RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships

RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

CherryNeko -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 2:32:08 AM)
I think it’s interesting. Although I still have to think if I agree with your idea that if someone is stronger, he has more power in a relationship, I think your definitions are cute. I agree. However, our opinions differ when you say negotiation is not gone in M/s. In my opinion, it just seems to be gone, appears not to be there, but it’s still there, reinforcing the positive outcome of the relationship. I also noticed that it’s like a circle: your reasons for trusting him with the authority in your relationship are that he is in control, and of course, there is no control without authority... like I said, a circle. I’ll be thinking more about this... very interesting, in fact.

Sundowner -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 3:47:29 AM)
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 < etc In another thread there was reference to the similarity, or not, of D/S and business life. Thinking along those lines I'd add two other points to ponder - "time" and "respect". Put it in the business context, where, modestly, I know I'm as wonderful as it gets (annoyingly I can't say the same about the D/S field). I have power, authority, control and respect in my business life all of which have been achieved over time. They're so intoxicating it's almost orgasmic - I'm old enough and "senior" enough that meetings don't start until I arrive, in the boardroom everyone stands up when I come into the room; pretty girls carry my briefcase to the plane, my chauffeur leaps round to open the door when we arrive; waiters greet me deferentially by name - you get the picture. As a way of life it's so pleasingly enjoyable it almost hurts. If - as I think many long term r/l D/S couples have achieved - you enjoy the same sort of parallel dynamics in the D/S context well ... I salute you and envy you. My point is that this utopia is only effectively and fully achieved through time and respect. One could perhaps be newly appointed to a position of authority - employed as a new CEO for example - and receive the apparent respect and privileges above but they would be superficial. They'd be what's expected in the circumstances. The CEO has power, authority, control but they go with the position. Only once respect has been earned do they begin to mean something real (and as an integral part of respect I include a concept of ready acceptance). And perhaps so it is with some D/S relationships. At outset - particularly if the relationship has started somewhere like CM - the dominant has his or her expected role and the submissive has theirs; both parties know what is expected. Over time it may prove that the dominant is actually a complete numptie with little ability properly to use power, authority or control. [Where the context permits read submissive for dominant and she for he]. And - back to the parallel of business life - either the employees accord superficial deference yet behind the CEO's back they snipe and criticise (woops - numptie employees) or they move on. Unless a submissive is desperately needy she will, faced with an incompetent dominant, move on. But oh - joy of joys - where the dominant earns respect the dynamic is different. Then the use of power, authority and control are all as natural and normal as breathing air. No need to shout and give orders, no problem in the dominant consulting and seeking the submissive's opinion, the relationship - the TPE if you will - is as simple as can be. In the same way that my executives are not humbling themselves by standing when I arrive the submissive is not demeaning herself by submitting. Quite the contrary; my senior people are there because they have admirable qualities and, for the most part, they are better at their jobs than I could ever be. I respect them and they respect me - it is the most simple and natural thing in the world that we hold our respective positions and they are not lesser beings simply because when needed they do what I say and ultimate decisions are mine. Back to my key point - the suggestion that time and respect are important as power, authority and control. Respect builds over time, and respect colours the other three concepts and makes them rich and rewarding. Probably.

lally2 -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 4:00:37 AM)
speaking for myself quiet authority has to be there in natural, unforced ways that i will automatically respond to. if its forced i can sense that and i fade out. if a sub responds to the authority then the control will, if all goes well and they fit, follow. Ms is pretty much where i would wish any relationship i enter to go. the gradation of authority and control is then dependant upon the people involved. but for myself as the slave their authority and control over me would always be in the forefront of my thoughts and actions. power over me comes with that authority and control. within the relationship i have no control nor do i want any. for me that is the crux of it. give me control over the relationship and the dynamic is lost just as assuredly as if i myself took control. the final veto argument is moot, because when one or both decide the relationship is over then its over and whatever TPE dynamic you had no longer has the power to hold it together. once TPE has gone, Ms has gone and for Ms people thats an untenable prospect, usually.

