In my group processes there is an early promise made in many guises; the most blunt way might be:

No fucking charity. No one will be paired up out of obligation, pressure, or pity. I will not force you to pair up, nor will I help you to pair up.

Since my work is highly relational and often both intimate and vulnerable, it matters a lot who you do it with. Especially when playing with submission, when you decide to put another’s will above your own. You must see them as worthy of this power. In some sense of the word, you must worship them. There must be a connection, a relationship, a spark between you. A polarity requires someone to dance with. You can’t be submissive without a dominant, and vice versa. Don’t get me wrong, you can identify with the preference, but you can’t really act it out. So having someone to work with is almost mandatory, and who that is matters enormously.

So people often ask if they should enter the process with a partner, or not. And it has pros and cons. If you enter with someone, you also enter with expectations, agreements and a previous dynamic. Which might not only be of eros — attraction, mystery, relational charge — but of everyday life. With family, households, hobbies, social networks. And preexisting, maybe unconscious and unspoken power dynamics. You’ll carry them all into every exercise, and they’ll colour your every encounter. Which might be amazing. Or a tragedy. If anything, when working with these intimate and vulnerable topics, you’ll learn a lot about your relationship. Whether it is exhausting or exhilarating. So, when I say in the beginning, No fucking charity — maybe that doesn’t apply if you have several decades of relationship together, because you are probably acting out of charity to the other from time to time.

On the other hand, if you decide to enter the group process alone, you’ll have to be responsible for creating relationships on the fly. And this is a skill to master in its own right. Of course, the way the work is structured, you’ll have plenty of opportunities to build rapport with others. Some in non-verbal short interactions, others over lunch or in the sauna. But eventually, as the process progresses, the exercises will become longer, more complex and more vulnerable. So at that point you kind of need to have woven a little spider web of connections.

There are no young hot willing assistants waiting for you. And there are no double circles where you rotate to be forcefully paired up with someone. No walking around with your eyes closed finding two other pairs of hands for an erotic massage. No lottery with twenty pairs of leaves deciding who you’ll sleep with tonight. These are all examples from the neo-tantra schools of the 1990s, and some still do it today, even after #metoo and the age of consent. I’m not one of them. So I can’t help you further than giving you the opportunity to weave your web.

On the other hand, you are always welcome and even encouraged to watch some exercises. They are often both beautiful and inspiring. I actually aim to take you to an edge where you actively decide not to participate. Because that is a perfect practice of boundaries and accountability. So others can trust that you don’t partner up out of charity.

If you think this sounds terrifying — to weave this social web, to express your desires, to partner up — then maybe this is your workshop. Because if you are not interested in learning these skills, I highly doubt that my work is right for you. If you want to learn, then it’s a great container to practise. Sometimes, when people self-isolate during the group processes, I invite them to ask the group for help. To talk about their hardship. Maybe even ask for feedback on why people do not want to partner with them. To show vulnerability. Because almost always the people who attend my group processes have had exactly the same experience, and they know what you are going through, and they are often willing to lend a helping hand.

Or you come with a fixed partner, and then that relationship will become a big part of your process. Both are equally fine. Except if the theme is desire, where you’ll always work with at least three people, so you need either a fixed trio, or to commit to the fun game of inviting others into your relationship.

Just to contradict myself: I also think there is great value in partnering up in ways that break your patterns, whatever they might be. Some always go for attraction, others always go for safety, while others always go for freedom to avoid attachment, and others still are always weaving their web. So challenging yourself to pick or accept a partner outside these patterns is often surprising — if not great, at least interesting. But that must come out of choice. And not by the force of my or another’s hand.

Ultimately, the reason I operate this way is that I prioritise my customers who are willing, able and maybe even enjoy weaving this social web and challenging themselves. I prioritise them over the people who want to be forcefully paired up to avoid the very same thing. Because the trend I see over the years is that people who prefer my way will feel safe in my processes, and they’ll recommend me to their friends. While in the meantime, the people who are drooling over that young hot assistant piece of ass will learn that it isn’t to be found with me, and they’ll either stop attending, or face their demons and adopt a social behaviour that supports them to pair up.

If you want to dig deeper into this subject I recommend the book Love, Freedom, Aloneness: The Koan of Relationships by that favourite culty tantra guru of some, Osho.