just lil ole me lol's blog: "BDSM INFO"

So you want to be a Dom. You've thought about it, you've fantasized about it, and you've decided that it's for you. All well and good. Now to take the theory into practice. There's a distance between wanting to be a dom and being a dom, though, and it pays to be aware that there's more involved than you might think. How hard can it be? Trickier than it sounds. There's more to being a dom than telling people what to do. There's a lot more to it than telling people what to do. Anyone can do that; it no more makes you a dom than owning a border collie makes you a shepherd. Nonsense. Doms tell people what to do; that 's the definition! Actually, no. It's more complicated than that. Context is important; being a dom is not about being bossy, and nobody gets to tell everyone what to do all the time. In fact, it's not even about telling all the subs what to do all the time. The very first mistake novice doms are likely to make is in believing that D/s relationship dynamics are simple. You're a dom; you see someone who is a sub; as a dom, your rightful place is telling that sub what to do, and as a sub, that person owes you respect, right? Wrong. For starters, if you want respect, you have to do more than say "I'm a dom, worship me!" In fact, saying "I'm a dom, worship me!" is a good way to get ridiculed and laughed at by anyone who has any experience in real D/s relationships. What many novice doms miss is that a D/s relationship is a relationship. Even if it's temporary, even if it happens only at something like a play party, a relationship exists between the dominant and the submissive because both people have made that choice. Believing that you can tell a submissive what to do before you have established some sort of relationship which gives you that authority is a bit like believing that any man can tell any woman to have sex with him, because, after all, men have sex with women, right? Men have sex with women, and doms tell subs what to do--but not all the time, and not by default. Do not assume for even half a second that simply being a dom grants you any authority or presumption of power over someone who is a submissive; this is as foolish and misguided as assuming that being a man grants you any presumption of sex over someone who is a woman. Now, hang on a minute, here. Submissives are submissive because they want to submit to a dom! Perhaps. But that does not mean that any particular submissive wants to submit to you. Assuming that someone wants to submit to you simply because that person is "submissive" is exactly like assuming that a heterosexual woman would want to have sex with you simply because you're a heterosexual man (or vice versa). But all submissives owe dominants respect. No, respect--even in the BDSM community--is earned. Believing that you're entitled to it simply by virtue of the fact that you call yourself a "dom" is a sure-fire way to be labelled a wannabe. And the worst, most patently offensive way to do this is to meet a person for the first time, find out that person is a submissive, and then say "Worship me!" Submissives, like all people, are human beings. Whenever you deal with human beings, before you've established any kind of context or relationship, you will find that you have the best success if you treat them as people. Funny thing, that; people like being treated as people, especially by strangers--launching straight into a D/s relationship with someone you've only just met is premature, and assuming that anyone who self-identifies as "submissive" owes anything to every person who self-identifies as "dominant" is offensive. And a big turn-off. The people you see who have all the subs, the ones you run into in the BDSM community and at play parties who are successful at finding and keeping partners, the ones who other people naturally seem to defer to? They have those partners and they have that respect because they understand that you treat everyone--including submissives--with respect until you've established a relationship that lets you assume the dominant role. I don't get it. If someone didn't want to be dominated, why would that person be a submissive? Again, it's about context. That person might very well want to be dominated, and might even want to be dominated by you, maybe--but until you find out what that person wants, don't make assumptions. And especially, don't make assumptions about what that person wants or needs, or how that person "should" interact with you. When someone discovers an interest in BDSM, it can be easy to slip into a fantasy-fulfillment mindset. You have ideas about how you would like to be and what kinds of things you'd like to explore, you have fantasies, you have things you really want to do--so it may be tempting to slot every submissive you encounter into your own fantasies. When you stop relating to people as people and start relating to them as fantasy-fulfillment objects, you can expect to have problems. How so? When I meet people online and tell them what to do, there's no problem! Online forums are very different from real-life forums. Online forums are more fantasy-oriented; in many cases, the submissive you're talking to is seeing you as nothing more than a fantasy-fulfillment object, you're seeing that submissive as a fantasy-fulfillment object, and you get along fine. But even in online forums it can be very presumptuous to assume a power relationship that has not been established. Start a conversation with someone who identifies as "submissive" with "On your knees and worship me!" and you might just come across as an insensitive poseur, or worse. Power exchange relationships are relationships. Don't assume that someone has granted you power just because you're a dominant and that person is a submissive. What are you talking about? I'm a dominant, and that person is a submissive--so of course there's a power exchange relationship! Nope, that does not necessarily follow. You do not automatically get power by being a dom; a submissive grants you that power. It's not yours by right. This is one of the basic cornerstones of consent--a submissive gives you power by consent, not by the simple virtue of being a submissive. Not every submissive wants the same things. Not every submissive interacts with a dominant in the same way. A wise and psychologically healthy submissive does not submit indescriminately to everyone who calls himself or herself a "dom." It is up to someone to choose to give you power, not up to you to take it. And you're not likely to get it if you walk around demanding that every submissive you see worships you. Nobody has an entitlement to that kind of automatic submission, Your Worshipfulness! First, get to know that person, even if briefly. Then, mutually decide whether and what kind of power relationship you have. Then, and