REDIRECTED TO MAYBEMAIMED.COM: Maybe Maimed but Never Harmed

I cycle a lot. (Not a surprise, really, for many reasons, but moving on….) Sometimes I'm all submissive and hurt-me-use-me and sometimes I'm not.

I haven't felt very submissive lately. Not "not submissive" in the sense that now I'm a top or a dominant, not like "oh, see, you're a guy so you're not really submissive anyway." I fucking hate that crap, which is the same thing as "you're a woman so you're really a submissive, at least a little bit."

I feel like anyone, anyone who's expecting me to get down on my knees for them is going to get smacked upside the head. Get me on my knees? Hah. Laughable. Because secretly, you see, I am actually the incredible hulk and when I am irritable or angry—or not feeling submissive—I become the emotional equivalent of a raging juggernaught. Only way you'll see me on my knees is in seven-inch thick steel, because I could break anything thinner and I would actually take a bullet before I voluntarily unlock my knee.

I don't like that I don't really understand why or where this comes from. I probably would enjoy the seven-inch thick steel, but I'm probably too ornery to actually make it a good scene.

Maybe it's been all the tech geekery that's turned me off from the submission for now (temporarily, I assure you; this has happened before). I spend all my time "being productive" and then when I'm feeling this way playing just feels like a waste of time. Like I could be doing something better with my time, as stupid as that sounds.

I am very picky about who and what gets access to my time. My time is very valuable to me. I only have so much of it. I've already used up 23 years of it. I loathe the idea of wasting anything.

I typically don't spend time thinking about things I don't care about. I get angry at people who I need to interact with when they are slow, physically or mentally. Of course, sexual playtime is hardly what most would call a waste of time, but I digress.

Naturally, this is sometimes problematic relationship-wise. Eileen calls it "not being in sync" (or something like that?) which sounds an awful lot like biorhythms, something I'm skeptical about at best. Still, there's no denying the cyclic nature of everything about me, which itself would be a complete summation if I were willing to accept it as such. (I'm not, of course.)

When "not in sync," however, what happens? One of us gets frustrated, in the bad way, about not getting to do what we want. "It's been a long time since you've wanted to get hurt," Eileen tells me a lot. "You used to get all moany when I pulled your hair, now you just say 'ow.'" I had to remind her: "I was all moany at the fact that there was a beautiful and sexy dominant woman paying attention to me. The hair pulling always made me go ow." (Yes, Eileen's attentions were my first that count. Being pissy about that is another rant entirely.)

Relationships cycle just like I do. Or maybe my relationships cycle because I do. Whatever it is, it's pissing me off. But don't try to put me on my knees because I will hurt you.

Tech geekery in both my professional and personal life has kept me away from this blog for a short while, but it was relationship angst that initiated the suspension of my time here. I got upset with Eileen for one reason or another (it doesn't really matter for this entry).

When you're in a relationship—any relationship—it can be hard to express being upset. When you're in a relationship that's specifically structured around power imbalances and the notion that things are unfair, it's that much harder to express being upset. Being actually angry doesn't always even present itself as an option.

Something somewhat astonishing to me is the fact that a lot of people who are enticed by the "things are unfair" idea seem to think this kind of emotional repression is actually the way such relationships are supposed to work, and that there's nothing wrong with that. Some people even use phrases like "Master/slave relationship" or "protocols" or other intelligent-sounding words to codify this behavior into a full-fledged system or "lifestyle."

Ultimately, this is not actually so hard to understand. Like so many other things, this behavior is an example of people structuring their relationships around their fantasies instead of structuring their fantasies around their relationships. The trap is in a particularly persistent blind spot most people have: their sexual desires.

Kink in Exile articulates one manifestation of this so clearly that I simply have to quote her:

I have seen more than one d/s relationship that seemed to be founded on at least one of the partner’s fear of being an adult and having to make decisions. Explain to me again how you willingly give power to your master or mistress if you don’t have that power to begin with? Submitting has to come from a place of power and control over your life, otherwise what’s the point? Otherwise you are not handing control of your life or even your evening over to your dominant, you are seeking out a caretaker.

Of course, doing anything like this is what we tech geeks call a Bad Thing. When people do this, they consistently fail to identify distinctions between different components of their relationship to one another and in doing so they often fail to address even the most basic of relationship concerns. In other words, a slave in a "Master/slave relationship" is still a person in a relationship first, and a slave second.

There's this concept of layers, or more technically a stack, that is fundamental to the construction of many things in our world today. The basic idea is that one layer builds upon the things it receives from the layer beneath it and provides things to build upon to the layer above it. In this way, a robust and reliable system can be developed—and maintained—by segmenting different pieces of the system.

I think that a D/s relationship could benefit from a construction similar to this. It's the way I think about my relationship with Eileen. I am at once her friend, her lover, her boyfriend, and her slave. Indeed, I am her slave because I am her boyfriend, and I am her boyfriend because I am her lover, and I am her lover because I am her friend.

Our relationship developed in a decidedly organic way; right place, right time, right person. I'd been playing for long before I met her, and I'd been looking for submission in a number of venues. When I didn't find fertile ground, I thought maybe submission wasn't for me. That's why I was a self-described bottom and not "a submissive." Of course, I'm submissive now to Eileen but this is because submission is the top (or last) layer that rests upon quite a few other things.

