Sub vs. Stock?

[orchidsoul]

Firstly, pardon me if this question is posed in the incorrect category and also if I missed a previous thread asking this same question. I have found other threads that touch upon, but not specifically this question.

I absolutely do not intend this as braisenly or presumptious as it may sound... I just don't know how else to ask this question.

When I am using these terms of "programming", they are used under the context of subconsciously, no mal intent, etc. And the submissive is a submissive, never coersion, non-consent, etc.

My question is where is the fine line drawn between an individual being a submissive and potentially being conditioned? I'm just wondering how one keeps their feelings and emotions separated, while being submissive, from being trained to serve, behave, and oblige. Classic conditioning depicts to us the outcome of repeated behavioral practices. Is that precisely the emotional balancing act of it all? How does one prevent themselves from subconsciously being "turned"? Has anyone ever felt that any of this happened to them in a relationship? How does one prevent the activities from crossing that line?

Again, I apologize for the terminology of this question, but I am trying to understand certain aspects as I am trying to figure out what happened to my mind a little while back. And by all means, they are mostly stream of consciousness questions, so no obligation to answer them all! Just trying to gain an understanding.

It would be great to hear opinions from both dom and sub sides.
Thank you in advance for any and all opinions.

~orchid

[Barton]

I believe that since a sub is willingly giving control to the dom the "Stoclholm" syndrom would not apply. There is a huge difference between starting out as a willing participant and being put in a situation where you have no choice at all.

In BDSM the sub should be a willing participant, getting pleasure by surrendering control. The opposite, whether kidnaping or abuse, presents nothing but forced control inposed by another. A totally different matter entirely.

[GaryWilcox]

I believe that since a sub is willingly giving control to the dom the "Stoclholm" syndrom would not apply. There is a huge difference between starting out as a willing participant and being put in a situation where you have no choice at all.

Exactly. The sub enters the relationship wanting to have someone Dom him/her in D/s. Stockholm is more about the trust you are forced to place in someone who controls your fate (not by choice, by force).

[orchidsoul]

I believe that since a sub is willingly giving control to the dom the "Stoclholm" syndrom would not apply. There is a huge difference between starting out as a willing participant and being put in a situation where you have no choice at all.

In BDSM the sub should be a willing participant, getting pleasure by surrendering control. The opposite, whether kidnaping or abuse, presents nothing but forced control inposed by another. A totally different matter entirely.

I totally agree, I just don't know what to call what I am referring to. Maybe just overall conditioning is what I am wondering about? That was why I expressed at the beginning about a non-coersed submissive. A submissive who enjoys giving up control. Maybe it's just having a totally strong mental self, being able to give up control, yet having complete control over your mind? It seems like such a fine line that could inadvertently become crossed without anyone intentionally trying. Can what starts out as consentual go too far without anyone realizing it until it's too late?

But it touches on many things which leads me to believe consent cannot be isolated from honesty and integrity. I believe our actions based upon our desires set a pattern of behaviour that can prove difficult to break. Therefore it is incumbent upon us, whether a dom or a sub, to be completely honest with our partners about our motives behind our actions and not to mislead eachother for some short term gratification or because it is easier not to say something.

This is very helpful. Thank you PE. Is this an aspect (preventing any type of inadvertent conditioning) of BDSM that always needs to be kept at the conscious forefront of everyones, whether dom or sub, mind?

Sorry for all the questions and misuse of words... again, I just don't know how to fully convey what I am asking. Hope this helped explain a little further.

~orchid

[ProjectEuropa]

This is very helpful. Thank you PE. Is this an aspect (preventing any type of inadvertent conditioning) of BDSM that always needs to be kept at the conscious forefront of everyones, whether dom or sub, mind?

Sorry for all the questions and misuse of words... again, I just don't know how to fully convey what I am asking. Hope this helped explain a little further.

