"Zelophilia," "Stigmatophilia," but no "Obedience"

I spent some time looking at the online resource "BDSM for Dummies."  Essentially it is a glossary of terms.  Presumably, by reading the definitions of these terms, one might get a sense of what one desires when entering the realm of BDSM.

It explains a lot, albeit briefly.  Zelophilia is sexual arousal from jealousy, which I never realized is a thing.  (And of course it must be a thing given how much jealous behaviour there is in the world!) And there's Stigmatophilia, which is sexual arousal from body markings -- tats and piercings and such.  These and many other conditions are in the glossary of BDSM terms, and curiously enough, what's missing?  Obedience!

This is one of the most important words in the BDSM lifestyle, is it not?  Obedience.

Consider words like "control," and "domination," and "mastery," and "sadism."  These words would describe illegal, unconstitutional behaviour without the consenting "obedience" from the other side of that relationship.  Mastery without obedience is just, well, abuse.  Obedience is such an important word!

Consider words like "submission," and "safe words," and "hand cuffs," and "hypophilia" (sexual arousal from breath play):  these words would lack the willing participation of a sub without the inherent desire to obey.  Submission, like obedience, can be forced -- yes it is true.  Forced by another word called "duress" and yet another, "coercion."  However, submission without obedience is the difference between "brat" and "beloved."  Submission without obedience is not how I imagine my submission.  And, obedience without submission is like the Story of O -- obeying a chateau full of men one has not submitted to, intimately and wholly.

Still, the word "obedience" is a crucially-important word: it implies choice.  It says that the submissive has chosen (on some level, even if far removed from the present time and place) to give her power away so that others may use it.  People ask, "Where is the submissive's power? I thought Domination took away all the power."  That power, friends, is in the consent.  Is in the obedience.  Is in the day after day obedience.  Is in the repeated vows of submission that, still, to this day, hold true.  That power is in the consent.  Because without that consent, there is no power surrendered.  Without understanding her dedication to obedience, no Master can dominate the mind and soul and heart of a submissive.

The BDSM glossary has lots of arrows pointed towards sexual stimulation.  I suppose it is a common understanding that the BDSM lifestyle is a sexually-charged lifestyle... but I still maintain that for me it is not.  My submission means other things.

 

Some words on mental health

Are you a narcissistic supply?  In other words, do you open your veins and let the narc feed from you?

An interesting metaphor is the vampire lifestyle.  When I first began my Second Life years and years ago, the first place I started was with a clan of vampires.  My career did not last for very long, largely because I could not understand what it is that these people do in the virtual universe.  (I was so new; I was so naive.) There is a game propping-up many SL vampires and that game is "get as much blood as you can," with the unspoken "keep as many supply dolls around you as you can, in case you need blood in a hurry."  These blood-doll submissives take pride in feeding the dominant vampires whenever needed: "count on me, bleed me dry," they beg, and their blood trickles from their bodies to nourish someone else.  "Just love me, is all I ask."

A classic narcissist is someone who fundamentally has no life inside (or, no "blood"), and so they seek self-esteem and gratification from others (or, drinking the blood of others to survive).  A narcissist thrives on the feedback from other people, even if it is negative feedback.  (Positive is better, though.)  Accordingly, they seek praise, or to troll and incite violence, or to steal someone's lover in order to feel "more special"  (because life is a competition, according to them -- and the competition must be won or else someone must die).  They seek what others have because they, themselves, believe deep down that they have nothing (rightly or wrongly).

Another word for this kind of behaviour is "parasitic" -- behaviour from someone who cannot live without the presence of another human being to draw from.  To drink from.  To receive from.  If you have ever tried to leave someone who simply will not let you leave, you have felt the clutch of a parasite who is panicking that his "supply" might be trying to get away.

If you have ever tried to have a civilized discussion about the proper way of doing something that nearly came to blows because someone refused to admit defeat, or someone refused to admit he was wrong, or someone behaved like "you touched a nerve!" then you have tried to reason with the unreasonable.  Mental health is unreasonable: it either works or it doesn't, and if it is not working then there is no logic that will solve that problem.

A narcissist presents herself to the world as someone who loves herself excessively: "I am the best," and "Other people are flawed because of this or that, but not me."  In fact, excessive criticism of other people is a very good indicator of a disturbance inside the mind.  Someone who soothes herself by putting others down is someone with whom logic will never win.  There is, alas, no point in trying to speak logically to these folks, whether dominant or submissive.  (There is great danger, in fact, if you pledge your service to such a person: you will inevitably find yourself on the receiving end of that same criticism they show towards other people.  And sometimes it does not stop with words.  And it goes without saying that you will have to keep a vein open for constant feeding regardless of your mood.)  Jealousy, anger, insecurity, irrationality... behaviours like these do not just come from skipping lunch. They come from an imbalance in the mind that is more dangerous (and more common!) than I have really considered before now.

If you have ever felt the rage of a narcissist (the narcissistic rage from the narcissistic wound, they call it) then you are exactly the right reader for this.  Failing to make your narcissist feel important means you risk your narcissist walking out on you: and that will cause some anxiety, especially when they come storming back (it never takes very long) with their rage, their pacifying, their new hunger, and then their feeding from your open vein, which will confuse the hell out of you until you begin to accept the patterns and cycles in your relationship...  Or, until you lock the door and never let them in again.  (Boundaries.  Limits.)  

There are many reasons, in short, why so many people do not connect properly and in healthy ways in the online gaming community: people are often not looking for you but, instead, for your blood (emotionally speaking).  It may not be you they want but only the attention you bring.  It may not be you they want but only the kneeling that you do, or the trophy that you represent.  It may not be you they want but, rather, that you belong to someone important and that you now choose the narcissist to be with instead -- a real coup for the ego of the narcissist.  And when it comes to taking a submissive to order around, or to pledging your service to a dom, the connection will be phoney without a free, balanced, two-way circulation system of communication.  Because, honestly, the D/s lifestyle is uniquely positioned to handle mental health issues in ways that vanilla living is not.  There can be good news at the end of the journey if you follow your safe, sane, consensual practicality and if you pledge to communicate with perfect transparency.  And if you strive continuously for wellness, with the right nutrition and physical activity, your body will not sacrifice your mind to disease.

