Breaking a Dom woman to a Sub

[Hotch]

How bout this... A dominant male WILL have a submissive woman, period, end of story. If a "dominant" woman is into you, she'll submit. The question is, are you man enough for her? By asking such stupid questions I'm guessing...

(edit) Just an after thought... Ever see a biker chick? A bunch of 'em are probably mean enough to rip off your dick and shove it down your throat. Do you think they "dom" their old man?

 

[Netzach]

How bout this... A dominant male WILL have a submissive woman, period, end of story. If a "dominant" woman is into you, she'll submit. The question is, are you man enough for her? By asking such stupid questions I'm guessing...

(edit) Just an after thought... Ever see a biker chick? A bunch of 'em are probably mean enough to rip off your dick and shove it down your throat. Do you think the "dom" their old man?

I think definitions are funny. If I interact one way with 99.99999 percent of everyone I've met, I define myself along those lines, even if the exception is particularly meaningful to me. I think most women I've met in the SM world who are willing to submit to one person suddenly re-map their identity totally to that. I see it as being multifaceted or interesting, but the extension of myself as submissive at times to T doesn't extend to anyone else. So the point's sorta moot.

 

[Etoile]

I think definitions are funny. If I interact one way with 99.99999 percent of everyone I've met, I define myself along those lines, even if the exception is particularly meaningful to me. I think most women I've met in the SM world who are willing to submit to one person suddenly re-map their identity totally to that. I see it as being multifaceted or interesting, but the extension of myself as submissive at times to T doesn't extend to anyone else. So the point's sorta moot.

Totally beat me to it. There's no need to define whether the OP's new toy is a submissive, a "sex slave," a slave, etc. Just BE. Know who's in control, but just BE.

 

[darkknight0307]

I'd say unless the Domme in question wants to be a sub, then the only thing that's going to get broken is her foot, off in your ass. Just sayin'.

Agreed.

Personally, I don't think you can break a person to become something they don't want to be. They have to be submissive, or want to be submissive for them to truely be a sub. Submission is giving someone yourself, you can't take it away from someone when it's not being given freely.

 

[Primalex]

You cannot force someone to submit. Submission is from the heart, or not at all. You can make someone obey you, but it's not submission unless they want to do it.

What about the Stockholm syndrome? Is this submission or not?

 

[Etoile]

What about the Stockholm syndrome? Is this submission or not?

I'd call that a psychological disorder, not submission. Anything that involves involuntary captivity - which Stockholm syndrome does, at the outset - does not count under any sort of submission in my book.

 

[Primalex]

I'd call that a psychological disorder, not submission.

Of course there are people who could call BDSM a psychological disorder in the first place. Does it matter from where or when the psychological disorder appeared?

Anything that involves involuntary captivity - which Stockholm syndrome does, at the outset - does not count under any sort of submission in my book.

I bet a lot of submissives have had some involuntary activity in their life.

 

[Etoile]

Of course there are people who could call BDSM a psychological disorder in the first place. Does it matter from where or when the psychological disorder appeared?

They're apples and oranges, though. You asked if I felt Stockholm syndrome was submission, and my answer is no. It is obedience, it is sympathy and compassion, but it is not submission given freely and willingly. As for BDSM as a psychological disorder, it's an awfully big umbrella term. I'd say most psychologists would identify codependency, fetishism, etc. before saying "BDSM is a psychological disorder."

I bet a lot of submissives have had some involuntary activity in their life.

Involuntary captivity is different though. Stockholm syndrome arises from kidnappings, hostage situations, etc. For example, the Carol Smith case could have been seen by outsiders as a BDSM relationship; in reality it was a case of Stockholm syndrome because she was kidnapped at the beginning. Involuntary activities done to someone who willingly entered a D/s relationship are not at all the same thing as being captured and held against your will. Compare and contrast, if you will, Carol Smith and Delia Day - at least what we know of the latter's story. Delia Day entered the relationship willingly, married the guy, served him willingly, etc. She felt the need to break free in the end, but it was not Stockholm syndrome because she chose to be there. Carol Smith, on the other hand (I believe her real name was Colleen), was kidnapped and forced into slavery. She came to care for her kidnapper and developed Stockholm syndrome, hence the book title "Perfect Victim".


Disclaimer: I am not a psychologist.

 

[Primalex]

What if she just falls in love with her captor? Like in "A life less ordinary"? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119535/

Is captivity and true love mutually exclusive in your opinion?



(Adding a smiley to express that I'm not argueing about your valid opinion per se, I just think it's worth to think more about motivations in a human and from where they come from...is there "free will" in an emotion driven sentient machine?)

 

[Etoile]

What if she just falls in love with her captor? Like in "A life less ordinary"? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119535/

Is captivity and true love mutually exclusive in your opinion?



(Adding a smiley to express that I'm not argueing about your valid opinion per se, I just think it's worth to think more about motivations in a human and from where they come from...is there "free will" in an emotion driven sentient machine?)

I like engaging discussion.

I haven't seen A Life Less Ordinary I'm afraid. I hesitate to say whether the two are mutually exclusive because I don't want to make a blanket statement. I think they are highly unlikely to go together...not that they never could, but that it seems highly unlikely.

Of course, bringing Stockholm syndrome into it means we are discussing extreme situations to begin with. But in the type of relationships being discussed in the thread, I think what I said is true. You cannot force someone to submit, period...you can force them to obey, to profess their submission, all manner of things. But submission comes from the heart in BDSM relationships. Someone who is either vanilla or dominant just isn't going to give over like that.

