Multi-Dynamic (Poly) Relationships

I have been a student of people and relationships for many, many years. Even before I recognized where my true fulfillment lay in the world of Dominance/submission and Mastery/slavery, I observed, studied, and analyzed people and their relationships - those successful and those not. After experiencing the epiphany of who I really was and what kind of relationships that I needed to be truly complete, I reveled in the open, honest communication and forthright nature of the D/s M/s lifestyle. While it is true that some lifestyle based relationships may not be totally and completely open, honest and forthright, they do appear to be a damn site better than those of the politically correct and inhibited vanilla world.

During my initial interactions with others of like mind, I observed several poly type relationships. While there was an inner attraction to this particular way of living, I dismissed my desire with the thought, ‘if you have one good slave, why need any more?’ and then justified that position with my observance of examples of such relationships that self-destructed. After studying these failed relationships and acknowledging my own need for multi-dynamic interaction, I began to see the possibilities for a relationship that had an even greater synergy than that of the one on one - a relationship that could and would be exponentially greater than the sum of its parts.

When one considers the problems and difficulties encountered in pursuing a one on one relationship, the idea of a triad or more seems almost ludicrous, but then again with relative surety, one could say, with a U. S. divorce rate (the highest in the world) in excess of 4 out of 1000 population per year (or between 49 to 53% of the yearly marriages) that the odds are against having a successful one on one relationship. I believe it comes down to the people involved, their commitment to the relationship and to the amount of daily effort that each person involved is willing to give.

I would like to expound a bit on my beliefs as to why poly (or multi-dynamic relationships as I prefer to call them) fail and what can be done to give them the greatest possibility of success. I will say at the outset that while I hope to eventually have a successful multi-dynamic relationship (namely a M/ss Mff triad), I have not as yet put such a relationship together so my theories are just that - theories from my experience observing people and their relationships, both good and bad. I will be coming at this from the perspective of a relationship which involves a master and two slaves. Having a multi-dynamic relationship in which one person is ultimately in control does solve some problems, however, it hardly solves them all and even creates others.

I believe the benefits of such a relationship speak for themselves. Some of these benefits are, extra companionship and friendship, help with one thousand and one mundane daily tasks, added emotional (and economic, if need be) support, and safe sexual variety. The list goes on and on but the benefits and pleasures are not the issues here. The issues are the problems and pitfalls, where they come from and how they might be handled.

Command and Compliance

The first misconception is that in a M/ss+ relationship (or a M/s for that matter), the Master, based on his status alone, can command unconditional compliance to each and every wish and whim in a consensual relationship. In the harems of the great Ottoman Empire in Istanbul, Turkey, where failure to please the Sultan could very well mean death, the women plotted, deceived, postured, and even killed to further themselves, their children, and their individual causes and positions. If slaves in this position did not unconditionally comply, it is highly unlikely that a consensual slave will do so for any length of time just because the modern day Master commands it. If her needs are not being met and gratified (at least to some extent), she will eventually tire of giving to the relationship and she will begin to resent her Master and her collar. Therefore the wise Master will work to instill the unconditional compliance that he desires from his slave by showing her both rewards of being pleasing and consequences of being displeasing throughout her service to him and reinforcing that fact that another slave entering the picture will not be a replacement for her but an addition that will compliment and enhance the relationship for everyone. This amounts to no small amount of work on the part of the Master. As I have said many times, “It takes more strength to willingly surrender to another and it takes more work to master that submission wisely.”

Religious or Societal Prohibitions – Which are which?

Many people cite religious prohibitions to multi-dynamic relationships as reasons why they won’t work, but when pressed can find little, if anything, in the Holy Bible, the Koran or the Talmud to substantiate their position. The simple facts are that there are no direct condemnations to multi-dynamic relationships in any of these religions texts.

From “Polygamy” by Charles A. Rubenstein (http://www.polyamory.org/Howard/je2.html ), we have the following:

The Bible, in tolerating polygamy, gives evidence that the practice had long been an accepted social institution when these laws were written down. In the patriarchal age polygamy is regarded as an unquestioned custom. While the Bible gives a reason for the action of Abraham in taking Hagar for an additional wife and, in the case of Jacob, for having Rachel as a wife besides Leah, it only proves that polygamy as well as concubinage, with which it was always associated, was among the mores of the ancient Hebrew people.

And…

However, if polygamy was not forbidden it was not directly sanctioned. It was a heritage from the past and it was left undisturbed. As the civilization of the people reached a higher form and, especially under the teaching of the prophets, their moral and religious consciousness developed, the polygamous system gradually declined….

Yet it survived far into the Christian era. In the New Testament Jesus neither condemns polygamous unions nor advocates a change in the system. From this noninterference attitude Luther, as late as the 16th cent., arrived at the conclusion that he could not forbid the taking of more than one wife.

The decline mentioned has to do with the fact that single marriages were the custom of the Romans (somewhat hypocritical for the people who inspired the phrase “Roman Orgy”!) who ruled over much of the Jewish people for many years. Turning from multi-dynamic relationships was more of a political expediency for the Jews than one of religious revelation.