This is why I maintain, in any interaction, that I am not in competition with anybody.  I do not know everything.  I submit first of all to humility, for every single person I meet knows something I do not -- just as I know something they do not.  And I do not want your boyfriends!  And as part of my value system, I have become quite comfortable with "No, thank you."

* * *

For people on Facebook there is a good resource for survivors of narcissistic abuse as you recover from being "the supply du jour."

Imbalance of power from the other side

Power imbalance from the bottom is an idea that doesn't (in my humble opinion) get enough exposure in the world.  It is part of the idea of "mental health" that is essential to peaceful and rewarding human relations: a balance of power in a power-exchange is the only way this is going to work.  The power must flow like circulating blood, to and fro, between the partners, an ebb and flow like tide and ocean.  The sun must not dry out the water supply without providing the relief of rain; the rain must not pour indefinitely without providing recovering spells of dryness.

It is an idea to meditate upon, for sure: it does not look the same for everybody.  It feels differently for everybody.  But we all know (or do we?) when our power is being drained without restoring it.

(I am not talking about topping from the bottom.  Sometimes a sub takes the top position if there is a power-vacuum and nobody else is taking control, and there's no whining about it:  if a dom wants the control back, it's there to take.  I am talking, instead, about a chronic abuse of power; a time-after-time lack of needs-met, and placing the blame squarely upon the shoulders of someone else.)

It has been my experience that people in dominant situations have drained me of all my good humour and loving disposition (historically, not presently) and it has been a good learning to discover I can prevent this from ever happening again.  My main source of frustration, historically, is the lack of self-governance -- the lack of mental clarity and self-respect among those who presume to dominate others.  (Sir Will, Sir Tony, Sir Dwight, Sir RB, and of course Tasdron -- you have a lot to teach the world about good mental health and I thank you for being such positive role models in the world.)  But what about if the roles were reversed?  What about submissives who drain the resources of a dominant?  Can a dominant personality recognize it and distance from it when it is happening, without feeling like a failure?

Just as a submissive might think, "I am a failed sub because I cannot obey every single thing he asks for..." when he is asking for too much, so can a dominant think, "I am a failed dom because I cannot govern her wild moods and incredible emotional outbursts, no matter how I try..." when she is asking for too much (time, attention, solitude, life-force, punishment, discipline, sex, whatever).

Finding the proper balance -- meeting the needs of others and meeting one's own regimen of personal care -- is the key, of course.  It is something to strive for daily.  It means dominating one's environment and one's life: it means a dom is really, through and through, a dom.  Of course there will be imbalanced days when one gives more than is restored, or when one takes more than one has given.  If this is a chronic, persistent state then the imbalance is unhealthy, obviously.  If this is acute and rare, on the other hand, it falls within the range of human experience that can reasonably be expected of people to handle.  We all have bad days, even bad weeks, right?  We bounce back and give back, later.

When the honeymoon between sub and dom is over and when the reality of day to day living comes into focus, the balance of power had also better come into focus.  And this touches on issues of compatibility: during the honeymoon everybody is on their best behaviour and high as a kite from all those happy oxytocin and seratonin bursts from cuddles and undivided attention.  But does that mean you both are compatible?  No; it just means you feel good together, physically.  Other elements such as common interests, common habits, common routines that take you both out of the house for a while, common friends, or common desires to keep separate spaces (for example) will determine overall compatibility which will, in turn, determine regular and healthy doses of oxytocin and seratonin.  Not to put too fine a point on it.  Time will tell, in other words, and so patience... patience... patience.

And what can go wrong?  Someone gets stuck in the honeymoon while the other moves on to more realistic living.  Or, someone's best behaviour becomes too exhausting to maintain.  Or, someone failed to spell out a few key expectations during the negotiation period.  Or, someone failed to negotiate at all.  So much can go wrong and that smile turns upside down.  How will the submissive react?  How will the dominant control the situation?  Is this a problem of communication within the relationship, or is this a mental health issue?  Is the dominant behaving according to his own code, and is the submissive deteriorating into an unmanageable mess regardless?  Are the two partners simply not finding their compatibility anymore, and is either one of them really to blame?

I would like to let both parties off the hook and propose that a) Domination works only when the submissive gives her power to be dominated; b) Submission works only when the dominant actively seeks to understand the wonderful complexities of that offering; c) Compatibility works only when both parties want it to; and d) If either one tries to suck the emotional blood of the other, there is no harm in cutting loose if that is what will save your life.  It is neither a failure of domination nor of submission if you must cut loose someone who drains you.  And there is nobody to blame, either: there is learning, and then there is flowing onward as the sun shines over the next hill.

* * *

Also, I really like this 10 quick tips to boost your seratonin.  This relates to physical and mental wellness, and frankly I do not trust a dominant (or a submissive!) who does not strive for perfect wellness.  (Nobody can achieve perfect wellness, but we can strive!  And keep striving.  It is a discipline that demonstrates the right attitude.)

The Dictionary, Page Twelve

Capture, now what was I thinking?  Capture, of all things.  The dictionary of my submission -- the words meaningful to me as I relate to my Tasdron:  capture is word twelve.

Not roleplay, no -- this is not a game.  Not slavery, no --  a slave to my passions, I am not, and I govern my passions with the desire of a saint.  Surely to cupcakes I had something in mind when I blurted the word "capture" for page twelve of the dictionary.

