the D/s relationship - ultimate responsibility Dom/me or sub's?

[eastern sun]

I am sure this has been discussed before, but I was hoping for your perspectives. . .

Where does the final responsibility lie. . . does a D/s relationship rest on the sub's willingness to aquiesce or the Dom/me's enforcement of demands?

 

[BiBunny]

Both. I know it's a simplistic answer for what could be a really complicated question, but if one or the other isn't taking responsibility for what's going on the relationship, then the whole relationship breaks down. It's a symbioitc relationship--it takes both of 'em, or else you don't have much of anything.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Both as far as I am concerned. I like to be dominated as much as I like to submit...if someone is not interested in dominating me in any way except barking out a lot of orders, I am not that interested in sticking around and pretending to find them dominant as opposed to dictatorial and hopeful with a big dose of ego thrown in to bolster their belief they are dominant. Dominance takes a bit more than the mythical/stereotypicalised 'look' and expectation I will want to fall at someone's feet in submission simply because they tell me they are a Dominant and/or put Sir or Master or Lord etc., before their name.

Catalina

 

[BiBunny]

Both as far as I am concerned. I like to be dominated as much as I like to submit...if someone is not interested in dominating me in any way except barking out a lot of orders, I am not that interested in sticking around and pretending to find them dominant as opposed to dictatorial and hopeful with a big dose of ego thrown in to bolster their belief they are dominant. Dominance takes a bit more than the mythical/stereotypicalised 'look' and expectation I will want to fall at someone's feet in submission simply because they tell me they are a Dominant and/or put Sir or Master or Lord etc., before their name.

Catalina

Yeah. What she said.

 

[callinectes]

Any relationship, regardless of flavor, is a partnership where both parties are equally responsible for its success.

 

[Chicklet]

Any relationship, regardless of flavor, is a partnership where both parties are equally responsible for its success.

ugh i hate not contributing to a thread past "exactly!" but...


EXACTLY.

 

[JMohegan]

ugh i hate not contributing to a thread past "exactly!" but...


EXACTLY.

Me too, on both counts.

Great post, Callinectes.

 

[Netzach]

Both.

And this is unpopular but when things go awry within a relationship the responsibility lies with both. The romantic notion of a submissive as anything other than an adult with eyes open has got to go.

 

[eastern sun]

what about those less than perfect moments?

What about those less than perfect moments, as I've experienced in every long-standing relationship, when the two parties are in conflict?

Here's the two arguments as we see them -

Because the relationship is based on consensual submission, ultimately the sub must acquiesce to the Dom/me's demands (without the need for enforcement) or s/he is not in fact submitting. If s/he "forces" the Dom/me to enforce his demands, then s/he is communicating that s/he is "not interested" in meeting the Dom/me's needs.

On the other hand, if the sub fails to meet a particular demand, (say more than once) and the Dom/me does not respond with punishment, or other corrective measures, then the Dom/me is communicating that those demands are not "important" or "worth the effort of the follow-through."

We're assuming as well that neither party is going to walk away from the relationship to look for someone "better."

(btw - this was written while Netzach was posting. . .)

 

[FurryFury]

I have to agree with most that ultimate responsibility as in all relationships is on all parties involved.

Fury

 

[Mike260]

OK. I disagree with all y'all.

Life, and relationships, are messy.

Power is never shared equally in any relationship. In a D/s relationship more power can reside with either the Dom/me or the sub. Charismatic and forceful Doms generally hold most of the power in the relationship. Conversely, an irresistable or manipulative sub can be the true center of power.

That person, the one who holds most of the power, calls most of the shots. He or she has more suasion over the life of the couple and the family. That person should take more responsibility for what goes on in the relationship.

We would all like to think that consenting adults are equally consenting. But they're not.

 

[liberatedslave]

That's true to a point but in most relationships the power exchange is consensual. My Sir is the authority in our relationship because I have given him that power freely. Despite that, I remain responsible for my choice to submit.

If we were having problems I would consider myself equally responsible for working on the relationship and maintaining good communication. If I ever reached the point where I was unhappy enough to consider leaving my Sir, the consent implicit in my submission would be questionable and I might eventually feel justified in withdrawing it and ending the relationship. Those things are still my choice, therefore they remain my responsibility.

I would never adopt the attitude of 'you're the boss so if we have problems they are your responsibility.' I would be totally remiss in my duty as Sir's willing sub for a start.

That's just MHO, of course.

 

[Mike260]

That's true to a point but in most relationships the power exchange is consensual.
That's just MHO, of course.

I was not saying that these relationships aren't consensual. (Non-consensual relationships are slavery.)

I said virtually no relationships are equally consensual. Whether it's the Dom/me or the sub, somebody's calling more shots.

 

[liberatedslave]

I was not saying that these relationships aren't consensual. (Non-consensual relationships are slavery.)

