The appeal of punishment?

[ownedsubgal]

Something's starting to bother me here. What is it?

Oh yeah...

Hearing OSG banging on and on about how consensual her relationship is and always has been - when I vividly recall around 2-3 years ago being contacted by her via PM, and her playing the misunderstood martyr at me, very vociferously, just because I dared to suggest in a public thread that everything that happens to her in her relationship is consensual because she gave blanket consent when she became a slave.

She banged on about it so much that I ended up having to to end the PM conversation by asking her, really, why she was so exercised about MY opinions of her choices. If she wanted to see what happened in her daily life as non-consensual then she could go right ahead - but I also had a right to my own opinion.

Seems she's changed her tune. Yeah... um.... that's not scary, given the extreme nature of the situation she's in.

and it seems our ability to understand one another is no better now than it was back then. a quote, from that PM between us: "i do not think of my life with my Master as non-consensual, i was referring to specific acts only and the emotions behind them (an act may feel non-consensual), not the reality of my situation."

and that discussion stemmed from the "Consent Non-consent" thread, in which i said exactly the same thing. my relationship is consensual, i chose to become his slave. that particular thread discussed the interesting duality of consenting to a dynamic but wishing one could say no to specific acts within that dynamic. ataxia still very much feeling raped by her Daddy, for instance, although she fully consented to being his little girl.

i am not sure why that was such a difficult concept for you to grasp...your assertion seemed to be that no one can ever possibly feel raped, abused or mistreated when they had given their total consent. this does not make for a non-consenting relationship, but it does not mean those situations effect you mentally and emotionally any differently than they would a person who had never given themselves over. in fact in some ways it can be a bit worse as with someone trusted or loved there will often be feelings of resentment, betrayal, loss, etc.

please do not blame me for your lack of understanding.

 

[ownedsubgal]

Just another day, huh...

Well, that's a bit nauseating to think about. Nausea is not my favorite sensation, so-- god bless, or whatever.

yes, just another day, as in..***** happens, i submit to it. my point was that whether it's the rude lady at the store or the out of control jerk in the woods, my reaction is the same...submit.

to desertslave, no. not that it matters.

 

[Stella_Omega]

yes, just another day, as in..***** happens, i submit to it. my point was that whether it's the rude lady at the store or the out of control jerk in the woods, my reaction is the same...submit.

to desertslave, no. not that it matters.

Yes, your submission is about as extreme as you can get and still be alive.

For most of us, the wonder of BDSM is the struggle to balance our need to submit with our equal and equally imperative need to assert ourselves.


And achieve physical satisfaction in ways that normative society doesn't understand.

And back to OP's original question, I ascribed to my BDSM desires to "punishment" for about five minutes. I figured out real fast that punishment didn't fix my fuckups, it would take more work than that, "punishment" was a copout-- and besides, I didn't need to contaminate the things that give me pleasure in such incredibly physical ways, with emotive junk. It's hard enough for me to get out of my head.

 

[Cattypuss]

OSG, I still fail to see the validity (or even the reality) of the distinction you draw, but you have made it plain that that is my failing, not yours (not so submissive in saying THAT, were ya?!)

I guess my problem with your postings (in general, and over a long period of time - not just on certain threads), is that I gave you the benefit of the doubt and I wanted to believe what you were saying about your choices and feelings and motivations. I wanted to believe that you are by nature an extremely submissive person, through and through, and that that is behind your life choices and the way you feel and the things you post.

But time and again your postings indicate otherwise.

Time and again your postings indicate that in fact -

• you are not really all that submissive at heart - else why would you be so passive-aggressive, so vocal, and often so openly condescending towards other people?
• you chose your lifestyle - and you choose to post the things you do post on this forum - NOT because of innate submissiveness or in order to educate all of us poor ignorant people out here, but rather because -
• your Big Kick, the thing that you have "got off on" for a huge part of your life is in fact seeing yourself (and having others see you) as a victim and a martyr.

Romanticising victimhood and seeing oneself as a martyr are NOT the same as being submissive.

It's such a shame, because when I first became aware of you I was fascinated at the prospect of being able to have a window via ths forum into a truly, deeply submissive personality. But I feel let down - I feel that you are not at all what you like to portray yourself as.

I can imagine this post will not sit well with you. I've said my piece though and, as you will no doubt be quick to point out, it is MY fault I don't understand you and it is MY prejudices and MY projection that cause me to judge you thus (and yep, I am indeed judging you).

