Thursday, February 28, 2008

Submissive rights

Submissive rights

In a D/s lifestyle relationship, what are the rights of the submissive partner?

Some might say that the Submissive has no rights. I have seen relationships where the Dominant will require that the Submissive gives him all her money, property, etc. All decisions are made by the Dominant. The Submissive might be granted privileges but she is not entitled to anything.

Perhaps this works for some couples. But I would not define this as D/s. Rather I would call it Master/slave (M/s). And while M/s may work over brief periods of time, as a long term strategy I feel it has significant problems.

First off, let me be clear in saying that there is no consensual way for a Submissive to give up her rights as a citizen. At least in most Western countries. IOW - no court of the land will recognize any citizen’s consensual decision to abrogate their rights. There is no way that they can be taken away. Therefore, any contract that might be signed between the partners that would attempt to do such a thing would be considered to be null and void.

Further, and at a minimum, any Submissive has the right to leave the relationship whenever she might wish to. The responsible Dominant may not refuse such a request. To hold someone against their will contravenes the entire philosophy of D/s lifestyle relationships. True, there have been times when I considered that a girl I was training was reacting with emotion rather than reason in making her choice. At such times I have advised them to wait a day or two before making the request. But if they insist, then they are released. The Dominant has no choice in such matters.

But beyond the right to terminate the relationship whenever they choose to, is the Submissive entitled to any other rights? I would say they do.

At a minimum, they are entitled to the honesty, trust, and responsibility of their partner. Honesty - that the dominant partner will not lie. Trust, that the dominant part will do what they feel is best. Responsibility - that the dominant part will be responsible for the protection and enhancement of the Submissive.

As part of satisfying these requirements, the submissive has the right to expect that the Dominant will provide her with certain things. For example, a set of rules and disciplines that will provide a framework of expected behaviours, so she can know what is required. She has the right to expect that these rules will not be changed arbitrarily, and too, that punishment for infractions will be consistent and appropriate.

Perhaps most important the submissive has the right to protection while she serves the dominant. Protection from abuse, both by him and others. This protection would be both physical and emotional since abuse can take on many forms. Protection would also include respecting any limits that have been negotiated at the beginning of the relationship.

Finally, I would say that the Submissive also has the right not to be summarily dismissed from the relationship. IOW - that the Dominant will not end the relationship without giving her fair warning, so that she can either modify her behaviour, or prepare for the transition that is inevitable.

D/s is not about taking away rights, it is about living in balance and harmony. Both parties have rights in this partnership, though they are not always the same.

Be seeing you,

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Greetings Sir,

A question if this girl may.

brenna has often questioned the weight of the term "slave" in so many of the lifestyle relationships she has encountered. Feeling that; often it is just a term that caters to the romanticisms and or the sexual appeal of BDSM. As a 24/7 continuum, this girl just doesn't recognize it to be possible for the reasons you have posted here, among others.

This girl has often witnessed full blown cat fights in forums over this term. People arguing over who is a slave and who is not. Which in brenna’s opinion is rather ridiculous to begin with. From this girls understanding, slavery is something that occurs without consent. How then can one be a slave if they have in fact consented to defer to a dominants control?

This girl understands that you have used the term slave lightly in your post. However, brenna is curious as to how you view the term as opposed to others. Do you feel the term "slave" to be reasonable in regards to this lifestyle where choice is the foundation in all beginnings?

Thoughtfully,
brenna

Mackenzie Cross said...

Greetings brenna,

In general I think that there is no such thing as a slave with respect to a D/s relationship. Simply put, there is no way for one individual to keep another as slave in our modern North American society.

However, many girls feel that they are slave in their hearts. What they mean by this is that they feel completely bound to their Master, would do anything at all for him, no matter what, and will be owned by him forever. So, perhaps in that sense they can be slave.

But the term has always made me a bit uncomfortable.

Anonymous said...

greetings, brenna..

There was a time in my life that I called myself slave, but it never felt quite right even though others tried to convince me it was true. As a result, I suffered considerable personal anxiety about what it means to be a "slave" in a Master/slave dynamic. After a few years of historical research, personal soul-searching, discussions and interaction with Masters and Dominants that I respect, I came to the conclusion that a submissive is one who submits their will to another, but a slave has completely surrendered their whole being to another. The key word being, surrender.