The same expediency changed the official position of the Mormon Church leadership in the late 1890’s. Sterling D. Allan, in his essay “Prices of Statehood” (http://www.greaterthings.com/Editorial/Statehood.htm), comments:

Prior to 1890, in the pattern of the patriarchs of old, the Mormons had come to hold polygamy as an exalted institution requisite for any man or woman seeking the highest heaven. This religious belief brought upon the Mormons the severest of persecutions, including continual refusals to grant Utah its statehood and the accompanying rights of autonomous government. The persecutors were the "Gentiles," whose carpet-bagger government over the Mormons was anything but benevolent.

As the persecutions increased and the Mormon's rights decreased, finally, the Mormons as a people said, "Uncle" to Uncle Sam. In 1890, their petitions to their God were heard, and He granted them according to their collective desires for popularity instead of persecution: polygamy would have to go. With the Manifesto in place the Mormons' task then was to prove to their Gentile persecutors that they really meant what they had decreed. Ultimately, this came down to them proving to the Gentiles that they could themselves be amply proficient in persecuting persisting polygamists.

By 1896, the Gentiles were finally convinced and Utah received her sought-after prize: Statehood. Hurray! For whom? Certainly it was a bitter-sweet occasion. Now the Mormons had the right of self-government. This meant an end to the unjust carpet-bagger oppression under which they had toiled. But at what price? What had once been a sacred cow had now become an internal scapegoat.

In a review of the book "After Polygamy Was Made a Sin" by John Cairncross (Published 1974 by Routledge and Kegan Paul, London. ISBN 0 7100 7730), Nathan Bender makes the following points:

In 1737 an Irish clergyman, Patrick Delaney wrote "polygamy is a doctrine daily defended in common conversation and often in print by a great variety of plausible arguments", and feeling that no-one had dealt with the arguments he devoted a 200-page book to attacking this doctrine.

Delaney’s book contains some of the most hopeless argumentation known to man. The best he can do is say "God’s revelation as to polygamy was neither clear nor full", and "God suffered the revelation to be lost or obscured by the corrupt glosses and comments of idle and wicked men". And of the biblical requirement that a wife’s rights should not be diminished by another marriage Delaney concludes that since such a diminution is impossible that the text is actually banning polygamy.

Delaney was later joined by De Premontval who ambitiously sets out to prove that the Old Testament condemns polygamy. Mr. Cairncross says of this "As an exercise in wishful thinking, tortuous reasoning and soliciting of the text, he is a model of truly mathematical rigor".

Meanwhile, Dr. Samuel Johnson’s companion Boswell writes "If it was morally wrong, why was it permitted to the most pious men in the Old Testament, nay especially blessed with fruitfulness? Why did Our Savior say nothing against it, if an alteration was to take place by a new positive institution? Suppose a man is too many for one woman, to use a common phrase, may he not be allowed to have more? The Elector of Hesse had an indulgence from Luther to have two."

And Westley Hall, a Methodist, "publicly and privately recommended polygamy as conformable to nature, preached in its defense and practiced what he preached."

Have you ever sang "Hark the Herald Angels Sing"? Its author, Martin Madan, wrote a three volume work called Thelyphthora in 1780-1 that "contains practically every argument that can be adduced in favor of Old Testament polygamy...But the essence of Madan’s teaching is his insistence on the appalling situation of the unmarried girl who is seduced, cast off and indeed punished for her crime, whereas the seducer goes Scot free. He insisted that, as in the Old Testament, the seducer, married or unmarried, must marry the girl. This would diminish child murder, suicide and abortion. As things are at present, observes Madan, such a step on the part of a married man would be punishable by death."

As Madan himself states "The only real and substantial difference between the ancient Jews and the Christians is this: The former took a plurality of women whom they maintained, protected and provided for agreeably to God’s word. The latter take a plurality of women and turn them out to ruin and destruction not only against God’s word but against every principle of justice and humanity. Or in other words, if the Jew took as many as he could maintain, the Christian ruins as many as he can debauch...We may boast of our marriage and condemn polygamy, but there is not a nation under heaven where polygamy is more openly practiced than in this Christian country, for, though a man can marry but one at a time, he may have as great a variety as he pleases without ever marrying at all...To punish a poor deserted creature for being a prostitute, when it is put out of her power to force her seducer to provide for her as the divine law enjoins, is equally cruel and foolish, not very unlike the man who threw his child into a ditch and then beat him for being dirty."

The best his opponents could do was concentrate on the economic issue of polygamy costing a man too much, evidently being beaten on principle and retreating to practicalities which are themselves doubtful - as the possibility of an extra wife producing an extra possibility of income is not explored.

Cairncross sums up with the following:

· Polygamy is found along with a belief in the literal inspiration of the Bible, and especially the Old Testament and with a strong millennial current. The situation was normally advanced by a charismatic leader who had compelling reasons for desiring to change the form of marriage.