~orchid

Though I know we are not discussing crimes here, we are discussing human nature which is very complex. When I was worked in the Probation Service I had access to case histories on all sorts of crimes, many around consent but also on a much broader field. Its a privelege to see behind the headlines of a crime and get some perspective on people's motivations. I suspect we are discussing consent here. Quite often motivations for commiting crimes around consent are not conscious, patterns of behaviour have usually been established well before any crime has been commited. When the behavoural patterns are forming it would be curlish to say one of the party is right or other wrong, though by the time a case gets to court it is usually one party fighting to be proved not guilty and it's not necessarily the man. Often behavoural patterns are not prevented from starting, out of well meaning intentions, such as not wanting to hurt the other person's feeling or finding difficulty in being honest or feeling an inability to put into words one's concerns. By the time the behavoural pattern has formed it is difficult for both parties to stand outside themselves and take an objective view of their relationship. Habits have formed, one of the party might be giving the other the benefit of the doubt to a particular type of behaviour and the other assuming this is consent. Once the party that has been giving the benefit of the doubt decides s/he doesn't want to deal with such behaviour, the other party might not even hear the other party protests because s/he has not changed his/her behaviour. This is why so many people end up in custody bewildered as to how they got there. I'm not just talking about uneducated and unsophisticated people. It's quite surprising how many highly intelligent people do not recognize their behaviour until it is too late. Habits were formed and people become fixated. One thing for sure is that when you look back over a case history you see behaviour was established very early in the run up to an event. Most could have been predicted if a third party had access to the relevant information. It's pointless saying there was no consent after the event, it helps no one.

It's a little like getting into a car with a friend that has been drinking, you've done it many times before and he drives OK, you just try to behave towards him in a way to keep him driving safelty but on one occasion the he has edged up to 100 mph it is too late to say stop, the mere action of him standing on the brakes will cause an accident. Far better not to humour him in the first place and refuse to get into the car or catch a taxi instead. It's irrelevent that you know him well and that he doesn't mean you any harm, the pattern has been established. You can substitute the male driver for a female driver. Therefore being honest, even if hurting someone's feelings is paramount. It stops behavoural patterns forming.

[ProjectEuropa]

It would be great to hear opinions from both dom and sub sides.
Thank you in advance for any and all opinions.

~orchid

This is a huge question and one could write a thesis set around this question. But it touches on many things which leads me to believe consent cannot be isolated from honesty and integrity. I believe our actions based upon our desires set a pattern of behaviour that can prove difficult to break. Therefore it is incumbent upon us, whether a dom or a sub, to be completely honest with our partners about our motives behind our actions and not to mislead eachother for some short term gratification or because it is easier not to say something.

For me BDSM is a way to heightened sensibility and erotic experience. As one pushes closer to the edge it is essential that both participants share all the information, be it doubts or sensing one's feelings are changing. It's better to know where the compass is pointing and to avoid a crash, rather than crashing because eachother had different expectations.

[slavelucy]

i've been meaning to reply to this thread for a couple of days now, i think you raise a REALLY good point, orchidsoul. There's two issues here, as i see it...firstly...

My question is where is the fine line drawn between an individual being a submissive and potentially being conditioned?

To be completely honest (and perhaps slightly 'down' on DS), i think that line is finer than we'd like to admit, it's all well and good us nattering about the theory of BDSM, but the fact remains that one person DOES largely submit to the wishes of another, and in doing so, becomes increasingly molded in someone elses image. i think you put it really well when you refer to it as being 'turned'. However, people are, of course, frequently molded even in vanilla relationsips, sometimes rather manipulatively, whereas i think a (good) dominant would only seek to change someone insofar as it served a purpose for the sub as well as themselves..whereas when it happens by 'acciden't, it's much more haphazard (and worrying). i also think it REALLY helps if the dominant encourages an atmosphere wherein a sub is free to question why he/she would like him/her to change any part of themselves or their every day behaviour...this encourages the submissive to reflect on their OWN life and their OWN behaviour, which is how it should be.

So, you say:

Has anyone ever felt that any of this happened to them in a relationship? How does one prevent the activities from crossing that line?

Has anyone ever felt this happening? Yes, i have, which is what struck me when i first read this thread. How does one prevent the activities from crossing that line? By trusting that you have a dominant who won't take advantage of a position of power and by being encouraged to understand and reflect on why certain things/changes are asked of you.

