Lesson One - The Gift of Submission/Dominance What is submission? Submission is submitting to the will of another person in a trusted relationship. Submission is fulfilling the Dominant's desires or needs to the very best of your ability. Some gifts are for small periods of time, like only in the bedroom or during a scene. Some gifts are for a few hours a day and some are day in and day out, every day of your life. It is controlling yourself enough to give complete control away. Submission is a gift based on Respect, Trust and sometimes but not always, Love. It is something that is given and not taken. It is about surrender. It is a decision that is made with a sound mind. When You've been given this gift, it should be cherished. A good or striving slave should be made to feel like gold or Your finest treasure. The gift of submission should be nurished and positively reinforced. Being given this gift is an honor, not a right. The same needs to be understood about the Gift of Dominance. The Dominant should guide and love, to better the slave. The Dominant lights a path of growth for the both of Tthem. A Dominant should listen, counsel, teach and if love is involved, love unconditionally. Dominance should truly be a gift to the submissive as much as the submissive's gift is to Him/Her. A Dominant should also trust and respect the submissive. Taking on a submissive is an important decision and should never be done without truly knowing what that gift entails. Things that you may think about when researching the gift of submission/Dominance: Is my gift a life gift, an occasional gift or a sexual fantasy whirlwind gift? What if I like to be forced or to be challenging for my Top, is it still submission? What if I like a challenging submissive or do I want total submission 100% of the time? How do I know who to trust? What exactly do I want to give and how much? What do I want from a submissive? What do I want from a Dominant? What kind of submissive am I? What kind of Dominant am I? Is it natural to fear having so much power or giving so much control? How do I build trust with a possible Dominant/submissive? What does this gift mean to me? Lesson Two - Respect Respect is earned and not a right. It is not owed to us. The belief that One is entitled to it because they are a Dom is false. Submissives are human beings and to treat them as such will be a good start toward success. Merit, demeanor, listening more - speaking less, communication, patience, kindness, being gentle, there are many ways to earn respect. Doms are not the only ones who need to earn respect. Submissives need to earn respect, as well. If any person, Dom or sub, is treated like a fulfillment to a fantasy, instead of a genuine, individual spirit, there are bound to be eventual problems. Getting to the bare basics, the bottom line essentials, we are all only human. We all start from scratch. Things that you may think about when researching Respect: Am I respectable? What can I do to earn respect? Do I need to make any changes? Do I feel I should be treated better or less than because of my station? Lesson Three - Trust Trust is a big deal that Aall involved in BDSM needs to be looked into closely. It is the foundation of ANY relationship. But this just isn't any relationship, is it? Some of Uus may lay a basic trust in people rather easily, but this type of trust should run far deeper than that. First of all, are Yyou being honest with Yyourself about who You are? Have Yyou really found Yyour core? Trust begins with honesty. Communication is extremely important. Yyou must know who Yyou are and who Yyour partner is. Yyou must know what Yyou want and what Yyou are looking for. Have rules been established? Are safety measures in place? Trust needs to begin some where. Things that you may thing about when researching Trust: Am I being completely honest with Mmyself about who I am? Am I being honest with Mmy partner? Am I communicating EVERYTHING? "How should I tell Him/Her I am scared?" Do I trust Someone with my life? Do I know what I want and have I communicated that? Do I discuss red flags? What does trust mean to me? What is sadomasochism? Sadism is defined as social or sexual gratification or pleasure by inflicted pain by other person. The word "sadism" is derived from a french philosopher-writer of sadistic novels Marquis de Sade. The counterpart of Sadism is the Masochism. The sexual gratification or pleasure by reception of pain from being humilliated and tortured is defined as Masochism. The word "Masochism" come from the autor of the masochistic novel Venus in Furs Leopold von Sacher-Masoch. Commonly interrelated (one person obtain sadistic pleasure by another who obtains masochistic pleasure) are well-knowed as S&M or Sadomasochism. Now sadism and mosochism are commonly used to describe people's personalities rather than being used for sexual terms. Althought their original meanings the use of these words is not entirely inaccurate. They can be used to point the desire to be controled or to control another person in emotional terms speaking. Biology of Sadomasochism Love, sex, violence and pain experiences are strictly associated with the release of several hormones on the human body since humans show