~ PROTOCOL VS ETIQUETTE ~
by XMentor
|
Recently, a person I respect in the lifestyle made a distinction between protocol and
etiquette. The distinction, though subtle, was significant, and I have found it very
useful in dealing with others in the lifestyle.
Etiquette, according to this distinction, is a set of conventions or practices that are
based in common sense, and are usually, but not always, followed within the
community as a whole. These conventions may not be universally used or even
understood, and are not necessarily enforceable, but are generally considered rules of
politeness which help people to interact with each other.
Several examples of etiquette immediately come to mind. One example is the etiquette
that one does not touch another's toys, including that one's slave(s) or their collars. It is
almost universally recognized, and a breach of this etiquette may get someone de facto
excluded from the community or from groups within the community. However, it is not
absolutely universal, and those new to the lifestyle cannot be expected to know that
etiquette, although we often think a person should, as a matter of common sense,
recognize it. When a newcomer breaches this convention, usually someone will take
that person aside and quietly explain the social gaffe that person has committed.
Another example is whether one talks to another's submissive without permission. The
typical approach is the safe one of asking permission or for an ok to do so. Only where
the Dominant has made it absolutely clear that conversations, greetings or hugs are
always ok will another Dominant or submissive understand there is no necessity of
asking permission.
The point here is that there is no need for someone to ask what the convention is, if
one follows common sense, general rules of politeness and good judgment. There is no
need to ask what is appropriate to people in a given relationship.
Protocol is something else entirely. Protocols are specific rules between a smaller set of
persons, usually in some form of relationship such as a Dominant-submissive or bdsm
family relationship. These rules may be quite elaborate. It is also necessary to
communicate those rules in advance to someone, and for that person to accept those
rules, if they are to be followed. More importantly, those outside the relationship
cannot and should not be expected to honor or even know those rules.
One example of a protocol might be one where a submissive in a D/s relationship is
expected never to use furniture in his/her Dominant's presence. It must be
communicated, and it requires commitment to honor that rule. However, those in the
community at large cannot be expected to know the D/s couple follow that rule, and
the D/s couple cannot expect others in the community to follow it.
Perhaps the best example of this distinction is the use of the honorific "Sir" or "Maam."
The etiquette is that it is polite for a submissive (or a Dominant, for that matter) to use
those honorifics, if they desire to, and if they feel the person they are talking to merits
them… but it is not required between members of the community as a whole, as a
matter of etiquette. However, when one is in a D/s relationship, the Dominant can
require that the submissive address him/her in that manner or in a similar manner, as a
matter of protocol between the two of them.
Let's apply this example in real life. When I am at D/s munches or social events, others
in the community may or may not address me as Sir. I don't require it and I don't feel
bad if the honorific is not applied. Nevertheless, when it is, it feels good, and I tend to
think the person who did so is wonderfully perceptive and polite . But it is not required,
and I cannot expect others in the community, especially newcomers, to use it. That is
the etiquette of the situation.
However, if someone approaches me for mentoring, protection, training, scening or for
purposes of submitting to me, I can, and do, make explicit my expectations and rules
for them, in their relationship with me. One of those rules is that they are to call me Sir.
If they accept that rule (and others, of course), then the relationship continues. They
are also free not to accept that rule or other rules, in which case I can (and do) choose
not to enter into the relationship. I also cannot expect others to know or to follow it. It
is a rule of the relationship. In other words, it is a protocol.
Other examples of protocols can include: heeling to the left, "no talk" rules, postures,
manner of service, forms of address, and, frankly anything else one can think of.
In summary:
An etiquette:
Is a generally recognized convention, but is not a rule.
Generally applies in the community as a whole.
Is not "enforceable" (although failing to follow it can get a person disliked in a hurry).
Is almost (but not completely) universally recognized in the community.
Is usually, but not always, followed.
Is based on common sense.
Is usually based on concepts of politeness.
A protocol:
Is a rule, and not a convention.
Is something that has been explicitly communicated and accepted.
Is particular to a relationship, and not to the community as a whole.
Is something those outside the relationship can NOT be expected to know or to follow.
Is enforceable within the relationship, but not outside it.
Can be (and often is) different or distinct from normal etiquette.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Feedback, comments, criticisms and suggestions (positive or negative) are encouraged,
as I've never written anything that hasn't been improved by the input of others.
XmentorX@aol.com
© 1999 Xmentor
Reproduced by permission for the BDSM Resource Center.
All rights reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written
consent of the author.