Conflict or just a different point of view?

One of the recurrent themes that seems to be repeatedly raised whenever the literal slavery v voluntary submission debate comes up is the assumption that literal slavery [a relationship based on consensual non-consent] contains so much more confrontation and struggling than voluntary submission [a relationship which requires continuous consent by the submissive.]

I know, from my own experience, that this is not always the case, so why, whenever the debate comes up, is this assumption automatically made?
I believe the main reason for this is that the issue of consent is often the easiest and most obvious distinction we can make between slavery [M/s or TPE] and D/s [which involves voluntary submission.] That said, there are many other features which appear more commonly or even exclusively in M/s, most of which relate to this primary and fundemental difference, "consensual non-consent".
So it makes sense that when discussing M/s v D/s the most common topic for debates center on the submissive's ability [or not as the case may be] to give consent to the various activities a Master might desire.

Since it would make no point at all for us to only discuss the areas where the need for consent is a non-issue [those times when we are blissfully happy to follow our Master's orders] we tend to use, as examples, the occasions when we have felt...hmmm...less than willing, shall we say?
This, as I understand it, often paints a very different picture to how things actually are.
Instead of continually using the examples of "contented slave, happy to follow orders", we tend to describe the reactance episodes. Which leads on to the second cause of so much of those misconception and assumptions... "reactance".

Since reactance episodes occur as a direct result of increased restriction of those freedoms we see as important to us, then we can conclude that the only times a reactance episode will occur is in a situation where the one imposing the restrictions has the authority to make them stick, ie a situation where issues of choice [consent] are irrelevant [hey-presto...M/s!] and since, quite often, reactance manifests as resistance, then shows of resistance are far more commonly occuring in an M/s relationship than in a D/s relationship...hence another reason for the "there are so many more struggles in M/s" conclusions.

Another interesting phenomenon, which I feel worth mentioning, is the different ways people, generally, manage to cope with a restricted freedom.
In normal circumstances when someone perceives a restricted freedom and experiences some reactance to it, they display a number of responses. The first [and most obvious] is to attempt to regain some control of that particular freedom. Should that fail then they may attempt to cope by trying to regain or assert their freedoms in another, perceivably less restricted, area.

A good example of this, for me, would be from my own past [prior to being enslaved] at such times when I felt particularly manipulated into doing something I would have preferred not to do [usually at work.] At these times I would attempt to redressed my feelings of powerlessness by choosing to do something I hadn't allowed myself to do for some reason. Going out and spending money I hadn't really got on shopping I didn't really need or eating that whole bar of chocolate when I had done so well with eating healthily all week are two glaring examples. I always felt pretty guilty about doing those things but it worked well as a "quick fix" to feeling powerless.

Nowadays I can't choose to just do those things, so the reactance I experience is sometimes heightened. When this happens I find myself resentful of rules [restrictions] that I didn't give a second thought to the day before.
It's really good in some ways because, now, whenever I feel resentful or resist standard orders which normally I would be pleased to follow, it is an massive clue that something deeper is going on, something that may need sorting out, and Tanos is an expert at spotting them, often, even before I do. And so those things always get sorted out [ whether I like it or not!]

So, granted, resistance, reactance and the issues of non-consent get talked about often in an M/s forum, but that doesn't mean we are all fighting tooth and nail to resist our Master every minute of every day.
It doesn't mean we need to be made to follow orders or forced to be a slave.
It doesn't mean that we don't find joy and peace in our submission because for 99.9% of the time, we most certainly do.
What it does show is how important it is to understand how the Master, in an M/s relationship, is able to deal with the 0.1% of the time when we react or resist his authority. Indeed it's his ability to insist on obedience at such times which underlines the fundemental and very real difference between being a literal slave and being a voluntary submissive.

lili (February 2001)