This is the second part of an interview conducted in person between PD, (formerly of InSex) and JG-Leathers, in conjunction with Mark of SeriousImages.com, during the last days of January, 2012, at his new studio in Oakland, CA.

In actual fact, the questions posed below were written out away back in 2006 and sent off to PD.  He answered them fully at that time and had the answers transcribed to a written, digital format, but I never received them and so they languished  in my files until January, 2012, with me thinking that they'd never get answered.

As many in the scene, I've been familiar with PD's work almost from its first appearance and have always wanted to know more about the driving force and evil, creative genius that did such astounding things.  He was the originator of and the sometimes shadowy presence behind one of the Internet's most incredibly intense and real life sites and as such, many have wondered who the real person is.

InSex was most certainly an 'in your face' and 'this is really happening folks!' web site and as such was one of the gems that were (and still are) hard to find in the wasteland of BS internet S&M/B&D sites.  Far too many out there are 'Hollywood' types, using the same tired settings and the same models; each of who seemed to have to manufacture an aura of distress.  That was definitely NOT the case with InSex!!

Over the years that InSex was on-line, I subscribed a number of times and was continually amazed at what I saw there.  PD always impressed me with his inventiveness, as well as his sense of fun, and he has continued to do so.  That last being said,, he made no bones about the fact that InSex was all about the submission of the female of the species to his demands., controlled by inescapable bindings, and subject to apparent torment.  His models availed themselves to his devices and situations, maybe with some knowledge of what was coming ... and then it actually happened.

However, due to the changing moral and political climate in the USA, particularly by the blue-nosed ass holes who were then in positions of power in the Administration of the time, political pressure was placed on credit granting agencies to prevent kink-sourced transactions from being processed on-line and so the InSex name and all of its materials were eventually sold, but can still be accessed still at INSEX ARCHIVES.

Being the creative man he is, PD did not retire, but has kept his hand in, and his continuing involvement can be seen on the following sites: HARD TIED (rope bondage), INFERNAL RESTRAINTS (device bondage), TOPGIRL (an archive of Sister Dee's training site), and REALTIME BONDAGE (the newest live feed site).

That gives you a little background on the person and processes that have gone on, but I feel it's pertinent for me to provide some up-to-date and personal impressions of the man himself, upon meeting him face-to-face at last.

Mark, Dalton and I arrived at the building housing the PD offices and studio in Oakland at 10:30 one morning and after a little searching of the massive place, found his new lair.  We were warmly welcomed inside immediately and soon were introduced to all of the staff by a most cordial PD.  I'm not really sure what I expected in terms of physical appearance, but found the man himself to be tall, well-built and with a most noticeable air of command about him.

As well, I quickly discovered him to be most articulate and eloquent when describing his views, designs and goals, and if you read the interview fully, you'll certainly see why.  I felt immediately at ease in his presence and I believe he in mine, despite the fact that I was wearing my normal kink attire: ear rings, a skirt and breasts.

Being the true gentleman he is, PD paid my appearance no attention and told me that it was an honour to meet at last.  I was astounded, actually, for I regard myself as only one of the many fish in a huge ocean of kink, and I felt more than a little awed that he would even know who I was.  It is and is a huge honour for me to be accepted by him as an equal in the scene spectrum, for he is truly one of the 'movers and shakers'.

He showed us all around the facility and it's a huge one, allowing for all kinds of interesting things to be done, complete with office/production facilities and a large work shop area.  I was certainly impressed by the size and wished that **I** had the same type of facilities available to me, but that's another story.

After our initial getting to know one another meeting, we made arrangements for the full-on interview process to happen the next day, complete with still images being taken and a video record of our conversations, then headed back across The Bay Bridge to Mark's place, well satisfied with the morning ... one that seemed to have just flown by.

Further arrangements were made by Mark to be present when a live web cast was done and a full video record of that and my interview will be available eventually in Part Three of this series of articles.

I hope you will find the following to be both an interesting and informative look into the life and intellect of one of the strongest forces in the world of B&D/S&M over the past 30 years.

Without further blathering from me, here's the interview.



Interview with PD - Pt. Two

JG-L:  OK, to continue from Part One ... once things started to move, you did some pretty strong scenes and there was obvious distress on their part. Did you ever feel that you were pushing the envelope just a little too hard?

PD:  Well there are many dimensions to being fanatical or extreme or ambitious, crazy. All of those things were correlating in my mind at any given time. Women could always interrupt it and many of them did. There was a lot of rehearsing off camera. Ultimately were dealing with the maison scene or the lie of the cinema. People see what they want to see, they want to see the kind of content that was portrayed, they don't imagine that there was a lot of prep behind the scenes for it. Everything was discussed and were it necessary, rehearsed. Research was done, even people with more experience was brought in to help with the scenes, but yes, I was pushing everything ... too hard.

JG-L:  Did you permit them ‘safe words’ in case things got really intense and they just couldn’t continue?

PD:  OK, this question implies a couple of dimensions, one is there were situations where they really didn't have the option of saying no or something. I absolutely permitted safe words. Of course. Safe words were always implicit and only, by the way, when gags were being used, the person can speak at anytime about what they're permitting or not permitting or what they want us to continue with or not. There was never any moment ever that a persons right or freedom was denied them, even though the circumstances implies that, as the theatre or cinema can do, there was never anything like that as far as I can tell. I would say that we did do some experiments with live feeds where it was implied that the person couldn't stop. I think a lot of the girls played along with that idea, that they weren't going to stop no matter what. I think that kind of comes naturally if you're actually submitting. It certainly did for me when I was subbing. I don't care what they did to me, I was not going to say stop no matter what and I think there was a certain pride or questioning to pursue that idea and I think the models did that as well.

