carmin: (Default)
Chateau Carmin Mods ([personal profile] carmin) wrote2013-11-19 02:47 pm
  • Add Memory
  • Share This Entry
Entry tags:

Setting: Culture





Submission
The ideal submissive is quiet, attentive, and has a keen sense of humility. They may take pride in their service, but it should be expressed as a self-possessed poise. They communicate well and readily, immediately informing their dominant of especially negative or positive reaction, and they should surrender every facet of their lives over to their control, from personal behavior to finances. This should bring them comfort and peace, basking in the sense that they're thoroughly taken care of. And, needless to say, they should be both subservient and obedient.

A submissive should not be nearly so cooperative toward anyone else. Although grace and evenness of tone is prized, submissives should protect their dominant's interests to any end, regardless of what befalls them. Old tales might include stories of a captured submissive committing suicide rather than let another take them, and equally dramatic gestures of devotion. All in all, a sub is meant to be eager to serve and to inspire a sense of pride in their dominant as their possession.

Most of the time, a submissive finds fulfillment in their service through a sense of absolute safety. They tend to be people that are absolutely in control during daily life, and face immense pressures on them in one way or another. They tend toward criticism, both of others and especially of themselves. Submission becomes a chance to let down these burdens and relax into letting someone else take up that mantle of control. It is a relief that is found only through total trust in their dominant. Often, application of pain or restriction can aid the process by forcing them to let go of any mental resistance.

In real life, much of this is impossible. How much any given actual submissive embodies the above qualities varies and is debatable. Many dominants do not actually want an "ideal" submissive, much as real people do not want an "ideal" man or woman as perceived by societal standards. Mouthy, sarcastic rebels aren't uncommon and are sometimes sought after, but most dominants likely expect that at some point in the scene the sub is brought to heel. A truly intractable submissive will likely face ridicule and questioning of whether he'd typed himself right.

Traditionally, submissive colors tend to be warmer jewel tones, and subs (male or female) that are especially valued by a wealthy dominant might keep their hair long. Depending on the person, it can be either extremely easy or quite difficult to peg each person as their orientation-- formal gestures can help.

Although not used in casual practice today, a submissive might indicate their position of supplication by kneeling, kissing their dominant's palm, licking their knuckles as a pet, exposing their neck, or addressing them with terms of respect such as sir, miss, ma'am, Master, or Mistress. How often any given individual utilizes such gestures is indicative of their sexual assertiveness, or their personal relationship with the dominant receiving them.

Submissives are often friends with one another and frequently share gossip about their relationships. There is a tacit agreement of privacy, that the information will not be shared with anyone else. Pressures experienced within the relationship may be more easily understood by other submissives, and often cannot be expressed to the dominant in question. As such, many dominants are quite understanding of their sub's need to keep others as friends and have time with them, and it generally provokes far less jealousy than spending time with a different dominant would.

Domination
The ideal dominant is a master of reading people. They can tell from a glance how their actions are affecting another, and can alter their behavior accordingly to extract from them the desired response. They are manipulators, but manipulators that do it to benefit the recipient. Although domination brings them contentedness and a sense that all is right with the world, ultimately their actions are meant to benefit another and not themselves. As such, inflicting anything unwanted or unbeneficial is a mark of a bad dominant, who might be selfish or ignorant to not have realized the resulting consequences.

A large amount of expectation is placed on them to be always in control. They should be calculated without being overbearing. The ideal dominant does not throw their weight around and make others cower before their presence; they exude an aura that expects obedience, and so are given it. They are meant to be selfless, considerate people that possess a strong desire to take care of others, placing always their sub's needs before their own.

Of course, they aren't teddy bears. Dominants tend to also possess a strong, healthy ego, and an unshakable sense of self. Their confidence should be impossible to bring down, regardless of what mistakes or hardships they endure. Oftentimes it is their submissive that provides this surety; since their sub accepts their commands and finds pleasure in them, there is no reason for them to doubt themselves. Similarly, they will not accept doubt in their abilities from anyone else. They are overtly proud and may have a sadistic streak that enjoys mocking others who they see as inferior.