many responses while watch, image and hear such experiences. * By pain experiences endorphins are released and percibed as pleasurable and some times as addictive. In this way masochistic scenes make an addiction on many people who likes to feel endorphins throghout the whole masochistic scenes. * Serotonin and norepinephrine are realeased during such actes and scenes when they cause pleasure on the person. * Epinephrine and norepinephrine are released during stressful or painful experiences, and can cause a pleasurable 'rush'. BDSM and Sadomasochism BDSM is composed by many subdivisions of the alternative culture. Bondage and Discipline (B&D), domination and submission (D&S) and Sadism and Masochism (S&M). While saists enjoy inflicting pain masochist enjoy receiving pain wich, by the way, could be sexual or not sexual. At deeper level, dominance and submission is more internal distinction, not all sadists are dominant neither all dominant are sadists while not all masochists are submissive and not all submissives enjoy pain. BDSM Culture If you try to find a proper category for BDSM, maybe the most accurate position is to see BDSM as a culture. That way it seems to encompass the many factors that are included into BDSM. Some people see BDSM as a separate and distinct part of their lives, it simply isn't about sex, others can't have one without the other. Sex doesn't always play a role if you look at the difference you will find between those into service and those into S&M. It’s not always sexually motivated, sometimes it's just the sheer enjoyment of `hurts so good' or the love of pleasing a partner, What draws us together is the umbrella like cover that BDSM represents. We share a basic power exchange that happens either physically or spiritually and a perchance for not following established societal rules of intimate relationships. Of course there is a huge sexual component, shared by both, but the importance can be placed on any one, or more, parts of the whole BDSM puzzle. Bondage it's sexual for some, for others is a stress reliever. Though most fetishes are considered sexual, for some, it is a comfort, or a release of stress, or statement to the world. Much the way religion or language has been passed down from generation to generation, BDSM with all its different rituals, techniques, and philosophies are also being passed on. In BDSM our common denominator appears to be some kind of power exchange. What we get from the power exchange is individual to every player. We all seem to require it at some level and once we've got overcome the fears of exploring the various aspects of BDSM we tend to migrate towards others who accept those traits in us. We teach and learn from each other with information being passed by word or mouth, books, movies and the Internet. Aspects of the definition for culture shine through even when looking at individual relationships. The dominant, usually takes a training role with a submissive. Mentoring also takes on the role of training both dominants and submissive. There is a power exchange happening, even at that level. Techniques are taught and practiced, knowledge is shared, rituals taught and developed. There is an standard of excellence that many in BDSM seek to obtain. We do it in different ways, but it seems to me we all try in our own way. The ultimate goal is still the same though the journey is not always the same. We want to be safe and lower the risk in our chosen expression of the BDSM lifestyle. How you express your sexuality, can be one of the determining factors in what culture you live in. It's that expression of BDSM that groups us together regardless of our orientation. BDSM is the focus as opposed to our gender, our orientation or our side of the power exchange. Distinction between S&M, BDSM and D/s Sadists enjoy inflicting pain; this may or may not be sexual in nature. Masochists enjoy receiving pain, which again may or may not be sexual. The simple desire for pain is technically known as algolagnia. BDSM is a short-hand abbreviation for many subdivisions of the culture: B&D (bondage and discipline), D/s (domination and submission), S&M (sadism and masochism), and Master and Slave. Dominance and submission—control over another, or being controlled by another, respectively—typically describes a relationship power dynamic rather than a set of acts, and may or may not involve sadomasochism. Bondage and discipline describes a set of acts that sometimes involve D/s or S&M; although discipline often implies a level of suffering (real or pretend), participants may stop short of causing actual pain. Etymology The development of the term sadomasochism is very complex. Originally "Sadism" and "Masochism" were purely technical terms for psychological features, which were classified as psychological illness. The terms are derived from the authors Marquis de Sade and Leopold von Sacher-Masoch. In 1843 the Hungarian physician Heinrich Kaan published Psychopathia sexualis ("Psychopathy of Sex"), a writing in which he converts the sin conceptions of Christianity into medical diagnoses. With his work the originally theological terms "perversion", "aberration" and "deviation" became part of the scientific terminology for the first time. The German psychiatrist Richard von Krafft-Ebing introduced the terms "Sadism" and "Masochism" into the medical terminology in his work Neue Forschungen auf dem Gebiet der Psychopathia sexualis ("New research in the area of Psychopathy of Sex") in 1890.