retreat q and a: 1


This will be at least three parts. I am still collecting questions, so free to add a question in a comment below or send it to me by email — shaemadigan@comcast.net.

The questions have come to me not only from comments and emails but also from a few people who know me in my daily life. I am arranging the questions in an approximate chronological order to the retreat.


Do you think the purpose of the lifestyle retreat was for the education of the five dominants or to create an experience for you in the presence of those men? (Neighbor John Miller)

The retreat was serious teaching about the art of dominance, and my place in it was relatively peripheral. I cannot imagine Master McKenna setting up the entire retreat for my sake.

Master McKenna has so far been intent of developing me for him — shaping me to his preferences. Amanda is about developing me for me. That’s not a criticism of him, just the current truth of it. So he would not be thinking “Shae needs an experience with dominant men.” But Amanda would, and I have no doubt that, given the retreat was going to happen, Amanda saw it as a learning experience for me.

It served both intentions, but I would not suggest that I was so important to Master McKenna’s intentions in planning the retreat.


I’m curious if as the slave there is any sort of vetting process that goes on with regards to the would-be dominants you encounter? In other words, is it enough that Master McKenna says they are dominants or do they still need to prove themselves as such? (Dave)

Dave, my understanding is that, for the retreat, each man attending was chosen by Master McKenna. Two of them were referred to him by other dominant friends; three he had met before. I assume he had conversations with all of them before inviting them to the retreat. I also heard second-hand (through Amanda) there were two others Master McKenna had decided not to invite. So he was vetting the group on some basis.

At the retreat, in the introductories, he mentioned that each of those present was “seriously considering the D/s lifestyle.” He seemed to know at least that much about them. I think the vetting of them was simply Master McKenna’s own process and his confidence that they were real dominants.


We have now followed an extended weekend with two different groups of participants…The first group consisted of women and men. If any of these were dominant, without themselves exploiting or knowing that they are, would you recognize such a quality? Can you recognize dominance based on speech or behavior? Can you recognize a dominant near you via atmospheric vibes, psychic [vibes] or by eye contact? (Nudo)

A great question. Yes and no.

Yes, I am often able to detect someone’s dominance if I have some time in a room with them. Dominants have body language and speech tells, and I pick up on those things even in vanilla situations. These aren’t always what you might think: it isn’t true that a man who publicly shows control and authority is actually dominant — often a person overcompensates for his weakness. But I often sense these body and speech signals. Also, if someone is in direct conversation with me, I tend to feel their assumption of authority over me in their language and tone. Again, this isn’t always what you might think it to be. It’s rather subtle.

No, I don’t have any psychic vibes or magical sense about dominant persons, and I can’t tell if someone is dominant just by looking into their eyes. It isn’t like that. But if I have some time in their presence, I can feel the dominance of someone.


Here’s a follow-up question from Nudo, which got a bit mangled in translation. I’m pretty sure I know what he’s asking, so I am paraphrasing: Regarding group two, the dominant men. Could it be that some of them do not have the quality of true dominance and seek D/s experiences just for the sexual arousal and pleasure? (Nudo)

Yes, I think there are many people exploring the possibilities of a dominant life, as these men at the retreat were doing by being there. Again, I expect Master McKenna had a pretty good sense of the five of them being real dominants. But the retreat was really about this very thing — providing the men a way of determining if they were truly dominant enough to seriously consider a D/s life.

But you’re also suggesting there are pretenders among us, people who present themselves as dominant but aren’t, just using the pretense to have sex with submissive women like me. I suppose there are such people, and that we submissives are vulnerable to them. For me, as it seems I am so thoroughly dominated these days 😉, it seems unlikely I would be in danger of that.


1. Was it exciting for you, to be at the center of so many men’s attention? (Mister Archie)

2. You have written in the past how being in the presence of dominants, especially male dominants, makes you feel; how you have even a great awareness of your submissiveness and your status as a slave. I’m curious to know how you felt being in a room full of male Doms. Specifically, how did you feel being there as Master McKenna’s slave when he had you topless, heeled, collared and leashed? Was it exciting? Arousing? Submissively satisfying? (CJ)

Mr. Archie, eventually, yes, it was exciting for me to be in the middle of so many dominants. But there were several mental processes I had to go through first to get to the level of comfort to allow myself to feel the submissive excitement in the situation.