Oh indeed, oh yes.  Oh for the very certainty.  Yes, and I remember precisely why, too.  I remember a day -- early, early in my understanding of this lifestyle -- when brave old Sir Will set me down in a new and unfamiliar sim, greenery everywhere, with some delicate iron chairs and a table for two.  I was honored to hold his attention for the twenty minutes we had for talking and enjoying green nature.  (I am always honored when someone of sublime humanity invites me for a small time to enjoy an idea or two, and I have been very lucky with how many of those people -- people of sublime humanity -- I have been able to meet.)  What we talked about was preserving -- holding time in a bottle, as it were.  How afraid I had become, at that time in the year, of time slipping away and vanishing, and taking everything I love with it.  It was an anxiety easily quelled, in fact, and brave old Sir Will's picture in my photo album proves it.  "Why do you take pictures?" he asked.  "I need to capture and then hold on to moments," I replied.

When I frame it, snap it, save it, and treat it, it is mine for however long I say so.

Memory is unreliable, and dreams are easily influenced.  The taste of the tea at the time of a special moment is a taste I could try with all my might to recapture, tomorrow.  And of course, that taste, that perfect chemistry just so, just right, just there in that moment now gone, that taste is precious and flown.

So I take tea every day, for every moment.  I won't take any chances of missing out.

* * *

What happens, though, when the moments are perfectly collected, and the visuals perfectly captured, and the words and associations catalogued carefully and with pristine attention to every detail worth remembering -- and then the feeling fades... What happens when the chemistry that coordinated all of my feelings of submission suddenly changes, changed as a vial of blood poured into the clear, pure glass of aqua vita changes the look and meaning and value of the intoxicant?

The chemistry that made me crave the pain; the chemistry that made me crave the care; the chemistry that made me crave the naked vulnerability and steadfast rules and limits.  The chemistry that made me open myself to surrendering to another.  How do I recapture that chemistry?  I have gone all vanilla and happy.  There is great love, there.  There is placid, easy conversation.  There is intelligence and connection.  There is beauty and truth.  There is all such goodness but -- what of the chemistry that made me crave the sting of a riding crop?

My submission changes with every new day.  I am no less submissive simply for not craving pain.  I am no less submissive simply for not craving a passionate violence in fantasy.  I am no less submissive. I am simply... chaste in thought, now, as well as in deed.

There is no capturing chemistry as one captures its look.  Chemistry boils and bubbles, forever changing.  The species named "Submissive" does not change with the flowing, floating fury of volatile chemicals always at play.  I'm still me.  I'll be fine.

* * *

And I have valentines chairs to sit in for when you get home, by the way.

Similarities and differences

A woman asked, recently, in a discussion about submission: what is the difference between BDSM and abuse?  It's a loaded question and there are as many answers as there are practitioners of BDSM.  Here is mine.

I suppose it seems threatening to consider a relationship built upon an architecture of power-exchange and domination/submission.  If there is one person in the relationship who "has more power" then maybe it resembles the beginning of that vague word "abuse".

But, only in an abusive relationship does it resemble the beginning of abuse.  Resemble.  And of course there are, just like in relationships of equality, abusive personalities who enjoy taking advantage.  The online community is populated with all manner of people who call themselves "Doms" and who, instead of mastering a submissive, bully her into compliance or try to tell her to feel grateful for less than she deserves to benefit himself.  Or "submissives" who manipulate and do violence when they are incapable of articulating their deep-rooted needs.  Of course there is going to be abuse: there is abuse everywhere, in any lifestyle, but it is not something to take for granted simply because one is a dominant or a submissive personality by nature, or simply because one may have a predilection for painful pleasure.  Responsible adults know how to do this right.  Right?

The difference between BDSM and abuse is that BDSM has a fundamental tenet of safety, sanity, and consent.  We emphasize these things (though some may not really understand their meaning until an emergency emerges).  "Abuse" (such a vague term... let us call it "bullying" or "taking advantage of" or "assault" if we want to be specific) is by definition non-consensual.  Insane.  And not safe.

These are the basic differences as I see them.  To put in better context:

Does a BDSM slave strapped to a cross and whipped on his thigh by his Mistress constitute abuse?  Not if he has begged her for this scene or consented to it at her request.  

Does it constitute abuse if he has not consented? I would argue that yes it does.  

Does it constitute abuse if he has given a blanket consent weeks ago that she may do anything she wishes to him without asking, and this is one activity that she will use to test that theory?  It's a grey area, but I would argue that if he has access to a respected safe-word that he may invoke whenever he is uncomfortable (indicating her sanity in respecting the word and his sanity in using it) then it still falls under the jurisdiction of kink-aware awesomeness.

How about a submissive woman wandering through a vanilla club, suddenly harassed by men who declare she is obligated to kneel for them and obligated to strip and dance, obligated because THEY say so, ridiculed for her refusal to comply, and insulted for her inability to submit to them -- does that constitute abuse? It bloody well does.  

What about if she were wandering through a BDSM club, suddenly harassed like that?  It bloody well does there, too.  It's abuse no matter where you go.  And, some people love it!  And some people hate it!  And we can only hope that the people who hate it get the hell out.  Because ultimately this journey is supposed to be exactly -- to the letter -- what you want it to be, not someone else's version.

The difference between BDSM and abuse is like the difference between a swimming pool and a tar-pit: they aren't comparable items at all, existing as they do in entirely different realms of requirement or convenience, but they feel the same kind of wrong if one is being forced into them without consent or regard for safety and sanity.  That wrong exists as frequently in the world of equality as it does in the world of established power-structures.

* * * 
How can a submissive be abused in the world of BDSM?
- Assume she is your 24/7 slave when really she's just a lovely submissive personality wandering her own journey.
- Assume she wants to dedicate her entire life to you without asking her if that's any kind of true.
- Assume she will be satisfied with one third of a commitment when she is entitled to the whole thing.
- Assume the limits that she presents to you are invitations to break them.
- Assume that when she screams out a safe-word she is lying about it.
- Assume that your way is the only right way of doing things, even though she may have opinions to the contrary -- valid and worthy of respect.
- Assume that your way is the only right way of doing things, and if she does not comply then she is simply "not submissive."
- Assume that she wants to be humiliated, beaten, insulted, ignored, or caged even though she hasn't asked for any of it.
- Assume that depriving her of something (food, attention, fresh air, public discourse) is good for her character, and not just a power-display of your own imagination.
- Assume that telling her "you will disappoint me, otherwise" is a healthy motivator.
- Assume that when she says, "I don't think that I can do this," she doesn't mean it.
- Assume that when she says, "I don't think that I want to do this," you don't need to care.
- Assume that, after depriving her of something for several days, she should be grateful to you for finally giving it back to her.

