BONDAGE PSYCHOLOGY
After meeting 'BB' from Oberhausen several times at SM
events in London, Hamburg and Los Angeles I got him to put some of his
extremely detailed thoughts on the philosophical side of Bondage as
distinct from S&M onto paper. His English is certainly better than
my German - but it all reads much better in a German accent.
July '86
Dear Maurice (Jim?),
After being at home for quite a long time already, I finally find time
to write you. First, I want to cheer you for the fine mask you have
made for me.
You asked me to send you some written considerations about what bondage
means to me. I suppose that you are not interested in a psychological
evaluation on possible factors that caused me to thrill on bondage;
if you are, I'll go into that later.
For
me, BONDAGE is a very sophisticated form of sensual encounter. When
I'm bound and through bondage reduced to a mere helpless creature, I
no longer exist as a personality that can utter thoughts, words or in
other ways can express command over other persons, and I only exist
in that small space that the actual bondage permits. On the other hand
all my senses are very eager and awakened: I feel (within the confines
of my bondage) more intensely, and all the other senses send me more
signals - or I encounter them more intensely than under 'normal' conditions
- so that not the restrictive side of bondage alone gets to me, but
the mind-opening side of it as well.
We talked about the differences between BONDAGE and SM games. I think
the difference consist mainly of the goal of those forms: SM has the
goal of getting pleasure through pain (or humiliation?), and in BONDAGE
the goal is gaining pleasure through restriction of movement or the
other senses (hearing, seeing ..... speaking?). And although BONDAGE
can become painful that's not the intention (goal?) of it. This pain
is different from 'SM-pain'.
Next point; I have always encountered the experience that in BONDAGE
the age of my partner is only of very peripheral importance: while engaged
in some other forms of 'gay entertainment' I always looked out for someone
in the range of my own age (plus or minus 10 years). In BONDAGE that
is totally unimportant, neither is the question of education, physical
build etc. important (although I have only met highly educated and sophisticated
people to be seriously involved in BONDAGE). That is quite interesting
to me. Almost all of them were quite active in some kind of arts. This
to me another indicator of the highly sensitive and sensual nature of
BONDAGE.
Another interesting observation was that, when I surrender myself to
someone not so strong or intellectually educated as myself, it was a
distraction in a normal S-M scene (and I had always to readjust my perceptiveness
to not notice the fact), in BONDAGE willingly giving in to someone whom
I could easily master mentally or physically is of no importance for
me. I know what I do and know I am as much a part of what happens as
is the 'active'. I am, although seemingly passive, as much an active
participant of the BONDAGE-scene as is my partner. How to put that more
clearly?:- he is active in giving, I in receiving his administrations;
he is passive insofar as I set the limits of what can be done and I
am passive inasmuch as he renders me immobile. Therefore I would prefer
not to speak of S or M in this scene, but about the S as the donator
and of the M as the receptor of what mutually interests and turns them
on. BONDAGE as BONDAGE plays on a totally different level than SM, although
it can easily be mixed up (Ask him does this mean - can be combined
- or be mistaken for? - or overlap? Ed.)
There are - without doubt - some games that occur either in BONDAGE
or in SM (i.e. verbal abuse, fucking, shaving, caning, tit-torture etc.).
I think, that of the before-mentioned, verbal abuse is the most alien
form to BONDAGE: all others have in them something, that can be looked
at as reminder or heightener of the sensual feeling of BONDAGE. E.G.
A shaved skin is more susceptive to the feeling of leather, rubber,
restrictive clothing - so then the goal of the shaving was to heighten
that feeling, not to dominate or subject somebody . Same with tit-play
or ass-play or any such assault on the senses, in a bondage situation
this is often just to remind the bound person that they are unable to
resist or protest. I suppose caning, belting etc. are also sensual experiences.
Here the distinction between B-D and S-M become more blurred. Maybe
it is all a matter of intention.
But to me BONDAGE is the purest and most subtle form of sensuality (and
therefore something for the quite sophisticated). For me the emotional
side is much more elaborated (Complicated? Ed.) in bondage than in SM.