RCdc -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 4:33:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain quote: ORIGINAL: RCdc The only real constant is authority, which Master has. Even that is not a constant, because he only wields authority over as long as you allow him to do so. That might wind up being until the day you die, but you always have the right to no longer submit to his authority. I'm not even sure why you are trying to convince me.[:D]

lally2 -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 4:56:59 AM)
Chulain, does the Dominant have the right to abuse their authority, control and power

allthatjaz -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 5:31:34 AM)
I very much agree with Sundowner when he says that there are parallels with good D/s and how a good director runs his company. I think its fairly easy for a dominant to have 'perceived' authority within a new relationship. Its like being accepted into a work position because you could talk the talk but once your in there and quite clearly unable to do your job, you don't keep that job for long. This is why new employees are often taken on a trial basis. I have always said that a submissive that is starting off on a new relationship will nearly always test her dominant and this thought pattern tends to upset a lot of people. What I actually mean by testing is not about squirting him with a water pistol and then watching his reaction but quietly observing his authority. Its no different to the trial basis I mentioned above. Surely if person wishes to live with someone under the dynamic of TPE she needs to feel secure and how can she feel that if she doubts his ability? I also agree with what Sundowner said about 'it should be as easy as breathing air'. Of course it should but it seldom is and that's why I believe so many relationships fail at the first hurdle.

osf -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 6:32:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: allthatjaz I very much agree with Sundowner when he says that there are parallels with good D/s and how a good director runs his company. I think its fairly easy for a dominant to have 'perceived' authority within a new relationship. Its like being accepted into a work position because you could talk the talk but once your in there and quite clearly unable to do your job, you don't keep that job for long. This is why new employees are often taken on a trial basis. I have always said that a submissive that is starting off on a new relationship will nearly always test her dominant and this thought pattern tends to upset a lot of people. What I actually mean by testing is not about squirting him with a water pistol and then watching his reaction but quietly observing his authority. Its no different to the trial basis I mentioned above. Surely if person wishes to live with someone under the dynamic of TPE she needs to feel secure and how can she feel that if she doubts his ability? I also agree with what Sundowner said about 'it should be as easy as breathing air'. Of course it should but it seldom is and that's why I believe so many relationships fail at the first hurdle. testing is an on going process and not always a conscious thing on her part it must be comforting in a way for her to know the boundaries are still there I tell people that they can never forget they are handling a horse because the horse never forgets it's a horse

happylittlepet -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 7:33:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf testing is an on going process and not always a conscious thing on her part it must be comforting in a way for her to know the boundaries are still there I tell people that they can never forget they are handling a horse because the horse never forgets it's a horse With the variables we are considering, your last sentence then reads: The Master can never forget he is handling a slave because the slave never forgets it's a slave. I don't see how that leads to the idea that a slave will continue testing consciously or unconsciously. If the slave never forgets she is a slave, doesn't the Master ever forget he is a Master either? And does it hold true that: the slave can never forget she is 'in the presence of' a Master because the Master never forgets he is a Master? Why would she test that? To confirm that she is a slave? I am not convinced that someone who knows who he/she is (slave) and who is in the presence of someone with authority, needs to keep testing to make sure he/she is just him/herself or needs to keep testing that authority. If that happens I start to wonder if the person is who he/she says he/she is. I am happily playing with Spinoza's ideas in BDSM context: is someone Master/Dominant/sub/slave because that is who he/she is and therefore that is good to him/her, or does this person consider one of these to be good and therefore wants to be like that.

osf -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 7:46:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: happylittlepet quote: ORIGINAL: osf testing is an on going process and not always a conscious thing on her part it must be comforting in a way for her to know the boundaries are still there I tell people that they can never forget they are handling a horse because the horse never forgets it's a horse With the variables we are considering, your last sentence then reads: The Master can never forget he is handling a slave because the slave never forgets it's a slave? I don't see how that leads to the idea that a slave will continue testing consciously or unconsciously. If the slave never forgets she is a slave, doesn't the Master ever forget he is a Master either? And does it hold true that: the slave can never forget she is 'in the presence of' a Master because the Master never forgets he is a Master? Why would she test that? To confirm that she is a slave? I am not convinced that someone who knows who he/she is (slave) and who is in the presence of someone with authority, needs to keep testing to make sure he/she is just him/herself or needs to keep testing that authority. If that happens I start to wonder if the person is who he/she says he/she is. for some weird reason it's far more common for him to become lax in his role and let things slide there is even a term for it, dom rot he is after all the initiator of everything and her role is to wait and react gonna get a lot of comment on that

happylittlepet -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 7:49:02 AM)
First off: I was editing while you were posting, my editing has nothing to do with your response. In response to your post: Then the testing is a result of her expectations? Edit: and if dom rot is able to set in, was he true to himself or did he also project himself differently than who he is, maybe to impress her? Edit2: agreed with : "he is after all the initiator of everything and her role is to wait and react" 1. if he initiates while projecting himself to impress he raises her expectations which he won't meet later on. 2. if it is ok for a slave to have expectations (if she is to wait and react, she is to make sure she is aware of expectations that are unreasonable.) then he put her on the wrong foot by trying to impress her. (and I do think having expectations is normal, from both sides). 3. 1 and 2 can work both ways. I thus think that it is essential that both present themselves as they are, not as who they would like to be, how they want to be perceived, or in order to get to something they want (which then clearly can also lead to disappointment when it turns out that what/who they wanted does not exist. Know thyself is the most important part.

