O_and_P's profile . O_and_P's homepage . O_and_P group posts
 |
| Tanos |
on Thu 22 Oct 09, 11:54 PM to the O_and_P group.
One of questions that comes up repeatedly in D/s and M/s forums is what protocols and etiquette are appropriate amongst groups of D/s or M/s people. For instance, should submissives defer to other dominants? Should owners speak to others' slaves directly?
In O&P, the concept of respect for property rights informs these relations between people outside of their relationships.
For example, protocols and etiquette should treat unattached submissives as independent, self-owning people, governing their own lives, and not subject to other dominants. This means dominants aren't in a position to order other submissives around, and shouldn't presume any right to deference.
Equally, protocols and etiquette should acknowledge the status of submissives in other dominants' possession, and do not presume, for instance, that submissives can still make decisions which are now in the hands of their dominant. So instead of saying to another submissive "Tell me if you decide to go to the party next week", good etiquette would be to say "Let me know if you are going to the party next week" and implicitly acknowledge that the decision is not entirely theirs.
These ideas reflect the aim of etiquette in minimising the potential for unintended offense or embarrassment. I believe good protocols - ie rules for behaviour in different environments - include the same aim, along with removing ambiguity and uncertainty about what is expected of a submissive or slave. Furthermore, I believe this basic idea of respect for property rights is a good foundation for individuals or groups to build their own protocols, with some chance that differing protocols won't clash.
Do you?
Regards,
Tanos
| 23 Oct 09, 10:26 AM cinder UK(CR), 6 yrs  |
I totally agree - lot of it comes down to simple politeness for others and their relationships. If I am memoing someone I check their profile to see if they want me to contact someone first, I have no issue with this and don't see it as them imposing their values on me at all. It's just respect for their wishes. We don't have this protocol but there are less transparent rules that do exist (like him knowing all my correspondence, him being asked to meet others etc)... On the whole this is pretty much understood by most folk I have come across (that there maybe rules within a relationship that aren't blatantly obvious)...but on one occasion it does cause an issue with someone who just didn't understand that they were pissing on his turf, which he found disrespectful. Waffle aside, a lot of it comes down to old fashioned values of respect and courtesy with the added dimension of Ds don't you think? N x
Edited 23 Oct 09, 10:27 AM by cinder |
| 29 Oct 09, 6:21 PM Belasarius UK(M), 8 yrs      |
I shall do what I always do (sigh - I know I can be a boring b'stard) and refer people to old posts on two old threads: http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/149166/ http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/146026/ And an old weblog: http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/146010/ Why? Because i still think this system has huge potential in a D/s context - because it provides a delicious formal protocol and the ability for people to be defined by how others see them, rather than how they see themselves, also - where there are families or even groups rather than couples, loose-knit or closely-gathered, it provides the opportunity to reinforce and make formal a pecking order between individuals. Best to all.
Patience is bitter - but its fruit is sweet. |
| 30 Oct 09, 10:46 AM TheFalconer UK(S), 6 yrs |
In an odd way, this reminds me a bit of the kind of manners queries you used to see about what's the proper way to address a Bishop, and how do you contrast the military ranks vs clerical ranks vs professional standing to decide which local dignitary should be the one to cut the cake at the village fete.
That's not me criticising the idea, just that it made me smile I think you're right though in identifying the two essential items of protocol should underpin interactions between unrelated D/s people - firstly that Dominants only have any rights at all over their own submissives, and secondly that people should recognise that an owned submissive may well have restrictions on their behaviours, and therefore in some circumstances it's best to address the Dom first. "Morality, like art, means drawing a line someplace." - Oscar Wilde |
