Miss Abernathy's Concise Slave Training Manual (5 page)

BOOK: Miss Abernathy's Concise Slave Training Manual
2.6Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
ads

If what you want is an accomplished chef who has a foot fetish or who can recite Yeats while being caned or who is willing and able to learn French so that she can accompany you to the film festival at Cannes, that is a slave.

In general, though, I believe that all slaves should exhibit some basic qualities. A slave should be sincere, loyal, discreet, clean, modest, honest, grateful, intelligent (that is, able to learn what is required for her position), respectful of herself and others, observant, attentive, and ethical.

In addition to these basic qualities, a dominant may require other characteristics, such as physical attractiveness, strength or stamina, specific sexual traits, a pleasant voice (particularly important for slaves to be voice-trained), social adaptability; or specific technical skills (construction, sewing, writing, accounting and the like).

I would like to say a word about a particular phenomenon that may arise between submissive and dominant. You will remember, no doubt, the urgency with which Severin pursued his Mistress, Wanda, in
Venus In Furs.
What you may not recall is her initial reluctance to fulfill his fantasy. It is possible to read
Venus In Furs
as the story of a would-be slave who is submissive only to his own fantasies. Gregor (as Severin was called while in service to his lady) is a textbook example of a pushy submissive who "tops from the bottom." I do not wish to imply that a real-life submisive should have no input into a contract or the ways in which it is carried out, but there is a qualitative difference between a dominant who enters into a contract freely - who indeed will most often initiate it - and one who is bullied into adopting a "dominant" position by a needy submissive. Gregor created a monster in Wanda, one with whom he quickly became dissatisfied. I refer to the tendency to bully people into dominance as "Gregor Syndrome"; individuals afflicted with it should be avoided.

To Those Who Would Be Masters...

Personal Qualities of a Good Dominant

Just as a slave must exhibit exemplary qualities, so must a dominant show that he is worthy of the privilege of ownership. Just because a person is a sexual "top" or sadist does not automatically mean that he will be a good dominant.

First and foremost, the dominant should possess at least the same level of personal integrity that he expects from his slave. While "do as I say, not as I do" may be an amusing erotic game, it cannot, in the long run, form the basis of a dominant/submissive arrangement.

Second, the dominant should have a clear sense of his own limitations and needs, and be able to articulate them clearly and succinctly. A dominant must have exceptionally good personal boundaries, particularly since slavehood implies a level of dependence on the dominant.

Third, a dominant should be inquisitive. The best dominants are insatiably curious about human nature. This curiosity drives such individuals to dig deep into the hearts and minds of submissives to discover what makes them tick A dominant must be highly observant - nosy; even. Selective prying is the dominant's prerogative.

A dominant should be creative, versatile, and decisive, both in matters of reward and of punishment. The tasks she sets for her submissive, the authority with which she presents new restraints and challenges, the ingenuity with which she approaches the training process - all these are vital if the dominant wishes to avoid boredom and conventionality in her relationships. .

I believe that a dominant should herself have an intimate knowledge of the tasks she sets for a submissive. So, while she need not be physically able to do a task herself, she should both understand the logistics of the problem and appreciate the skill and energy necessary to complete it.

Not only does this assure that the dominant will value lave appropriately, but it will also allow her to the better correct the slave in the event of an error or insufficiency in the work. A dominant must be both teacher and student, able to learn from her peers - and from her slaves.

This raises the broader question of nature versus nurture. Are the best dominants born, or are they made? Old School wisdom has that the best tops start at the bottom; that is, that a would-be dominant should undergo training as a submissive in order to appreciate the complexities of service.

To the extent that this is possible, given the resources of the community and the individual's temperament, I think it is sound advice. Certainly there are those who are constitutionally unsuited for submission, and I am not suggesting that such individuals force themselves into an unnatural role. To them I recommend extensive observation of successful D/S relationship, and, if possible, the experience of co-topping or co-owning a submissive. Indeed, some of the most successful masters have been trained by slaves or by more experienced dominants in exactly this manner.