only then, can you start with the giving orders. Seriously. You don't get to call the shots to every submissive who talks to you, and you don't get to assume that every submissive who talks to you is submissive to you. Okay, okay, I get the point. Now what? The next part to understand is that, as a dominant, it's not your job to do whatever you want. It's your job to do whatever you want within the bounds of basic common sense and the limits negotiated with your partner. Now, "basic common sense" is subjective and contextual, and changes with your degree of acceptable risk, your experience, and so on, but regardless of all that, a lot of the stuff you read about in bad S&M fiction? Way outside anyone's definition of "basic common sense." Ordering your newfound submissive to have unprotected sex with a pub full of strangers? Not basic common sense. Digging that eight-foot bullwhip you've never actually used from the back of your closet, and trying it out on a person who's never experienced any form of pain play before? Not basic common sense. Dragging your new partner home and leaving your new partner tied to your bed for three days? Not basic common sense. Even within the realm of basic common sense, it's important to understand that it isn't all about you. Of course it is! I'm the Dom! The Dom does whatever he or she wants! Um...no. At least, not if you want to keep a submissive. The relationship works for both of you, or it works for nobody. You see, submissives are submissive because they get something from the experience, too--and they have things they want to do, things they want to explore. Ignore the fact that you need to create a positive experience for the submissive, and don't be surprised when the submissive leaves and finds a different dominant. Ignore a submissive's limits, and carelessly or maliciously cause permanent damage, and don't be surprised when the submissive files charges. Any D/s relationship between two (or more) people is a relationship first and a D/s relationship second. As with all relationships, there is a need for mutual reciprocity in the relationship; everyone involved must feel that the relationship meets their needs. And if you do start a D/s relationship with a submissive, remember that it's your responsibility to pay close attention to the submissive. When you're engaged in some BDSM activity, make a point of being conscious at all times about how your submissive is responding to what you're doing. Don't get so carried away that you stop paying attention to the experience from the submissive's point of view; remember, you only get to play again if you do a good job the first time around!

All right, so what is "BDSM"? "BDSM" is an acronym of "B&D" (Bondage & Discipline), "D&S" (Dominance & Submission), and "S&M" (sadomasochism). "BDSM" refers to any or all of these things, and a lot of stuff besides. Tying up your lover is BDSM; so is flogging that person, or bossing that person around, or any of a thousand other things. BDSM is highly erotic, usually (though not always) involves sex or sexual tension; and is highly psychologically charged. One person (the "submissive") agrees to submit to another person (the "dominant"); or, alternately, one person agrees to receive some sort of sensation, such as spanking, from another. Some people like to be submissive all the time, some people like to be dominant all the time; some people like to switch, being submissive one day and dominant the next. Many people practice some element of BDSM in their sexual lives without even necessarily being aware of it. They may think of "S&M" as "That sick stuff that people do with whips and cattle prods and stuff," yet still blindfold one another from time to time, or tie one another down and break out the whipped cream... All of these things are "BDSM." BDSM is not necessarily hardcore sadomasochism; it can be remarkably subtle and sensual and soft. Pinning your partner to the bed and running silk or ice cubes or rabbit fur over your lover's body qualifies as "BDSM" (specifically, of a variety called "sensation play"). BDSM doesn't have to involve all of these. There are many people involved in BDSM who enjoy tying others up, or being tied up themselves, but who do not enjoy S&M--that is, they aren't interested in inflicting or receiving pain. Sometimes, one partner just ties up the other, as a form of foreplay. Similarly, there are many people who may like the psychological control they get from ordering their lovers to do things, but do not care for being physically restrained or tied, or for tying up their lovers. BDSM is as varied as the people who do it. Some people, myself included, love the aesthetic of an elaborate rope harness, or an elaborate form of bondage; others simply aren't interested in the bondage elements at all. The key to all these different forms of BDSM, though, is the exchange of power. One person (the "bottom" or "submissive") is choosing to allow the other person (the "top" or "dominant") to have control over him or her in some way--perhaps by allowing the dominant to tie them up, perhaps by allowing the dominant to spank them, perhaps simply by doing whatever the dominant instructs them to. In particular, BDSM is NOT abuse! People who are practicing BDSM in any of its trillions of forms are doing it voluntarily, for fun. It's a way to explore. Everything that happens in a BDSM relationship is consensual; and believe it or not, it's not just about the dominant getting what he or she wants--it's more about the submissive getting what he or she wants. An abuser has no regard for the feelings, needs, or limits of the victim. A BDSM dominant is concerned above all else with the needs and desires of the submissive. Pretty straightforward, really. BDSM isn't what you see in porn flicks. The image of BDSM that is portrayed in many materials of this sort has about as much to do with BDSM as the child's tale "Jack and the Magic Beanstalk" has to do with agriculture. These materials show little more than women being used in various unoriginal ways for men's enjoyment, usually by force. The reality is that there are actually more male submissives than female submissives; and that BDSM is a mutual activity that is driven more by the needs of the submissive than by the needs of the dominant. Uh-huh. Sure. The needs of the submissive. Right. The dominant is the one bossing the other person around; you'd have to be some kind of jerk to want to do that. While that may seem like it makes sense on the surface, the truth is just the opposite. People who are good at dominating or inflicting pain are, in general, LESS likely than many other people to be jerks or assholes. Why? Because in order to be good at doing it, you need to be highly in-tune with your submissive. People who are self-centered generally make poor dominants, because they lack the empathy required to be able to read and judge their partner's reactions, and bring their partner where that person wants to go. Assholes quickly find that nobody wants to play with them; and people who are empathic tend not to be assholes. All of the real top-notch dominants I've ever met, without exception, are incredibly cool people. In tune with your submissive? The dominant is the one calling the shots. What does the dominant care about the submissive? Believe it or not, the dynamics of a BDSM relationship are often driven by the submissive, not by the dominant. The submissive sets the limits; the submissive decides what places can and can not be explored; the submissive has the ability to call a halt to the scene. The dominant, in many ways, is simply a facilitator. It's the dominant's job to create a setting where the people involved can explore the submissive's fantasies. Dominating your partners does not mean that you don't want to please them. It is not always, or even usually, true that a dominant is interested in his own gratification rather than his submissive's. In fact, many dominants are driven as much by their desire to please their partner as by anything else; the psychology of a healthy BDSM relationship is driven by the submissive as well as by the dominant, and a dominant can take pleasure from gratifying the needs of the submissive just as easily as the submissive can take pleasure from gratifying the needs of the dominant. This kind of thing is not one-directional. It's all for the submissive's benefit? Yeah, right. The submissive is the one being bossed around or spanked or whatever. How can you say that isn't abuse? Simple. Two reasons: In a BDSM relationship, the submissive sets the limits. A victim of abuse doesn't get a vote; the victim can't tell the abuser what to do, or how much to do it. A submissive sets all the limits--what kinds of things can be (and can't be!) done, how much, and for how long. And while we're on the subject of limits, there is more than one kind of limit in a BDSM relationship. Everybody has "hard" limits--things that they absolutely will not do, and will not even consider. Some people, for example, like to be tied up but don't like the idea of being whipped; if they won't allow themselves to be whipped, ever, that's a hard limit. There are also "soft" limits--things that someone won't do under ordinary circumstances, but will allow to be "forced" on him or her in the context of a particular scenario that's being acted out. Between soft limits and hard limits lies an interesting psychological territory to explore. A submissive gets a way to opt out. This may be a code word, or a sign of some sort; if the submissive uses it, he or she has had enough and the scene is over. An abuse victim doesn't tell the abuser when to stop. So don't you have to be kind of sick or messed up to do that stuff? No. C'mon, really. I mean, tying people up...whipping them. Isn't that demented? No. For the most part, people who are into this kind of thing are remarkably well-adjusted. People involved in BDSM generally are neither abusive nor come from backgrounds where they were abused, because people with that kind of backgrounds aren't likely to be sexually turned on by giving someone else power over them. That doesn't mean that no BDSM relationship is abusive--since people are what they are, no form of human interaction is immune to abuse. But it does mean that the people you'll find in the BDSM community are, for the most part, very stable. (In fact, if you're going to get involved in this kind of stuff, it helps to have a cast-iron ego and a strong sense of self, particularly if you're a submissive.) Some people think anyone interested in BDSM is suffering from some kind of past abuse. I think that the "BDSM interest=past abuse" assertion is most frequently made by people who don't understand what BDSM is. They see someone being flogged, they say "Oh! People in a BDSM relationship get hit; people in an abusive relationship get hit; ergo, BDSM is like an abusive relationship. QED." But the fact is, the psychology of a BDSM power exchange is vastly different from the psychology of abuse; and in a BDSM relationship, the psychology is frequently driven by the limitations of the submissive, not the dominant. Typically, it is the submissive who says "This far and no farther"--which is entirely contradictory to the psychology of abuse. Now I'm not saying that people into BDSM are never victims of abuse, of course. If you survey any arbitrary group of people--all lawyers, all redheads, all Toyota Camry owners, all BDSM participants--you'll find that some people in that group are abuse survivors. But that doesn't imply a direct connection between abuse and the practice of law, or hair color, or choice of transportation...or BDSM. The psychiatric profession agrees, In fact, according to the DSM-IV, the standard diagnostic reference text "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders" published by the American Psychiatric Association, The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors must cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning in order for sexual sadism or masochism to be considered a disorder. BDSM is not what it looks like from the outside. It's not just tying people up and having sex, and it's not just arbitrarily whipping people. That's very crude, and kind of boring. What it is is a sort of role-playing, where the people involved are acting out a fantasy that involves taking or giving up power. Sex is often involved, but not always. Role-playing? Fantasy? You make it sound like it's all some kind of game. It is. You're exercising your imagination, and you're playing a game with the other person. You get to be the dominant; your partner is the submissive; you're playing the role of the mad scientist who's just kidnapped someone and is going to use this poor innocent person for evil experiments. Or whatever. (There are people who do this all the time--one always the dominant, one always the submissive--who will tell you it isn't a game, but that's part of the game.) At the same time, however, it is very serious. You're creating a framework that allows you to have fun and explore some very powerfully charged areas of human psychology, and push your boundaries at the same time. In this way, BDSM can be a powerful tool for self-discovery and exploration. You can also explore fantasies by roleplaying scenarios that are highly charged psychologically. One such type of exploration is a form of BDSM called "resistance play," in which one person (the dominant) takes another person (the submissive) by force, and the submissive is expected and encouraged to resist by force. This kind of play is not everyone's cup of tea, of course, but it can be a safe and fun way to explore some of the darker fantasies that are very common in a surprising number of people. This also can lead you into some highly volatile psychological territory. Even if it seems like something you really want to experiment with, it's possible that it can hit some psychological triggers that produce a reaction you didn't expect. So it pays to go carefully. Many of the standard rules of BDSM apply doubly or triply to this kind of scenario. For example, using a "safeword"--a code word that means "Stop!"