Affection in a D/s Relationship
How does affection weave itself into a D/s relationship? Is it good? Is it bad? Is there really a definitive answer?
For most D/s relationships some level of affection is needed. To be able to train and guide the sub, the Dominant needs to care about the person to some degree. It is not always necessary when a sub is primarily serving; as in serving dinner, maid, house boy. Above casual contact, affection is vital to the relationship. It is what binds a relationship in the long run. The level of submission along with the type of service will determine the amount of affection which is commonly found and needed.
casual service- no affection to some
teacher/student- some affection to moderate
Mentor- moderate to verging on high affection
Dominant/submissive- high moderate affection to love
A submissive can love a Dominant and it will not undermine the relationship. In fact it is very healthy and should be encouraged. A sub’s love for their Dominant promotes dedication and hard work; a need to please. A Dominant can also come to love their sub. But there can be hazards in a D/s relationship when affection starts to over rule the control. This happens when the Dominant allows affection to cloud their control judgment. It happens when the sub uses this affection to influence the Dominant. It escalates when the submissive sees the control they are procuring and fosters the affection to gain more power. The greater the affection between them the more the Dominant needs to be alert to prevent emotions from overwhelming control and their position as the Dominant.
This is not to say a Dominant should never try to make the sub happy. A happy sub is a better servant. But if the Dom only does things to make the sub happy and avoids things she doesn’t like, it can start to conflict with what a D/s relationship is forged on. Eventually the boundaries soften until they become vague and obscured. The sub will become confused about what the boundaries and roles really are thus eroding the D/s relationship to the point it can not be repaired.
The Dominant has to have the ability ,or learn the ability, to step back from the emotional attachment to the sub when dealing with her in a D/s venue. It’s not to say he has to remove himself constantly ,avoiding any affection and love with his sub. When the need arises, he has to be able to deal with the relationship from a completely objective and Dominant role.
I am not implying that affection is bad. In fact it is a good thing to allow affection to grow but only if both are aware of the inherent pitfalls and work toward making affection a positive influence on their relationship. The more a sub loves the Dominant, the greater the loyalty and devotion, the greater their desire to serve. The more the Dom loves the sub, the more interest they take in the training and guiding of her. Without some level of affection , how can the Dom effectively train the sub? He has to care about her and her progress. Otherwise they are just going through the motions. Affection and love develops over time just like a D/s relationship takes time to develop. As one side of the relationship grows so does the other side. As their trust increases in each other so will the D/s and affection mature and bloom. When the amount of control increases, the affection will also increase.
Now what I am avoiding talking about. What I want in a D/s relationship in regards to affection. I think I need moderate to high affection to start with. I need to know they care and I matter. I need to know that what I do, my service, touches them on some intimate level. I don’t see love entering into the relationship until the D/s side is well formed and solid. I want the D/s to always be the foundation of my relationship, not a nice perk. If love develops, fine, but never let it push the D/s to the side or over shadow it. I think I would remove myself from a relationship that went from one based on control to one that primarily lovers. I am an equal part of the relationship but the power and control will always be unequal.