Who Am I? Reflections by SlinkiJay Sugarplum
Years ago, on a spiritual retreat, one of the tasks was to divide into pairs and ask this of each other. “Who are you?” and one’s partner replied beginning with the words “I am ….” We were given a long time for this exercise – or so it seemed … and as we asked this of each other, asking until we could go no further, what became apparent was the unmasking of ourselves ….
First our roles, social faces, made up and ready to play the social game ….. lawyer, doctor, father, mother, sister, husband, wife, …. going deeper going deeper naming, finding place for each, unwrapping …. happy, anxious, mysterious, terrified, aroused, …. the emotions came next …. and connected to which, often, our bodies …. overweight, fertile, thin, muscular, aging … and beyond these, our dreams our innermost longings and admissions …. sadistic, cruel, submissive, trapped, one with everything, suicidal, powerful, godlike, at one, at peace …
I think that this part of us gets born into Second Life, or Secret Longings, as Christopher eloquently named it. Second Life may be about paths not taken, now being allowed to be inhabited and pursued, safely, without apparent damage to ones “real life”. As a newbie, asking for advice, a friend said to me “SL fills the gaps in RL – you need to be aware of what those gaps are”. I have found it is not as clearcut, or as simple, but it still holds true.
In SL I have found a freedom that I do not have in my RL – geographically and personally. I have met people from all over the world, joined an international community, and found parts of myself I did not know existed. I have laughed with people, cried with them, and cried alone, in front of my computer, often. So deeply touched by what is being lived in my so-called Second Life. And had such a wondrous variety of relationships, the intensity, and intimacies of which would be almost impossible to replicate in “real life”
For me, I think, without realizing it, many, myself included, have come to do the deepest psychological work – namely that of integration. I am aware people come to SL for many other reasons too, e.g., scripting, building, creating etc – this piece responds to the issue of relationship and the value and magnetism of the cyber relationship and digital identity.
Perhaps it is clearer if we ask: What am I drawn to in SL? What is missing in me and my life that I try to fill or hold onto? What are the psychological tasks that we have come to complete here? What do I need here that I am lacking? What do I want from relationships here?
Some of my discoveries have been while exploring the D/s world in Second Life – they are clearer there, than in other relationships because of the obvious distinction between the two parties involved, and the tasks the two appear to have come to complete with each other. The roles and nature of the relationship is clear to both. However, the points can be generalized to other relationships because they originate in Object Relations Theory, which is the formation of our identities through relationship.
The nature of the D/s relationship with the dominant and submissive can be understood using the Kleinian concept of the object and splitting – and the search for a dominatrix who is both ideal and persecutory, is a repetition compulsion with the aim to master, to overcome the split and integrate the psyche. I am quoting extensively for the reader’s edification and contextualization of where my points are located.
“The concept of the splitting of the object was elaborated by Melanie Klein. This is a defense mechanism deployed by the ego against anxieties concerning the destructiveness of the death drive, and which is directed at maintaining the separation between a good object and a bad object to safeguard the security and integrity of the ego.
The object that is split in this way is the internal object; Klein developed this concept of internal object on the basis of the concept of introjection. In fact, according to Freud, the ego introjects external objects that are sources of pleasure, and expels outside of itself that which causes unpleasure. For Melanie Klein, splitting, introjection, and projection constitute the first defense mechanisms. In his “phantasies,” the child introjects parts of his parents’ bodies (the breast, the penis, and so on), and the parents are split into gratifying good objects and frustrating bad objects.
The infant’s first relationship is a relationship to part-objects, principally to the mother’s breast, which is split into the ideal breast and the persecuting breast. In this relationship, the ego projects the death drive outwards and introjects an ideal object that is the product of the projection of the life drive.” (answers.com)
In addition, another concept that has been useful for me in understanding the D/s relationship is Winnicot’s concept of a transitional object, which can be related and demonstrated in the dominant’s need for and use of his/her submissive. Like a child had, loved and specifically used his teddy bear, so the submissive or slave takes this role for the psyche of the dominant. So many submissives and slaves have survived early abuse in childhood and it is logical that this looking for a dominant to repeat this abuse, because it is familiar, as is the combination of being used as an object and apparently loved, and longing for the idealized qualities of the dominant too – has parallels with redemption in many cultures and enactments.
