quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

Such a shame for them. Not my fault if you can't read.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rover

quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

Such a shame for them. Not my fault if you can't read.

Ok, you're adept at tossing around insults.  But really, I'm not here to be insulting, or to be insulted.  And I doubt very much that you are either.  So to begin, I'll invite you to ask any questions you may have from me in order to ascertain why I hold the views that I do, and the validity of the logic used to arrive at those conclusions. 

Then why start in such a manner? You haven't demonstrated any honest interest in learning or attempting to understand what I'm expressing.
 
I've been trying diligently to do the same in return.  No grandstanding in this post, just a few clear, concise and serious questions.  They're simple questions, requiring only simple answers.
 
1.  You've alluded to your studies of psychology, and made numerous statements of fact regarding the field and practice of psychology.  Are you a degreed psychologist, therapist, psychotherapist, psychiatrist, etc.?  How is it that you're credentialed to make the many psychological assertions in your posts?

By no other reason than having done the leg work to get to that point of understanding. No, I have no formal training, and nor do I claim any. This is what I mean about "asking to be spoon fed" - it took me years to gather this much together and assemble even this much of the jigsaw, and you're expecting it to be readily communicated in clear an concise points for your easy digestion.
 
2.  You've repeatedly made mention of traits that are uniquely those of slaves, and uniquely those of submissives.  The list you provided earlier was not unique to either, and some were not even unique to power exchange relationships at all.  Can you provide any of the often promised traits that you assert are unique to slaves, and unique to submissives?

I think here you're confusing BDSM and D/s. They are unique sets of traits, but they may both be possessed by the same woman - think of a cake that contains both white and dark chocolate pieces. in effect, you need to find and assess women who are only dark chocolate, and what traits they possess, and then find and assess women who are only white chocolate, and what traits they possess, then separate these out into  which is unique to that psychological nature, and which is shared.  When you have this basis, can then analyse women who are combination of both, to determine what sort of balance they possess. Understand that this is theoretical and abstract work - the whole of the person hasn't changed, what we are doing is categorising those underlying traits to express the formulation of that person.
 
3.  Is sadism an innate characteristic, or learned skill?  And what evidence (beyond the entirety of psychology) is there to support your contention?  You've worked both sides of the fence on this issue, and I'd rather have you speak clearly for yourself.

It can be both, although this is still largely a theoretical study. For instance, Freud's views on sadism and masochism were largely familial in orientation as was much of his work. This does tend to intertwine with the nature/nurture arguments across a plethora of topics - for instance, are homosexuals born homosexual, can they become homosexual due to environment and experience, and does this require at some level a predisposition toward a homosexual from heterosexual transition? There is evidence to support the assertion that people are both born sadists, and that they are capable of learning sadism. I read an interesting article two days ago on the sadism in the military vis-a-vis the war in Iraq and the heinous brutality displayed on both sides, and whether this was a demonstration of learned or inherent and supressed sadistic tendencies. If I can find the article again, I'll link it for you.
 
4.  Is there any specific evidence to support your contention that sadism in submissives/slaves is not natural, and a "breakaway" trait?  If it's just your opinion, feel free to say so.  We all have and share opinions here.  But it's only fair to know that it's an opinion, and not a scientific fact (as has been your inference).

Mostly anecdotal, and survey based. It's important to ask the right questions though - a born sadist starts out that way, while a learned sadist acquires the tendency, so if you intend asking any women (or men) then you need to craft your questions in an unbiased form to elicit this information. I've done this in the past in other communities online and offline that I have visited, and I'm doing it here. To this point, the data supports the conclusions I've made previously. Understand that there is no "scientific fact" in psychology, there is simply not enough known about the mind to do any more than theorise and construct models that explain and interpret its operation.
 
I'll try really hard not to appear to be making "points" from here on out.  Nor to disparage you or your intellect.  But this is a bulletin board, not a billboard.  And people are expected to ask questions, solicit information, critique theories, etc.  I'll do my part, and hope that you'll do yours as well.

It's particularly hard to try and take something that has taken me years to build up and understand to my satisfaction - and by no means do I contend to have the complete picture, I'm still only scratching the surface, and psychology in general is still only scratching the surface of the human mind - and express it in an understandable form and language that you can gather the winding intricacies from. It is not made any easier by snide remarks, or out and out baiting. In the nature of this discussion you won't find a lot of online materials, for the sheer volume of the dicussion you're going to need to hit the library.
 
