Tuesday, November 6, 2007

S-D/s

I am going to use S-D/s to refer to the dynamic that I seek. The "S" stands for Sensual. I have described the kind of relationship I want in previous entries, and in the interest of clear communications, and my own need to refine and define my vision, I include it below.

Displayed it this way - S-D/s - may already be in common use and understanding, but I haven't seen it. Since I am not a sub in the conventional sense, nor looking for a conventional domme, this is a start until something better comes along. This will save me from having to write a standard, descriptive explanation/disclaimer for the term D/s when referencing the kind of relationship that I, and other like minded "subs," would like to create. Of course I am open to ideas and suggestions.

* All references in the definition below and in entries will be assumed S-D/s to mean a woman in the dominant position and a submissive man, but of course the term can apply to all gender configurations of this dynamic.

S-D/s

The S-D/s relationship is based on mutual recognition of equality and the rights, needs and desires of both parties, and exists primarily within the context of a genuine relationship.

The S-D/s relationship is entered into consensually. It is based in the intention of mutual love, admiration and respect. It is truly equal since each party needs the other to make it work, and these equal partners have come to recognize and agree upon their equal but complimentary opposite roles regarding the power dynamic between them. This implies the domme's understanding that her sub's needs, feeling and desires are as important as hers and must be considered when she makes decisions for him and the two of them. If she truly has the kind of command and leadership skills and qualities to make her worthy of a sub's trust based submission, she should have the self control, wisdom, insight, understanding and compassion to only make decisions, take actions, and make requests that are respectful of the entrustment he has given her. She may decide that getting her needs met first is her wish, but it is understood that his needs are equally important, and to the best of her ability she will do what is required to meet them. S-D/s implies a non professional, but rather relationship based arrangement. Since the sexual kinks, fetishes, desires and proclivities of humans may be considered unlimited I would never dream of suggesting what they can and cannot be, other than to say that when it comes to sex, again, whatever is mutually agreed upon and hopefully satisfying is the only rule.

Conversely, the sub in a S-D/s relationship is not seen as a non-entity to be used without consideration or acknowledgment of his individuality, unless this is his desire and choice, and it is of mutual agreement. Unless it is otherwise stated and agreed upon the dynamic will not include pain, humiliation, or degradation. The domme will not require money or tributes but of course the sub is free to offer to pay within whatever context is consensual and comfortable between the two.

I will not use the term S-D/s to refer to conventional professional or lifestyle dommes, or D/s arrangements and dynamics, but instead continue to use the accepted form D/s.

Hopefully this will be a starting point of identification. Using the form S-D/s and applying my definition to it may be useful for people considering where they fit outside the confines and constructs of convention. Too often it has been put to me as an "either or" choice. Either you are a sub in the conventional sense and you understand that role including all relinquishing of rights to have your needs met (which may be the sub's need) or you are not a submissive at all and you just want to play out some kinks within the context of an otherwise vanilla relationship. Since I don't see myself in either camp at this point it is nice to have another choice. Perhaps others will relate to it and accept it too.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

You are definitely on the right track. But, love has got to be in the mix. He strong and independent submits out of love and she accepts that submission with love.

Verity

Mnwhr said...

A well thought out post, I am interested to read who responds to your search.

NTM said...

Verity,

I mentioned love as a component in the beginning of the definition, but you have made it much more of an explicit and clear focal point, which is so totally right. In the end, this is about love.

mnwhr,

Although I haven't used this term S-D/s in any kind of profile or search (I'd have to define it anyway since no one would know what I meant), I have been using the basic concepts, perhaps not as completely articulated as I have here. In fact in a earlier entry, "Some Things I've Learned - My M4W Post" you can see the kind of thing I've done to try and attract dominant or potentially dominant women. You can also read about the results in "My Craigslist Rant Which Lead Me To This."

I would be eager for any observations. It wouldn't surprise me if wiser and more objective eyes than mine can see things in the post that might have triggered some of the less desirable responses.

Now my goal is to try and put this across without inviting the trad pro/life domme, who I have already learned, is not for me. I'll share any new/other posts and results here.

Thanks to all readers and thanks for any and all comments.