Read all about it

The online diary of an ethical pervert.

Friday, 13 May 2011

Power, protocol and punishment

I slip the condom off and straddle his chest, quickly shoving it into his mouth before he can react. I press my fingers against his tongue, pushing his semen down his throat. His eyes widen from their relaxed post-orgasmic state. He makes a face, a sorrowful, confused moue.

"The next time you don't say thank-you immediately after you've come, that happens."

I surprise myself with how much force I can put behind that statement, I am genuinely cross with him and the punishemt, together with his obvious unhappiness, satisfies me. He begins to make excuses but I slap his leg and he quietens down. I lie down next to him and explain the importance of such things to me, reminding him that this is what he came to me for.

Punishment is a part of D/s training that needs to be delicately managed. I've learnt that it must happen quickly after the transgression so that the two are linked. It needs to be distinct from other parts of the relationship, clearly enshrined as a punishment: I want it to be obvious, isolated, unpleasant and cathartic. An action delivered to teach someone a lesson, ultimately it is instructive and (hopefully) constructive. My goal with my partners is to make them "better" through the training I'm delivering, they are of course marvellous and delightful already or I wouldn't play with them, but there's always room for specific tailoring to my own tastes. Reward has its place, of course, including praise and pleasure, but there must be punishment too. Enduring something unpleasant is part of submission: the ability to put distance between what the submissive wants and what the dominant wants and enforcing the latter to the detriment of the other strengthens the bond created by the power exchange.

I like punishment that is appropriate - this seemed like the obvious punishment for ungrateful orgasm. When pain is used for punishment it must be carefully contextualised, which is part of the reason why I don't often like delivering something such as a beating for punishment: it's too close to something I might want to do, whatever has happened. I don't want there to be a confusion of association because effectively I'm attempting to create reflexes and those require repeated, similar, stimulus.

Punishment reinforces and protects the rules of engagement: protocol. I love protocol because I want my relationships to be very clear in how they operate for my own piece of mind and assurance. To know who stands where and how so that each relationship I maintain is enshrined in its own little empires. I may not be the king of the world, but I will be king of that which I command. It's part of being the
only X that does Y, I've got to have my particular space and protocol helps me define that space.

I don't run detailed protocol, and most of it is under the surface or private rules that will not be obvious in company. I prefer a few simple, brief rules that are "always on". Anything else can be delivered as an instruction when required. Micro-management holds little charm for me, it removes the space for the submissive to delight, surprise and please of their own initiative. I have smart, funny, capable partners - I want them to show flair in what they do.

One of the interesting training challenges with Mr Smith is overwriting the sexual behaviours from the swinging crowd, particularly the freedom to act and reversing his "naturally" dominant tendencies, particularly around women. He's very tactile, for example, which is nice but has caused a number of wandering hands incidents that needed correcting. We had a conversation in a taxi about how he had touched a submissive friend of mine and her dominant had a twinge of annoyance - I can certainly empathise with that. The act itself was relatively insignificant, and done because of casual friendliness. However, both myself and my submissive friend felt it was inappropriate. When I talked to Mr Smith about it he bristled and was annoyed that he wasn't informed at the time, because he would have liked to have been able to account for his own actions. I explained: "When you are with me, in a kink context, you represent me. You don't have authority for yourself, I do. I am responsible for your actions - how you behave reflects upon me."

The specifics of good protocol should be invisible, except to those who are aware of it and (certainly for me) it is akin to good manners, which is something I look for in submissives in general. What should be obvious is that there is a relationship of command, I love it when people comment on how "good" and "well-behaved" my submissives are. They don't need to know which rules they are following in order to appreciate the total package...

...almost as much as I do.

No comments: