I'm sure I'm not the first to ask! ;-)

When thinking about lifestyle Master/slave, lots of folks (and especially less experienced ones), assume that lifestyle naturally includes sex of the vanilla sort, or at least some variation thereof (oral service, etc.) Indeed, for the vast majority of people who do BDSM of one kind or another, sex is either the goal of the "BDSM foreplay" or at least the expected outcome. So I think many people have a little difficulty wrapping their minds around relationships based on the POWER rather than the SEX.

So...how does a nice gay man and a nice lesbian get together for an obviously VERY successful M/s lifestyle relationship? :-) What makes you willing to serve or be served by SMers of either gender? Other than your sexual preferences, do you see yourself more or less like other M/s couples--or do you feel there are some significant differences because of your fairly unique situation? And--to be supremely nosy--what do you do for sexual release?

To Master Jim: do you have samesex partners in addition to your relationship with slave marsha? Do you consider marsha a primary relationship or one of a household/select group of partners? Do you, er, play with her, um, pink parts? :-) (BTW, we don't censor here so feel free to use the vernacular. *wink*) If so, do you allow her orgasms?

To slave marsha: since you serve a man, did you negotiate a no-sex agreement at the outset? Since he is your Master, if he asked for oral service, say, would that fall outside your agreement or, as his slave, would you comply unquestioningly?

I want to add here that I've occasionally heard from lesbians who are approached by male doms or het couples and who feel very unclear about how to deal with it. They are attracted by the power but turned off by the idea of having to be sexually intimate with a man.

So any thoughts/opinions you can share would be extremely helpful to them and many others who need to understand more about total power exchange and how it works in real life.

hugs,

G.

*chuckling*
Glory, , it might take the entire month to respond to all the questions you raise here. And you're right -- you're not the first to ask.

Seriously, the questions you ask certainly get to many of the important aspects of Master/slave relationships in general, and the M/s relationship I have with slave marsha in particular.

Yes, I do have same sex partners; however, I do not have a same sex "life partner." slave marsha and the Master/slave relationship that i have are both primary to me. I have discovered that if I am going to develop the M/s relationship that I am seeking, the slave constitutes the primary relationship -- but it is in no way a partnership. I also have only one slave. To me, the responsibility, the time and the energy that are involved in a M/s relationship makes it extremely difficult to have more than one person in service as slave marsha is to me.

The most important thing to me is being served by someone who is "slave wired" -- someone who has the heart of a slave. I believe that few such people exist, and as a result, are very difficult to find. Thus, sexual orientation to me is very much a secondary consideration when looking for a slave. Sex is easy to find --- service from a slave is very difficult to find.

I own slave marsha's body. If i choose to use it as her Owner (and I do, from time to time), that doesn't affect how I identify as a gay man.

And all of this only begins to scratch the surface of the questions...

And now, from my perspective...

i did not negotiate a "no sex" agreement. i spent the first part of my adulthood in a (very unhappy) heterosexual marriage, denying my sexual orientation. i began exploring my identity as a lesbian about the same time i began exploring my identity as a slave.

i did have a fairly long written contract when i entered into service with Master Jim. (i also was His bottom and His submissive for about a year and a half total before i entered service as His slave.) Just over a year ago, that written contract was burned, and was replaced by this vow --- i will obey and i will serve. Period. That is my contract with Master Jim. (i'm happy to explain in another post the whys and wherefores of all of this.) So, if Master Jim wants to use me sexually, that's part of obeying and serving. If He wants a blow job... well, let's just say i suck cock as good as the gay boys do! *laughing* Some lesbians are known to suck a strap on from time to time, after all.

Do i get to orgasm? Not enough, in my opinion. *laughing* Seriously, though -- i am allowed to masturbate once a week. i also am allowed, from time to time, to date women and have sex with them. Also, when i am allowed to participate in SM with women, it often has a sexual component to it -- i was allowed a fantastic scene at a women's party a few weeks ago that involved 3 butches, 2 femmes, me (also a femme) and a LOT of orgasms.

