Power Exchange Textbook: Chapter 4

This is the fourth chapter of the Power Exchange Sextbook that I am writing. You can access the earlier chapters at this tag. This book is not published yet and this work is exclusively for subscribers.

...

Chapter 4
Systems of Addressal

A system of addressal is a method of referring to another person, not by using their name, but by using an alternative reference that may have personal meaning, engrained respect, indication of a role or affection, built into the reference. In general, the power-exchange community tends to be very big on systems of addressal but that does not make it a compulsory practise. Some people enjoy it and others choose to continue to refer to one another by name. It helps to find roots and relatability for the practice within general society.

For instance, there are certain roles in socio-professional structures like being the president of a country or a judge and sometimes even a holy-person that automatically convey to people not to refer to these people by their names but to use titles like “Sir/Madam,” or “Judge/President” or “Father/Swami” as a sign of respect and to acknowledge the role. There is also a rich tradition in most cultures of referring to one’s partner using affectionate nicknames or personally assigned names. Power-exchange just has its own version of that.  

Types of Systems of Addressal

There are a few different types of systems of addressal that are popularly used:

-          Honorific/Dysphemism
An honorific is not a name but a title and it is meant to convey that the role someone is taking is being acknowledged as well as respected by the person referring to them. A dysphemism is the opposite of that, a term which has some level of inherent (apparent) disrespect built into it. It’s important to note that disrespect in this sense is a desirable form of it and may not even register as reductive to the person in question. It may also not be disrespect at all but reinforcement of the idea of a hierarchy in which terms that indicate respect/reverence are on one end and terms that indicate a lowered position are on the other. Honorifics may be terms like “Master” or “Mistress” where a dysphemism may be something like “slave” or “pig”.

-          Role Designation
Sometimes it is not about respect or reduction, but about reinforcing roles. When you refer to your mother or father as mom or dad, it’s not that they are superior to you on a hierarchy or even (necessarily) that the terms have reverence built into them, it is a system of reference that reinforces and comforts by way of roles. The specific nature of the roles varies for different people which is why using the same term may have different meaning for different people. Some people may refer to their partner as “sir/ma’am” while others may use terms like “mommy/daddy” but for some the term “sir” may imply ownership and for others it may imply a romantic, guidance-based role.

-          Personalised
A personalised system of reference is one where the parties choose their own terminology that has meaning to them. A very common way that this happens in M/s relationships is by way of “slave names” where the dominant-party may choose a name for their slave which henceforth constitutes a title to that section of their identity. Some people also personalise terminology by incorporating different languages into it, by changing existing terminology by adding a personal flair or basing their reference to one another in pop-culture or art.

-          Hypocorism
Hypocorism refers to an affectionate nickname, much like one may use for their friends or children, but within power-exchange may take on a form that may not be considered appropriate under normal settings. One may refer to their partner in “little” form with affectionate nicknames that may seem infantilising under normal circumstances.

-          Mindset Creation
Some systems of reference may be designed to evoke a certain mindset. In a dynamic that has many different facets, they may be a system to signal shifts from one role to another. One may refer to their partner as “mistress” when in scene and something else outside of it. There can also be a more specific set-up where a certain method of reference has specific codes of behaviour associated with it.

-          Third-Person Reference
Some people enjoy enhancing the objectification or the dehumanisation of their dynamic by referring to themselves or enforcing that their partner refers to themselves in third-person only or as it. You may come across people calling themselves “this girl/boy/slave” or using a more dehumanising term such as “this pig/it” and that usually exacerbates the feeling of being owned or immersed in their role. It may also be part of the rules or protocols of the relationship.

Why Do People Choose Systems of Designation?

-          Arousal/Evocation
For some people, using certain kinds of terminology to refer to people is simply arousing or evokes emotions they find enjoyable to experience.

-          To Reinforce/Establish Roles
In referring to your partner by an honorific or term that denotes their status, there is a type of reinforcement of the role. Each time one refers to their dominant partner as mommy or master, it may establish the power-dynamic or indicate the desire to engage in a specific way.

-          Express Affection/Romance
Like any hypocorism, the systems of address used within power-exchange settings can be a function of affection or romance. Sometimes, it is a special term that contains a lot of personalised meaning for the user of the term or the recipient of the term.

-          Commitment To The Construct
One of the primary features of BDSM in general is suspension of disbelief, it means ones ability to commit to the construct is usually directly related to the gratification they may derive from it. One of the ways to build the construct is through systems of address.

The Systems of Usage

In practise, there are different ways to determine the frequency or situations within which particular systems of addressal are to be used.

-          Choice-based

For some, it is entirely choice-based, and there is no obligation, rule or consequences surrounding the term. They may refer to one another that way whenever they feel like it and default to calling one another by name in other circumstances.

-          In Scene Only
For others, honorifics or other systems of addressal are play-related and are most enjoyed when used in-scene only. There may be enforced obligatory usage in-scene or it may be a strong preference with no punitive consequences associated with it.

-          As The Only Option
There are also power-exchange relationships where systems of addressal are sacrosanct and the only way in which they refer to one another. Forms of compulsion can often be a method of enforcing roles and establishing conventions within the relationship.

Of course, it is also entirely possible to use a hybrid system where more than one system of addressal is at play within a relationship. For instance, I refer to my partner as daddy in parlance, but master in private and during play, and I almost never refer to him by name. The systems are designed to be understood and then adapted to your convenience.