RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive?

RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

Bobkgin -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 12:24:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: missturbation Why? I have to admit i tend to skip past his posts now unless it is his thread as he only responds to those who he can pick apart. Those who show a thinking of their own and a view which opposes his but could be right for that person he ignores. While I do not agree with your characterization, I do not see you answering every post here, or even in your own threads. Many people speak of what is right for them, and unless I have something to say about it, I say nothing at all. They are free to speak their mind as they wish. My apologies to you or anyone else who feels I'm neglecting them or their point of view, but there are only so many hours in a day and I do the best I can to spread myself around. I hope you will excuse me. I have a bread to bake, a nap to take, and the dogs want to chase the squirrels.

agirl -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 1:00:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin As I see it, a master who accepts responsibility for the well-being of his slave is accepting responsibility for the state of her self-esteem and confidence. I think it is well-known that fear can be and has been used to damage the self-esteem and confidence of individuals since humanity began. I think there is a sufficient number of cases of battered spouses that can testify to how effective this can be within intimate relationships. If punishment is to act as a deterrent to stop undesirable behaviour, as part of an aversion therapy, then the punishment must be something the punished wishes to avoid. The degree to which the punished wishes to avoid punishment is the degree to which she fears it: from very little to scared-as-hell. In my relationship punishment isn't a deterrent, it's a consequence. It's physical and severe. I can only recall being punished a handful of times in the 3 yrs that he's owned me. I wasn't punished because M was disappointed; it was for completely unacceptable, deliberate actions. It would be extremely difficult for me to disappoint him. I'm not punished for mistakes, either. We do have a penalty system, which is physical. We've used it to achieve all sorts of things that I want for myself. The penalty is agreed beforehand and I choose something that I REALLY do not want to happen. So basically, I use my own dislike, or fear if you like, of being beaten as a back-up for the times when my motivation goes awol. It's entirely for my benefit. This system suits our relationship and the people that we are. agirl

camille65 -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 1:03:59 PM)
Bob it is an ongoing issue (forgetting that medication) and a poor example. I have some serious memory issues and cognitive thinking problems due to both medical conditions and the very same medication that I forget lol. So that particular example was not a good one. I found your question vague and answered it best I could but unfortunately chose a difficult scenario for it.

Pyrrsefanie -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 1:50:42 PM)
Gah, I'm late to this party! Oh well... I brought cheesecake? :D Anyway, I actually prefer non-physical punishment to the "rawr I will beat you!" style of discipline, for multiple reasons: 1.) From my position as a submissive, I've got a really high tolerance for pain... most spankings/whippings/croppings will just turn me on and completely defeat the purpose anyway! In order to physically punish me I'm afraid it'd go way too far and into the realm of emergency room visits, which is just a no-go in my book. 2.) Anybody can smack another person around. But to make the "punishment fit the crime," so to speak, you've got to be pretty imaginitive! It takes more effort on the part of a Dom/me, in my opinion, to put together a completely non-physical punishment that will have an effect on their sub, and shows more involvement in the D/s aspect of the relationship. 3.) Put your junk in that bo-- oh, wait, nevermind. 4.) Again, from my point of view, making a sub stand in the corner or write sentences seems to show more guidance on the part of the Dom/me... the reasoning behind the punishment seems more like "to help you learn" rather than "BECAUSE I R BIG AND STRONG LIKE OGRE LOLOLOLOL." While it's still indisputably a punishment, it seems more like a guiding hand than simply showing off dominance. This isn't to say that people who punish their slaves physically are stupid. I know some of the silliness above might come across that way, but it's really more about the Dom/mes out there who think that hitting someone because they fucked up instantly equals dominance and that no psychological aspect is required. And keep in mind that I've never actually stepped out of the submissive role before, although I'm hoping to learn more about being dominant to appease my switchy li'l self. Again, this is just my point of view, my opinion, I am not claiming it to be law or for me to be supremely awesome and right, blah blah blah, don't sue me plz kthx bai.

