Rover
Posts: 2634
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline
|
I'm sure others have covered much of the same ground, but it's an interesting topic and I'd still like to throw my two cents into the hat.
quote:
In this life style, or should we say life in general, we live in many illusions. While Vanilla people live in the illusion of morality, social norm, or this so called “American dream”, we live in the illusion of “power”, of “responsibility”, of “trust”. But in this little article, I want to talk about the illusion of power.
Some live in the illusion of morality (often we call it "hypocrisy") and others do not (they really are true to their morals). There really are social "norms" (averages) that can be (and are) measured statistically. And based upon those norms, one can construct an "American dream" which is nothing more than a compilation of averages. It may not describe anyone exactly, but it describes most people generally.
Similarly, in our lifestyle "power" may be an illusion from some, and a reality for others (I've wrestled with this issue myself, having been the subject of an article many years ago). "Responsibility" and "trust" may also be illusions to some, and realities to others. It's nothing more than separating those that talk the talk from those who walk the walk. A necessity that extends beyond the lifestyle, to include much of life.
quote:
You assert your power over others through making them suffer. Not through fun, not through making them happy, or making them better…but through their unwillingness to obey. Please note, the idea is not simply “obey” but the “unwillingness” of obey
As you correctly note further on in your post, there exists a crucial difference between the "submission" described in Orwell's "1984" and WIITWD. Though that's not surprising, in that the nuances associated with many of the terms we use in the lifestyle differ (often substantially) from the vanilla meanings for those same terms. The difference (and distinction) here is more than simply consent, it goes to the very foundation of who and what a person "is", and thus whether their circumstances suit them.
I believe the "submission" described by Orwell would best be termed "resignation". By use of force, and suffering, one can become resigned to their condition even if it does not suit them.
Any analogy of lifestyle submission to "resignation" would fail of it's own illogic. And "consent" (your sole distinction) would be but one (though indispensible) element contributing to that illogical conclusion. One need look no further than your own personal experiences with both human and animal pets. While it is possible to obtain their obedience by virtue of your power to cause suffering, the overwhelming majority don't find that necessary, nor desired (it causes other, unintended consequences). They achieve the same (and "better"?) results by exercising their power to cause happiness and fulfillment.
quote:
I’ve been in this lifestyle for roughly a year, and I’ve never stop thinking all the concepts we’re speaking of every day. Power exchange, dominate and submission, Control, responsibility…I’m sure many of you have said or heard more than once something like “I will tear you apart, break you down, and put you together as I please.” Yes, of course, that’s the true, ultimate power one could ever have over another person. How could you be sure you “own” a certain someone completely? Tear him apart, exam every little componate, CPU, hard drive, video card, sound card...keep those you want, throw away those you don't, and put something new there...and there you have it, your own brand new PC! What? we're not talking about PC, but a live breathing human being? ....
In my opinion, you're now making a correct distinction between what is possible, and what is an illusion (impossible). I think many people throw around the terms you mentioned because they're "romantic" in a lifestyle way. Because they tweak some deep emotion inside of themselves. But if this is your "standard" for painting all of the lifestyle as illusory, then I think you're greatly overstating the percentage of lifestylers that would adhere to that standard. You're not using the statistical "norm" (average). In point of fact, I believe that the vast majority of lifestylers would agree with you that such statements are, indeed, an illusion (fantasy).
quote:
When you think about this, I mean, really sit down, in the middle of the night, when you don’t need to face any one but yourself, you probably will realize behind all the loving, caring…or whatever mask you would like to put on this power, the power itself, the absolute power in the DS fantasy land, the power over another person, is quite horrible. What’s that familiar saying? “Absolute power creates absolute corruption”. Just think about what O’Brien achieved in Winston by the end of 1984, he successfully torn his mind to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of his own choosing. Winston became what the government wants, a perfect lawful, “big brother” loving citizen. And he became, against his will, what he was afraid and disgusted the most. That’s the ultimate power we are talking about!
Ummm.... no, that's not the kind of power we're talking about. That's the kind of power that exists in fictional literature; both vanilla and lifestyle fictional literature. Reality dictates that any submissive/slave is ultimately responsible for themselves, and retains the ultimate "veto", in that they are always able to dissolve their power exchange relationship by leaving. The Dominant/Master's complete exercise of power in that relationship is not an illusion. The illusion is the portrayal of it's duration as an "eternal" certainty. It may last an hour, a month, a year, a decade... or it may last forever (though our own observations tell us that this is the exception rather than the rule).
quote:
But, I know what you've been thinking about--Consent!
Yes, we should never forget this little word that makes every thing OK. After all, we're not talking about 1984 here, but "modern consensual BDSM". But the paradox in “consent” is how do you know you’re actually controlling another person, or simply doing him a big favor? High protocol, TPE…we have a lot of fancy names for power. But the truth be told, no one is controlling anyone, no one has power over other people. We’re playing in a big fantasy world of power exchange
Actually, consent does not make all things "ok". What about the German case in which an individual consented to be cannibalized? Yeah, it's an extreme example, but it vividly portrays the issue.
Personally, I see no "paradox" inherent to consent. Fact is, in any power exchange relationship we ARE doing each other a "favor" (if you want to call it that). That's the nature of compatibility. At the very least, we are fulfilling each other's need to control, and to be controlled. And that control is (often) very real.