Fire away. You won't get another rise/response out of me.

 

[incubus'_sub]

hear, hear. well written and my sentiments exactly.

 

[ownedsubgal]

You won't get another rise/response out of me.

on this we are finally of like mind.

 

[eastern sun]

if you are talking about actual punishment, and not "funishment," where mutual pleasure/excitement is the basis of it all, then it is enjoyable for neither the receiver nor giver. for the Dominant it is a time of disappointment above all else. with many there is also frustration at lessons yet unlearned by the submissive, and yes sometimes even anger if in the infraction involved actual disobedience. it is not a fun, sexy, happy time for anyone.

but it is a mutual cleansing, a wiping the state clean and starting fresh kind of thing.

I haven't read the books, but this is my experience of punishment in the context of an M/s relationship. And it isn't always expressed through physical pain though it can be.

 

[eastern sun]

Punishment is very frequently a product of anger and disappointment. It is designed to change behavior. Sometimes when the person meting out that punishment is bigger or physically stronger than the person they are punishing, the punishment seems out of proportion to the transgression to any observer.

Setting aside the issues of parental and domestic abuse, (which clearly exist and which schoolteachers, psychologists, police officers, etc. where I live are mandated to act on when they observe certain behaviors/injuries), it is very difficult to determine from an outside perspective how a person receiving the punishment is experiencing it.

Personally, I have experienced deep release of emotional and physical tension as a result of physical punishment (which looked like he was going to kill me if you were observing it from the outside - but during which I could tell he was totally in control of himself and that I was not in real danger). How can I explain that?

I have had friends and family and neighbors express concern for my safety. Ultimately it's up to me to communicate not only my consent, but the ways in which the relationship is working for me. And, they have to be able to see that it is.

 

[ownedsubgal]

I haven't read the books, but this is my experience of punishment in the context of an M/s relationship. And it isn't always expressed through physical pain though it can be.

absolutely. the punishments i fear most are those of the non-physical variety. they always involve some form of deprivation...food, sleep, his company/attention. that last one is the worst, to be made to feel absolutely alone. and anyone on the outside looking in could clearly see that he is suffering as well at those times.

 

[Netzach]

Why are we so into negative and positive punishment as a community and hardly ever discuss positive reinforcement in training?

 

[Netzach]

I mean I know it's boring by comparison, but I've heard so many people say "it doesn't work on me" when it works on just about everybody, and generally better. In the instances when it doesn't THEN you bring out the bigger ammo.

 

[intothewoods]

I have had friends and family and neighbors express concern for my safety. Ultimately it's up to me to communicate not only my consent, but the ways in which the relationship is working for me. And, they have to be able to see that it is.

Makes sense to me, and I think it mirrors what JM posted earlier in the thread:

I don't define abuse by the absence of consent. Nor do I define it by the behavior itself, and certainly not by whatever labels a person affixes to their relationship.

I define abuse by the effect on the victim. Anyone who causes material and sustained physical or emotional harm to another human being is engaging in abusive, and therefore fundamentally unethical, behavior - even if the abused person consents to it.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Why are we so into negative and positive punishment as a community and hardly ever discuss positive reinforcement in training?

I prefer it SO MUCH. It works really well on me, I know for a fact. It's the positive reinforcement of a bottom smiling and thanking me through her tears that teaches me to be a better top.

A little kindness, and putting her hair in papers...

 

[njlauren]

obviously a key purpose in isolating another human being is to restrict or eliminate external influences. it is also a comparatively speedy and thorough method of conditioning a person...their behavior, way of thinking, emotional state of mind, etc. and yes that is very cult-like. but there is one significant difference between those who are indoctrinated by a cult and those who chose a slavery like myself...my eyes were wide open. i understood i was giving up life as i had known it and giving myself over completely to someone else. i didn't know all it would entail (not by a long shot), but i understood that there were no limits beyond those he placed on himself. see, there's that consent thing again.

The people in Jonestown in Guyana did exactly that, they placed total trust in Jim Jones and he used that power to have several hundred people kill themselves without force or anything else. They in effect consented to their own demise (and that of quite a few children). The people chose to join that cult, the same way you chose slavery, they weren't drugged into it, they left the US and went to Guyana with Jones, cut themselves off from friends and family, etc.....