· Also, the analysis of the polygamous movement "has been seriously distorted as a result of highly emotional prejudice, sometimes unconscious", with polygamists being portrayed as morally sordid when the reverse was often the case. In line with this, when women were supposed to be oppressed, the polygamists often offered a better life and position to women than was otherwise available at the time, and consequently they became some of its fiercest defenders. They were often assured of a home and a husband when otherwise none would be available.

· Polygamy became less popular as people abandoned belief in the Old Testament (a corollary of this might be that people who accept Biblical Inerrancy would be more expected to be led into acceptance of polygamy).

(read the review at: http://www.btinternet.com/~familyman/pcairncross.htm)

The book closes with a quote from George Bernard Shaw - "Women will always prefer a tenth share of a first-rate man to the exclusive possession of a third-rate one." Wouldn’t the life of two (or more) slaves being the proud, beloved, and cared for possessions of a first rate Master be infinitely more desirable than that of a solitary unhappy, unfulfilled, neglected slave of the third rate (or worse) Master?

Similar situations are mirrored over and over again throughout history. What is a social custom or political compromise has been taken as religious fact. While this may fit into the agenda of those who have blindly accepted dyad relationships as the only way, it is certainly not a mandate from God and is hardly proof that multi-dynamic relationships are in any way flawed from the outset. On the contrary if such relationships are established for the right reasons in the right way it would appear that they should find favor from the Divine and most comfortably fit into the natural order of the universe.

Writing in “If Polygyny Is Wrong . . .”, (http://home.sprynet.com/~jbwwhite/if.html) Jeffrey Brian White drives directly to the heart of where much confusion lies regarding the Holy Scriptures and multi-dynamic (poly) relationships. By thoroughly ascertaining the true meaning of words and phrases that have been misunderstood due to inexact translations, White brings clarity to areas of the Bible that to many (myself included) appeared to be contradictory.

If you believe that polygamy is sinful or wrong, then I have number of questions for you. My aim is not to condemn or to enrage anyone, but to simply set forth a number of things which I believe demonstrate that polygamy, specifically polygyny in Christ according to the will of the Spirit of God, is Scriptural and Righteous. Many, many moons ago, I began to realize that I didn't know what the Scriptural definitions for many words in the Bible pertaining to sexuality and marriage were. These were words like »wife«, »concubine«, »duty of marriage«, »adultery«, »fornication«, and the like. Of course, it would be easy to say that we all know these words, but when we say this, without having looked at them in Scripture, we are assuming that our cultural definition is the same as the Bible's, or rather, that the Bible's definitions conform to those of the culture we live in. So, I began to look at the sexual vocabulary of the Scriptures in English and German translations, and in the Greek and Hebrew languages. Without explaining everything that I discovered in the course of that study (which still continues when the Spirit directs me back to it, and which would require several more articles), these questions I put forth and the comments I supply are the result of this searching. When I first began to access the Internet, I did not know that anyone else had seen and perceived the same things. Then I began to come across websites of others who had indeed not only been seeing the same truth, but were walking in the things! I was quite amazed and praised Yahweh for his leading. When Yahweh begins to bring forth an area of truth through the Spirit, he distributes that revelation to several believers and establishes it to them in and through the Scriptures. I am therefore both honored and humbled to have been included in this particular movement of his Holy Spirit.

God himself on a number of occasions literally represents himself as a multi-dynamic entity.

Surely Yahweh would never have presented himself to Ezekiel this way if it were not a part of his image to be a bigamist. All through this passage, Yahweh speaks as a jealous husband, even invoking the Law of Moses concerning Jealousy (Nu 5:11-31) against them in verses 31-34. The law in Numbers 5 only pertained to a HUSBAND (Nu 5:12). So, Yahweh considered himself a husband to both Aholah (Samaria) and Aholibah (Jerusalem). In Malachi 3:6, Yahweh says »For I am Yahweh, I change not, therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed« (KJV-OTR). In Genesis 1:27, it is written, »So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them« (KJV). If Yahweh changes not, and presents himself as a bigamist in Ezekiel, then Yahweh had bigamy as a part of image when he created Adam. Thus, Adam, on account of being created in God's image, was created with the capacity for bigamy and polygyny in the beginning. Yahweh doesn't change, so why wouldn't he seek to display this polygynous aspect of his image in his people in this day? He changes not.

Take a look, you won't find polygyny ever condemned. Go through the Law of Moses. Search the book of Proverbs. Read the Prophets. Look through the New Testament. Do it carefully and recheck several times just to be sure. There is no verse of Scripture anywhere therein which ever condemns polygyny as sin, a work of the flesh, or represents is as discontinued on account of the New Covenant.

The admonition of the Bible (as in the Koran) is not a prohibition of having more than one wife (or multi-dynamic relationship), but of not changing in your treatment, attitude, regard or love for the first when the second is added.

Why does Moses give laws to govern polygyny and establish the rights of the first wives and firstborn sons born of first wives?