[1] In 1905, Sigmund Freud described "Sadism" and "Masochism" in his Drei Abhandlungen zur Sexualtheorie ("Three papers on Sexual Theory") as diseases developing from an incorrect development of the child psyche and laid the groundwork for the scientific perspective on the subject in the following decades. This led to the first time use of the compound term Sado-Masochism (German "Sado-Masochismus")) by the Viennese Psychoanalyst Isidor Isaak Sadger in his work Über den sado-masochistischen Komplex ("Regarding the sadomasochistic complex") in 1913.[2] In the past BDSM activists turned repeatedly against these conceptual models, originally deriving from singular historical figures and implying a clear pathological connotation. They argued that there is no common sense in attributing a phenomenon as complex as BDSM to two individual humans, as well one might speak of "Leonardism" instead of Homosexuality. The BDSM scene tried to distinguish themselves with the expression "B&D" for Bondage and Discipline from that pejorative connotated term "S&M". The abbreviation BDSM was probably coined in the early 1990s in the subculture around the Newsgroup news:alt.sex.bondage. This new term is first recorded as appearing in July 1991. Later the dimension Dominance and Submission was integrated into the connotation of BDSM, creating the multilevel acronym common today. Psychological categorization Both terms were coined by German psychiatrist Richard von Krafft-Ebing in his 1886 compilation of case studies Psychopathia Sexualis. Pain and physical violence are not essential in Krafft-Ebing's conception, and he defined masochism (German "Masochismus") entirely in terms of control.[3] Sigmund Freud, a psychoanalyst and a contemporary of Krafft-Ebing, noted that both were often found in the same individuals, and combined the two into a single dichotomous entity known as sadomasochism (German "Sadomasochismus")(often abbreviated as S&M or S/M). This observation is commonly verified in both literature and practice; many sadists and masochists define themselves as "switchable"—capable of taking pleasure in either role. However it has also been argued (Deleuze, Coldness and Cruelty) that the concurrence of sadism and masochism in Freud's model should not be taken for granted. Freud introduced the terms "primary" and "secondary" masochism. Though this idea has come under a number of interpretations, in a primary masochism the masochist undergoes a complete, not just a partial, rejection by the model or courted object (or sadist), possibly involving the model taking a rival as his or her preferred mate. This complete rejection is related to the death drive in Freud's psychoanalysis (Todestrieb). In a secondary masochism, by contrast, the masochist experiences a less serious, more feigned rejection and punishment by the model. Secondary masochism, in other words, is the relatively casual version, more akin to a charade, and most commentators are quick to point out its contrivedness. Rejection is not desired by a primary masochist in quite the same sense as the feigned rejection occurring within a relatively equal relationship--or even where the masochist happens to be the one having true power (this is the problematic that underlies the analyses of Deleuze and Sartre, for example). In Things Hidden Since the Foundation of The World Rene Girard attempts to resuscitate and reinterpret Freud's distinction of primary and secondary masochism, in connection with his own philosophy. Both Krafft-Ebing and Freud assumed that sadism in men resulted from the distortion of the aggressive component of the male sexual instinct. Masochism in men, however, was seen as a more significant aberration, contrary to the nature of male sexuality. Freud doubted that masochism in men was ever a primary tendency, and speculated that it may exist only as a transformation of sadism. Sadomasochism in women received comparatively little discussion, as it was believed that it occurred primarily in men. Both also assumed that masochism was so inherent to female sexuality that it would be difficult to distinguish as a separate inclination. Havelock Ellis, in Studies in the Psychology of Sex, argued that there is no clear distinction between the aspects of sadism and masochism, and that they may be regarded as complementary emotional states. He also made the important point that sadomasochism is concerned only with pain in regard to sexual pleasure, and not in regard to cruelty, as Freud had suggested. In other words, the sadomasochist generally desires that the pain be inflicted or received in love, not in abuse, for the pleasure of either one or both participants. This mutual pleasure may even be essential for the satisfaction of those involved. Here Ellis touches upon the often paradoxical nature of consensual S&M. It is not only pain to initiate pleasure, but violence—or the simulation of violence—to express love. This contradictory character is perhaps most evident in