For any submissive woman in such a situation there is a primary concern about safety. I was never outright fearful, but this was my first “public” experience under Master McKenna and it was with five strangers. I didn’t know what the dominants would be like or if Master McKenna would be able to control them. As it happened, the very first night Master McKenna said some things to them that proved his control, and I relaxed from that point on.

I also was distracted about how far Master McKenna would go in revealing my body to the men. I expected he would make me undress, but how far he would take that, I didn’t know. I was hoping it would just be me topless and not much more. Which it was.

So it took some time for me to settle into a comfort zone there, which is why I say eventually it was exciting for me.

CJ, being in a room of male dominants was indeed a deep submissive and sexual experience for me. Like you say, I’ve written about being in the presence of dominant people before, but this was a concentrated immersion in a space of so many dominants all at once — a distinctly new experience for me. Yes, it was (my god!) arousing.

For one thing, it pushed me into a level of submission that is somewhat uncommon in my experience. Amanda noticed this too. It’s one of the varieties of sub-space. Collared, heeled, and leashed — and especially later when I was also topless — I became extremely docile and compliant. It seems counter-intuitive: you’d think in a strange situation of strangers, I would have some defenses up; even in daily life with Amanda, while I am submissive to her, I obey with a touch of attitude or humor. In this, I just became utterly acquiescent. Maybe it was a deeper surrender that came from knowing I was surrounded by six dominant men. There was a lot of testosterone in the room.

I suppose it was “submissively satisfying,” as you inquire, CJ, but I’m not sure how to calculate that. But yes, it aroused me submissively. My body tends to show my excitement all too readily — my chest gets rosy and freckled and my nipples grow pinker and become pointed and my face flushes — I cannot hide my arousal. Some of the men there commented on that even, and I became self-conscious.


Do you think that if there’s another retreat, Master McKenna would give the men access to you sexually? If so, how would you feel about that? (College friend Jeremy)

Yes, probably.

I don’t think Master McKenna would allow the men just to have their way with me during the retreat or overnight, but I well imagine he would have training activities and demonstrations that would perhaps involve me sexually with them.

How I feel about that… well, it’s one of those situations that I would find both humiliating and arousing. More below…


From a comment to a pre-retreat post, but it applies here: I did wonder how the idea of one or more Mr. Smiths plays to your self-described promiscuous nature. Does the idea of a lack of familiarity with the participants enhance or detract from the pleasure of the experience? Are the two thought processes even connected? (Dave)

Here’s how I replied to his comment on my post “being shared”:

Dave, thanks — good thoughts. You may be right that some men would not want Amanda watching. Do you think maybe that’s a specific kink for certain men?.. To your question (a very perceptive one), yes the multiple Smiths idea does play to my promiscuous dynamic, and the two processes are very much connected inside me… For me, there is shame in being known as promiscuous, and the prospect of being with strangers sexually is in some sense a definition of being promiscuous. At the same time, the idea of being promiscuous is extremely arousing to me, I must admit…. The lack of familiarity with a stranger would enhance my sexual experience, but not necessarily for the sex itself, rather for the idea of being used sexually by someone I don’t know.

Here are some of my further thoughts on this in the context of the retreat:

Being in the presence of five dominant men certainly compelled in me feelings of desire and fantasies about the possibilities as well as the shame of promiscuity. I can’t deny I sometimes have desires to be taken by a stranger, and here were five strangers. I have sometimes indulged in the fantasy of multiple men at the same time, and the possibility of the five having me there in The Great Room was always around the corner in my mind. Also in all of it, I had a sense of my promiscuity in it, the simple shame of standing half nude, collared, and leashed before a group of men.

As is much in the slave life, it is and was all of the above.


Did Master McKenna ever really tell you how he thought you did? (Lily)

I have found that Master McKenna is restrained in his handing out of praise. In my trainings with him, he tends to say “such and such” was “acceptable.”

As a perfectionist achiever, I find this drives me nuts. It’s like being in a pass/fail class, which I always disliked. I’ve learned that Master McKenna’s “acceptable,” means I did it has he wants it.

As I think I posted somewhere, Master McKenna spoke with Amanda after the retreat and expressed to her his appreciation for my presence and how I did well. He and I have not had another time since, but perhaps when I see him again, he will express how acceptable I was 😉.

I will also say that during the retreat there were a lot of times when Master McKenna would stand beside me as were between sessions. Again, he didn’t offer high praise, but I got the sense he was reasonably pleased. Sometimes you can feel that a dom is proud to have you attached to him.


More to come…

3 thoughts on “retreat q and a: 1

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s