It turns out that, at least for me, any meaningful submission requires a foundation of both friendship and sexual attraction. Only once these things are established does the opportunity for submission seem to be present.

Being aware of this construction helps in many ways. One of the first questions I ask myself these days when confronting some kind of emotional obstacle (or novelty) is: "In which layer does this interaction belong?"

For instance, it's clear that asking for her permission before I allow myself the pleasure of an orgasm is an interaction that belongs in the D/s dynamic we've engaged in. Thus, it's a higher-layer interaction, and it relies on the well-being of lower layers. Contrastingly, cleaning the bathtub because it's dirty and we don't want our drain to clog is probably something that belongs in the friendship layer; I'd do that for any roommate, not just one that sexually dominates me. As Tom puts it, doing nice things for each other is one of the lubricants of a good relationship.

For the first time in over a year, I asked Eileen for a break from orgasm denial that weekend when I was feeling upset. I had already accidentally had two orgasms, felt terrible about them, and was in an emotional state in which I couldn't deal with maintaining that explicit D/s dynamic because the boyfriend dynamic was having trouble. Of course, this was an extreme case, but it serves as a useful illustrative example of this concept in action.

This entire concept is, of course, a drastic simplification of emotional interactions. Obviously, I clean the tub sometimes because I am submissive, and I'll ask for an orgasm because I'm Eileen's lover and my own sexual gratification is served by the asking. The difference between theory and practice, is, of course, that in theory practice is the same as theory whereas in practice they are different.

That said, the point still stands. When there are problems, you need to address them at the layer or with an approach that actually confronts the issue, instead of sidestepping it. That's what Eileen and I do when we have issues to work out. She never pulls the "but I'm your Mistress" card when we're not dealing with an issue that's a part of the D/s layer. It would be harmful to do so.

This image has been removed. The new photo is still available at the current mirror blog site.

This Kink on Tap is kind of an extended addendum to our previous episode where we talk about and introduce the topic of sexual teasing and denial and chastity play. If you haven't listened to that episode already, I strongly urge you to do so.

The best part, however, is that Tom Allen from the Edge of Vanilla joined Eileen and I to talk about his personal experiences. Of course, the advantage of having someone on the phone is that you can ask personal qusetions and get immediate, personal responses.

There's no shortage of that in this converastion, where Tom shares a lot about his own reasons for enjoying chastity, the way in which this kind of sexual power play developed in the relationship with his (very blessed) wife, and of course why this kink in particular is often thought of as being very "vanilla." I couldn't help but share some of my own opinions and experiences as well, and Eileen does the same.

Lest you think that Tom's always this cerebral, however, don't forget about his super-hot chastity porn. My own fantasies tend to drift towards slightly more painful tastes, but that doesn't stop me from being the first to admit that I've sprung more than my fair share of hard-ons looking at Tom's stuff.

As always, I hope you enjoy this episode of Kink on Tap and invite your feedback of any kind (though especially regarding audio engineering) either as comments here or by emailing kinkontap+feedback@gmail.com. Have something you want to hear talked about or a story you want to share? Write to me at kinkontap+viewermail@gmail.com (and don't question why it's called viewer mail, 'cuz I wouldn't know what to tell you).

This morning a friend asked me to give her an image that turns me on, followed by an image that is iconic of a "top" or a "domme" and then to determine whether the answers to those two questions share any key visual elements. Yes, this friend's really smart, by the way.

In response, I told her that the first thing that popped into my mind of an image that turns me on was Eileen's lips and tongue during the blowjob she unexpectedly gave me last night, but that's only because I haven't been able to stop thinking about it for the past twelve hours or so. In fact, if my friend had asked me for an image that turns me on another day, I probably wouldn't have said blowjobs at all.

The last significant mouth-on-penis action I've received hasn't been for more than two and a half years. Before that I wasn't even that excited about blowjobs. Handjobs always felt better to me anyway, so I wasn't very interested in getting them, though I don't think I ever turned down the opportunity. All my partners were far more skilled with their hands than their mouths anyway but more interestingly—and more to the point—I liked handjobs more because it was easier to bottom to them.

Few men can deny the fact that having someone else's hands around your genitals can be a vulnerable position. Of course, it isn't always intended that way (unless you're me, in which case it probably is) but our culture is saturated with images and stories of men's genitals being vulnerable in the hands of women. It's even in our slang: "She has got me by the balls" means that I am well and truly dominated by her control of the situation. I'm not sure why this is supposed to be a bad thing (</sarcasm>), but it is.

Contrast this with any imagery of blowjobs displayed by popular culture and the exact reverse is true. For some reason, people seem to think that putting your penis in someone else's mouth gives you some kind of control over the situation and makes the person whose mouth is around your genitals submissive. This has always been somewhat baffling to me, because it is far easier to hurt my penis with your teeth than it is to hurt it with your hands. Is my penis somehow more vulnerable to teeth than a so-called "Alpha Male"'s is? I'd love to know if it is, as I've unfortunately had no experience putting real live penises in my mouth.

(As an aside: if you want me to feel submissive while you make me go down on your cock then you should use something along the lines of a ring gag (NSFW) while you do it. Not that there aren't other ways to make fellatio into a submissive act—you could close my nose so I have trouble breathing, or hold a knife at my neck, or you could just whisper in my ear that you know how badly I want to drown the back of my throat in ejaculate, but the point is that it's all about how you do what you're doing.)