I wanted to address the questions that pertain to what is the focal point of my Master/slave relationship separately.

We have been talking about both sexual orientation and sexual activity. My primary identification is as a leatherman, who is a Master and an Owner. The defining characteristic of the Master/slave relationship that I have developed is control. (I prefer the term "control" over "power.") The M/s dynamic is what I seek; as such, the relationship is not the means to an end. The M/s relationship is an end in itself.

There is nothing "vanilla" about this relationship. No matter if I am shopping in a mall, attending a concert, engaging in SM work, or having sex, I am the Owner of a slave.

In presentations, I am often asked if there are times we step out of "role" as Master and slave, for example, to address a problem. The answer is a simple no. Being a Master, and slave marsha being a slave, are not roles. They are the way we live. They are how we define ourselves.

Hello Master Jim and Marsha :)

I have been in a relationship with a woman and her male/submissive partner. The three of us were together sexually but only she was allowed to top me which was my preference. The time with them was great. I was with him and her not there and I did enjoy it. Since then, I've wondered and people have asked/stated I am Bi. I don't agree with that. Yes, I was with him. Yes, I enjoyed it. But I am a lesbian my preference is *women*
Would either of you consider yourselves *BI*?

Marsha, how do other lesbians feel about your relationship with Master Jim? How do they feel about you being with him sexually? Or being a slave to him at all? Do they understand? Do they accept it? Not that it matters how they feel or anything but how *do* they feel? The lesbians I know would look at it as being Bi and the lesbians I know are not interested in bi women.

I see you are allowed to date other women from time to time but what would happen if you were in a *relationship* with another woman? Master Jim, would you allow such and if so, would Marsha be, or even want to be with a female dominate, female submissive/slave?

I have another question :)

Do either of you feel lesbian and/or gay male S/m relationships are different from male/female S/m relationships?

From my experiences, gay men do not seem as down on another man being Bi. Would either of you agree with that?

slave marsha,

I like the simplicity of the vow you mentioned (of course, we know that there is much more detail to it in your and Master Jim's heads) but I'm curious about this: If the first part of the vow is "To obey", why is the second part (to serve) necessary? Doesn't 'obey' encompass serving?

First, i'll take a shot at SteelSkys question -- but everyone please understand i am NOT speaking as The Voice Of All Lesbians In The Leather Community... and i'm sure not the voice of gay leathermen (as much as i love my leather brothers)...*laughing*

i think the answer to your question may be impacted by what kind of SM relationship you're talking about. Gay leathermen in male/male SM relationships (and by this i mean as Top and bottom) have a fairly well-known history that gives them some context and community. They have leather bars where they can at least see others who appear to be interested in the same things they are interested in. They have a large number of levi/leather clubs, many with long histories and traditions. i think this history, tradition and community may give men in gay male SM relationships a sense of belonging and "okay-ness" that people in male/female SM relationships may have to search harder to find. i also think there is somewhat less of concern that the relationship might appear abusive when it involves two men, because it seems more "equal." Please understand that i firmly believe that abuse can and does exist in male/male SM relationships, but the issue seems to be more of an acute concern in male/female SM relationships.

The lesbian leather community's issue is a little different, in my opinion. The greater lesbian community overall is not at all welcoming of SM relationships, even female/female ones. Sometimes SM is treated as some leftover social conditioning from the "violent patriarchial hirarchy." In fact, at the Michigan Women's Festival, women who are into SM have traditionally been pretty much segregated in the SM "encampment." (That looks to be changing, by the way.) So i think women in women/women SM relationships have that particular issue that is very different from gay male SM relationships, and different from heterosexual SM relationships.