the observation by some that not only are sadomasochistic activities usually done for the benefit of the masochist, but that it is often the masochist that controls them, through subtle emotional cues received by the sadist. In his essay Coldness and Cruelty, (originally Présentation de Sacher-Masoch, 1967) Gilles Deleuze rejects the term 'sadomasochism' as artificial, especially in the context of the prototypical masochistic work, Sacher-Masoch's Venus In Furs. Deleuze instead argues that the tendency toward masochism is based on desire brought on from the delay of gratification. Taken to its extreme, an infinite delay, this is manifested as perpetual coldness. The masochist derives pleasure from, as Deleuze puts it, The Contract: the process by which he can control another individual and turn the individual into someone cold and callous. The Sadist, in contrast, derives pleasure from The Law: the unavoidable power that places one person below another. The sadist attempts to destroy the ego in an effort to unify the id and super-ego, in effect gratifying the most base desires the sadist can express while ignoring or completely suppressing the will of the ego, or of the conscience. Thus, Deleuze attempts to argue that Masochism and Sadism arise from such different impulses that the combination of the two terms is meaningless and misleading. The perceived sadistic capabilities of masochists are treated by Deleuze as reactions to masochism. Indeed, in the epilogue of Venus In Furs, the character of Severin has become bitter from his experiment in masochism, and advocates instead the domination of women. Before Deleuze, however, Sartre had presented his own theory of sadism and masochism, at which Deleuze's deconstructive attack, which took away the symmetry of the two roles, was probably directed. Because the pleasure or power in looking at the victim figures prominently in sadism and masochism, Sartre was able to link these phenomena to his famous philosophy of the Look of the Other. Sartre argued that masochism is an attempt by the For-itself (consciousness) to reduce itself to nothing, becoming an object that is drowned out by the "abyss of the Other's subjectivity" [4] By this Sartre means that, given that the For-itself desires to attain a point of view in which it is both subject and object, one possible strategy is to gather and intensify every feeling and posture in which the self appears as an object to be rejected, tested, and humiliated; and in this way the For-itself strives toward a point of view in which there is only one subjectivity in the relationship, which would be both that of the abuser and the abused. Conversely, of course, Sartre held sadism to be the effort to annihilate the subjectivity of the victim. That would mean that the sadist, who is exhilarated in the emotional distress of the victim, is such because he or she also seeks to assume a subjectivity which would take a point of view on the victim, and on itself, as both subject and object. This argument may appear stronger if it is somehow understood that the Look of the Other is either only an aspect of the other faculties of desire, or somehow its primary faculty. It does not account for the turn that Deleuze took for his own philosophy of these matters, but this premise of desire-as-Look is associated with the view always attacked by Deleuze, in what he regarded as the essential error of "desire as lack," and which he identified in the philosophical temperament of Plato, Socrates, and Lacan. For Deleuze, insofar as desire is a lack it is reducible to the Look. Finally, after Deleuze, Rene Girard included his account of sado-masochism in Things Hidden Since the Foundation of The World, originally Des choses cachées depuis la fondation du monde, 1978, making the chapter on masochism a coherent part of his theory of mimetic desire. In this view of sado-masochism, the violence of the practices are an expression of a peripheral rivalry that has developed around the actual love-object. There is clearly a similarity to Deleuze, since both in the violence surrounding the memory of mimetic crisis and its avoidance, and in the resistance to affection that is focussed on by Deleuze, there is an understanding of the value of the love object in terms of the processes of its valuation, acquisition and the test it imposes on the suitor. Many theorists, particularly feminist theories, have suggested that sadomasochism is an inherent part of modern Western culture.