In real life, once again, how much any given dominant embodies the above varies. Dominants are not meant to see submissives as truly beneath them, just as submissives are not meant to feel beneath them, but that isn't to say it never occurs. Abuse of power happens and is treated extremely harshly by the legal system, and by the social ramifications (intense stigmatization) should it be made publicly known. On the opposite end, a dominant may be gentle and reserved. Everyone has their own style of dominating others and as long as they do it with consideration and pride, it is not generally frowned upon.

Traditionally, dominant colors are dark, cold tones, in black, grey, blue or purple. Their manner of carrying themselves is upright and confident, and they own the space around them with a careless ease. They tend to make far more eye contact than submissives do, and will demand it without shame.

Characteristic gestures are frequently centered around the neck: stroking, kissing, biting, or lightly squeezing. When displeased or demanding they might sharply pull their submissive's hair or use it to pull them somewhere. They could demand shows of obeisance from the sub, or if they're less harsh, utilize more affectionate behaviors such as petting. Public gestures of possessiveness are expected and socially encouraged, and often desired by the submissive. A sub might kneel at their dom's feet while they're seated, from which they might lay their head in their lap and have their hair stroked, be fed by hand, etc.

Historical context
In the past, dominants held the power both in the household and in the world beyond the home. They were the highest paid workers, middle and upper management in companies and businesses. They owned property, they did the banking, their votes counted when elections rolled around. Submissives, if they held jobs and weren’t left to stay at home to tend the household, had the lowest paying jobs, those no one else wanted and those that required the least education.

But times changed. Opinions of those in power shifted. Dominants and submissives came to hold equal legal rights. Naturally, there were those who resisted, who felt that a submissive’s place was in the home, not managing a bank. However, as the years pass, those individuals grow fewer and further between.

Part of the growing shift in attitude stemmed from the problems that arose when a submissive inherited a great deal of property, money, and/or power and had no dominant to transfer it to. This led to a number of submissives rising in power to, at best, the barely grudging acceptance of their dominant associates. In many ways, these submissives were the pioneers in the movement that sought to bring equality to both orientations.

Likewise, it was not totally unheard of for a dominant to break with societal convention and adopt a lifestyle more suited to a submissive. Some were incorrectly categorized upon reaching the age of majority, others simply changed – either because they wished to or had no other choice – as the years and circumstances of their lives dictated.

Today, dominants and submissives are generally accepted as equals in the political and financial worlds. There are still some holdovers to the old way of thinking, but society is becoming more progressive. The rise in number of individuals adopting alternative lifestyles points to this change, and as the years pass, no doubt there will be more changes to come.

Nearly all historical worldwide events remain unchanged, for ease of coordination among players. Some of the details may be written in with a D/s overtone, which you are free to do without mod approval, but the actual content and results of major political events remain unchanged.

Choosing a role
At the age of 18, everyone is legally required to register as one orientation. This tends to result in considerable birthday parties, as the individual is now also legally able to have sex with adults and to attend chateau parties. (Underage sex is legal only between others that are also underage.) Typically a teenager undergoes a socially encouraged sexual exploration period in high school, culminating in their 18th birthday. It's not generally difficult for someone to decide, for they're not truly deciding-- most feel attraction as instinctively as anyone heterosexual or homosexual feels attraction for their preferred gender, though that comparison is not relevant for this setting.

You might note a hiccup here, which is that some do change their orientation later in life. This is uncommon, socially criticized, tends to dissolve current relationships, and is a laborious legal undertaking for the paperwork alone. It is nonetheless possible and may be done by those who truly feel they have made a mistake in their alignment, but they should expect to face dismissal of their feelings from many around them. This might contribute to its scarcity.

Casual & public interactions
Since sex here is defined as "sex with D/s roles" and is completely normalized, non-sexual D/s takes on its own aspect in society. It is approached much more casually than sex itself, and is the subject of frequent joking between friends. It can be used to resolve interpersonal tension, to demonstrate caring, to apologize, and to serve many other functions. Some couples will however decide to make non-sexual scenes part of their agreed exclusivity, and decline to engage in them outside of the relationship. Mostly, casual non-sexual scenes are relatively common and strongly enculturated, but constitute an overt display of trust (on behalf of both participants).

