What is punishment?

Webster, in a prime display of circular reasoning, defines punishment as the act of punishing. Further research yields the following definition: "to impose a penalty on for a fault, offence, or violation." The key word here is "penalty". The common characteristic to all penalties is that they must impose a suffering upon the party being punished.

It is a simple concept; there is a price to be paid for committing a wrong. Nothing is free. Balance will be maintained. As cause is to effect so is offence to penalty.

What is the nature of the wrong? Why is the person being punished? If the common characteristic is the penalty then what of its cause? Webster's "fault, offence or violation" is sadly as clear as mud (though at least it covers the ground). In fact, a broad continuum of motivating factors can be used to justify the penalty. They span virtually every field of human interaction and include religion, politics and commerce.

One might, therefore, conclude that punishment is a universal component of the human condition and consider the discussion closed (which will, perhaps, be your wish by the time you reach the end of this paper). But I find this answer provides little insight, particularly when considering the dominant/submissive relationship (D/s). What role does punishment play in the interaction between dominant and submissive?

The phrase 'opposites attract' is never so true as it is with dominants and submissives. The dominant is gratified through the wielding of power, and the submissive has a need to serve. The dominant commands, the submissive obeys. The dominant says no, the submissive says yes.

Power, in this context, is nothing more than the ability to achieve one's objectives in the manner one chooses. The dominant is an individual who finds the application and use of power to be fulfilling. It satisfies a natural urge to be the primary partner in the relationship. Control techniques are the normal mechanism used to implement this application of power.

As their relationship develops, the dominant develops a deep sense of responsibility for the submissive. Control without responsibility may be nothing more than play or potentially criminal cruelty. However, to truly satisfy his desire to dominate, he must accept responsibility for the submissive's well-being. At minimum when they are together, and in many cases full time.

If power is the primary domain of the dominant, then the realm of service belongs to the submissive. Beyond the sexual abandon and freedom of bondage, the essence of a submissive is a desire to serve, to perform acts that help. A submissive feels great joy and satisfaction in the proper execution of her duties and sure in the knowledge she is contributing to the benefit of her dominant.

Why are submissives motivated to serve? There is no easy answer. Some may claim genetics, others socialization. Some may say an abusive upbringing, while others may speak of religion and faith. In my opinion, the seminal cause of this need is not material. There is a long and venerated tradition of service in all societies. For example, many men and women who feel the need to serve have traditionally entered religious life. Their motivation is rarely questioned. However, not all submissives are well suited to a life of chastity or poverty, even though obedience would not usually pose a problem. There are certain pleasures in serving a flesh and blood dominant which may not be generally available from a distant and unknowable deity. Happily, it is the nature of dominants to accept these forms of services.

That being the case, why, then, should a dominant punish a submissive at all?

Punishment, even the threat of punishment, should never be used to coerce a submissive to serve. A submissive serves out of an inner need. It is a crime to force service in such a manner, and those who perform such acts are criminals. Non-consensual service is a vile thing.

The need to punish may seem counter-intuitive at first, especially if love is also a component in the relationship. How could a man hit the woman he loves? How could he cause her to suffer? The answer lies within the responsibility that a dominant must always have for his submissive. Ironically, his responsibility for her well-being requires that she be punished.

To understand why this is so, one must first understand the process of forgiveness.

When anyone commits a mistake, an error, a sin, even an unintentional cruelty, there are three stages to resolution. The first is recognition. It is required that the person recognizes the nature of their infraction and the damage it has caused. The second part is restitution. It is required that some atonement is made, some way to right the wrong. The final stage is redemption or forgiveness from the wronged party and from the person himself or herself. This is common for all people, not just those in a dominant/submissive relationship. However, when a submissive in a D/s relationship makes a mistake, it is the dominant who must forgive.

Submissives require a structure in which to serve. This is reflected in the set of protocols or disciplines that are given to the submissive by the dominant. If her need to serve is to be satisfied then she must clearly understand what is required to please her dominant. While others might feel these rules to be an unwarranted and unwelcome restriction on their freedom, the submissive will thrive in such an environment. If structure is lacking, the submissive will seek another who can provide it.