Just as submissives can suffer from "Gregor Syndrome," dominants are prone to a number of ailments as well. The most general is mown as "top's disease," or, in common parlance, delusions of grandeur. Just because you are suzy slave's master doesn't mean you are automatically Master of the Universe. It is inappropriate and downright rude to try to dominate innocent bystanders; in some cases, this behavior can become abusive.

A related ailment is "Wanda Syndrome," named after Gregor's mistress in
Venus In Furs.
A dominant suffering from Wanda Syndrome is actually letting herself be dominated by her so-called submissive. Often this leads to resentment, and, in some cases, betrayal and abandonment, as was the case in Sacher-Masoch’s novel. Passive-aggressive behavior and codependency are as unhealthy in a dominant/submissive relationship as in any other.

Commitment and Resources

Just as slavehood can be a vocation, responsible and committed dominance can be a source of great joy and satisfaction. However, in the desire to possess and care for a submissive, some dominants overestimate their own level of commitment and resources. If you are having trouble paying your own rent, it is foolish to take on a live-in slave. I(you are a naturally monogamous person, contracting with a submissive whose greatest fantasy is to be lent out to your friends would be a grave error.

One dominant of my acquaintance has written, "The Mistress must be worthy of the servant." I can only applaud her. I believe that the best dominants are essentially modest. A modest dominant is not an oxymoron. She must know her limits and her weaknesses as well as her strong points; how else can she dare to correct someone else's? She does not suffer from delusions of grandeur or overestimate her abilities. She does not believe herself to be a panacea for the world's ills, and especially not for a submissive's inner pain. No one, but no one, can "cure" another person's childhood wounds or spiritual malaise. At best, a dominant can help create a supportive atmosphere in which to allow a submissive to heal those wounds herself.

Styles of Dominance

Just as there is a wide variety of submissives, dominants do not come in one flavor only. There are the classic roles of
mistress
and
master.
(It should be noted that masters may be female or male.

Some women prefer the title
mastress.
I suppose that there may also be male mistresses, although I do not know any personally.) The archetypal mistress is a leather goddess wearing towering spike-heeled boots; she is wasp-waisted in her corset and brandishes a whip. Yet how many women are inclined to prance around their homes in clothing that is more like bondage than any chains? Very few, in my experience. More often, "mistress" is a general title of respect for a dominant woman, whatever her style. Likewise, a master may be macho in his chaps and mirrored shades - or a friendly gentleman in a business suit.
Nota bene:
just as a submissive may well be offended by a random individual trying to "top" her, many dominants dislike being addressed as "master" or

"mistress" without prior negotiation,. even in a kink-friendly environment.

The key aspect of a mistress or master is authority, and especially authority based on personal achievement. We speak of a master craftsperson or of a Master of Arts degree. In both of these cases, the title of “master” is conferred after years of training and work. Likewise in D/S, the title of master or mistress ought to be earned, not taken.

Another role is that of the
trainer.
Trainers often model them selves after athletic, military; or animal trainers; they are often primarily concerned with performance. The trainer is the natural complement to the pet; a
butler
in the middle position of supervising other slaves may also act as a trainer.

An
owner
can be a master, trainer, or mistress; here the emphasis is on the submissive as possession. Owners are suitable dominants for pets and for slaves who enjoy being first and foremost someone's property.

A final category of dominant is the
tellCher.
In this group we find governesses, headmasters and -mistresses, the Mother Superior and the local priest. In all cases, the dominant stands
in loco
parentis,
assuming a disciplinary pseudo-parental role. A teacher may also take on a dominant-in-training. In any case, one would t a teacher to have a particular'ID-ea of expertise, be it French or fencing.

To Those Who Would Be Slaves...

While this book is primarily addressed to dominants, I have no doubt that some submissives will have braved their way through it as well. If you are one of these, you are to be commended...but also forewarned. It takes more than good posture and pretty manners to make a slave. I must repeat myself slavehood is a vocation. It requires patience, hard work, unflinching honesty, and a strong sense of self. The following short essay will, I trust, give you food for thought on your journey.