When you start talking about people in M/s and D/s relationships, though, it is my opinion that we all have more in common than we have differences. The issues of how to build and sustain a M/s or D/s relationship seem, to me, to be pretty common, no matter what the gender(s) of the people in the relationship. For example, Master Jim and i have done a number of long programs on M/s relationships, ranging from 3 day seminars to 5 hour "classes." Those classes have included male/female, male/male and female/female pairings. The issues, questions, and concerns that were raised and discussed were pretty applicable to every possible pairing.

i asked Master Jim if He thinks gay men are not "as down on another man being Bi" -- and i assume you mean compared to how lesbians view bisexual women. Master Jim says His experience -- and again, He's not the voice of gay men everywhere -- is that gay men are not particuarly more welcoming of bisexual men than lesbians are of bisexual women.

rabidchihauhau (great name, by the way!),

Yep, i agree that obeying technically does include serving. Master Jim nevertheless included service in the vow for a couple of reasons. One reason is that service is very, very important to Him -- His philosophy on Master/slave relationships is that all of His M/s relationships are based on the concepts of direction, discipline and service (and yes, explaining this would be another post). The Master receiving service and the slave rendering service are critical to M/s relationships, so critical that Master Jim felt it deserved being named in the vow. Also, to Master Jim, including service in the vow adds the sense that what i do must be more than just external obedience -- it means that my heart and soul are aligned with His will so that for me, my purpose and my life are His. To try to make this a little clearer, take the example of a prisoner in a prison. A brutal prison guard can make the prisoner obey. (And now everyone with a prison fantasy is paying attention! *laughing*) If you inflict enough punishment on someone, you can almost certainly make her obey. But would you call what she give you "service?" Master Jim wouldn't -- for Him, service comes from a heart and soul that desire to give all to the Owner.

i hope that helps make it a little clearer.

I agree that service is a little different from obedience. The way I like to define it, obedience means obeying direct commands, but service includes all the times a command is not given, but a slave goes out of their way to satisfy or please the owner.

hello Master Jim and slave marsha. I just would like to say thank you for being willing to share your experience and knowledge with us. I am sure that I am not alone in hoping that I can take away a lot of what you have to share and make use of it in my own D/s relationship. I would also like to compliment the two of you for making a place for yourselves in this sometimes so crazy world where you can be who you are without the defining sexual roles. I can't help but laugh at the idea that you have been waiting for a newbie such as myself to come and pay you a compliment on your life, but there it is. <laughing>

Please know I am very eager to learn from the two of you.

Master Jim and slave marsha, since the M/s relationship fullfills your "lifemate needs" and your romantic relationships come second, would you consider yourselves to be a married couple? That is, if the term marriage has significant meaning to you. I know a lot of bdsm folk don't find marriage to be as significant as collaring.
To make my question clearer, could you ever have children together, or imagine doing so? This question may be somewhat personal. If you feel it is too private or it is too risky to answer, then ofcourse I'll understand.

Neither I nor slave marsha, consider ourselves as a married couple. In fact, I never use the term couple when refering the M/s relationship I have with slave marsha, prefering to call it a pairing. For us, the M/s relationship creates a greater bond that a marriage contract would ever create.

If your reference to children suggests that having children is the measure, or one of the most important measures, of the bond between two people, I could not disagree more. slave marsha never has had a desire to have children. I have three grown children from a previous heterosexual relationship and having experienced being a father I can say with certainty that having a child with slave marsha would in no way increase the bond of the M/s relationship.

Master Jim,

YOU WROTE:

<<The most important thing to me is being served by someone who is "slave wired" -- someone who has the heart of a slave. I believe that few such people exist, and as a result, are very difficult to find. Thus, sexual orientation to me is very much a secondary consideration when looking for a slave. Sex is easy to find --- service from a slave is very difficult to find. >>

IN ANOTHER POST YOU WROTE:

<<We have been talking about both sexual orientation and sexual activity. My primary identification is as a leatherman, who is a Master and an Owner. The defining characteristic of the Master/slave relationship that I have developed is control. (I prefer the term "control" over "power.") The M/s dynamic is what I seek; as such, the relationship is not the means to an end. The M/s relationship is an end in itself. >>

That’s a lot of wisdom in two short paragraphs. And it perfectly answers the question of how a gay man an a lesbian woman can form a Master/slave relationship. The essence of your relationship is control. And this is the essence of any Master/slave or Dominant/submissive relationship. Gender and/or sexual orientation is irrelevant if your goal is the M/s dynamic rather than sexual activity.

