All Comments on 'Timmy's Story Pt. 01'

You caught my interest, because this piece is very well written (even though I have the impression that this story is going to be darker than I like), but I wish you posted a longer submission.

you capture a feel of it so well...

I’m undecided as to whether or not I should carry on reading, as another comment mentioned this chapter of your story implies that subsequent instalments are going to be very dark and intense. There’s no doubt here that our protagonist is and sees herself as a victim.

The only submission of your writing I’ve read so far are the 4 chapters of “Sally Turned”, now looking at the descriptions of all of your stories it looks like they are of a very similar theme. All of the women, including those who’ve voluntarily gone ahead with whatever arrangement is on offer, seem to come across as victims.

I’m hoping that it won’t be the case for all of your stories (particularly re S.T). Whilst ‘dirty talking’ can be a huge turn on in a sexual scenario isn’t it time that we took charge of our own sexuality and libido? Stop simply accepting and living the labels thrown at us by judgemental arseholes. It feels fucking fantastic as well as being healthy to enjoy sex, it’s not a privilege of only half of the human race. It’s hard to go against thousands of years of social judgement and conditioning but it’s worth it, because it’s about damned time that “good girls do...” That might sound like some feminist bullshit but I’m not a feminist, I believe in equality for all not filling quotas or positive discrimination. Don’t believe me ? Try having a closer look at history, literature and art it’s all there.

Tess (UK)

(in response to Tess)

These stories are explorations, as much as they are anything else.

Explorations of the implications of a particular set of impulses, in the context of a recognisable social setting (no science fiction, new world order or magic allowed).

It is all too easy to see domination as a believable impulse - sociopaths rule us after all - but hard to see it as fully acceptable.

On the other hand, submission is built into our culture - all the major world religions preach submission of one sort or another - but the whole of modern/enlightenment culture has been about rejecting it, about becoming sovereign individuals.

Domination has been codified (it's fine to be a boss of wage slaves living in poverty, or a general, or a government minister who cuts welfare payments; it's not fine to boss someone harshly in a one to one situation).

Submission has also been codified (it's 'sensible' to accept wage slavery, accept the law even if it seems wrong-headed, but 'perverted' to be a sexual submissive).

The codification is asymmetrical.

Because we (rightly) abhor cruelty, bullying and victimisation in a person-to-person context, having sexual impulses that relate to domination is a awkward reality to navigate - the circumstances in which these impulses may be gratified are very tightly policed (therefore, lots of transference - people working to get themselves into acceptable dominant positions so they can get their rocks off that way - Trump starting a modelling agency, for instance).

On the other hand, having submissive sexual impulses, while regarded as 'perverse', is not so socially dangerous. Even happy, consensual submissives tend to be seen as the victims of dominants - and thus receive much less severe social sanction on exposure.

All of this results in a very particular condition, which is sort of what the exploration hinges on.

And it is this - that the submissive is actually in the position of power - in the wider world - while being in the subordinate position within the situation.

All a submissive needs to do (as is often an explicit option in the minds of my protagonists) is to step outside the situation and cry foul. They don't even need to play the victim - the asymmetry of the social setting will pour fire on the head of the dominant, and pity the submissive - perhaps even offer them 'treatment'.

I'm not complaining about this situation - it seems to have some equity to it, and provides at least some safeguard against real sadists abusing people, which is clearly a Good Thing.

But it provides the landscape of my exploration.

Under what circumstances might someone intelligent, thoughtful, not in a position of desperate weakness, or psychologically vulnerable, or blinded by love, actually choose to submit to a dominant who is honest about their intentions, and who is clearly going to make rather extreme demands (also being clearly understood by the submissive as machiavellian and manipulative)?

Is it possible to write a fantasy (and it is all the wildest fantasy) wherein this happens, from the submissive's internal psychological perspective, and have it 'stack up' in the reader's mind? Wherein the submissive is not a victim, but a conscious, willing participant - however dark the places are which they might taken to?

In these stories, it is the submissive whose point of view we occupy, whose internal psychological landscape is rich, complex, sympathetically explored, while the dominants are cartoon cutout characters - strong, rich, older, opaque, unemotional, mostly absent outside the sex scenes, more real, more present in the text as instances inside the submissive's head than in their own right.

Further, despite the attractions of the present continuous in its offer of immediacy of emotional impact, these stories are (mostly) told by the protagonist herself from a position in the future - a position where the she is presumably free and able to tell her story in a measured way; she has survived - more than that, she has grown (in understanding at least), and is whole, sane and sanguine (whether any of these stories will get this far is debatable, but I have imagined the situations from which these writers are telling their stories, having come 'through' the darkness, and approaching some new equilibrium).

In all the films of the 'Story of O', the male leads seem nervous, hopeful, tortured, while O is serene and calm; they are the supplicants, asking for what only she can give them - which is consent for them to indulge in their ultimately pathetic fantasies, while she is on a far more meaningful mission; seeking to resolve some deep quality of her own psychology. When (if) she gets there, she will have moved on, while they will be left stuck in an endless cycle in which, having dulled their sensitivities by excess, they will never be satisfied - always needing new extremes to get their rocks off.

As at the end of 'Story of O', for this landscape to have any real force, any real light and shade, the possibility of things going too far must be 'in play' for the submission to have real meaning (the 'if' in the previous paragraph must remain a possibility).

All this takes these stories outside the 'lifestyle' bdsm world - which is the domain of reality, after all - real people live those lives, and sanely, hopefully healthily and happily, resolve their impulses in mutually boundaried settings. Alasdair Gray's '1982 Janine' is relevant here.

These stories wouldn't work there, because the 'high' and 'low' points are simply conventional. The risks taken by the participants in these fantasies would be considered evidence of insanity in real life. The same is true of most fantasy literature in any genre.

So I'm not interested in victims, but I am interested in people who walk the edge, in intensity of emotion and risk, in search of some new meaning. I'm too sane (at least I hope that's the reason) to want anyone to do any of this stuff in real life - but that's what stories are for, surely - for exploring beyond the everyday.

I hope this helps - although it is not at all intended to convince anyone to read anything they're not sure about. Further, none of the above is intended to deflect criticism, just to add information.

Your comment (and it's expanded sister 'An Apologia') are impressive and articulate. I appreciate the rigor with which you have framed your stories in a realistic but extreme exploration of submissive psychology. Thank you for a deep dive into difficult waters. It is sadly, too rare. You have done something difficult with genuine skill.

I disagree with your assumption that the male lead have "ultimately pathetic fantasies" while the female lead "is on a far more meaningful mission; seeking to resolve some deep quality of her own psychology." I wonder if it doesn't take both sides of the dynamic being present and communicating difficult truths with each other for the game to continue long enough for deeper insights to be gained.

The best dramas have powerful and compelling antagonists who lead our central character forward in their mission to find meaning in their trials and tribulations. Thank you for your exploration of "people who walk the edge, in intensity of emotion and risk, in search of some new meaning." Your writing is a pleasure to read.

I wonder if exploring both sides of the relationship would lead to new meaning.

Thanks again for your excellent work.

Just an introduction. I'm guessing the real story follows.