I think blowjobs are so riddled with unnecessary connotations of submission that whenever my previous partners went down on me they were, in effect, submitting. (As another aside, these particular past partners were for the most part submissive women, which I'm sure had something to do with it. Why my dating history has a 3-to-1 ratio of submissive women to dominant women is, however, another frustrating post entirely.) While I enjoy sexual stimulation from a talented mouth as much as the next man, girls who go down on me with a disposition that is solely intended to please are just not as sexy as the ones who do it with a mind for taking control of me.

There are two times in life when people will show you their true emotions. The first is during a round of poker. The second is during sex.

It should probably be obvious, but maybe it's not: submissive men like assertive blowjobs, not amiable ones. In fact, in case one thing doesn't lead you to the other, submissive men like assertiveness and control in general. We like assertive handjobs and masturbation, fucking (of many varieties), kissing, and pussy-licking. In other words, we enjoy all the very same sexual acts anyone else does, but what we enjoy most about them is the assertiveness and control of our dominant partners.

So when Eileen took hold of my wrist and placed it behind my back as she enveloped my penis with her throat, I nearly shuddered from the hotness. There was the key visual element that combined one of the sexiest things I have ever seen with my iconic image of female dominance: assertive and control, wanting me and taking me. She took me, this time, with her mouth.

She licked my cock from base to head and from head to base, not in worship to me but in her own indulgence. Whereas before I was used to blowjobs being a rather piston-like up and down motion or a stationary sucking sensation (penises aren't straws, by the way), Eileen's mouth slowly travelled all over my shaft. When she combined a powerful suction on my penis' corona with vertical strokes from her tongue I had to say it out loud: "I'm going to orgasm if you keep doing that." And in response, she eased up just enough to make it possible for me not to come.

In response to my friend's second question asking for an iconic image of a "top" or "domme," I responded that to come up with one is actually pretty difficult. After all, there are so many different looks that I associate with dominance. Does the so-called iconic female dominant have long hair or short hair? Is she dressed in tight clothing or is she lounging in bathrobes? It can all be hot.

So my answer was that an image iconic of a female top or domme for me, at that moment when she asked, was a tall woman wearing jeans that shows off her ass nicely and some kind of tank-top-like shirt, probably black. It's comfortable yet sexy—sexy because she's comfortable. And in my fantasies, she's holding something, like a knife in her right hand and a coiled rope in her left, not to be too specific about it. (I realized later that I was actually just describing Eileen in one of her more playful moods, but that's besides the point right now.)

Clearly I have a thing for the outdoorsy look, but what I really have a thing for is the confident type. This should be no secret (and if it is, I pity you and would like to invite you to listen especially close right now), but confidence is always sexy. Always. It's sexy to me when you look into my eye and feel confident enough to know you can make me hard just by licking your lips.

Confidence is about being sexy, regardless of orientation or activity. Assertiveness and control is about taking that confidence and applying it to a particular sexual power dynamic. Like, you know, leaving me literally laughing on our bed from desperate arousal after giving me the most dominant blowjob I've ever felt and then smiling as you tell me there's not a chance you'll let me orgasm tonight.

Playing with other people in a sexual way has been a new experience. I'm a gigantic slut in my fantasies, but in reality I've only ever been with about as many people as I can count on one hand. For some reason, while I feel perfectly okay doing "crazy kinky shit" with people I've just met, like letting them beat me with whips, letting them tie me up in very strenuos positions with rope, shackles, handcuffs, and whatever else is lieing about, and more things, I feel far more self-conscious and uncomfortable with the thought of kissing, groping, or fucking people that I don't know very well.

When Eileen and I were talking about our positive weekend experiences with others, one thing that has stuck in my head that she's mentioned is that she said she felt good about the experiences in part because she, "felt like [she] was giving [our friends] a new toy -- you." This struck a chord because that was so much the feeling I got that I was glad she felt it too. In fact, our friends felt similarly!

To make the feeling even more blunt, a week before we had purchased a little gold dog tag at Petco (ahh, one of the many pervertible stores in the city) and placed it on my collar. The collar reads, appropriately enough, "Property of Eileen" and makes a lovely little jingling noise when I shake my head. This thing feeds directly into my human pet fantasies and I've been crushing hard on it ever since we got it. (Note to kinksters on a budget: for God's sake, go visit Petco! Not to mention the fact that this tag really enhances puppy play scenarios!)

I liked feeling as though I were being given to our friends for the night. Eileen went so far as to give them the option of letting me orgasm (or not) once and once only that night. The combination of these things had put me deep into a headspace of feeling owned. The funny thing about it all was that this feeling was around even while spending the night and, wonderfully, it didn't impede or hamper the activities at all. I was still EIleen's, but I was there with our friends. I think this worked so well, at least in part, because they not only understood, but enjoyed the dynamic as well.

This experience makes me want to dig deeper into exploring feelings of ownership and, beyond that, of being shared.

A lot of people think BDSM is an all-or-nothing sort of arrangement. Either you are my slave and do everything I ask of you, or you are not and shouldn't be wasting my time. Either I am always, absolutely forever and constantly at your feet and abiding by protocols or whatever, or I am not, and I never play that way. Either you are a pain slut and there's nothing you can't take, or pain's just not your thing and don't ever want to be really hurt.

