Several weeks ago I asked Chloe, who writes the blog “She Obeys” to talk to me about what being a slave meant. She was kind enough to write about it and her post is here. 

Chloe, first, I am sorry to have taken so long to answer your well thought out response to my questions about the difference between submission and slavery. I needed time to process, and then, well life just started moving too fast to attend to my cyber life.

You said some interesting things, but what I think was the essence was this:

This is not, primarily, a relationship built on surrender. To me, this is a relationship built on belonging.

In short, I see it as such: One who is a slave belongs to another. One who submits, surrenders to another. I belong to my Master. Do I submit to him sometimes – am I conquered? Yes. But is that my main relationship dynamic? No. Belonging to him, being owned by him, is.

I’m not saying I’m going to achieve a perfect state of “being property” (though I’d like to). I’m not saying I’m a slave in the way the slaves of the south were.

I guess all I’m saying is this: I don’t look at him and think “I submit to him” or “I am submissive to him.” I look at him and I think “I belong to him.  He owns me.”

That’s the difference, to me.

What you are talking about is how you see yourself, as you look at him. And at the end of the day it occurs to me that we all are simply trying to figure out who we are. I know I am.

It seems to me that the name we give ourselves, when all is said and done, has mostly to do with how we view ourselves. We enter into a relationship and develop our dynamic, but perhaps it is how we see ourselves that influences how we name ourselves more than the specifics of the relationship dynamic. What I mean by that is that if you look at “submissive” or “slave”, there are so many who call themselves by these names. I guess they feel most aligned to this or that club by virtue of there being more similarities than not. Yet in truth, when you dig underneath, there can be as many differences as similarities in their relationship dynamics even within their group.

I am most familiar with the club of “DD wives”, and while yes, we all live in relationships that acknowledge a “Head of Household” i.e. have a 24/7 power dynamic in place, I find I do not feel I have very much in common with many of them.  When I read blogs of some women who call themselves slaves, I found I felt compelled to dig to find what the relationship was reallylike, that I could not assume. Now that seems like it would just be common sense, but there is also an assumption that slaves are one thing and submissives another, and of course, DDers are their own club and even often tell themselves that “we are nothing like you people”! (please note that was sarcastic…and yes, in DD circles they DO say those things, because some tell themselves “they are not kinky”…but don’t get me started). And then there are the slaves, like your commenter, that felt a bit offended that I was even asking the question, as if all slaves are somehow…well more something and should not be asked to explain themselves.

It has seemed to me, the deeper I look, the more I feel affirmed in my belief that we are all women on journeys of self understanding and relationship fulfillment. Exactly how we do that, where we find it, might vary, but people are people. We are more alike, all of us than different, and the defensiveness in all circles or clubs is usually rooted in fear and misunderstanding.

It occurs to me that the choice of name and affiliation, and thus the substantial difference between a slave and submissive, or DD wife, has something to do with the dynamic of the relationship, but really, mostly, to do with one’s view of oneself…our own identity or self image. As you said, the idea of “slave” really is very much a chosen one, not an imposed one.  I am just very interested in thinking about how women choose to define themselves.

I have also seen that the definition and the chosen descriptive words mean different things to different people. I must say, the words you use that appeal to you …you like to think of yourself as his “pet”…just do nothing for me. That does not resonate for ME, so I don’t use that kind of terminology. Does that also reflect that there exist different kinds of boundaries in our relationships? Are our relationships so fundamentally different? Maybe, not necessarily, though. There are so many nuances in relationships, and seeing through reading a blog only shows you so much.

You said something interesting about limits:

However, I don’t know that I agree that my Master respects my limits. (This has been really difficult for me to think about, and I will probably have to revisit it in the future.)

He certainly respects his limits. But mine? I don’t think so.

I have to wonder. If he thought something he wanted was hurtful to you, would he do it? I don’t mean it just hurt, but YOU were hurt, in your heart or mind? I am talking about hard personal limits. I know slaves often go back to the idea that he “would never want to hurt his property”…but is that just another way of saying he respects you, your limits? There is a huge difference between what you don’t want, and what harms. If he cares for you, as I hope he does, you are precious to him as YOU are. He recognizes you for yourself, engages with you with a posture of awareness and care that would indeed be respectful to you and your hard personal limits…I think?

I have witnessed, in the relationships I have seen close up, (all were people who defined themselves as DD) that while we have a great deal in common…probably mostly because we were drawn to each other as friends, that there are also differences in expectations, the ebb and flow of power and what we each find we can and can’t live with in our relationships. NONE of us are just the same, and each of us, whatever we call ourselves, has a relationship with ourselves that we bring to the table with our significant other. Perhaps that name we choose to present to the world reflects that as much as it does the reality of the dynamic we live within? What do you think?

For me, and I believe for all of us, it comes back to the question of “Who am I?” I am interested in looking at other people, women in particular, I think because it ends up helping me see myself more clearly. I could not begin to think of myself as a “slave” as a “pet” and yet I would say I am his as he is mine. That last bit works for me. In truth, I don’t see myself as a submissive either. (I know it is not a noun, but humor me, please). Some women in D/s relationships see themselves as fundamentally “submissive”. I see myself as a complex woman with many qualities of all sorts, who does feel some satisfaction (and also challenge) in fitting herself into harmony with a man she loves, who is more dominant than not in personality. For me, for us, the spanking and any other BDSM-ish activity we might engage in fall into the category of sexual interest and play.  Does it cross over into relationship and power dynamic? Of course! I don’t think we can slice ourselves or our relationships up into fixed parts. Everything crosses over and touches everything else, but if we do pin it down, as we must to look at it, that is how I see things…at least for today.