'Real' BDSM

Today I find myself in the mood for a little rant. lol.

While doing research and exploring the BDSM community, you see a lot of comments about being a 'true submissive' or a 'true dominant'. If you talk to those who've been in the lifestyle for any length of time, however, you will find that they hate those terms. There is no such thing. You either are a submissive, or you're not. You either are a dominant, or you're not. Just because you don't submit to every dominant personality, or Dom everyone around you, doesn't make you any less of what you are.

The same holds true with BDSM. I've found many, especially those outside of the lifestyle, who feel that if pain or bondage is not involved then it isn't BDSM. That just is not the case.

First, let's define BDSM. Bondage & Discipline. Domination & submission. Sadism & Masochism.

What do these terms mean and why are they broken down? Because anyone of these things, or combination there of, fall under BDSM. A person does not have to enjoy pain. They don't have to like being tied up either. There are also those who want to be tied up and flogged, but have no desire to be dominated in any way. Fetishes take all different forms, and they all fall under the BDSM heading.

There is not 'real' BDSM. Wants and needs in a relationship are what you make of them.

So what does this have to do with anything you might ask? Where is the rant? Something I've noticed in a few reviews Slave has received is the disregard or the lessening of the BDSM element in the story. There is no impact play, pain, or bondage in Slave. There is, however, a clear domination and submission dynamic. This is BDSM. Yes, it is a milder form than seems to find its way into many BDSM novels, but it IS BDSM none the less.

Slave has gotten some really great reviews, and I'm grateful to everyone who has taken the time to do so. However, I'd like your opinion. How do you feel about it? Should a novel be deemed 'less than' because it lacks what is the norm in the mainstream?