Dancing in the moment: What coaching can teach us about BDSM

Last week I had the privilege of presenting at the annual Gay Coaches Conference. My talk on what BDSM can teach us about coaching seemed to go down well. I believe the video may be available at some time in the future if you want to see it.

The talk came out of my observation that it would look to an outside observer that coaches and Dominants are in charge in a session. However, in really good coaching and BDSM sessions, there's an element of co-creation, where both people involved are working together to find the best possible route through a session to the best possible outcome. 

While preparing for the talk, I came across a model of coach maturity that I think helps as a way of thinking about BDSM scenes, especially from a Dominant's point of view. It may also help you to understand coaching a bit better. To read the full article the model comes from, see this article by Prof David Clutterbuck and Prof David Megginson. (Note, the 'critical questions' for coaching below are directly from this article.) I didn't have time to discuss the model during the talk, and decided in this blog post to look from the other way round - how coaching can help us become better at BDSM.

The model suggests four levels of 'coaching maturity': Models-based, Process-based, Philosophy-based, and Systemic eclectic. I'm going to unpick each one and show the comparison between BDSM and coaching.

Models-based

Critical questions:
How do I take them where I think they need to go?
How do I adapt my technique or model to this circumstance?

My first experience of coaching was during a leadership training course that I attended while at a company I used to work for. We were given a basic model of coaching (GROW, for those who understand these things) and followed some steps. During my first coaching conversation, I 'coached' a colleague in how to deal with a particular problem. At the time, she told me that I did a great job. What I know now was I led her to the solution I had decided would be the best for her. This was more like a Socrative style of teaching than true coaching. I was asking questions that led to a pre-determined solution. This wasn't coaching as I know it now.

Basic coaching, as taught in a million short courses around the world, gives the coach a set of tools that they can pull out of the bag. They'll re-label bits of the tool kit to show how this tool relates to a particular client's purpose and then use it in exactly the same way as they would with any other client.

For example, a client may say "I want to open a cafe". The coach will then pull out their "How to plan a project" tool and work thr



ough it with the client. Ultimately, in coaching, this means that the coach is in charge of the session and believes (whether rightly, arrogantly, or wrongly) that they know the best way to approach a problem with the client.

In BDSM, this would be similar to a Dominant going to a kink workshop and learning a few basic techniques for, say, bondage, whipping or spanking. Then, when approached by a submissive, the Dominant would plan a session that followed that basic set of techniques more or less to the letter without deviation. This sort of Dominant can be spotted a mile off by proclaiming "It's my way or the high way" or "If you're not into x, y, z, then you're not a proper submissive."

Everyone needs to start somewhere, but I'd strongly suggest that you avoid both coaches and Dominants who have a limited palette and believe they know the best under all circumstances.

Process-based

Critical questions for coaches:
How do I give enough control to the client and still retain a purposeful conversation?
What's the best way to apply my process in this instance?
Critical questions for Dominants:
Do I know enough about what the submissive is looking for to have a great session with them?

What style of session am I going to use with this particular submissive?

Process-based coaches will hold back from making a decision about where they take their clients. They will encourage their clients to dig deeper into their desires before they start making plans. For example, the client who arrives saying "I want to get a new job" would be encouraged to consider a why they needed a new job and then the best way of getting what they truly wanted. Some clients, for example, may want to reduce stress, or improve their work-life balance. Others may need to improve working conditions or the enjoyment they feel from working. Others may feel that they have skills that are being underused, or feel that the values of the organisation they work for are incompatible with their own.

These coaches will often ask permission from a client before presenting a particular tool or model and will rarely offer advice. When tools and models are used, they're used in a more organic way, allowing the client to see the process rather than leading the client step by step.

Process-based Dominants, on the other hand, will have a wide variety of techniques they can use with submissives. They'll quiz the submissive before a session and may plan a session in advance, but will check in to see that the submissive is on the right journey. Frequent use of traffic lights will help the Dominant understand the submissive more and make the session even better for both. Now and then, a new technique or toy may be introduced, but the Dominant will watch the submissive closely to understand the submissive's response to the idea. Ideas that land well will be pursued; ones that cause the submissive to withdraw will be left aside.

Philosophy-based

Critical questions for coaches:
What can I do to help the client do this for themselves?
How do I contextualise the client's issue within the perspective of my philosophy or discipline?
Critical questions for Dominants:
What do I need to know before I start a session about interests, limits and values? 
What do I need to draw out of the submissive to make the best use of our time?
Where do I have to teach, push boundaries or rein in with this particular submissive?

