BDSM 101 - Class 03: Leaps and Bounds

Hello class. This is Class 03 of BDSM101. Links to previous classes for this course are listed at the end of this post.

An note about the Laboratory Sessions for BDSM101. All the Labs for this course are self-initiated and self-paced. I urge you to review the class notes before undertaking a Lab, to follow the class instructions as closely as possible, and most importantly to use your head, and to use your common sense, and to try to keep a clear and predominantly sober mind when you take on a new goal, new scene, new Top, or new bottom.

Today I'll be be talking about Bondage. I'll discuss the iconography of Bondage, it's prime role in BDSM play, some simple guidelines for successful Bondage scenes, and the responsibilities for both bottoms and Tops when using Bondage in erotic play.

In Timothy L. Taylor's "The Prehistory of Sex: Four Million Years of Human Sexual Culture" the author illustrates his assertion that polymorphic sexuality has always been a part of human culture, with photographs of Paleolithic stone sculptures of women, made during the Ice Age (circa 26,000 years ago), with their wrists seemingly chained to each other. Similar sculptures represent women with their arms being held by straps tied behind their backs.

I have a hunch that human beings have been tying each other up or restricting each other with inanimate objects and bodily force for as long as we've been human. In fact Bondage itself could very well be one of the initial markers of our humanity, in that instead of the chasing off, or outright destruction of another being, there was a choice to use tools or confinement to restrict and control. Perhaps this was first done with trapping animals with cages or snares, and later was done with people. Perhaps there was an intent to commit violence later (i.e. rape), perhaps instead Bondage was used as a way to avoid further violence, to hold captives to trade later for example, or to restrict the antisocial behavior of another tribe member.

There's one form of bondage that Taylor describes that enabled our ancestors to fully walk upright, and freed the use of the arms from locomotion. That was the baby sling, a piece of leather, that confined an infant and restricted her movement, as well as holding her close to her mother or female relative to aid nursing, or close to her father or male relative to aid bonding. This use of a tool - the pappoose or baby sling - to emulate and echo the enveloped and nurtured environment of the womb points us to an ancient and deep-seated cultural significance, something that perhaps is tapped or alluded to in the particular comfort and euphoria that some erotically bound people experience.

Tying up another being asserts dominance. It hinders the bound one from freely interacting with the world and with time. Bondage can be both a nasty trick and and an act of creation or re-definition. There are all sorts of reasons to bind or confine another person, some benign, some malevolent. Malevolent reasons could include coercion, rape, torture, mutilation, humiliation, and murder. Benign reasons could include ritual protection during epileptic seizure, illness, or intoxication. Bondage is a part of the earliest cultural and religious myths: the trickster gods Prometheus and Loki are chained, the West African Anansi, sometimes depicted as a spider, creates the world and tricks and binds various animals to become the King of All Stories. Other Spider Deities with their particular Bondage talents feature in mythology all around the world as creators or tricksters, like the Oceanian Marawa, the Sumerian Uttu, the Japanese Inari, the Lakota Iktomi, and the Hopi Taiowa.

Bondage is a trick, it's a way to control a Trick, it's a way to create a new role for the bound one, it's a way to recreate for the Binder. The power relationship between the bound and the Binder could not be clearer. The hindrance of mobility and the ability to affect the environment renders the bound powerless. The responsibility and authority for the bound's well being, and the power over life and death now belong to the Binder. Look at that word "authority" . The person with authority is an author, a creator. Who creates and has authority over life and death? a goddess does, a god does. Bondage in its primeval ritualistic nature is playing at being a god.

Bondage is a common ritual in religious mysteries, for example binding hands with cloth or rope is often used in marriage ceremonies. In many traditions, seekers of divine blessings give themselves up for confinement or binding. In the worship of Mithras and Cybele, an initiate was shut up in a chamber beneath a killing floor, where a sacrificial animal's blood would rain down upon them. The Immersion Baptism of different Christian sects requires an initiate to bind herself, with arms crossed over the chest in the attitude of the dead, and to give up her mobility and her will to act, so that the priest or pastor, in the place of God, can take control over her life and death [by drowning] and give her a new birth, a new life, a new role - as one of the saved.

Sounds heavy, huh?

