a rushed contract. So take your time, there's no rush, and anybody who tries to rush you probably isn't looking out for anybody but himself. Not a good sign.
Something else to consider when determining if including a contract in your dynamic is a good idea is starting small and leaving room for growth and change.
Starting small can be an excellent idea because it give the people involved less chance for failure. The erotic novel contract can be incredibly hot with their coverage of any possibility, 128 rules, subsections, sub paragraphs, clauses, and minute detail (that the s-type will inexplicably be capable of following with no mistakes right off the bat)... But let's try to keep things realistic.
It takes 2 months I'm told for a person to develop a habit, or to learn a new behavior, and that's all a rule is: It's learning and applying a new behavior to your life. If you learn one rule at a time it's pretty easy- If you try to learn 128 rules all at once you're bound to screw up. So start small with the rules and expectations. You can always add to the contract somewhere down the line which is easier than trying to do too much and then feeling like a failure if you become overwhelmed.
Another tip I've picked up from successful, happy D/s partners is that they leave room for growth and change in their contracts. They don't view their contract as something set in stone, but instead consider it something to be revisited on a regular basis to determine if things need to be reworked, either because something isn't working or because they're ready to add more. One couple has a "State of The Union" type meeting every 6 months to address this, and they readily admit that change happens often during those meetings.
And that's all I've got for you. I'm sure there's more that I'm missing, but I've only had one can of caffeine so far today and I might not be firing on all cylinders yet. Also, as usual, YMMV and I do not have a monopoly on The One True Way (not that I'd want one- Or wait. Maybe I do? Hmm... This requires some thought).
Looking at that, it makes sense that a lot of people put quite a bit of stock in the use of contracts for a D/s relationship- And on one hand I understand how they can be a very useful tool for defining the parameters of a relationship. A contract could be a good way to outline expectations, responsibilities, and perhaps even consequences for negative behavior, and much like in Vanilla Land they can be useful for helping to define when someone isn't holding up their end of the bargain.
I think that the negotiation phase where both parties (or all, if there's more than two people involved) hash out what they do and do not want, what will and won't work for their relationship, and what things are important enough to include in a contract can be beneficial- But that's more because of the amount of communication that needs to happen, and communication is never a bad idea.
I also think that contracts can also be a helpful tool for immersion in the D/s fantasy of being "owned" (not offence meant, but the quotation marks are there because of slavery being illegal in a great many parts of the world it's not actually possible to own someone).
Contracts can be a good thing and a beneficial thing to the people who want to use them, especially if the contract leaves some room for growth and change that may happen if the relationship or people in it grow and change. Yay, contracts!
But then there's the other hand.
That hand holds the BDSM equivalent of shady loan sharks- The D-types who take advantage of Newbies. So this is the part where I point out a few things a newbie might find helpful when considering using a contract in their relationship.
The very most important thing to point out is this: A BDSM contract IS NOT a legally binding document. It carries ABLSOLUTELY NO LEGAL AUTHORITY. It CANNOT be enforced in a court of law and there are no legal penalties for breaking a BDSM contract. NONE.
A D-type who claims that you must do something because it's "in the contract", or that you cannot leave because "it's in the contract," or any other excuse that includes "because it's in the contract," is blowing hot air.
You CAN leave.
You DO NOT have to do something you don't consent to.
This might be a deal breaker for the relationship, but he cannot haul you into court and have a judge enforce the contract. Why? Because the premise of a BDSM contract, that you belong to another human being is illegal and a contract based on an illegal activity is null and void. Beyond that- Contracts are only a tool to define the parameters of a relationship BOTH parties consent to.
You have the right to negotiate the contents of a contract.
If a D-type sets a contract in front of you and demands that you sign, you're free to do that if you choose. But if the contract includes things that you are not comfortable with, that you do not want to do, or even just thing that for some reason won't work for you, you can say "There are some things in here that we need to talk about. There are some things I'd like to change before I sign this."
Someone who says "no" to that reasonable request is someone I would cut loose because that signifies to me that they do not have my, or our best interests in mind- They're only looking at what will benefit them. And I'm just not that big on selfish people or people who would want me to do something that might cause harm to me or our relationship.
