Different Loving: The World of Sexual Dominance and Submission (11 page)

Another key communications and safety tool is a
contract
(also known as a
slave contract
), which bears a vague resemblance to a prenuptial agreement. D&Sers often prepare formal written agreements that specify the nature of the prospective D&S relationship and delineate the guidelines partners will observe. These agreements are meticulously negotiated by both partners in a nonerotic context, so that power roles do not bias judgment. Contracts typically stipulate limits and give concrete expression to each partner’s expectations and commitments.

We will not take it upon ourselves to define sanity. “Sane,” in this context, however, generally means, first, that any given D&S activity is done for the pleasure of everyone involved. Erotic play should not cause emotional anguish; it should not abuse the submissive’s vulnerability or subject a submissive to unreasonable risk. And a submissive should not have to worry that the dominant will exceed his or her personal limits.

The concept of limits is crucial to an understanding of both “safe” and “sane” D&S. To
respect limits
means that a dominant will honor a submissive’s personal boundaries—in terms both of physical limits (degree or type of stimulus) and of psychological limits (degree or type of roleplaying). Limits are, of course, entirely individual: One person’s paradise is another person’s purgatory. For example, Jane might find very light bondage to be the height of ecstasy, whereas Jack is aroused only by stringent bondage. If you put Jack in light bondage, he may be frustrated, but if you put Jane in rigid restraints, she may be traumatized. If Jack and Jane submitted to an experienced dominant, their individual limits would be carefully discussed before any bondage occurred.

Respecting a partner’s limits is the foundation for trust.

Dominants also have personal limits. Novice dominants may stumble upon this surprising intelligence when they are urged by an aggressive submissive (also known as a
smart-ass masochist
, a
sam
, or just
greedy sub
) to do something they later regret.

Pushing limits
, or
stretching limits
, describes erotic encounters in which a dominant presses the submissive to accept a greater level of stimulation than the submissive originally expected. This delicate and risky process is primarily the purview of long-term partners who have discussed
expanding limits
in
hopes of enhancing a given activity’s erotic potential. In order to push a limit, one must first be certain where the limit lies; one must also be confident that the submissive will not be harmed by heightened intensity.

Consensuality is really the first law of the D&S communities—and with good reason. Our interviewees incessantly emphasized the consensual nature of D&S, no doubt because of extreme sensitivity over the popular perceptions of sadomasochists. Dominants, and especially novice dominants, are often confused or distressed by comparisons with violent criminals.

Submissives, meanwhile, struggle against comparisons with battered spouses or pathological victims.

Clear, informed, and verbalized consent is the moral dividing line between brutality and D&S: Partners must voluntarily and knowingly give full consent to D&S activity before it begins. D&Sers typically avoid any relations with minors, for example, because it is generally accepted that minors cannot give informed consent. Some D&Sers are even reluctant to enter into relationships with novices, often preferring people with D&S
experience. The D&S community also promotes open discussion and debate about safety issues. Abuses are rarely tolerated: Dominants who mistreat submissives will be openly criticized or ostracized.

Throughout the following chapters our interviewees frequently refer to the Scene as “the community.” A distinct communal spirit has marked the leather scene since its inception; at first self-protective, the idea of community has become an important source of group esteem and identity.

Specific support groups and social clubs are actually independent communities, but the vast majority of them actively network; D&Sers coast-to-coast exchange information and cooperate on educational outreach. National community events and symposia bring together D&Sers from across the nation and the world.

The trend toward broadening and strengthening the D&S community seems to be growing; it is a significant phenomenon at a time when nuclear families are suffering turmoil and dissolution. For some the D&S subculture is a kind of tribal organization whose advocates, spokespersons, and senior members are leaders and spiritual guides. For others support groups are a contemporary version of the extended family.

D&Sers are, by nature, politically incorrect,
if by
political correctness one means adherence to the puritanical notions of sexuality espoused by some feminist apologists. Although the fact may at first seem paradoxical, most D&Sers of both genders actually support feminism on principle and in practice. Our female interviewees perceived a direct connection between their sexuality and their goals as feminists.

Our female interviewees agreed that real sexual freedom implies freedom of choice: One should be free to decide for oneself what kind of sexual activity affords the maximum of sensual pleasure.

The submissive in a consensual relationship does not relinquish social or professional power, nor is she likely to accept authority from anyone but her dominant. Many submissives told us that the ability to surrender sexual power privately and to fulfill taboo fantasies is a profoundly empowering experience.

While submissive women often bitterly resent stereotyping as passive victims, dominant women are in a double bind: Even if they overcome the anxiety that sexual assertiveness is “unfeminine,” they may then grapple with feminist theory which mitigates against any overt expression of power in intimate relationships.

Some feminist rhetoric suggests that the desire for power is a uniquely masculine impulse and that sadomasochism is an outgrowth of male oppression of women. Not only is this view historically groundless and intellectually hollow, but it has helped to sanitize and dismiss the diversity of female sexuality as thoroughly as did the Victorians. It is little wonder that the parochial view of female sexuality espoused by some feminists has garnered political support from the reactionary Right.

While women increasingly believe that they have a right to demand power in the boardroom, as a group, they have yet to demand sexual satisfaction in the bedroom, much less to seize (or even to accept) consensual power. Female dominance may be a final frontier in the empowerment of women.

I
NTERVIEWS

Sometimes I scratch my head and wonder what I’m doing here. And then I look over at my honey and realize exactly why. For some women I think there would be a conflict. For me there isn’t. [But] I can’t really picture myself submitting to anybody else but Leonard. I think that if I did walk out of this relationship tomorrow morning, if I were in another D&S relationship with a man, I’d probably be dominant. But certain things in my personality and his gel a certain way so that we’re happy. As long as it is a matter of choice and I know he really does not think that he owns me, I feel secure in doing what I’m doing.