The Striker’s Shadow
The psychological dimensions of the Striker role that deserve honest examination—and why examining them makes practice safer and more genuine
“The shadow of any role is the part that uses the role for something other than its stated purpose. Examine it or it will examine itself through your practice.”
— Mr. Lucius Thorne
What the Shadow Contains
The Striker role carries genuine power and genuine status in many BDSM community contexts.
It offers the specific experience of competence under conditions of genuine demand, the specific reward of producing significant experiences for other people, and the relational significance of being trusted with something consequential.
These are legitimate goods that genuine practice produces.
They are also goods that can be sought through means that are not genuinely in service of the Receiver.
The Striker who prioritizes the feeling of competence over the Receiver’s actual experience is using the Receiver to produce a feeling for themselves.
The Striker who prioritizes community status over accurate self-assessment of their development is misrepresenting their readiness to people who may be trusting them with significant vulnerability.
Specific shadow dimensions to examine honestly: the attraction to the power that the Striker role provides, independently of what that power is in service of.
The desire to produce impressive encounters for observers, independent of whether the encounter is serving the Receiver.
The reluctance to end encounters before the plan is complete, even when reading indicates the encounter should be closing.
The tendency to overstate competence in contexts where honest assessment would limit access.
―― ? ――
The Practice of Examination
The shadow is not examined once and resolved.
It requires ongoing examination, because the conditions that activate it change and because the shadow adapts to the forms of honest self-examination that are available to it.
A useful practice: after encounters, ask not only how the Receiver did but what was motivating specific choices throughout.
Was the choice to continue past a particular point genuinely in service of the Receiver, or was it in service of reaching the intensity level the Striker wanted to reach?
Was the pace determined by what the Receiver’s state called for, or by what the Striker found satisfying to deliver?
These questions do not require that the answers always be disturbing.
Sometimes the honest answer is that the choice was genuinely in service of the Receiver.
But the habit of asking the question—and the willingness to answer it honestly when the answer is not flattering—is what keeps the practice genuinely oriented toward what it says it is for.