John

quote:


1.  You've alluded to your studies of psychology, and made numerous statements of fact regarding the field and practice of psychology.  Are you a degreed psychologist, therapist, psychotherapist, psychiatrist, etc.?  How is it that you're credentialed to make the many psychological assertions in your posts?

quote:


By no other reason than having done the leg work to get to that point of understanding. No, I have no formal training, and nor do I claim any. This is what I mean about "asking to be spoon fed" - it took me years to gather this much together and assemble even this much of the jigsaw, and you're expecting it to be readily communicated in clear an concise points for your easy digestion.

quote:

 
2.  You've repeatedly made mention of traits that are uniquely those of slaves, and uniquely those of submissives.  The list you provided earlier was not unique to either, and some were not even unique to power exchange relationships at all.  Can you provide any of the often promised traits that you assert are unique to slaves, and unique to submissives?

quote:


I think here you're confusing BDSM and D/s. They are unique sets of traits, but they may both be possessed by the same woman - think of a cake that contains both white and dark chocolate pieces. in effect, you need to find and assess women who are only dark chocolate, and what traits they possess, and then find and assess women who are only white chocolate, and what traits they possess, then separate these out into  which is unique to that psychological nature, and which is shared.  When you have this basis, can then analyse women who are combination of both, to determine what sort of balance they possess. Understand that this is theoretical and abstract work - the whole of the person hasn't changed, what we are doing is categorising those underlying traits to express the formulation of that person.

quote:


3.  Is sadism an innate characteristic, or learned skill?  And what evidence (beyond the entirety of psychology) is there to support your contention?  You've worked both sides of the fence on this issue, and I'd rather have you speak clearly for yourself.

quote:


It can be both, although this is still largely a theoretical study. For instance, Freud's views on sadism and masochism were largely familial in orientation as was much of his work. This does tend to intertwine with the nature/nurture arguments across a plethora of topics - for instance, are homosexuals born homosexual, can they become homosexual due to environment and experience, and does this require at some level a predisposition toward a homosexual from heterosexual transition? There is evidence to support the assertion that people are both born sadists, and that they are capable of learning sadism. I read an interesting article two days ago on the sadism in the military vis-a-vis the war in Iraq and the heinous brutality displayed on both sides, and whether this was a demonstration of learned or inherent and supressed sadistic tendencies. If I can find the article again, I'll link it for you.

quote:


4.  Is there any specific evidence to support your contention that sadism in submissives/slaves is not natural, and a "breakaway" trait?  If it's just your opinion, feel free to say so.  We all have and share opinions here.  But it's only fair to know that it's an opinion, and not a scientific fact (as has been your inference).

quote:


Mostly anecdotal, and survey based. It's important to ask the right questions though - a born sadist starts out that way, while a learned sadist acquires the tendency, so if you intend asking any women (or men) then you need to craft your questions in an unbiased form to elicit this information. I've done this in the past in other communities online and offline that I have visited, and I'm doing it here. To this point, the data supports the conclusions I've made previously. Understand that there is no "scientific fact" in psychology, there is simply not enough known about the mind to do any more than theorise and construct models that explain and interpret its operation.

quote:


I'll try really hard not to appear to be making "points" from here on out.  Nor to disparage you or your intellect.  But this is a bulletin board, not a billboard.  And people are expected to ask questions, solicit information, critique theories, etc.  I'll do my part, and hope that you'll do yours as well.

quote:


It's particularly hard to try and take something that has taken me years to build up and understand to my satisfaction - and by no means do I contend to have the complete picture, I'm still only scratching the surface, and psychology in general is still only scratching the surface of the human mind - and express it in an understandable form and language that you can gather the winding intricacies from. It is not made any easier by snide remarks, or out and out baiting. In the nature of this discussion you won't find a lot of online materials, for the sheer volume of the dicussion you're going to need to hit the library. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

In pyschology there are no hard and fast "Facts" which is what I'm trying to get across to you - and hence my comment that if you're unable to deal with theories, postulations et al, then you're wasting my time. Since the ground we are covering is entirely theoretical in nature.

quote:


I'll try another tact - you have an object X, and are trying to describe and quantify it in some meanignful manner. You might say X weighs so much in a standard gravity, X reflects between this and this point of the electromagnetic spectrum, and it absorbs between this and this point, X has a "pits and peaks" texture akin to an orange peel, and so on. You're not in any way changing the fundemental nature of this object, but identifying particular characteristics that describe it. Perhaps X is pliant when heated, but rigid when cold (heh, like a woman ;) ), yes, these distinctions and abstractions of what X is are largely arbitary, but they provide a way in which X can be described.