--is absolutely vital when you're experimenting with resistance play; one of the tenants of resistance play is that "no" does not mean "no," so you need a word that does It also pays to negotiate the basic parameters in which you'll operate beforehand. Different people have different idea of what constitutes "force" or how rough "rough" is. If everyone involved isn't on the same page, someone may get hurt in a way that isn't so fun. Whoa, wait a minute. Force? Whipping? That's supposed to be FUN?? It is fun, if that's your sort of thing. The experience of being flogged is nothing like what you imagine it would be like. For the most part, it's more stimulating than painful. Ditto for the experience of acting out, say, a resistance-play fantasy. Quite honestly, there was a time when I drew the line at the whipping thing. I was absolutely certain I'd never, ever, under any circumstances, allow someone to flog me. Not me, no sir. But then I tried it (long story), and it was absolutely nothing like what I though it'd be like. Ever have a really deep massage? The kind that hurts, but still feels good? Same thing, only more so. Besides, when you're sexually aroused, all kind of stimulation can be fun. Ever had a lover who left gouges in your back during sex? Or one who bites? It's very passionate and intense. If you're in the right frame of mind, even a flogging that leaves welts isn't really painful, precisely--not like stubbing your toe, or running into the edge of the bathroom wall at two o'clock in the morning because you didn't turn the light on. It's more like the lover who claws your back when she gets off thing. But hey, if it's not for you, don't do it. Damn straight! I would never do that; I respect my lover too much. Experimenting with intense things like resistance play and pain play do not mean you do not respect your lover. Quite the contrary; respect for your lover is absolutely paramount if you wish to do these things safely. Respect for your lover is not just in behaving according to some ideal about the way "men are supposed to treat women" or whatever. Respect for your lover lies in exploring with your lover, creating with your lover, doing with your lover those things that you and your lover wish to do, sharing yourself on a very deep level with your lover... It's reflected in everything you say, do, express, feel, and think with your lover. Different people want, need, and value different things. Respect recognizes those differences. And above all else, respect is an integral part of the mutual process of self-exploration and self discovery. Now hold on a minute, kink-boy. We're talking about kinky S&M here, not Buddhism. What do you mean, "self exploration?" Just that. BDSM is a very broad term that encompasses many wildly different practices, and many wildly different beliefs. But central to all these things is the idea of challenging boundaries and testing limits--and that's precisely what self-exploration is all about. You cannot know your limits if you never test them and never explore them. You may know some general things, but you can't truly know yourself if you have never explored and never experimented. As Francis Bacon wrote, Your true self can be known only by systematic experimentation, and controlled only by being known. BDSM provides a context and a set of tools for exploring your own personal boundaries in a safe, fun, enjoyable, and mutually reciprocal way. It provides a vehicle by which you can get to know yourself and your lover much more deeply and intimately than you might have thought possible. And hey, you often find along the way that you can be surprised! You probably have turn-ons that you don't even know you have, and you will never discover without exploration. And that, my friend, can truly enrich your life and the life of your lover. When it comes right down to it, if your goal is self-knowledge and personal enlightenment, I put six months in a BDSM relationship up there with three years in a Tibetan monastery any day. But where do you draw the line? How much is too much? You draw the line wherever you want to. There isn't one way to "do" BDSM, and not everybody is in to the same things. If you like being tied up, but you don't want to be whipped, then don't be whipped! Every person is unique; not everybody has the same turn-ons; if you don't like something, don't do it. Most people who practice BDSM believe in "safe, sane, and consensual." That means: Don't do anything blatantly unsafe; don't try anything that's likely to get you killed or injured if you screw up, and don't do something if you aren't sure how. Be reasonable and rational. Know the difference between fantasy and reality. Make sure you're both into it before you do it. Do that, and you'll probably be okay. It's like anything else; exploring an interest in fine cuisine doesn't mean you have to like fish eggs! If it isn't for you, then that's where you draw the line. But once you get involved in this sort of thing, don't you keep going further and further? Can you ever stop? This isn't really a question about BDSM. This is a question about human nature. People are very, very complex creatures, and it's unrealistic to think that you know the whole truth about every aspect of yourself without ever having experimented with the things that turn you on. There are many things that I thought would never appeal to me that experimentation has proven are huge turn-ons for me, and I suspect the same is true of most people. Not even "most people who are into BDSM"--most people. Nobody is completely static, and nobody can be expected to know absolutely everything about himself or herself from the get-go. So yeah, when you start experimenting, you may find that there are things that turn you on that you never thought would turn you on. But then again, unless you are hopelessly shallow, as you go through life you'll probably discover new things that turn you on even if you don't get involved with BDSM! And of course you can stop. Just because you learn something new about yourself, that doesn't mean you're changing into some kind of raving, uncontrolled lunatic! It just means you've discovered something new, that's all. But how do I know if it is for me? How do I know if I'm a dominant or a submissive? How do I know if I like any of this stuff? That depends on you. It's not like there's only one kind of person who's into BDSM; and it's not like only men are dominant or only women are submissive. (In fact, the deck seems to be tilted in favor of men who are submissives.) And you don't necessarily even have to be dominant or submissive! Maybe you like experimenting with being tied up, or tying up your lover, but all that bossing-about stuff does nothing for you. So, the terms "dominant" or "submissive" may not apply to you, even though you do want to experiment with some aspects of BDSM. Don't get hung up on the terminology. It's really not that important. Are you into any of this at all? Well, that depends. Have you ever had fantasies about being tied up and helpless while unspeakable things are done to your body? Have you ever wanted to be able to tell your lover exactly what to do ("Get on your knees and bark like a dog!")