Who has the most power?

[cadence]

Typically I have the power, and try to hold on to it, until the power exchange ultimately happens and he beats my ass black and blue - then he has the power

[openyoureyes]

In the beginning, the power is definitely equal, and on the surface, it would appear to remain balanced throughout a D/s relationship. However, in my experience, once a dominant has successfully gotten inside the submissive's head and heart and the submissive has truly surrendered, the submissive is like a puppet on a string. Granted, we are all adults and capable of making decisions, so protests of "he made me do it" seem kind of silly in the harsh light of day. Ultimately, we are in control of ourselves, but the feelings evoked in power exchange of helplessness, dependence, etc., are very real. For it to feel real, there cannot be true equality.

As far as the relationship itself is concerned, I believe the power is equal. We can choose to leave the relationship at any time if we are not happy. If a submissive feels they can't leave, but aren't being forced to stay, that's still a choice they are making. We are adults, not victims, and we all make our own choices.

However, as far as during scene, it's hard to say the submissive has control simply because they have a safeword. If I am tied up, regardless of what I say, I don't actually have the power to stop what's happening. While I may choose to be put in this situation, I still don't have the power to stop it if it goes too far. Yes, I have a safeword, but it's not up to me if it gets listened to.

[Dejah Thoris]

In the beginning, the power is definitely equal, and on the surface, it would appear to remain balanced throughout a D/s relationship. However, in my experience, once a dominant has successfully gotten inside the submissive's head and heart and the submissive has truly surrendered, the submissive is like a puppet on a string. Granted, we are all adults and capable of making decisions, so protests of "he made me do it" seem kind of silly in the harsh light of day. Ultimately, we are in control of ourselves, but the feelings evoked in power exchange of helplessness, dependence, etc., are very real. For it to feel real, there cannot be true equality.

Reading this made me realize that I very much feel the same way - and I would not want it to be otherwise. Thank you for expressing this sentiment.

[angelhunter]

I am just saying that power even life is nothing more but an illusion. If I kidnap someone off the streets and then I truly have the power but we are not talking about that. The sub wants to dominated, she sets the boundaries and cause this illusion take effect. When it comes down to it the master is really the slave. I am just humming.
Nuff said.

[Ozme52]

I am just saying that power even life is nothing more but an illusion. If I kidnap someone off the streets and then I truly have the power but we are not talking about that. The sub wants to dominated, she sets the boundaries and cause this illusion take effect. When it comes down to it the master is really the slave. I am just humming.
Nuff said.

Balderdash.

That's like saying you, as an employee, have all the power over your employer.

Once you accept the position (i.e., make the choice to interact within the relationship as defined,) you relinquish the power to the employer.

Thereafter, the employer holds the power until you choose to withdraw.

[Jennifer Williams]

So then is threatening to quit if I don't get a raise on a day when everyone calls in sick "Topping from the bottom?" :P

[Ozme52]

So then is threatening to quit if I don't get a raise on a day when everyone calls in sick "Topping from the bottom?" :P

Yep... and that rarely works either. You're more likely to see a pink slip than a bigger check once everyone gets better.

[Matin]

I like the employer/employee illustration. I submit that it may be a bit simplistic for the description of relationships.

Power seems to be as a word too vague. It describes the possession, by one party, of a thing of value desired by the other party. Me having, and you wanting, is leverage. I now have the ability to compel you, to a degree. The value that YOU place on the thing I possess determines the extent of that leverage - how far I can push.

This simple dynamic describes employment, because -generally- in a work environment the employee is replaceable.

In a relationship both parties have leverage. Her desires place value on my strength, stability, attention... My desires place value on HER stability, submission, ability to compartmentalize...

Codependency is another way of saying mexican standoff. If I did not value my sub's emotional welfare, I would have all the leverage. I would also be a douchebag. ^.^

Even situations where the sub claims to have no self regard seem to me to be false, because that in itself is a trait that any dom could value, and thus the sub has gained leverage... Power...

Occam's razor. It is called a power exchange because it is, and in a very literal sense.