Bad assumptions.  And they are bad assumptions in the real world, too, not just in the virtual world or the D/s world.  Maybe your submissive has already declared her willingness and pledge to do these things or behave in ways that will please you.  Maybe your submissive has already submitted to the fraction of goodness you were prepared to offer.  Maybe, just maybe, the submissive may react with grateful gratitude and with grateful receiving -- maybe.  But if you assume it of every single submissive, and more to the point if you punish her for not reacting so gratefully, congratulations!  You've just abused someone.

There are distinctions to make.  They require thought, care, communication, questions, time, lots more time, and many many many more questions.  Make these distinctions.  Think about them and talk about them.  YOU can tell YOUR OWN difference between abuse and BDSM at the end of it.

To forgive, to absolve, to let go

I'm working on forgiveness.  Like "Jealousy" and like "Shame" it is a very large, very baggy and convoluted idea.  And of course, it involves many people's differing opinions and advice.  When I talk about forgiveness with people, we all seem to have different ideas about what the word really means.  Often people imagine "absolution" or "forgetting" or "letting go" or "re-inventing" or "erasing" when they imagine the process of how they forgive.  But what is it, actually "to forgive"?

The best way for me to look at it is through a Christian lens.  To forgive is to hear a confession of absolute responsibility; to understand without a doubt that the person feels responsible and feels remorse; and then to feel satisfied that the person's sense of responsibility and remorse will prevent any future and similar behaviour.  Forgiveness in that sense takes two people.  The one must confess in a real and meaningful way; and the other must understand that the confession is real.  Which is great if it happens like that.

What if one is required to forgive someone who does not believe he has done anything wrong?  I believe there is no forgiveness in that sense since forgiveness requires two people, but there is the solitary version of it: absolution.  Another Christian term, but applied without any religious fervour.  A person may choose to absolve another human being of any harm he has inflicted, if a person wishes to. That is what Christ does when he offers the other cheek for slapping.  When someone slaps your cheek, offer the other cheek too, he says; don't slap in revenge.  (I'm not really a Christian, thank heavens, so I can slap whoever I want.)

In either case, whether to forgive or to absolve is the tension, the end result is a "letting go," by all accounts.  It is peace.  It is a new level of serenity.  Or, at least, that is my mental picture.  Really, what it means is, if I forgive this person once, I have to keep forgiving this person every day of my life.  Doing it once means I'll definitely have to do it twice, and thrice, ad infinitum.  At least, that is my great fear.

On the other hand, I suppose that it is possible -- it is possible -- that the person in question already self-punishes and self-loathes as a result of past and recent behaviours.  It is possible.  I will never know for sure.  Therefore, it is possible that I do not necessarily need to "keep score" and keep the wound fresh and alive for the rest of my days as an act of "being true to me."  Absolution, private and without fanfare, may be the only solution.  Honestly, the whole situation is simply exhausting... Not like my pretty picture of a dock at sunset and calm water.  My happy, peaceful, forgiving place.  Sometimes I am amazed at how realistic Second Life photography can be.   My second life needs no absolution!  It is such a pretty place!

Topping from the Bottom

"TFB" or Topping from the Bottom is a phenomenon that is as misunderstood as any other part of a dominance and submission relationship, if one is new to the scene and learning from under-informed people.  I read something today, though, that has explained the idea to me brilliantly.  My excellent mentor has given a notecard to me something to read called "A Dominant's Promise" and it is all about D/s communication.  And after reading this notecard, I see very clearly how mature, shameless communication forms the architecture of the ideal dominant and submissive union.  The perfect union is possible; but not without sharing your dreams and needs openly and honestly.

In the mildest form, topping from the bottom (or, when a submissive tries to control a dominant) is a result of improper manners and improper communication.  And, manners are easily corrected.  If the submissive respects the dominant, and if the dominant respects the submissive, the correction will hold. If there is no respect, though, there's a bigger problem to deal with.

In worse forms, topping from the bottom is a deliberate and calculated manipulation of the dominant.   "I will not do that for you, and if you ask me to do it again, I will leave you."  This is something the immature personality declares.  It is the submissive equivalent of the dominant's, "If you don't obey me, you are a terrible submissive."  Topping from the bottom at its worst is just plain old bullying.  The brat who bullies to get her way does not need further indulgence: she is a bad nut and should be thrown in the trash like Veruca Salt.

The best part about this particular notecard, though, is its incredible maturity of thought.  It takes sophistication to understand this concept, and we must never take for granted that everybody CAN understand it, because not everybody has achieved the same level of maturity.  Here is the concept:

Sometimes, for some people, it is a fun fantasy to behave like a brat and to be punished for being a brat.  In fantasy.  Just like, sometimes, for some people, it is a fun fantasy to pretend to be in the Story of O and to be forced into doing things that we wouldn't normally.  In fantasy.  And so in order to accommodate those fantasies, a D/s couple talks about them.  Asks for them honestly, openly, without shame.  Figures out a way to do it so that it can be done, and so that both parties understand the difference between fantasy and reality.  Mature communication can achieve this.  Selfish demands and petulant pouting cannot.  "You should have known," doesn't solve anything.  Nobody is a mind-reader.  Maturity asks for what it wants, clearly and specifically, and then enjoys getting it.  Immaturity rants and froths and foams and, ultimately, fails.

Everybody's Version of Paga Servin'

I'm dreaming of water.  I would really like to be wandering through a shallow stream right now.  Instead, the guru that I follow has put me in secluded shackles for three days, but that is another story.  So here I sit, far from prying eyes, way up high in the sky.  People come and go down below, while I sit here, and so I open up their profiles and I read.  And I get to see (sometimes) how they prefer things, how they do things.  I get to see "other."

