Boundaries: Good Idea

Have we talked about boundaries lately?  I've just read something that demands sharing.  I'm sitting in my happy spot nicely bounded and feeling pretty secure at the moment, so now is a good time to revisit this idea of boundaries.

First, it is empowering to realize that it is our own responsibility how we let other people treat us.  [It is not our fault if someone abuses us!  Not at all.  Abuse is a whole other dynamic.] 

In day to day living, we teach people how to treat us, and we teach them what we will accept and what we will reject.  We do that even if we aren't aware we're doing it: and regardless of what we teach them, there are people in the world who will bulldoze right over established boundaries anyway (or, will try to!) without regard for your boundaries.  Which is why you need to know what those boundaries are, and where the warning signs are posted, and when to sound the alarm.  "Learn to say no," in other words.  "Know what actions you need to take if your wishes aren't respected."

"Recognize that other people's needs and feelings are not more important than your own," is another good idea.  When you start imagining a relationship in terms of "more important" and "less important" then there is an unhealthy dynamic at play.  It is not about more or less, when there is love and trust to bind two people.  Domination does not mean "more important."  Submission does not mean "less important."  There are people in the world who would tell you that you are obligated to do something because you are someone.  Your submission obligates you.  Your obedience obligates you.  And the truth is, while submission means that you are inclined to serve and to obey rather than to give orders and dominate a situation, submission does not mean that you will obey blindly.  Rather, submission simply means that, in the relationship between a dom and a sub, the dom sets the mood and the tone of the activity, and the sub reacts and responds to this setting.  In a dance, one leads and one follows.  Neither takes priority: both are required, and the dance is beautiful.

You are never obligated to act against your own conscience.   You are never, as a submissive person, obligated to obey rules that insult your soul.  You are never obligated as a human being to perform actions, feel guilty, subjugate your own self-esteem to benefit another's ego, debase yourself for someone else's gratification... you are never obligated to perform as a slave for the selfishness of another.  Ever.  (Of course, if you want to do those things, then of course the world wants you to get what you want!!  But you are never obligated by virtue of your being submissively inclined.)

Domination does not mean "ownership."  There are some subs and doms who speak in terms of ownership, but it is not an obligation by virtue of submission and domination.  Ownership need never come into the relationship if you aren't comfortable with the word.  For some, it's perfection.  For others, it's overkill.

The idea of boundaries is a good idea to revisit from time to time.  It is good to clarify words and meaning as they relate to one's own experience.  One's own brain is the sole source of pleasure in this world, and it wants to know what's on the menu before selecting.

Also from the article, signals that there are boundary issues:

- you go against your values to please someone else

- you give as much as you can for the sake of giving

- you take as much as you can take from someone, for the sake of taking

- you let others define your personality, your rules, your acceptable limits

- you expect others to fulfill your needs automatically

- you feel anxious and guilty if you say "no" to a request

- you do not speak up when someone mistreats you

- you fall to pieces so that others will take care of you

- you fall in love with someone you barely know

- you fall in love with someone who reaches out to you for a conversation

- you accept someone's advances, touching, and sex when you do not want it

- you touch someone without asking first

These signals should send warnings that it is time to have a conversation.  It may be that everything is alright.  It may be that "it's just meant to be."  And that's great!  But have the conversation to make sure.  That, right there, is a boundary worth enforcing.

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!

Shame, Part Two

"Kink shame" and "shame as kink" are two different things.  Some people are ashamed of their kinks; and some are turned on as a kink by the idea of shame.

I spent a great deal of my second life (the first time around) dead-ashamed of my kinks.  (I mean, the "G" word.  My first BDSM fantasies were, counter-intuitively, Gorean.  And I'd never even heard of Gor before Second Life, so this was quite an awakening.)  I was not ashamed to live my fantasies of sexual slavery and participate actively -- only ashamed to associate my fantasy self with my real self and to introduce both selves to each other.  Often, it is shame that prevents many people from integrating their first and second lives: the feelings of shame lead to this behaviour of dividing (sometimes with a violence) the two lives.  In extreme cases, it is this shame that prevents the real self from meeting the fantasy self.  Living in the closet is a painful experience: one divides the self and it doesn't feel very good.  I am sure this theory applies to more than just "kink" and Second Life.  I am sure the idea of living in the closet is more common than society would be comfortable admitting.