All of these things are pointedly untrue, though this misconception is popular not only with the mainstream vanilla folks, but with many BDSM players and kinky people as well (which is endlessly frustrating). It certainly offers some explanation of why kink can be so scary for people who don't understand it and who are not at least intrigued by the acitivities. The fact that extended play time such as the extremes described above is actually a common, lustful fantasy offers, I think, a very plausible explanation to why so many people even of the kinky inclination think such a thing is true. And perhaps, though I have reason to doubt some of the claims I have heard, there really are people for whom "24/7" literally means every second of every day.

In the realities of day-to-day life, play time that lasts more than a couple of hours is very, very hard to come by. Beside from the fact that we all have "Real Jobs" and a life to lead outside of the bedroom, it's hard to stay in, for instance, slave headspace when you are constantly surrounded by your personal belongings at home or even at a friend's house. This was not something I ever anticipated being problematic for certain scenes such as longer-term ones, though it is. It's also particularly problematic for other certain kinds of scenes, namely singletail whipping. Again, not something I'd have guessed.

Another point of note regarding the length of a scene is the definition of what precisely a scene is. Two weekends ago, when Eileen and I were at a friend's house for a party (a vanilla party--not all the parties I go to are beat me, whip me affairs) we do as we always do, and I was ordered rather plainly to fetch her drinks from time to time. This was not a dramatic event, but it was not subtle either. It was only after our friend pointed out how strange it must seem for those in attendance who did not already understand our dynamic that we even noticed that it seemed like anything remotely like play at all. Was that a scene? Not for us. It might have been for some of our friends, though.

It's the fact that our dynamic is that way at all that makes it appear as though we do the kind of 24/7 play that you hear people talking about with awed tones, but I think this is actually kind of silly. I don't really consider myself a 24/7 slave with any of the weight people seem to place upon that phrase, I just find the juxtaposition of day-to-day life and servitude enjoyable, both erotically and otherwise. That makes the line between scene spaces and vanilla spaces very, very blurry sometimes, though that is a side effect rather than a direct effect of how Eileen and I interact.

There are, however, certain things we have done expressly for creating play headspaces for longer periods of time. Some of these things are play-specific, and others are again blurry, as above. For instance, a little over a year ago, Eileen bought me a rather heavy locking leather and metal collar. When it goes on me, I know she wants to play. The collar usually stays on a lot longer than the scenes last, and this helps keep some of those slavish emotions around after the beating is through. When we play at night, sometimes she uses the collar and some of our lengths of chain to secure me to the bed for the night to the same effect.

Being leashed or hitched is also a way to actively induce a desired headspace, and is also something that often can last quite a while.

Aside from that collar, I also wear 5 lengths of small jewelry chain all the time. They are placed around my neck, each wrist, and each ankle, and they are have no clasp with which I can remove them (so I don't). They're my "everyday collars". Recently, Eileen's been very turned on by the "harem slave" idea, and so she's added a sixth length of chain around my waist that she calls "utterly decadent."

All this decoration does not leave me unaffected. It's very much like wearing the heavier, locking leather collar, only with a different twist. Rather than being her pain toy, the whipping boy, I'm her cherished posession, and quite often her sex toy. There's something intensely erotically humbling about being equated in some way to a favored vibrator.

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

A long time ago a friend turned to me one night and said, "I'd play with you."

"Really? Thanks," I said. This reaction clearly surprised my friend because he stopped dead in his tracks and looked at me quizically.

"Thanks? I just told you what amounts to 'I'll have sex with you' in our scene, and I'm straight!" he said.

"Is playing really the same thing as having sex with someone?" I asked.

I think it's still a good question. The distinction between sex and BDSM play is often a funny one. Some people insist there is no difference, some people insist the two should be distinct and always separated, other people insist one is the other, and I've gone through so many different phases I forgot what I think right now. I do know, however, that never before in my life have I so closely linked playing with sexual activities and that is a direct result of Eileen's influences and our opportunities for play.

Case in point, the entire kink of orgasm denial is intensely sexual. It's not something I've ever done—or even mentioned, actually—to anyone I knew in person until I met Eileen. Thankfully, she broke the ice on the matter. I was all too happy to let the floodgates open.

Today, teasing and denial (or T&D as it's sometimes known to those of us for whom it's a common kink) is a central and integral part of not only our relationship but of our life. After all, how could something so fundamental as the freedom of sexual gratification not affect your life when you begin to play kinky games with it?

Which brings me to the point of sex and kink, and what lines, if any, are drawn between these things. It's obviously a very gray space, very few bits offering themselves as either black or white. Each person has their own take, informed by their personal interests and kinks.

A good friend of mine has recently confessed to wanting to top me. This, I think, is awesome, both because I think we would have a great time but also because I have never actually seen her switch with her boyfriend and would love the opportunity to do so. Of course, this was just a remark and I don't intend to read too much into it, but it did get me thinking. Is wanting to top me the same thing as wanting to, in some form or capacity, have sex with me, even if the sex is limited to something as commonplace as mentally undressing someone in your mind's eye? I'll confess to having had such thoughts myself.

It also wouldn't actually be the first time. About a year and a half ago, Eileen and two of her close friends (who are also my friends in their own right now, and yayness for that!) all triple-topped me one night in a very mild, practically introductory sort of breath play. I think if we were to actually play together again, it might help her if Eileen was there for part of it, or all of it, at least at first.