? You might enjoy experimenting with this sort of thing. Hey, there are worse things in the world than having an interesting and varied sex life--and if you experiment and decide it isn't for you, so be it! So...why? What's the point of tying people up? Why would someone agree to any of this? That's a complicated question. The short answer is: Because it's fun, it's highly arousing, and it's tremendously powerful. It's a great vehicle for exploring a number of different kinds of fantasies in a way that's exhilarating. People are dominant or submissive for different reasons. Being submissive in a BDSM scene can be tremendously liberating, particularly for people who aren't comfortable exploring their sexuality or their personal boundaries. When you agree to act as a submissive, you give up responsibility for what's going on; you sit back and let things happen. Provided you trust the person who's being the dominant, you can mentally relax and concentrate on the role that's being created for you. As a dominant, the pleasure comes from constructing a scenario and acting it out. You can, at least within reason, determine the submissive's fate; you're the scriptwriter, director, and producer of the entire show; you construct the fantasy world and make it real. Being a good dominant is a lot of work. You have to be creative; you must be able to improvise; and you have to pay attention to your submissive, to maintain the illusion you're creating and make sure your submissive is getting what he or she wants from the scenario. In many ways, the dominant person is a facilitator; the dominant's job is to make a fantasy that takes the submissive wherever he or she wants to go, and bring that fantasy to life. For many people, BDSM is an intensely personal and meaningful experience, from either side. I am both dominant and submissive--a switch. I am into BDSM because I want more. I want more experience, I want more intensity; I want to feel more, think more, experience more, be more. I want to live life in immoderation, not moderation; I want to experience intensity because I want to live intensely. I surrender to another because I want to be taken to that place where reason and thought disappears, where the world folds up flat and spins away into its own corner and there's nothing left but what I'm feeling. I take control of another because I want to take them to that place--because when I become the orchestrator and the director of their world, when I can set the stage and write the script and make them, for a little while, become someone else, somewhere else, then I can feel what it is to wake the sleeping lion--and that is heady stuff indeed. On top of that, it's very romantic. What? Romantic? You've got to be joking. Nope. See, that's one of the things about BDSM that isn't obvious to someone on the outside. When a dominant is creating a BDSM scenario, the dominant needs to focus his or her attention entirely on the submissive. A good dominant pays very close attention to the submissive--how the submissive is reacting, what's going on around the submissive, what the submissive is feeling--everything. Having somebody pay that close attention to you doesn't suck. It's very romantic. So you've got someone tied to the bed. So what? It's more than just tying someone to the bed. The good stuff isn't in tying the knots; it's in what you are while you're tying the knots. Think of it as a game that's two parts acting, two parts roleplaying, three parts sex, and two parts psychology. Or, if you want, think of this: There she (or he, depending on who you are) is, lying helpless beneath you, restrained hand and foot, blindfolded, and you have a feather in your hand...and she's very ticklish...and she doesn't...know...when...you're...going...to... Uh...wait. Blindfolded? Yeah! That way, the submissive (a) can't tell what's about to happen (anticipation can be half the fun) and (b) is made to focus more closely on what she's (or he's) feeling. So, anyway, there she is, restrained hand and foot, and you get out the clothespins, and... Clothespins? Yes. You use them to...well, maybe we'll get into that in the "How" section. The point is: Just tying somebody up is boring. The fun is in the stuff that goes with it. When you're restrained, you have this delicious feeling of helplessness, your lover free to do anything to your vulnerable body...it's fun! (Incidentally, there's more than one way to tie somebody up. When most people think about bondage, they think of tying someone spreadeagle to the bed. That's a simple form of "restraint bondage"--tying somebody to keep that person from moving. Another form of bondage is "stimulation bondage"--tying somebody up, not to keep that person from moving, but in a way that stimulates that person sexually. For example, there is a form of rope harness called a "karada" which is typically tied around a woman in such a way that the ropes pass across her breasts, around her back, and up between her legs. This form of bondage does not restrict motion at all--in fact, you can wear it to work under your clothes!--but every time she moves, the ropes shift across her breasts and between her legs, constantly stimulating her and reminding her that they are there.) The same kind of fun can be had in bossing your lover around. The fun part isn't that you can give orders; anybody can be pushy. The fun part is in the fact that your lover is compelled, within the limits of the game, to obey. She must submit as you tell her to slowly--no, more slowly--peel off her clothes, and caress her own body as she tells you, Maestro, that she'll do anything to make you happy; then, as you direct, pick up the vibrator and... You get the idea. These are some very tame scenarios, but they illustrate that there's more going on than just tying somebody to your bed or bossing somebody around. There's an entire interaction here that's highly sensual and very intense. Okay, okay, so, what do you actually DO, anyway?