I said virtually no relationships are equally consensual. Whether it's the Dom/me or the sub, somebody's calling more shots.

I agree that non-consensual relationships are slavery, I do tend to chuck the word around as a generic disclaimer. My apologies.

I agree that in D/s relationships one person has the power and control. I was making the point that this does not absolve the controlled party from an equal responsibility for the health of the relationship as a whole. Regardless of who's calling the shots, both people have to be content with the relationship and where it's going.

Hope I haven't offended you

 

[Netzach]

OK. I disagree with all y'all.

Life, and relationships, are messy.

Power is never shared equally in any relationship. In a D/s relationship more power can reside with either the Dom/me or the sub. Charismatic and forceful Doms generally hold most of the power in the relationship. Conversely, an irresistable or manipulative sub can be the true center of power.

That person, the one who holds most of the power, calls most of the shots. He or she has more suasion over the life of the couple and the family. That person should take more responsibility for what goes on in the relationship.

We would all like to think that consenting adults are equally consenting. But they're not.

What I see most often in relationships which aren't totally mismatched is that it moves back and forth depending on context and life events.

 

[eastern sun]

thanking Netzach for the light of reason

What I see most often in relationships which aren't totally mismatched is that it moves back and forth depending on context and life events.

I completely agree with you, Netzach. And I wish I could perceive things as clearly and state them as directly as you do.

However, since I don't, may I ask. . . in those moments when the power shifts, when the relationship is in flux, is it unreasonable for a sub to expect the Dom/me to enforce the power structure? or is it simply too frustrating for the Dom/me who expects the sub to "reaffirm" his or her submission?

(My husband and I are in one of those moments - where, because we have transformed a 20 year marriage into a TPE, the power structure in our relationship is more "rational" than it ever was, but the subtleties of our behavior defy perfect reason.)

 

[shy slave]

What about those less than perfect moments, as I've experienced in every long-standing relationship, when the two parties are in conflict?

Here's the two arguments as we see them -

Because the relationship is based on consensual submission, ultimately the sub must acquiesce to the Dom/me's demands (without the need for enforcement) or s/he is not in fact submitting. If s/he "forces" the Dom/me to enforce his demands, then s/he is communicating that s/he is "not interested" in meeting the Dom/me's needs.

On the other hand, if the sub fails to meet a particular demand, (say more than once) and the Dom/me does not respond with punishment, or other corrective measures, then the Dom/me is communicating that those demands are not "important" or "worth the effort of the follow-through."

We're assuming as well that neither party is going to walk away from the relationship to look for someone "better."

(btw - this was written while Netzach was posting. . .)

Looking at both your examples they strike me that they could be seen as topping from the bottom or playing at being bad in order to get a reaction.

Sometimes however, due to other life issues the PYL may need time out from being Domly. If they are unwell they cannot respond as they should. It must be hard to be Domly if your head is down a toilet so you can throw up!
Therefore sometimes it is not about being 'worth the effort' but about timing.

As for punishment, there have been many threads on it and punishment spans from non-physical to physical. I take punishment seriously, he has only punished me twice. That is not because 'I am the bestest slave in the whole wide world ever' but because he is clear about acceptable and unacceptable behaviour. Of course he has hit me playfully for odd comments but that is a lighthearted reminder of who is the PYL in our relationship and not punishment.

In your first example the concept that if a pyl submits they are not really a pyl is something I just cannot get my head around. To me it adds up to 'do your best to please and then be seen as wrong.'
A relationship that adds up to the choice of do nothing=fail or achievement=fail, does not sound healthy. It is the type of relationship that could undermine anyone's self-esteem fairly quickly.

From my view there are times when a PYL cannot be 100% due to other issues. Just as there are times a pyl cannot be everything their PYL wants because of other issues. Whether it is physical illness, stress, being overwhelmed with work/life; no-one is perfect.

When EG had his heart attack I don't imagine his Janie was trying to be bad just to get his attention, nor can I see he was up to dealing with anything he deemed 'punishable' at that point in time.

The control of a relationship does not waiver during difficult times, and responsibility is for ensuring its success is equal; but it comes down to respect.

If a PYL cannot be all they can be for a period of time, the pyl should respect that and see they are human not some God-like person on a pedestal. If the pyl is not able to meet everything they usually can the PYL needs to understand and not make the situation worse.

Regardless of what type of relationship it is, respect is everything. If the other person lacks that, then why bother with the relationship at all.

PYL=Pick Your Label~Dom/me/Top etc
pyl =pick your label~sub/bottom etc

 

[shy slave]

I completely agree with you, Netzach. And I wish I could perceive things as clearly and state them as directly as you do.

However, since I don't, may I ask. . . in those moments when the power shifts, when the relationship is in flux, is it unreasonable for a sub to expect the Dom/me to enforce the power structure? or is it simply too frustrating for the Dom/me who expects the sub to "reaffirm" his or her submission?