And there is a fundamental problem with that style of TPE as there is with a cult, someone is granting absolute power to someone else and can only assume that their intention is good. You could have an ethical dominant who is a normal person, or you could have a psycho like Jeffrey Dalmer, and are you saying that someone is consenting to anything the dominant would do, even if it turns out he/she is mentally unhinged. A dominant who deliberately hurts their slave knowing they can, because the slave won't say no, doesn't deserve the honor of their slave's submission, to me they are a warped person inflicting real harm because that feeds some twisted need in themselves. I am not talking accidental harm, I am not talking inadvertently going to far, I am talking someone who in some way gets positive reinforcement for truly hurting someone else. There is something that any kind of relationship has, whether it is a TPE or a vanilla one, that is at the core of any relationship and so obvious people forget about it because it is assumed, and that is trust. A TPE dominant who goes out of their way to cause harm (I am not talking punishment, I am not talking accident), deliberate, is violating the basis of any relationship and that is trust.

I have known people in 'real' tpe's (a term I fucking hate, to say anything is real or not real when it comes to things like this), they were total control, I mean down to the most minute thing......but the dominants, who were friends of mine, had a kind of safety net in place, they asked trusted friends to be kind of observers because they were afraid that they would be tempted to abuse that power, or harm their sub maybe not knowing it, and I really respected that. Yes, the dominant was giving over some of their power, but they did so because their ethics and their knowledge of what power like that can do, how tempting it can be, means they wanted to protect both their slave and themselves. THey lived by much the same credo you do, but they had dominants who also understood what a precious thing that submission is, and also how easy it is as a dominant to do the wrong thing. If a slave is a piece of property, then it is the foolish owner who abuses it or doesn't take care of it, a car lacking oil dies, a house without care becomes a slum. Taking a sledgehammer to a piano in anger might make someone feel better, but that piano would never play the same way again, even if repaired.

 

[njlauren]

The only reason anyone gets concerned about your relationship is because you make sure to tell people all about how extreme and abusive it is. Yes, I understand that you have a point to make, but anyone can predict that broken bones and anal rape will arouse people's desire to protect the victim.

This desire is a good thing. It's the milk of human kindness.

Yep, it is why we survived as a species, and that altruism and empathy is hard coded in us as a species.

 

[njlauren]

No, it is not giving the killers a free off the hook...and I am talking about the situations referred to by others here which are not BDSM and seen as abusive, and free for them to intervene because they feel it is the right thing to do, and their right. Based on my professional knowledge of working in the field (as advocate, counsellor and court worker to liaison with police, victims, shelters and court systems), and the well researched and police backed knowledge that most women and children in or from abusive relationships are killed while or after escaping, not while in the relationship. I have worked with women who have had their faces rebuilt with titanium plates, lost their sight or hearing due to the abuse, and some who went to prison for striking back and killing the abuser...all still said they did what they had to do in staying until they felt (if at all) it was possible for them to survive leaving...it takes planning and a lot of luck.

What untrained but concerned citizens do not often realise is that while they may be concerned and want to help by trying to persuade or get the victim/s out, the women involved usually are in the best position (knowing the abuser, knowing the patterns, knowing the posibilities, knowing the likely outcome) to make this decision. Someone outside taking that responsibility on themselves without this knowledge, to step in, can result in death....that is sort of final and sad if a result of someone blindly doing what they feel is right, not actually what is. It is about what is in the best interests of the victim, not about what makes the would be rescuer feel good about themselves and their actions.

Yes, of course if you hear sounds which indicate someone is in danger by all means call the police...you should, but don't just decide your neighbour is obviously abused and so it is up to you to get her out or persuade her to get out. I don't know of any counselling or support service which actively makes that decision for an abused woman simply because they know the real risks involved and work within that framework to a safe outcome. Sadly for some women, staying is the safest thing they can do. The news reports back it up as well. Most deaths reported in such situations mention the victim was leaving, or the more usual, had left. Sometimes it can be months later, often the women have a restraining order...people feel that protects, but reality is it doesn't.

Sorry, rant over, but I feel strongly about this as I have been in the position to see the deadly outcomes and listen to those who thought they were doing the right thing try and make sense of why their act of 'kindness' ultimately killed the person they were 'helping'.