[citation needed] According to their[who?] theories, sex and relationships are both consistently taught to be formulated within a framework of male dominance and female submission. Some of them further link this hypothesized framework to inequalities among gender, class, and race which remain a substantial part of society, despite the efforts of the civil rights movement and feminism. There are a number of reasons commonly given for why a sadomasochist finds the practice of S&M enjoyable, and the answer is largely dependent on the individual. For some, taking on a role of compliance or helplessness offers a form of therapeutic escape; from the stresses of life, from responsibility, or from guilt. For others, being under the power of a strong, controlling presence may evoke the feelings of safety and protection associated with childhood. They likewise may derive satisfaction from earning the approval of that figure (see: Servitude (BDSM)). A sadist, on the other hand, may enjoy the feeling of power and authority that comes from playing the dominant role, or receive pleasure vicariously through the suffering of the masochist. It is poorly understood, though, what ultimately connects these emotional experiences to sexual gratification, or how that connection initially forms. Dr. Joseph Merlino, author and psychiatry adviser to the New York Daily News, said in an interview that a sadomasochistic relationship, as long as it is consensual, is not a psychological problem: “ It's a problem only if it is getting that individual into difficulties, if he or she is not happy with it, or it's causing problems in their personal or professional lives. If it's not, I'm not seeing that as a problem. But assuming that it did, what I would wonder about is what is his or her biology that would cause a tendency toward a problem, and dynamically, what were the experiences this individual had that led him or her toward one of the ends of the spectrum. ” —Joseph Merlino, [5] It is usually agreed on by psychologists that experiences during early sexual development can have a profound effect on the character of sexuality later in life. Sadomasochistic desires, however, seem to form at a variety of ages. Some individuals report having had them before puberty, while others do not discover them until well into adulthood. According to one study, the majority of male sadomasochists (53%) developed their interest before the age of 15, while the majority of females (78%) developed their interest afterwards (Breslow, Evans, and Langley 1985). Like sexual fetishes, sadomasochism can be learned through conditioning—in this context, the repeated association of sexual pleasure with an object or stimulus. With the publication of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) in 1994 new criteria of diagnosis were available describing Sadomasochism clearly not as disorders of sexual preferences. They are now not regarded as illnesses in and of themselves. The DSM-IV asserts that "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. The manuals' latest edition (DSM-IV-TR) requires that the activity must be the sole means of sexual gratification for a period of six (6) months, and either cause "clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning" or involve a violation of consent to be diagnosed as a paraphilia.[6] Overlays of sexual preference disorders and the practice of Sadomasochism practices can occur, however. The term BDSM describes the activities between consenting partners that contain sadistic and masochistic elements. Many behaviors such as erotic spanking, tickling and love-bites that many people think of only as "rough" sex also contain elements of sado-masochism. Note the issue of legal consent may not be accepted as a defense to criminal charges in some jurisdictions, and very few jurisdictions will permit consent as a defense to serious bodily injury. In certain extreme cases, sadism and masochism can include fantasies, sexual urges or behavior that cause significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning, to the point that they can be considered part of a mental disorder. However, this is an uncommon case, and psychiatrists are now moving towards regarding sadism and masochism not as disorders in and of themselves, but only as disorders when associated with other problems such as a personality disorder. "Sadism" and "masochism," in the context of consensual sexual activities, are not strictly accurate terms, at least by the psychological definitions. "Sadism" in absolute terms refers to someone whose pleasure in causing pain does not depend on the consent of the "victim." Indeed, a lack of consent may be a requisite part of the experience for a true sadist. Similarly, the masochist in consensual BDSM is someone who enjoys sexual fantasies or urges for being beaten, humiliated, bound, tortured, or otherwise made to suffer, either as an enhancement to or a substitute for sexual pleasure, usually according to a certain scripted and mutually agreed upon "scene." These "masochists" do not enjoy pain in other scenarios, such as accidental injury, medical procedures, and so on. Similarly, the exchange of power in S&M may not be along the expected lines. While it might be assumed that the "top"—the person who gives the sensation or causes the humiliation—is the one with the power, the actual power may lie with the "bottom," who typically creates the script, or at least sets the boundaries, by which the S&M practitioners play. Ernulf and Innala (1995) observed discussions among individuals with such interests, one of whom described the goal of hyperdominants (p. 644):[7] A good top is an empath who knows how to tell with the least possible feedback exactly what will blow the bottom’s mind. The top enjoys his pleasure vicariously. He has a great time. The idea is to turn the body into a sexual response machine. Main article: Sadism and masochism in fiction Many of Marquis de Sade's books, including Justine (1791), Juliette (1797) and his magnum opus The 120 Days of Sodom (published posthumously in 1905), are written from a cruelly sadistic viewpoint. Leopold von Sacher-Masoch's novel Venus in Furs (1870) is essentially one long masochistic fantasy, where the male principal character encourages his mistress to mistreat him. In Pauline Réage's novel Story of O (1954), the female principal character is kept in a chateau and educated by a group of men using a wide range of BDSM techniques. "O"'s submission is depicted as consensual. As with many sexual interests, sadomasochism is a popular subject in erotica. While S&M erotica is often about consensual humiliation and power exchange, consent is often abandoned as serves fantasy. The contemporary novelist Anne Rice, best known for Interview with the Vampire, wrote the sadomasochistic trilogy The Claiming of Sleeping Beauty (1983-85) and Exit to Eden (1985) under the pseudonym of A. N. Roquelaure. Dominance and submission, and the inner conflict and surrender connected with these are enduring themes in human culture and civilization. Human beings share with many other mammals the desire to look up to certain individuals who become leaders through strength of will and personality, to lead or follow, and to submit or dominate.[citation needed] In human sexuality this has broadened to include mutual exploration of roles, emotions and activities which would be difficult or impossible to do without a willing partner taking an opposing role. While D/s deals with representations of brutality and cruelty, and the emotional responses to them, adherents are quick to point out that D/s is not about actual acts of brutality and cruelty. It is a consensual power exchange between the two partners and need not involve any brutality (such as corporal punishment) or cruelty (verbal or emotional abuse) at all. It is primarily based upon trust and communication between the partners. It is also based on a deep ethos of mutual respect in which exploration of the emotions brought up by brutality and cruelty can take place in a safe, sane and consensual manner. A safe word is usually given to the submissive partner to prevent the dominant from overstepping physical and emotional boundaries. The safe word is especially important when engaging in verbal humiliation or playing 'mind-games' because the submissive may not be aware of an emotional boundary until it is crossed. If an emotional boundary is breached and the safe word called, the dominant should cease all play immediately and discuss the emotional breach with the submissive in a tender and understanding manner. D/s may be ritualised or freeform. It is usually a negotiated lifestyle, with people discussing their wishes, limits and needs in order to find commonality. A D/s relationship may be sexual or non-sexual, long or short term, and intimate or anonymous. Most adherents search for the essential intensity, trust and intimacy that are required to make any deep relationship possible. Terminology Main article: List of BDSM terms D/s participants often refer to their activity as "play", with an individual play session called a "scene". The term "top" is equivalent to dominant while the term "bottom" is equivalent to submissive. Another term that is one the same vein is “switch”, a switch is someone who will change from top to bottom in different scenes or with different partners. The term "vanilla" refers to normative ("non-kinky") sex and relationships, the vanilla world being mainstream society outside of the BDSM subculture. The term comes from vanilla ice cream being considered the "default" flavour. D/s relationship styles There can be any number of partners in a D/s relationship, in some cases with one dominant sometimes having several submissives, who may in turn dominate others, or a submissive sometimes may have multiple dominants. Relationships may be monogamous or polyamorous. Romantic love is not necessarily a feature in D/s, partners might be very much in love or have no romantic relationship at all. Variation in D/s is virtually limitless and the activities take many forms. These may include: * domestic servitude or consensual slavery * enforced chastity of the submissive * erotic humiliation * payments by the submissive to the dominant (These may include payments of money, sexual favors or general servitude.) * sexual slavery * verbal humiliation * fetishes, such as foot/shoe/boot worship, uniforms, smoking, latex, heavy rubber, among others are activities considered part of BDSM * dehumanization or objectification (pony or animal play, becoming an 'inanimate object' such as a foot stool) * cross-dressing These may be combined with other forms of BDSM. A classic example of D/s is the sissymaid, where an adult male dresses in cartoonish female clothing and performs stereotypical female chores such as housecleaning or serving tea. It should be noted that cross-dressing in D/s does not always involve a desire to be sissified or made into caricatures of women or to serve; for example, others may desire to be made as beautiful as possible and interact on a "girlfriend-to-girlfriend" non-sexual basis. Some D/s relationships are sexual, others completely chaste. Fantasy role play can also be a