On Ethics

Miss Abernathy strongly believes that our world and our community cries out for a more balanced and harmonious ethical structure, one that ends neither in an eye-for-an-eye literalism nor in a turn-the-other-cheek denial of the self. I find in medieval chivalry an embodiment of such a system. The following pages do not contain a lengthy discussion of chivalry as a historical and literary phenomenon. Rather, I have taken the terminology of chivalric ethics as a starting point for a discussion of submission and service.

While this section is addressed primarily to submissives, I hope it will become apparent that these guidelines represent an ethical structure appropriate to dominants as well.

Foundations of Submissive Ethics

In his romance Lancelot (The Knight of the Cart), the twelfth century French poet Chretien de Troyes tells the story of a famous knight in service to a famous queen. Lancelot has vowed to do his lady's will without hesitation, thinking not of himself, but only of her wishes. One day, the queen requires Lancelot to climb into a cart which, the author tells us, was used in those times like a pillory, to display common criminals to public mockery. The proud knight, forgetting his vow, hesitates for the space of two steps, and the queen rebukes him, causing him no end of distress.

When the two finally meet again, he asks why she has ignored him, her faithful lover.

Then the queen explains to him:

"What? Where you not then ashamed and afraid of the cart? You showed great
reluctance to climb in when you hesitated for the-space of two steps. That indeed was why I
refused either to address you or to look at you." 'May God save me, " says Lancelot, "from
doing such a wrong a second time; and may God never have mercy on me if you were not
absolutely right! [...]. "
(trans. D.D.R. Owen) What kind of a relationship is this, where one partner may ask the other to humiliate himself publicly for her sake? Courtly love, although it is the source of many of our modern notions of romantic love, diverges sharply from its contemporary counterpart in that love is explicitly defined in terms of the lover's service to his lady. The relationship is one of fealty, a vow of devotion to an individual and commitment to serving him or her. Such was a knight's vow to his king, and such is that same knight's vow to his lady love.

The unattainable woman. The devoted lover. Seemingly random acts of disdain that humiliate the lover. His continued adoration and increased fervor. We might just as easily be reading Sacher-Masoch’s
Venus In Furs
as a medieval romance. Just as Gregor submits to the humiliation of traveling as Wand’s servant, riding in crowded, smelly coaches with the commoners and sleeping in cold and drafty servant's quarters, Lancelot, the flower of chivalry; submits to the punishment of the cart: the mark of the common, the mean. And all for love.

What qualities did a chivalrous lover possess? What did he offer his lady in return for her affection? And how can a modern submissive interpret and adapt this seemingly archaic system to his own situation? What does it really mean to love, honor, and obey?

Friendship

I believe that no dominant/submissive relationship can exist without the bonds of mutual affection. I am not talking about a casual affair or mere erotic titillation, but about an ongoing committed relationship. Love and acceptance are the basis of such a union. A submissive should be first and foremost a trusted companion to the dominant. Obedience, which often stands firmly at the center of any spoken or written contract between a dominant and a submissive, grows out of the trust established by love.

Honor

While friendship and obedience develop between two people, honor is a matter of individual discretion and conscience. Honor is both a personal quality and a system of values according to which we . make decisions. It is based on discernment, a realistic sense of order and fairness. There was a time when an honorable woman would not dream of "compromising herself" with pre- or extra-marital sex; for some people, this rule still holds true. A man of honor would not let a slanderous remark against himself or his family go unavenged. For the purposes of a submissive ethic, honor is an internal sense, one which allows the individual to make judgments about a given person, action, or situation. In the most general terms, "being honorable" is an old-fashioned way of saying that an individual has appropriate and consistent boundaries, that she is able to say; "This is acceptable; that, however, is not." It is vital for a submissive to be able to articulate her sense of honor, both in negotiation and in service.

BOOK: Miss Abernathy's Concise Slave Training Manual
2.6Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
ads

Other books

As a Favor by Susan Dunlap
Leave the Last Page by Stephen Barnard
Valkyrie by Kate O'Hearn
La Chamade by Francoise Sagan
Do Dead People Watch You Shower? by Bertoldi, Concetta
Amply Rewarded by Destiny Moon