One profile in particular struck me as interesting, and it involves the negotiation process in surrendering oneself to a man's collar.  He says in his profile that the submissive's consent happens when she puts the collar on, and then anything thereafter is taken for granted.  There is no need to negotiate or consent after that:  once the collar is on, the man's word goes, full stop.  And his profile was very lucid and common-sense up until that point.  Obviously he is a man who knows what he is looking for, and what he is looking for is a slave.  More specifically, a slave who is content to abandon all her rights with that one word of consent.

Another profile in particular struck me as interesting: a woman who says, quite clearly, that the negotiation process is ongoing for the entire duration of the relationship with her ideal man.  Her ideal man is submissive (and not stupid); her ideal man can think for himself but chooses to let her make all the important decisions, and in fact begs her to make all the important decisions; her ideal man enjoys her sense of humour and her sense of sadism; and her ideal man will not crumble if she does not log in for 2 days, because they always know when they will meet next.  She didn't call him a slave; and the man's profile above did not call his "ideal" submissive a slave either; but I wonder now at the word "submissive" in this lifestyle.  It is not a word anybody can take for granted.

People can't take for granted that "their way" is THE way.  There is no such thing as THE way to dominate, or THE way to submit, anyway.  There is simply the way we want when it comes to relationships -- and finding someone who wants the same thing that you do.  D/s is a very specialized architecture for relations between people: and, as one person said in a discussion recently, D/s is a power exchange, not a hostile takeover.  In other words, both partners get something out of it.  That guy who believes that consent comes with wearing the collar and there's no more need for negotiation?  He can probably find someone to buy in to those conditions, sure -- but that's not everybody's idea of submission.  The lady who wants the man to beg for all important decisions to be made by her but who can still retain a measure of his own independence?  She'll find what she's looking for, too, no doubt; but that's not everybody's idea of submission.  Neither one practices "the right way" to do things.  In the D/s world (like in the mainstream, vanilla, everyday world) if you don't beg, you don't get.

Limits

I read so often in D/s literature that a submissive without limits is not as attractive as a submissive with limits.  I like Connor's take on limits very much, actually.  In his post about limits, wherein he talks about hard limits, conditional limits, soft limits, every kind of limits... he talks about how it is an accepted perspective in our lifestyle that limits are supposed to be pushed, and that is how a person grows.  I usually object to statements like that, but what makes this one different is that he tempers the idea by saying that to continually push limits would have us all committing "crimes against humanity" eventually.  Why bother declaring a limit if a person is just going to ignore it?   I have fought about this with lots of folks along the way:  my limits are damned sacred and they are not for pushing.  My limits really do mean, "this far, and no farther."    But, I suppose, I do not use my limits for growth.  My limits are not a tool.  My limits mean, "There is nothing else past this line for you to see.  This means you."

House Sparta calls that a boundary, the idea of "this far, and no farther."  Fine with me.  I will call a boundary a boundary if it means "this far, and no farther."   In the spirit of tolerance and respect, I can understand that sometimes people set limits that, over time, they grow past (if they want to) with the right kind of incentive.   But I object to the idea of "growing past" a limit, as if a limit by default were some kind of defect that needed help or some kind of stunted growth.  I think that is a dangerous assumption to make.  Not all who wander are lost; not all who limit are broken.  Feeling a part of House Sparta, as I do now, I know that my personal limits are safe as if twenty gods stood guard for me.  And, accordingly, because I feel so safe with my limits, I make sure they do with theirs too.

I have been meditating on and exploring the idea of limits.  I hadn't declared any limits because I still considered myself a student and not really a practitioner.  I didn't really need them.  I realize, though, that it is a good idea to declare them.  To think carefully, to understand what it is that we declare when we say "this far, and no farther."   "This far, and no farther," reflects a person's personality.  Some people say "anything goes" and those are the people (according to the literature) whose expectations are difficult to meet and who often do not know the meaning of "anything."  Defining limits demonstrates personality.  So I have been thinking, and I have been coming to some helpful (to myself) conclusions about where and when I say, "This far, and no further."   I do not have many limits, and I do not have many boundaries, but they are real and they are hard.  And I like being able to enforce that.  My limits and my boundaries protect someone else, actually, so that means they are especially unbreakable.  And I like that I do not need to change them if I do not feel like it, and I can be right about it.

How good it is to know YOU

A week's absence has not been a week idle.  As I sort through the change in my real life, I also watch as my Second Life's learnings fall into place more clearly.  And because of You, Master, I know how connected the two are; and because of You, Master, I know how connected we all are.  Because of You, Master, I know the source of joy, and also I know the source of anger (and how easily you found them, how soon into knowing You).  I also happen to know, and this is my own learning, that joy is stronger.  Joy is power.  And because of You, Master, I know that power flickers, sometimes, even with the best of intentions: power is precious, power is renewable (if we take the time to renew it), and power shouldn't be taken for granted.  Sometimes even the most reliable  'on'  button is going to need a little help.  And that is what we are here for; that relating, that strengthening, that harnessing of power to feel that joy.  Master, submissive, top and bottom, or equal friends, there is joy to have in the world, however you find it.  Master, it is so good to know You.  And I'm pretty excited about the hidden 'me' I am getting to know because of You.

Jealousy, The Assignment, isn't going away.  In fact, it's gaining momentum.  This (above) is one of the pictures I took for my submission on jealousy, and I'm going to do something here that I should have done more clearly before: I'm going to explain in my own words why this is a picture (one of many pictures) of jealousy.  To me.  As an artist, I can see the actual art. I have to.  It's how I come up with the story.  But as a viewer, I do not spend much time analyzing the view.  And so I am going to do that here.