part, with partners taking classic dominant/submissive roles, or classic authority figure roles such as teacher/student, police officer/suspect or parent/child. Animal play, where one partner takes the role of owner/caretaker and the other takes the part of a pet or animal, can also be D/s play. Consent and contracts Main articles: Consent (BDSM) and legal consent which discusses when consent can be a defence to criminal liability for any injuries caused and that, for these purposes, non-physical injuries are included in the definition of grievous bodily harm. Consent is a vital element in all psychological play, and consent can be granted in many ways. Some employ a written form known as a "Dungeon negotiation form", for others a simple verbal commitment is sufficient. Consent can be limited both in duration and content. Consensual non-consensuality is a mutual agreement to be able to act as if consent has been waived within safe, sane limits. In essence it is an agreement that subject to a safe word or other restrictions, and reasonable care and commonsense, consent (within defined limits) will be given in advance and with the intent of being irrevocable under normal circumstances, at times without foreknowledge of the exact actions planned. As such, it is a show of extreme trust and understanding and usually undertaken only by partners who know each other well, or otherwise agree to set clear safe limits on their activities. It's not unusual to grant consent only for an hour or for an evening. When a scene lasts for more than a few hours, it's common to draft a "scene contract" that defines what will happen and who is responsible for what. It's a good way to work out what all the parties want, and usually improves the experience. Some "contracts" can become quite detailed and run for many pages, especially if a scene is to last a weekend or more. For long term consent, a "Slave contract" may be used. BDSM "contracts" are only an agreement between consenting people and are usually not legally binding; in fact, the possession of one may be considered illegal in some areas[citation needed]. Slave contracts are simply a way of defining the nature and limits of the relationship and are not intended to carry legal force. After a slave contract is drafted, some celebrate the event with a "collaring ceremony", in which the local D/s community is invited to witness the commitment made in the document. Some ceremonies become quite elaborate, and can be as involved as a wedding or any similar ritual. Relationships In some D/s relationships a partner only submits occasionally and with definite short-term goals, perhaps for an evening or the duration of a party. In other relationships, there may be an ongoing (not scene- or play-specific) power exchange between or among partners in a committed relationship, often involving love and servitude and enacted in ways throughout the relationship. Some D/s relationships may be compared to the idealized marriages portrayed in older television programs, in which one partner is domestic and service-oriented and the other partner is the provider, protector, and household authority. BDSM may otherwise be deliberately and consciously incorporated into the relationship, or it may focus wholly on power exchange. Some people may opt for the master or mistress/slave model, in which consent is negotiated once for a long period and the consent given is generally broader. Slave contracts may be used. Where the contract is in effect continuously, the relationship is referred to as "24/7". The limits of the slave contract can vary widely and extend into other areas of BDSM. Some people opt to be purely "sex slaves", while others who prefer domestic service identify as "service slaves". Some slaves allow their masters or mistresses complete latitude as to the demands that can be placed on them. Such a relationship is known as total power exchange or TPE. People usually only enter into a master/slave contract after they have known and played with each other for some time, often several years. It can be one of the most difficult relationships in the BDSM world to maintain, and requires special skills and experience. Equipment and accessories Some people maintain a special room or area, called a dungeon, which contains special equipment (shackles, handcuffs, whips, queening stools and spanking benches or a Berkley horse, for example) used for play scenes, or they may visit a BDSM club that maintains such facilities. Collars Main article: Collar (BDSM) Many submissives wear a "collar" to denote their status and commitment. It can be much like a wedding band, except that only the submissive partner wears one. The traditional collar is a neck band in leather or metal, chosen, designed or even crafted by the dominant partner. Some subs wear a "symbolic collar", often a bracelet or ankle chain, which is more subdued than the traditional collar and can pass in vanilla (non-BDSM) situations. It is not uncommon for a sub to have several collars for special occasions. Dog collars are integral for K-9 roleplaying—pup-play. There was once a tradition that wearing a collar with an open padlock indicated that one was seeking a partner, a closed lock indicated that one was in a relationship. This symbolism became less common after 1995 or so.