dawntreader -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 2:12:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin Through the various punishment threads the theme seems to be: 1. sub/slave breaks a rule. 2. sub/slave needs physical punishment to learn not to break the rule. What this says to me is: 1. sub/slave is not devoted to obeying her d/m 2. sub/slave is too stupid to learn by any other means than brute force. Bottom line: to be a better d/m, and to get a more obedient sub/slave, frighten your sub/slave with punishment and the threat of punishment. Agree? Disagree? Why? Greetings Bob, i am actually going to have to agree with you on this topic. my personally philo on this is "choice equals consequence"...regardless. It is the natural order of things. If someone says to me that if i disobey - i will be punished...it says 2 things to me. 1) If i disobey, i am not really dominated by that person, and 2) if the dominant has to punish to be obeyed, he is not much of a dominant. ( i am not addressing a negotiated disagreement here - just outright disobedience) Ofcourse, i am not speaking of the role-play kink that can spike up the fun of a weekend trist - being a bad girl can have its advantages[;)] but in a serious commited relationship, there should be no reason for blantant disobedience nor "punishment" for an adult. This is only my opinion and the standard at which i hold myself. * i am well aware my opinion will be ill recieved but such is life, right? i enjoy being in the presence of what i percieve to be a truly Dominant man who inspires my submission (beautiful in its uniquitey) to come out naturally. i do not need to be beaten or punished to be the best i can be ~

welshwmn3 -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 2:35:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin Through the various punishment threads the theme seems to be: 1. sub/slave breaks a rule. 2. sub/slave needs physical punishment to learn not to break the rule. What this says to me is: 1. sub/slave is not devoted to obeying her d/m 2. sub/slave is too stupid to learn by any other means than brute force. Bottom line: to be a better d/m, and to get a more obedient sub/slave, frighten your sub/slave with punishment and the threat of punishment. In another punishment thread I said: quote: As I don't believe in punishment, I don't really see a difference between an "infraction" and an "excuse for sadism". They both seem to be a way of loading any guilt the d/m is feeling about being sadistic on the back of the submissive. It's like saying "you've made me angry" when the truth is I choose whether I will respond with anger or something else to whatever is done to me or around me. Do you see where I am going with this? It's akin to abusive husbands who blame the beatings on their wives' behaviour. Agree? Disagree? Why? "Punishment", even corporal punishment, is as different from "abuse" as day is from night. In my past, I've had both, corporal punishment and abuse. The difference, in my opinion, isn't even consent or non-consent (because at the time my grandmother punished me, I wasn't able to give consent). It has to do with if it's done with respect. Corporal punishment at my grandmother's hands was for a specific infraction. Maybe I was a brat. Or had a tantrum and broke a bed (yes, true story), or other behavior that wasn't acceptable. Grandma discussed what the issue was, spanked me, and that was the end of it. I apologized for my misbehavior, we hugged and kissed and "made up". And sometimes she'd give me cookies afterwards! She never made me feel like I was scum or terrible because I did whatever it was I did. Most of all, I was never afraid of grandma, but then, I seldom did the offending behavior again (or in the case of breaking the bed in a tantrum, NEVER did it again). Abuse at other people's hands was meant to make me fear them and hate myself. It is what you acuse "punishment" of being. If I learned anything from the abuse, it was how to be a better liar or 'sneak theif' so I didn't get caught the next time. I was in constant fear of being beat at any time. I thought I was a terrible person who had no rights to any kind of respect. I deserved any abuse that was heaped on me, no matter who it was from. It's taken me a long time to see the difference. When Sir punishes me for breaking a rule (because I am not perfect, and never did claim to be perfect), he does so with respect. I know what I did wrong, he administers the punishment, and that's the end of it. There's no words of how I "made him" do anything. I was wrong, it was something that xyz is the consequence of, and so, unless there are extenuating circumstances, I get xyz punishment. Now, if he just wants an excuse to be sadistic, then that is just "I'm doing this because I want to and you like it." Like I said, this is just my opinion, and I've not read the whole thread yet.

Aswad -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 3:46:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin Why choose fear when there is love? False dichotomy. One can have both, either, or neither, in a relationship. quote: How does this differ from the abusive husband whose battered wife obeys out of fear? Fear is not the only factor driving battered spouses. The closer you examine the topic, the more the line to D/s blurs. In my mind, the difference is intent, consent and the methodical approach. Edit: To clarify, I mean the form can be similar, not what's going on under the hood. Health, al-Aswad.

