I have written a book called "M/s for the Rest of Us" it is available for purchase here: http://www.lulu.com/shop/k-e-enzweiler/ms-for-the-rest-of-us/paperback/product-22151343.html

Or on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Rest-Us-K-E-Enzweiler/dp/1329062213/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1432825657&sr=1-2&keywords=m%2Fs+for+the+rest+of+us

I am the founder of the Albuquerque Masters Group. We meet once every other month. The group is open to all who wish to explore their Mastery, slavery, or Dominance and submission. Please contact me here or at my email : Bigdykebear@yahoo.com for more information!
The meetings are free to all who wish to attend!

If you are interested in power munches, skills workshops or play parties in the Albuquerque area please contact the 20 year organization of AEL at:


If you are interested in active online community please find:


Group names for the Albuquerque Community Include:

Land Of Enchantment Fetlifers

Albuquerque Kinksters

KinkySpot Clubhouse

Albuquerque Master/slave forum

New Mexico Leather League: Leather/Kink/Fetish and More

Friday, November 28, 2014

Empowerment through avoidance.

First off I blame my slave-  ever since she had been  experimenting with  bath bombs, cookies, and stuff that fizzes and explodes into  these amazing smells and colors in  water I have not been able to  take a normal  bath. I don’t even  want to  any more!!!

OK  that being said.

 Last week  was the Albuquerque Masters Group  meeting, it went really well,  very intense. There was a lot discussed, and this time instead of “questions in the hat” I did  more of a leaded discussion. It was really deep  and thought provoking. I am  grateful  to  all  that attended for stretching my own  ideas and giving me new things to ponder.

One of the ideas that was brought forth was  that Masters control  slaves for a sense of safety. It was a huge idea for me- really interesting in its perspective. 

The concept is that Masters that need to  micromanage everything that the slave does,  says,  and thinks are more driven  by their innate sense of feeling unsafe then  they are  driven by feeling a sense of control.

I have always wondered about Masters that micromanage,  since I am  not one of them. As that isn’t how I connect to  my sense of power. But micromanagement is popular among Masters and although  I figured that is how they connect with  their sense of power, it never occurred to  me that it is also  how they  connect to  their sense of safety. 

But it makes perfect sense-

The need to feel  that they have absolute control  over something, the need to not deal with  who  they are because they  “have to/get to” put all  of their energy in   dealing  with something outside of themselves. They don’t have to  think  about their own lives, accountability,  even  long term  decisions-  because they have to deal in  the right here and now with  their slave. Moment by moment. 

Now I am  talking in  exaggerated  terms here- I am  not saying that all  Masters that micromanage do  it because they can’t deal  with  their own  self. I am  saying that when  someone is constantly training, overseeing,  managing,  correcting, and focusing on  what another is doing- it takes the pressure off of the overseer when it comes to doing a self assessment. 

“I can’t think about (fill in the blank here)  because that slave is looking to send out an  email and I WILL  see if they get to send it.”

Exaggerated but I think there is some truth there.

So  as far as how that ties into  a feelings of safety- the Master doesn’t have to  feel  fear, insecurity, or discomfort because  nothing is about them. It all  gets diverted to the slave. The emotional concentration is on  what the slave is doing- so the Master doesn’t have to  recognize what is going on  in their own  emotional lives.

Think of it like this-  you are feeling bitchy- you don’t know why- so  you pick  a fight in  your relationship  to  feel  better (or relieve some steam) instead of dealing with why your feeling bitchy. That way  the feeling of discomfort gets to  become  someone else’s fault.

Master woke up  feeling insecure- find something that the slave did wrong, of just make it up. Then  it gets to  be about the Master getting emotional relief because of what the slave did or didn’t do instead of the Master  dealing with  how they feel.

Feeling unaccomplished and lost- no  worries there- pick out the slaves clothes, watch  how many drops of salt they put in  your eggs,  and not allow them  to  pee when they ask. Suddenly the  focus is on  what the slave is doing and not how the Master is feeling. 

Now I know that I am going out of the box here- really exaggerating the point-  but I do believe that there is some kernel of reality there.

Or at the very least, something to  think about-

When  a Masters sense of empowerment comes from  avoidance.  Huh.

My brain hurts…..

Although I am grateful-  You  Suck Bernalillo……


  1. this kind of dynamic makes more sense and is easier to understand when it is non-consensual- for example, the kinds of things that get done and said when one person has the gun and the power... its definitely more challenging to make this work when it really is consensual.... but there is always that very easily blurred line between abuse and domination. i dont know how that works for someone with a less "hands on" dynamic. (ie someone like you)- i am sure there are issues, I just dont see a parallel example at the moment

  2. It is easier to see under the non consensual BUT- there are many slaves that want micromanagement- they want the attention- they thrive on the intensity of being watched and controlled moment by moment. For theses types of slaves a more hands off Master cant work.