allthatjaz -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 8:07:10 AM)
Personally I don't think it takes a long time to see someones true colors. An act is an act and its exhausting. If he was to spend all of his time trying to be something he is clearly not then he would probably be the one to walk. I sometimes hear dominants say, 'my sub exhausts me and she doesn't understand that sometimes I just need a break' a break from what? I ask myself. Its these very men/women that walk from what could be very healthy relationships and they walk because they don't have the stamina to keep up the act. They even become bitter and resentful and they quickly blame it all on her. This is really not all about being who your sub expects you to be, its about being yourself and if you have all of those attributes that we spoke about earlier in the thread then we have one very happy sub and one very relaxed and contented dominant.

osf -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 8:08:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: happylittlepet First of: I was editing while you were posting, my editing has nothing to do with your response. In response to your post: Then the testing is a result of her expectations? Edit: and if dom rot is able to set in, was he true to himself or did he also project himself differently than who he is, maybe to impress her? I see the testing as reassurance, like a mountain climber testing his equipment after awhile it becomes subconscious for the sake of argument I'll assume you're free.when you decide to do something you don't have to usually think about it in detail because you can adapt as the need arises, but if you take responsibility for another, not only do you have to make decisions for her but you have to be sure she understands exactly what you want and how she interprets it her performance depends to a large extent on you and I see the need for control as most often greater than the need to control even a slave-less dom is halfway there as he does have control of himself but for a slave to have to be responsible for herself is far from what she wants

happylittlepet -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 8:20:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: allthatjaz Personally I don't think it takes a long time to see someones true colors. An act is an act and its exhausting. If he was to spend all of his time trying to be something he is clearly not then he would probably be the one to walk. I sometimes hear dominants say, 'my sub exhausts me and she doesn't understand that sometimes I just need a break' a break from what? I ask myself. Its these very men/women that walk from what could be very healthy relationships and they walk because they don't have the stamina to keep up the act. They even become bitter and resentful and they quickly blame it all on her. This is really not all about being who your sub expects you to be, its about being yourself and if you have all of those attributes that we spoke about earlier in the thread then we have one very happy sub and one very relaxed and contented dominant. And no dom rot. quote: ORIGINAL: osf but for a slave to have to be responsible for herself is far from what she wants Might not be what she wants, but what is it that she needs? And how about what he needs? I can see that with a slave who refuses to be responsible, a Master gets exhausted. I am going to make another post, to avoid having too many edits,and respond to your last message in more detail.

osf -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 8:37:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: happylittlepet quote: ORIGINAL: allthatjaz Personally I don't think it takes a long time to see someones true colors. An act is an act and its exhausting. If he was to spend all of his time trying to be something he is clearly not then he would probably be the one to walk. I sometimes hear dominants say, 'my sub exhausts me and she doesn't understand that sometimes I just need a break' a break from what? I ask myself. Its these very men/women that walk from what could be very healthy relationships and they walk because they don't have the stamina to keep up the act. They even become bitter and resentful and they quickly blame it all on her. This is really not all about being who your sub expects you to be, its about being yourself and if you have all of those attributes that we spoke about earlier in the thread then we have one very happy sub and one very relaxed and contented dominant. And no dom rot. quote: ORIGINAL: osf but for a slave to have to be responsible for herself is far from what she wants Might not be what she wants, but what is it that she needs? And how about what he needs? I can see that with a slave who refuses to be responsible, a Master gets exhausted. It's not always that she refuses but rather her being what she is and I have no problem with that, it's what I prefer