Catalina

You are assuming we are saying in the case of serious abuse that someone should just barge in and play hero, and no one is saying that. On the other hand, people shouldn't do nothing either, and sit back and say "well, you know, if I do anything , it is likely the abusive spouse will her her", that is ludicrous. People can help by calling the authorities, they can help by trying to find resources for battered women and convince her to call them to get help in getting out, to getting expert help. I wouldn't directly intervene because I know the consequences, unless I saw a women or kids being beaten, in which case said abusive spouse would face a really pissed off person or 2 or three (having strong friends is a plus) stopping them from further hurt until the cops could get there.

BTW, having worked with groups that help battered women and having raised money and gotten to the know the people running the show, plus having a therapist who donated a lot of time helping battered women, the argument that the women knows best often simply is not true. Long term sufferers of abuse often have horrible self image, the abusive spouse has them believing they deserve what happens, it is their fault, who else would want them, they are useless, etc, and that is very, very common. It is why there are laws on the books that if others witness abuse they don't need the spouse's testimony or to have her file a complaint, others can based on evidence (like an er injury that doesn't look like an accident), it is because often the spouse is either too afraid or actually believes that he/she is responsible for what happens. They often have lost hope in being able to do anything, the husband has in effect brainwashed them into thinking there is no hope or it is their fault.

 

[eastern sun]

Why are we so into negative and positive punishment as a community and hardly ever discuss positive reinforcement in training?

I think we do, Netzach, just not overtly. Because the sexual pleasure and emotional well-being, etc. that we talk about all the time is often the best positive reinforcement.

He's used sexual reward, coupled with very moderate pain (i.e. the kind I find pleasurable), to change deeply habituated behavior and it is highly effective.

Maybe all the talk of "punishment" that is pleasurable is actually positive reinforcement in disguise?

 

[eastern sun]

The people in Jonestown in Guyana did exactly that, they placed total trust in Jim Jones and he used that power to have several hundred people kill themselves without force or anything else. They in effect consented to their own demise (and that of quite a few children). The people chose to join that cult, the same way you chose slavery, they weren't drugged into it, they left the US and went to Guyana with Jones, cut themselves off from friends and family, etc.....

And there is a fundamental problem with that style of TPE as there is with a cult, someone is granting absolute power to someone else and can only assume that their intention is good. You could have an ethical dominant who is a normal person, or you could have a psycho like Jeffrey Dalmer, and are you saying that someone is consenting to anything the dominant would do, even if it turns out he/she is mentally unhinged. A dominant who deliberately hurts their slave knowing they can, because the slave won't say no, doesn't deserve the honor of their slave's submission, to me they are a warped person inflicting real harm because that feeds some twisted need in themselves. I am not talking accidental harm, I am not talking inadvertently going to far, I am talking someone who in some way gets positive reinforcement for truly hurting someone else. There is something that any kind of relationship has, whether it is a TPE or a vanilla one, that is at the core of any relationship and so obvious people forget about it because it is assumed, and that is trust. A TPE dominant who goes out of their way to cause harm (I am not talking punishment, I am not talking accident), deliberate, is violating the basis of any relationship and that is trust.

I have known people in 'real' tpe's (a term I fucking hate, to say anything is real or not real when it comes to things like this), they were total control, I mean down to the most minute thing......but the dominants, who were friends of mine, had a kind of safety net in place, they asked trusted friends to be kind of observers because they were afraid that they would be tempted to abuse that power, or harm their sub maybe not knowing it, and I really respected that. Yes, the dominant was giving over some of their power, but they did so because their ethics and their knowledge of what power like that can do, how tempting it can be, means they wanted to protect both their slave and themselves. THey lived by much the same credo you do, but they had dominants who also understood what a precious thing that submission is, and also how easy it is as a dominant to do the wrong thing. If a slave is a piece of property, then it is the foolish owner who abuses it or doesn't take care of it, a car lacking oil dies, a house without care becomes a slum. Taking a sledgehammer to a piano in anger might make someone feel better, but that piano would never play the same way again, even if repaired.

I have been drawn to cult-like organizations in the past. In fact, that's where I met my husband. . .

The measurement of one's psychic health has to be made on a relative scale. The question is ultimately "do you know what's good for you?"

None of us get out of here alive.

 

[intothewoods]

In fact, that's where I met my husband. . .

Wha--? Really? Wait, do you mean AA?

 

[eastern sun]

Wha--? Really? Wait, do you mean AA?

Nope. AA isn't really cult-like, no matter what they say.

 

[DeepGreenEyes]

Nope. AA isn't really cult-like, no matter what they say.

Hmm... Apple store?