In my series of interviews around "shame" I met many people who keep a careful array of closets.  Closets for reasons of gender, for reasons of sexual orientation, for reasons of shame and kinks... there are many reasons a person will hide part of oneself from the rest of the world.

I know that in my case, I have struggled in the past with asserting a confident sense of self.  Second Life has really helped me achieve a better (and loveable) sense of self.  I feel more confident saying to people "I need this."  I feel more confident saying to people, "I will not tolerate this."  I know the difference between fantasy and reality: and I know that I do not want one to become the other, but I would like both to have their own special places in my life.  This took quite a bit of time to articulate, finally.  Naturally, I wish that I could go back to the beginning knowing then what I know now.  Knowing that there is no shame (objectively) to wanting and desiring.  Knowing that I have a valid, loveable self that can play nice and contribute fun things.  Knowing that when someone acts like an ass, it's not because of something I did but, rather, that person is quite separately an ass regardless of me.

I'm over my kink-shame in much the same way that I am over my "invalid self" feelings.  I know I have a lot of people to thank for this.  I'm grateful for each and every one of them.

Shame, Part One

The reason why it is so easy to associate "shame" with "submission" (and, therefore, one reason why submissive personalities are often so vulnerable to unexpected bullying) is that the idea of shame depends upon the victimization of one's character -- the lowering of a person's self-esteem and the fragmentation of a person's ego.  It strips away the person's self-pride.  When used as a weapon by a bully (or a dominant personality who also happens to be a bully) the potential for long-term damage is enormous.  The submissive is at risk because this imbalance of power resembles power-exchange (in the same way that Cinderella in her ballroom gown resembles her evil sisters in their ballroom gowns).  A person who does not have the critical thinking skills to see this -- that power imbalance is not the same thing as power exchange -- will not see the damage, or the potential for damage, or even the problem in general.

Shame, I have been researching, results in the erasure of the self.  Shame is what makes us go away.  Shame is what makes us turn away.  Shame is what makes us want to remove, erase, eliminate, sever, bury, camouflage and mask something we believe to be wrong for us personally or as a species.  Shame is the button "go" that releases behaviours we cannot otherwise explain.

Shame emerges from the self, or shame is inflicted by a third party onto the self.  I may accept the gift of shame from another just as another accepts the gift of my submission.  In that case, if I accept his shame, then I accept the consequences of his shame.  It is a condition often expected of a submissive and results in many otherwise-inexplicable punishments (according to my interviews).  And because submission resembles victimization in the same way that Dominance resembles victory to the inexperienced and very vulnerable, too often the new submissive gets the foul end of things.

Domination by bullying; the victimization of character and ego; the perceived judgment of others... there are so many reasons why it is a good idea for a submissive (and a Dom, for the love of God) to take a mentor when first exploring the D/s lifestyle.  In Second Life, it is made so simple to do.

Truth

 Mistress Steel's collection of learnings  was my first "how to" manual of BDSM and the D/s lifestyle.  I have read and re-read the articles herein.  Each time, I am refreshed.  What strikes me this time is truth.  In the "24/7" article, she writes:  "It becomes crucial to say clearly exactly what you mean and to listen carefully to hear exactly what your partner says to you.  We have often been taught to try to say what we believe other people wish to hear instead of the truth.  Truth alone can be blunt and unkind, but it is the edge of the blade that does far less damage than a blade that is blunted by false veneers.  Honesty is essential.  Hiding or masking anything will quickly lead into a morass of problems and, most often, the severing of the relationship's potential."

Lately, I have been tasked with writing down my thoughts during scheduled moments of meditation so that we can discuss them later.  I remember the first time I thought I had bad news to deliver: I had meditated on limits and I was about to impose them.  I was not sure how that would be received, and I could feel the anxiety rise.  How do you deliver unpopular news to someone you respect?  How do you tell someone whom you value that you are about to place limitations on the relationship?