happylittlepet -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 10:06:08 AM)
This has become a longer post than I thought it would be. The short of it is: a slave might not want to take responsibility, but I think it is unavoidable that she does. Maybe she doesn't have to for the direction the relationship moves in (although that could be argued), but she will have to be responsible for her actions. If she refuses to be responsible for her actions I think she asks something from the Master that he should not be willing to give to her. quote: ORIGINAL: osf I see the testing as reassurance, like a mountain climber testing his equipment after awhile it becomes subconscious A slave testing her Master means she is testing her equipment? How about a slave knowing her Master and trusting him and having no need for testing? To me testing shows that the slave expects that the Master is not trustworthy. If someone does activity X consciously and then is no longer aware of it, this does not mean it has become subconscious. At any moment, that awareness can return. Maybe our definitions of what subconscious is differ. If she is no longer aware she is testing him, while the testing is putting a strain on the dynamic, maybe she has to do some homework and figure out what is behind her behavior, which she cannot label as 'subconscious'. Key: know thyself. I don't think controlling this sort of stuff ever becomes the responsibility of the Master, pointing out what she does yes, helping her to resolve it yes, but she cannot refuse to take responsibility for it or be accountable for it. She might struggle with taking responsibility, but also there the Master can help (and he will, because it makes his burden smaller, thus more enjoyment for him). Unless of course he wants her without responsibility, and transforms her that way (but how would and why would she still be testing him if she got what she wanted, i.e. no responsibility?) Also, would this be in her best interest - see *. quote:* ORIGINAL: osf for the sake of argument I'll assume you're free.when you decide to do something you don't have to usually think about it in detail because you can adapt as the need arises, but if you take responsibility for another, not only do you have to make decisions for her but you have to be sure she understands exactly what you want and how she interprets it If Master and slave actions are in accordance with who they are, to me, then they are free, because they do not have to put up a performance. But that is probably not what your 'free' means. I think you mean 'free' as 'unattached'. I don't think it makes a difference for responsibility, whether one is unattached or attached. Either one is able to take responsibility for oneself, or one is not. If able for self, maybe also able to take responsibility in a relationship. If not able to be responsible for self, maybe that person should think before taking on responsibility in a relationship. If one is able for self and relationship, then it makes no difference when confronted with something unexpected. I think everyone should think in detail, become aware so to speak, regardless of relationship status or place in the dynamic. ** If one partner requires from the other that all responsibility for acting is turned over, and the partner with all the responsibility passes away or becomes unable to function, then how will the other party function in society? How was it in the best interest of that person to give all the responsibility away? Would this in the long run show that the trust given to the Master was misplaced when he either wanted this or allowed this? When I read 'if you take responsibility for another' I wonder, in what way? It is possible to take responsibility for the direction the relationship is moving in. Is clarity therefore essential, oh yes. However, if it means that it is possible that one of the two in the dynamic is led that way, yet for every act that person does while following the directions given, that person takes responsibility for acting, and chooses to act. That would imply that any testing that goes on is also a choice, as I can't imagine a completely docile person still testing the Master (subconsciously). quote: ORIGINAL: osf her performance depends to a large extent on you Yes, when we talk about knowing what to do. No, when we talk about the quality of the performance. A Master can ask for the best performance possible, it still remains the slave's choice/responsibility to actually give the best. quote: ORIGINAL: osf and I see the need for control as most often greater than the need to control even a slave-less dom is halfway there as he does have control of himself but for a slave to have to be responsible for herself is far from what she wants It is possible that the slave's need for control arises from not knowing how to take responsibility for her actions. With this the slave can be helped/taught, and, if she wants a healthy relationship and an unburdened Master, she will be happy to learn, because everyone will benefit. (If the person can't learn to be responsible, should this person be in a relationship to begin with? ) However, it is also possible that the apparent need for control stems from the slave not wanting to take that responsibility, regardless of how much strain that puts on the dynamic and the Master. This leads to the question what the motivation of the slave is. The slave not wanting to take responsibility for her actions puts the Master in a corner. The 'need for control' then might be more a desire for attention.

happylittlepet -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 10:22:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf It's not always that she refuses but rather her being what she is and I have no problem with that, it's what I prefer I find this problematic, because, according to your sig, which reads i want a woman to make into the woman she never wanted to become this leads to you taking a woman who is not able to take responsibility because of who she is, and you will turn that woman into a woman she never wanted to become. If she doesn't refuse to take responsibility, and she does not take responsibility, am I wrong to conclude she is not able to take it? Should such a woman be made into something she never wanted to become?

LaTigresse -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 11:58:01 AM)
For me, if a woman doesn't have the absolute gut solid desire to be my slave and submit to me........then I will lose interest in having her around. Having someone constantly 'test' me would exhaust me and get old. It would lead me to believe they don't really belong with ME. It's not that I expect seamless perfection, a robot. Not at all. But for ME there are just some things that I am not going to have an interest in and a battle of dominance and submission is one of those things. Playfulness, joking around......that is part of a relationship to me......but a continuing power struggle is not. As for the three words, power, authority and control. As a woman that manages men, even the whimpiest of the crew I have authority over could physically over power me yet.........I know without a shadow of a doubt, no matter how angry he might get, he would never dream of it. As a woman that raised a teen son that could have physically over powered me by age 13, yet would have never dreamt of trying it. As a woman that has trained and controlled animals many times more powerful physically ............I can say without a shadow of a doubt that 'power' is far FAR more than physical size and strength.

roughleather -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 12:34:51 PM)
Quit pondering. Just grab her and fuck her brains out already.