It is true that owning another human is now illegal in western society. As such, any M/s relationship is really only a simulation of slavery. I do believe, though, that slavery is really more of a condition of the heart and mind. Surrendering one's control, surrendering one's possessions, surrendering one's life is not done lightly (and shouldn't be) and, for that reason, it is my belief that most M/s relationships are, in reality, D/s in nature.

Historically, people in ancient times were permitted to sell themselves into slavery to pay off debt. They were also allowed to buy themselves out of slavery if they chose and had the means. This was a voluntary slavery and provides a solid basis for the idea of consensual slavery today. Afer surrendering, the slave today always has one choice available to them - to leave or terminate the relationship. In many circles, this raises the question of whether the slave was a "true" slave to begin with, but that's not for this discussion. In my eyes, if one has truly surrendered their heart, their mind, their control, their choices, their possessions and everything else they hold dear to another, then they have voluntarily consented to enslave themselves.

I don't know if this helps with your confusion, but perhaps it will be easier to understand why another may call themselves slave.

Sincerely,
amber

P.S. It is important to point out to any impressionable younger minds that may be reading this that it is even more vitally important to perform background checks, reference checks and do all due diligence to learn all you can about someone who purports to be a Master before making the choice to surrender. And if it doesn't "feel" right - it isn't. This can't be stressed enough.

Anonymous said...

Greetings amber,

brenna would first like to say, it does a girl good to know your still around, and she greatly appreciates the time you have taken to comment.

This girl understands the reasoning behind why a girl may refer to herself as slave, and really doesn't have an issue with this. brenna at times feels these things within herself, but not as a continuum, and therefore mostly dismisses those sorts of feelings.

This girls comment was more to do with the reality of the label slave. For brenna, it's not just a question of whether it is acceptable or not in western society.

For example... you feel that if one choses they can voluntarily enslave themselves to another by surrendering all that they are and all they hold dear.A condition of the heart and mind. The slave surrenders to anothers control without thinking, without question. A dominant makes a request and the surrendered slave responds immediately, without reservtion in the hopes of meeting his expectations.

So then... when there is a problem in the relationship which ibo is bound to happen at some point, and probably more than once in a lifetime... the domiant made a mistake, the slave misunderstood, life intrudes, fatigue sets in, etc... All these little inconvienences intrudes upon the M/s relationship and the slave then responds, or acts out... out of human nature. At this point, ibo... the continuum of absolute mental, heartfelt service is broken and where does the label of slave go... right out the door. Atleast, until the issue has been corrected and balance has been restored.

As you may know, Mr. Cross uses the term "deeply submissive." A term that brenna can understand and agree with... simply because it acknowledges the fact that life isn't perfect and the mentality of *slave* can be broken quite easily due to human nature.

With that being said...after speaking with Mr. Cross more on this subject the other night... (Thank you Sir) brenna came to realize that her frustrations were with this forum she spoke about briefly in her previous comment. This girl has always had a difficult time speaking about this lifestyle with others... trust issues and putting herself out there are not easy things for this girl. However brenna has been feeling confident enough to the point that perhaps she was ready to tear that wall down and begin communicating with others on a regular basis. brenna thought she had found a place where she could do this, but then witnessing all this argument over labels and such nonsense makes brenna feel that these are not the kind of people brenna wants to associate herself with.

Yes brenna has her own opinion on the term slave, but doesnt try to force that on others, or demand they agree with her. Nor is she willing to argue over such things and finds that people who do continuously try to push their agenda on others are only about status and not really there to discuss anything of value.

So all in all, it comes down to this girl just trying to find others to discuss issues with not for the sake of arguement but for the sake of learning.

brenna is confident enough to know that for her status means nothing... labels mean nothing... brenna will not ever label herself in such a way... not even to say she is deeply submissive. Because labels are not what is important. What is important is that one finds balance in their life. And brenna feels that the argument of who is or who is not slave throws the lifestyle community out of balance. Not to mention the ones who may be reading these forums that are new to the lifestyle. It distorts everything that is truly important.

brenna... now coming down off her soap box

brenna

Anonymous said...

brenna doesn't wish to feel close minded on the issues and would openly welcome and appreciate any response that could help her to understand these issues from another viewpoint.