Of course, all of this needs a roundtable discussion, as is—and I believe should be—the way of things.

Sometimes it's strange that it's actually difficult to write about this kind of stuff—kink, I mean. You'd think it would be easy, you know, comes from the heart and all that, but it's not. So many personal things hinge on the acceptance of this sort of writing. What would she think? What do you think? What will I think, looking back, reading my own words a minute, a week, a month, a year, a decade from now?

I can't help but think, though, so I do it all the time. It's shocking, sometimes, how central kink is to who I am, to what I do, to why I do what I do. It doesn't just manifest in the bedroom (or the club), either. It's everywhere, all the time, involving itself in my relationships with friends, even employers in some indirect ways. (When thinking about living choices, one of the first questions I ask is, "What's the scene like there?")

That is not what I sat down intending to write tonight, but it's certainly worth thinking about. I'm sometimes amused at the directions my thoughts wander when I let them. I sat down wanting to write about some of the recent experiences I've been having.

Last weekend was the first time in a long time that Eileen and I made it out to the club. I used to hang out there religiously every Friday and Saturday night, long before I knew her. I used to miss the club because it was the club, it was my hangout, where everyone knew my name. But for a while, I was missing it—we were missing it—because it meant play, the kind of play that works better in noisy dark spaces with (I'm almost ashamed to admit it) onlookers you know are watching because you can feel their eyes but you can't see their faces. There's something delicious about that space, so fun, so personal, so intimate, yet so public.

It was an absolutely amazing night for the most part. I was chained to a metal frame and took lash after lash of the singletail 'til I bled. I didn't bleed much at all by our typical standards, but I bled. It felt good to bleed from a whipping again. Strangely, she thought, and I concur in some ways, in part of the scene I kept saying, "I'm not a masochist!" only to breathe in deep and obvious pleasure when she would strike me again.

She is getting bolder with the whip, which I like, making it dance on my back in the way she knows I enjoy but also starting to let her crueler side out a bit more. I noticed it most when she picked up a fast and hard rhythm that seemed to purposefully stay at the same spot on my back stroke after stroke. It hurt, a lot, but I was so happy to have her hurting me again that I wanted more of it.

I'm really not a masochist in the way the dictionary defines what a masochist is. The definition I've seen most often is:

Someone who obtains pleasure from receiving punishment.

Wikipedia, naturally, does a better job:

The counterpart of sadism is masochism, the sexual pleasure or gratification of having pain or suffering inflicted upon the self, often consisting of sexual fantasies or urges for being beaten, humiliated, bound, tortured, or otherwise made to suffer, either as an enhancement to or a substitute for sexual pleasure.

Without being baited by these definitions or going down the dark path that is defining "punishment" or even "sexual pleasure" for that matter, why was I saying I'm not a masochist? Well, because I don't like pain. To put it bluntly, it really hurts. It's uncomfortable, it's painful (duh), it's not a state I really enjoy being in for the sake of being in that state. It certainly doesn't turn me on in the make-my-dick-hard way most often associated with "sexual pleasure." However, I have found no equally intimate experience to share a moment with a loved one in any other way, and that's probably one reason why I enjoy being beaten so much. I cried a little by the end of the scene. It was from joy though, not from pain. It was just…so loving.

The whip marks are fading by now (I've been told I heal like Wolverine, apparently an invaluable trait for a sub as far as a dom's concerned, though rather annoying if you, like me, enjoy the visuals of the marks), but they're still there. And hopefully I'll have more in a week or two, when I'll be the demo bottom for a singletail demo again. Now that brings back memories. It's how Eileen and I met.

Oh, the wonderful intricacies of idioms and toying with them through language. Such cryptography can only succumb to cryptanalysis that accounts for the relevant factors of today. (Apologies to those readers who aren't actually a part of my non-cyber life.) In such cases, a picture is worth a thousand words.



The picture of me, above, was actually taken in 2005, though a similar and yet distinctly very different night was had just a few hours ago.

Today I read Lady Julia's recent post on Verbal assertions of control where she quotes Her Buddy who said:

I asked her if I did good this weekend. She said she must not give me enough praise. I said that is not it, just for some reason, I like to hear her acknowledge what I have done. Just a reminder from her verbally goes a long way.

This never really struck me as being something that was ever tied specifically to a D/s relationship, because this is something I find important in every aspect of my life. I like to know that my efforts have not gone unnoticed, that I'm actually making a difference and that people appreciate my work. I like to know that my friends think I'm a good friend and that my girlfriend thinks I'm generous to her. This isn't something I seek out of some kind of lack of self-confidence or a need to feel validated, but rather a connection to whomever is on the receiving side of my efforts.

Lady Julia remarks:

Everyone needs a bit of praise from time to time, but it took me a while in the beginning to realize just how much more intensely words of encouragement and appreciation mean to many submissive fellas. Even more than that, I think, is how much hearing the assertion of my control means.

(Emphasis added.)

This is very true. What's more pertinent to me than simply understanding that this form of acknowledgement is desirable, however, is thinking about why it is that my Mistress's assertions of her control are so sexy. Certainly, it is an obvious part that an assertion itself is a statement of control, and that is what I get off on.

Lady Julia continues and says:

For many these types of verbal assertions of control really seem to excite, motivate, and strengthen the bond between the Dom/me and the submissive.

