Who Really Has the Power in a DS Relationship?

[Ruby]

No BDSM can happen without consent. Also, no BDSM can happen without awareness of risk, communication, honesty, and safety. In a relationship where abuse occurs, at least one of those things is missing. Even in the case of one partner manipulating the other partner into performing activities that the other partner might be unwilling to perform, risk awareness, safety, and honesty are all compromised. When a perosn compromises all those things, they take the power away from the person. And when that happens, those people are no longer practicing BDSM.

A submissive or slave may concede as much of her power as she wishes to her dominant partner, and as long as she is conceding it and it is not taken from her by manipulation or force, then there is nothing at all wrong with it. That's why I still completely believe that power does, always has, and always will lie with the submissive in any DS relationship.

Been reading, reading, reading, and I still have an issue with many of the statements made in this thread.

I disagree on how these concepts are being bantied about without any qualifiers. BDSM in itself does not imply consent - if it did, we wouldn't have the number of NC stories in the library or elsewhere.

SS&C is a philosophy and a practice.

When you say - No BDSM can happen without consent, I say qualify that.

If you were to say -

No healthy BDSM relationship between two or more individuals should ever remove consent, giving all parties the right to refuse each other's requests.

or

No healthy BDSM relationship between two or more individuals should ever operate without practicing SS&C.

Hey, then I'm with you.

What about the power? Again let's qualify that:

In a healthy BDSM relationship practicing the SS&C philosphy, a submissive or slave may concede as much of her power as she wishes to her dominant partner, and as long as she is conceding it and it is not taken from her by manipulation or force, then there is nothing at all wrong with it. Ultimately, that power then remains with the submissive.

[slavelucy]

i don't wish to take sides, but i will say this. Regardless of whether or not he's a moderator, this IS BDSM_Tourguide's thread, and as such, he has the same rights as all members to ask for it not to be taken off track...it is, in this respect, his property, and he could even ask for it to be locked, if he wanted, as anyone could. To this end, whilst issues of trust and abuse are constantly interesting in the realm in which we all operate, i am not convinced they are relevant here. This is to say that the fact remains that TG WAS talking about functional Ds relationships, not one's wherein one person consistantly lied to another (although that would, i'm sure, make an interesting thread in it's own right), or one that is actually tantamount to abuse as they are not even purebred, SSC Ds relationships, they are abusive ones, whatever guise they choose to veil themselves in. In my view, it seems that TG has presented a model and others have essentially said "Yes, but what if they WEREN'T in a Ds relationship?" (i.e. were lying to each other or being abused)..interesting, if veiled in DS, for sure..but if they wern't, then it isn't the point of the thread.

i think Ruby has it about right when she says...

No healthy BDSM relationship between two or more individuals should ever remove consent, giving all parties the right to refuse each other's requests.

...and i think we can safely assume this pretty much WAS what TG said, other than any BDSM relationship that isn't 'healthy' in the above described way, is not BDSM at all but is something entirely different, and i have to say, i agree with him.

No BDSM can happen without consent. Also, no BDSM can happen without awareness of risk, communication, honesty, and safety.

TG's point is that if these conditions aren't fulfilled they're not DOING BDSM, and if they're not doing it, then surely issues of abuse and trust are not relevant to this particular thread.

i see where the trust and abuse come into it on a minutiae level but i truely believe they would be more at home in other threads.

Don't pout. It's not really a becoming trait

Hmm You mean like the need to be right all the time?

(And numerous other unecessarily abrasive parts of posts from most people concerned...)

....either way, if we could ALL keep the fight clean, it'd be much appreciated.

sl

[Donatien]

No healthy BDSM relationship between two or more individuals should ever remove consent, giving all parties the right to refuse each other's requests.

No healthy BDSM relationship between two or more individuals should ever operate without practicing SS&C. ...........

in a healthy BDSM relationship practicing the SS&C philosphy, a submissive or slave may concede as much of her power as she wishes to her dominant partner, and as long as she is conceding it and it is not taken from her by manipulation or force, then there is nothing at all wrong with it. Ultimately, that power then remains with the submissive.

To remove any possible misunderstanding of my position, may I say that I fully support the aspirations, for healthy BDSM relationships that TG is cogently propounding, and as defined in Rubys thread. on rereading my post i realise that it came across as harder hitting, and without any of the light ironic quality, that I intended.As I read it now it comes across as bad tempered and rude. PLease all accept my apologies for that. ( lucy you are wise as always! ......But it wasn't me that said "hmm, the need to be right allthe time".really it wasn't)

My only slight caveat and reason for writing, (apart from what I only intended as a light hearted nit pic at TG, who is more than capable of looking after himself) being the question of situations, of power imbalance, when even apparently whole hearted consent is not what it seems. ( e.g stockholm syndrome). I do not believe that enough recognition is given to the presence of hypnotic trance phenomena , in particular the post hypnotic suggestion, in every day life, without any formal trance being induced. Most false , confessions, 'miraculous healings', conversions,and even anxiety attacks, panic attacks, and phobias, probably involve this mechanism. Since only a minority of the population are succeptable to this phenomenon, (perhaps only 10-15%) , the possibility of its existence is not even considered. In BDSM a consensual shift in the power balance is common, and it is my impression that there are a higher percentage of highly imaginative individuals in the bdsm sub world than the normal population, and a strong imagination is one of the prerequisites for this capability.
Finally please forgive my ignorance as a new comer, but what does SSC or SS & C stand for?

[slavelucy]

As I read it now it comes across as bad tempered and rude. PLease all accept my apologies for that. ( lucy you are wise as always! ......But it wasn't me that said "hmm, the need to be right allthe time".really it wasn't)

Ah, you're right, it was not, my apologies, i shall change that quote forthwith. Although, i'd agree that what was probably intended as dryly ironic and wise came across as bad tempered and rude. *grins*

(apart from what I only intended as a light hearted nit pic at TG, who is more than capable of looking after himself)

Heh! Oh yes, TG sure is more than capable of looking after himself, but it's difficult for him to be involved in the..heated debate, whilst attempting to keep order in it as a mod, so being as i mod the forum, lucy stepped in and asked ya all to tone it down.

Finally please forgive my ignorance as a new comer, but what does SSC or SS & C stand for?

You're forgiven. SSC stands for 'Safe, Sane and Consensual', a phrase/concept/notion/idea/ethos adhered to and put into practice by all those in a healthy BDSM relationship.

sl