There are a number of different philosophies of coaching. My initial training was in solution focused coaching, where you start from the intended outcome and work backwards. There's also narrative coaching, which is similar to some therapeutic methods in looking back at the stories from people's lives and re-narrating them to learn something that takes the client forward. Or somatic coaching which focuses on how clients want to embody their goals.

A really good coach will help a client go on a learning journey through the session. When this works well, the client will be equipped with a deeper knowledge of both what they need right now, and a higher level of resourcefulness for future challenges.

For an example, in some sessions I have worked with clients to develop metaphors for parts of their life, for example the kind of person they want to be when showing up at business meetings. Then we have brainstormed where other metaphors could help them in their lives - anything from during hook ups to when they lead their teams at work.

A while back, I was at a leather event and allowing my boy to worship my boots while I talked to another attendee of the event. When I told my boy to stop, the other guy leaned down and told my boy "You must always start on the left foot. It shows your submission." Whist specific rules are fine and work well for many, what this person was ignoring was that I (or my boy) may have had our own reasons in the moment for acting in the way we wanted. I personally find hard and fast rules are constraining. I much prefer setting understanding of intention expected ("You do what you can to make me feel/look good," "You put me first when you can,"  "You are to maintain a healthy lifestyle").

A philosophy-based Dominant will have a particular view of the sub-Dom relationship and work within that, changing their exact approach to suit the submissive they're working with. For example, a Dominant may enjoy being pampered and expect worship from different submissives, but they will understand that for some submissives this takes the form of foot rubs and body massage, other submissives will enjoy cock worship, whilst others enjoy taking the Dom on shopping trips. Or Dominants may be into impact play but recognise that different submissives want different forms (hand, cane, whip). Alternatively,  a Dominant may be into aggro play and enjoy stomping, humiliation, or breath control... Again, these Dominants will have a view of the sub/Dom relationship during play, but will vary their approach based on the particular needs, limits and likes of the submissive.

These Dominants will frequently introduce a different toy, instrument or action to see what happens with the submissive and see how it lands. If the submissive responds well, the Dominant will continue in this vein. If it doesn't, the Dominant will find another way to open up the session in ways that weren't planned before the meeting.

Dominants and submissives working at this level will be able to explain  to each other their likes and dislikes in a broader way that doesn't sound like a shopping list. Often, this will be about how they want to feel rather than what they want to do.

Systemic eclectic

Critical questions for coaches:
Are we both relaxed enough to allow the issue and the solution to emerge in whatever way they will?
Do I need to apply any techniques or processes at all? If I do, what does the client context tell me about how to select from the wide choice available to me?
Critical questions for Dominants:

How can we learn from each other in a session to take the session to the next level, within our different roles?
What cues and clues are we following from each other to move forward in our session and learning?


The best coaches and the best Dominants will see learning as a life long process. They are infinitely curious, looking to expand their understanding of their respective roles. Coaches will examine different philosophies of coaching, moving as needed from one to another as the client needs. For example, some clients may need to revisit a past experience in order to learn from it (using narrative coaching tools), and then use it to plan a future (solution focused coaching). Or maybe they need to focus on the stress a client is feeling at work using somatic coaching tools or to use mindfulness or hypnotherapy techniques.

The best Dominants will have a range of different ways of approaching a submissive. They will quickly switch mode from aggressive to parental,  strict to playful, carefully watching to see which way of dominating works best for the pairing. They'll be alive to the emotional and physical abilities of the people in the scene and will follow paths to take each scene to a new level.

The International Coach Federation is keen on the phrase "Dancing in the moment". Celebrities in the dancing shows on TV are able to follow a pre-determined set of steps to demonstrate their abilities at a particular dance. Couples at tango milonga will be able to create beautiful dances in the moment without ever having met each other and without a single word. Their bodies tell the story of what to do next. Similarly, the best coaches will be able to work with their clients in a dance of words that pushes the client to a greater understanding of themselves and their challenges and the best Dominants will work with a submissive in a dance of bodies that ends in deeper connection and hightened emotions. Now that's something to work for.

Misinformation

I'm using my blog to talk about an issue that I've almost got myself involved in a Twitter argument for because it takes more than a couple of lines of characters to explain.

On the surface, the 'argument' was on the safety of a particular site. However, my reaction is nothing to do with that. To those involved: hold fire until you've read this whole blog.

We live in a world where we're bombarded with information and it's very difficult to tell what's true fact, what's low quality and what's misinformation.

I've been passionate about this for years. Many people don't know that I used to be a science teacher. As much as I loved teaching about the fundamental particles and cosmology, I was much more interested that the students I taught ended up scientifically literate. To me, this means being able to use the basic skills of the scientist to sift through data and make informed decisions.