IceDemeter -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 12:43:10 PM)
FR ~ Wow! Thank you all again - I hope you're all having as much fun as I am with looking at the different angles. I'm loving how so many different aspects are being brought up since everyone has different priorities in their personalities and relationships. Some of the things recently brought up are responsibility, time, respect, testing, and the instinctive search for the state of "being themselves" that makes a person happiest and takes the least amount of "work" for the relationship.... (pondering, pondering...) I'm thinking that knowing yourself and your motivations should be a precursor to a relationship, since how can you know what type of person you want to be with and what type of relationship you want to have without the self-knowledge? The precise details can't be known since there will be another party involved, but where do you start without at least a general goal in mind? It has been stated that there are those who put on a facade within their personal relationships (how very sad for them and their partners), but I can't see this as being workable in the long run - at least, for me, it sounds exhausting. Responsibility, in my definition, is the ability and willingness to accept the consequences of your actions and decisions. I further expect that a responsible person will act and make decisions with a specific goal in mind and will change directions (with new acts or decisions) if a better path to that goal appears. With that in mind, I feel that, for my relationships, we both have the responsibility of maintaining and improving our relationship. We both have to take responsibility for our own actions and decisions within the relationship. We both have to take responsibility for defining our roles within the relationships. We both have the responsibility of communicating our status within those roles, and if we see or feel any possibility for changing directions. I perceive that within the framework of a D/s or M/s relationship, the dominant party holds the power, has been willingly given the authority, and chooses to exert the control. Over time, they will demonstrate through their actions and decisions whether they are responsible users of the authority and the control. The submissive party will demonstrate through their actions whether they are responsible in meeting the requirements of the dominant party and of the relationship. My feeling is that mutual respect is earned by the ongoing proof that both parties are doing their best to meet the needs of both each other and their relationship. For me, without respect there will be no long-lasting relationship, and that a respect for each other and each other's worth in our chosen roles is a basic requirement. I guess this is where I see the idea of "testing" come in. Frankly, the word leaves a really bad taste in my mouth when it is used with regard to relationships. I don't believe in "testing" - at least, not in setting up specific scenarios to see and judge what will happen. The only way in which the concept makes sense to me is looking at it from the perspective that all of life is a "test" for each of us. As a new relationship starts and as time goes on, we get to observe each other in all different situations and see how we react to different things. We get to see in what ways and what situations the dominant party chooses to exert control. We get to see in what ways the submissive party reacts to that control. We get to see who the other person most naturally is. It is from this interaction over time that we either gain or lose respect for each other. In a way, this is a test, as we observe and judge whether this is the person and the relationship that is best for us. Enough pondering - off to work! Thank you all again!

happylittlepet -> RE: Pondering on power, authority, and control in relationships (2/1/2011 1:47:58 PM)
In response to IceDemeter's post of 3:43:10 PM and while thinking about Lally2's thread about change and trust : http://www.collarchat.com/m_3550737/tm.htm The idea of core comes up, and being true to oneself. Yet there are parts of myself that I don't know yet, that go deeper. Knowing those parts often lead to more freedom, as my own limitations of what I think is acceptable or not become less and less. This then feels comfortable, as it is not in contrast with who I am, it is an enrichment. Even though at first tension/resistance might be felt to let go of limitations (imposed by society, upbringing, myself, or all three), the more I learn to trust in my own capability to let go, which is enforced by the experience of contentment, the more I can let go, the less tension I will experience. This will lead to more contentment, and so on. It reinforces itself. Then there is the idea of adapting towards the other. If the other's intent is to let me become more free, more myself, with less limitations and inhibitions, because that both gives him a great experience, and allows him to let go as well, then I am no longer confronted with the demand of the other that I become someone who I am essentially not, which would bring tension and resistance. When the inner limitations are gone, the other can ask for behavior that is no longer in conflict with who I have discovered I am. This could be perceived by outsiders as being forced. Yet I am free to do what I do from the inside out. The letting go brings me to dehumanization, and ultimately to feeling 'as if nothing'. In that 'as if nothing', I am also everything at the same time. That is bliss. For the other it seems to work the other way around, in acquiring more and more authority, power, control, maybe all in one, the other goes as deep, and reaches also that level of 'everything/nothing'. These states complement each other, they merge. If there is any test, it is me testing myself, to let go and see how far. It would not make sense to test the other, because if I didn't trust the other, and myself, I wouldn't have that dynamic. There is also no force from the other. The other guides, encourages, is patient and accepts that this takes time. And so both partners can evolve together. I still have to think some more.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875