quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

And Focus, it in no way makes the dominant a passive participant, you have to be the sort of man that inspires someone to offer up authority over them.    But I think I see where you are coming from, we dominants DO exude a certain aura and power that attracts those who eroticise power. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

(snip)...btw; I just wanna know what it is that the majority in this thread seem to think is better than the PE term but have not bothered to explain (assuming they even can)....  I'm getting the drift of a cliquey new "buzz-term"; surely there's some meat to it?
 
Focus.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

Not looking for a pissing contest or to maliciously pick holes in your opinion, btw; I just wanna know what it is that the majority in this thread seem to think is better than the PE term but have not bothered to explain (assuming they even can)....  I'm getting the drift of a cliquey new "buzz-term"; surely there's some meat to it?
 
Focus.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Maxwell67

Of course this is all semantics.  Words (especially English, it seems) are so ambiguous that it is impossible to pin them down to a meaning that everyone can recognize and agree on at first glance.  If you are asking for suggestions though, I would be all for throwing all these terms right out and going back to simply naming the thing we are trying to describe: "D/s dynamic"  It is simple, direct, addresses the issue and it is impossible to look at it and say "That is not what D/s is." 

The reason that people do not want to do this, of course, is that once you accept that a thing is what it is called, then it is assumed you 'know' it... and so very few of us are willing to to risk that someone else's actions under the banner of D/s might focus unwanted attention on it in a way that would reflect badly on all of us.  We want a way to point at 'those people' and say catagorically "That is not WIITWD"  [Oh I love that acronym, hehe.. it is like a net-speak version of LCN ( 'la cosa nostra'  - This thing of ours).. the gods know how much we love to romanticize/poeticize our activities and then to crystallize it into some little cypher that only we can understand.  I guess it makes us feel special.]

But uless we can all come to a consensus and publish some sort of BDSM bible with rubric that defines every part of that dynamic completely, explaining SSC and edgeplay and all the rest of those terms we use to separate our actions from those of anyone whose practices we disagree with, it just isn't going to happen. 

I mean, I love to have authority as much as the next person, but let's face it, folks we are not exactly the Council of Trent for alternative sexual practices.  And even if we were, we would then have to face the task knowing that our work is likely to do as much damage as good.  We would factionate and once split from each other over little disagreements in definations.  Little splinter groups would form, all with 100% certainty that their rules were the right ones and the rest of us were misguided, at best.  And once we lost our sense of belonging to a larger community, we would be easy pickings for the puritans who are out there even now trying to legislate thier morality and take away our freedom to be who we are.

So to reiterate.. I say we remain a unified community, stick to "D/s dynamic" and let the ambiguity work in our favor.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

Not looking for a pissing contest or to maliciously pick holes in your opinion, btw; I just wanna know what it is that the majority in this thread seem to think is better than the PE term but have not bothered to explain (assuming they even can)....  I'm getting the drift of a cliquey new "buzz-term"; surely there's some meat to it?
 
Focus.

I think I did explain my perspective, and the reasoning behind why I use the terms I do is because one of my fetishes deals with the use of language and the desire to choose the most accurate word(s) for a given situation as I can possibly manage (unless I happen to be sick or tired, and just decide "screw it all").

quote:

LuckyAlbatross:

It's not power exchange, it's authority transfer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bbwsubbynyc

Haven't finished reading the thread, so forgive me if I'm repeating things, but I thought I'd put in my two cents anyway.

It helps me to think of this power dynamic in terms of spaces - topspace and subspace.  I discovered this once after bottoming to someone who wasn't officially my Domme.  She couldn't put me deep into my subspace, despite spanking and flogging me harder and longer than the Dom (whom I usually play with) who can put me in very deep and very quickly with less work on His part.  I wondered why and I realized it was because I hadn't surrendered very much of my power to Her but I had surrendered quite a bit to Him.  So than I began to wonder how much of his power does he have to surrender for me to be able to lead him into his topspace and how much of my power do I have to surrender for him to take me into my subspace.  We both simultaneously lead and follow each other into our respective spaces.  It's not so much an exchange as it is a transfer.  Exchange implies that the power can never be taken back or must be exchanged for something else to take back, which isn't true.  But if it is transferred, it's merely moved around from space to space and back again if need be, and I feel like that is exactly what happens in a D/s relationship.

quote:

We both simultaneously lead and follow each other into our respective spaces. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

quote:

ORIGINAL: bbwsubbynyc

Haven't finished reading the thread, so forgive me if I'm repeating things, but I thought I'd put in my two cents anyway.

