Sub vs. Stock?

[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