JG-L:  How serious were/are you in your intent to wring the utmost from a model in any given session?

PD:  First of all, I have to determine the competency of the model to begin with and only through a lot of practice and work with them was I willing to "push" them in the context that a coach would in a sport activity. Up until that point, when a model had my confidence or I had hers, I really was much more cautious and was more suspicious of what the model might have been thinking, so I was walking on eggshells a lot of the time with new models. But once a model showed her willingness or called for more work, then I began to act more like a coach, i.e., pushing them.

JG-L:  I’ve had people ask me to do scenes where there are no safe words and that I should just indulge my baser instincts to the maximum. I found that there was a limit beyond which I could not go. Did you have the same thing happen?

PD:  I would have to say no. I never really ... Ultimately I was always interested in the cinema or the scene, the tableau, the spectacle, it had to be recorded. Really more like making movies I think in a lot of ways and in that sense I would try to embellish. We had models who were not actresses so absolutely I would stimulate them with electricity just a little bit beyond what was let's say comfortable or soothing so that they would react. I mean, we all were kind of reacting to the situations but I never had some compulsion to be extreme with it. Possibly doing harm or something? I'm not even sure I understand the question in a certain way. You know, if someone approached me like that, and I think people have, I would object ultimately. I would say oh no, there has to be a safe word or something. I would never operate that way. It's just not me.

JG-L:  Your site was noted for its apparent lack of care for the models, but obviously that could not have been totally the case, otherwise, you’d have ended up in jail pretty fast. How much care was there for the ladies after a session?

PD: T hey absolutely were cared for before, during and after the session. I don't have a lot of tolerance for let's say.... shake downs or surly models if you will, models who were struggling for their next fix or who had been coached prior. Put it this way, there was a lot of slander of InSex right from the get-go. Models who came to me could have heard stories about me before and had some preconceived notion. For example, I had models come in who were beautiful and worked very well with me, and then would go out to the west coast and come back with an outrageous attitude that was impossible to work with them after that. I suspect they were being coached or things were being suggested to them. But I also had many women coming back over and over again to work with me. Obviously it's a matter of perception and probably even more so, a matter of slander.

JG-L:  PD, I can’t help but notice that most of your scenes were conducted in what I would call pretty grungy settings and environments.   Is this intentional and if so, why?

PD:  As I stated earlier, much of my influence of what would appear on camera was based on cinematic experiences or movies where grunge was an important aspect of atmosphere. Also, I think grunge or degenerate or worn or stressed environments are somewhat beautiful in a certain way with all the textures. So I just felt it was a very good cinematic technique and that’s why I strove for that or used it. It also could suggest that there was an element of violence, I guess you could say, in an environment like that. It kind of plays upon society's own fears of itself and it's conditions. The idea of neglect, degeneration, possibly that could be a resonant chamber for the seemingly violent and hopeless condition of the models, perhaps? It all resonated in a thematic way.

JG-L:  Where were the shoots done, in a general sense (city, kind of area, etc.)?

PD:  The very early work was done throughout my college years in Buffalo, NY - there was a lot of cheap real estate around there that artists could use for studios and I would always try to rent something that was grungy or suggestive of seedier undertakings going on, when InSex started - I actually worked out of an apartment with nice wooden floors and I hated it. So as soon as possible I moved down into the city and I found a grunge area in DUMBO which was a violent and crime-ridden area at the time which has completely gentrified at this point. I was actually mugged twice in the first year that I got here and that was symptomatic of the type of atmosphere I was looking for. Then of course, whenever I had a chance I would shoot outdoors.

JG-L:  Did you look for a particular type of setting?

PD:  Yes. I always kept my eyes open. Obviously there a lot of great settings, but owing the ship and access is a major problem so ultimately I had to take it into my own hands. As an expression of what this question is getting at, I was ultimately able to purchase a farm in upstate NY which was certainly chosen for its express purpose of doing shoots for InSex and for storing a lot of the gizmos that were being built at the time. Since I was renting in the city and I knew that that was never going to be completely reliable because that area was going to be completely gentrified at that time, the farm was a very wise move and certainly was part of an idea I had about shooting or working on a farm with that type of atmosphere.

JG-L:  How about the other locales like the out of doors scenes?

PD:  The very early outdoor scenes on InSex like 'Sapling Love' for example was shot in a remote part of Pennsylvania where I would drive to for several hours with a model. I was able to procure a cabin in a remote area and shoot out of there. There was always an attempt to use natural settings as opposed to studio sets. Unfortunately, at this point I'm confined to the studio regimen except for the farm which is only seasonal.

JG-L:  You appear to have a penchant for metal restraints, as do I. Any idea why?

PD:  I think metal is extremely flexible and easy to fabricate, yet has diabolical properties of permanence and rigidity with amplifies bondage ideas or ideas of restraint, subjugation and enslavement. Metal just creates such a tremendous contrast with flesh, with the yielding, soft, gentle texture of flesh and then this cold, devoid sort of metal devoid, sort of metal forged in ancient stars. It's just beautiful, and sort of poetic.

JG-L:  One of your hallmarks was that the restraints used in your scenes were always, well, fairly crude in appearance and manufacture, if you’ll forgive that description. It had a distinct and brutish air to it, given that it was sometimes rusty and obviously adapted from on-hand industrial equipment. Without a doubt they were very effective. Was this intentional, or just a matter of expediency?