At the time I was teaching (and, depressingly, still), the three big 'debates' in the world were whether vaccines cause autism (spoiler: they don't), mobile phones cause cancer (nope) and whether humans are the cause for current changes in climate (they are).

How can I be sure? Because there are literally thousands of articles written in high quality peer-reviewed journals, based on double-blind trials, high quality statistical models or established science that show that these things are true.

Now, science does work by every now and then someone coming along and finding an exception to the rule, or developing a new paradigm that changes everything. However, these are few and far between, especially when a particular area of science is well understood. To change what mainstream scientists believe requires three things: evidence of the new claim that can be verified independently; an explanation for the new claim using established scientific principles; ways of further testing the claim.

In the case of vaccines and autism, only one study was found to link the vaccines with autism. Other studies showed no link. The study also made no attempt to explain how the chemicals in vaccines could cause autism and no further predictions for relationships that could be found outside the study. Worse, the study was found to have been conducted by a doctor who was being paid to write a study with a particular bent, and was conducted under incredibly unethical conditions.

So what's this all to do with sites on the internet?

Let's roll back a couple of weeks when I found myself emboiled in a Facebook debate about PrEP.

For those who don't know, PrEP (Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis) is a way of preventing HIV from being passed on by taking an anti-retroviral drug even if you're HIV negative.

There have been many studies done on the efficacy of PrEP and it's been found to be a) highly effective and b) safe for most people. There is, however, a small risk that it may affect your liver or kidney function. As such, people who have been prescribed PrEP are given regular tests to check that their vital organs are not being affected by the drug.

Of course, the Facebook warriors decided this wasn't the case. They were shouting about the 'dangers' of PrEP. If people believe that, it's fine, that's their choice. But not if it puts other people who could be at risk off using the drug.

When I challenged those making claims to provide evidence for the assertions, all I got back were anecdotes along the lines of "My doctor won't prescribe it because they're scared" or worse "you're such a sheeple". Of course, in America, there's an added complication that healthcare is a profit making business. This means that there's a suspicion about every drug that's out there. Luckily, in the UK, the NHS is not profit making and can be usually be relied on to make much more informed decisions. In the case of PrEP, they tried very hard to find reasons not to prescribe it, but have recently come to the conclusion that it's much more cost effective to give people the drug than the potential consequences of at risk groups not taking it. They also looked at the effectiveness compared to the side effects.

The point here is that "A guy off Facebook who knows a doctor" is nowhere near as reliable a source as the UK health regulator, but the guy off Facebook could stop someone making an informed decision by spreading half truths and doubt.

So what triggered this blog? Someone I follow on Twitter tweeted a "warning" about a particular site. This warning linked to an article written in a really obscure online "newspaper" in barely understandable English. The article made half a claim in the headline, then completely failed to explain the basis for the claim in the main body of the text. They claimed to be using a source "who worked for the company" but there was no evidence of this. There was a picture attached the article that doesn't have anything to do with the site mentioned.

On questioning this, I was given the usual "There's loads of people complaining on the web about this site". So I went looking. Trustpilot is a site where people can rate sites. A really good indication that something fishy going on is reading the number of 5 star or 1 star reviews. If there's a clutch in a particular time frame, this can suggest that someone is trying to manipulate the reviews. In this case, the site being criticised had a number of poor reviews written fairly recently. There wasn't a common thread to the reviews, either. Some of them were clearly sour grapes, whist some were nothing to do with the site functionality, but the content on the site (which is like complaining that YouTube is rubbish because PewDePee said something bad - it's creator led).

I'm open to the fact that some sites are dodgy, that science can get things wrong and that 'Big Pharma' makes up conditions in order to persuade us to buy medicines that we didn't know we needed. However, I do not agree with spreading misinformation. At best, it can spread confusion. At worst, it can cause people to behave in ways that are detrimental to their health, to the environment, or cause problems for legitimate businesses. So please only share high quality sources.

If you're in doubt about whether to believe something written on line, use the following guide to work out whether you should be taking notice of the information.

Reputation Is the author or organisation who wrote the source of information knowin to be honest, competent and neutral? Do they have integrity?

Ability to see Does the author have first hand knowledge of the subject, or are they rehashing second hand data?

Vested interest Does the author gain financially from writing this? Who is paying them? What are they trying to gain?

Expertise Is the author an expert in their field? What qualifications do they have?

Neutrality? Is the source biased? Are they ignoring one side of an argument? Has the 'opposite side' been given an opportunity do respond?