It helps me to think of this power dynamic in terms of spaces - topspace and subspace.  I discovered this once after bottoming to someone who wasn't officially my Domme.  She couldn't put me deep into my subspace, despite spanking and flogging me harder and longer than the Dom (whom I usually play with) who can put me in very deep and very quickly with less work on His part.  I wondered why and I realized it was because I hadn't surrendered very much of my power to Her but I had surrendered quite a bit to Him.  So than I began to wonder how much of his power does he have to surrender for me to be able to lead him into his topspace and how much of my power do I have to surrender for him to take me into my subspace.  We both simultaneously lead and follow each other into our respective spaces.  It's not so much an exchange as it is a transfer.  Exchange implies that the power can never be taken back or must be exchanged for something else to take back, which isn't true.  But if it is transferred, it's merely moved around from space to space and back again if need be, and I feel like that is exactly what happens in a D/s relationship.

I get where you're coming from (re transfer) just as I've already said that "exchange" on its own doesn't work for me, esp the literal meaning of the word.  However, "power exchange" does, as that implies an energy based dynamic.
 
Sub-space is a headspace and will always work more readily with someone you're familiar with as trust is a major contributor in going there.
 
I don't agree this, though, or it's certainly not my experience, anyway...

quote:

We both simultaneously lead and follow each other into our respective spaces. 

I (as the Dom) certainly don't go anywhere unless she's slipped into sub-space *first*.  As the one in charge, I don't get to relax and enjoy etc unless all is well with her....

But hey, you've at least taken a shot at this mysterious "authority transfer"!  Many have come out in support of it but the subsequent silence makes it obvious there's nothing to substantiate it beyond contemporary "buzz-word".  So that myth is BUSTED...!  lol
 
Focus.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bbwsubbynyc

But that's what I mean....The first time I topped someone I felt like I was in that topspace - like I became something "other."  I was totally surprised by that.  When the scene was over I felt myself coming down in a similar way that I do when I bottom, tho not as deep or intense, but come down I did.  I understood then what is meant by topspace and that I had indeed been there....I couldn't pinpoint the moment when I entered that space...I'm not so sure it matters exctly when that happens either, only that you are there.  Time stops or becomes meaningless rather, for me anyway so it would be impossible to gauge.  I only know his reactions led me in there and that I led him by making the reactions I wanted to happen actually happen.  I'd think checking in would be a part of what a top experiences while being in that space.  At least it was that way for me....


Edit:  I think one of the things that has helped me try to understand all this power business is because I was wiccan for a long time.  You spend a lot of time playing with energy - raising it, feeling it, manipulating it, releasing it.  You enter and exit a circle.  It's a very similar process (for me anyway) to starting and stopping a scene no matter who it's with and energies are indeed moved around and manipulated whether by one participant or all of them....

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

"Transfer" seems to be a common theme in this thread, though I've yet to see anyone actually explain it.  I (as an ignorant onlooker) have interpretted "authority transfer" as a sub empowering a dom - that everything depends on the sub's actions *first* and, until then, the dom is reduced to a passive entity with seemingly nothing of value to contribute.
 
Now I'm asking rhetorically here and not specifically taking aim at you, the.dark.  I do NOT advocate "authority transfer" as it's been presented in this thread - mostly just as a vote in favour of....  The flaw is there's no acknowledgement for a dom's contribution to a D/s dynamic (until the sub empowers him).  So, what happens when "authority" is (mistakenly) transferred to a vanilla partner?  Buggar-all, I'd imagine - beyond head-banging frustration on both sides....  
 
I'm all for embracing new ideas but I do not advocate "fixing" what isn't broken anymore than replacing something old with something new but inferior.  I think before people wanna dump on "power exchange", they might wanna consider the meaning and context of "power" for starters....
 
You've guessed it; power exchange, control, D/s dynamics etc - absolutely my favourite lifestyle topics.  lol
 
To EVERYONE reading this, do I hafta go ask my own question of what you define as "authority transfer"?  So far, all I've seen is a populist new age buzz-word/term that no-one is willing to explain in comparison to PE (present company excepted).  It's better 'cause it's newer?  Purrrrrrrrrlease....!
 