"Is this what I have to do to make you look at me more than you look at her?"  This is a woman who knows her partner's gaze wanders to another woman.  She feels jealous of her partner, therefore, and she begins to exhibit jealous behaviour.  The jealous behaviour:  trying to be someone else, trying to be someone she is not, trying to be like that other woman.  She part-reveals her body in a semi-sexual way.  The tentative behaviour is, therefore, revealed with this part-this and half-that.  Her eyes are shaded darkly; we cannot see the real eyes of her.  She herself probably does not want to see, either, clearly; she is ashamed of the behaviour she has reduced herself to.  There is nowhere to hide in this picture, so her hands are awkwardly placed.  A little bit shy for the face; a little bit shy for her arousal; and altogether attention-seeking, though it  might be negative attention.  Ultimately, it is a picture that frustrates a GENUINE sense of self.  And that is what I believe -- or, ONE of the points that I believe -- defines jealousy.  Jealousy frustrates a genuine sense of self.  Jealousy forbids a genuine sense of self - and the reverse is true: those without a clear sense of self are subject to jealous feelings and jealous behaviour.  Jealousy focuses too much on the 'other' rather than reassuring the 'self' that the self is still whole.  Jealousy focuses too much on 'him' or too much on the 'her' that he is looking at.  Jealousy removes the focus from the very precious power (power that I have recently felt, power that is golden, power in the belly of the woman who loves) -- this very precious power that we must never take for granted.  It is golden, this power.  There is joy, there.

Jealousy, Part Two

The fundamental premise of my study of jealousy was that feelings of jealousy contradict feelings of belonging (from a submissive's point of view) and feelings of being the significant voice in the life of a loved one (from a dominant's point of view).  By that I mean to say, the extent to which a person feels like she belongs, or feels like she is the primary influence, is the extent to which a person is not feeling jealous at that moment in time.  Jealousy is defined as an anxiety over the possibility of losing someone (or, from a dominant's perspective, losing someone that we feel a type of ownership over).  The feeling that we will be replaced by someone else, in other words.  The feeling that, even though it hasn't happened (and may never happen), the possibility is undeniably and damnably distracting.

Feelings of jealousy contradict feelings of belonging.  Feelings of jealousy contradict feelings of significance.  Where this leads to is the "imaginary" part of jealousy.  It is an anxiety: if it were a wholesale loss of someone, then the feeling would be properly termed as "grief."  If it were the wholesale deception and adultery proven, then the feeling would be properly termed as "rage."  But it is neither; jealousy exists in the nebulous realm of the imagination, especially if nobody is talking about it.

If jealousy exists in the nebulous realm of the imagination, then it suggests to me a very interesting thing: jealousy also contradicts the three tenets that hold up the D/s lifestyle, those being safety, sanity, and consensual relations.  If the dom or the sub (or the Master or the slave) are in the wrecked throes of a jealous rage, all inside their imagination, it calls "sanity" into question and the mental preparation required to properly command or obey.  It calls "safety" into question and the trust one requires to come face to face with a man with a whip (so to speak).  It calls "consent" into question because, well,  is the person really here and present when she agrees to the scene if she is mentally occupied with sorting out her jealous reactions and stifling her jealous behaviours?  Is her consent valid if she is preoccupied with trying to figure out how to confront you - appropriately -  about her fears and anxieties?  Jealousy begins in the mind, but it ends in behaviour: everyday actions that look like everyday actions (baking, shutting a door) but are, in fact, the body's reaction to what the mind cannot ignore.  The body cries out when the mind is in pain, after all, and the jealous wife who bakes a little more furiously and the jealous husband who slams the door a little too loudly are just begging for some good, heart-to-heart and face-to-face communication of the "please listen" and "please focus on me" variety.

Fine Lines

This has been quite a week of conversations.  I have learned this week more about myself than in recent history combined, and so much has come from being tested with misconceptions.  I'll give the benefit of the doubt and not say the word "prejudice" or even "bigotry" but rather call it "misconception" that drives the conversations of recent memory from which I have stepped higher still in my journey to submission.  I, too, am guilty of misconception (and my recent post on protected precious sweet asses is evidence of that).  Perhaps nobody is immune; we all must learn and no one is born perfect.  But, this week especially, I have been challenged on many fronts.  It felt surreal, this week, sort of like I was exploring "D/s through the looking glass" instead of just plain old D/s.   I think the most important learning I can catalogue this week is HOW perspective changes, and THAT perspective changes, and WHY perspective changes, and the vast difference between the perspective of the new versus the perspective of the very experienced.  The difference is in the fine lines.

[Digression:  one of my pet peeves in language is the way people abuse the phrase, "There is a fine line between...(insert comparatives here)."  There is often not a fine line between the things they suggest, when I stop and think about it, and then I scuff my toe in frustration having wasted all that time.  And that is not what I mean to suggest here, either, when I talk about fine lines.  There is no fine line demarcating the initiate and the Master.  Instead, there is a crude chalk-drawing by a student, a three-stroke stick-figure trying to tell a story it isn't complex enough to convey.  Next to it, a finely-wrought image drawn by the Master, an image comprised of a thousand fine lines, conveying a rounder, deeper story that takes hours to appreciate and weeks to analyze.  What the new person scratches-out cannot compare to the Masterful image of high complexity.  That is what I mean.  The fine lines reveal everything.]

The new person:  1) expects things to be obvious, 2) gravitates towards the obvious, 3) leaves heavy footprints through the journey.


The initiate:  1) understands that things are not always as they seem, 2) gravitates more towards what she desires instead of what is obvious and presented by default, 3) tries to walk more softly through the world.


The initiated:  1) begins to develop subtleties that characterize her unique self, 2) begins to assert her desires and hardly pays any attention to the obvious and the default anymore, 3) strives to walk not just softly but without penetrating the rice paper.

The Master:  1) recognizes subtlety in others and celebrates it, while recognizing that the new need guidance also, 2) can anticipate desire and meet it but is never above being surprised by joy, 3) can carry himself and his disciple (if required) with minimal impact to the land beneath.