Personally, I believe in the Mistress Steel philosophy:  the cutting blow of truth hurts, but it doesn't hurt as much as repeated blows from a blunt object that didn't do the job right the first time, or the second, or the third.  A clean break is a mercy.  A person can work with a clean, clearly-stated truth; people are strong (regardless of how they might protest to the contrary).  Speaking for myself, I would rather hear a clean, clearly-stated truth (i.e. "It's not working out, but we gave it a good try.  Let's end this thing.") than to be left in the dark, second-guessing myself, wondering when and if and how and whether... Speak, say it, define it, bind it, and let go.  Truth is a necessary condition of maturity.  I suppose that I take it for granted that a dominant personality will speak truth to me -- will, at the very least, be able to deliver unpopular news to me with a clean blow so that I can deal with it.  If a dominant personality cannot deliver unpopular news with the same conviction as good news, then it warrants examination.  Even doms have limits and the right to assert them.  As a submissive personality, I look to them -- to one especially -- to give it to me straight and clean.

I relate the ability to tell the truth to the ability to define limits and boundaries.  The ability to say 'Stop!' when it is time.  The ability to assert, "This far, and no further."  The ability to say, "I think I have made a mistake, can you help me?"  The ability to say, "I have needs, and you cannot meet them if you continue this way."  The ability to say, "I thought I was going to like this, and now I realize I do not."  The ability to say, "Damn, that was harder than I thought it was going to be."  Speaking truth to power is not easy, sometimes, but how else are we going to enjoy our lives if we cannot speak truth to power?  How else are we going to live in a world of conflicting needs and competing desires without the ability to say, "Enough; now it is time for my needs."  Of course, a person needs a nice safe place to be able to speak the truth and have it heard as truth, and have it analyzed and discussed as human beings.  A person needs a safe place, lots of patience, great understanding, and a curious spirit engaged in getting to the source of things... yes yes.  These things I also take for granted.  A person must want to live with truth, for starters.  And that is another reason why I am so blessed with the people I know and love.

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.

Vulnerable Days, Strong Days

Today is father's day, and it is the first father's day that I experience without a father.  (I can see where this week's anxieties have come from, now that I think about it.)  My father was kind, quiet, strong,  self-centred (in the way that is zen and healthy), well-read, and always occupied (and yet forever available if I needed him).  My father did not raise me to be dependent upon him.  My father did not raise me to fall apart when he is gone.  My father raised me to live my own life; and if I faltered, he would fix it so that I could continue along the path I had chosen.  My father was unexpectedly hilarious in rare moments.  My father rarely spoke using contracted words, usually preferring to speak the word in its entirety as if to savour the full meaning of it.  My father was contemplative. My father took incredibly good pictures, usually of things nobody else was looking at.  My father's handwriting was immaculate.  My father's patience was selective.  My father's curiosity was healthy.  My father's storytelling was legendary.  My father could write so that anybody would want to read him.  There is nobody, obviously, who will replace my father.

It is not a replacement I seek, in any event.  However, it is fair to suggest that my taste in a dominant -- my comfort zone in obedience and learning -- has been groomed by someone extraordinary.  It would be within my comfort zone to interact with a man who does not expect me to fall to pieces waiting for him to return.  I do not.  It is not in my makeup.  It would be within my comfort zone to interact with a man who gives me consistency and regularity in terms of time and attention -- and who otherwise allowed me to live my life, with faint reminders scattered here and there, and enjoy things to look forward to.  It is why I do not enter this lifestyle broken: it is not reparation I need.  It is not an antidote I seek.  My first dominant, the man who first guided me and fashioned me and set me loose upon the world to live as shaped by him, he did so with care.  I am accustomed to that; and I am satisfied with the course of my own journey now.  The course is taking me further towards You, the great and powerful You who has hypnotized my thoughts and who compels me forward and forward on.

I felt weak yesterday; today I feel strong.  Today I feel like I master the very darkness that I seek -- and I know that is not possible... but sometimes little victories feel like big ones.  My little victories:  I have further defined my submission; I have made a situation that was not working for me (and bringing me pain) work for me, and bring me security.  I do know some very good people in the world.  And I will know You, the cooling dark that surrounds my burning light, strips me bare so that there is nothing hidden or wanting.