BDSM is about play, it's about taking these heavy cultural associations, these deep dark facets of our histories and our souls, and making something creative and exhilarating and illuminating out of them. As BDSM players we can sometimes treat the meaning and the thrill of Bondage casually and even with levity, but the mechanics of Bondage must always be treated with the utmost seriousness. Bondage is a very serious game. The bottom gives trust and gives up power. The Top takes trust, and takes up power. With Bondage, the Top receives more power than She actually needs. Her standing and reputation depend on what She does with this excess power. If She abuses it, She risks disaffection, perhaps social isolation, perhaps at the extreme end, even Her own incarceration and destruction.

With Bondage, the bottom gives up more power than he actually thought he would. The standing and reputation of the bottom rely on how he reacts to this diminution of mobility and ability to affect his situation. The trust he gives, his capacity to remain still, and compliant will aid the Top to do a much better and ultimately more comfortable and enjoyable job. Novice bottoms should not be gagged or hooded initially, (that should be one of the discussed limits with Tops.) Any use of gags or hoods is really a BDSM201 sort of activity, it's not for beginners.

A Bondage Top must be competent with the method or device that binds or confines. That's why I advise novice tops to learn from an accomplished Dominant as an apprentice. Novice tops can also teach themselves methods and devices, if they're willing to be patient and assiduous about becoming proficient, and if they seriously study the attributes and drawbacks of the Bondage methods that they plan to use. There's a whole continuum of value in Bondage. On one hand there's learning how to use simple velcro straps, and on the other hand there's the study of the elegant and complex Kinbaku-bi (Japanese style bondage.) There's the down and dirty use of a belt to restrain a bottom's arms behind the back, and then there's the very delicate and potentially risky use of the same belt around a bottom's throat. The aforementioned gags and hoods are a good example of devices that can be dangerous if not used or monitored correctly. Only after the Bondage has reached a plateau of stability, with the Top in continual observation of the bloodflow to extremities and the relaxed pace of breathing, should any sort of device be used that could possibly restrict an airway. Any use of such devices needs constant monitoring, a Top must be able to see and hear the effects of such devices at all times at close range.



The Exercise for this class is about the continuum of value in Bondage. In the graph above, the "Orb of Bondage" ;-), there are two gradients: Danger to Safety, and Coarse to Refined. Floating within that graph are 14 points. Each point signifies a type or method of Bondage. The task set before you is to devise and describe 14 different types or methods by their placement on the graph. I'll help you out with a couple of examples:

3. (Highly Safe, Highly Refined): In a Public Place, let's say a symphony concert, I walk the bottom into a stall in the mensroom, and after he locks the stall door, I tell him to take off, fold, and give me his pants, his underwear, and his cellphone. I tell him I'll be back when the 2nd act's done.

10. (Somewhat Dangerous, A Bit Coarse): After using handcuffs to restrain the bottom's hands behind his back, I take him for a ride to the country. When we get there, I use a nightstick to lift his wrists higher and cause his shoulders and head to lower, and then we go for a walk for half a mile. Then I put a black hood over his head, and walk him a quarter of a mile. Then I attach shackles to his ankles. I force him to walk the last hundred yards shackled, and then lead him up a railroad bed until he's in the middle of the tracks. There I force him down on his ass, and use a plastic ziptie to link the chain of the handcuffs to the chain of the shackles. I walk away, pulling out my knife to have it ready. And then we wait to hear the sound of a train.

Complete the other 12 points.


BDSM 101 - Previous Classes:

Class 01: Making an Omelette - Breaking Some Eggs

Class 02: Making an Omelette - Technique

Big Boy the Wonder Horse or Suggestions for Tops

This beautiful creature was called Big Boy. I spent a week with him on a horseback trip I took in Banff 5 years ago. We got along very well he and I. He was the biggest horse that the outfitters had in their string, at 17 hands. He had the golden Palomino coloring, and was about 23 when I knew him.

I've only ridden 9 horses, and I've spent about a 40 days of my life on horseback. I've never owned a horse or taken care of one. Not in this lifetime at least. So I can say fairly that I know diddly squat about horses. Yet. Yet I get along very well with horses. Knock on wood, I've never had any trouble, haven't been thrown, nor kicked, nor bit...well once I did my foot stepped on lightly, but no bruises or broken bones. I've ridden with people that raise horses, that own ranches, who train horses for competition in steeplechase, dressage, and western style reining and cutting. I've ridden right behind some of these people, and watched as they were thrown, and one as he was thrown and broke his left ankle. (We were in the backcountry, and boy was it ever fun trying get him back mounted from the right side of the horse, so he could travel back on logging roads to the town hospital.)