Rook's particular hot button is for me to remind him that I saw him, decided I wanted him, and was able with almost no effort to seduce him into being mine to control. He loves knowing I took him - a man who did not identify himself with being submissive at all - and guided him to a place where he will now do anything I ask.

For many utilizing verbal assertions of control won't be a natural thing. It wasn't for me, but the more I use them and take note of the responses they elicit, the more it has become a natural part of the way I communicate.

Last night Eileen and I walked and talked for hours and one of the things that came up during the conversation was how sexy I find it when I think about her dominating a man who displays more traditionally masculine personality traits and how focused on her that fantasy is. In fact, when I think about her being with someone cool and masculine and sexy in those ways, it is still her dominance that is arousing to me (and this is true for every arousing thing about unfair situation I may be in). That dominance is an assertion of her control much in the same way as a verbal declaration such as "I like it when you're horny and needy" is an assertion of her control, and that's sexy.

For me, and I have observed for many other people, kink and BDSM is a sexuality all its own. It is not merely arousing in a sexual connotation, but in an emotional one. Kink and BDSM play upon very fundamental aspects of the human psyche that are familiar to all of us, regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, education, or personal experience. Helplessness, selfishness, greed, the lust for power and control, pain and pleasure, are each feelings distinct from the notion of sex. Certainly, they can be sexualized (and often are), but this is not a prerequisite for BDSM play.

Turning these things into sex is merely what makes kink kinky. Without the sexual component, they are still all fun and valid means of self-expression, friendship, and affection. In my experience, in fact, BDSM play of this kind has proven to be one of the most powerful ways to communicate emotion. It touches my psyche in ways mere words will never be able to reach.

For example, I remember a scene early in my relationship with Eileen when I was at her place for the night. We were just beginning to play together, and we were both eager to explore the relationship we were developing to its limits and then beyond. That night, she stripped me down to my boxers and tied my hands behind my back to the chair she had seated me on. Eventually, as she stood before me, she smacked my cheek with her palm. It was one of the first times I had ever been struck on the face and I didn't really know what to make of it.

My ultimate reaction was not sexual arousal, nor a masochistic desire to feel the painful burn of her palm across my cheek again. Instead, it was a flood of cathartic emotions released from the intimacy of the act. Here was a woman whom I did not know exceptionally well by any traditional measurement standing over me, looking intently into my eyes, focusing all her attention on my reactions. And there I was, naked except for my underwear with my hands bound uselessly behind me, exposed and physically vulnerable to her advances.

But the floodgates weren't opened by my physical vulnerability. No, instead, they were openned by my emotional vulnerability. I couldn't help it; I began to cry. As tear after tear rolled down my cheek, she didn't stop hitting me or ease up at all. Her expression didn't waver. She slapped me again and again until I was sobbing quietly.

Later, she told me that she felt it was a wonderful thing to know that wherever she was pushing me into, she could bring me back from--she knew we'd be okay. After she had finished slapping my face, she untied me and helped me lay down on her bed. I curled up into a fetal position and she lay down beside me, spooning me. She hugged me close to her and I flipped around to rest my head on her chest. Then, without a prompt of any kind or vocal prologue, I kissed her gently. With my kiss and without words I was saying, "I will indeed be all right." What amazed me about the experience was that when we spoke about the scene the next day, she conveyed a perfect understanding of my nonverbal communication.

She said that there were at least two distinct moments of very close silent communication, or perhaps understanding is a better word. She told me that she felt as though she knew precisely what I was feeling or trying to say without my having to say it. The first was when I began to cry and that she made the conscious choise to keep hitting me. The second was when I kissed her. She had said, "Thank you," back to me, and I renewed crying at her appreciation of my attempt to soothe her.

While such an experience is not necessarily devoid of sexual feelings, it is not, in itself, inherently sexual. Much of my play and my understanding of BDSM was in fact not directly sexual. Meeting Eileen was a fascinating thing because of how differently we came to the understanding of what BDSM was. For her, it was always directly sexual, and so playing with me in the ways I was used to doing was a little strange for her. Similarly, when she began introducing sexual experiences into play our that involved heavy sadomasochism, pain, fear, and other forms of emotion, I found it difficult to reconcile the seemingly contradictory feelings I was having.

Ultimately, everything we do is about connection and self-expression. To truly connect with someone, we have to express ourselves with utter honesty, and without a connection to someone else we can't express ourselves. If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

When I used to be closer friends with the Pro Dommes at one of the local dungeons where I live, I would get invited pretty regularly to their Friday night parties. These were not great events because the Mistresses never had a truly fun time (since they were technically working), and I'm pretty sure that's why they kept inviting me; I was never a client, only a really, really young boy to play with. And I'll admit it: I was incredibly naive.

On several occasions, the girls used to dress me in full cross-dressing gear from head to toe. One of them was a fantastic makeup artist, and so the first time they did this I was actually speechless when I looked at myself in the mirror on the wall. With the makeup, she had done such an amazing job that I actually got asked if I worked at the dungeon by one of the party guests, and another one who had been eyeing me all night had to "check to make sure" whether or not I was female.

At that time, I didn't really understand the appeal of becoming outwardly more feminine. Now, however, it's one of the fantasies that runs deep within me, for many reasons and, and elicits a lot of different emotions. (As a sidenote, there's an interesting discussion spawning around this subject at the Fetish Lore Forum.)