Backwards, Frontwards, Side to Side

It's been quite a day.  And there's nothing like talking to a real friend on a real kind of ... strange day.  I wanted to know about the role of love in submission, especially in the virtual world.  "Can you give yourself and still be independent?" my mentor asked me, challenging me to enjoy the feeling of a man without giving myself away.  And I enjoyed the feeling of a man.  And it feels like so long ago, but it is only just over a week, now.  "One more thing," she says to me, "do not fall in love with him."  That must mean that love is a part of submission.  Love can be a part of submission, rather.  It must mean that love risks being a part of submission, and that a person risks falling in love when perhaps love is not the bargain domination negotiates.
I started this journey, as I was reminded today by Sir RB, with the directive of "no love, please."  And I remember vividly saying to many people, "It's not  your love I'm looking for."  And I don't think that's changed, to be honest.  I do not think it is love that I am missing: but I do know that I am not cut out for a casual arrangement.  I do expect to be somebody's priority, because when I submit I make that man my priority.  I clarified today (thank you Sir RB, the conversation was precisely what I needed) that I spend a great deal of time erecting defenses against the possibility of being hurt (which would be a regular occurence if I did not erect these defenses; there are cruel people in the world), instead of privileging the aftermath of experience.  To privilege the guard-against means that I shall never really experience.  To privilege the aftermath means that I shall, in time, equip myself with the tools required to heal and to mend and to repair and to enjoy.  I have been doing things backwards, in other words.  I'm still not convinced that by doing the opposite I will actually be going forwards; I feel like I'm staggering to the side a little.  I know, however, that I am still on the right path towards You, mighty You, the You I know knows me.  Forgive me, I beg, if I take a little longer to get there.

It's not necessarily love that I need.  In fact, I'm sure it is not love that I need. It is love that I feel, though; and I'm now beginning to clarify things in my mind.  It's not love that I need; it's time and privilege.  It is love that I have to give, when I submit.  And what I need is consistency: time and privilege, dedicated time and dedicated priority.  I do need to be somebody's priority.  I do need that.  I have needs, and that is one of them.  Priority when he is here.  Priority when we have established a routine of inviolable time to share.  Not a monopoly but a scheduled priority.  My submission and my love are not very far different from each other; and I do not expect a virtual dom to understand it or reciprocate it -- but I do expect it to be valued, consistently, as part of who I am.  I think it is what makes me a desirable submissive.  And to that end, a consistent one.  Which means, it's time I communicate  a little bit now.  And so I shall.
*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *
In other news, in my frenzy to try to understand the mind of a dom, before I was lucky enough to score Sir RB's attention, I started reading notecards from a library in Second Life.  I was instantly disheartened, but then I realized "Hah, it's not really surprising."  Check out the first line in one of the notecards, and I quote:  "Dominance is a primitive part of the human psyche.  To plug into this primitive role, you have to appear strong.  So be as strong as you can.  Then fake the rest."   And then it goes on to say, "Strong people have wants, but not needs."   There is another notecard from the same library, "How to be a good top."  I turn my attention to that.  It poses the question, what do you do with a submissive you have tied up?  "You can be stern and commanding, sympathetic but nasty, jolly yet sadistic... anything you please."   My initial reaction to reading this?  "Not with me, you can't."  Whoever wrote these wrote them with absolutely no forethought about what it means to engage meaningfully in a long-term negotiated D/s relationship.  And now the highly questionable experiences I have endured in this world make a lot more sense, given what is out there instructing people.

In still other news, the landscapes in this post are of the Journey to Domination and submission sim that Genny (my mentor) owns and operates.  I have given her a bunch of fresh landscape shots because it has been a while since I have photographed some beautiful land.  I was chatting today about how the principles of photography (perspective, light, focal point and level of interest) are also the principles of any human relationship, not just relationship between subject and beholder.  I process a great many things when I am engaged in an intensity of focus on a picture.