Humiliation Chart, by Sir Viktor Note: We should not put our BDSM values on anyone in the vanilla world! Please do not humiliate anyone in a Vanilla setting such as a restaurant or supermarket with a possibility of a vanilla person seeing this. HUMILIATION activities/ideas *Act as objects (furniture, etc.) *After orgasm, making sub drink his own cum *Always address you Sir, ma'am, etc. *Anal plugs *Age Play *Baby pacifier tied around neck *Bathroom use control *Bathroom use in front of others *Become a human ashtray *Beg for cigarettes, drinks, etc. *Blindfolds *Boot worship at odd moments *Cavity check in private *Cavity check in public *Cage display *Cage display and ignore them *Carrying a doll or toy around *Clip on earrings that don't match *Crawl on 4ís *Cum or urinate into their food. *Curse words (Whore, Slut, Worthless, etc.) *Curtsy in public *Dancing/ stripped tease *Dom chooses food *Dom chooses cloths *Dom urinates into water, while sub is taking a bath *Eat from a pet dish *Eat from floor *Eat without utensils *Embarrasing positions *Enema *Eye contact restrictions *Feed submissive from hand *Feeding the food in restaurant (Remember: don't put your values on others-if they can see) *Feminine necklace exposed (for males) *Foot worship *Forced bestiality (not for everyone. This is a hard limit for most) *Forced Cross dressing *Forced dressing *Forced exercising *Forced nudity *Forced masturbation in odd places *Forced shopping for pantyhose and asking the clerk ìWould this fit meî (male) *Forced slave auction *Forced to go to bathroom in front of others *Forced to sell lemonade in the street like a kid for .10 cents *Forced to wear a sign (slut, etc.) *Forced to be a slave *Forced to wear a leash *Golden shower *Handcuffs in public *Handcuffed to a shopping cart while shopping *Harem--serving w/other(s) *Hood *Human Garbage Can *Immobilization *Lead on leash while having a rubber bone in the mouth *Leave bathroom door opened *Leave note with embracing instructions *Made to walk the streets in a ìRed Light Districtî *Made to urinate in front of others into a cat liter box *Maid services *Make sub wear underwear that you've urinated on *Mask *Nipple clamps under see thru top *Orgasm control *Orgasm denial *Pantyhose work with shorts (male) *Pet roles (act like a dog, cat, etc.) *Pet play (forced sex w/pet) *Record real embarrassing sessions and make them watch it *Scat Play *Scolding *Spitting in face *Send shopping with note and hand it to clerk. *Serve others (supervised) *Serve others (unsupervised) *Serve as toilet *Shave head *Shave body hair *Shave pubic hair *Slap face *Slave tattoos (temporary) *Spanking (public) *Speech restriction *Spell ìSlaveî with suntan lotion & get tan *Stand in corner *Swallow urine *Suck dildo in car, so others can see *Take Pictures *Take Video *Verbal Abuse *Wear a bra and get a tan (males) *Wear diapers *Wear Masters cum on your face without wiping *Wear no bra under see thru top *Wear no panties under see thru clothes *Wear T-shirt that say ìI'm a sissy boyî, ìI belong to Masterî, etc. *Wear Collar everywhere *Wear unmatching clothes *Wear clothes that are ripped *Write on body (slut, sissy, etc.) *Undress in front of others

BDSM vs. Abuse The key difference between S&M and Abuse, is "consent". * Consent = Is an agreed approval of what is done and/or proposed by another. * Abuse = to use so as to injure or damage: MALTREAT S&M * Is based on the safe, sane, consensual theory * S&M is a controlled environment * S&M has safe words to stop the scene * In a S&M scene the dominant looks out for the well being of the submissive * S&M can be an erotic sexual encounter * In S&M both partners are enjoying themselves * in S&M the dominant respects limits * In S&M there is mutual respect * In S&M the relationship is fulfilling * In S&M both parties feel they contribute towards the relationships * In S&M one can ask their partner to "play" * In S&M relationship there is trust * In S&M a submissive voluntarily serves the dominant * S&M is about building trust * S&M builds self esteem * S&M builds the spirit of a submissive Abuse * Abuse is not negotiated * Abuse is an out of control environment * Abuse does not have safe words * An abuser does not give a damn about the victim * Abuse is always one sided * Abuse is never negotiated. * In abuse, no one is enjoying the results * The abuser is into non consensual violence * The victim has no respect towards the abuser * In abuse the victim is harmed * In abuse both parties are left unfulfilled * The abuser always feel they are superior * A person does not ask for abuse * In an abusive relationship there is no trust * The abuser does not care for consent * Abuse has no trust * Abuse destroys self esteem * An abuser destroys the spirit of the victim Dominants!!! Before you get in trouble know : * A sub may be in subspace and not have the presence to stop the scene. Watch for your submissives well being * "Recalling," also known as "Flashbacks." Example of this can be, a sub who was raped years ago, and during a humiliation scene, has a recall of that traumatic moment. Know thy sub. Don't let her flip out. * Always clean your toys. Do not use the same toys without using condoms each time. Wash the toys after each use. Do Not use same sex toys during multiple partner scenes, without changing condoms. * Always use common sense. You are playing with a human being, who has given you the gift of trust. Don't abuse that trust. * Reputation takes a lifetime to earn, yet a measly second to lose. For a moment of gratification, don't ruin someone's life. Don't be abused...Recognize the Signs Physical abuse is all of the following: * Hit, choke, slap, threaten or hurt you outside the scene content. * The abuser will force sexual acts upon you, even if you are not in the mood * Will rarely respect your physical limits Mental/emotional abuse consist of: * Isolating you from your friends, family or others * Putting you constantly into a confused state * Constantly being criticized * Making you financially depended upon them * They are constantly draining you of your finances * You constantly have to watch what you say around them * Making you feel worthless * Blames you for all misfortunes * Extreme jealousy on their part * You being constantly afraid to speak to your partner * Never listening to your concerns * Constantly asking you for financial support * You living constantly in the state of "Walking on Egg shells" In case of Abuse: * Contact National Domestic Violence Hotline 1-800-799-SAFE (7233) or 1-800-787-3224 * Leave the relationship * Contact your family or friends * Contact your religious leaders * Call your local police department * Get Local Counseling.