»If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.« (Ex 21:10, KJV)

This duty of marriage, regardless of one may interpret the verse in the context does express one aspect of the righteousness of law: fairness. Even more so, it illustrates Yahweh's commitment to each individual who is betrothed unto him. As he adds more believers into house, the Lord does not diminish anything that he has given to them who came before. While no man could ever equal the magnitude of Jesus' generosity, the principle is nonetheless intended to be displayed in the people of God. When God joins a second wife to a man who already has one, his intention is that this righteousness of care and love for first wife should not wane, but remain.

God has even given directions which demand forming a multi-dynamic relationship.

Why did Yahweh give a law which in certain circumstances would have caused some husbands to become polygynous?

»5 If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the widow of the dead man shall not be married to a stranger outside the family; her husband's brother shall go in to her, take her as his wife, and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her. 6 And it shall be that the firstborn son which she bears will succeed to the name of his dead brother, that his name may not be blotted out of Israel. 7 But if the man does not want to take his brother's wife, then let his brother's wife go up to the gate to the elders, and say, 'My husband's brother refuses to raise up a name to his brother in Israel; he will not perform the duty of my husband's brother.' 8 Then the elders of his city shall call him and speak to him; and if he stands firm and says, 'I do not want to take her,' 9 then his brother's wife shall come to him in the presence of the elders, remove his sandal from his foot, spit in his face, and answer and say, 'So shall it be done to the man who will not build up his brother's house.' 10 And his name shall be called in Israel, 'The house of him who had his sandal removed.'« (De 25:5-10, NKJV)

In giving this law, Yahweh apparently didn't care one way or the other whether the surviving brother already had a wife or not. If the surviving brother was already married to one wife, this law would have compelled him to form a polygynous household or be subject to public and lasting shame. As with Moses' laws concerning polygyny, the righteousness of this law must also be fulfilled in us who believe.

Being familiar with many of the references that White has cited and having researched them and others in a ‘new light’ of understanding, I find a renewed conviction in my belief that multi-dynamic relationships are not any kind of aberration but are, in fact, very much in line with the ‘natural order’ of the universe as laid down by the Creator.

I don’t, however, believe in taking everything I read as the absolute truth without examining it for myself. I would encourage the reader to do likewise. Study the references here and others that you may find as well. In doing so I believe that you will come to the same realizations and conclusion that I have.

Communication

This can be tough. George Bernard Shaw (again) once said that the English and Americans were “two people separated by a common language”. This is more than a little true when men and women talk to one another. More than once I have heard ally say something and the meaning that I attached to it was completely different than how she meant it.

It is far more important that you deeply understand your slaves than that they understand you. You are the one in charge. This information is vital for you to be effective as a Master.

Many times it will be necessary to (after sincerely listening to what your slave has said) restate it; “So what you are saying is…” and try to convey back to her how you understand what she said. It can take several tries at this before you are both communicating on the same level. This might seem to be a lot of work when you can just pull out your “Master Card” and say “Shut up and do it my way!” but your relationship will be strengthened immeasurably and you will learn much more about your slave as a whole person which will make your mastery of her even more effective and her service more beneficial to you.

Responsibility

If it seems that I am placing most of the responsibility for the success or failure of the relationship on the Master…BINGO! You are right. If the Master is truly to be the Master, then the buck stops with him as long as the slave is willing to be mastered and trained. A great many of the multi-dynamic relationships of the M/ss+ variety that I have seen fail have done so because the Master decided, “I have found my slaves, now I can kick back and do nothing.” Nothing could be further from the truth. In the Koran, the Talmud and the Bible the admonishment is that a Master (man or husband) only have as many slaves (or wives, limited to 4 in the Koran) as he could provide and care for. I believe that this providing and caring for is not only limited to food, clothing and shelter. If the relationship, any relationship, is to flourish the total person body, mind, and spirit must be cared for. After all, if you own a slave you own the entire slave - body, mind, and spirit. This is a mighty tall order for anyone. Many Masters fail with only one slave. How much is it worth to a Master to have the unconditional, ideal servitude that would make his own life far better, happier and more fulfilled? The price is working to make the relationship beneficial for everyone involved - not just for the Master alone. This, in my opinion, is not only true mastery but one of the golden keys to making the M/ss+ relationship work in real, everyday life.

Equality

One basic premise in the world of multi-dynamic relationships is that of equality. I believe that this concept has been misunderstood especially in those of a M/ss+ variety. I have a total of 5 children, 3 by my first marriage and 2 sons that my slave, ally, had when we met. While I love all of them totally and unconditionally, my relationship with each and every one is different due to time, varied life experiences, and persons involved.

What I have with my oldest son is different than what I have with my daughter. Both of those are different than my relationship with my youngest son or my two step sons. To try and make all of these different relationships equal and the same is insanity. They cannot and will not ever be totally equal. If this is the case with children, what makes anyone think it will be any different with a Master and slaves or any multi-dynamic relationship?

