slavery and Masters

by Bob

The presentations by Master Skip and Master Steve triggered an epiphany. For some time, I had been sensing polar views about Master/slave (M/s) relations and about when titles such as Master are used.

For example, I had developed the idea that M/s relations represented one level more extreme than mere Dominance and submission. That is, slaves were super submissives; that Masters were super Doms. In this world, masters endeavor to obtain the services of a slave whether for personal service or sexual pleasure or both. This seemed to me to be the model in the heterosexual world of BDSM (what I call the het-BDSM world).

Then I read Guy Baldwin's Slavecraft and began to understand that from the Leatherman's point of view, slaves were often Dominants with a slave heart who had chosen slavery for a very specific reason; often a reason associated with spirituality. When Master Skip and Master Steve were speaking to us a few weeks ago, Master Steve's slaves were introduced as competent, strong dominants in other aspects of their lives, but slaves to Master Steve. Last year at the GWNN Bash, I had sort-of picked up on that theme when Guy Baldwin spoke, but I didn't get it. As Master Skip told us privately, in the world of Leathermen, it is the slave that chooses the Master. He went on to say that some slaves are tempters or enchanters. They tempt the Master with Love to test the Master's strength of will. If the Master falls in love with the slave, the slave will see the falseness of the teaching relationship and leave.

Continuing with the private conversation, Master Skip observed that more often than not, those that seek to explore their slave hearts are seeking surrender rather than submission to their Masters: that the M/s relation involves authority exchange rather than power exchange. This rang true with my own experiences. Now: that's half of the story, but I'll hold up here.

Now lets talk about titles for a sec.

In the het-BDSM world, people seem to step into the scene adorned with self-styled scene names. We have Master T, Lord William, Sir Galahad; whatever. This works fine so long as only that titleholder's submissive is expected to use the appellation; it tends to fail if the titleholder expects others to use it. Most critically, it not only fails but presents one as a dilettante when trying to explain your name to someone with a Leatherman's perspective ; but I get ahead of myself.

Scene names ; and self-styled titles ; are not common in the world of Leathermen. This is a world of protocols and customs. It is a world where leather clothing is awarded for service, not bought as a fashion statement (yes, I know ; we bought ours, but we were young and stupid and I've since apologized to all the Leathermen I know). It is a world where the Master title is earned after years and years of experience and demonstrated correctness in areas such as leadership, ethics, morality and honesty. What became clear when Master Skip and Master Steve were speaking is that these are Masters in the sense of teaching masters; these are people with Wisdom to impart.

Which closes the loop on my story.

My epiphany was that there are men and women out there who are dominant in many aspects of their lives who choose to affiliate with a Master with the clear and stated expectation that the Master will further the slave's spiritual growth and education. For those who are service oriented, they chose slavery. Part of the process involves the slave turning authority of his/her personal actions to the Master. For these slaves, serving the Master is one of the vehicles of learning: wax on, wax off. And they may, over time, become Masters in their own right. slaves are on a Mission. i am on a mission.