A simple example: it is confusing (to the new Doms and  to the new subs at the beginning, if nobody knows any better) whether a submissive lady should be kneeling by default when a man speaks to her.  There are so many competing opinions and values and practices in Second Life, as many different answers to that question as there are practitioners of alternative lifestyles and roleplay.  There are so many reasons why a Dom may believe it is appropriate for a girl to kneel when speaking to him.  There are so many reasons why a submissive may believe such behaviour to be archaic, misguided, inappropriate to her life's purpose, or totally and perfectly reasonable.

What does submission look like?  It looks like whatever you want it to look like.  Submissive women wear lingerie and snowsuits and sneakers and pumps (granted, not all at once...).  Sometimes a sub wears a collar.  Sometimes she doesn't.  There are at least a dozen variables (and possibly ten dozen more) affecting whether you see her sporting a collar at any given moment.  She may or may not kneel.  She may or may not be owned.  She may or may not be attached at all, in any relationship.  She may be getting over a relationship; she may be entertaining the possibility of a new relationship; she may be withdrawing from any immediate relationships; she may be seeking platonic friendships or protective arms with no other expectations.  She may be wearing leather or lace.  There is a lot in common, really, with the vanilla lifestyle.  But, honestly, there are so many ways to LOOK submissive if one wants to be obvious and catch the attention of the obvious-seeking.  There are also so many ways to assert one's subtleties if one is looking to attract the attention of the more discerning (and less obvious) tastes.  I have endeavoured to wander the road paved by the discerning.  My protected precious sweet ass enjoys the tranquility.

Little Submissions

I have stumbled upon a blog that has quickly become my favorite read in all BDSM-dom.  It is called Little Submissions and it is simply genius.  It's a collection of little "shorts" (and some shorter than others); little stories that depict the life and times of a Domme and her submissive.  Normally my interest wanes after but a moment when confronted with stories about submissive men and their Dommes.  But these little vignettes do more than entertain.  These little vignettes burst with ripe juice; they educate; they illuminate; they show the way.  The impact of the learning  makes me shudder with intellectual gratification.  (The writer should be lauded and celebrated.  Regularly.)  They are written so well.  They're great stories.

What has affected me so, about Little Submissions?  The wordplay, first of all.  Getting the words right.  That there is an owner in the world who will do that; who will reinforce the importance of words, whether at play or in all seriousness.  That there is even the idea of getting the words right.   I was thinking about this today because I attended two discussions (in one day!) and both times the frustration of le mot juste compromised some very key feelings.  (Not mine; other people's.)  It struck me, soundly, that there are people in the world who cannot articulate their realities.  There are people in the world who cannot say what they want to say -- or, rather, who want to articulate something but they do not know the word for it.  They don't know that there is a word for what they want, and when they eventually get that right word, their complex feelings that they feel so awkward trying to express will actually become legitimized.  Because they suffer, they do, trying to legitimize feelings that they don't believe they're even entitled to.  When one increases one's vocabulary, one increases one's ability to process one's world.  To legitimize one's feelings.  To stand firmly upon one's principles.  Hell, to articulate one's principles.  Anyway, getting the words right is huge.  I love the word-play in Little Submissions.

What else affected me?  Cause and effect.  The structure; the anticipation; the expectation; the playfulness.  That there is the talk, the banter, the play.  That there is laughter.  That there is learning.  That there is ongoing amazement and joy.  It feels like joy.  I read the back and forth, and I think to myself, "That is how I wish it could be.  That is how I would love for it to be.  But, between me and a man who loves me as much as that woman loves her sub."

What else affected me?  I begin to understand a little more what a dominant personality "gets out of it."  I find it difficult to empathize, and I have been trying to empathize: I have been trying very hard to figure out what it is about domination that tops feel so attracted to and yearn for.  I now see, a little bit more anyway, the subtle celebrations of her personality every time she dominates.  At every intersection of her domination and his pleasured submission.  And there are wonderful, sundry little points of intersection.  Domination is not just one mindset; one job; one state; one long pathway of never-ending sameness.  Domination, when I observe the woman in Little Submissions, entails an enormous garden of endless variety.  It is never boring to tend one single garden for a long, long time.  Every day the garden yields more.  I do not dream of domination; I dream wholly and eagerly of submission.  But I'm beginning to see, now, why You (when someday You come) might want me.  Someday.

Today was a day of eurekas.  And good pictures.  I have entered one or two photography contests.  Someday, maybe You might be proud of my artistic accomplishments, just one of the many petals that bloom for You.

Taming Desire

"Unrealistic expectations and desires," says Miss Steele in her Fantasy vs Reality article, "are some of the most difficult challenges faced by those in the lifestyle."   Fantasy is not sustainable 24 hours a day: as she quite rightly puts it, somebody has to do the grocery shopping, clean the floors, launder the clothes for the week, etc.  I tried explaining this to somebody, once, who spent a considerable amount of time trying to convince me that once I experienced him I would never want anything else.  (Alas, and obviously, he is not "The One" for me.)  Fantasy is not sustainable 24 hours a day.  It's exhausting.  I need (and love!) my vanilla living as a solid foundation around which my alternative fantasies can open and close.  I started thinking about this as a result of a discussion I attended last night on the longevity of Second Life relationships and whether D/s relationships had any better (or worse?) chance of surviving in-world.  The discussion yielded so many different comments that could, if properly analyzed, be traced back to unrealistic expectations and unbridled desire.  (There were other kinds of comments too, some remarkable in their maturity and many that I keep with me to learn from, in stages.  It was a good talk.)

Especially resonant with me at the moment is the phrase "unrealistic expectations and desires".  Desire, by its very nature, is without reason: it is a want -- a lack -- that makes itself feel like a need.  Desire exists: desire fuels and enflames.  We know this much.  We can't blame desire for being what it is.  Rather than blame desire, I think the onus is on expectation.   Unreasonable expectations is, quite simply, where some people go wrong.  The expectation that desire will be quenched perfectly, in every way, from every angle, at any cost, by a total stranger.  The expectation that people will mind-read, soul-read, spirit-read at first or second meeting.  The expectation that, regardless of time invested or personal compatibility or personal suitability, he or she whom you desire will not only desire you equally but will fulfill you (and all your sweet, bizarre kinks that you travel with and that make you you in your bizarre and kinky way) immediately and without hesitation.  Before the week is out.  And make a sandwich after.