What should be strived for is an equality of opportunity and involvement and personal growth for each. Each component relationship of the whole should be progressing toward its maximum potential and fulfillment. ally and I have been together for well over 5 years at the time of this writing. Whoever comes into our relationship later will not have the same relationship that she and I have. There will in fact be 4 unequal relationships: myself and ally, myself and the slave to come, the slave to come and ally, and finally me, ally and the slave to come as a whole. Time, life experiences, and persons involved will by necessity make each and every one of these relationships special, wonderful, and different. However, without the proper, upfront communication and understanding that each relationship will be different, the inequality has the potential to bring about the opposite end result. The goal is to make each and everyone rise to the relationship’s greatest potential for all involved.

Jealousy and Sexual Biology

Jealousy can be devastating to any relationship and more so to those which are multi-dynamic in nature. It often appears to be irrational even to the one experiencing it. When the actual basis for the rise of feelings of jealousy is uncovered - then, and only then, can it be dealt with successfully – not merely shoved into a back closet where it grows and feeds and becomes so large that it becomes impossible to handle. If this happens, it will devour all around it.

Once the true causes of the feelings of jealousy are known then they can be placed into their proper perspective by the person experiencing them and more readily understood by others affected by them. Through understanding, communication and support of all involved, the emotion of jealousy can be moderated and while it may or may not ever totally disappear, it can be sublimated from a destructive force to a sharing experience that will draw everyone closer and strengthen the bonds of their relationship.

Tanos is his essay ‘Polygynous Enslavement’ from his ‘Internal Enslavement’ website (http://www.enslavement.org.uk/poly.html) states:

Evolutionary Psychology gives some clues about all of this. Indeed, there is a "smoking gun" implicit in the approximate patterns of jealousy shown by the two sexes: women tend to be jealous of rivals for their man's emotions; men tend also to be jealous due to sexual acts themselves.

If you think about this in terms of reproductive success, then a possible explanation becomes clear: once they've "paired off", men and women tend to invest the same amount of effort in supporting and/or caring for their offspring. In doing this, a woman is necessarily helping copies of her own genes to survive (ie in the children), but a man is only doing this if they really are his children (ie that he hasn't been "cuckolded".)

This would suggest that men should be instinctively more concerned about their "woman" having sex with other men. Whereas, for women, the only danger in their "man" having relations with other women is that he will begin to divert resources into supporting them too, or even that she will lose him completely (and have to support her offspring alone.)

Furthermore, it benefits his gene's chance of survival if he does have other relationships, especially if he can get any resulting children supported "for free" by some other unwitting dupe. (Whereas if she does this and is caught, then she risks being deserted and being unable to bring up the children alone.)

So the above arguments suggest that there is a strong, instinctive basis to these feelings of jealousy in women as far as non-casual relationships go. The relationships we're talking about here are very much that type, so it should be no surprise that very many people attempting to pursue polygynous enslavement would face this problem.

Nurse, Kathy Labriola, identifies three core beliefs that promote the emotional response of jealousy.

JEALOUSY IS INEVITABLY GENERATED BY OUR CORE BELIEFS

Our society is addicted to three core beliefs about relationships that are almost guaranteed to create jealousy even in the most well-adjusted people. Most of us have absorbed these beliefs without even realizing it. Identifying and dismantling these beliefs in our "heart of hearts" is the single most effective way to short-circuit jealousy. Ask yourself how much of you believes each of these three statements. Is it 90% of yourself that believes them? 50%? Notice which belief is most entrenched in your subconscious mind and which one you’ve made the most progress on:

Core Belief #1

If my partner really loved me, (s)he wouldn’t have any desire for a sexual relationship with anyone else.

This belief sees any interest your partner has in anyone else as a direct reflection of how much (s)he loves you. It’s a quantitative view of love which equates the amount of love with the ability to be interested in having another partner. When you break it down, this is as absurd as saying that a couple that gives birth to a second child must not love their first child or they couldn’t possibly have any interest in having a second one.

Core Belief #2

If my partner were happy with me, and if I were a good partner/spouse/lover/etc., my partner would be so satisfied that (s)he wouldn’t want to get involved with anyone else.

This belief is even more insidious. With the first belief you can at least blame it on your partner for not loving you enough. This belief says that if your partner is interested in someone else, it’s your fault for not being the perfect lover or spouse and your relationship must be a failure. If you truly believe that your lover could only be interested in another partner because you’re inadequate, you can see how that will generate jealousy big time!

Core Belief #3

It is just not possible to love more than one person at the same time.

This belief is built on the "scarcity economy of love", the belief that love is a finite resource, there is only so much to go around, and there is never enough. Therefore, if my partner gives any of her or his love to anyone else, that necessarily means that there’s less for me. Because most people already feel there are some areas in their relationship where they are not getting enough of something (time, love, affection, sex, support, commitment) they are fearful that they will receive even less if their partner gets involved with additional partners.

Because each of these beliefs is connected to a very primal fear, they take time and effort to overcome. The first belief expresses a deep fear that you are not loved and will be abandoned. The second taps into our insecurities and the fear that we are not adequate or deserving of love, and the third is a fear of deprivation and being starved for love and attention. So have compassion for yourself and your partner(s) as you work with these beliefs and gradually replace them with beliefs that support your desire to embrace open relationships. Try on these new beliefs instead and see how they feel to you.