quote:


The traits I've listed are ones that I've noted and documented existing in isolation from each other, both through my own experience and through talking to and analysing women.

quote:


The fact that they can and do occur together, which has been your experience, doesn't make them functions of the same part of the psyche.

quote:


Also, these traits are contradictory, this doesn't mean that they can't occur together, but that the presence of both is a source of conflict within the woman.

quote:


For example, a woman might crave being punished but at the same time she is so thorough in her drive to serve that little opportunity for it arises. As we get closer and closer to either end of the spectrum, we see less and less internal contradiction and conflict. In this regard we have affirmation that these traits are from opposite sides.

quote:


Edited to add: Merely because you have encountered a theory before, whether in depth or at a distance, and found it not to your liking, does not invalidate the theory itself.

quote:


Neither of us is the final arbiter on truth, in that regard. I find the theory works flawlessly for me, and that it accurately describes the balance of slave and submissive natures in a woman, and the conflicts that arise therein. I have spent a lot of time pulling the data and knowledge together to bind this theory, but you are under no obligation to accept or believe it. It is pretty clear you don't, so I'm not sure what point there is in continuing this discussion further.

quote:


By your own words, you've encountered it before, didn't like it, and rejected it. If that is so, then nothing I say now or in the future is going to change your mind or alter your perspective, since you aren't actually receptive to either of those.

•  is a control freak and has a compulsive need to control  everyone and everything you say, do, think and believe; for example, will launch an immediate personal attack attempting to restrict what you are permitted to say if you start talking knowledgeably about psychopathic personality or antisocial personality disorder  in their presence - but aggressively maintains the right to talk (usually unknowledgeably) about anything they choose; serial bullies despise anyone who enables others to see through their deception and their mask of sanity
•  displays a compulsive need to criticise whilst simultaneously refusing to value, praise and acknowledge others, their achievements, or their existence
•  shows a lack of joined-up thinking with conversation that doesn't flow and arguments that don't hold water
•  flits from topic to topic so that you come away feeling you've never had a proper conversation
•  refuses to be specific and never gives a straight answer
•  is evasive and has a Houdini-like ability to escape accountability
•  undermines and destroys anyone who the bully perceives to be an adversary, a potential threat, or who can see through the bully's mask

quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

First. You haven't proven anything invalid, you've simply stated "this is invalid". I've given you a list of traits, as much as it is within my capacity to express their subtle shades. You've rejected that list on the grounds that they do occur together.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

The Slave

The desire to be possessed/owned in the sense of a possesion.

quote:


The desire to be subsumed to the will of another.

quote:


The need for this transition of control to be forced, and sudden, and without consent.

quote:


Fulfilment through the anihilation of self

quote:


A rejection or innate abhorence of control of themselves, and a general malaise when forced to do so.

quote:


Control focused.

quote:


The Submissive

The desire to serve, and fulfill the needs of another

quote:


The drive to be pleasing and the need to please

quote:


Sustained by the visual, emotional, physical et al feed back from the object of their service, that they are indeed pleasing.

quote:


Pleasure focused.

quote:


A general lack of control concerns, a willingness/eagerness in approach to serving

quote:

ORIGINAL: SteelofUtah

I see both of your points and if you stopped trying to make the other change thier belief or prove it as fact you would see that both of you have different views and perhaps should try to understand the others rather than claim it is off, or wrong, or inaccurate, or whatever. You are BOTH Highly Intelegent Men. Why can't that be enough?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rover

Spade.
 
Hope that helps to understand (even if you do not agree).
 
John

quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

Control for a slave is non-consensual. Control for a submissive is consensual and willing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

As I intimated before, I'm not talking about BDSM, Leather, the lifestyle, power exchange relationships, WIITWD, etc. Your response was that D/s is a subset of BDSM. This, in my opinion, is not true, BDSM borrows and contains elements of D/s but D/s is an entity all it's own, with a scope that is much larger and deeper than usually recognised in any of the aforementioned communities.

quote:


Most people are content not to explore the depths to which it can go, that does not mean those depths do not exist. Acronyms such as "What It Is That We Do" while essentially designed to be tolerant and inclusive have become through adoption their own limitations.

quote:


"We" in a sense instills both the concept of community, but also negation of individuality - the acronym itself suggests compliance with pre-established standards and ideals rather than an exploration of the true nature, needs and depths of a person.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

It still doesn't change the fact that this community is largley based on those pre-existing standards. This is a community based not on who and what we are but on how we express it.