Publicly, acting in role is mostly seen as a public display of affection, and similar social rules apply. It's acceptable within moderation and in certain contexts. Kneeling for your dominant in public would barely cause anyone to bat an eye (someone might find it cute, like a couple kissing in public) but something like flogging at the office would be considered distasteful. It's tantamount to forcing others to participate in an exhibitionism kink. Among groups of close friends in a private area, it may be done relatively without fanfare, but it's a bit like someone making out in the corner.

D/s takes on a social function in this universe, and the roles do not reflect someone's social status except to very stodgy and offensive old conservatives. Submissives are not obligated by cultural expectation to act submissive to anyone they haven't negotiated something with, so when they do, it's a means of social interaction indicating closeness. The same is true for dominants.

Negotiation
Negotiation is ubiquitous and critical. A responsible dominant will insist on it before playing with any sub, and all but the most reckless subs will engage in at least casual verbal negotiation before rescinding control. For some, there is a marked, clear line between normal life and a scene, and a negotiation exists definitively in the former. Most typically it will include a candid, unemotional exchange of each other's limits, whether spoken aloud or written down in a brief list, a formed agreement on their relative level of exclusivity, the kind of aftercare expected, and any particular kinks they have that they want catered to. Some people get this all over with in five minutes before getting to the fun part, and others require a much lengthier courtship.

In many cases, negotiation is courtship. It can be extremely flirtatious, or staid and professional, consisting of a written contract. That's quite old fashioned, however, and may be likened to something like an arranged marriage. Even when visiting the Chateau or other professionals, the negotiation will consist of a verbal exchange and a quick signature on a waiver of liability. For those engaging in extreme and potentially dangerous kink, such as breath play or long term constriction, there may be a similar waiver signed and a written agreement on what to do in the event of a medical emergency. In short, it is considered extremely irresponsible for both parties-- moreso the dominant, as they shoulder more responsibility-- to not undergo at least a quick negotiation, but it does not have to be formal.

Etiquette
In the majority of normal interaction in the wide world, there is little acknowledgement of one's orientation, much as someone doesn't typically alter the way they speak depending on another's sexuality. Not to say it doesn't happen, but it's rather rude and prejudiced, or contrarily it may be flirtatious and sexually aggressive to continually make catered comments.

A sub unnecessarily using terms of respect such as sir is sending a very clear message of interest. Being submissive does not mean being incapable of initiating a liaison. A dominant, on the other hand, might express interest by giving an order and seeing how it's received. Subs are under slight cultural expectation to be obedient to doms that aren't their own, but may nonetheless refuse.

At a party, things change. Everyone at a party is functioning within their role. Some parties are more formal than others and will carry a defined set of hard rules that should be obeyed (or risk an admonishment by the Mistress), but many are casual in nature and will consist of lounging around socializing with drinks while a scene is performed. Each room will contain its own scene, most of them performed by guests. Occupying a room for extensive amounts of time is extremely rude and might merit a talking to; others would like to perform as well.

There is no sex that takes place publicly as per law, so those with an exhibition fetish will have to make do with private parties hosted by their friends. Additionally, one does not touch anyone else without explicit permission from the individual. In the case of a taken submissive, permission should be obtained from their dominant, who should in turn consider their submissive's desires and likelihood to consent whether they check in with them or not.

Those at a party may take on a variety of roles: part of a couple and looking to perform, part of a couple and looking to wander around until eventually retreating to a guest room for private play and sex, as a single trying to pick someone up, or as a single intending merely to socialize and observe. Levels of dress therefore range the gamut accordingly, from full fetish costumes or period attire to lingerie to nudity. Very casual dress is generally not allowed in the door; if one absolutely refuses to dress for the occasion, they may be allowed in if they are wearing all black along the lines of business casual.

At parties, everyone must employ the universal safewords of green, yellow, and red, functioning as the colors on a stop sign do. (Go, slow down, stop.) A dominant or observer may at any time check in with the submissive's consent by asking for a color.