New Core Belief #1

My partner loves me so much that (s)he trusts our relationship to expand and be enriched by experiencing even more love from others.

New Core Belief #2

My relationship is so solid and trusting that we can experience other relationships freely. My partner is so satisfied with me and our relationship that having other partners will not threaten the bond we enjoy.

New Core Belief #3

There is an abundance of love in the world and there is plenty for everyone. Loving more than one person is a choice that can exponentially expand my potential for giving and receiving love.

The fact that these new beliefs sound so strange and almost laughable to us at first shows just how deeply the old paradigm beliefs about love and relationships are ingrained in our consciousness. It also underscores the importance of dissolving these old beliefs if we ever hope to enjoy multiple relationships free of jealousy.

Instead of being baffled by the irrational ‘green-eyed monster’, the wise Master can use this knowledge to communicate with and support his slaves by helping and guiding them in dealing with such emotions in the most constructive manner for all. It is very important that the Master be non-judgmental and understanding when guiding the slave through such times. Very often the slave will feel that she is somehow less than she should be or even that she has actually failed in her slavery. Assuming that these feelings of jealousy are not of her deliberate creation but are manifestations from her own primal, sexual programming, she probably is feeling very confused, ashamed, frustrated, and even angry with herself for even having such feelings. This is the time when the Master needs to rise to the occasion and be the rock that she needs in order for her to move up to higher levels of service to him.

Keep in mind that the same primal, sexual programming that has drawn her to be a slave in the first place is that same programming that may cause her to become jealous of another slave. This is also the same programming that compels a Master to be dominant and may also give rise to his own feelings of jealousy. If this primeval programming is looked at in the same way as any other driving instinct (i.e. the needs for food, clothing, shelter, survival, etc.) and not relegated to being irrational or purposefully difficult, then it can be dealt with successfully and become a productive life experience.

Time Management

One of the chief concerns of a slave is the loss of time with the Master should another slave come into the Master’s service. The basis for this feeling can be easily traced back to the slave’s desire for security and fear of loss of the Master’s attentions.

Once again, the solution to this situation lies with an ‘active mastery’ on the part of the owner through communication (listening to the slave and actually hearing what she is telling you) and action. Yes, there are only so many hours in the day but realistically, so much of this time is usually spent in a non-productive manner. A wise Master can provide quality time for all of those in his home - providing he chooses to use his time wisely. This will at times require careful scheduling and may compel the Master to forego watching the 17^th rerun of M*A*S*H or participating in endless hours of online chat room debate to tend to these needs of his slaves. It is a very small price to pay for the rewards that he will reap.

This hardly means that the Master need deny himself every enjoyable diversion. A slave is generally extremely grateful for the smallest reinforcement of her boundaries and security. Besides Trapper and Hawkeye and the best online chat pale in comparison to having slaves serving your every wish and kneeling in joyful servitude at your feet.

Dealing With Multi-Dynamics in a Dyad World

While every Master would like to claim omnipotence and omniscience, we all have our limits. It is said that ‘good engineering is the art of good compromise’. This is very true in crafting a multi-dynamic relationship. While we are making some inroads, we are years if not decades behind the gay movement. There have been many positive changes for all alternative lifestyles and more are coming, but right now we still have to deal with family, friends, co-workers, and a society at large that has little or no true understanding as to what the BDSM, D/s, M/s, and multi-dynamic lifestyles are all about.

As much as you might wish to shout from the rooftops that you own two or more slaves, there are times and places where it might not be the best long term strategy. Choose your battles carefully. If the loss of a relationship with a beloved family member or the loss of your job will likely be the result of your being painfully honest about your owning two slaves, then it might be best that (after discussing the situation with those concerned) one of the slaves becomes a roommate, friend, assistant, etc. for those occasions where it might be more prudent than the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Such infamous polygamous persons as Tom Green of Utah, who was recently convicted of child rape as well as welfare fraud to Brian David Mitchell who with his accomplice kidnapped teenager Elizabeth Smart claiming in some overly zealous, religious delusion that she was to be another of his wives - to say nothing of David Koresh in Waco, TX., give everyone a bad name who honestly, seriously wish to pursue a multi-dynamic relationship based on love, caring, personal growth, and fulfillment. The acts of these predators distort what the rest of us are working to accomplish in the minds of the public at large. But, through understanding, education, and setting an example of how a multi-dynamic lifestyle can be lived by quality people, society at large will see the truth.

Crafting a multi-dynamic relationship is difficult enough on its own – don’t invite anymore situations to deal with than you will already have in creating and maintaining the relationship.