Bobkgin -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 3:47:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: camille65 Bob it is an ongoing issue (forgetting that medication) and a poor example. I have some serious memory issues and cognitive thinking problems due to both medical conditions and the very same medication that I forget lol. So that particular example was not a good one. I found your question vague and answered it best I could but unfortunately chose a difficult scenario for it. I appreciate your effort to answer me nonetheless. Do you find yourself remembering better if you've been spanked, as opposed to not being spanked?

Bobkgin -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 3:59:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin Why choose fear when there is love? False dichotomy. One can have both, either, or neither, in a relationship. I readily accept the last two as possibilities. And I recognize that Prop has also said what you are saying, bit it is a difficult concept for me to accept that one can have love -and- fear for the same person at the same time, or that fear leads to greater love. I asked Prop if the fear she was speaking of might better be described as "awe" (as in the "fear of God"). Is that the fear you are describing? quote: quote: How does this differ from the abusive husband whose battered wife obeys out of fear? Fear is not the only factor driving battered spouses. The closer you examine the topic, the more the line to D/s blurs. In my mind, the difference is intent, consent and the methodical approach. Edit: To clarify, I mean the form can be similar, not what's going on under the hood. I think what's going on under the hood can also be similar, tho' not in all cases (as several contributors to this discussion have taken the time to point out).

Aswad -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 5:10:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin I recognize that Prop has also said what you are saying, bit it is a difficult concept for me to accept that one can have love -and- fear for the same person at the same time, or that fear leads to greater love. Depends on the context, I imagine. I think love without any measure of fear is a rare thing, at least past the initial stages of it, depending on how you define fear and love. What prop said seems to me to be that the fear helps make her a better slave, which in turn helps maintain their love. Fearing the man and fearing what he may do is also quite different. quote: I asked Prop if the fear she was speaking of might better be described as "awe" (as in the "fear of God"). She has clarified in the past that this is, at least in part, the case. IIRC, that is. quote: Is that the fear you are describing? For me to discern different kinds of fear and describe them would be a hopeless task. quote: I think what's going on under the hood can also be similar, tho' not in all cases (as several contributors to this discussion have taken the time to point out). I never said everyone practices the same. It's not how I run my ship, but each to their own. As I've said elsewhere, men tend to have an instinct to hunt, conquer and keep. But without the instinct to protect and provide, this is little more than plain animal savagery, with nothing much to respect about it. That's just sating hunger, IMO. Health, al-Aswad.

Bobkgin -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 5:45:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: welshwmn3 "Punishment", even corporal punishment, is as different from "abuse" as day is from night. In my past, I've had both, corporal punishment and abuse. The difference, in my opinion, isn't even consent or non-consent (because at the time my grandmother punished me, I wasn't able to give consent). It has to do with if it's done with respect. Corporal punishment at my grandmother's hands was for a specific infraction. Maybe I was a brat. Or had a tantrum and broke a bed (yes, true story), or other behavior that wasn't acceptable. Grandma discussed what the issue was, spanked me, and that was the end of it. I apologized for my misbehavior, we hugged and kissed and "made up". And sometimes she'd give me cookies afterwards! She never made me feel like I was scum or terrible because I did whatever it was I did. Most of all, I was never afraid of grandma, but then, I seldom did the offending behavior again (or in the case of breaking the bed in a tantrum, NEVER did it again). Abuse at other people's hands was meant to make me fear them and hate myself. It is what you acuse "punishment" of being. If I learned anything from the abuse, it was how to be a better liar or 'sneak theif' so I didn't get caught the next time. I was in constant fear of being beat at any time. I thought I was a terrible person who had no rights to any kind of respect. I deserved any abuse that was heaped on me, no matter who it was from. It's taken me a long time to see the difference. When Sir punishes me for breaking a rule (because I am not perfect, and never did claim to be perfect), he does so with respect. I know what I did wrong, he administers the punishment, and that's the end of it. There's no words of how I "made him" do anything. I was wrong, it was something that xyz is the consequence of, and so, unless there are extenuating circumstances, I get xyz punishment. Now, if he just wants an excuse to be sadistic, then that is just "I'm doing this because I want to and you like it." Like I said, this is just my opinion, and I've not read the whole thread yet. I wanted to thank you and everyone else who has contributed to the topic of discussion. I don't always have something to say regarding each contribution, but I do appreciate the input and the broadening of horizons. I hope there will be more thoughtful contributions to come. Thank you.