In the case of the information shared regarding the site, I felt that the reputation of the source was low, there was an anonymous informant who was the source, and there was no right to reply in the article for the site. Finally, given the number of articles attacking the same site in the 'newspaper', the neutrality of the source has to be questioned.

The internet is a great place, and there's loadsd of information out there... but please don't spread misinformation. Please be especially careful when you share stories that could damage people, businesses or go against the grain on health or the environment. Think carefully about the reliability of the source before hitting share, like or acting on the information.

Isolation sex

I'm a wanker. So should you be.

While so many of us are isolated, I've no doubt that many people will be practicing self loving. Sometimes several times per day. There's nothing wrong with that. In fact, go for it. Nature gave you the gift of a set of pleasure spots and you don't need anyone or anything else to enjoy them.

Our culture has made masturbation seem like a bad thing. So we knock one out and sometimes feel bad about it. So now is the right time to celebrate jerking and use it to learn more about ourselves.

When I've worked from home in the past, I've been used a quick wank in the same way people use walks, cigarette breaks and cups of coffee; as a way of breaking up the monotony of the day. I finish a piece of work, then pull out my dick, shoot a load and then get back on with work. As I generally take a while to cum, this wastes time, but it also means that the amount of pleasure I get from masturbation tends to decrease.

On the other hand, at times, if I'm in a situation that cranking one out isn't possible (for example when I'm staying with family), then I notice that I don't feel the need to jerk off quite as often. When I eventually do, I find that I experience much more pleasure.

So, tip one, mix it up. By all means enjoy trying to break your record for the number of orgasms per day, but also try to break the absenence record. You'll enjoy both, in different ways.

Pornography is so easily accessible that it's easy to forget that it's possible to beat off without watching any. Our wildest fantasies are there on the screen. I've enjoyed many long edging sessions where I started on one particular fantasy and ended somewhere completely different. I'll be watching muscle guys fucking in the desert, then get excited by the boots, move to kink, then to straight stuff, gangbang porn... and so on and end up cumming to a skinny twink boy being force fed dick by daddies. Or whatever. It's fun to just follow our mood. Add poppers and it's even more fun - hours of edging, riding the peak and repeating. Bliss.

However, like all good things, we get desensitised to porn. You'll notice this happening as you start to search for harder and harder scenes. What started as being excited by a hot guy with a nice cock turns into needing multiple load bareback gangbang sex to even raise a twich in your nether regions.

Tip two therefore is to give yourself breaks from porn. Take a few days off per week when you don't watch anything and instead let your imagination run riot. You may even learn a few things about what you're into.

How can you take a quick solo hand job to another level? If you keep treating a session as just another thing you do each day (or several times a day), it soon loses its allure.

Try using toys to spice up your quicky. Even if you haven't got anything from a sex shop hiding under the bed, anyhing from clothes pegs/pins to watermelons can be used to have a good time. Just don't put anything that doesn't have a firm handhold inside you and please use lube with insertables. Our hospitals have enough to deal with without you adding to the emergency surgery lists with a baseball bat stuck up your nether regions or your dick in a vacuum cleaner. And NEVER try anything involving bags over your head or strangulation on your own. No breath control is totally safe at the best of times - on your own it's just stupid.

Try dressing up in different outfits to make yourself feel sexy. Just because no one will see you doesn't mean you can't feel good. Business clothes, sports clothes, underwear, dressing gowns, jeans, fetish gear... the list is endless. Play in a different place from your normal routine. If you normally beat off in bed or shower, try doing it in the kitchen or on the living room floor.

Try spreading the session out to take a whole evening to yourself. Phone off. Nice bath. Champagne. Strawberries. Romantic meal and enjoying your body, with or without toys, poppers and porn for a few hours. Work slowly - start with the secondary sexual areas. Your lips. Your nipples. Your feet. Don't aim to orgasm for a while. Take your time and really enjoy who you are and what your body can do for you.

Alternatively, find someone online to enjoy your body with. Camming with someone is safe and fun - as long as you know you're not being recorded. Pulling your meat out on chaturbate or cam4 is fine if you're out to friends and family as a sexual being, but has potential consequences if you're a teacher or aspiring politician. Paying someone is an option if you want your exact buttons pushed (for example, I know people who want specific words used when they're being dominanted or given instructions), but the cost can build up.

For those people who are a little scared of meeting people at the best of times, this is a great time to get to know people without committing. Use the hook up apps to find someone nearby, and enjoy each others' company via video. Learn about each other, then have some hot isolation video chats. You'll be ready to go further when we all get released.

Enjoy your body. Enjoy some solo loving. Stay safe, keep calm and wank on.

Just wash your hands afterwards.