CHAINS by Rick Umbaugh She lays in front of you on her belly. You take each delicate wrist and encircle it with a gleaming brass chain. The links lay flat against her wrists. You do the same with her ankles, locking the chain to her with little brass locks. A small bar with rings at either end attaches the two chains making the classic hog-tie position. She struggles, trying to slip the chains surrounding her wrists, but nothing happens, the chains won't roll off, no matter what she tries. In the end she can only lay there and wait for what comes next. Locks and Chains are easier to manipulate than rope, they are inherently safer and less prone to dangerous situations. They are also harder for the prisoner to defeat. The problems with chain are its lack of availability and that when it does fail the failure can be very embarrassing without the fail safe device which is both clumsy and expensive. Like rope, chain is a flexible strand which can attach to body parts then attach body parts to other body parts or to inanimate objects. Unlike rope you can leave the attachment points accessible to your prisoner since without access to the keys the attachments are unbreakable. Houdini's escapes were more a triumph of the pickpocket's art than that of the picklock. Unlike rope chains will not bind when used properly or tighten, but unlike rope they can make loops for attaching only in quantum increments . The size of the links limit how loose are tight the attachments are. This means that chains with smaller links, taking into account the strength of the individual links and the size of the lock which is going to go through the link, are inherently more useful than chains with larger links no matter how much more intimidating the heavier chain looks. For our purposes there are two types of chain. The normal type of chain is that in which the links meet each other to form a 90o degree angle. This is a fine chain for securing a bicycle, but not very good for confining a person. The 90o angle means that the chain effectively has a circular cross section so an escape artist can simply roll the chain off his or her wrists. It is impractical and ugly to have multiple strands of chain, the way one has multiple strands of rope, so the solution is to use a different kind of chain. This chain has what is called flattened links. What this means is that the links are twisted 45o or so. With the twist the links lay flat against the skin thus creating an effectively ovoid cross section which is harder to roll than the circular one. In this vein also, the links on the chain should be as small as you can acquire since this will increase the amount of area holding the confined joint, reducing again the chance of the prisoner slipping the chain. The same rules of bondage apply to the chain as to the rope. You should be able to get a finger between the skin and the chain or it's on too tight. In reality you can put a chain on a little tighter than a rope since there are gaps in the chains compression of the flesh but if the point of compression is a join or a blood vessel then the damage could be worse. When testing this you finger should slide under a joint between links, rather than under a link. I use three sizes of chain, one with 3/4" links, one with 5/8" links and one with 1/2" links. Any thing smaller than 1/2" requires a very small gage wire to construct and so is both insecure and not very attractive. Smaller links tend to not be closed, i.e. the link is twisted into shape but the ends are not welded. This leaves the possibility that the chain can cause a scratch. My 1/2" chain doesn't have closed links, but the gage of the wire is so large that it won't gouge anyone's arm. You should buy your locks and chains in the same store so you can tell if they work together. The shanks of the locks should fit through the links of the chain and two links of the chain should fit inside the shanks of the lock. You should also, as much as is possible, get locks that are single keyed. This way you will only have one key per lock size to find if you have to get the person out quickly. With the smaller locks this is easy since they are generally shipped with only one or two key patterns per box. With the larger locks you'll have to special order them. All my smaller locks are single keyed because I use them for attaching wrists and ankles, so I can get people out of them quickly. I use the larger locks to attach chain to chain and so it is less likely I will need to get them undone as quickly so I have simply marked them. Quick Links are also useful. These are normally shaped chain links with one long side having an opening which can be closed with a long hexagonal bolt. I have three sizes, one, two and three inch long links but they make intermediate sizes. I use them primarily to attach leather cuffs to other things, but they can also be used to attach chain to chain and the smaller ones link to link. The hexbolt can be tightened enough that fingers can't open them. Lastly snap hooks and panic hooks can be used but they must be kept away from prying fingers. Some people advocate placing a snap hook in a centralized place where the chains become ineffective by releasing the snap hook. I personally don't to the kind of chaining that would need to avail itself of such a technique and I find it a little counter productive. A struggling person is best left in bondage until they calm down and can be quietly released (for your safety and your prisoners). Once the person is released in this fashion they still have chain on or surrounding their body, which, if they keep struggling will just become entangled, causing an equally dangerous situation. The fail safe for all this equipment is the Bolt Cutter. This is a huge wire cutter. I've seen them in two sizes, 18" and 24". They should only be used is a lock fails or is someone becomes hopelessly entangled in the chain. If a lock fails then cut the lock's shank. Any lock that jams is automatically considered unreliable, no matter whether it opens later. You are going to throw it out anyway. If you can't get to the lock then you'll have to cut the chain. Make sure that no one looks at, or is even around when a piece of chain is being cut. The person doing the cutting