When i did my dissertation, i studied indoctrination in some detail, to become brainwashed or conditioned requires a complete LACK of thought on the part of the person who suffers it....which should be the opposite to what happens with regards to any serious changes encouraged in a person in the course of submission.


Anyway, to move on to the second point, add to that fine line the fact that humans are not machines, they are emotional beings, and it's a VERY tricky equation.

Indeed, as you put it:

I'm just wondering how one keeps their feelings and emotions separated, while being submissive, from being trained to serve, behave, and oblige.

Frankly, i don't think this IS possible. Much as i'm sure many of those who adhere to the classical school of BDSM would disagree, i seriously question the possibility of developing no emotional attachment. i am not for one minute suggesting this necessarily goes as far as love, but i find it something of an anomaly to say that a sub should essentially care less about doing things carefully and with consideration for someone he/she has little regard for. To that, one could say 'well he/she could respect him, in the way one respects a teacher', which is absolutely true..but i think the often personal nature of DS training dictates that it's entirely possible to develop feelings that one would likely not develop for a tutor teaching you maths, so, yes, i think it's an issue that bears a considerable amount of watching.

Again, I apologize for the terminology of this question, but I am trying to understand certain aspects as I am trying to figure out what happened to my mind a little while back.

No way should you apologise, it's a great thread! And, if you want to talk about it in any more personal detail (from either your or my perspective), feel free to PM me.

sl

[Lord Douche]

Thread moved to Knowledge Base

LD

[orchidsoul]

ProjectEuropa-
You are absolutely correct that this is about human nature. And it is about behavioral patterns forming. Very enlightening example you gave. Thank you as it only helps me to understand even more.

Slavelucy-
Thank you so much for your insight.

I think that line is finer than we'd like to admit, it's all well and good us nattering about the theory of BDSM, but the fact remains that one person DOES largely submit to the wishes of another, and in doing so, becomes increasingly molded in someone elses image.

Exactly.

However, people are, of course, frequently molded even in vanilla relationsips, sometimes rather manipulatively, whereas i think a (good) dominant would only seek to change someone insofar as it served a purpose for the sub as well as themselves..whereas when it happens by 'acciden't, it's much more haphazard (and worrying).

Very true. In any relationship really (friendships, lovers, family, work) behavioral patterns become established. We tend to adapt towards a specific person and behave accordingly. Sometimes, it's even just based on developed patterns with those people. Which is why I also raised this question. Behavioral patterns develop in many relationships, but couldn't it be more harmful in a d/s relationship due to the innate nature of the relationship?

How does one prevent the activities from crossing that line? By trusting that you have a dominant who won't take advantage of a position of power and by being encouraged to understand and reflect on why certain things/changes are asked of you.

But how does even the dominant prevent themselves from inadvertantly crossing that line? Obviously in a healthy relationship as you describe above one does not expect any of this to happen, but could it regardless?

No way should you apologise, it's a great thread! And, if you want to talk about it in any more personal detail (from either your or my perspective), feel free to PM me.

sl

I'm glad you found the question/thread interesting. I'm suspect that it's possibly a scary question since I haven't heard from too many people and it was not intended to be scary or presumptious. IMHO, a D/s relationship is so unbelievably amazing because of the trust, intensity and personal nature. Which is why I was curious if this is more apt to occur, especially since behavior modification can be a part of this type of relationship.
Thank you for the offer. I will probably take you up on that Lucy!


Maybe what you guys are telling me is that, whether subconsciously or consciously, BDSM'ers tend to be more cognitive of preventing this from happening through open lines of communication?

And again... sorry for including so many questions! It's more my stream of consciousness "thinking out loud" to try and understand.



Hmm... I think PE is correct when he stated a thesis could be written on this topic!

Thank you both for your helpful input.

~orchidsoul

[slavelucy]

Hiya OS,

Behavioral patterns develop in many relationships, but couldn't it be more harmful in a d/s relationship due to the innate nature of the relationship?