By the way, when I asked her how she learned to do this she recommended a book that I think was called Making Faces. It was a photography book showing pictures of men's faces made up to look like stunning women through the use of makeup. She said such books (and a willing human canvas) were the best ways to learn.

It had not been first time I had ever cross-dressed, but it was the first time I was truly made to feel like a girl. This was a subtle yet eye-opening revelation for me. I always had thoughts of what it might be like to be a girl instead of the boy I am, and from a very young age I became fascinated with the gender differences (and similarities) between the sexes. When I became sexually aware, I began to have (and still have to this day) a very serious case of clitoris envy.

I believe that this, in at least some significant part, is due to the fact that I have always felt very strongly feminine in many ways. The popular phrase these days is to say that I am "in touch with my feminine side." I was an introvert and a shy child in general, but more so than this, I was hyper-sensitive to emotions and felt very moody much of the time because of this. I got along better with girls than I did with guys and I felt envious of them for being able to manipulate society's double-standards in ways that I wished I could, such as the approval of playing a sexually submissive role yet at the same time desiring to be lusted after.

Cross-dressing in and of itself is a lot of fun. I find girl's clothing to be unusually comfortable and very sensual. The softness of the fabrics such as leggings and nighties are extremely appealing (I've always loved soft things). The tight, form-fitting nature of the clothes such as jeans and shirts make me aware of my body in ways other clothes don't. (Interestingly, that only became an appealing aspect once I begun to feel more okay about my self-image.) However despite all this, I never truly thought of myself as "girly" in the sense of liking pretty things for the sake of their prettiness or being enthralled with pieces of jewelry. I like pretty things and I love jewelry that is somewhat demure, but these things never defined the pleasant emotions behind wanting to be a girl.

I eventually confessed to my girlfriend how sexy I thought girl's clothing was--everything from panties to outerwear. At first, it was a novelty when we went shopping for some tight jeans for me in the girl's section. Then, it became a regular occurence. Now, I own more girl's jeans than boy's jeans, enough panties to last me through a full laundry cycle, and a little less than half my outerwear wardrobe is girl's clothing. I don't wear most of them for any special occasion whatsoever; they're just part of my regular wardrobe. It certainly helped me to hear the continual encouragement from my girlfriend. She told me how nicely shaped my waist is and how feminine my ass looks, how sweet and cute I looked when I dressed in younger-looking clothes and how sexy she thought I was in my new tight clothes. Being handy, she made me lots of necklaces and we eventually bought a jewelry box for me.

All the while, we slowly began introducing more and more feminization aspects to our play and sex as well. It varied immensely and was the most role-play-like thing I had done to that point; at times she would speak to me as though I was a young lost girl, at others I would put on my sexiest red nightie and do my best to seduce her. While there was a naturalness to the play that I was not expecting, there was also the feeling of being almost doll-like in the sense that I was not myself anymore. Again, while I am very much a "girly boy," I am still a boy.

Feminization, then, is partly self-expression but also partly being made into my dominant's image. The submissive in me finds it incredibly erotic to be molded in whatever way my Mistress wants. When I am her little girl, even though I am a boy, that is an act of her power and my submission because I am then something she has made me into for her own pleasure. She turns me into her pretty, perfect little girl. And I like feeling perfect.

Here's a question I have been pondering for a long time: How can a submissive reconcile the desire to be with multiple partners (not necessarily simultaneously, but rather enjoy polyamorous relationships) when they also desire to be owned by one of them. This is a seemingly contradictory statement but it is something that has come up (again) today in a conversation with a close friend.

Too much of the issue is personal to the point that I am unprepared to write about it in detail, but I do want to say that I am really curious about people's opinions, if they have them.

Mistress 160 has a lovely description of a scene involving CBT with clamps and pegs and clothespins. What's awesome about the way she desribes the scene is that her descriptions are analogous to a creative act like painting.

While my hand moved up and down his cock I considered my next artistic endeavour, as the canvas in front of me (sol's family jewels) was now blank again

This brought to mind the observation that so many activities in BDSM are likened to these sorts of things. I think it's wonderful, fulfilling and very satisfying. There have been many times when designs of wings, flowers, or abstract curves and shapes have been cut into my flesh (usually on my back or my ass) by my love. She would stand above me and admire her work in very much the same way she was doing so when she was proud of any other accomplishment she had achieved. I loved the feelings of closeness it gave me to offer her my body as the medium of her expression.

While this feeling was coupled with my submissive (and completely "normal" loving) desire to make sure I do whatever I can to enable her to do what she wants, to make her life full of happiness and pleasure, I found that on more than one occasion, she would offer the same for me. The typical vanilla example is a hickey. For us, a hickey is also a mark akin to a bruise from a beating so on the occasions when she encourages me to mark her like that, I feel priviledged and grateful that she's offering her body to me.

Ultimately, I think these makes a lot of sense. Creation is experssion. People very frequently talk about using the body as a means of expression. It fits in many ways that we would choose our bodies as the medium of that creation. It's primal, and a part of who we are as human beings.

Ms. Rika's writings are absolutely amazing and brilliant. It seems silly to say anything more specific than that, though I will say that I found the following essays to be the most moving:

• True Submission


• Rewards vs. Treats


• The Power of Irony


• The Joy of Denial

All of her writings can be described somewhat generally as being guidelines for managing successful 24/7 ("full time") D/s relationships. This is something of interest to me because it is a topic I know very little about. Despite what some people may think, submission is actually a relatively newly practiced thing for me. I've had years and years of top/bottom dynamics, but indeed, the first (and so far only) person I've ever felt I could be submissive to is Eileen. We've begun exploring D/s dynamics, but I believe we've only scratched the tip of the iceberg.