Pardon me; I often use typing to think.
-matin

[xspy4u]

I am an author not a practitioner so my point of view may not carry as much weight as those of you with actual experience. I comment because fir I am impressed at the level of intelligence on this site. I post elsewhere, where the mainstream folks sound hateful, spiteful and generally egotistical. So I find it interesting that a interest in BDSM attracts such high IQ's (not that it shouldn't as you must truly understand yourself to choose this lifetstyle) But much like my multi-chapter stories, I digress.

I think that the word "power" is immaterial. All "power" is based on coersion and compliance of some form (psych 101) and therefore fleeting. Every creature has a point at which they "break" and power over them is only the ability to destroy or release (earlier experiments in psychology proved this). I think more important however, is that it is not about power, but dominance and submission. Does a sub have power? of course not. But nor do they seek such or they would be a dominant. What about 'safe words'? These aren't power, they are a request. But can't a sub decide not to engage or to leave? Not if they are a real sub and that would be "flight" not "fight" so its really not power its avoidance. So I submit that if your lifestyle is one of "role playing" BDSM then it is a "game", games have rules and power is equally divided and at one level it is not truly dominant/submissive because there are in fact rules. If your lifestyle is truly dominant/submissive then the engagement is determined by the dominant and the submissive has no power except that which is granted - which is not power at all. Hey but what do I know - I just really liked the intelligent conversation.

[denuseri]

I am an author not a practitioner so my point of view may not carry as much weight as those of you with actual experience.

If your point of view is logical I personally don’t care weather you are a real life practitioner, are here for the literary aspects of the site or just hanging around to have some online fun. I do however appreciate your honesty.

I comment because fir I am impressed at the level of intelligence on this site. I post elsewhere, where the mainstream folks sound hateful, spiteful and generally egotistical. So I find it interesting that a interest in BDSM attracts such high IQ's (not that it shouldn't as you must truly understand yourself to choose this lifetstyle) But much like my multi-chapter stories, I digress.

I think that the word "power" is immaterial. All "power" is based on coersion and compliance of some form (psych 101) and therefore fleeting.

I would surmise that this is the case with most things in life, but also maby not so fleeting when properly maintained.

Every creature has a point at which they "break" and power over them is only the ability to destroy or release (earlier experiments in psychology proved this).

If your not pushed to the breaking point, than sufice to say that one need not be made to break nessesaraly no?

I think more important however, is that it is not about power, but dominance and submission.

Holding or surrendering of power by any other names perhaps?

Does a sub have power? of course not.

Both actually have power to one degree or another in my experience, but it is "exchanged" in what may apear to be a one sided manner at first glance yet can also at times be flowing in the other direction or balanced depending upon a variety of factors.

But nor do they seek such or they would be a dominant.

Not nessesarally, for instance, I am a slave, yet I hold dominion over that which I can hold dominion over, (which all people do in real life bdsm or otherwise) while I submit to those who hold dominion over me, I am quite cabable of seeking power, and on occassions even enjoying it when I have it, but I submit to my owner and those others who can hold dominion over me, becuase in certian circumstances power is exerted over me in such fashion that I choose to submit or am forced to admit that such dominion indeed exists.

What about 'safe words'? These aren't power, they are a request. But can't a sub decide not to engage or to leave? Not if they are a real sub and that would be "flight" not "fight" so its really not power its avoidance.

The dominanit party is just as capable of picking up his or her toys and leaving or avoiding the equation as well, so imho this is a moot point.

So I submit that if your lifestyle is one of "role playing" BDSM then it is a "game", games have rules and power is equally divided and at one level it is not truly dominant/submissive because there are in fact rules. If your lifestyle is truly dominant/submissive then the engagement is determined by the dominant and the submissive has no power except that which is granted - which is not power at all. Hey but what do I know - I just really liked the intelligent conversation.

If you watch the people around you and their personal interactions you will see D/s behavior at work in allmost every human exchange, not just in a bdsm capacity.

[Ozme52]

I like the employer/employee illustration. I submit that it may be a bit simplistic for the description of relationships.

Of course. Simplification makes complex ideas comprehensible. Analogies are wonderful for using that way.