Focus. 

1. the power to determine, adjudicate, or otherwise settle issues or disputes; jurisdiction; the right to control, command, or determine.
   
2. a power or right delegated or given; authorization: 
   
3. a person or body of persons in whom authority is vested.
   
4. persons having the legal power to make and enforce the law.
5. an accepted source of information, advice, etc.

1. ability to do or act; capability of doing or accomplishing something.
   
2. great or marked ability to do or act; strength; might; force.
   
3. the possession of control or command over others; authority; ascendancy.
   
4. legal ability, capacity, or authority: the power of attorney.
5. authority granted to a person or persons in a particular office or capacity.
6. a document or written statement conferring legal authority.
7. a person or thing that possesses or exercises authority or influence.

1. to give up (something) for something else; part with for some equivalent; change for another.
2. to replace (returned merchandise) with an equivalent or something else.
3. to give and receive reciprocally.
4. to part with in return for some equivalent; transfer for a recompense; barter.

1. to convey or remove from one place, person, etc., to another.
   
2. to cause to pass from one person to another, as thought, qualities, or power; transmit.
3. to change over the possession or control of an item.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY
A little late in the game, but let me give it a try...

First, how about starting with "authority"?

Authority (noun):

1. the power to determine, adjudicate, or otherwise settle issues or disputes; jurisdiction; the right to control, command, or determine.
   
2. a power or right delegated or given; authorization: 
   
3. a person or body of persons in whom authority is vested.
   
4. persons having the legal power to make and enforce the law.
   
5. an accepted source of information, advice, etc.

Compare it with "power"...

Power (noun)

1. ability to do or act; capability of doing or accomplishing something.
   
2. great or marked ability to do or act; strength; might; force.
   
3. the possession of control or command over others; authority; ascendancy.
   
4. legal ability, capacity, or authority: the power of attorney.
   
5. authority granted to a person or persons in a particular office or capacity.
   
6. a document or written statement conferring legal authority.
   
7. a person or thing that possesses or exercises authority or influence.

Okay... they are both very similar and pretty interchangeable.  I prefer "authority" over "power" because it does give the sense of consent.  My parents had power over me... it was never given to them by me and did not involve my consent or my choice.  Firm had no power or authority over me before we met... that made me an active participant in the relationship and in the determination of his power over me.  Unlike my relationship with my parents, I got to search for and choose the best person to have power and authority over me.

Now, look at "exchange" and "transfer"...

Exchange (verb)

1. to give up (something) for something else; part with for some equivalent; change for another.
   
2. to replace (returned merchandise) with an equivalent or something else.
   
3. to give and receive reciprocally.
   
4. to part with in return for some equivalent; transfer for a recompense; barter.

Transfer (verb)

1. to convey or remove from one place, person, etc., to another.
   
2. to cause to pass from one person to another, as thought, qualities, or power; transmit.
   
3. to change over the possession or control of an item.

A bit easier to see where the differences lie here.  Note the common theme in the "exchange" definitions... equivalent and reciprocally.  As so many have tried to explain here, the word "exchange" implies a barter of some sort... a tit for tat... you give this, and I give that.  While any good relationship is indeed an exchange with each partner contributing to the relationship as a whole, in D/s (or M/s) it is neither power or authority that is being exchanged both ways.  Perhaps the sub is exchanging power in return for the dom's responsibility, but the term isn't Power and Responsibility Exchange.  It is Power Exchange which implies that each is conveying power (see the definition above) to the other in equivalent measure.

I understand that you do not like the term "transfer" because it brings to mind the idea that submission is a gift and makes the dominant party appear passive with nothing to offer, but I submit that you aren't considering the whole picture.  When something is transferred, it doesn't automatically mean that it is a gift.  When I transfer my money to a new bank, I do so because they have earned my business... I'm not gifting them with my patronage, I expect them to live up to their word.  When I transferred authority over to Firm, it was because he had earned my love and respect.  I expect him to live up to the reputation he developed with me and wield the power he now has over me with thoughtfulness and responsibility. 