[citation needed] Many people, for example some of those in the punk rock and goth subcultures, wear collars for other reasons such as fashion, so one cannot assume that all people wearing collars are involved in BDSM. Members of the furry fandom may also wear collars as a part of costuming or as a fashion. Use of collars in the sexual aspects of furry lifestyle may or may not be connected to BDSM depending on the individual's preferences. Safety There are some risks commonly associated with D/s. Because it is mostly a mental activity, many of the risks associated with D/s involve mental health. Others involve abuses of the trust inherent in a D/s relationship. Some examples are: * "Top's disease," or the tendency for some dominants to grow into a sense of infallibility or omnipotence[citation needed] * Physically or mentally abusive dominant partner * Self-hating subs * Dominant partners who violate the trust relationship by attempting to isolate the sub from society or monetarily exploit the sub * Unstable dominant partners or subs who, through act or threat of calling public attention to the other's private life and their relationship, can cause financial or personal hardship (see Outing) * Emotionally unstable or manipulative subs or dominant partners seeking more from the relationship than the other, as a human being, can give.[citation needed] This can include so-called mind games, emotional vampirism and any other forms of emotional manipulation or abuse present in any other relationship.[citation needed] The extra factor is that D/s relationships are already predicated upon a delicate shift of power, and so rely more than usual on participants being able to handle that well. Local and regional BDSM organizations typically provide community-based counseling and assistance to dominants or submissives who are in a troubled relationship.[citation needed] History There are many writings from the ancient age through the modern that would clearly indicate a willingness to submit for purely romantic reasons.[citation needed] Another medieval example is the literary convention of courtly love, an ideal which usually required a knight to serve his courtly lady (in "love service") with the same obedience and loyalty which he owed to his liege lord.[citation needed] This convention was submissive and sometimes fetishistic, with the knight performing acts of cross-dressing and self-flagellation.[citation needed] However, the relationship between the literary conventions and actual practices is unknown.[citation needed] There are also accounts of prostitutes in most major cities that catered to male submissives, as well as masochists.[citation needed] In a male dominated world it was all too easy for a submissive woman to find a strict male dominant,[citation needed] but some women still found ways to leave husbands who were "too soft".[citation needed] One of the most famous works in this area is Leopold von Sacher-Masoch's Venus im Pelz (Venus in Furs, 1869), in which the protagonist Severin persuades a woman, Wanda, to take him on as her slave, serves her and allows her to degrade him. The book has elements of both social and physical submission, and is the genesis of the term masochism coined by the 19th century psychiatrist Krafft-Ebing. The Rolling Stones song "Under my Thumb" (M. Jagger, 1966) is supposedly about a D/s relationship. The Green Day song "All By Myself/Dominated Love Slave" (Frank Edwin Wright III or Tre Cool) describes F.E. Wright III's feelings for female dominance. Myths Common myths about D/s: * Dominants are naturally cruel people. * Submissives are naturally weak-willed "doormats." * Submissives are attempting to re-live childhood abuse. * Women who are into D/s are nymphomaniacs, or indiscriminate sex partners. * D/s is usually a case of "role-reversal" with people who have much power and responsibility in real life often preferring a submissive role. There is little or no factual evidence to support any of these concepts; submissives and dominants come from a broad spectrum of society and most people into BDSM are very selective about who they play with. Considering the risks, this is not surprising. The idea that submissive women are sexually indiscriminate likely stems from pornographic fiction and the appeal of an insatiable partner who will do anything one commands. In real life this is rarely the case. Dr. Michael J. Bader, author of Arousal: The Secret Logic of Sexual Fantasies, writes: "It is quite common that children who were abused grow up and develop sexual fantasies loosely based on their abuse. ... The adult indulging in a fantasy of sexual surrender or abasement is actually saying to her or himself: 'I'm recreating a terrifying or traumatic scene, but this time I'm in control because I'm scripting the scene ...'" [1] The "role-reversal" myth likely stems from studies done in the 1950's which found that most of the clients in houses of domination were wealthy, powerful men. This is probably more due to the high fees charged in such houses (often $200-$5,000 a session) than a dearth of impoverished submissives. There are many poor submissives and wealthy dominants.