Or perhaps, let me put it this way. If you could force someone to submit, I don't think it would be a submission worth getting. If someone isn't submitting because they want to then I wouldn't be interested in it. For me, the fun would come from knowing that they really DID want to do whatever dastardly thing I was suggesting, just to please me, because that was what they wanted. It wouldn't be about "I will force you to drink piss because I have broken you" but more about "You will willingly drink piss because that is what I want you to do."

So Stockholm syndrome, captivity, none of that sounds very satisfying to me. I'm sure there are people out there who don't give a flying fuck and would be happy to just have someone do their bidding, willingly or not, but I'm not one of them. Power is something to be taken; submission is something to be given.

 

[astralkiss]

a flying fuck

OMG. I NEED THAT.

Sir would probably get irritated by it though, I have a tendency
to be overzealous with new toys >_>

 

[Primalex]

Of course, bringing Stockholm syndrome into it means we are discussing extreme situations to begin with. But in the type of relationships being discussed in the thread, I think what I said is true. You cannot force someone to submit, period...you can force them to obey, to profess their submission, all manner of things. But submission comes from the heart in BDSM relationships.

Heart... pussy... brain... I don't know from where it comes from. I doubt it's the heart though, this doesn't correlate with business doms.

Someone who is either vanilla or dominant just isn't going to give over like that.

Don't nitpick. The very moment the vanilla does what the partner wants out of love/free will (over a period of time) she is a submissive, isn't she? I say "If it flies, then it's an aircraft" and you reply "A car will never be an aircraft." (now we just need someone to mention a DeLorean).

Or perhaps, let me put it this way. If you could force someone to submit, I don't think it would be a submission worth getting. If someone isn't submitting because they want to then I wouldn't be interested in it.

Now this is somehow funny. What about the traditional art of seducing a woman? You will reply now that the woman isn't forced, but where is the line between force and art? Violence? If I would make her drunk (very traditional, too), you would say it's force nevertheless. What if I would use artificial hormones? What if I would use a rose?

Okay, your next reply might be that she wanted to give in from the beginning. But is this really the case? She will suck my cock if I seduce her but will call the police if not, how can she then want to suck my cock from the beginning? Obviously my actions changed her state of mind. And then we are in the above paragraph again. If I flirt with a girl here and seduce her so that she falls in love with me, is this really less force if she has no other choice than to fall in love with me? Do you choose to like me or to not like me? No, you don't, how can this be free will then?

 

[Netzach]

Heart... pussy... brain... I don't know from where it comes from. I doubt it's the heart though, this doesn't correlate with business doms.

Business Doms? Please enlighten.

 

[Netzach]

The very moment the vanilla does what the partner wants out of love/free will (over a period of time) she is a submissive, isn't she?

By this definition every single person in a functional romantic relationship is a submissive. I'll bet even you've done something simply because you knew it would make your SO smile at some juncture.

 

[midwestyankee]

Sweet Jeebus on a Sybian....is it really so attractive to get to toy with a troll?

 

[DiscusDave]

Business Doms? Please enlighten.

i think what Primalex meant were those that were Domme's for pay.

The very cliched statement of "if you don't like your work it's a job, but if you love your work it's a career" Even a person who uses domination as a profession can still have a deep seated love or passion for domination as a concept or idea, and not just the idea of having to dominate a certain person. Since there are wide examples of stranger fantasies, I don't see why it couldn't pass over into the s/D or s&M realm. Being able to dominate a wide variety and sometimes large numbers of different people could be more exciting to someone. (that's just personal preference for that person though).

the thing about paying someone to submit to them is (if you think about it) possibly the ultimate form of submission. The person is literally giving money to submit to someone. The financial base of someone coming into play in these situations seems huge to me. But I digress...

I disagree with the statement that it "comes from the heart" however, my disagreement is based on the extent of submission. I agree with Primalex in that I beleive submission comes in many forms. Some more extensive than others. Small submissions (like I would do for past girlfriends) of changing my shirt because they thought it was not dressy enough for the place we were going, don't make me a "sub." However, in that instance I was submitting. This is also the case for role playing. There could be a submissive role to be filled in a particular play, but after it's over, is that person still a sub? or fill have that want for that submission?

But I don agree with Netzach and the many others who said it, that there can be and often is a deep seated tie between the sub and submission in general. I think the idea of "coming from the heart" can only really stand true for those who practice complete submission, or at least as some people put it "beg to submit."

But to give loneranger a little advice.... the reason this thread started (although i do like seeing how a discussion arose)... first, find out if these dominating women truly want to be submissive. If that's the case, have fun with it. IF they want to be submissive, they want to be submissive. The adherence to your ensuing standards might be difficult for someone who is usually a dominating person themselves, however with the proper punishment and/or reward system they will learn what it is you really want.

But a specific thing that might be fun for both is look at how these women were dominating in their lives. Could be their business drive; could be their control of their kids; could be that they are the ones picking the movies, restaurants, clubs that them and their friends go to... whatever, but then use these same things to dominate them. It will lead to a neat reversal. If they expect a kid to be home by a certain time... give them a bedtime. If they always choose what to do on a Friday night.... never give them the option of choosing or even suggesting an activity.

That's just a suggestion but you have a lot of leeway with this.

 

[Etoile]

I would appreciate it if my comments could be left in context; taking them out of context distorts their meaning and is not what I intended at all.