I understand that, for you, the M/s relationship is an end in itself. You are not using your power relationship to obtain sex. As you say “Sex is easy to find—service from a slave is very difficult to find.” But I do think that in all M/s or D/s relationships involve sex even if it they may not involve sexual activity. The sex drive is, in my humble opinion, the source of the drive to dominate or submit.

I am a submissive male. Like any man, sex is very important to me. For me, however, the biggest sexual turn on is dominance. Only someone who is “slave wired” can understand how exciting it is to be under the authority of a truly dominant person. And I said “person” on purpose because, for me, the gender or sexual orientation of the dominant person is irrelevant. And the turn-on does not depend on whether I am going to engage in sexual activities with that person.

I could be a very happy and sexually turned-on slave to a dominant lesbian or a dominant heterosexual male even if sexual activity were not part of our relationship. I would hope that my Mistress or Master would allow me to engage in sexual activities, as you do with slave marsha, but the goal or essence of the relationship would be M/s rather than sexual activity.

So, in short, it is easy for me to understand how your relationship can work. What I don’t understand is why we don’t see more of these type of relationships. Are you aware of other “mixed orientation” relationships?

Let me add to this as well. As Master Jim said, i've never wanted children. No matter how "romantically in love" with someone i might be... i just never have wanted children. (And i also had a fairly long heterosexual marriage, so i had the opportunity to have children, if i had wanted them.) To me, having a child is not an expression of the bond i experience in a relationship, even a romantic one.

It's important to understand that i love Master Jim deeply -- it just isn't a romantic love. Sometimes we forget that there are many different kinds of love, and romantic love is not necessarily better or deeper or more fulfilling or more desirable than the other kinds of love we might experience.

i am bound to Master Jim for life -- and should He die before i do, i will not serve another Owner -- i will continue to serve Him. The love i feel for Him is not that of a wife for a husband, a lover for her lover -- it's a different kind of love.

And now, we're getting into why i view slavery as a calling. *smile*

"If your reference to children suggests that having children is the measure, . . . of the bond between two people, I could not disagree more"

Not disscussing *measure* of bond or *depth* of bond, but *type* of bond. I was curious about a type of relationship I haven't seen before. I hope my words didn't make you feel under attack.

ultraviolet...

No, not under attack at all. That's one of the downsides to communicating in this medium -- sometimes it's hard for us to communicate passion here without sounding offended or angry. If we haven't been clear about the kind of relationship we have, please don't hesitate to keep asking questions.

bill...

Obviously, i can only speak for myself, but sex or the sex drive really is NOT the source of my desire to be a slave -- and i know others who feel as i do. my experience is much more akin to that of a woman who chooses to enter into religious service -- i feel a call to live in a certain way, to be obedient and to serve. Being a slave is not sexually exciting for me -- it IS the source of tremendous joy and contentment and fulfillment. It is how i was meant to live. And believe me -- i do NOT get wet in a good way from, oh, for example, cleaning the toilet! i probably also should add that when i have a sexual relationship with a woman it is NOT a dominant/submissive relationship in any way.

Regarding your question about other mixed relationships... Master Jim and i have known a few other M/s pairings of mixed sexual orientation. They certainly aren't very common. i suspect part of the reason for that is that our community as a whole almost always inextricably links M/s (and D/s and SM) with sexual activity, so the idea of looking beyond one's sexual orientation for ownership understandably isn't one that occurs to many people.

slave marsha,

Thanks for your answer. Although I don't think you are unique, I think you are definitely in the minority in not linking sexual turn-on with D/s. I once read the diary of a female who was her husband's slave and she listed "being turned on 24 hours a day" as one of the advantages of her slavery.

