cloudboy
Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005 Status: offline
|
Depersonalization is sexy and erotic, unfortunately its also depersonalizing....... A kinder reading of her book would be that in order for the D/S dynamic to work, it needs to be omnipresent and full time in its implementation. To her, the worst thing that happens in M/S relationships is "devolvement" and the popping up of gray areas which undermine power exchange (not being in the mood, vanilla time, indulging the sub or slave's demands or needs, etc.) According to her, subs and slaves respond best to total control and omnipresent power exchange (bright lines, full time enforcement), and that Mistresses experience more satisfaction and less frustration by "grabbing the reigns" of power and being clear and consistent in what they demand and expect of their subs at all times without exception. She does not believe in sceneing or playing -- but rather fulltime, fully committed lifestyles. The blackmail element of her equation is less blackmail than it is a built in penalty for breaking the M/S contract. According to her, the penalty should be stiff and severe for a slave or sub failing to meet his commitment. Although this looks horrible and one sided for the sub or slave, she claims that enforced slavery is actually freeing and good for those disposed to the lifestyle. Fundamental to her is the removal of choice from a slave, who must learn to always surrender and obey. Societal outs and allowances only undermine the achievement of such an M/S relationship, so measures are needed to bind the slave to the Mistress. Unquestionably an Ingrid Bellemare slave departs from the grid of normal, "well adjusted" living, but that's the point for her as anything less is a watered down, flaccid, uninspired form of M/S living. I thought she made a good case defending her views.
< Message edited by cloudboy -- 11/10/2009 4:22:45 PM >
|