Sub vs. Stock?

[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