You do not have to sign a contract right away, and it's a safe bet that signing right away isn't a good idea. (Disclaimer: It can and has worked out for some folks, I'm not saying it can't, but they're the exception to the rule. They don't prove it)
Sure, after a few weeks you might think that the guy is Mr. Domly Right- The play might be awesome, he might seem like a super great guy (and he could be), but how well do you really know him?
Many folks take BDSM contracts seriously. They take the relationship their forming with another person based on the contract seriously. A decent vanilla comparison might be an engagement and marriage- It's a serious commitment to another person. Would you marry someone within a few weeks of meeting them and without knowing who they really are when the New Relationship Energy has worn off and they're not on their best behavior?
Probably not. And much like the old vanilla saying, "Marry in haste, repent at leisure" can apply to a hasty wedding, the same thing can apply to a rushed contract. So take your time, there's no rush, and anybody who tries to rush you probably isn't looking out for anybody but himself. Not a good sign.
Something else to consider when determining if including a contract in your dynamic is a good idea is starting small and leaving room for growth and change.
Starting small can be an excellent idea because it give the people involved less chance for failure. The erotic novel contract can be incredibly hot with their coverage of any possibility, 128 rules, subsections, sub paragraphs, clauses, and minute detail (that the s-type will inexplicably be capable of following with no mistakes right off the bat)... But let's try to keep things realistic.
It takes 2 months I'm told for a person to develop a habit, or to learn a new behavior, and that's all a rule is: It's learning and applying a new behavior to your life. If you learn one rule at a time it's pretty easy- If you try to learn 128 rules all at once you're bound to screw up. So start small with the rules and expectations. You can always add to the contract somewhere down the line which is easier than trying to do too much and then feeling like a failure if you become overwhelmed.
Another tip I've picked up from successful, happy D/s partners is that they leave room for growth and change in their contracts. They don't view their contract as something set in stone, but instead consider it something to be revisited on a regular basis to determine if things need to be reworked, either because something isn't working or because they're ready to add more. One couple has a "State of The Union" type meeting every 6 months to address this, and they readily admit that change happens often during those meetings.
And that's all I've got for you. I'm sure there's more that I'm missing, but I've only had one can of caffeine so far today and I might not be firing on all cylinders yet. Also, as usual, YMMV and I do not have a monopoly on The One True Way (not that I'd want one- Or wait. Maybe I do? Hmm... This requires some thought).
Thursday, February 20, 2014
Tuesday, February 11, 2014
Consent, "Grape," and why my head is imploding.
A while back some Random Guy on Fet wrote something self-flagellating about how he might have "graped" a girl when he was younger and it was the absolute, very worst moment of his previously unenlightened life. It got about a jillion "loves," a metric crap ton of comments, and it really rather baffled me.
I had meant to write something about it then, but life intervened and it slipped my mind.
So today when I visited K&P to ensure myself that it was still the intellectual and artistic wasteland I'd come to expect- I stumbled upon another article in very much the same vein: Girl meets girl, girl feels up new girlfriend, new girlfriend isn't entirely comfortable but says nothing, and GRAPE! Enter the self-flagellation, deep ponderings about consent violations, and a lot of muckety-muck about how everybody everywhere should always make sure that thing they're doing (even if that thing has been done 1,000 times before with fantastic results and innumerable issuances of consent) is something the Being-Done-To person consents to...
Because, I guess, some folks just can't say "no," or "stop," or even "slow down" and because they're unable or unwilling to communicate their needs or issues you are now solely responsible for their well-being.
And that is where my mind boggled.
It boggled the first time I'd read that bunk, and it boggled again when I read the second version of that bunk (or Bunk 2.0), and it continues to boggle as I write this.
So why am I boggling? I'll tell you (of course I will, this is my bloggy thing after all):
Because it's so one-sided.
We've all heard some variation of "Your partner isn't a mind reader" before and usually it's in reference to being a responsible adult and speaking up when something is going, or has gone wrong. And that's just common sense, and most adults realize that, so we learn to communicate. We learn to say "I need to stop now" or "I need to slow down," and we learn that because it's the responsible, adult thing to do. It acknowledges that both partners bear an equal responsibility for their safety and well-being.