The term "authority transfer", to me, is a one time deal.  It happened once... my transferring part is over, he now possesses the authority.  Yes, before I transferred authority over me, I was in control of it.  Now he is.  But he didn't have to accept it.  He sought it, he earned it, and he accepted it... that hardly makes him passive.

quote:

Edited to add:

And just so this doesn't appear to make the dominant seem powerless during the process, I had to earn Firm's respect, as well.  I had to prove to him the kind of submissive that I am... I had to sell my abilities and show to him that I was worthy of taking responsibility for.  I had seek him out, earn his interest, and petition him to accept authority over me.

quote:

LuckyAlbatross:

It's not power exchange, it's authority transfer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

... breaking down phrases into individual dictionary definitions never does anything real justice.  That's why "divide and conquer" is such an effective competitive strategy - breaking things down individually tends to destroy the relevant context and syncrosity of the greater combined whole.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

I said several posts earlier that "exchange" on its own doesn't work for me because I'm not actually swapping what I've got for what I haven't, I'm contributing and combining it (in equal amount to her contribution) for a greater mutual benefit (D/s dynamic) not possible for either of us individually.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

The *phrase* "Power Exchange" does achieve that meaning adequately and it acknowledges an equal D & s contribution whereas, for eg, the phrase "Power Contribution" seems flat and confusing and "Authority Transfer" implies an individual action (by the sub).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

My second problem with your explanation comes from your edit....  While I realise you phrased it as such to emphasise your point, your use of 'I' 6 times also emphasises my point that "Authority Transfer" is about the sub empowering the Dom, which implies by default that the sub has all the power blah blah.... 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

But "Authority Transfer" does not give a true or overall picture (to a BDSM novice, for eg) of what is required or contributed by *both* D & s in order to achieve a working D/s dynamic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

My second problem with your explanation comes from your edit....  While I realise you phrased it as such to emphasise your point, your use of 'I' 6 times also emphasises my point that "Authority Transfer" is about the sub empowering the Dom, which implies by default that the sub has all the power blah blah.... 

Now... I'm sorry, but this is a bit of a stretch.  My use of first person neither empowers or takes away from Firm.  Personal pronouns allow us to write in perspective... they do not emphasize one role over another. 

In each other, Dom and sub have an OUTLET for their respective needs and "gifts" - is that not an exchange?  Certainly "authority transfer" seems utterly inadequate in that context; it does to me....  But dare I even phrase it that way - a "power outlet", for cryin' out loud....??

I'm done here and I've thoroughly enjoyed our own exchange.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross

It's not power exchange, it's authority transfer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prinsexx

quote:

ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross

It's not power exchange, it's authority transfer.

I agree absolutely.... <snip>

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prinsexx

quote:

ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross

It's not power exchange, it's authority transfer.

I agree absolutely.... <snip>

Frankly (referring to LA's post), I find it quite offensive when personal OPINIONS are presented as global absolutes.  It immediately implies a right way and a wrong way and that's just "one-true-wayist" Bullshit....
 
As for the rest, I've never read (or heard of) these articles you cite but they come across as the musings of bored academics discussing theoretical ideology. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prinsexx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prinsexx

quote:

ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross

It's not power exchange, it's authority transfer.

I agree absolutely.... <snip>

Frankly (referring to LA's post), I find it quite offensive when personal OPINIONS are presented as global absolutes.  It immediately implies a right way and a wrong way and that's just "one-true-wayist" Bullshit....
 
As for the rest, I've never read (or heard of) these articles you cite but they come across as the musings of bored academics discussing theoretical ideology. 

Actually i also usually disagree with what LA says: not necessarily the content but the way in which personal opinion is projected out as if it must be true for everyone. We learn do we not, not to do this as part of the maturity process?
As to the sousre of my material there was a link and you could research it yourself.
The WipipediaL
http://www.londonfetishscene.com/wipi/index.php/Main_Page
and Informed Consent:
http://www.informedconsent.co.uk Diceionary)
are sorces of others' definitions i occassionally look at when i need to expand my own experiences and when i am writing.
i do feel however that experience forms the greatest part of understanding for me and therefore some part at least experience contributes towards knowledge.
Authority transfer feels closer to my siutaion rather than power exchange but i do also recognise the precidence of the term Power Exchange and i refer to the writings of Jack Rinella.

quote:

PS: i am also an academic amongst other roles and i am rarely bored in my role as an academic.

Then it seems reasonable that the articles you cited would've been the works of other academics that you've read - which makes my instincts (from your previous post) the stuff of legend, surely?  &  &  & , too!