“In human childhood development, the term transitional object is normally used. It is something, usually a physical object, which takes the place of the mother-child bond. Common examples include dolls, teddy bears or blankets.
Donald Woods Winnicott introduced the concepts of transitional objects and transitional experience in reference to a particular developmental sequence. With ‘transition’ Winnicott means an intermediate developmental phase between the psychic and external reality. In this ‘transitional space’ we can find the ‘transitional object’.
When the young child begins to separate the ‘me’ from the ‘not-me’ and evolves from complete dependence to a stage of relative independence, it uses transitional objects. An infant sees himself and the mother as a whole. In this phase the mother ‘brings the world’ to the infant without delay which gives him a ‘moment of illusion’, a belief that his own wish creates the object of his desire which brings with it a sense of satisfaction. Winnicott calls this subjective omnipotence. Alongside the subjective omnipotence of a child lies an objective reality, which constitutes the child’s awareness of separateness between himself and desired objects. While the subjective omnipotence experience is one in which the child feels that his desires create satisfaction, the objective reality experience is one in which the child independently seeks out objects of desire.[citation needed]
Later on the child comes to realize that the mother is separate from him through which it appears that the child has lost something. The child realizes that he is dependent on others and thus he loses the idea that he is independent, a realization which creates a difficult period and brings frustration and anxiety with it. In the end it is impossible that the mother is always there to ‘bring the world’ to the baby, a realization which has a powerful, somewhat painful, but constructive impact on the child. Through fantasizing about the object of his wishes the child will find comfort. A transitional object can be used in this process. The transitional object is often the first ‘not me’ possession that really belongs to the child. These could be real objects like a blanket or a teddy bear, but other ‘objects’, such as a melody or a word, can fulfill this role as well. This object represents all components of ‘mothering’, and it means that the child himself is able to create what he needs as well. It enables the child to have a fantasized bond with the mother when she gradually separates for increasingly longer periods of time. The transitional object is important at the time of going to sleep and as a defence against anxiety.[citation needed]
In a later stage of the development the child no longer needs the transitional object. He is able to make a distinction between ‘me’ and ‘not-me’, and keeping inside and outside apart and yet interrelated. This development leads to the use of illusion, symbols and objects later on in life.
Winnicott related the concept of transitional object to a more general one, transitional phenomena, which he considered to be the basis of science, religion and all of culture. Transitional objects and phenomena, he said, are neither subjective nor objective but partake of both. In Mental Space, Robert Young has provided an exposition of these concepts and has generalized their role into psychic phenomena in adult life.” (wikipaedia).
Why do submissives/slaves do this? Perhaps it is repetition compulsion – to repeat what is familiar with the intention to master it. This is what I believe. These drives and urges are largely unconscious, but are fully acted out and enacted in Second Life. We long to be free, and free of them, but until then, we are trapped in the samsara of eternal return, repeating endlessly what is familiar.
For both dom and sub, I think, the concept of Total Power Exchange, which can only be a fantasy in Second Life, provides a regressive function, a soothing and a “and they all lived happily ever after” quality to the relationships. I think Second Life itself allows everyone to regress and find a place of soothing and comfort, regardless. It provides possibilities and is the ideal mother, giving us the world. And for that hope, we return and offer much.
“The unexamined life is not worth living, the unlived life is not worth examining”. I am offering these concepts to hopefully shed some light for people who find themselves living lives they are drawn to, so that they can understand why, and do the necessary integration to free themselves and become more whole. Second Life, sadly, is no substitute for psychotherapy for those who find themselves in these situations.
In short, SL allows us to freely feel – we love, laugh, loathe and express parts of ourselves we may never do in our real lives. We are given the possibility to feel, to live, to enervate every fibre and part of us, in ways that call to us, deep within. And if used with awareness, SL can allow us to grow and find place for these parts of us, so that we continually grow and develop and blossom.
I am so grateful for the people I have met along my journey in SL who allow me to reflect on myself and the nature of identity and being, in so many different ways. And find a peace and celebrate the human being as we are, in our shame and our glory.
And beyond this, perhaps, to find a oneness, a deeper connection, without our physical bodies, to spirit, to archetypes, to energies, to saints, sages, the universe, or even God. Who knows?