PD:  It was absolutely intentional and you describe very well the kind of look that I was striving for. I was looking for a modern medieval or evil environment where industrial sophistication was deployed for the brutish enslavement of people. I did not want it to be embellished, nor did I want it to be cheap in terms of manufacture, i.e., using very thin slivers of metal. There was a certain poetic in that goal too when I discovered KGB who was my metal smith - he is this Russian fellow. KGB we call him - just a kind of interesting resonance with the quality of work he is able to produce for me.

JG-L:  Why not go for the more finished look of real hand cuffs, collars, etc.?

PD:  I just think that there are plenty of people already doing that. Perhaps that this is a way that I can distinguish myself. I think that also I'm very sensitive to the photography and anything that highlights or glares tends to distract from the scene in a recording where in the human eye it can diminish that highlight automatically with the faculties of perceptions. But in a recording system, it's very limited contrast so I just found those highlights very offensive from a picture point of view.

JG-L:  Do you have a workshop and build the equipment yourself, or do you give someone a general idea and have it made?

PD:  InSex had it's own workshop. I usually don't have the time to build the equipment myself, nor do I have the practice or handcraft practice, coordination, finesse to use welders, etc. Hence, someone else is ideal. I have to say as a tribute to the artist that works on my metal work, he has his own unique skill base and I was very inspired to work with him, and in fact, he was very much a part of all you saw with the metal work. It became a synthesis of his skills and my proclivities because he certainly isn't a bondage fellow by any means and that was probably the essence of that union or that convergence which is really what attributed and promoted some of the quality of the work. Initially the ideas were very sketched, just drawn on a chalkboard, but as they became more complicated and it was impossible to communicate them with that type of drawing so other means had to be sought to communicate the complexity of a device.

JG-L:  It’s pretty obvious that you have your own design parameters and goals when you create gear. Was this intentional, and if so, why?

PD:  I did indeed have my own criteria or design parameters. The thickness of the metal was important, but finding some kind of compromise between what would be very wearing on the metal in terms of weight or abrasion with what appears physically heavy. Also, all this stuff could be made with styrofoam or plastics to reduce the strain on the model, but obviously we were looking for some kind of realism as well. Not only realism in terms of appearance, but real in terms of the theatre or the acts they were creating. The idea of real bondage, or real restraints, and the of course that's very satisfying for those models who are inclined. A lot of my equipment was inspired by other artists, Pichard for example, some of the new 3-D artists like Kume appeared on the scene using metal devices that were designed on computers and that became challenging to me to try to produce those in real form.

JG-L:  The stuff was very strong, but do you do any sort of testing with it, prior to application on a ‘victim’?

PD:  Yes, we do all kinds of testing. One of my frustrating aspects is that a lot of times the devices are built to the sizes of females, which means that I don't get to test them, and that's really annoying, but that was one of the benefits to having a resident because they tested everything, but yes, absolutely everything was tested.

JG-L:  Which piece was the most difficult to engineer and build? Has it evolved into other things since it was built?

PD:  The most difficult piece was the roasting device. It was all curved and liner 3/4 inch rod. Very closely and anatomically schematic in holding the figure in a very exposed but safe manner. This could not be done with just drawings and I used a computer program to design it.

JG-L:  Who were they and where can these craftsmen be contacted to have equipment made?

PD:  There is only one gentlemen who did all this work. We call him KGB and his background is in jewellery and he was trained as an artist in Russia. There's been discussion about this about him going "commercial" or doing other custom work. But I think for him, he's interested in doing work for me. We've actually formed a certain kind of camaraderie in this whole enterprise and I don't think he sees it as worth his while to do it outside of this context at a roles between him and I and that's as far as I know. I'll talk to him about the fact that you may be indeed asking about whether he's available and I'll approach him about that, but I think this has happened before but he's always been very negative about that.

JG-L:  Which piece of gear gave you the most enjoyment; i.e. your favourite piece, or the one that you are most excited or impressed by? Is it still used?

PD:  I think in a very general or generic way, that cages are the most interesting to me personally and the piece that I enjoy the most to this day and still use is what we call the slope cage. I originally built it for 912 and it's a complex piece that can be completely enclosed, or it can just be a cage. It can rotate and has many access points. It's a pretty elaborate piece and is probably the culmination of all my cage designs.

JG-L:  I’ve had the privilege to visit some absolutely incredible ‘medical’ dungeons and they scared the shit right out of me. So, the question really is, have you ever considered enacting scenes in a ‘clean room’ or clinical type of environment, so that it appears to be impersonal and ‘institutional’ in nature - the opposite extreme?

PD:  I’ve never played in a room like you've described. I have done some medical scenes and I'm absolutely horrified of them, as a sub. The way you describe it would be terrifying and I'd probably have to be tied to a Gurney and wheeled in because I don't think I could walk in voluntarily. I have done medical scenes on the former InSex site. For the lack of the atmosphere, obviously, like you describe, I would probably do some kind of a dread with the girl, some kind of a mind fuck like talking about the sutures or letting her see the needles and the thread or showing her the smelling salts, trying to create an atmosphere of fear or dread in the way that a medical room can convey on its own.

JG-L:  I’ve noticed that a many of your scenes/sessions involved some sort of predicament, so that if the ‘victim’ did anything at all, there was an immediate, uncomfortable and/or downright painful consequence/payment of some sort involved. Is that your preference?

PD:  My personal play is actually quite reductive and generally focuses on some kind of sexual bedroom scene in a way. The whole scene / session thing for me is about the spectacle and creating spectacles for people. One of the features of InSex was that it was very interactive in that people would recommend things and we would do them. People would definitely ask for predicament bondage as we called it. Under those circumstances, I was very motivated to come up with ideas and sometimes ideas was offered. Double-binds as we called them. As for myself, I play in a much more personal way that's much more simple and has a lot of sexuality of sexual focus. If that's the case, there's a finite amount of time, there's a specific biological arc to sexual expression. I think the only time I've done any decent scenes is when sex was not the point so I find the two circumstances very different, i.e., producing spectacles, performing live or playing privately in my own space. I think there's a very big difference.

