Master/slave Relations: Handbook of Theory and Practice Read Free Page A

situation to create a
defined, reproducible result. Protocols are used to create
an effective governance structure in an M/s relationship.

    Rituals: A preferred way doing something. For example,
you may have a ritual of having cocktails before dinner in
your living room while there is a fire burning in the fireplace. Within that ritual, you may have a dozen protocols
that concern who sets the fireplace, how the appetizers
and cocktails are prepared and served, and how the
lights, candles, and music are all set up.
    slave: A person who has transferred authority over him/
herself to another. (Officer Wes: "The submissive is a
volunteer. The slave is not a volunteer." Officer Wes goes
on to note that the slave's mindset would be as follows:
"Once i have gained trust in my Master, i am willing to
place anything under his control. Over time, i expect and
hope that all limits will be negotiated away."
    The slave is expected to understand the terms and conditions of his/her submission and the restrictions placed
upon him/her. Generally, the slave's responsibilities
include such things as:
    • Ensuring complete support for Master and Master's
Household, including acting to ensure Master's health
and wellbeing.
    • Appropriately communicating any change in the slave's
physical, mental, spiritual, or financial state.
    • Being open and honest with Master, discussing freely
any issues, concerns, hopes, or fears.
    • Being sensitive to the fact that all his/her actions or
inactions reflect upon Master and his House.
    • Understanding that the slave's primary purpose is
the subjugation of his/her will to serve and to please
Master. In that light, success not only depends upon
how effectively service is rendered, but also the manner in which that service is rendered.

    Structured relationship: A framework of systems or
methods of accomplishing tasks that defines the authority
dynamic of a particular Household.
    submissive: A person who gives up personal power to
another under certain negotiated terms and conditions.
The Good Officer Wes explains: "The submissive has a
desire to submit to the direction of another person, which
in this community we call the Dominant or Top. Their submission may be quite limited in range. For example, they
may only want and desire to release their submission in a
limited fashion, for short amounts of time and within tightly
confined arenas. This type of submissive will generally
carry a long list of rules, boundaries, limits, requirements,
etc., which they require the Dominant to agree to prior to
engaging their submissive aspect within the relationship."
    Trainer: A Dominant who is primarily concerned about
teaching systems that improve and refine a slave's skill
set - such as puppy skills, pony skills or other pet skills.
    Leather vs. Not-Leather
    Before going any further, I'd like to set the stage for the balance
of this book.
    In a general way, the current and diverse "BDSM Community"
has developed from two major paths. At the risk of oversimplifying these origins for the sake of brevity, the "Leather" path is
an outgrowth of returning gay GIs from WWII, who often associated with motorcycle gangs in the 1950s and 1960s. They bring
hierarchy, protocol and spirituality to their modern-day practices.
The other BDSM path, a path that I'll refer to as "Not-Leather,"
evolved - at least in part - out of the swinging movement of the
1960s and even earlier. The Leather path has greater focus on
obedience, spirituality, service and protocols, whereas the NotLeather path has its focus on amorous love.

    For a definitive historical discussion of the origins of BDSM
both in Europe and in the US, see Robert Bienvenu's doctoral dissertation. (www.americanfetish.net)
    I'm mentioning these different paths because they carry some
implications in relation to how Masters and slaves get together in
this current age. Again, while there are no absolutes, there is a
general