Sunday, November 27, 2011

Creating an Enduring Relationship

As most of you know, we are a kinky family of several partners, polyamorous if you want the technical term. So we have Master Lynn, a friend of nearly 20 years, in our home; Patrick, my slave of more than 16 years; and Craig, a part-time long distant slave in Iowa who visits every six to eight weeks.


Added to that, I've been seeking to own an object, that is a man who is completely surrendered and whom I can treat as "my thing." This past week we've had an object-applicant (animal) staying with us, which prompts another object-applicant (Chicago object) to ask "How would this affect anything that you and I might pursue?"


My answer flows from several of the principles I apply when I create a relationship. Let me explain each of them.


First off, as you may have noted in the last paragraph, I believe that relationships are created. At least the best relationships are created. Sure there are times when they just "happen" but I have found that when they do they are less likely to endure. Creating, you see, takes time, negotiation, and arriving at a mutual understanding of how the relationship will work both in principle and in reality.


There ought not be a rush to have a relationship. You can start one but let it grow slowly and naturally before you say it's ready to "go live."


That negotiation entails a myriad of "what" questions. Chicago object and I have been negotiating for almost a year about such topics as health, finances, sex and fetish, friendships and social life, chores, career, schedules, limits, affection, and dealing with multiple relationships.


The basis of a healthy relationship resides within the realm of one's authenticity. Beyond ego, lust or infatuation lies the real me and the real you. The best relationships recognize the authentic in each partner and (here's the catch) the partners complement one another's authentic selves.


The problem, of course, is that one's authenticity may not be easily known, especially in the passion of first meeting. Yet if we pause to consider what is authentic while we create the relationship, we are much better off than if we dive in half-cocked, half-cooked, and half-crazy.


Another important consideration is vocabulary. Having the same definition for the same word facilitates good communication. Having different definitions only causes difficulty. What, for instance, is a "husband" and what are his duties? The same can be asked of a master, slave, daddy, mommy, boy, girl, etc. It is also a matter of finding if your expectations are compatible. What do you expect when you begin living together? Expect for duties and responsibilities? Expect for the future?


Just as we need to discuss expectations, we need to know what the underlying assumptions are. It is easy to ignore one's assumptions, thereby having contradictory assumptions that will eventually cause problems. Having to say "Oh, I thought you meant…" six months into a relationship is not a pleasant event.


Each of these questions are compounded when the relationship includes more than two. What do, for instance, Lynn, Patrick and Iowa boy expect from an object? How will the object treat each of these men and how will they treat him?


I have long thought that every relationship is created by the two people in it, if only because one consents to the other's design. Looking at it in that way, then, the couple needs to consider their own needs, goals, and desires while they consider the hopes and fears of the rest of the family.


It may seem like a lot to consider but there is wisdom in doing so before the tangles of emotions, finances, social obligations, house-sharing and love weave a bond that becomes a straight jacket. Better cover the eventualities now rather than later.


But of course, none of the above really answers the applicant's question: "How would this affect anything that you and I might pursue?" He's not asking about theory, he wants to know how a second object will change the relationship. In some aspects it wouldn't and in others it would. Let's see.


He and animal will have the same rules. The principles of objectification: obedience, subjugation, domination, control, and humiliation apply to both of them. No change there.


There are areas where having two objects changes the scenario:


First, there will be less chores for each of them, since they will now be shared. Animal, who is retired, has much more time to "serve the house" than does Chicago object. Therefore he will carry the bulk of those chores while Chicago object works at his daytime job.


Secondly, since there is only one of me, they will each have less face-to-face time with me for sex. One will be "stored" while the other serves me. That's not to say there won't be three ways and sharing of the objects with others.


I believe that having multiple objects (as opposed to be the "only" one) will increase the feeling of being an object, as they experience being ignored while another has my attention.


Most importantly each of them has different talents and abilities, hence their lives will vary based on the optimal use each has. For instance, it is obvious that animal is very skilled in house keeping and enjoys doing it. Chicago object is younger, trimmer and desires public exposure and will therefore be more likely to be on exhibit, i.e., a bound figure in the living room.


The simplest answer is that each of us is a unique being with varying skills, abilities, and desires. It is these important characteristics that must be taken into account when relationships are constructed.

Have a great week. Jack

* * * * *

Buying one of my books helps to pay for the cost of this email. Please visit my website to make a purchase.


You can send me email at mrjackr@leathermail.com or visit my website at http://www.LeatherViews.com. You can also subscribe to my blog at LeatherMusings.blogspot.com. Copyright 2011 by Jack Rinella, all rights reserved.

No comments:

Post a Comment