Power Dynamics and Heirarchies

Power Dynamics and Hierarchies

by Aramock Nanuck

November 2013

There has been a lot written about the lifestyle of late. Still, it is usually quite unrealistic or filtered through neo-Christian ideals, and even though it is academic in nature, it is not truly unbiased. Probably the person who first brought this to the forefront in modern times, starting in the 1980s, is Ivan D. Chase, a researcher and professor at the State University of New York. He has had a number of articles published on this subject, the most relevant and specific to the lifestyle is: "DYNAMICS OF HIERARCHY FORMATION: THE SEQUENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF DOMINANCE RELATIONSHIPS", 1982. It provides a good summary of how dominance influences social groups and inevitably leads to a hierarchical structure. More recently, Dulcinea Pitogara has written extensively on "The Kink-Poly Confluence," which also explores the aspects of how hierarchies form in polyamorous relationships. A little focused research should yield academic works. Still, many of them overlook the emotional and structural elements driven by a strained power dynamic when more than one person rises to challenge for dominance within a community. It is very hard to write about it if you do not live it. The understanding of power and control is as much a metaphysical as a psychological concept.

Where do these structures and organizational hierarchies come from? Well, mostly from the fact that those involved in BDSM are a community of such wild and varied proportions with a mix of everything imaginable, that a stratification was a natural occurrence to emerge. Once people began to have multiple relationships, those involved started forming hierarchies. This lifestyle is largely about dominance and structure, forgetting all of the kink side to it. Therefore, power distance and rules had to be established to accommodate this distinction within a diverse group structure.

Additionally, this lifestyle is much closer to a feudal or oligarchic system than anything else, and certainly as far removed from a democracy as it can be; therefore, it was natural for this to emerge. The details of the hierarchies are shaped and adapted by those within them. Still, the help in codifying it over the past 40 years has allowed me to exist within an extremely complex and dynamic social order that is this lifestyle.

The rights and privileges of those who are at a level are almost always DICTATED by those above them. This is why, in a poly household or complex power structure, an agreement (or contract, if you will) is particularly required. Those entering the group do so at varying levels, and only through negotiation can they change the terms of reference for their station within the organization. As with all organizations, the larger it becomes, the more difficult it is to maintain a dynamic nature that allows for change. This is largely because it affects the people already in the organization and their position in it. This is clear as a group progresses from a couple to a threesome, to a four-or-more group, to a truly poly organization where the structures remain constant within a small group. Still, as the groups mingle (i.e.: Orgies, Events or Munches) the dynamic requires more and more structure to avoid the antithesis of this lifestyle anarchy. This is also the case where two dominant groups wrestle for power and, in the process, merge. Ultimately, there is only ever one true dominant, and the others take secondary or tertiary roles; the submissives follow an elongated chain back to their original structures or ultimately blend in. Highly, highly dynamic. It is also where the need to demand the submission of a master to another forces the subordinate in an act of shame to submit in front of the host to the primary sexually. The submitting dominant loses face in front of not only the other dominants but also his/her submissive, making they subject as well to the will of the primary. This power transfer is almost instantaneous in the minds of the submissive, but it can take longer and requires repeated reinforcement of the subordinate's position.

Movement through the ranks from the lowest of the low to the highest or in reverse is always possible. The human dynamic is constantly at play, and even with a "glass ceiling," the best of the dominant will not only allow but also encourage challenges among subordinates for a sense of pride and place. This always keeps the dynamic alive, and if properly managed, keeps the subs from challenging the dominant. These trials are usually held at forums, events, or munches, where acts of true humiliation often follow the humiliation of defeat. The power and dynamics of the results are always transferred to the dominant host of the event, enhancing their stature while diminishing that of the competitors. Even the winner, regardless of circumstance, is reduced because they competed for the pleasure of the dominant and his guests; many times, the dominant is rewarded or paid for the joy of others viewing the spectacle, echoing the days of gladiatorial challenges. Now, there are situations where juniors will challenge seniors for pride of place; similarly, the Alpha male in a pack of wolves is challenged by younger males. It is usually the offspring who are most likely to succeed, for the emotional attachment to one's own young is always a dominant's biggest weakness.

Conversely, when dominants compete, there can only ever be one victor, and the loser must drop one but many levels to truly prevent a resurgence from the same challenger. So in those cases, many times the challengers become slaves themselves, and their slaves become peers or even superior to the challenger, further humiliating them.

So in the final aspects of your questions... BDSM is not a democracy, nor can it survive as such. IT demands an authoritarian rule, dictatorship if you will. IT is why many of the Dominants are also sadists and control freaks. Those who lose their edge inevitably lose their power and become fodder for other dominants. Some submissive members become switches and aspire to be dominants. However, in this harsh reality, the lifestyle can never truly be dominant in the presence of other dominant forces. They must strike on their own and raise their hegemony or overthrow the current dominant, and in turn make them submissive to the new dominant. This is as close as possible to what predatory pack animals live, and it is the only way to compare our lifestyle and culture.

Harsh reality (I know), but truly one with the passion and excitement to never be boring. However, as shown in the diagram above, it is ultimately based on the responsibility of the Dominant due to the power which rests with them.