No One Size Fits All

Another of my pet sayings is ‘There is no one size fits all in BDSM, M/s, D/s or multi-dynamic lifestyles’. Just because person A is dominant and person B is submissive, that in no way means that they will even approach being compatible in a relationship. Hell, they may not even be able to be friends! It is the same with multi-dynamics. While there may be a similar interest and understanding about such a lifestyle, that understanding in no way translates into ‘Let’s pick out curtains and ‘Mss’ monogrammed towels next week’! As in vanilla relationships, there has to be common interests and philosophies outside of the lifestyle itself if the relationship is to have a chance. Then friendship is built followed by regard and affection. If it hasn’t blown up by then, maybe even love. I know, I know, I have heard it a thousand times “A Master cannot, shouldn’t, won’t, etc love a slave if the relationship is to work.” I say BULLSHIT! Those who declare such are generally those “arm chair masters” who want self–mastered slaves that require no effort on their part.

A brief pause is warranted here to discuss the word love itself. As most of us have come to realize, it is a wholly inadequate word which is used to describe a vast list of emotions ranging from “I like having coffee with you” to “I can’t live another moment without out you being totally and completely a part of my life forever”. A M/s or D/s lifestyle is no different. Love can be a very soft, warm and expansive romantic love or it can be tough and hard providing boundaries. Many times it will move from one type to another based on the wants and needs of all those involved. One persons idea of love might well be another’s nightmare.

More often than not, love is required to make the sometimes difficult but best decisions for the good of the slave and for the relationship as a whole. This is a double-edged sword. The very love that compels making the best decisions often times makes those decisions even more difficult. Due to societal conditioning, some of the reinforcements that a Master provides for his slave might feel unloving and sometimes they may even feel downright cruel. They are, however, necessary for the balance and dynamic of the relationship and truth be known, these are the decisions that usually show the most love.

If the relationship is to work longer than past next week, there had better be something very strong at work – preferably love. It will be the only thing that will get everyone through the difficulties that any relationship encounters. If a Master truly loves his property, then he will make the extra effort to provide those things that are needed for that property to grow and develop and become the exquisite slave that will ultimately serve and do credit to him. Conversely, if a slave truly loves her Master then every day of her servitude will be a joy to her and a blessing to him.

Care and Feeding Of a Slave

A slave needs much more than food, clothing (while most of us Masters opt for non-clothed slaves, you know what I mean here), and shelter. When a slave has invested herself and her trust in a man she calls “Master”, she requires a continual reinforcement that she wears the collar of the ‘right’ Master for her. This reinforcement comes from the knowledge that she has rules and boundaries set for her, in her best interest, by her Master.

These rules and boundaries provide her a sense of security, self-worth, and well-being. If her Master becomes lax at showing her that her rules and boundaries are solid and in place, her security and sense of well-being are shaken and she may feel lost and unfulfilled. Likewise, punishment for infractions as well as discipline exercises, while in and of themselves may be less than pleasant for the slave to endure, show the slave that she is cared for, loved, and valued by her Master. If the service of the slave is joyous, then the dividends for the Master far exceed the effort he has expended to produce them.

While every slave will need to be handled a bit differently, there is a commonality at work here and an “active mastery” is the key to having a valuable, helpful, obedient slave that will be a credit to her Master.

Also relating to feelings of security and well-being for slaves, attention should be given to the financial/economic realities of the multi-dynamic relationship. Unless the Master is independently wealthy (that certainly lets me out and most of the men that I know!), it is very likely that a slave may be required to maintain employment or a career if not for income considerations, then certainly to provide health care benefits to guard against accident or severe illness.

This brings up the issue of the financial picture of the relationship as a whole. The following are just a few of the points to consider. It is by no stretch of the imagination everything that should be given thought or action.

· Is everyone to pool all incomes and have them apportioned by the Master on the basis of need and the long term financial goals of those involved?

· What of the residence? Is it to be owned jointly?

· What happens if one of the persons involved is removed from the picture because of dissolution of their part of the relationship or even death?

· If the Master and slave “a” have worked jointly for several years and have accumulated assets, when, if ever or after what time period, are these shared with slave “b” that has newly joined the relationship?

· What if slave “b” comes into the relationship with assets of her own? After what period of time, if ever, does she share these with the relationship as a whole?

· Should a certain sum be set aside to provide for a fresh start in case one or more decides to leave the relationship?

· What of corporate style ownership of the group’s assets with contingencies in writing for these various future situations?

· What of “Living Wills”, "Powers of Attorney" etc. that would provide access and input should the worst happen?

All of these (and many, many more) considerations can be dealt with successfully with various legal documents and preparations providing there is the bedrock honest, sincere communication that is so very important to such a relationship. (Always check with your favorite legal and tax professionals before proceeding)

These are very serious issues and it I believe it would be foolish for anyone, Master or slave alike, to commit not only themselves and their emotions, but their assets as well to a relationship before enough time has elapsed to know with relative certainty that such a relationship is solid and has the best chance of lasting.

I know, I know – how can anyone ever be truly, 100% certain? The answer is quite simply that you can’t. You can, however, take the necessary time to get to know the person(s) – really get to know them, make sure that there is more of a common ground than simply a mutual lifestyle interest, go slowly and don’t let your heart, emotions or your desire to have the relationship override your good sense. If your gut is telling you that something is just not right, don’t jump in until it is resolved to your satisfaction. There is nothing wrong with taking things with a grain of salt until you can be reasonably sure that everything and everyone is as advertised. All red flags should be examined. They usually don’t come up without good reason.

