kommune
Posts: 3
Joined: 4/17/2006
Status: offline
|
i appreciate the intention of susan's original post - to examine if we apply the same attitudes toward both genders, but something about the context disturbs me.
my disclaimer
i am not a one-true-wayer, and i won't tell another person how they should live their lives. what follows is my personal belief, and i appreciate that not everyone believe as i do
the proper attitude of a sub is one of service. i don't think anyone will dispute that.
the proper attitude of a dom is ALSO service - and here i find many men and women who disagree, in my converations and in some of the mailing lists i am involved in.
a dom can be hard, and mean, and positively evil sometimes as the scene requires - but the dom should also serve, not sometimes but constantly. caring for my sub's physical, emotional and mental wellbeing is my responsibility, and i take my service seriously. why shouldn't i? do i not expect that same level of commitment to serving my needs and desires?
it would be highly delusional to believe oneself so divinely inspired that he or she is born to rule regardless of merit. it might be necessary in some situations to PRETEND like this is the case, but i don't think it should ever be fact.
i believe in mutual consent - and even in a 24/7 lifestyle - bdsm is more like an elaborate game than it is a way of life. basically, there is a reality that we return to. and if we don't, then perhaps that is telling of a more complex delusion.
what is being discussed is that dirty, and somewhat shady, concept of financial slavery. i suppose the appeal to the sub is in service (i do this because i serve him/her), in humiliation (he or she only wants me for my money), or even an obtuse form of 24/7 power exchange (service at home, and at the office).
but where, in this exchange, does the dominant's responsibility lie? the lines are blurred, and there is a strong potential in this case for things to go wrong.
one of my earliest brushes with BDSM "philosophy" has to be shevette's (now defunct) evangelistic website.
in an article she penned, she illustrates a situation i will attempt to retell.
as a submissive, she believed it her responsibility, to her master, to take out the trash. and while her master believes that housekeeping was part of her responsibility, taking out the trash was one of those "heavy lifting" jobs that posed a physical danger to his sub. so he instructed her to inform him when the trash needed taking out, and he would do it.
if he was unavailable or preoccupied, she'd take out the trash. or he would send her to a corner (i'm making up the exact details here. my memory is sketchy) until he could find the time to do the chore himself.
this stuck in my mind as a marvellous example of just how collaborative power exchange as a lifestyle can be. both dom and sub acting in an attitude of service - both assuming ALL responsibility, so when it comes down to actually executing their responsibilities, both find themselves needing to do considerably less than they initially intended to.
(and here i hope i have not becomes too vague)
it's utopian, but when it works, it works extremely well. an electorate surrenders their collective power to an elected government, which then uses that power to serve its electorate, just like a sub surrenders power to a dominant, confident that the dominant acts in the best interest of the sub. i don't believe there is a more powerful dynamic than that.
|
RE: Male Doms should not have to work for a living. Dis... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread