Focus50
Posts: 3962
Joined: 12/28/2004
From: Newcastle, Australia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: IceDemeter
A few threads and comments have me pondering on the concepts of "power", "authority", and "control", along with how these concepts work within the framework of D/s or M/s.
In my perception, and in my life, I see these concepts as:
"power" - the ability to do something (create a situation, perform an activity, etc.) - I see it as an active attribute
"authority" - the right to do something - not so much an active attribute, but an underlying status
"control" - the action of using the "power" in a situation where the "authority" exists
Now, I would identity myself as "bottom" who is in a relationship that is more hanky-spanky than D/s or M/s.
Looking at our relationship, he is definitely stronger than I am, physically, mentally, and emotionally. This does give him more "power" in our relationship.
Hmmm - but does he have "authority"? Well - I have chosen to give him much authority over me. He has proven that he is better able than I am to choose goals beneficial to both of us and our relationship, and that he makes better decisions on how to reach those goals. As with any relationship, that "authority" can be revoked. In our case, as a relatively new relationship, we're still working out where the boundaries of the "authority" are, and movement of those boundaries will not necessarily put an end to the relationship. We're basically letting things happen organically, without a ton of discussion, or rules, or major introspection.
As for "control" - so long as the "authority" exists, then he does have "control" over all aspects of our relationship that he chooses to.
My perception of D/s is that the relationship could be fairly similar to ours, but more overtly defined. Both parties have the final veto power of walking away, but they have agreed that "authority" rests with the dominant party, who has the "control" of the relationship. I feel that there is still room here for negotiation of the boundaries of the "authority" without the relationship dissolving.
My perception of M/s is that the room for negotiation is gone - that the only remaining "power" of the slave party is the final veto. Does this mean that the slave party has the final "power"? No - since both parties retain this final veto and can walk away from the M/s or D/s or the relationship entirely when they choose to.
My perception is that either of these will have room for discussion, for input from both sides, for consideration of all information as to likes/dislikes/wants/needs, and for treating both sides in the manner that best suits both them and their relationship.
As I mentioned, we're basically a typical vanilla pair with some kink and some conscious awareness of where the "authority", "power", and "control" fit in to our relationship. I am curious, however, as to how these concepts look to those who are in D/s or M/s relationships --- how they are the same and where they differ when looked at within the framework of their lives and perceptions.
What are your thoughts?
I think you're overthinking what amounts to fairly simple concepts.
I define (personal) power as that which makes you desirable to another. Anyone, and by that I mean *ANYONE*, who has something you desire has a certain power over you - a very simple fact of life. If I, as a Dom, walked into a room full of attractive women whereby one is submissive and the rest vanilla, all have some power (I did say "attractive") but the submissive has most by far. If all the other women were Dommes, than their power diminishes even more. Power is just like beauty; it's for the beholder to appreciate.
In a D/s (or M/s) relationship, a submissive's power of desirability to my dominant self is what draws me to her. And I've been around long enough to know that I have dominant power that draws a submissive to me. This makes each person's personal power equal, which is how you make sense of the old bdsm term of "Power Exchange", or "PE". It basically amounts to the dynamic created when you form a personal relationship with another. Since power is of desirability, PE also defines vanilla and gay relationships, too. Cues D/s and M/s....
The theory of egalitarian (vanilla) relationships is that control and authority etc are equal, too. In D/s and M/s, it's agreed by both parties that control is unequal; that Dominant has control which submissive defers to.... Which in turn leads to authority. Mostly, I think "authority" serves only to convolute your reasoning. If one controls another by mutual consent (D/s or M/s), then 'authority' is a given....
One other thing.... In all my relationships, I've been much bigger and physically stronger than all my partners. It's easy to see or gauge. But mentally and emotionally? That's highly subjective. For eg, I don't like heights AT ALL, but snakes & spiders, dark nights, tight spaces and potentially violent confrontation etc doesn't phase me. Everyone has mental/emotional strengths and weaknesses - where do you even begin to calibrate them...?
Focus.
_____________________________
Never underestimate the persuasive power of stupid people in large groups. <unknown>
Your food is for eating, not torturing. <my mum> (Errm, when I was a kid)
|
Pondering on power, authority, and control in relations... - 
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