One of the most basic rules a submissive learns is failure has its consequence. If the dominant does not exact punishment for a failure, then, in effect, he is indicating the discipline was not really important in the first place. Further, it indicates the dominant did not feel strongly enough about the failure to do anything about it. This undermines the very nature of the relationship and leaves the submissive in state of doubt. For if one discipline is not important, perhaps others are not as well. Or, worse yet, she suspects her dominant no longer cares enough to be bothered enforcing his rules. In many cases, such failure often marks the beginning of the failure of the relationship as a whole.

To fail to punish is to fail the submissive. Spare the rod, spoil the sub.

Therefore, when she fails in her service she needs some way to atone. Punishment allows the submissive to move past her failure to forgiveness. For a submissive, requesting punishment is not just following a protocol. She requires it. Often, she is desperate for it. Care must be taken when refusing these requests. To do so will often place a submissive into a limbo-like state between punishment and forgiveness. This will be emotionally draining and often prevent her from properly executing her duties. Unless you know the submissive well, a better alternative is to execute the punishment.

Punishment also provides easily understood boundaries of acceptable behaviour. A submissive quickly learns what she will, and will not, be permitted. The relationship will, therefore, always contain an element of formality. Formality can be both erotic, and therapeutic.

In addition, the dominant may be angry with her. The punishment provides an opportunity for that anger to be expressed and dissipated. There is an implicit "safety-valve" factor in the process of punishment that should not be overlooked. Anger will not accumulate over time, thus building to dangerous levels.

Of course, the responsible dominant is aware that after the punishment is completed, he, too, must be willing to forgive and let go of the infraction. To continually remind the submissive of her failure after the fact is cruel. It also lessens the value of the punishment. If the submissive suspects the punishment will not lead to forgiveness, then its effectiveness is greatly reduced.

Therefore, the act of punishment provides important emotional outlets for both the dominant and the submissive.

When should the dominant punish the submissive? The short answer is, of course, when she fails in her service or breaks a rule.

There are two basic forms of failure. The first is a deliberate act. This is when the submissive makes a conscious decision not to satisfy a discipline or task. There are a variety of reasons for this abnormal behaviour, each requiring a different solution. In the case of a masochistic submissive, she may wish a physical beating. Giving her what she desires, therefore, reinforces the unacceptable behaviour. Clearly a punishment for this behaviour is essential, but in order to satisfy the requirement of suffering, it is necessary to develop a penalty that is not desired. In my experience, both isolation and withdrawal of service work effectively. One might also consider a hiatus from the pain infliction routines that are being sought. I will have more to say on the forms of punishment below.

Another reason for deliberate failure is testing the limits of acceptable behaviour. In other words, how much leeway does her dominant permit? Here the dominant has a choice. If the behaviour is acceptable, then no punishment is required. Otherwise, the submissive should be punished. Once again, the punishment must be seen as a penalty.

A third reason for deliberate failure may be an unresolved conflict between the dominant and submissive. The failure of service is a signal of this issue. Here a punishment is unlikely to resolve the conflict. A dominant may recognize this issue when the submissive keeps repeatedly making the same mistake or when her attitude changes. At this point, discussion is required between the parties involved, or either party may terminate the relationship.

The final type of deliberate failure is when a task is beyond the capability of the submissive. Frequently dominants may assign disciplines that simply cannot be performed, or require experience that the submissive has not yet acquired. Some dominants will punish for these failures. My own preference is to forgive such errors without punishment. Of course, this leads to a discussion on goal settings for the submissive, but I suspect that will require another paper.

The second form of failure is a non-deliberate act. Here the submissive has simply forgotten to perform an assigned discipline or task. Punishment is always required in such cases. The submissive will feel despondent and unhappy with her failure. She requires a mechanism that will allow her to be forgiven, to release her negative feelings, and return to service. Simply being forgiven by the dominant is rarely sufficient. She must forgive herself as well and to do this she will require some form of atonement.