JG-L:  Most of your models eventually ended up naked, other than for the rubber and mummification series. What’s your personal preference? Why?

PD:  I personally prefer nudity, or actually I prefer change culminating in nudity. Total exposure, if you will on the part of the girl. But leading up to that, clothed, partially clothed. Because it's part of a gamut or a dynamic, part of a process which is more active and that's what I prefer.

JG-L:  Do you like to use models with body jewellery?

PD:  I think that body jewellery is a mixed blessing. The nipples, especially. Often the women have trouble with them, infections, etc. So more often than not, they complain about it, hence the nipple rings are out of bounds. One of the body jewellery pieces I prefer is the one in the tongue. I think that's an amazing one - they usually don't complain about that and then you can tie a rope to it and you've got them by the tongue. But usually they're more a problem then a help.

JG-L:  Speaking for myself, body jewellery is really meant for sensual restraint and control. Agree? Disagree?

PD:  Yes, I agree that it was obvious that it was meant for some kind of restraint or control. I don't its popularity admits to that, if you will, or understands the history of how that stuff was used. I find it somewhat ironic, when a girl who is wearing all that jewellery, adorned with it, is suddenly bound by it as well. They seem quite shocked and confused possibly.

JG-L:  Many of your models had piercing's and jewellery (nipple, labia, clit, tongue, etc.) and It seemed to be mandatory that they be employed in your scenes. How seriously did you like to make use of this jewellery?

PD:  I would always look for the opportunity to use it if it was available, always. It was such an obvious way of controlling the situation or enhancing the portrayal. Indeed on a couple of occasions we actually inserted jewellery as part of the scenes, labia rings in particular. I've done nipples as well, but labia certainly, was one that we used during a live feed.

JG-L:  Any idea of how the models felt, having their ‘decorations’ used against them?

PD:  I would actually make jokes about it as part of a scene to kind of tease them over the fact that they thought were so pretty and clever with their jewellery and now what it’s come to. Made it more like a tease and they would be somewhat befuddled by that predicament, or bemused by the irony of it.

JG-L: Given your deep involvement in dominance and submission situations, are you married now, or do you have a full time pelvic associate?

PD:  I'm not married, but I do indeed have a full time pelvic associate.

JG-L:  Have you had women who want to be your real life, full time slave? Have you accepted any such offers?

PD:  I'm not particularly motivated by those kinds of ideas or offers in my personal life. Actually I prefer good friends and good company, without any presuppositions or orientations. However, in relation to the business, I definitely cultured or encouraged those types of ideas. We had a program called residency which was really a woman who resided on the premises and who was in fact a full-time "model" and I would do live feeds and special projects with her. That’s as far as its really ever went with me, so it was always part of a scene or part of a spectacle. In my personal life, I'm not really interested in that.

JG-L:  If so, how does she feel about the whole thing, being perhaps(?) a live-in slave; 24/7/365, fully-committed to what you wish to do with/to her, whatever that may entail?

PD:  I'm trying to relate this question to the situation with InSex and the residency program. Again, I think the terms of this question imply a certain condition which I really don't operate with or understand, perhaps. I did indeed expect a resident to be available to try out equipment, to work with me privately for examples, rehearsals or practice. Even in my personal life, I had a resident and lets say we were intimate with each other which I think was very convenient and it sort of arose out of the...in other words, a woman would show interest in me, a model let's say. And really wanted to make more of a commitment to being involved with my business or involved with me. I personally directed it towards as more of an organized scenario. Because anything a woman did with me privately during InSex, ultimately was used by the business. It became a practicing ground, a training ground for my live feeds, for shows, etc. It was a very absorbing sort of life and any woman who was involved with me ultimately had to share in that business.

JG-L:  If you have one, how does she live (i.e. in a cell, restrained, leashed, chastity-belted, collared, etc.)?

PD:  In order to respond to this, I have to go back to the InSex days where the resident did indeed live in a cell, was restrained, leashed, chastity-belted, and collared. We had ceremonies, for example, for a girl who became a resident ... she was collared. We had ceremonies for example for a girl who did become a resident, she was collared. We did do live feeds which lasted for 48 hours where they were in a cell the entire time, very restrictive cage, really. Chastity-belts ... we did those which lasted beyond 24 hours and the resident would report the ordeals with the chastity belt. So all of these things were possible in relation to the InSex site which portrayed a culture of B&D/S&M.

JG-L:  If you have such a possession, (or had one) do/did you take her out in restraints and display her?

PD:  Yes, the residency did allow that, or I expected that. Indeed, we would go to clubs in the city where they were displayed in a very conspicuous manner during these scenes or private parties that would go on, weekend parties that would go on, they were indeed displayed as my "possession", if you will.

JG-L: Was/is she excited/proud to be your possession? Reluctant to be seen in public wearing your signs of ownership?

PD:  These young women were in the twenties and were very excited about what was happening. What they volunteered for. They were bemused by the fact that they had a collar on when they would go visit their families. The collar was in fact designed in such a way that it wasn't easy to remove. They fully accepted the situation and they were very entertained by it under all circumstances.

JG-L:  How far would/did you take her along the path to total ownership? What would/did that involve (piercing's, full restraints, deeper control of all aspects of her life, etc.)?

