|
| Introduction
Dominance and Submission is riddled with
paradoxes and ironies. In both scene-based and online relationships, many
of the paradoxes are obvious. For example, contractual limits are often
set as guidelines for the dominant, safewords are given to submissives so
they can control when a scene ends and yet remain in character and beg for
mercy without really meaning it. Actions done to the sub or required by
the domme to be done by the sub are termed "forced" or "ordered", yet the
sub is the one who determines if the acts are actually going to be
performed. In most cases it is actually the sub's desire to perform the
tasks he is being 'forced' to do. It is often said that the sub is
actually the one in control of the scene (I'm all for "Safe, Sane, and
Consensual", so I'm glad this paradox exists!).
Lifestyle D/s also
has paradoxes and ironies although they present themselves in a much more
subtle manner. As I have written, in a lifestyle D/s relationship the
focus is on what the sub can do FOR the domme rather than what the domme
does TO the sub and the concepts of limits and safewords do not readily
apply. Additionally, since this form of D/s is substantially an extension
the underlying relationship, formalities which exist in the scene world
(e.g., collaring, protocol, etc.) are superceded by more traditional
attachments such as love and commitment.
The most powerful of
paradoxes which exist in the lifestyle D/s relationship is that of mutual
benefit. A true submissive learns to derive pleasure in pleasing. His
needs are satisfied by subjugating his perceived wants and desires to
those of his partner. This concept is the hardest for the novice
'submissive' to grasp. The guy who is hell bent on 'being done while he's
helpless' can't imagine that he will get his satisfaction, perhaps deeper
than what he would get were he to get what he craves, by being the one who
satisfies.
In building strong D/s relationships, the successful
domme realizes the power of this irony. She understands that when a
submissive is forced to confront the truth of the paradox, and rationalize
his reaction to it, he feels more deeply involved in his role in the power
exchange. Any exercise which fosters this confrontation within the sub can
be used to strengthen the relationship.
|
|
|
|
|