Self-Esteem from Self-Control

Why spend so much time exploring self-esteem?  I wish the answer to that question were not so obvious in my own experiences with people.  Anyway, the more I read about "The Master's Viewpoint" by Dennis Najee, the more I realize how much really depends upon self-esteem.  A healthy relationship depends upon it.  A healthy self-image depends upon it.  A healthy outlook on life depends upon it.  Personal expectations of how people treat us in the world depend upon it.  And, of course, relevant to the D/s community, a healthy experience at play or in communication depends upon it.  "No man is in a position of dominance if he cannot control himself," says Mr. Najee, and with that I wholly agree.  And, by controlling himself, it means what he eats; how much he eats; what he does for exercise; how much he exercises; whether he is in control over his emotions during periods of stress; whether he is in touch with his emotions during periods of affection; whether he abuses narcotics; whether he over-indulges in intoxicants; and whether he thinks that it is safe to interact with other people when he is drunk with control-sapping stimulants.  "Lack of control on the part of the dominant is a sign of weakness."   I have trusted people, inching as I did towards more and more control surrendered to them, only to have them lose control entirely one way or another.  They stopped listening to me, to the word "no".  They stopped speaking sanely.  They stopped being trustworthy.  When someone I trust loses personal control, I no longer trust.  Is a submissive supposed to negotiate in good faith with that person?  A submissive who, in good faith, does take care of her mind and body; who does make sure she adheres to codes of respect for her own body as well as the bodies of others; whose mindset is about bringing beauty, not fear.  Christian Grey, in Fifty Shades of Grey, has it right:  he has dominated his life so that things are under control.  His finances are healthy; his food is healthy; his exercise is healthy; he drinks wine from time to time; he even strives for healthier energy sources globally, that's how healthy he wants things to be.  He strives.  (Love the book or hate the book, Christian's outward character is formidable, and it is one viable basis upon which to grow a relationship.)

When one masters self-control, one feels pretty good about oneself.  Self-mastery  turns us into worthy partners in play; worthy partners in fantasy; worthy partners in exploration and mutual gratification.  It means I can trust the man You say You are.  It means I can feel good about surrendering control.  (And otherwise it ain't happening.)  It means Joe Dominant's domination is effective, not hypocritical and weak.  It means Cutie Submissive's submission is real, not a nymphomaniacal collar-hop perpetually seeking the honey-moon.  Words I will adhere to as I have done throughout this whole learning process:  "The BDSM lifestyle," writes Mr. Najee,  "is one where you are free to choose what you desire.  All avenues are open to you.  The key is to make the proper choices for what fits your needs.  Implant the image of what you want in your head and work towards bringing it into reality.  There is no reason why you cannot do this.  However, before focusing outward, take a look at yourself."

Control, Part One

I have no doubt that "control"  will be one of the many topics that I introduce in my learning journal which will ultimately yield changing or deepening conviction as I progress.  Before I go there, however, I'd like to address a question I get asked almost every day.  "Where," they ask me, "do you shop?"  And I guess it is a consequence of being a very experienced Second Life resident (though my current avatar is relatively new) that I know some pretty great places to shop, because I make it a point to shop only at reputable, high-quality, fair-priced brands.  I don't buy things for 5L on the marketplace: they're probably scandalous in origin.  I earn the money I spend here, and I spend it on integrity-priced high-quality goods.  My look is Curio skin, preferably, and I wouldn't be me without it.  So, I'm posting fashion-blogger images today to deliberately call attention to the good art that makes me "me" and the good artists behind the scenes.  Without good art on the grid, we'd be a bunch of uggle-fuggles wandering chalk-drawing streets, duckwalky and herky-jerky gesturing.  And I don't put up with that in the real world, let alone in my ever-evolving fantasy world.  The fantasy would be just ruined!

Sometimes I wear Belleza skin, if the photography demands bolder eyes and blush.  The Asian features on both skins are so delicately and expertly handled.  Both brands showcase great artists.  I spend a lot of money in Second Life, and I like to know that I am spending money on not just great artists but also principled artists.  These artists (and other greats on the grid) are important to me:  Gala Phoenix, Tricky Boucher, Elika Tiramisu, and Cocoro Lemon, because their art is original and fun and sexy and good, good fantasy.   Here, then, is one of a dozen answers to the question of where I shop.  I would very much like to continue shopping at Gala Phoenix's Curio store, as would thousands of Second Life residents.  Gala's reputation in the world as an artist is formidable, a person of unique and special talent.

So, now, back to the idea of control.  I have been reading this excellent blog written by, clearly, a Master (and by "Master" I mean someone who has mastered the art of communication, someone experienced who can convey complicated ideas by breaking them down into digestible bits so that all the parts build upon each other and make perfect sense to people who are newly initiated, like me -- a Master whom I could look up to and learn from for a long time).  This blog treats ideas such as "control" and "self-esteem" and "the difference between submission and slavery" and "trust" and "goals" and "the bullcrap" (ha ha).  In other words, the man has taken great pains to a) empower the submissives and Doms who take the time to read; b) clear up a whole mess of misconceptions; c) make it perfectly clear that even though there are traditions in the lifestyle, ultimately how I live (and how You live, and how They live) will be a personal expression and fulfillment, not something prescribed and prefabricated.   And the idea of control weighs heavily upon me right now.  I know that when I submit, there will be limitations to the power that I surrender.  It won't be a total power exchange 24/7 -- it will not be slavery, in other words, consensual or otherwise.  There will be limits to what I am capable of offering (reluctant, but real).  And determining what, exactly, those limits are will be an excellent exercise that develops between me and my Future You.

