Rika Revisited

In spite of what I say in this post, the book, “Uniquely Rika” is worth reading. I have had it on the side bar to say exactly that. However, you will have to weigh its implications, for your future is at stake.
When first reading it I was on a hormonal high with a fully established FLR. I read and understood what I thought she was saying in her book. I remember liking the book much when I first encountered it. I remember feeling that I could be hers in a fantasy scenario as she described her views. Now, over three years later, things are different. I have a logical base from which to assess her presentation of the subject. I have re-read the book with a clear mind.

Rika in the first page of the book says, “ … many couples have attempted to establish working D/s relationships. Surprisingly, most fail in the long run. Why should this be?”

Have you asked yourself? Have you come up with an answer? I have some answers.

Uniquely Rika is based on a flawed assumption that men want to be submissive, but are fixated on the assumed ideal of a pornography mistress of whip and stylized femdom-wear. They cannot distinguish between their fetish and their innate submissiveness. She will set that straight so that the men will know right from wrong. Right. Exactly as she sees it.

Some men are confused on that subject. They may be addicted to the shallow unattractive females portrayed by the media in artificial background and no substance. They have not developed a relationship with an understanding female. All they have is their fantasy even when married and with children. I despise the stereotype dominatress, and maintain that my personal fetish does not support the porno industry. I find it disgusting and boring. At the same time I don’t diminish any man’s wishes for fantasy fulfillment as long as it is non-injurious to self or others. They are no worse than any women’s wishes for the same or for benign romantic play. So, starting with the flawed assumption I will elaborate on the book.

Contrary to Rika’s claim, a man needs more than to simply satisfy his need to serve and subsequently be allowed to do so by a woman. Rika’s service oriented submissive is happy just to serve even though his original needs and whishes are not met or even addressed. That is a gross assumption by her, and nowhere substantiated by her or in literature.

She is talking about the supposed fetish that men have for being whipped by a skinny abrasive woman clad in ridiculous leather and rubber outfit. Such man would be a fool to want that and to try to live with 24/7/365. Still, in spite of my aversion to the stereotypical whip-wielding dominatress, I believe that if a man needs just that, he should get it from time to time. As for the simple solution of transforming a man into Rika’s service oriented submissive, it might work on one who is at heart a submissive and has no higher aspirations. It is also easy when her household is simple: up to three bedrooms, no pets, no yard work, few if any children. In other words, an hour or so a day keeps the home clean, rest of the time can be devoted to full-time servitude to the mistress of the home. It is good if one can afford it. Alas, few of us can be kept servants without working for a living on the side. When having to work for a living, personal service for the mistress cuts into sleep time. I know how it is to sleep three hours a day for months without a break.

The “Deal” in chapter three of the book (on page 47 of printed version) is neat and seems fair: he serves, she enjoys. That is what the basic premise is supposed to be, also assumed to be a submissive man’s dream. Alas, nothing is as simple as she presents it. Her rules work in her case only and maybe in some few cases with truly submissive men and the women who are cold and calculating about taking advantage of it.

She talks about making routines to allow her dealing with fewer responsibilities and him more things to do. She says, ”The obvious benefit is that we end up with an ever-expanding, prioritized list of tasks for him to do and a schedule for him to follow to get them done. Once on the list, he can put the task out of his mind. … frees up his time to take on more tasks.” I think that her message is appropriate for young people where the man has not taken responsibility for much, he tends to waste his time on games and video entertainment, and wifey is stuck with the work. For more responsible males already doing realistic home maintenance it is a farce. As much as some of them might want to do personal service for the female in charge, there is only so much time in a day, and one must sleep to survive the next day.

Full time service without compensation is unreal regardless of how kinky the man is. Lack of compensation is Rika’s prime directive. She talks of gifts to be bestowed on occasion just to keep the slave from rebelling under the yoke of her imposed tyranny, but not giving him the idea that he is rewarded for good behavior. Some of us have a problem with that.

Rika simplifies the control that she offers over what she assumes to be submissive men. In her experience it worked. Her experience with submissive men may be limited to one or two possibilities. One possibility is that she is or was a professional dominant whom men pay for her services. Her exposure to and control and observation of these assumed submissive men were limited only to her workplace. It would be limited to these customers who were returning for the coveted mistreatment. That would be mistreatment that she dismisses as undesirable fetish by men that should be channeled into service oriented submission to a woman. She does not know how these men performed on the long run on their own. In addition, an assumed submissive man performs a certain way with a professional, but that is no indication of how he will perform with a personal partner in real life. Now, if she is talking about real experience with respect to her husband, I am somewhat confident that she is telling the truth. That may be where she has collected all of this wisdom, albeit, limited in scope. If true, the problem is, this particular experience is based on one man. We are all different. What worked between her and her husband does not make a general rule. Some of her rules may apply over a short time, but they are not applicable to all men all the time, not even to her husband that she claims to love. There is no such rule.

She advocates communication. That is a platitude, no different from saying, “I like nice. Nice is nice.” Some people are incapable of communication. They are capable of yelling, berating, hurting, whining, playing victim, etc., but communication to resolve issues is beyond them. That leaves out a large segment of the population. Sure, it is best to try to communicate. Did that work in your case?

She explains Rules of Engagement:

1. You [the female] decide if and when you play
2. These are gifts you’re giving him …
3. They should never be confused with his service to you …
4. When you’re done playing, things go back to normal …

This is fine if you are giving him gifts and that is all he will ever want. If he is a true slave, than his feelings are of no concern. Otherwise, he will falter. Not many of us are true slaves.

At the end I think that she is more warped than the professional dominatresses. Professionals do it for the money. She does it, if she is honest, from conviction. She wants service. She promises nothing. Only a foolish man would go into such relationship with her. Despite her claim to love her husband, her words refute them. Her manipulations in chapter 5 (starting on page 66) are cold. They simply treat a symptom that she would rather not, but realizes that one must pay the bills. There is no love, not even liking in her description of what a woman should do to her submissive man on “Simple Gifts” (page 68 an on). She says, “ … [in] D/s relationship the focus is on what the man can do for the woman rather than what the woman does to the man. In this context the concepts of limits and safe-words do not apply …” I am not much for safe words, for I don’t care for role acting where “no” means “yes”, etc. However, completely detaching herself from what the man wants and needs is perverse. She may as well hire some schmuck from skid row to mistreat and not deal with the continuous education of her in-house submissive man. I know, some of you men out there think, “Hey, that’s exactly what I want!” Right. You might want that for a sex scene or maybe for a weekend before you return to your normal life. As for living with it, well, maybe, if you are bent that way, which is not true for most of us.

I am disillusioned with her book and her view. Although both have some useful qualities, she destroys the good with her cold execution of her rule. You can use the book as an instruction manual for many things in D/S and have fun on the short term. In chapter 6 and subsequent she presents many scenarios that can be kinky fun for both partners, but not in her ice-queen setting. As for applying it to your “submissive” man as a lifestyle, it is very unrealistic. Even if he is truly submissive he will have a problem with the execution of his sentence and consequently will rebel. I have my extreme and weird fantasies, but this is not one. I am strange when it comes to D/S, but I want to relate to and with a woman who has feelings for me, rather than just for herself. I guess you can call me a non-submissive.