This school of thought though? It shifts all of the responsibility from the Being-Done-To partner to the Doing partner. It implies that the Being-Done-To partner no longer has a responsibility to communicate because the Doing partner should just know, or that the Doing partner should continuously be asking questions which isn't at all logical- If the Being-Done-To partner can't speak up on their own, why is it safe to assume that they'll speak up when questioned? It turns every Doing partner into a potential grapist if they don't assume responsibility for a person who is actively abdicating their own responsibility.
Seriously, how is that in any way right?
So maybe instead of all this "You should ask and keep asking and then ask some more just to be sure" business it makes a bit more sense to talk to your partner before you start doing any dirty deeds and ask, "Are you able to tell me to stop if you need me to?"
Because then you have a choice. You can consent to assume all of the responsibility, or you can not consent and find a partner who is able to communicate their needs with you. Personally, I wouldn't consent to play with someone who wasn't able or willing to be responsible for themselves, and thinking about it, that's something I feel I have a right to know about before the fun sexy times start.
And if you want to frame this in a BDSM context- I think it's pretty damn important to know if your partner is willing and able to revoke consent if the need arises, because otherwise how can you trust them to keep both of you safe?
Disclaimer: Eh. Random Ramblings. Par for the course. As usual, take everything I say with a grain of salt. YMMV. Opinions are like assholes- I have one and so do you and I doubt neither smell like roses.
I had meant to write something about it then, but life intervened and it slipped my mind.
So today when I visited K&P to ensure myself that it was still the intellectual and artistic wasteland I'd come to expect- I stumbled upon another article in very much the same vein: Girl meets girl, girl feels up new girlfriend, new girlfriend isn't entirely comfortable but says nothing, and GRAPE! Enter the self-flagellation, deep ponderings about consent violations, and a lot of muckety-muck about how everybody everywhere should always make sure that thing they're doing (even if that thing has been done 1,000 times before with fantastic results and innumerable issuances of consent) is something the Being-Done-To person consents to...
Because, I guess, some folks just can't say "no," or "stop," or even "slow down" and because they're unable or unwilling to communicate their needs or issues you are now solely responsible for their well-being.
And that is where my mind boggled.
It boggled the first time I'd read that bunk, and it boggled again when I read the second version of that bunk (or Bunk 2.0), and it continues to boggle as I write this.
So why am I boggling? I'll tell you (of course I will, this is my bloggy thing after all):
Because it's so one-sided.
We've all heard some variation of "Your partner isn't a mind reader" before and usually it's in reference to being a responsible adult and speaking up when something is going, or has gone wrong. And that's just common sense, and most adults realize that, so we learn to communicate. We learn to say "I need to stop now" or "I need to slow down," and we learn that because it's the responsible, adult thing to do. It acknowledges that both partners bear an equal responsibility for their safety and well-being.
This school of thought though? It shifts all of the responsibility from the Being-Done-To partner to the Doing partner. It implies that the Being-Done-To partner no longer has a responsibility to communicate because the Doing partner should just know, or that the Doing partner should continuously be asking questions which isn't at all logical- If the Being-Done-To partner can't speak up on their own, why is it safe to assume that they'll speak up when questioned? It turns every Doing partner into a potential grapist if they don't assume responsibility for a person who is actively abdicating their own responsibility.
Seriously, how is that in any way right?
So maybe instead of all this "You should ask and keep asking and then ask some more just to be sure" business it makes a bit more sense to talk to your partner before you start doing any dirty deeds and ask, "Are you able to tell me to stop if you need me to?"
Because then you have a choice. You can consent to assume all of the responsibility, or you can not consent and find a partner who is able to communicate their needs with you. Personally, I wouldn't consent to play with someone who wasn't able or willing to be responsible for themselves, and thinking about it, that's something I feel I have a right to know about before the fun sexy times start.
And if you want to frame this in a BDSM context- I think it's pretty damn important to know if your partner is willing and able to revoke consent if the need arises, because otherwise how can you trust them to keep both of you safe?
Disclaimer: Eh. Random Ramblings. Par for the course. As usual, take everything I say with a grain of salt. YMMV. Opinions are like assholes- I have one and so do you and I doubt neither smell like roses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)