PD:  I asked everything of them in relation to the InSex situation, for example, other people playing with them. I would propose that and they would willingly volunteer. Again, always with an attempts to try to do it on camera, but actually sometimes with the private play that was not the case and I would ask or demonstrate their obedience by having another male play with them, fondle them, etc.

JG-L:  What was the first piece of really interesting bondage gear you ever made and where did you make it?

PD:  I made some leather restraints back when I was in college. I wanted to master the use of leather and I bought a sewing machine and modified it so it could actually pierce through the leather which I operated by hand because the motor wasn't strong enough and I built a set of lined leather cuffs with all the metal hardware, fasteners attached to them. This was done in Buffalo, NY.

JG-L:  What are your views about employing pleasure at the same time you’re doing dastardly deeds to the ladies. Can you give us an explanation?

PD:  Well, I sort of developed that style of pleasuring the girl early on back when girls were modeling for me during my college days. I noticed that the girls would be extremely wet or extremely aroused by the bondage and would show obvious signs of the arousal and it occurred to me to try to masturbate them at the time. I came up with a device, probably the first Eroscillator every invented. It was a sunbeam electric toothbrush that I created in a hot-glue appendage on the end of it in replace of a toothbrush and I applied that to one of the models and their excitement and their ultimate orgasm was very encouraging to me because I realized that I could create an atmosphere or an environment for the girl that was in bondage that was also extremely sexual as well and I think that was a premise of InSex as well, from the very beginning, a unique premise, I might add, where a lot of the porn that was coming out the US at the time was about girls being kidnapped or subjugated against their will perhaps. InSex took a totally different approach, recognizing that girls could be excited by bondage and culminating in their attempts to have real orgasms. I really believe that InSex was one of the firsts to actually do this and it created quite a dramatic shift in the way bondage porn sites are produced nowadays. Where the emphasis is on the sexuality of the practice.

JG-L:  Most if not all of your models were brought to orgasm at some point in the proceedings. Was this planned or hoped for, or just an added benefit, if it happened?

PD:  As I stated previously, it was anticipated and hoped for. It presented bondage as a form of foreplay and a form of exotic lovemaking culminating in some kind of sexual gratification.

JG-L:  If you are intent on bringing the model pleasure during a session, how far do you take her? Is it just one orgasm, or do you force the situation until she cannot take any more?

PD:  Usually the model is in bondage, which can be quite severe which is contributing some sensations of pain to her. However, that pain is very easily masked with the sexual arousal in the specific arousal with orgasm. But after the orgasm there’s a sudden rush of pain or the memory of the pain comes into full force and that really mitigates against any further play. That's one approach where pain is very carefully measured during the arousal phase so that it actually acts as an inducement or an enhancement to the orgasm. Likewise, the orgasm or sexual arousal does create a kind of endorphin or a masking of the pain from the restraints or explicit S&M treatments. Explicit use of canes during orgasm. If i was going to torment her purely sexually with multiple orgasms, I would certainly make the bondage much softer and much easier.

JG-L:  There’s a very fine line between pain and pleasure as we both know. How many models did you find that could transform their physical tribulations into a trigger for orgasm?

PD:  I don't know if there's a fine line between pain and pleasure. If it's pain it's pain, and if it's pleasure it's pleasure. However, you can have pleasure and pain at the same time as long as the pain is not too strong or too overt. I also think there's a tremendous psychological dimension to it. The girls who are modeling are enjoying the spectacle that they find themselves in, they often are exhibitionists and this will excite them. Since it was easy for them to transform the pain or discomfort they were feeling once that they became obviously an sexual experience for them particularly with the applications of vibrators and such. It appears that there is a fine line between pain and pleasure, but I think that pain and pleasure can actually be merged if carefully applied to enhance the experience of orgasm.

JG-L:  At what point, generally, did that seem to happen?

PD:  I think it happens during a caning, for example where there's an arc of pain and pleasure or a combination to the pain. You begin a caning situation which is extremely painful at first, but after successive blows, the model or subject becomes more receptive to it. Actually even more perhaps ecstatic over the fact that she can actually accept the pain and control it. That her fear has been abated. That she's overcome fear. Fear is a big obstacle in everything we do and it's certainly true in S&M. By the slow and methodic application of the came a personal realizes that the pain is being transformed by their own participation in it, by their willingness to accept it. That moment where that person is in that mode now their becoming extremely susceptible to the aesthetics of sexual manipulation as well, so the whole thing creates an amazing crescendo going from pain to ultimate orgasm. So beginning with pain and culminating with orgasm is a great method.

JG-L:  OK, given those thoughts, what’s your philosophy on B&D/S&M and the emotional relationship between partners in a scene context?

PD:  I'm trying to think of Pat California who spoke a lot about BD/SM philosophy, I'm really not an expert in that type of analysis or I haven't given it a lot of thought it that context. I do believe that it’s a form of adult activity. I think it's a very adult form of activity and certainly not for everybody. I think its comparable to something that might be in sports where people exert themselves to an extreme manner for the thrill and pleasure of that type of concentration and focus. I think BD/SM is exactly the same. It's especially exquisite or ecstatic if you combine it with love or attraction, the emotion of attraction and ultimately sexuality, which is a more or less biological kind of phenomenon. But mixing all that together, exertion, devotion, concentration, commitment, testing, affection, it becomes an unbelievable sort of activity. An exquisite and ecstatic form of release, transference. It has all those wonderful qualities to it in the end no matter what people want you to believe.

JG-L:  It’s been my experience that there’s a hell of a lot more laughter in the areas that I play in than there is screaming and yelling. That certainly did not seem to be the case, most of the time, with InSex, for it was all pretty intimidating. I assume that aspect grew your customer base?