Is brenna missing something here?

brenna

Anonymous said...

Hello again, brenna..

I agree that the label of "slave" can bring out strong opinions and heated emotions. But then anything that touches our convictions usually does. As mentioned, being deemed a slave when I didn't really understand it caused me a great deal of anxiety, too, and I've since come to the conclusion that many, if not most, of those who use the term really don't understand its implications either.

However, I disagree that consensual slavery is a mantle that can be shrugged off whenever someone succombs to the imperfections of humanity and put back on again when things are worked out. If anyone is doing that, then I restate my belief that most M/s relationships are really D/s in nature. Just because a submissive disobeys or rebells, does not mean they are no longer submissive. In the same way, one who lives as a slave may be called upon to make a decision without consulting with their Master, or their health may deteriorate so that they can no longer physically serve, but that does not make them no longer slave. They are still subject to punishment. They are still subject to the Master until the Master terminates the relationship or the slave begs to leave.

Be that as it may, I fully agree that arguing about semantics, labels or status is fruitless and serves no real purpose. What is important in what's in the heart, and that's no one else's business unless we choose to make it so. It does sound like the other board you frequent has some things to work out and I hope Mr. Cross' blog turns out to be the kind of place you're searching for. Lively discussion is a good thing. =)

Wishing you most well,
amber

Anonymous said...

Greetings amber, :)

brenna feels she should clarify on how she envisions "slave".

Slave to brenna is absolute. At least in mentality. While it is to be expected that errors will be made in the peformance of tasks or assignments... there can be no error in the dedication or will of the slave to perform to the dominants satisfaction or pleasure. If that will or dedication to absolute service and pleasure is broken even for a second then in brennas opinion consensual slavery becomes submission. The slave may have to answer to the dominant, but if she does so with the least amount of resentment or discontentment then the act of heartfelt internal slavery are cancelled out.

So while this statement...

***Just because a submissive disobeys or rebells, does not mean they are no longer submissive.***

brenna completely agrees with... she doesn't feel you can apply the same to slave, or that this statement...

***In the same way, one who lives as a slave may be called upon to make a decision without consulting with their Master, or their health may deteriorate so that they can no longer physically serve, but that does not make them no longer slave. They are still subject to punishment. They are still subject to the Master until the Master terminates the relationship or the slave begs to leave.***

is valid when applied to this discussion.

While we may not agree, brenna appreciates the time you have taken in responding. In doing so, you have helped this girl to formulate her thoughts with a touch more clarity which is always a good thing around these parts.:)

Sincerely,
brenna

*brenna does feel comfortable in discussion here, but doesn't feel Mr. Cross' blog is the place for her soap box perfomances... especially when they are mostly spoken out of emotion instead of reason... brenna apologizes Sir.

Anonymous said...

A bit more clarification...

All that brenna has stated here is based on the premisis that one can be slave because it is a condition of the heart and mind.

brenna understands these types of feelings, but is unable to grasp that this is something that can be absolute or is a continuum. Even if it is something as small as the dominant has assigned the slave a task that she performs, but doesn't really enjoy doing. Or something like the slave going to the dominant and saying something like, "I need a bit of time to myself, may i be excused" Even though she is asking permission, there is something there that says *right now,my needs must come before your own.*

Just felt a need to say this... maybe one day this girl will be able to get it all out in one breath.

As always, open to enlightenment.
brenna

Anonymous said...

Greetings,

This one hated the word slave and it took her a lot of training to understand that it is a state of mind ,outside of what society deems normal. sienna had to let go of what others said was right and wrong. This one was only able to recognize the nature of her submission by acknowledging she is a slave.
This one wanted to ask about the idea of disobeying and rebelling .sienna wanted to know why a girl would do that? It only brings punishment and disappointment from ones Master.

* greetings amber, good to hear from you

wishing everyone a blessed day

sienna

Cross Purposes via RSS. Subscribe now!

Lijit Search