Bobkgin -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 6:28:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin I recognize that Prop has also said what you are saying, bit it is a difficult concept for me to accept that one can have love -and- fear for the same person at the same time, or that fear leads to greater love. Depends on the context, I imagine. I think love without any measure of fear is a rare thing, at least past the initial stages of it, depending on how you define fear and love. Fear of what? Loss? Rejection? Betrayal? As I see it, Love does not exist without Trust. And as Velvetears pointed out, how can there be fear where there is absolute Trust? I see the fear as a lack of trust, an insecurity in the trustworthiness of the partner. Where do we differ on this? quote: quote: I asked Prop if the fear she was speaking of might better be described as "awe" (as in the "fear of God"). She has clarified in the past that this is, at least in part, the case. IIRC, that is. Not to prejudice her answer, but I suspect this would be so, from other things she's said. quote: As I've said elsewhere, men tend to have an instinct to hunt, conquer and keep. But without the instinct to protect and provide, this is little more than plain animal savagery, with nothing much to respect about it. That's just sating hunger, IMO. I think the instincts to protect and provide exists within each man and woman. But like any instinct, its development can be stunted in an unhealthy environment.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 8:16:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth My debate with Bob ... ... takes interesting twists and turns. I would invite those interested to read the exchanges in the "Safe Punishment" thread, because Merc's synopsis is not to be relied upon. Taking quotes out of context and attempting to use them to support an unsupportable position when the facts are known is called a "straw man", and I've wasted enough of my time on this one already. [;)] Those were both your quotes in their entirety. If they look foolish and contradictory to you now, you now know my problem with them. The quotes where your posts in their entirety; deliberately so to avoid the "out of context" charge I'm was sure you would make. But then what other choice is there but to challenge the method or the person when your own words make a case against your position. No wonder you need to "withdraw" when faced with adversity or challenge. You need to make sure whatever "betrayal" perceived wasn't actually in compliance with something you said the day before. Well good luck with that and best of luck on your goal.

Bobkgin -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 8:50:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth No wonder you need to "withdraw" when faced with adversity or challenge. lol Merc, anyone who reads the "Safe Punishment" thread will see you dropped out of it, only to try and re-argue it here after trying to misrepresent my position which was very clearly stated through several unquoted posts in the "Safe Punishment" thread. I take that as a reflection of your opinion of the intelligence of your audience. I think of mine as being smarter than that. Which is why your claims merit so little attention from me. You are welcome to fool as many stupid, gullible people as you can. [;)]

Aswad -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 9:09:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin Fear of what? Loss? Rejection? Betrayal? I wouldn't know. You might comment on whether you fear to lose again, though. quote: As I see it, Love does not exist without Trust. It might well be necessary, but I'm not sure, especially without a good definiton for love. quote: And as Velvetears pointed out, how can there be fear where there is absolute Trust? I would not allow absolute trust to develop in anyone who should trust me. And absolute trust is ... Well, suffice to say I suspect it's more damaging than fear, and a significant risk. quote: I see the fear as a lack of trust, an insecurity in the trustworthiness of the partner. Where do we differ on this? I see it as a situational thing, learned responses, etc.; in short, adaptive response. For that matter, without Fear, where is Thrill? quote: Not to prejudice her answer, but I suspect this would be so, from other things she's said. Yeah, well, I suspect the two are intermingled for her. My own "awe" of my god has no element of fear. Just as my respect and admiration for an animal that could kill me does not have that element. It has an element of awareness, yes, but not fear. That may have something to do with acceptance and naturalism, or not, I dunno. I know the animal will most likely not attack unless I attack it, or it is starving, and I know how it will go down if it does, though I don't know the outcome. I also strongly suspect the animal can sense that, at least for some animals. "Even" a horse can be positively lethal, and they are pretty skittish, but I've had no problem approaching one I'd never met, cut it loose from its harness, help it up, examine its injuries, bandage them, then later move it a distance, remove the bandages, and apply a tourniquet. The horse was dead calm all the way, and did not shy from my touch. Nor did I fear it, even though I am well aware of what its hooves could do to my body. In prop's case, I get the impression that there is fear as well, however. quote: I think the instincts to protect and provide exists within each man and woman. But like any instinct, its development can be stunted in an unhealthy environment. No doubt it can be stunted or enhanced, but that's usually a matter of another coat of paint. In either case, if the hunt/conquer/keep instinct is stronger than the protect/provide one, that's a recipe for problems, I suspect. Health, al-Aswad.