PD:  From the very get-go it seemed that InSex was a growing customer base and that was back when I was extremely naive with the entire thing and way before I became more informed by some of the BDSM experts that were in the NYC area. I think the thing that made InSex really popular was that it just genuinely honest, that it was an inquiry, not only with the type of characters that appeared on the site, but also in the general activity itself. It was just extremely honest and I really didn't pull punches with the girls either, I wasn't particularly beholden to them, so I expected a certain type of performance from them regardless. It just appeared to me to be a very genuine sort of inquiry, an artistic endeavour on my part. There's no mistaking that the money corrupted it and corrupted me at different times. Sometimes I could see the worry was oppressive. Worrying and knowing that those bastards in Washington were going to try to interfere with it. So it was intimidating, and intimidating to me as well, in other words, what have we wrought?

JG-L:  The very intensity of B&D/S&M scenes appears to touch on something primeval in the human mind, for both the male and the female. You obviously tapped into that aspect of our supposedly civilized, but thinly-veneered human nature. Any comments on that view?

PD:  I actually found the B&D/S&M scene to be extremely civilized. Much more so than what I generally see in society or the way people treat each other in society or throughout the world, actually. To me BD/SM is an Oasis. I can remember going to some 3-day weekend gatherings in where the love and feeling of warmth, love and tolerance was palatable and almost floating through the space, everyone had a kind a glow of joy and love, really. I do think that was primeval, absolutely. The primeval, innate ability of people to be caring that is certainly primeval. And people seem to go to great lengths to try to overcome that and try to be absolutely dastardly in the behaviour. Horrendous.

JG-L:  Do you have any observations on the reasons why people have an interest in really serious and strenuous situations, such as the ones you used on the InSex Site, and now in the new ones? Is it a part of the primal, male human condition?

PD:  I don't think it's exclusively male or gender-specific. I find women extremely motivated and willing to participate fully in these activities. Certainly this was true on the InSex sites. I wont mention any names, but I can tell you that some of those models, I would lay down and die for because they were completely inspiring in the way they participated in it and understood the goals. Ultimately, a lot of those scenes were not rehearsed but yet the models were willing to push themselves and thankfully to the wonderful training I received from the community, I was willing to push them right to a certain point and that was all very good, male and female together There was definitely a downside to it, a lot of the girls were just there for the business. Girls had come and worked for me and gone away and obviously, I'd been slandered and the sight had been slandered and they would come back with an attitude that was probably dangerous that I could sense and I would dismiss them. There was a lot of undercurrents that were the dregs of humanity and most common. Competition, envy, jealousy, despondency, desperation, anger, cunning. The full miasma of human action, but when the shoots were going on, that’s when things were kind of beautiful in a way. Everyone for that moment, put aside the common aspects and really strove to succeed and accomplish or take on the challenge.

JG-L:  Is it just the male that has the interest, or did you find a lot of women with that same mind-set also?

PD:   I did find women with the same mind set also. There are obviously differences, but I think in particular, women enjoy being a spectacle or exhibitionist and wanting to show of their charms and their abilities as women, as desirable and as sexual people and the BD/SM context really allows them to do that in a rather spectacular way, so I think in one way they would be responsive to it for that purpose. But in addition to that there’s also women who nurture fantasies from an early age as victims, as being subjugated to rape or abductions, being affected or feeling aroused by such an idea. Which was certainly just a fantasy for them, but then when they saw InSex they realized that they could probably live out these fantasies in a safe and sane manner and so they would come with that express purpose. And that was extremely interesting and exciting to be able to share this fantasy with women in such a genuine manner.

JG-L:  We’ve all heard the expression ‘Deadlier than the Male’. Do you feel that women can be more sexually cruel than men? If so, or not, any idea why?

PD:  I absolutely do believe that they can be much deadlier than the male. I found women to be particularly sadistic. That was just a frightening realization for me because I was on the receiving end of some of their attentions and it was outrageously cruel. I don't have anything else to say. Perhaps they may be getting even because men are obscene, ridiculous with cruelty and violence towards women. Maybe there's some kind of compensation there. I can not speculate why, but it has certainly been my observation.

JG-L:  It’s my view, and it’s most likely a wrong one, but I think, as do many men, that we males got the short end of the stick in a sexual sense. Did you use that as one of InSex’s drawing points, by ensuring that your female models generally got a searing experience?

PD:  I really don't understand the question perhaps, and if it does try to differentiate men and women which I suspect it is, I just don't subscribe to it. The longer I've been in this business, the less there appears to be a difference between men and women in terms of sexuality, proclivities or interests. I just can't draw any real distinctions here. I would suggest we take a look at the InSexM site which was produced by SirC, a dominant female on InSex. She did some amazing things with those men and I'm really flabbergasted with her talent and ingenuity. As a submissive I am still in love with her (probably a "Stockholm Syndrome"). I just don't see the difference.

JG-L:  Do you use extreme e-stim very often, either in photo-shoots or other occasions?

PD:  I don't think I use "extreme" e-stim. I certainly would use electricity any chance I had because I recognize what a feeling of terror it would engender -- maybe arising from the awe and fear of thunderstorms. It naturally instilled a feeling of dread. With it a non-actors becomes great actors -- epitomizing the first tenet of acting (being yourself in extraordinary circumstances). I was very grateful if the model (novice actor) would let me use it because its very safe and causes no ill effects, really. Its more of a mind thing. However, hi-levels of e-stim could be very physically wrenching, I'm sure. My method would be to set the volume or level of electrical stimulation to where the actor notices it and then for the sake of the shoot I would crank it up just a few percentage points more to go slightly beyond what their expectations were and that would seem to be enough to invoke the kinds of responses we wanted and then on top of that I would certainly perform some kind of a mind fuck in a theatrical, expressive manner with words and gestures and that’s all I really needed to do.