Unfortunately, the vast amount of information that is available on this topic comes from submissive men. This is a problem because I have no real practically applicable interest in hearing about what other submissive men feel about submission beyond stimulating thought internal to myself. The reason is obvious: I am a submissive man, and I know what I feel like already because I'm feeling it. Making sense of it may be hard, but my emotions are unique to me.

On the other hand, I am very interested to hear about what dominant females have to say about submissive men and D/s relationships from their perspective. The reason for this is likewise obvious. Ms. Rika's writings are educational because they shine a light onto the other side of the coin, the side that no matter how hard I try to see, I can only be told about. I'll never experience being a dominant female so my only ways to learn about that side of the equation and how to mesh better with it is by having it explained to me. Few people can explain themselves as eloquently as this lifestyle dominant can, which is one reason why her writings reached me strongly tonight.

(By the way, I'd also love find writings like this from dominant men about submissive men. That's kind of a tall order, I know, but if you have any bookmarks you're willing to share, I'm all ears!)

I wish I had the energy to write more about this right now, but I don't. Instead, let me list a few revelations that struck me when I was reading her essays:

• Dominance and submission is a "layer" that is added to a relationship. This implies the obvious, that a relationship needs to exist as a foundation to add D/s onto, as well as the subtle: that D/s dynamics must be maintained equally by both partners for their respective roles. A submissive needs to be actively submissive, not being a mindless doormat (unless this is desired in a scene, see next point). Likewise, a dominant needs to be actively dominant, providing feedback and suggestions for things the sub can do better and recognizing these attempts.


• The single ultimate purpose of submission is to have the submissive please the dominant partner, not have the dominant please the submissive. That may sound obvious, but the massively important implication here is that it's the submissive partner who must adapt his or her terms to align to the dominant partner's terms. Aligning to this "one-sided compromise" is what submission is all about for the submissive, while enforcing the straight-forward "that's the way it is because I said so, and I'm the dominant partner" logic is what domination is all about.


• Scenes are not "lifestyle" D/s, but are instead manifestations of sex. A scene is kinky sex, whether or not sexual intercourse or other traditional sexual activities are involved and so the submissive is the equivalent of the so-called passive (or receptive) partner. Just like vanilla couples don't spend one hundred percent of their time fucking like rabbits in the backseats of cars, successful 24/7 D/s relationships don't spend all their time in scene. However, that doesn't mean that they're not doing the "24/7 thing." This finally brings to light for me why I feel differently about bottoming to things that feel like self-motivated service (having the urge to take care of Eileen and do things for her being second nature to me now) as opposed to bottoming to things that are done in a scene.


• Punishments are scenes, and scenes typically require more effort from the dominant than the submissive (see earlier point; dominant is essentially the active sex partner). As a result, so-called punishments in D/s dynamics are really just scenes, or sex, and even if the activity isn't something the bottom enjoys, it's still ultimately providing a passive sexual experience. This explains to me why I never liked punishments in reality, but enjoy the fantasies of punishments so much. In other words, I don't want to be punished for real even though I do want to be submissive for real. Punishments, or what I've come to call "consequences" are part of the fantasy, kinky games I enjoy playing.

These definitions are, of course, my attempts at paraphrasing and making my own what Ms. Rika has written in her essays (which is why I suggest you go read them--that context will help you understand this post). They may be false for some people, but I don't think they are false for me. Something in what she writes clicks for me deep inside and makes clear distinctions that I had been confused about previously. The newly vivid distinctions have, in turn, provided insights into past experiences and motivations, both the successes and the failures.

Before I met and became involved with Eileen, I wondered about D/s relationships and even about 24/7 dynamics, but always considered them flawed in some way. However, for the first time ever, I'm starting to believe that with an accurate understanding of the deepest motivations behind and distinctions between Dominance and submission are and a solid handle on one's own self awareness and emotional barometer, a 24/7 D/s relationship may not just be possible but is something I've actually desired for a very, very long time.

Surely, I am not this Mistress's clone and so I will have different nuances from what she describes for herself and her slave and subs. Further discussion and refinement of these ideas is clearly warranted. Nevertheless, I feel confident and certain that these foundational elements are, at the very least, not far off "the truth" for me. That's an exciting prospect.

On that note, let me close this post with Ms. Rika's words from her article The Vanilla Domme:

notice this arrangement does not turn him into a spineless, mindless puppet. In fact, it's quite the opposite. He's encouraged to think. It also doesn't make him passive in bed. I like a man to be aggressive and to show his desire. This doesn't stop him from doing so. I do, however, reserve the right to be pleased on my terms, which may, or may not include an orgasm for him. If it pleases me to have him seduce me and take me to bed, give me an orgasm orally, even have intercourse but stop short of his orgasm…and then have him rub my back until I go to sleep…then keep his own erection up for 30 minutes more while I sleep before he goes to sleep himself, hard and frustrated, then that's what he must do. Sounds like he'll hate it? Well, yes…he will, but he'll thank me in the morning when he realizes how dominated he feels. Are you getting the picture?