I met a man who said to me that if I will not be intimate with him, he'll be very upset if I am intimate with others.  (His lifelong commitment to pain is touching.  I smile with mischief as he reads this.)  I met a man who believed that, since I claim to be a student of the D/s lifestyle, my body ought to be made available to him magically and automatically.  (We did, actually, set the record straight on that one, no fear.)  I met a man who plays his own submissive (by using the magic of Second Life).  I met a man who wanted to talk with me only to show me how funny he is when he talks to other people.  I meet people who yearn for applause; who yearn for attention; who make funny faces with the alphabet and who sacrifice incredible things in order to feel a moment of gratification (and who try desperately to extend that moment, pulling at the thread, reliving and revisioning and recreating one single moment repeated, because there was only ever that one single moment).   I meet people every day led by desire -- not just feeling the desire but actually governed by desire, shoved down the merry path by desire, hoodwinked and persuaded by desire, believing so strongly in their desire and the desperation for someone else to meet that desire, the be-all-and-end-all condition to endure at all times.  And the appetite... and the need... and the wanting... and the impatience... and the inevitable meltdown... they follow as darkness follows the day.  They travel together.  And it is no wonder that there is a sizeable, jaded community of "exes" in the world.  But, like a beacon of light through a misty night,  Maj made the following comment last night during the discussion:   "You have to put time and effort into it to make the relationship work.  There is no magic to it, and it's not easy.  It just matters how much you want it."   A relationship is a journey based on managed-expectation and not on unbridled-desire.  Maj and Simona are, of course, in a long-term relationship, and it shows.

The reason I practice my disciplines -- the reason I think about things like discipline of the mind, discipline of the spirit -- is because I train my desire.  This is the way I see clearly.  This is the way I feel comfortable alone (and not lonely) until such time as You see fit to claim me.  I wander happily in the light, and I know You will take me into the darkness where I desire to feel You overpower me... when it is time.  And not before.  Waiting is not a chore.  I know that bewilders some people, but I cannot please'em all.

Discipline - The Aspiration

Our destiny is frequently met by taking the very paths we have chosen to avoid it.  Sayuri's "destiny" in Memoirs of a Geisha comes up against her aspirations in nearly every chapter.  It is difficult to determine whether the happy ending to the novel is due to her destiny or due to her single-minded, purely-focused aspiration.  If we call it "destiny," she has been a passive passenger on a pre-ordained journey, and there has been no point whatsoever to her mental conditioning and emotional tribulations.  If we call it "aspiration," she has taken charge of her fate and brought about exactly that which she had set out to do on the day she changed her living.  From the moment of her prayer to the gods, she directed her mind, body, and spirit towards the one man she knew in whom kindness came easily.  The discipline of her aspiration is expressed here:  "With  my eyes squeezed tightly shut and my hands together, I prayed," she explains.  "I would suffer through any training, bear up under any hardship, for a chance to attract the notice of a man like the Chairman again."  And, every moment thereafter was devoted to this singular vision until, finally, at long last, she realizes her vision.

Sayuri remembers, "For a flicker of a moment I imagined a world completely different from the one I'd always known, a world in which I was treated with fairness, even kindness."  She continues, "And when I raised myself to look at the Chairman, I had a feeling of leaving my misery behind me there on the stone wall."  To get very, very picky here, I notice that she says when I raised myself to look, and that is the key to this sentiment.  That is the definition, as I would understand it, of aspiration.  When I raise myself to look.  When I raise myself to look, I see more, and I see further.  I can change things before they happen.  I am not a passive recipient of destiny's hand (if I do not wish to be); I take an active participation in that which shapes me (if I wish it so).

I do not take it for granted that there is a destiny for me.  I do discipline myself so that I can face the world and all of the choices presented to me.  I do not wait passively:  I wait actively.  Behind my eyes, there are dreams, and there are ladders I craft to reach them.  There are butterflies - the symbolic metamorphosis is the achievement of aspiration.  My geisha name, Choji, a butterfly name; my sole aspiration, to become that which You have always wanted in me.

Discipline - The Mind

Discipline of the self is something I regard as the combination of mind, body, spirit, and aspirations of the person into a personal completeness called "integrity".    I alluded to the discipline of my "self" in the last post whereby my geisha training comes out of hibernation and I begin to apply it to my learning about D/s relationships.  My already-enjoyable journey into the dark becomes even more enjoyable as a result.  My core self I introduce to my fantasy self, and my personal feelings of "being real" strengthen.

In my mind, I harbor indelible thoughts.  Philosophy that I hold to.  Learnings that I adhere to.  Information that I seek.  Memories that, over time, re-create and re-adjust.  Some memories, though, that fade in colour.  And some that could never change due to the thrust of the original intensity.  This is the makeup of my mind.  The makeup of my mind contributes to my personal integrity; the extent to which I consider myself a person with integrity is the extent to which my discipline of mind maintains an equally-strong link as-and-to the rest of my parts.

That which may compromise me: impatience.  If there is something worth disciplining in my mind, it is impatience.  At a group discussion earlier this week on "Patience" I learned (or, rather, re-discovered) that  "anxiety" feeds on "impatience," and vice versa.  My chronically-anxious disposition may be disciplined by practicing the virtue of patience, in other words.  The body begins the exercise and the mind acclimatises thereafter.  The physical behavior of patience calms the mind to patience.  And patience is a beautiful visual: water flowing over stones, nothing obstructed, nothing blocked.  The physical behaviour of patience is stillness, calm.  Observation.  Meditation.  Reading.  Walking without purpose.  (Being bound... being restrained... feeling cage bars surround me...)   The physical behaviour of patience will bring the mental stillness of patience.

With patience, one can trust more easily.  When You come, I will trust You in ways I will not trust others.