Mastering emotions in lockdown

Remember last autumn, before anyone had ever heard of corona viruses? We got on with our daily lives, understanding the ebb and flow of the emotions that we feel. Annoyance when the train was late. Panic at the impending deadlines. Happiness to see our salaries being paid. Disappointment a week later when the salary seemed to have disappeared…  It was almost like we didn’t even notice the emotions they were so linked to the events of our every day lives. 

Even the times when strong emotions flared up were so linked to events that they’re part of the wallpaper of life. The anger you feel when someone cuts you up on the way to work. The happiness you feel when your team wins. The annoyance when someone’s grabs the last slice of cake in the staff canteen just before you get there.

Now everything has changed. Emotions are suddenly different from normal. You may be feeling bored or lonely because you’re stuck at home. Or scared of the lurking virus. Or frustrated that you can’t meet friends or have sex. Or fearful that your job may be at risk. Or angry at your Government’s response. Or proud of the many thousands of people who are working on the front line to combat this disease. You may even feel happiness that you get to spent more time with your loved ones or relief that you don’t have to commute into work every day. 

How do we deal with these new emotions?

I wrote about emotions in Mastering Life (you can download it for free here). I explained that emotions exist to tell us something. For example, if you feel scared, then it’s your brain’s way of telling you that there’s some potential danger. 

The key to dealing with emotions is to follow a three step process:

• Decode the information in the emotion
• Decide on the emotion we would prefer to be feeling
• Work out how to get from the current emotion to the one we’d like to feel

Here’s a couple of examples.

• I’m feeling boredom. This tells me that I am lacking something. I don’t have stimulation. I don’t have purpose.
• I would like to be feeling excitement.
• In order to go from boredom to excitement, I need to do something to make me feel more engaged. I need to cook a new meal. Or watch a scary movie. Or find someone to have an online video sex session with.

• I’m feeling scared of the virus. This tells me that I am in danger of contracting a potentially life threatening illness.
• I would like to feel peace.
• I need to recognise that I am fearful for a reason. This fear is keeping me safe by ensuring that I am self isolating. As long as I’m following guidelines, then I will not become ill. I need to thank my fear for keeping me safe. Then I’ll find peace.

This sounds easy on paper, but needs a few subtle skills to make this work. 

Firstly, you need to be able to recognise and name the emotions you are feeling. 

There are hundreds of emotion words in English. Sometimes it takes a while to realise what emotions we’re feeling. Robert Plutchik suggested that there were eight core emotions which could each be experienced in different intensities. For each basic emotion, he suggested that there was a physiological response that had been inbuilt in humans by evolution. Anger causes us to attack the thing causing the feeling. Disgust pushes us to reject. Sorrow closes us down. Joy opens us up. Fear causes us to protect. Anticipation pushes us forward whilst surprise causes us to stop. Trust allows us to accept. 

Emotions can be combined. Mixing anticipation and anger causes aggression. Surprise and fear causes awe.

The model can be represented on a diagram like this:

Before moving forward, consider your response to this model. Does it work for you? 

The first step in mastering your emotions is to name them. 

What are you feeling?

Then, consider:

What do you want to feel instead? 

This is important. It’s very easy to say “I’m bored”. But without knowing what you want to be, you can’t find a route. It’s a bit like saying “I don’t like this place I’m standing,” but not knowing where you want to go to. Decide on the destination, and there’s a reason to move forwards. 

Finally, link the two.

The reason I’m feeling [starting emotion] is so I become aware that I want to feel [ending emotion]. My options to make that change are…

"Options" is plural for a reason: it allows you to brainstorm. Think of as many different ways to achieve the end emotion as you can. Some may be impossible, some unlikely, but some will be worth taking. Once you’re put into a resourceful mode of thinking, you are more likely to be able to make the journey you wish to.

Examples:

The reason I’m feeling bored is so that I become aware that I want to feel happy. 

My options for that are: to skype my best friends; to rewatch my favourite box set from the start; to start learning to cook exciting foods… (etc)

The reason I’m feeling angry (with politicians) is so that I become aware that I want to feel trust. 

My options for this are: to join a political party; to become more political on social media; to write to my MP / government representative; to start a political blog…

The reason I’m feeling scared is so that I become aware that I want to feel peace. 

My options for this are: to find a cure for corona virus; to continue to practice self-isolation and good hygiene practices; to realise that I am unlikely to fall very ill and volunteer to help people around me who are more likely to be badly affected by the virus.

Taking control of our emotions can be hard to start, but it will pay dividends over time. 

Use this period where your emotions are possibly out of the normal balance to become more aware, and you’ll find yourself more able to deal with your emotions being knocked out of place in the future when the world gets back to normal.