JG-L:  That particular experience can be quite unbelievable in its intensity. How far would you/did you take a model when she was hooked up in an e-stim situation?

PD:  The control that e-stim allows is ideal for provoking dramatic responses for the sake of the theatre. Everyone knows there is a safe word, but character emerges and If they seemed to be more resistant or defiant I would turn it up until I got the response I wanted -- stark screaming and possibly contractions, muscle contractions, contractions in the genitals but again she could safe word at any moment. I never went beyond what I would consider consensual with them. Even though they were game and willing to challenge themselves with some kind of torment, I was never gratuitous with the application of electricity and again, I think the mind fuck had more to do with it than anything and I became very good at pursuing that with them simply because I didn't want to really hurt them. I can remember one particular live feed where the girl was stimulated with electricity. Her character was one of defiance. A dildo with electrical contacts happened to cause a contraction in her right leg. The next day that leg was actually sore, fatigued as if it had tremendous or strenuous exercise applied to it. Here was a woman tolerating that tremendous shock in her genitals, for the sake of being in character. A character she naturally gravitated towards -- a SirC in another life. She topped me a couple of times off camera. This was an example of where I couldn't really mind fuck her at all, no matter what level the voltage was at, she was able to tolerate it. So the whole thing is completely subjective and depends on the individual, what the level is and what the intensity should be. But again, always within the realm of permission. One must be sensitive to the person they are performing with.

JG-L:  Did you continue even though she may have been screaming her head off? If so, why?

PD:  Because she let me. We had a safe word. I don't know, the act of screaming, the act of being frightened can be a turn-on. If you look at haunted houses, amusement park rides, they play upon that idea. It's not an unusual kind of response for a human to be thrilled and chilled by the trauma of fright and shock in a safe or ritualistic context.

JG-L:  Given that the model had consented to the session, how far would you take her along the path to her submission?

PD:  As far as she would be able to go. I would discern that through physiological symptoms such as sweating or a particular expression of pain that no longer had a theatrical quality to it. Also between takes I would make eye contact with her to see if she was in the realm of permission i.e., are you okay, I would ask them to wink to me or something. So I always maintained a very caring connection with them and would insist on that even though that would often spoil their own experience of being the victim or being in that situation, but I insisted on it. This is not to say that a woman who was scorned or rejected for a shoot sometime later or had been poisoned by some kind of slander after working at other sites would not take exception to my treatment and would kind of put aside or forget what kind of care there really was in that and chose to perhaps slander me later for their own purposes or benefit. I can honestly say that there were many people around that I would always have with me when I was shooting. I never shot by myself. If you talk to anyone that was on the set with me and there was always a very comprehensive and professional kind of awareness for the permission for the girls participation, or sensitive to that.

JG-L:  You’ve launched another set of web sites. Why are you putting them up? Surely it’s not just the money?

PD:  It certainly isn't for the money. What it is for, is perhaps to try to master creative forms from a different point of view. InSex was really a quirky, personal web site built around the personality of a particular individual. A freak site, an artist site, and that was its weakness and its strength. I think my tendency right now or my interest is to really master a business which is really being able to deploy people and use them to their best ability and retain them and focus their energy for the common goal of a successful business. InSex never did any of those things. It was always about enabling me as the artist to perform to his best and everyone was directed towards that goal. I think a successful business is really much more cunning and conniving than that, more clever, and I think that being successful under those terms is appealing to me. You could even watch sites that have adopted many of InSex's techniques but in a more clever, sophisticated manner, succeeding very well. I think that one of the business ideas that I'm pursuing was to simply copy those sites, the way they did InSex but copy their business method to see what the merits are for that type of business approach. We all know the story - you have a creative, artistic effort on the part of the individual losing to a more cunning business model. Classic economic history in the united states is replete with examples of that. It might be nice to understand the full spectrum of business strategies, master that.

JG-L:  What’s the difference, really, between what you’re doing now and what you were doing at InSex?

PD:  The difference is dramatic. My goal is to allow other people do the handling and to simply mimic what other sites are doing that are seemingly successful. That seems to be an important business idea. For example, you take the creativity of another enterprise where a lot of resources were devoted to R&D and simply appropriate that without the expense of development. Again, the two sites are really basically just cynical sorts of deployments to try to master a business strategy. It's not even for me, really. I'm hoping that the people that are working here will be able to take it in their own direction and add to it. It also becomes a proving ground, testing ground or training ground for young people to want to get into the business. Obviously that’s a skill that I have utilized in the past, training people to become web masters and pursue their own success as web masters.

JG-L:  This being the case, what’s happened to all of the material you created while InSex was in operation?

PD:  The content that was in InSex is now owned by a Dutch gentleman who's operating a site without a merchant account, collecting money through the mail which is an amazing tribute to that site, considering that it’s a viable business for him without it being able to require a merchant account he's able to still operate that business and sell that material as history, as an archive. The site is called INSEX ARCHIVES.

JG-L:  Are you still on the lookout for other artists (and you most assuredly are an artist) who can inspire you?

PD:  There are artists to this day, illustrators that I respond to or subscribe to. BD/SM art, I think it's called, Dual fantasy are of particular interest to me and I subscribe to those sites, but yes, I'm always looking to be inspired.

JG-L:  Which equipment and/or situations did the models truly hate?

PD:  I think they hated the cattle prod most of all. It's something simple and something completely devious and horrific at the same time. Maybe because of some kind of empathy with the other poor creatures of the planet, that was truly a devious device.