 

[ownedsubgal]

Why are we so into negative and positive punishment as a community and hardly ever discuss positive reinforcement in training?

actually i do recall a thread delving into that sometime in the not-too-distant past, but you are right it doesn't get nearly the attention of punishment. i think it was you who mentioned the concept of random rewards...where out of the blue, not directly connected to any particular behavior or moment, a sub or slave gets some sort of "treat" from the Dominant. that type of positive reinforcement works on me...not as a motivator for good behavior, but just as a way to stay sane and mostly emotionally balanced. what absolutely does not work for me is the direct service/reward system. a pat on the head every time i do what those things which are my duty anyway, would feel very icky, forced and kind of condescending. and even for the tough stuff, a "good girl" every time would just make the sentiment lose all meaning.

but to wake up on a regular old morning and be told out of the blue, and for no particular reason, "get ready, we're going museum hopping in DC." knowing that's not exactly his number one pastime, but he is still eager to do it...yeah, that kind of stuff goes a long way in keeping the head up.

 

[BiBunny]

It's not just any old "positive reinforcement" that works best. People say that, but they leave out part of it. It's intermittent positive reinforcement that works best. The quick Google search I did pulled up a bunch of needlessly complicated shit about it, so I've got nothing to link to. But I did get my psych degree at a very behavior-analysis-oriented program, so we got that shit drilled in our heads constantly.

The rat in the Skinner box who's learned that pushing the lever brings food every time will soon stop pushing the lever if it stops getting the food. Continuous positive reinforcement creates behavior that's extinguished quickly. Positive reinforcement that's linked to a time-table or a certain number of times a behavior is performed creates behaviors that are a little harder to extinguish. But truly intermittent reinforcement that's tied to nothing in particular, that happens at random times creates behavioral responses that are very hard to extinguish. The rat will push the lever til he dies, in hopes that this time will be the time.

Of course, humans aren't rats. We aren't rewarded for one specific behavior. So if it's extrapolated to us, then intermittent positive reinforcement is a lot like what OSG and Netz talked about. The "behavior" being rewarded is technically "being a good boy/girl," so it's not totally random. (Nobody's going to stop and hand you a reward for being bad.) But it happens on a random schedule, so you can't predict it, which makes it even more effective at shaping the "good boy/girl" behaviors.

TL;DR Bunny hasn't forgotten everything she learned in college, and she doesn't get out nearly enough.

 

[Cattypuss]

But I did get my psych degree at a very behavior-analysis-oriented program, so we got that shit drilled in our heads constantly.

Loving the slight whiff of brain-washing as part of a psych degree

More seriously, I've seen what you describe (for humans) played out textbook-style by my own dog over several years now.

 

[Wileycharacter]

I remember hearing a story called baby elephant syndrome which relates to abuse: when baby elephants are in the circus they are shackles to a small post in which they cannot move, and they try and try but give up soon enough, as time goes on the elephant grows and is big enough to move the stump but doesn't try again because of all the failed attempts before even though they are free to go.
do that's one theory on punishment and how it is effective

I might not understand slavery as a whole, my d/s relationship had only just developed from play to fulltime as of recently so it was new, but I always assumed that if one party ( even the slave) was truly unhappy they could leave or object. Yes there are roles but we are all human and we all have some instinct of basic needs. And if the dominant truly loved Thier slave they would understand that if a sub had taken the risk of losing Thier role due to the issue at hand that they would make exceptions to some degree.

I assumed its still a relationship dynamic regardless of roles, perhaps I know nothing and am completely off point but isn't the goal of any relationship, Bdsm included that the combination of all involved needs are being met? Otherwise why would you persue it? Someone pointed out that she likes to feel like a victim or martyr- perhaps that's her need and in that case it is consensual for her, because deep down she likes to feel abused and victimized, those actions and lifestyle suit her wants and needs.

I'm just trying to offer an idea, I havent alot of experience in these things, my master was incredibly hard on me in terms of punishments but I always submitted because I wanted to. Not because I was too weak to say no, or because I believed I'd die if I didn't submit, but because I wanted to and some of the punishments have been violent and painful, some have been pretty extreme but the truth is I choose to submit because I like to suffer when I've messed up. If I wanted safety and freedom I know where the door is. Everyone does.
She's saying she consents, no one can say she doesn't but her.

Meh maybe I'm way off track, I'm just rambling now anyway... Carry on chaps.