MadRabbit -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 9:11:45 PM)
Hmmm....welll lets see.... Starting a thread with loaded questions... Refusing to acknowledge or accept other people's viewpoints... Ignoring posts that provide relevant information and continuing to pompously to argue as if it never existed... Continuing to rehash the same flawed thesis over and over again despite how many people argue.. Picking apart people's posts into the "straw man arguments"... Twisting words around rather than trying to actually establish successful communication.... Declaring everyone else is wrong regarding everything and that one is right all the time... I would say these things do about as much for Open Minded Discussion as sucking the air out of the room does for breathing. [Mod Note: namecalling removed]

Bobkgin -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 9:36:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin Fear of what? Loss? Rejection? Betrayal? I wouldn't know. You might comment on whether you fear to lose again, though. hmm... My comment would have little relevancy, as I am not currently in love. When I was losing my wife to cancer it was not her that I feared, but rather it was being without her that I feared. quote: For that matter, without Fear, where is Thrill? I recall hearing that the physiological responses to fear are identical to the responses for excitement. The difference is how the brain interprets the responses. That's why some people love roller-coasters while others fear them. quote: quote: Not to prejudice her answer, but I suspect this would be so, from other things she's said. Yeah, well, I suspect the two are intermingled for her. My own "awe" of my god has no element of fear. Just as my respect and admiration for an animal that could kill me does not have that element. It has an element of awareness, yes, but not fear. That may have something to do with acceptance and naturalism, or not, I dunno. I know the animal will most likely not attack unless I attack it, or it is starving, and I know how it will go down if it does, though I don't know the outcome. I also strongly suspect the animal can sense that, at least for some animals. "Even" a horse can be positively lethal, and they are pretty skittish, but I've had no problem approaching one I'd never met, cut it loose from its harness, help it up, examine its injuries, bandage them, then later move it a distance, remove the bandages, and apply a tourniquet. The horse was dead calm all the way, and did not shy from my touch. Nor did I fear it, even though I am well aware of what its hooves could do to my body. I think they sense the alpha-ness of the individual. Where they will not trust some, they seem more prone to trust those who have a high alpha-ness about them. quote: quote: I think the instincts to protect and provide exists within each man and woman. But like any instinct, its development can be stunted in an unhealthy environment. No doubt it can be stunted or enhanced, but that's usually a matter of another coat of paint. In either case, if the hunt/conquer/keep instinct is stronger than the protect/provide one, that's a recipe for problems, I suspect. Agreed.

stef -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 9:43:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad False dichotomy. One can have both, either, or neither, in a relationship. I readily accept the last two as possibilities. And I recognize that Prop has also said what you are saying, bit it is a difficult concept for me to accept that one can have love -and- fear for the same person at the same time, or that fear leads to greater love. Since you still haven't appeard to grasp the simple fact that punishment isn't necessarily "intended to correct behaviour through physical discipline", that's not very surprising. Fear doesn't have to be fear of the person, but could instead be fear of disappointing them, or the fear of disappointing yourself. When the punishment is physical, the fear isn't necessarily fear of the person, but fear of the punishment or fear of how you will react to it. That doesn't change the fact that you still love the person or diminish that love in any way. ~stef