JG-L:  Which situations appealed the most to you? Why?

PD:  Live feeds appealed the most to me the most because they were genuine, honest and I had to be performing flawlessly because it was real time, hence it was the consummate challenge to me on many fronts not the least of which was the care and welfare of the model and that challenge was the epitome of a reward and goal.

JG-L:  I like suspension scenes, as is certainly obvious from my own site. I saw one sequence where you had a lady suspended in a web of chains, in the back of a cube van, then she was driven out to the country still suspended, supposedly scared brainless and suffering all the way. A very hot scene for me and many others. Did you do a lot of those?

PD:  No, I did not. That’s the simple answer to that question, but maybe it implies something that’s worthy of a better response. I personally don't like suspension scenes and I think they're dangerous and difficult to do safely. The suspension scene that you're describing is really a tribute to the woman who did it, we called her Toughgirl and it was inspired by her and I would only involve myself in spectacles like that when I had a model who was truly worthy of the attention and effort and was willing to accept the risks and difficulty of it.

JG-L:  As a designer and creator myself, and I’ve had it happen ... have you had any truly spectacular failures? What was the most humorous or wacky experience you’ve had with gear and models? Was the model/victim amused as well, after all was said and done?

PD:  Well for me, a catastrophic or spectacular failure would be injury to the model and even though there may have been speculation on how the models were harmed or neglected by me, all of that was basically slander. I took great care to protect the models. I describe to incidence for the sake of the story. Star, a great model who still works for us was put into a special frame and she had to go to the bathroom and that created an urgency or haste on my part to get her up and suspended so we could shoot the piss. I completely neglected certain parts of the tie that resulted in too much pressure being applied to her upper arms, which resulted in bruising of the nerves to one of her wrists, This prevented her from actually moving her thumb for a couple of weeks. In other words, I injured this girl long after she had left the site and I felt horrible and stupid about it because it was caused by haste and lack oversight on my part. I just completely lost it really. It gave me great pause as to what was going on at that time during the business and it was something I'll never forget. Another incident was with a spectacular model named Angelica who was fastened to the bars of a cage by her nose with a nose ring and I suddenly shocked her with a cattle prod inadvertently and she lunged back, cutting the tissue. Another spectacular failure and foolish action oh my part. Those are the two that I think were genuine. There may have been others incidences but I think they basically were contrivances to slander or extortion scenes, but those are the genuine ones I'm aware of. Amusing situations? I think some of the funny ones, which I don't remember exactly where I would end up being hurt somehow by my own actions, maybe dropping a manacle on my toe or something like that would engender a lot of comedy.

JG-L:  PD, I know you’ve got a lot of gear, but what piece(s) do you not have, and would like to?

PD:  At this stage of the game, I'm not even sure what those pieces would be because I've made/acquired or constructed all of the more obvious ones. I guess there's a few but they're definitely hatched in my brain or constructed in my own imagination. There's a couple of medieval devices that I would like to play around with more, and I’m working on those devices. Ideas such as a metal container that a person is put in so that a fire could be built under it. That they would be cooked in, like some kind of oven in the form of an animal like a cow. That's the most extreme example of a scene. There are others too, but I'd rather keep them close to the cuff for now, because I'd rather surprise people with them.

JG-L:  Do you have any words of wisdom for people who are interested in truly strong and serious bondage? What advice can you give those who want to try your bondage ideas?

PD:  I think one of the great ironies and beauties of BD/SM is that even though it portrays an extremely diabolical and horrific kind of human behaviour which of course government and criminals fully indulge in, when its among consenting people, that type of shock and horror actually does imply a tremendous of care and concern as a kind of almost ironic contrast. And the implicit advice I would give anyone is to be absolutely caring for the individual that is in your charge. Treat them as if they were a baby and that's my best advice - to care for them as if they were children or little babies.

JG-L:  PD, I recognize you as strictly ‘top’, whereas I’m a switch (but certainly not a bottom) and enjoy both sides of the coin. Do you think players should get a personal knowledge of both roles, or just understand that empathy is probably the most important word and ingredient in any scene and role?

PD:  Certainly empathy is extremely important and I would hope that anyone, even a pure sadist who's never been on the bottom would be able to muster that human quality for the sake of the people their responsible for. But I can't emphasize how invaluable the experience that I had with tops that I subbed to. I'm so extremely grateful for their willingness to do it. Again, I can mention Sir Barry, Sir C, Sir Robert who were all wonderful tops and sadists who handled me and taught me a great deal. I don't think I could possibly even be a top. I could never assume that kind of a role particularly in an S&M context without first experiencing it for myself. It just doesn't make any sense to me, but this does not impugn all the tops who have never been a sub or choose to be. For example Sir C never subbed as far as I know, but I always felt very safe and comfortable with her even though she was absolutely horrific and sadistic in her treatment, but also very informed and very careful. My experiences with tops have always been what I hope everyone’s would be, always nurturing and caring and also very informative.

JG-L:  Do you think women enjoy B&D and S&M, particularly your style, as much as men do watching them in it? Any ideas as to why or why not?

PD:  As long as we don't take about the quantity of women, I think that they do indeed enjoy B&D/S&M and also particularly, my style. I've had many offers and proposals from women to participate or to join me in such a thing privately even though I've never really taken anyone up on a private proposal because my turn on was to do it in public, so private play for me was not that particularly interesting. However the girl that I'm with now, I obviously share a very intimate relationship together, we both enjoy it, and I play privately with her.

JG-L:  OK, thanks very much for the interview!   We all wish you the very best and continued success!