Power seems to be as a word too vague. It describes the possession, by one party, of a thing of value desired by the other party. Me having, and you wanting, is leverage. I now have the ability to compel you, to a degree. The value that YOU place on the thing I possess determines the extent of that leverage - how far I can push.

This took me a while to think about... something wrong with it and now I see it. I disagree because it's part and parcel of that initial contract. The employer has all that power over me as the employee... but I agreed to it "in exchange" for that paycheck. A D/s power exchange is the same. The sub cedes power to the dom because of what they get in exchange, something they need, desire, or covet. An employee may even get to wield power within that exchange (take the cases of a middle manager,) or just as in ancient times, a slave might have run the household affairs on behalf of the master, or in a M/s relationship, the sub runs their household, raises the kids, etc, though still under the direction of the master.

This simple dynamic describes employment, because -generally- in a work environment the employee is replaceable.

That depends on the skills and training of the employee... or the submissive. Not all are easily replaced. weg

In a relationship both parties have leverage.

And that depends on the nature of the negotiations and subsequent relationship. Certainly some pairings are more one-sided than others.

Her desires place value on my strength, stability, attention... My desires place value on HER stability, submission, ability to compartmentalize...

Then that is what you two exchange. It does not ipso facto give her power over you

Codependency is another way of saying mexican standoff. If I did not value my sub's emotional welfare, I would have all the leverage. I would also be a douchebag. ^.^

Co-dependancy is a negative concept imo. Co-dependents can't function without each other... and that's less of a relationship and more like a negative-symbiosis (to coin a term,) and certainly not a mexican stand-off. Co-dependents wield zero power over each other. They can only function with each other and that's very far from a D/s relationship imo.

Even situations where the sub claims to have no self regard seem to me to be false, because that in itself is a trait that any dom could value, and thus the sub has gained leverage... Power...

Occam's razor. It is called a power exchange because it is, and in a very literal sense.

Pardon me; I often use typing to think.
-matin

Well, in this I disagree, because you use power exchange to mean exchanging one kind of power for another and this itself is what leads to this confusion over who has power. Again, the sub trades his/her power to me in exchange for things s/he values from me... and that's not power.

[rocco]

hyperthectically;
can a sub, submit to themselves? can a dominant, dominate thereself?
i know this statement sounds odd! but try and understand it.
is a brick wall stable without its cement? no.
i think the "power" holds the relationship together. with out one or the other there is nothing.
this power is revolves around love, trust, and honesty.
as mentioned earlier it "flows" through that particular relationship, bonding the two or maybe more involved.
if say, i knew one of you but you didnt know me, and i knocked on your door and said ive come to submit or dominate you. at first glance would you let me in? probably not!
but if time went by and we got to know each other well, and slowly that "power" began to circle us then maybe! this is where the outside world fails to understand the term bdsm. its a relationship built on specific "love oriented power" and thats what makes us unique.

[Matin]

<--- needs to think about the last two posts more ^_^

[NiNLover]

I'd like to say both. . .

I mean, it's a power exchange, so both parties are giving power to each other. Neither really has the most because both can stop the other whenever they want. Although there are times when it can shift, like when a scene is being played out. Then I think the sub's got it more because they can stop the scene whenever they choose. It really depends on what's going on, imo.

[Red Dragon {mpellegrino}]

Aloha all

Interesting reading this thread. I have a slightly different view to offer up to the group.

To me this question is like that of the conumdrum of the meaning of life the universe and everything in a way (okay, okay I know the answer is 42). It is a subject you can consider for as long as you like and yet never reach a group agreement on. Everyone will have their view and who can really stop someone having a differing view in the light of no right or wrong answer.

So I would humbly suggest that power share is whatever you wish it to be. What you wish it to be abd what it is are possibly two different things anyway. In fact my view would be it is an ever shifting sea and so hard to define at most times except at either ends of the spectrum. This makes it a fantastic topic of discussion for finding others thoughts but something, perhaps not to loose sleep over, as you will never find the definitive answer.

Just a thought or two. (Ducks while rest of thread throw stuff at old Dragon.)

Mahalo - Dragon (Hope some of this made sense )

[Matin]

"If you choose not to decide / You Still have made a choice!"

Copy that.