(My husband and I are in one of those moments - where, because we have transformed a 20 year marriage into a TPE, the power structure in our relationship is more "rational" than it ever was, but the subtleties of our behavior defy perfect reason.)

In my view it can be seen as unreasonable depending on the situation.

In a similar situation I asked him for a session. I did it in the belief that it would help both of us. I didn't do it because I wanted to have the power in the relationship but because it seemed the right thing to do for both of us at the time.
I think the question of whether it is reasonable behaviour or not comes down to the motivation for wanting him to reaffirm things.

I see it as a joint role to look after each other. If he is happier with the more even distribution of power, then that is what is right for him; right now. If he is clearly unhappy, stressed, irritable and seems to be someone who does not like himself anymore; then intervening is the right thing to do.

There have been times I have wanted to crawl in his head to figure out what is going on. I have also been frustrated at the narrow line between trying to support him and nagging/whining.

I hope you manage to get things sorted in a way that works for both of you

 

[Netzach]

I completely agree with you, Netzach. And I wish I could perceive things as clearly and state them as directly as you do.

However, since I don't, may I ask. . . in those moments when the power shifts, when the relationship is in flux, is it unreasonable for a sub to expect the Dom/me to enforce the power structure? or is it simply too frustrating for the Dom/me who expects the sub to "reaffirm" his or her submission?

(My husband and I are in one of those moments - where, because we have transformed a 20 year marriage into a TPE, the power structure in our relationship is more "rational" than it ever was, but the subtleties of our behavior defy perfect reason.)

Having a chronic illness changed my life. I can no longer be certain where I stand at any given moment let alone in relation to anyone else - even in remission that changes your whole idea of certainty and changes your priorities for good. If M needs more presence of authority he has found ways of asking for it in ways that are pleasing to me and not offensive and don't make me feel like I'm being controlled - so has H. I can't always follow through at the moment, but when I get one of these gentle and infrequent tugs at my Domme sleeve I do listen to them carefully and give them respect as much as I am able to -- I have good people who really come to me with needs when it matters and not whims when they want to manipulate my behavior. Also, I am not opposed to certain needs being met from sources other than me - I can't be all things to all people all the time.

My relationships have a service cornerstone rather than a Domination cornerstone though. If the correct service behavior is "leave Ma'am the fuck alone she's working" that's what's done and expected. If the correct service behavior is "Make tuna salad and rent South Park season 7" well, that's what happens.

 

[FurryFury]

OK. I disagree with all y'all.

Life, and relationships, are messy.

Power is never shared equally in any relationship. In a D/s relationship more power can reside with either the Dom/me or the sub. Charismatic and forceful Doms generally hold most of the power in the relationship. Conversely, an irresistable or manipulative sub can be the true center of power.

That person, the one who holds most of the power, calls most of the shots. He or she has more suasion over the life of the couple and the family. That person should take more responsibility for what goes on in the relationship.

We would all like to think that consenting adults are equally consenting. But they're not.

I never said the power in a relationship is always completely equal. I don't believe that.

However in most cases both have ultimate responsibility for themselves, the communication in the relationship and the relationship itself.

What percentage of power each has, is given or takes, I can't say as that is different for each relationship.

I can bitch all I want about my ex but I in a sense let the situation continue and the abuse. That's on me though I still call it non consensual. I freely admit it. I was a sick lil puppy. In some ways I still am.

Fury

 

[FurryFury]

What I see most often in relationships which aren't totally mismatched is that it moves back and forth depending on context and life events.

I totally see that too.

Fury

 

[JMohegan]

My relationships have a service cornerstone rather than a Domination cornerstone though. If the correct service behavior is "leave Ma'am the fuck alone she's working" that's what's done and expected. If the correct service behavior is "Make tuna salad and rent South Park season 7" well, that's what happens.

I would describe the distinction as D/s with a command-me cornerstone vs. D/s with a force-me cornerstone. The former being described here, and the latter being described here.

In one case, he simply tells her to do the dishes and in the other he has to "make her".

Either way, the dishes *will* get cleaned.

 

[callinectes]

It seems to me some are confusing power with responsibility. I can give up all of the power but I still have a responsibility to contribute to the success of the relationship. I see the two as different issues.

 

[FurryFury]

It seems to me some are confusing power with responsibility. I can give up all of the power but I still have a responsibility to contribute to the success of the relationship. I see the two as different issues.

I agree you can give up power and still have a responsibility. They are two intermingled issues is the way I see it.

Fury

 

[Kailey_86]

I am sure this has been discussed before, but I was hoping for your perspectives. . .

Where does the final responsibility lie. . . does a D/s relationship rest on the sub's willingness to aquiesce or the Dom/me's enforcement of demands?

i think it all depends on the context of the situation. In most cases the responsibility lies with both parties. In an arguement, the Dom makes the final decision. i speak for myself on this one though.