Also the question of reliability (Trust? Ed.) is more important. If
an SM scene becomes too heavy for me I can stop it at any point (if
the S is halfways normal and reliable). In BONDAGE (if it is really
total BONDAGE), I have totally to rely on the active partner or donator,
since very often I cannot give him signals (because that is the main
part of the scene) and therefore I would only submit to BONDAGE to somebody
who I already trust (not only I can trust, but I really have to trust
him) and whom I know to be emotionally on a level with me. I can make
that clear by example: with JKM Berlin I'm ready to give up each and
every control of what happens to me. With DB
Munich it's not the same: I always try not to reach the point of giving
up all control of the scene. That's not to say that DB is not reliable
or could not be trusted, but that the emotional side or disposition
of myself is totally different with each: both like to apply BONDAGE,
both are interested in a safe and sane BONDAGE, but there is some difference;
and that difference is the quality of LOVE or however you will name
it. I hope that doesn't sound tacky to you, but it's the most simple
way for me to tell you the emotional difference. (Dear Maurice, I hope
that you get the point of what I mean; but I slightly fear that the
last part was a little bit confuse).
So BONDAGE has also a part in it that is connected to acquaintance.
I can have a hot scene with a relatively unknown SM-master, but not
so with BONDAGE: there needs to be more: at least it needs a lot of
experience and experiment before to risk a full BONDAGE experience is
possible.
One last comment: I think that the fact of my being ill with polio when
I was five years of age (I remember all those dreary days of being treated
with needles, feeling pain while the doctors tried everything to help
me back on my feet, and being unable to walk or even to move arms or
legs at all) plays a main role in my being into BONDAGE. I don't think
that any question of guilt could be important because I know to the
fullest extent that my giving in to being bound doesn't take away from
me the responsibility of what happens to me: I give myself to be bound
and fucked etc. (AND I LIKE IT!!!). From my very first fantasies in
puberty - those dreams were always connected with BONDAGE, masks, gags,
heavy steel restraint, leather, rubber ...? I like it very much and
don't think I have to understand everything to its fullest extent. The
experience lies in the heightened sensuality. Over the last few years
- I have also gained access to other sides of my humanity and emotionality
and am willing to admit and to express my feelings. All those things
have broadened my personality and I think that BONDAGE played no small
part in that process.
So, Maurice, I think that (here) are enough confessions for today. I
don't know if my considerations have been clear enough. Feel free to
leave it aside and give it to the litter bin. My English teacher once
went so far as to ask me never to tell anyone that he was my English
teacher. When I first visited England he even proposed me to wear a
collar (no, not a bondage collar), one with the advertisement 'deaf
and dumb'.
If something in the above is too confused or un-understandable - I shall
not be surprised - occasionally I also succeed in not being understood
in German. For now all the best - BOUND TO BONDAGE - not yet, but again
in some hours.
REPLY to BB
September '86.
Dear B.B.,
Hello at long last. I started writing this letter two weeks ago but
... the usual excuses ...
Many thanks for writing. It was very interesting to read your thoughts.
I had no problems understanding your ideas, which were very well put
together. Sometime soon, with your permission, I would like to share
your letter with other people so they can read and respond to your observations.
Certainly my friend and representative in the USA Richard Hunter will
be interested in many of the points you make. So will Bob Wingate who
founded the New York Bondage Club and edits their Newsletter (Since
then has become editor of 'BOUND & GAGGED' magazine. M.J.S. '94).
He's written a piece about whether or not there are fundamental differences
between S&M and Bondage - and the responses from members have been
revealing.
For myself, your letter has opened up two or three new avenues for further
speculation.
I will go through your letter point by point ...
You
said you would not go into the psychological roots of your attraction
to bondage - but then outlined your history of polio and experience
of being manipulated even at such a very early age, and struggling
against lack of bodily movement. Such a legacy might leave different
people with different emotional marks - and I think it adds an interesting
footnote to your story.
I agree about not needing to understand the roots of the impulses.
There's enough to do, learning to live comfortably with them.
Returning to the beginnings of your letter: The reduction of ability
to command or influence other people (or even respond) does remove
a weight of responsibility, doesn't it. But you are the first to point
out to me just how great is the responsibility of having surrendered
responsibility.