should wear something covering his or her eye since the cut shank or chain link may go flying. Now for the fun part, using chain to tie your honey up. The first step is to choose a suitable extremity, loop the chain once around it, taking suitable precautions, and lock it closed. Attach the other end of the chain to a suitable extremity, other sub or inanimate object and have fun. I try to have the attachment point of the chain, when chaining a wrist, on the top of the wrist, rather than the bottom, as the top of the wrist. The shank of the lock forms a 90o angle with the chain and thus could put pressure on sensitive veins, nerves and tendons. I also prefer to have the palms of my prisoner's hands available to me. The chain used for attaching a person's wrists should be the one with the smallest links you have. The quantum effect of links means that sometimes you will have to attach the chain looser than you feel is secure (because making the connection one link tighter would be too tight) and this limits the effect of erring on the side of safety. By attaching the wrists with a 3 foot chain which runs behind his or her back then setting the person to serving at table you have created a classic and beautiful scenario for a scene. You will have to have some patience with him or her at first but many servants, with practice can perform the tasks every elegantly. I use my medium sized links on the ankles as it is harder to slip them due to the nature of the joint and except for the Achilles tendon there aren't as many things which can be hurt at the ankle. You don't have to make the ankle loop as tight as you do at the wrists since the ankle loop can only be slipped by pointing to toes and moving it over the heel. I use my heaviest chain for attaching to the neck and waist. The waist, particularly on the large slave, has almost no place where the tightness of the chain is a problem, so the chain can be attached rather tightly. You have to worry about tightness around the neck, but you don't have to make a neck chain too tight since getting it over the chin is almost impossible. Additionally you don't have to worry about the chain tightening so as long as you don't jerk too hard, hard enough to hurt the vertebra bones in the back of the neck you are okay. You do have to worry about pulling on the chain if it is attached so that it runs down the back rather than the front of the slave. In this situation you can never jerk the chain, but if the chain is attached to the elbows or the wrists, which are at full extension or attached to some other part of the body so that they can't move up or down, then running the chain across the front of the neck is okay. This is again because the chain will never tighten and the elbows or the wrists, properly restrained, only pull out to escape, not down. One of my first introductions to the beauties of bondage was a picture in my Latin book of a slave with a chain around his waist then attached to an ankle chain. It is an easy arrangement to reproduce. First you attach the ankles with a medium sized chain, the attach a larger chain to it. The ankle chain should run completely through the shank of the waist chain to reduce the chances of the slave stumbling as he or she walks. This should always be done with the captive facing away from you to reduce the danger of kicking. Once restrained this way (a kick will either not be very effective or will pull both feet from under the creature) you turn the person around and attach the larger chain to his or her waist. I consider this a punishment tie in as much as it can be used to restrict your servant without him or her being restricted from performing their duties. If you want to make this a trust tie all you have to do is attach the submissive's wrists with a short chain, the attach the chain to the waist chain as well. The same lock used to attach the waist chain should be used to attach the wrist chain, placing the shank of the lock through a link, unless the lock on the waist chain is on the opposite side of the body from where you want the slave's wrists. I am also quite fond of the Gorean sirik. In this chaining arrangement the chain is either attached to the slave's collar or looped around her neck. The chain then runs down the front of the body (only down the back if attached to a well padded collar) and down to the ankle chains. The wrists are attached at the height of the slave's belly button. This is a particularly devious chaining when the wench is in heat as you don't have to attend to her and she can't attend to herself. I have not said anything about handcuffs here as I consider them of limited usage. With chains and locks you are relatively free to handle and manipulate the submissive without worrying about hurting anything since the chain will give while the shackles of the hand and ankle cuffs can press against sensitive areas and not give. I also consider handcuffs less reliable and less able to be opened with a bolt cutter. The mechanism is more complex on ordinary handcuffs and thus more prone to failure. Oiling and cleaning will reduce this but I still consider it a problem. Locks and chain, on the other hand, use a simpler locking mechanism and the shanks and links are easy to cut with the bolt cutter if the need arises. If you keep them clean and oiled they will last a long time. Losing a key in the heat of the moment is also a problem. You should keep your keeps on a belt loop key chain and a spare set somewhere you can get at it easily. If there is a way of placing a snap hook on a particular chaining scheme so that you can quickly release the captive, but they cannot reach it, you have a wonderful so close but yet so far conundrum for your prisoner to solve. Chaining can be as intricate or simple short chaining someone wrist to the opposite ankle is a quick, easy and frustrating way to confine a prisoner. He or she cannot rise to walk without having to bend over deeply, and thus being all out of balance. By chaining both ankles to both opposing wrists with long chains you have created a wonderful costume for the dance, and one of Cecil B. DeMille's most favorite images. What greater invitation is there then a woman simpy chained to your bed by the neck to the bedposts?