I think you (and perhaps others) are under the (false) impression that gratification/fulfillment/enjoyment is mutually exclusive to control/power. It's not, unless it's incompatible with who and what you are (ie: vanilla). If you're a Dominant/submissive/slave, it's quite likely that control and power are quite compatible with you, that you find it gratifying/fulfilling/enjoyable, and that both the control and power are quite real (and if you're anything like me, even the slightest hint that it seems contrived is a serious turn off).
quote:
Not long ago, I read a post saying “submission is not a gift”. Although the words in that post are somewhat harsh, the idea actually makes a lot of sense. It makes a lot of more sense than “I’ll tear you apart and build you up again according to my will”. The idea of that post is simply submission is not a gift you freely give to your dom. It something a sub give away in return of what she needs. It's not a gift but a currency so to speak.
I like the analogy to "currency". I've often considered submission to be a "loan" (similar to currency, I suppose) of indeterminate duration. Either way, what you "do" with your currency (or loan) is very real, as are the consequences of what you do. You can squander it and have nothing to show for it, or you can invest it in something that will pay handsome dividends.
quote:
There’s no such thing as “ultimate power over other people” in consensual BDSM. It’s an illusion we create. Power exchange, more than often, when we read this phrase, we read “power” but ignore “exchange”. It’s an exchange. I give something you need, in exchange for something I need.
Ultimately, we all are responsible for ourselves. And that "ultimate power" is expressed by the "ultimate act"... leaving a relationship (even a TPE relationship). As Jack Rinella once said (and I paraphrase)... "Your continued presence constitutes consent". And in a TPE relationship, it remains a TPE relationship (with one partner having complete control) so long as the relationship continues to exist. And in return, the other partner has their needs fulfilled. That's the "exchange" in a "power exchange relationship". In vanilla relationships, people exchange all sorts of things to have their needs met. In a "power exchange relationship", the currency is control.
quote:
Please understand, I never say the illusion of power is bad or wrong or anything. It’s just a fact. After all, we don’t need "slavery" in its historical sense. As a submissive, I have a desire to be controlled. It’s a need of mine. A dom controlling me is in a way doing me a huge favor of fulfilling that need. As a dom, you have a desire to control people, it’s a need of you, and I’m doing you a big favor by letting you control me. I’m fulfilling my needs in fulfilling yours. A wonderful positive circle. Everyone is happy
And I would say it's a fact that power is an illusion sometimes in some relationships, and it's a fact that power and illusion are sometimes real in some relationships. All relationships are not the same. And the fulfillment of your need to be controlled does not make the control any less a reality (if that's what it is), or any less an illusion (if that's what it is). The fact that two people are compatible, and can fulfill each other's needs, does not make their currency (control) any less real, or illusory. What makes it real or illusory is who and what they are, whether they are being themselves (real) or pretending to be something they're not (illusory).
quote:
They both endured a lot of heart breaks for their relationship to work. But rather saying it’s because of control or power, it’s because of love. Isn’t that true for most relationships, BDSM or vanilla?
Most vanilla relationships? Yes, that's the norm (average). All vanilla relationships? No, some endure for many other reasons (money, children, etc.). Most BDSM relationships? Yes, that's the norm (average). All BDSM relationships? No, some endure for many other reasons (even "vanilla" reasons like money and children).
I agree with your premise about the "remaking" of people. I've said many times that you can't "make" someone enjoy what they do not enjoy, or "be" someone they are not (short term exceptions like "role play" exist). People can pretend for a while, endure for a while, but the "transformation" doesn't exist deep down. It's only skin deep.
quote:
The essence of a BDSM relationship is, like any other relationship, not power, but love. Just my humble opinion…but, doms, when you write in your profile something like “I’ll tear you apart and build you back up according to my will”, or you get into this lifestyle looking for this “ultimate power over another human being”, go read 1984, and you’ll know, that kind of power in reality is an illusion. We can play with it all we like, but don’t believe, and certainly don’t live it.
Again, it's inappropriate and untrue to make universal statements that apply for all relationships, BDSM or not. They vary wildly. I believe what you have stated is a "norm" (or average), but that's a far cry from a universal standard for all relationships, BDSM or not.
As for the profile statements you mentioned, they're no different than the submissive/slave profiles that express a desire to be "naked, chained or caged 24/7". It's just a fantasy (an illusion). What do you expect, this is the internet? Obviously you don't take them seriously, and a great many others don't either (count me in that category).
quote:
And my fellow subbies, you’re your own person. No one can “tear you apart, and build you up anew”, unless you don’t have this thing called “self”…in that case, you’re already apart, and I doubt anyone could put you together. Play games all you like (don’t we love playing…), but when it comes to everyday life reality, know what you’re looking for, know what it is behind all those fancy words. be smart and be safe.
I think we'd both agree that such a person was in need of professional services.
All in all, I really enjoyed your post. It's good to see your critical thinking, and I would encourage you to join a local discussion group. I'm guessing that you would enjoy (and benefit) from the critical analysis of your views. Those challenges will either convince you of your "correctness" (for you) or contribute to your continued intellectual evolution (as it relates to lifestyle issues). And don't hesitate to post here again as well. It's greatly appreciated.
John
< Message edited by Rover -- 1/22/2007 8:16:02 AM >
_____________________________
"Man's mind stretched to a new idea never goes back to its original dimensions."
Sri da Avabhas
|
RE: Illustion of Power - 
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