Aswad -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 10:01:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin [...] it was being without her that I feared. Which demonstrates that fear and love can coexist, feed each other, and intermingle, doesn't it? quote: I recall hearing that the physiological responses to fear are identical to the responses for excitement. Makes sense. quote: The difference is how the brain interprets the responses. As usual. quote: That's why some people love roller-coasters while others fear them. I just get disoriented and annoyed at the G-force. Except during the near-freefalls, where it's like a brief adrenal spike without context. quote: I think they sense the alpha-ness of the individual. Where they will not trust some, they seem more prone to trust those who have a high alpha-ness about them. ~lol~ While I do subscribe to the theory that there is such a trait, and strongly suspect possession of it, that sounded awfully like "domliness" with its usual connotations. But, yeah, I think most mammals have some sense of a person's nature and frame of mind. There are a lot of physical signs that are autonomic precursors to violence, for instance, and if I "trick" myself by conscious dissociation, so that one part of the mind remains a "watchdog" that will abort, while the other intends to do harm (which will be aborted), the response is very different. Actually, funny side note... I want a Czechoslovakian Wolfdog. I saw some pictures from defense dog training, two different setups. In the one that is offered to civilians, the dogs just sat down and gestured to indicate they wanted to play, or came over and licked the "attackers", or whatever. In the one that is offered to army personell and so forth, there's this guy with a protective suit on, doing his damned best to keep one dog from circumventing the armguard and going for the throat, while another dog is going for the hamstring. Not bad with a .9:1 body shape. Those have pretty excellent instincts and read people very well. Train them well, and the kitten may get to ride on its back. [sm=lol.gif] Plus they're so damned adorable and cute. Health, al-Aswad.

Bobkgin -> RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? (9/28/2007 10:31:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin [...] it was being without her that I feared. Which demonstrates that fear and love can coexist, feed each other, and intermingle, doesn't it? I'll go so far as to say it appears to be evidence in favour of such a belief. I could also point to battered wives and claim evidence to the contrary. Whereas the former situation is about loving a person versus be afraid of losing her companionship through no one's choice, the latter situation more clearly demonstrates a correlation between fearing a person and loving the same person. I can say no one has convinced me to embrace the use of fear in my relationships. But I have been convinced there is more to this than what I thought at the beginning of this discussion. This is one of those situations where an open mind proves useful [;)] quote: quote: I recall hearing that the physiological responses to fear are identical to the responses for excitement. Makes sense. This is one of those factors that makes assessing this issue difficult. Are people reporting "fear" when they could just as easily report "excitement", and vice versa? How do we distinguish between the two when our body sends us identical signals for each? quote: quote: The difference is how the brain interprets the responses. As usual. quote: That's why some people love roller-coasters while others fear them. I just get disoriented and annoyed at the G-force. Except during the near-freefalls, where it's like a brief adrenal spike without context. I've never been on one. Two terms crop up for me whenever I consider it. The first is "out of control". The second is "crater". [:(] Since adrenalin ages a body, I've chosen to avoid the stuff as much as possible so as to retain my youthful appearance [;)] quote: quote: I think they sense the alpha-ness of the individual. Where they will not trust some, they seem more prone to trust those who have a high alpha-ness about them. ~lol~ While I do subscribe to the theory that there is such a trait, and strongly suspect possession of it, that sounded awfully like "domliness" with its usual connotations. I get that a lot [;)] You have to keep in mind I'm alpha to a family of nine dogs: mom, dad and their five-year-old 'pups'. I've raised all the dogs since they were puppies. I've been the one to handle all their crises (a leg shot off by a rancher, porcupine quills, gashes and impalements from low-lying branches ...). So when you talk of matters relevant to horse-whispering, I relate through my experience with my pups. quote: But, yeah, I think most mammals have some sense of a person's nature and frame of mind. There are a lot of physical signs that are autonomic precursors to violence, for instance, and if I "trick" myself by conscious dissociation, so that one part of the mind remains a "watchdog" that will abort, while the other intends to do harm (which will be aborted), the response is very different. Actually, funny side note... I want a Czechoslovakian Wolfdog. I saw some pictures from defense dog training, two different setups. In the one that is offered to civilians, the dogs just sat down and gestured to indicate they wanted to play, or came over and licked the "attackers", or whatever. In the one that is offered to army personell and so forth, there's this guy with a protective suit on, doing his damned best to keep one dog from circumventing the armguard and going for the throat, while another dog is going for the hamstring. Not bad with a .9:1 body shape. Those have pretty excellent instincts and read people very well. Train them well, and the kitten may get to ride on its back. [sm=lol.gif] Plus they're so damned adorable and cute. [:)] Mine have lived with cats all their lives. I recently adopted two calico kittens, sisters. The smallest will plop herself down between the dog's neck and the food bowl, while the dog is eating, and wait for attention. Actually, the pack dynamic has been a fascinating study of D/s. The pecking order is constantly evolving, yet they all submit to the cats. [:D]

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875