I do have an unrelated question: Master Jim says he is your owner. One of the rights of ownership is the right to transfer ownership. If Master Jim transferred your ownership to a new master, would you obey and serve the new master?

bill

bill...

i agree that i'm in the minority in not linking sexual turn-on with D/s.

In response to your question asking if i would obey and serve someone else if Master Jim chose to transfer my ownership... yes, i believe i would. And i trust that Master Jim wouldn't transfer my ownership to someone who wouldn't understand the source of my slavery and my "slave wiring." He wants me to grow in my slavery, so i trust that He would put me in a place that would facilitate that growth.

Actually, the likelihood of this is pretty small, given Master Jim's beliefs about our M/s relationship. He believes this M/s relationship is for life -- should He die before i do, i will continue to serve Him.

"One of the rights of ownership is the right to transfer ownership."
That right is only there in one-sided ownership. When you own an object, you own it because the laws or your own strength keep others from taking it. If somebody else could get a hold of it then they'd own it.
In M/s the "ownership" is quite different (one of the reasons I dislike using the words owner or slave - the meanings can get confused). In an M/s relationship an owner owns a slave because the slave wishes to be owned by that particular person. (two-sided ownership) This requires trust, respect, and love. These are qualities that can not be transferred.

Dear marsha,

Now you've got me wondering!

Does SM turn you on?

*inquiring sexologists need to know!*

:-)

Gloria...

*laughing*

No, actually, it doesn't.

Let me be more specific, because the answer isn't quite as simple as all of that.

A fairly low level amount of "pain" (sensation is probably a better word) is somewhat stimulating to me. (And probably to a lot of of people who aren't willing to admit to it! *laughing*) By a "low level" i mean some fairly light nipple play, a light spanking, that sort of thing.

Anything beyond that is not stimulating/erotic/a turn on for me. Master Jim, on the other hand, likes very heavy SM. He is particularly fond of heavy flogging and working with His hands, as in heavy punching on my arms, shoulders and back. He also likes needles a great deal and cutting. None of that is a turn on for me -- i take it as service to Him.

To: slave marsha

You made a comment in post #20 (as it appears on my screen) that kind of hit home with me, so I'd like to ask about it.

I'm curious in that you say you'd continue to serve your master even if he passes on before you. While I think I have a fair idea as to what you mean by that, I wonder if you'd try to spell it out? Also, is that to say that you'd never seek another M/s relationship out of a specific loyalty to your current master? (I realize this calls for mostly -- at least, hopefully -- pointless speculation on your part, so if you'd prefer not to, it's perfectly fine. I thank you anyway.)

Thorn

I would say that my urge is sexually motivated, and I have always had difficulty understanding what motivates people who say that, for them, it's not sexual at all.

However, after reading your description of the motivation as similar to a woman who chooses to enter religious service it suddenly began to make sense to me. Thanks for helping me understand :).

It seems to me though that although people with sexual and non-sexual motivations may appear to be practicing the same things, it's really a whole different ball game. Despite the fact that some of the terminology is similar [dominant, submissive, etc.] we are talking about completely different kinks - in fact, I'm not even sure if 'kink' is an appropriate word to describe the 'calling' you are talking about. Do you feel that this is the case - that these two motivations are worlds apart? Or ..... have you found that they often combine in the same person?

Thorn and Jewel---

Thank you for the absolutely wonderful questions -- Master Jim and i really appreciate the chance to get down to the heart of how we live.

Master Jim would like to take these questions out of this thread and start a new one, since this focuses less on our sexual orientation and more on how we view Mastery and slavery. He and i will try to do that today or tomorrow -- but we're at the International Puppy Contest this weekend, so it make take us a bit longer than usual to respond.

Again, thanks for the questions.

in response to a question from Gloria, Slave Marsha wrote:

"...By a "low level" i mean some fairly light nipple play, a light spanking, that sort of thing. ...He also likes needles a great deal and cutting. None of that is a turn on for me -- i take it as service to Him."

