|
CallaFirestormBW -> RE: High Protocol Practices (4/13/2009 9:18:32 AM)
|
quote:
Does your perception of high protocol practices fit the stereotype that I mentioned above? What experiences have you had that led you to that conclusion? Are you interested in protocol type settings or events and just haven't had the chance to attend something like that yet? Have you had fears about doing so? What do you think you as person would make you feel more welcome?
I apologize in advance for the length of this post.
I grew up in a "high protocol" family. It had nothing to do with D/s. My dad held a respected, and elected, position in the community, and there were a -lot- of rules that went along with how one associated with others, because of that. My parents didn't call them "protocols", they called them "manners". Because of that, when I think of being "mannerly", I think of the somewhat formal ways in which people interact with one another in order to smooth the boundaries between them and make everyone comfortable. I think, too, that for some of us who are a bit long-in-the-tooth, or who, like me, had parents who were -much- older when they were born, were from a different culture, or both (my parents were in their 40s, and grew up in Europe), "protocol", or the rules by which one knows how to interact in given situations, was much more commonplace than it is now.
Because of that, I think that some individuals are skittish of the whole idea of complex manners of interaction. It's interesting that this is often the case, when typically, manners were meant to make things -easier- for the people involved. They provided specific forms of behaviors that could be applied in specific situations, and these specific behaviors would assure that nobody would be insulted or hurt or leave situations open to misinterpretation.
One thing that has made this difficult is that the current common expressions of "manners" are based on an enforced "equality" and an embracing of a more 'casual' manner of interacting. People often see the more formal styles of manners as "snooty" or "pretentious", and make it plain that they are "just people", to the point of getting insulted if approached in a more formal way. It's been my personal experience that the dropping of formal "manners" (read: protocols) hasn't really benefited society, and, in many ways, may actually have -hurt- us.
Protocol is something we all learn. We learn how to treat one another, and how to respond in a variety of situations. These are -all- "protocols". Nobody knows a new protocol from the first instant xhe's exposed, but I always understood that the point of protocols were to ease an individual through those awkward first experiences by giving a foundation where they could stand firmly, clear about what came next, while they gathered information and understanding about how the inner workings functioned. These days, we just leave people hanging, hoping they'll figure it out before they insult someone or peeve someone so much that it ruins the entire evening... and then we make fun of them for being "idiots" -- what were they supposed to do? We took away any basis they might have had that would have generalized their behavior and prevented them from doing or saying something inappropriate for the situation by taking away the formalized structure of "protocols" that would have given them an organized, uniform platform from which to branch out.
I use formal protocols a -lot-. I think they're -very- beneficial when dealing with newcomers, or dealing with individuals who might need to go back to a point in their practice -before- they developed bad habits, to give them a foundation from which to build again in a more productive direction. When I require protocols for a servant, their protocol does -not- intrude on visitors or guests un-necessarily. For example, when I have a servant in-house, and I have a guest, the servant will have a series of protocols in place that explain what -I- expect hir to do to make my guest comfortable. The servant would offer to take any outerwear and hang it properly or place it in a predesignated location, would show the guest to seating appropriate to hir physical needs, and offer something to eat/drink. The servant would gracefully defer any questions which xhe was not authorized to answer, would gracefully but firmly defer any untoward familiarity (touching, petting, pinching, patting, attemts to kiss, etc.) and would back away three paces from the guest before turning hir back on the guest to attend to any requests for food/drink or to fetch me. A servant who has been in my home for a long time might adhere to these implicitly, or might improvise if the situation seemed to call for it, but xhe would be familiar enough with how I prefer things to be done that xhe wouldn't make the guest uncomfortable with hir behavior. With a newcomer, the parameters are still raw, so new servants are required to obey implicitly and without deviation, and the protocols are designed to make that possible while still making a visitor feel welcome.
In the same way, servants in our home address new visitors as "ma'am" and "sir". I don't care, when someone comes to call, whether xhe is a servant or a keeper in hir own home -- in my home, xhe is a guest, and is treated with the same dignity of any new visitor. Once I've gotten to know the person, and xhe's a returning guest, the protocols will be altered for hir comfort, but any new visitor will be treated the same way in my home. The uniformity means that any visitor who comes to see me will be treated cordially, regardless of hir perceived 'station', and this assures that, when there -is- a guest who requires 'kid gloves', my servant will not be flummoxed or fumble through the protocols -- xhe will have used them a hundred times before, and will be able to be gracious and grace-ful, and will come away proud of hirself for having navigated treacherous social waters with ease.
I also have personal protocols in place, for how -I- prefer to be treated. These are rarely spoken of in front of guests -- instead, my servant knows that, under X circumstance, I want certain things to be handled in a certain way. My servants don't have to ask me about my medicine in front of guests. They know that, at 6am and 6pm, I take XYZ. They bring it to me discretely, with the appropriate beverage, so that I can take it. When I have company and it is time for a medication that I can't take in front of company, my servants know to give me a polite signal -- a hand-raise, or to come in and speak with me discretely, at which point I will excuse myself graciously and attend to what I need to. The same goes if I have a client/pastoral-care issue/etc., or any other situation that would call me away from my guests. There isn't any fanfare, no shouting through the house for me, etc. The servants know to approach me and exactly what information to give me so that I know quickly and precisely what needs to happen next.
Private protocols are often "invisible" to guests. I don't expect them to know what's going on -- the whole point is for things to be seamless so that they don't -have- to deal with our private issues while they are visiting. I can have a servant in my home, and have my great aunt, Aunt T, visit and know that my servant won't do or say or present hirself in any manner that would make my aunt uncomfortable. I can even have my friend, the dungeon-master dominant "bear" in our home at the same time and not have to worry about something being done or said that would put -either- my friend or my aunt in a position of dis-ease. The protocols for dealing with guests are meant to make it possible for me to have visitors from a broad range of experiences and have them all be comfortable and well taken-care-of in my home, regardless of the situation.
This is where protocols really -are- a blessing rather than a curse. They enable us to take complex situations and provide clear rules so that we can behave appropriately in a wide range of situations. Protocols have taken a real beating, particularly in American culture, but it's been my experience that they're of great benefit in smoothing the rocky places where people come together.
|
|
|
|