Forming a commitment
Relationship commitments work somewhat differently here. Casual dating works the same as ever, with a key distinction being the greater incidence of polyamory as we would define it. Some people are definitively monogamous and are not looked down upon for it, while some are monogamous only for sex acts and not for non-sexual D/s scenes. The reverse may be also true. Or there could be a large polyamorous association of people, all with their own individual relationship rules worked out between each pair. Obviously, involving more people makes it more complicated very fast, but suffice to say that free for all orgies are not commonplace and that cheating is real, defined, and as upsetting as it is to us. The specific rules of each relationship are completely decided upon among the participants, and it's not uncommon for couples (and moresomes) to have to lay down a specific definition of exclusivity to each other. It's part of the negotiation.

Legally, one may be "committed" to their partner, that is, listed as their official dominant or submissive for legal purposes and all the responsibilities (and laws) that come along with it. Some couples might make this an intermediate step before marriage or collaring (essentially the same thing, with the term used interchangeably), while others might not make it official until marriage. Commitment as a word implies the legal relationship ("You committed to him?") while marriage / collaring implies the emotional, social relationship ("I'm his collared sub, I'd never betray him"). One can have one but not the other, or one can have both.

As such, divorce as a definition of dissolution of marriage is less common. The old fashioned way was to commit simultaneously with collaring, but as times progress, it's becoming more standard to commit -- essentially, live together -- before marriage as a test run. This effectively lowers the rate of marriage, and therefore of divorce.

Being collared tends to imply an extremely long lasting, romantic soul mate devotion, and in many cases is paired with a higher degree of exclusivity and claim of one partner over another than the other levels of relationship. Collars themselves can take many forms, whether plain leather, chain link, or delicate ornate necklaces, but they function much the same way as our wedding rings do. Someone with a visible collar is definitively off the market. Radical liberals may choose not to wear a visible collar, whatever their relationship status, or a radically liberal dominant may wear a simple chain to signify his taken status.

Meanwhile, commitment comes with it several legal obligations, largely on behalf of the dominant. They are now required to provide for their submissive as their dependent, financially and emotionally, and as such abuses of power are treated much as cases of child abuse. Historically a submissive might be legally expected to maintain absolute fidelity to their dominant (or at least to only sleep with or play with others at their dominant's direction), but as sub's rights grows as a movement that is becoming infrequently enforced. Overall, committing to someone makes it legally enforceable that a dominant must take care of their sub, and often takes on their finances as well. How progressive a couple is will dictate what exactly is involved.

Alternative lifestyles
In general, gender inspires much less excitement and confusion than it does in our world. By default, people think of themselves as dominant or submissive, implying a different kind of heteronormative culture. Most consider themselves bisexual if they think about it at all, with few exceptions. Anyone with a strong gender preference would be like someone having a strong hair color preference. It would be considered an aesthetic preference or a kink or fetish, depending on the intensity of the attraction.

Relationships with those of the same orientation, however, are quite different. Dominant/dominant and submissive/submissive face much of the same ridicule and slowly growing acceptance that homosexuality does today. Mocking might include asking who holds the whip or, at best, innocent confusion over how they manage to get anything done. That said, obviously they're not unheard of relationships. It is uncommon, but possible, to get into a same-orientation arrangement, but those in it may find themselves having to "come out of the closet" to their acquaintances and friends, and being particularly public about it might be difficult. Within the relationship they will likely face considerable role confusion and some internal jockeying until they discern how best works for them.

Some may arrive at what is considered the "kinky" sex of this world, adynamic sex, also called more casually sex without roles. This is the normal vanilla sex of our society, and is seen as somewhat scandalous. Dominants engaging in it for the first time may have difficulty relinquishing control, and submissives may find it difficult to take it. Or the person in question might find they vastly prefer this type of freeform, playful sex, which has more room for unrestrained affection. Regardless, sharing details of your adynamic sex with platonic acquaintances -- or even admitting you've had it at all -- would be much like telling someone in our society, unprompted, that you're a sadomasochist. It's a bit off and slightly taboo, and definitely oversharing.