Here are a few (by all mean don’t stop with these) questions you may wish to ask yourself or a prospective addition to you life.

· What you desire from a multi-dynamic (or M/s or D/s) type relationship?

· What draws you to a multi-dynamic (or M/s or D/s) relationship?

· What potential problems do you anticipate and how would you contribute to solving them?

· What would you bring into the relationship in terms of personal qualities?

· Do you see this type of relationship being short term? – mid term? - long term?

· How do you feel this type of relationship can best be maintained while interacting with those in the vanilla world (family, friends, co-workers, neighbors, etc.) who may not understand or even accept such a relationship?

Rough Roads

This is one of those relationship areas that is sometimes treated unrealistically. You have jumped through all the hoops and over every hurdle and now you have a relationship and all of a sudden nothing is going as it should. Your slave is moody, angry and maybe petulant and you are on the verge of throwing up your hands and saying “Stuff it!” Congratulations! You have just fallen into the ‘real’ world of relationships - the world of less than perfect people (Master and slave alike) who are trying to deal with the reality of one everyday life situation after another and, at the same time, maintain who they are and grow in the lifestyle. To make dealing with this area a bit easier I’m going to give you some real gems now:

· Masters, it is ok to be angry, frustrated, disappointed, exasperated, etc. with your slaves – providing you keep your head and deal with the situation in a manner that is best for you, your slaves, and the relationship.

· slaves, it is ok to be angry, frustrated, disappointed, exasperated, etc. with your Master – providing that you express such emotions in the manner approved by your Master.

· Masters, it is ok to say to your slaves; “I’m sorry. I was wrong. I made a mistake.” Admitting any or all of these things will not make you less of a man or a Master. It will, in fact, elevate you in your slaves’ eyes. If you are strong enough to admit your errors, you are probably strong enough to Master your slaves.

· slaves, occasionally your Master will make a mistake or be wrong. Remember he may not be perfect or always be right, but he is always the Master.

· Masters, your slaves are a valuable asset. They often times have information or experiences that will help your administration of them and your relationship be more effective and gratifying. Use them. Power is not always possessing power yourself but in wisely directing the power possessed by others.

· slaves, while your information or experiences may be valuable and relevant, always follow the protocols that your Master has given you for offering such help. There are times your Master will truly appreciate your assistance and times that he won’t. Remember who you are and what your station is. Be what your Master actually needs you to be – not your vision of what he needs you to be.

These feelings and occasional potholes in the road do not mean that you have made the biggest mistake of you life or that the relationship is going ninety miles an hour straight into the toilet!

Here is where honest, sincere, in depth communication is an absolute must. The slave must, in accordance with her Master’s protocols, convey her feelings (good and bad) to him. After all, if the Master owns her, he owns all of her - even unpleasant feelings. While it is up to the slave to share these feelings with her Master, it is incumbent upon her Master to listen and hear of her feelings, then take whatever steps are necessary to place the relationship back on the course that he has charted for it.

As long as these feelings are not more 24/7 than your relationship itself, it simply means that there are, more than likely, some growth areas that need attention. Here is where the slave has it a bit easier because the responsibility for seeing to these growth areas is with the Master. This is another phase of ‘active mastery’ – dealing with the growth and changes of the Master himself, the slaves, and of the relationship itself.

Anyone who has a relationship that is older than about 3 minutes has gone through this. From the minutes and hours where everyone puts their best foot forward and is at their absolute finest to days, weeks, and months where all the all the ‘warts’ and imperfections come out can be quite a sobering experience. It is all a matter of personal growth. There are very few experiences more rewarding for a Master (in my, not so, humble opinion) than to orchestrate his own growth and development and at the same time watch his property grow, blossom, and achieve under his guidance and upper-hand and also to witness the realization that he created these relationships which benefit and bless all who are a part of them.

Conclusion

I believe that every multi-dynamic (poly), (or dyad relationship for that matter) that I have seen self destruct did so because the persons who were a part either didn’t know or didn’t follow the concepts that I have presented here. Are there any guarantees for a successful multi-dynamic relationship? No – not any more or any less than there are for more ‘traditional’ relationships.

I hope that my observations and opinions will open a few minds, prompt a question that merits further research, or maybe clear up a misconception or two about the potential of what I believe can be the most beautiful, satisfying, fulfilling, and gratifying way to live.

I wish you well,

Cavalier

References and Links:

http://www.polyamorysociety.org/

http://www.bayarea.net/~stef/Poly/Labriola/nonmonog.html

http://www.bayarea.net/~stef/Poly/Labriola/jealousy.html

http://www.marriage-relationships.com/jealousy_in_relationships.html

http://www.planetwaves.net/jealousy.html

http://joe.bi.org/jealousy.html

http://www.chaplaincare.navy.mil/selfhelp/jealousy.htm

http://www.planetwaves.net/compersion.html

http://www.yrshr.org/jfactor.htm