“He really likes squeezing me dry, and he really likes making me pay tribute. I feel awful.” — a letter sent to a BDSM advice column
The person who wrote it is an ordinary university student with no money to spare. Over a little more than a year of knowing this man, they sent him roughly 15,000 yuan (about 2,100 USD). The two of them met in person three times.
They never once shared a proper meal. The letter-writer paid, watched him eat, and was not allowed to eat at the same time — only after he had finished, and only what he left behind on the plate.
None of it was enjoyable. Breaking up was raised several times; he refused; and the writer found they could not let go either, so they kept accommodating him. In the last two months contact thinned to almost nothing. He said he had things to do and could not check his phone. Four or five days would pass without a reply.
They know it is time to go. They have also dreamed about him two nights running, and they want to know how to make the ache stop. Wanting to leave and being unable to leave is the part worth taking apart, because it is not a contradiction — it is two systems pulling in opposite directions at once.
Wanting to Leave and Wanting Him Back
Most people who reach this point draw the wrong conclusion from it. It goes something like: “If this relationship were really that bad, why would I miss him this much? I must love him. I should try harder to make it work.”
So they try harder, and it feels worse. They stop trying, and it still feels worse. Eventually they are being torn in half between attachment on one side and misery on the other, and every hour of silence reads as proof that the answer is to go back.
What is actually happening is simpler and less romantic: the attachment system and the judgement system are fighting each other, and the attachment system does not care whether the relationship is good.
The Feeling Fallacy Behind Missing Him
That misreading has a shape worth naming, because it shows up far outside kink. Missing someone is treated as evidence of love. Withdrawal is treated as evidence of depth. In reality, missing someone is mostly evidence of an interrupted supply — of a source of security that has stopped delivering, not of a partner who deserves another chance.
This is why the silence hurts more than the demands did. Silence is intermittent reinforcement: the message that sometimes arrives is worth more than the one that arrives on schedule, and the person waiting for it starts organising their whole day around the possibility. Four or five days without a word is not a small cruelty. It is a training schedule.
Attachment System vs. Rational Judgment
The attachment behavioral system was first described by the British psychoanalyst John Bowlby. His claim was that when a person feels separation, pressure or anxiety, they instinctively look for a figure who can supply safety — and the goal of that search is not romance. The goal is continued access to a feeling of being safe.
So although the letter never says so, the man who takes the money and treats them as less than a person must also be doing something else: supplying enough safety, at least intermittently, to have become an attachment figure. That is the entire trick of it. The same person is the source of the wound and the source of the relief, which is why leaving feels like losing the only shelter in bad weather.
His other behaviour — asking for money, putting them down, belittling them — is what makes the judgement side want out. Hence the stalemate: judgement says go, attachment says stay, and the body obeys whichever one currently hurts more.
The pattern is not rare. Plenty of people recognise it from adolescence: fighting with parents daily, swearing to escape their control, and then feeling adrift and anxious the moment they actually leave, because the safety supply went with them. In this relationship, the letter-writer is in the position of that teenager — except the person they are attached to is also charging them for the privilege.
Financial Domination Still Needs Consent
None of the above is a reason to keep paying. Two things in the letter settle that question on their own.
First, he takes the money and the care as his due and does not respect the person providing them. Being made to eat leftovers, and being left on read for four or five days, are not excused by “we’re in a BDSM relationship.” Anyone who has read the basics of this scene knows that power is transferred in the bedroom, not in the bank account by default. Even a genuine ATM or tribute scene is built on informed consent from both sides, with limits agreed in advance and a way to stop. We wrote about that dynamic in detail in our piece on financial domination — the defining feature is that the submissive chooses it, can negotiate it, and can end it.
A dynamic that cannot be renegotiated is not power exchange. It is extraction, and the patterns that surround it are the ones our readers already know from fake dominant red flags: entitlement without care, rules that only run one way, and no accountability when those rules cause harm.
Second, he has pushed the entire cost of maintaining contact onto the other person. He says he is busy, offers no solution, proposes no reliable way to talk, and leaves them to wait, guess and digest the disappointment alone. That is what not caring looks like in practice. Someone who wanted the relationship would have arranged something — a fixed evening, a short voice note, anything at all.
Whatever else is true, this person is not worth another transfer.
Step One: Stop Every Tribute Transfer
Before any psychological work, the practical one: stop sending money. Not reduce it, not pause it until things improve — stop.
There is a reason this comes first rather than last. Continuing to pay keeps the attachment system fed, because each transfer is also a message, a contact, a small proof that the connection still exists. The money is not only money here; it is the channel. Closing the channel is what makes the rest possible.
Expect the urge to be strongest right after. Expect a sudden message that is unusually warm once the transfers stop. That warmth is not a change of heart; it is the system noticing its supply has been interrupted. If a reliable structure is what was missing, our guide to finding a safe BDSM partner lists what real reliability looks like, and it does not include being charged for someone’s attention.
Step Two: Spread the Attachment Around
The second half of the work is redistributing what that one person was carrying. Friends, animals, interests — all of it counts, and all of it is slower than it sounds.
Concretely, put small specific things into each day:
- One hour of physical exercise.
- At least one social activity with friends, in person where possible.
- One piece of progress on a skill — a lesson finished, a chapter read, a thing made.
The logic is arithmetic rather than moral. The more functions a single person carries — companionship, and the confirmation that you are worth something — the harder they are to lose, and the more catastrophic losing them feels. Spread those functions across friends, routines and your own actions, and the dependency loses its grip gradually, on its own schedule.
Do not rush into the next relationship to fill the gap. A new attachment figure installed on top of an unhealed one simply transfers the same imbalance to a new address.
Nothing here is abstract to the people it happens to. A collar that is given, negotiated and worn by choice is a different object entirely from one that is used as a receipt — which is why the healthy version of ownership, like a BDSM collar and leash, always comes with the right to take it off.
Tribute and Financial Domination FAQ
Is asking a submissive for money automatically abuse?
No. Consensual financial domination exists, and plenty of people enjoy it. The dividing lines are consent, limits and revocability: the arrangement was negotiated, the amounts are agreed, and either side can end or renegotiate it without punishment.
What makes this case different?
The transfers were never negotiated as play. They came with humiliation the writer did not consent to, with no contact structure, and with no ability to leave — three things that point to exploitation rather than kink.
Why does it hurt more now that he has gone quiet?
Because silence turns an unreliable supply into an intermittent one, and intermittent reinforcement bonds harder than steady contact. The pain is withdrawal, not love.
How long does it take to stop missing someone like this?
Longer than anyone wants to hear, and shorter than it feels on day three. It shortens measurably once the transfers stop and other people are carrying part of the load.
This difficult stretch does pass. Two systems were fighting; one of them was only ever looking for safety, and safety can be rebuilt somewhere it is not billed by the message.
This is an 18+ essay on adult power exchange. Safe, sane and consensual (SSC) and risk-aware consensual kink (RACK) principles apply to everything described here: tribute play is a negotiated scene, not a payment plan, and no dynamic is legitimate once consent, limits or the ability to walk away are removed. Nothing here is instruction; it is a description of why a harmful attachment is hard to leave, and what makes it possible. If money, threats or isolation are involved in your situation, contact a local domestic abuse service — the frame of kink does not put anyone outside the protection of the law.
0 comments