I must confess that, despite both of your very able and obviously well thought out answers to these questions, I still remain a bit confused.

I can understand how and why you (marsha) can see giving yourself to Jim to do things that you do not necessarily enjoy as part of your service to him. What I wonder about is: why did you not find (or seek) a Master with whom you are both sexually/kinkily AND master/slaverly compatible?

I obviously mean no offense to Jim in asking this, but I do wonder why you 'stopped' searching for a Master with someone who appears to be incompatible with you in many ways and I wonder why he accepted a slave with whom he is seemingly incompatible in many ways.

Is it that the sense of Mastery you gain from him overwhelms those other needs and vice versa with what you give to him in service? What am I missing here?

Let me see how i can best answer this question. No offense taken from the question.

First, i would say it's really interesting that some might see what i've said as pointing out areas of "incompatibility" between Master Jim and myself. i've never thought of it that way, and still don't, but i can see why others might.

To begin generally, this post, and most of the posts to date here, have focused on the things that seem to make Master Jim and i different from each other, and different from others living in M/s and D/s relationships. That's fine, and He and i certainly don't mind talking about those things. But we haven't talked much at all about the things that bind Master Jim and i together, and the things that bind us to others who live in M/s and D/s relationships. i'm afraid the board may be getting a little bit of a skewed picture of Him, of me, and of how we fit into the larger community.

To try to answer your question more specifically -- if you are a slave, who wants to be owned, there aren't many people out there willing and able to do that. If you are an Owner, who wants to own and control a slave, there aren't many slaves out there who want that kind of life. Every day i thank the leather gods that my number came up in the "lottery" and that Master Jim found me.

But saying what i just said makes it sound like i just settled for what came along. Please don't think that. Here's really the bottom line for me. Sex just isn't that important a part of this, for me or for Him. He makes sure that i have a chance to have sexual satisfaction with the gender of my choice -- but you know, even if He didn't, i don't think that would matter to me. i know that for many people BDSM and D/s is how they identify in terms of sexual orientation and its very important to them -- it isn't for me or for Him. That's not to say we don't like sex. *laughing* We do. But it just isn't at the heart or core of Mastery and slavery for us. It's easy to find sex -- good sex, great sex -- other places, in other ways. Mastery and slavery they way He and i want to live it is very hard to find.

As far as the SM, again, it isn't that important to me whether i receive SM that "turns me on." What i get instead is SM that is service... and SM that is, many times, a transcendent, spiritual experience. Think of the Native Americans who participated in the Sun Dance -- by and large, they didn't endure that great pain because it sexually excited them. They did it as a part of a spiritual experience. They did is as a bonding with their history and their tribe. i may not get sexually aroused by SM, but i get something different out of Master Jim's work with me.

For Master Jim (and i'll have to speak on His behalf as He is on a business trip right now), i provide a great many kinds of service as His slave. As He has told me many times, He could not find the kind of service i give Him very easily. So the fact that i might not be the gender of His choice for sex is a very, very small thing to Him.

The bottom line is, really, i can't imagine an Owner *more* compatible with the way i want to live as a slave. i know that may sound odd, but it's the truth. i hope this helps clarify things a bit.

Perhaps incompatibility was not the most entirely appropriate word but you got the sense of what I was asking.

To boil it down to essentials then, if I understand correctly: you are saying that Mastery/slavery is the most important 'need' for you and Jim - so far as the relationship is concerned - and that you both fill that need for each other, and other needs can be subordinated or fullfilled elsewhere or in other ways?

Yes, i think that's pretty accurate. Don't get me wrong -- not just anyone who called him or her self a Master would fill that need for me, nor would just anyone who called him or her self a slave fill that need for Master Jim. Not all Masters are right for all slaves, or vice versa. But yes -- the need to live my identity as a slave and His need to live His identity as a Master are our primary needs.