No, i don't think so. The reason i don't think so is because i think to say that ANY change or learning is bad is like saying that teaching is bad, and to take that to the nth degree would be to say that no one should go to school or have any social eduction whatsoever for fear of indoctrination. Further, In a DS relationship, i think the very nature of it makes it LESS likely to be harmful, as the change is neither manipulative or subversive, quite the opposite in fact; a sub goes into a relationship hoping a dominant will help him/her grow and offer them guidance when necessary, but will ALWAYS encourage them to think for themselves...in a vanilla relationship, people often drift into it, believing they will remain themselves and come out of it as different people, not necessarily worst, but i'm of the view that knowledge and understanding of a situation always makes it less likely to have unwanted side effects.

But how does even the dominant prevent themselves from inadvertantly crossing that line? Obviously in a healthy relationship as you describe above one does not expect any of this to happen, but could it regardless?

But how does even the dominant prevent themselves from inadvertantly crossing that line? Fuck, but that's a good question! Hopefully via introspection and self-analysis, but, yes i think it could happen, unfortunately it remains one of the potenial pitfulls of DS.

IMHO, a D/s relationship is so unbelievably amazing because of the trust, intensity and personal nature. Which is why I was curious if this is more apt to occur, especially since behavior modification can be a part of this type of relationship.

i think it basically IS apt to occur, since it's almost part of the 'point' of the relationship, but that's not to presume that it is necessarily a pejorative, in fact i'd say the trust, intensity and personal nature to which you refer possibly go some way to ensuring it isn't negative, but positive and fulfilling. This goes back to the teaching analogy i used earlier, there's nothing to say that ALL change is a bad thing, certainly we don't consider it a bad thing when people grow and learn through education.

Maybe what you guys are telling me is that, whether subconsciously or consciously, BDSM'ers tend to be more cognitive of preventing this from happening through open lines of communication?

Possibly, yes, there is NO room for verbally softening or fudging a worry or concern or hoping a nagging doubt will just go away, in BDSM. The rot sets in from there, IMO.

sl

[orchidsoul]

Further, In a DS relationship, i think the very nature of it makes it LESS likely to be harmful, as the change is neither manipulative or subversive, quite the opposite in fact; a sub goes into a relationship hoping a dominant will help him/her grow and offer them guidance when necessary, but will ALWAYS encourage them to think for themselves...in a vanilla relationship, people often drift into it, believing they will remain themselves and come out of it as different people, not necessarily worst, but i'm of the view that knowledge and understanding of a situation always makes it less likely to have unwanted side effects.

That's a great answer Lucy. When I read this paragraph, it suddenly made all the sense in the world. And I think you are completely right about maybe more inadvertently occuring in a vanilla relationship since the partners are technically not intentionally molding their partners, but often it occurs. Again- people falling into behavioral patterns instinctively.
Thank you so much!

But how does even the dominant prevent themselves from inadvertantly crossing that line? Fuck, but that's a good question!

ROFLMAO!!!

Possibly, yes, there is NO room for verbally softening or fudging a worry or concern or hoping a nagging doubt will just go away, in BDSM. The rot sets in from there, IMO.

And this is why I am so attracted to D/s relationships. The level they delve to, the unbelievable level of communication and, more importantly, listening.
It, aside from all the sexual elements, is almost the greatest excercise a human being can go through to understand themselves and others.

...discussion (and acting on that discussion) is essential to ensure that the submissive is encouraged/led/taught to be changed in the 'right' way for that relationship.

Again, makes perfect sense. Every one is aware of what's occuring as opposed to our other "normal" relationships where, aside from people manipulating, it generally occurs subconsciously. It's also clear why Lucy and yourself are raging love and hormones together!


ProjectEuropa, Wontworry, and Barton all emphasized the need for communication and Lucy, you helped me understand how that communication manifests itself positively. Thank you all for helping me understand.

~orchidsoul

[Wontworry]

But how does even the dominant prevent themselves from inadvertantly crossing that line? Obviously in a healthy relationship as you describe above one does not expect any of this to happen, but could it regardless?

By having a relationship which includes a lot of discussion both in and out of a scene. This comes back to the relationship being 'healthy' but discussion (and acting on that discussion) is essential to ensure that the submissive is encouraged/led/taught to be changed in the 'right' way for that relationship.

If this doesn't happen then surely the submissive is trusting to luck.

[Barton]

Being able to talk is very important. Questions must be asked of all parties, and answers must be given for things to be safe and enjoyable.