I'm not too sure I agree with you about sophistication: Many people
with an enthusiasm for 'Erotic Bondage without too much SM' do seem
to be connected with the Liberal Arts. I hadn't noticed that - it
may be a dangerous generalisation. In a way I hope you're wrong because
I particularly enjoy meeting anyone with a more raw and non-artistic
approach to life who can discover sensual subtleties of bondage for
it's own sake but still keep a healthy sense of reality - and sense
of lusty fun. (I think humour is seriously lacking in most SM games.
In EB there can be wry humour and, on many occasions, laughter). I
guess sophistication in terms of subtlety of approach and ingenious
originality - yes, you have a point.
The Mind Opening effect, I had experienced. In a situation when so
many familiar sensual aspects have been closed, others do begin to
open - or do we just have more time to become more aware of other
senses ... and other emotional/psychological avenues to explore?
Your point about the goal and intentions of B/D vs S/M is a very subtle
one but very important. I shall need to think about it further.
The age/intellectual matching of bondage partners as opposed to general
gay encounters is a key to many of our games. I see many of my casual
encounters which involve bondage as a shift of power or change of
the usual balance of my life. Whether I am reducing the physical ability
of someone stronger than me or someone is changing my age/authority
status, the variety of different results can be unpredictable and
very stimulating. There is a mental as well as physical competition
going on throughout any game. Even when totally subdued and immobilised
(and silenced) I often feel that by surviving and not capitulating
I am still winning. However, sometimes the winning is in effect losing.
Perhaps I'd really like to be reduced to admitting defeat or pleading
or whatever - but my general personality can not easily admit this
possibility - or even imagine how I would deal with it if driven to
this point (I almost said reduced to that level - but I decided that
it could equally be seen as being taken to a new height).
The trust element is very important. How relaxing it is to have total
trust that someone will do what is right for you - even if it is painful
or challenging (physically or mentally) unwelcome at the time. This
trust seems to produce an almost tangible warmth, doesn't it.
The imposition of additional elements such as verbal abuse, shaving,
fucking during bondage games does, for me complicate the subject -
but inevitably anything which intensifies the defenseless state of
the immobilised person does heighten the scene. Certainly a writhing
'victim' excites me more than a comfortable or even stoic one. However,
whether the assaults on the senses of the bound person are physical
or mental the degree of pleasure or pain which can result must be
in tune with the general parameters of trust. How do you judge or
predetermine the extent and style of these? As a Top this is something
I think I'm not good at guessing. Particularly as one is often double-guessing
- because some of the things I would like to experience, I am not
at present able to admit - and particularly not actually ask for.
If asked I would say I'm totally against the use of drugs - fist-fucking,
piss drinking or electro torture - but if in a scene with someone
I trusted something of this nature was suddenly happening I would
like to be able to complain vehemently - but if this resulted in it
stopping I might (secretly) wish my ability to control the
situation had not been successful. I would then have to survive the
situation - and, in retrospect, might discover that it is an experience
I could use in future fantasies. Complicated, isn't it! But even that
question concerns the bondage situation rather than the actual SM
games.
Another point is - when somebody is totally bound and coping with
his situation - when does outside interference become a distraction?
Some people need to be left alone. Judging this and not feeling that
you're neglecting somebody who's in bondage is another of those instances
when sensitivity to the situation (or sophistication ) is essential.
I very much appreciated your point that in an SM scene the victim
is usually in a position to stop the scene at any moment. To risk
allowing a situation in which such ability to choose is removed demands
trust and sophistication .... and, as you say, experience. Glad to
hear that JKM Berlin ... is someone to whom you will surrender totally.
A matching of emotional disposition is something one only explores
through experience with the person. Most good bondage relationships
develop only gradually. Personally, I like to have a de-briefing session
after any encounter. That brings areas worth further exploration into
focus and makes sure that un-pleasurable elements are identified -
even if these are then used as threats or persuaders during future
encounters.
Well,
I think that's enough from me in one morning. I shall have to go back
and re-read it for obvious typing errors - and confused thought processes
- but, generally speaking, I shall leave it in it's ungrammatical purity.
Your English is, perhaps, better than mine.
Well - "That's all folks" as Bugs Bunny used to say.
M.J.S.A.