What You will not control, I can say right now, is what I look like.  And I have the right to say so; and that simply means that, as we customize our fit together, You will be with me because You don't need to control my look and because I do not need someone to take control over my look.  I'm pretty good at dressing and grooming myself (in any world) and there is every reason to be confident in my ability to "show well" when we go about the grid having adventures.  Controlling HOW I submit is the idea, here.  The detail about how I dress and groom myself is incidental: the point is that there will be limitations on my submission, but they will be limitations that I place.  When I surrender control, it will not be appearance-based control that I beg from You.  I have that under control perfectly well and dandy.  When I surrender control, it will be emotion-control, sensation-control (things I'll delve into later, at long long length).  Bondage and restraint.  It is important to realize, especially for a new submissive, that HOW she submits and WHAT she submits, and to WHOM, and for HOW LONG, are conditions that she still controls as part of that safe, sane, consensual dynamic.  Submission isn't just "a thing," in other words: it is "a series of things."  When I submit, I submit often and regularly, little bits here and there, depending on the situation and timing.  I cede control over little things bit by bit and temporarily, while we get to know each other.  The Grand Whole Unifying Collared Submission happens when we have been together for a long time and we, together, have earned that blanket.  The blanket of submission!  The blanket that rests beside the throne of trust at the table of intimacy, under the balloons of faith and in the next room over from the hammock of aftercare.

One of the things that I want to call attention to as a key learning in the realm of control:   self-esteem.   I quote Dennis Nagjee:

When we discuss fear, it is crucial to remember that it can manifest itself in different ways.  ... Characteristics such as guilt, worry, anger, resentment and arrogance have their basis in fear. ...   The problem with fear is that, when experienced, it puts us instantly into a state where we are out of control. ... Those who are driven by fear do not feel like they are in control of anything. ...  They are not even handling their own emotions.  ...  A person with low self esteem is driven by fear. 

It means that I will be looking out for evidence of fear in the Dominants that I meet, as well as examining my own, and not making decisions based on fear to the extent that such is possible.  "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing," isn't that the maxim?  I resent the control that a fearful, hateful person has placed over me, making me unable to patronize an artist whom I adore.  I look forward to when control is re-established in the proper hands and I can once again enjoy new and better work from Gala Phoenix.  I applaud those who have come out openly in support of a great artist: no fear.

Needs, Part Three

My mentor asks, "What is trust? Do we need it? Can we have a relationship without it?"

On a large scale, I believe civilization's fundamental bedrock is trust: therefore, we cannot have relationships without trust.  I believe, for myself, that I could not cross at a green light, board a high-speed train, or eat food purchased at a local market without trusting all manner of people whom I've never met but who, nevertheless, preserve my life for another day with their predictable and benevolent behaviour.  We need to be able to trust even on an unconscious level, or else we remain paralyzed and afraid of our own shadow.

On a more intimate scale (since intimacy and need are my focus right now), I believe that someone can trust me who has learned to depend on my judgment; who has learned to rely on my priorities and my ability to prioritize someone's sensitive issues; who has learned to read and understand my behaviours which consistently provide a "no-surprise" environment where sensitive issues are concerned.

To do otherwise would be a "surprise" environment -- or, in other words, it would be shocking, an emotional violence.  The extent of the violence depends on the extent of the betrayal.  Part of the trust a person places in me, however, is how terribly I would feel if I were to cause another to be so shocked by betrayal.

On the most intimate scale (since we get to the heart of the matter now) I need trust.  I need to be able to rely upon someone as readily as I offer my own reliability.  I need a "no-surprise" environment.  I need to take for granted that someone will behave in such a way.  Needs, part three:  I need safety from shocks and emotional violence.  Even accidental.

Wants, part one:  I would like to play.  I would like to play with physical boundaries. I would like to play with someone I would never doubt.  I would like to play with someone who takes play seriously; someone who flirts with the physical but who never, ever betrays the emotional.  Side effect of this learning:  As I become more honest, I require more honest.