So I'm lucky. Maybe. Or maybe I ride well enough that the horses don't balk. I think it's a combination of factors: I'm calm. I don't make sudden moves and spook the horse. I pay attention to the horse and the surroundings. I've got a gentle hand with the reins, and taking a hint from the dressage riders, I use my legs and subtle shifts of my weight for slow commands. I give praise and affection. I pay attention to the sort of stroking that that particular horse likes. I also give him a few carrots and an apple a day.

After a day of riding, back at camp, sitting around the wood stove, I'd have a pipe, and read some of the horsemanship books that had been packed in for the small bookshelf. I read about the Horse Whisperer and Parelli's Natural Horse-Man Ship Technique, and that helped me feel confident about my riding style when I saw so many of the habitual riders keep tightened reins and a stiff riding position.

I've seen 8 people get thrown from a horse. It usually happens very quickly, although a I remember one pinto jerking and jumping a bit in place before tossing some poor woman. Half of those people were "experienced" and half were novices. The novices would fail to be attentive, or be too tense and apprehensive, or would just do something really annoying to their horses like choose a muddy or steep trail when a perfectly dry or more level one was right next to it. Or when reining their horse to a stop, they'd jerk back the reins quickly, instead of applying a slow gentle pressure.

You might be asking "when is he going to drop this analogy and get to the BDSM?" (You might be asking "Whatever happened to Big Boy?" He worked to 26, and was put out to pasture, and died last fall at 27 of old age - in human years he would have been around 75.)

Here's why I chose the horsemanship analogy. I'm a Top. I'm Dominant. It's natural and suitable and appropriate for me to determine what's acceptable and unacceptable from a bottom or sub. But how do I talk critically to other Tops? What am I going to say - "You're doing that wrong - here let me show you"? I don't think so. I'd rather not battle with other Tops, and if I have to battle, I'd rather pick which battles I'll fight. Matters of mortal safety - yes. Matters of mental cruelty - probably. Matters of technique or style - not so much.

Yet we do have problems in the Leather BDSM Kink community, and I don't think they're all the subs' fault. In fact, shouldn't it really be all the Tops' fault? I mean aren't we in control of the scene? Don't we set the parameters and make the rules? And if it isn't all our fault, then maybe it still remains our responsibilty to make the situation better. I've got a few ideas on how to make the situation better.

I'm a Leather fetishist, I wear boots every day, and if I can figure out a way to wear my leathers some place I'll do it. (And that's in Houston where it's hot as hell 5 months of the year.) On my horseback rides, I always wore cowboy chaps and boots and a big hat. I even had a pair of chaps custom made just for riding. Half the riders were on these trips were "dudes" and half were horsepeople. Getting to the corral on the first day in my cowboy gear, I looked more like a hand than any of the other riders. The head wrangler and the packers all got a kick out of it, and they probably spotted me a couple of "points" for knowing a bit more than I did. The other riders certainly thought I knew more than I did. My horse even thought I knew more than I did.

So my first suggestion for other Tops to make the Leather BDSM situation better is: Look the Part. Define Your part Your way, but consider using some symbolic attire that conveys Dominance. Big boots are good. Gloves are good. Consider too that aspects of Your attire might send a mixed message and dilute the appearance of Dominance. Like short pants.

Woody Allen said "Eighty percent of success is showing up." That's my second suggestion to Tops. Show up. Show yourself. Give a little hope to all the subs out there that someone like You might take an interest. If You only wear Your symbolic attire to the bar or events, consider wearing a symbol or two discreetly at other times - boots, or keys, or a thick wristband. It's a generous gesture when You do that. Even to subs that aren't Your preferred gender flavor. It'll show them - There's a strong confident person Who's true to Their nature. Maybe Someone like that will take me in hand sometime.

My third suggestion is "Command Respect, but don't Demand it." or "Keep Your ass in the saddle and hold Your reins lightly." To paraphrase Queen Victoria - you can do anything in the bedroom you want as long as you keep from frightening the horses. Of course there are times when for the well being of horse and Rider, there's a need to spur and to whack a flank with a riding crop. There are even other times where it's good to dismount and lead the horse by hand. Those are Your decisions.

I wish sometimes I got along with men as well as I do horses. I've always kept a "good seat" on a horse, but men have thrown me several times. That's where this analogy finally ends, because people aren't horses, and to keep a Dominant-submissive interaction flowing and going for even one night, much less a weekend or a month or a lifetime is a sometimes delicate and exhilarating endeavor.