    This isn't abuse of domination- it is preference.

    Question---- you wrote " i dont know how that works for someone with a less "hands on" dynamic. " can you explain what you meant here?

    Thanks you!

  3. I couldn't come up with an easy term to describe the type of relationship you have with your slave, or several other people I know that have a similar dynamic. "Hands off" is about all I could come up with... as in, your fingerprints arent on everything that your slave does.

  4. And yes i agree, domination is different than abuse, Im just commenting that it is easier to see (for me) how the micromanagement kind of domination can become abusive... perhaps because the only difference (at times at least) between that style of domination in a M/s relationship, and that style of domination in a military or police operation ("dont move unless I say you can") is consent. And consent can slowly fade for one partner, or become conditional, with very ugly results.... which Im sure you have seen. If the consent between you and Eve faded away, for either one of you, what would be left? perhaps some apathy, I think, but not the same kind of ugly.

  5. Th interesting thing here is that micromanagement as well as a hands off approach can both lead to abuse if taken far enough- hands off can lead to apathy and neutrality.

    Consent is the basis of just about everything- BDSM or vanilla. Without consent there is no relatiosnhip. Without consent there comes anger,frustration, a sense of being taken advantage of, run over, and used.
    I would think that the lack of consent would breed all sorts of emotions since it directly ties to a persons sense of power.

  6. yes. we are coming at this from different angles and different levels of knowledge. My thought process, going back to your original post, which I had to really think about (going back to my relative ignorance about this stuff), is that if the driving force behind that type (micromanagement) of relationship is fear on the part of the master/dominant/authority figure, then is that any different in a M/s relationship vs a non consensual relationship? Im thinking no, the fear is present in the master/dominant/authority figure in both cases. So bravo for those master/dominant/authority figure people who have figured out a way to express their needs and emotions in a safe way, and a way that works for the people who take up the fear (aka the person lying on the floor, being told "dont move unless i tell you to")

  7. Good point here about fear bringing consent into question. I think that it absolutely can- is the Master refuses to acknowledge their own fear and deal with it-
    But there are those relationships where the Mister says upfront- I am a micromanage-er, and that is what I need. And the slave says- good- I love micromanagement- that is what I need.

    But back to fear and consent- we all are fearful people to a certain extent- but fear taken to extremes can trump consent becasue it can lead to duress. That does call question into consent- on both sides of the whip. This is really awesome- I am going to have to think on this more!

    Thank you Sarah!!!!!

  8. Yes, looking at it from tbe other direction (your discussion with people who are in existing M/s relationships), does a M who is driven by fear, lose their ability to truly consent to the structure of their relationship with their s? Will that underlying fear, which is such a raw and powerful drive, be so inherently unstable, that any consent is just "for now"? What happens of the fear spirals out of control? The M can't really consent anymore. But its at that moment. If the s and the M have a pre arranged standard (we can work through this), is that temporary loss of consent ok? Actually, now I'm wondering if that's the real difference between "M/s" and a"D/s" n that actually, there is an element of lack of consent in a M/s relationship, and the acceptance of that, is what makes the difference.

  9. You bring up a lot of powerful points here.

    As far as being driven by fear- yes, it can lead to the inability to consent. Even worse so If the M type does not recognize their own fear drives- if they are lacking insight. It can become that however that fear presents itself becomes justifiable. Some M types become violent.
    Some withdraw, some drink. And they use their M identity to justify that it is all OK.

    In essence all consent is a moment by moment basis- by either party consent can be withdrawn at any time. Even in situations where consent was explicitly given it can be withdrawn.

    If the fear is completely out of control the M type will need to release it somewhere, that is human nature.

    That is where the concept of never punishing while the M is angry comes into play.

    Because fear and anger are so closely linked one can turn into the other in an instant. If the M type starts to punish while they are fearful/angry they become legitimately dangerous to the slaves safety. And absolutely consent is called into question : UNLESS : like you said that was agreed upon.

    But - in my opinion- at that point the slave is consenting to the un- consent-able. In my opinion because fear/anger physiologically clouds the ability to think the M type is no longer in control, and the slave cannot consent to that. Even if they want to.

    In many M/s relationships there is the initial consent given from the s type, in the beginning of the relationship. That consent is a blanket consent. Consent is then implied for anything afterwards.

    It is not that we have less consent then D/s couples- it is that
    1) our consent is obtained differently.
    2) our expectations are different
    3) our level of power exchange is different