The Master/slave dynamic

Recently, I touched on the various titles people use for themselves in BDSM relationships, but I did not go into a lot of detail.  It has become apparent that elaboration could be useful for those who don't understand what it means to be a Master or a slave, since people who are on the outside looking in believe it's all about misogyny and inequality, rather than an agreement entered with both consent and responsibility, not to mention trust and complete knowledge of what it meant.

First, not long after we first started talking, we established that not only was I completely dominant and she, completely submissive, but she also wanted to be a slave.  She wanted to submit 24/7 and relinquish control to someone capable of dominating her--someone who knew what he was doing, whom she could trust completely.  She wanted rules.  We read through a list of rules, and the idea of them turned her on, but not all of them were a good fit for us.  They were obviously written for a lifestyle philosophy that wasn't to our taste.  I did borrow from them; some of them were solid.  I also made up my own.  I came up with a list of fifty she is required to follow, and I am responsible for enforcing.  I drew up a contract, as well, that spelled out hard limits and my responsibilities.  Everything about signing the contract was voluntary, including the agreement to enter into permanent service, which she did on February 8, 2014.  At no point was she coerced.  We joke a lot about Stockholm Syndrome, but her relinquishing control of her body, of adopting my will over her own, was something she not only agreed to, but wanted wholeheartedly.

Secondly, there is no legal obligation here.  This ownership is symbolic, and based on her willingness to do what I say, when I say it.  She is allowed to leave my service whenever she wants, because there is nothing legal binding her to me.  No, there is nothing legal, but there is a strong emotional bond between us.  We've connected on so many levels, and we love each other.  Now, not every Master/slave relationship involves love, and there are people in the lifestyle who say that love destroys the Master/slave relationship.  They believe that love makes the Master reluctant to enforce rules...but I disagree, at least for my part.  I enforce rules because I love her, and because she loves me, she very rarely breaks them.  She has every desire to please me, and if she breaks a rule--which she rarely does--she expects to be punished.  Living by the rules means so much to her, that if I didn't enforce them, she'd wonder if I lost interest.  She'd think I don't care about her anymore.


Finally, even though there is a requirement to obey, I observe hard and soft limits.  I never cross the hard limits, and I honor her safe phrase if her soft limits get pushed to the point where she can't take more sensation (usually pain).  Some would say the power is hers as a result, but I disagree with this notion.  I say it's about consent, not power.  I still control the play and where it goes; the safe phrase is in place to ensure that I don't go beyond the point where the pain ceases to be pleasurable.  The safe phrase itself helps to push limits: "Master, I'm weak."  She doesn't want to say those words.  She isn't a a weak person, so when she acknowledges that she is weak before me, I know she's taken herself as far as she can possibly go, and it pleases me.

I want to elaboration more on this whole idea that is floating around out there about the submissive having all of the power.  The submissive must consent, or any play you have is rape.  However, dominance is all about the art of seducing a submissive into doing what you want, of bending her to your will.  Dominance is about persuasion, about eroticism, about finding out what makes her tick, reading the signs that she's turned on, and using it all to your advantage.  Domination, when done correctly, may be done in harsh tones or in a whisper.  It's about showing her (or him, but I will use "her" as the generic here) your strength, your confidence, your skill, and your knowledge.  It's about earning her respect and trusting what you do with her.  When we first started playing, I got her safe word often, because I was testing her limits.  Now, if I get it, I'm trying to get it on purpose; I know where her limits are and when I'm approaching them.

The flip side of the "power in submission" idea is the notion that she can say her safe phrase whenever she wants.  Yes, she can.  However, using the safe word flippantly is something she knows would displease me, and I have the option of telling her, "You can take more," to which she can reply with the safe phrase again, or she can use her hard stop safe word instead.  I've never heard her say "migraine".  In any case, the idea that the safe phrase will be abused as a stop to play because she just doesn't feel like it ignores the dynamic entirely.  She agreed to be ready for use whenever I like.  She agreed not to have a choice.  To use the safe phrase to stop play for no good reason would violate our rules, and violation of rules would merit punishment. The safe phrase is not there to stop my will.

We don't necessarily play how others do with the Master/slave dynamic.  For some, it's about complete objectification--which is hot during sex, but not practical when interacting with other members of the family.  For some, love is off limits, but that's obviously a different dynamic than ours.  Some consider slaves to be tradable property, but I consider her a priceless treasure, not to be shared or traded with anyone.  That's where our monogamy comes in; I am selfish when it comes to her.  I'm not insecure; rather, I value her so much, I don't want her touched by anyone else.  I also find the idea of multiple slaves undesirable and impractical, given how insatiable she is and how in love we are.  I'd neglect an additional slave, if I had one, I'm certain.

There are many types of slaves.  Mine is a sex slave and a domestic servant.  She is mine to use in any sexual manner I choose, and she is also there to tend to my household.  Think 1950s housewife.  She is into that idea completely.  She wants to clean, cook, do laundry, do the dishes--everything a the stereotypical 1950s housewife was expected to do.  She even likes the idea of dressing the part.  In private, she is required to be naked, or wear whatever clothing or accessories I want her to wear.  She is required to be available for any sexual act I choose, whether it is a spanking, a whipping, a paddling, forced orgasm, or penetration of any orifice.  She absolutely wants this life.  The more used and helpless she feels, the better.  The harder and rougher the use, the wetter she gets.  Her reactions feed my needs.  This life is definitely about both of us--not just me, and not just her.  We entered into it knowing what we wanted, knowing what our roles would be, and wanting them completely.  I didn't buy her.  I didn't coerce her.  I showed her my dominance, and she signed away her will and body as a result.  She gave herself as a gift to me, to enter forever into my service.