The antomy of trust (Full Version)

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



Message

Slaveboiz -> The antomy of trust (11/28/2005 10:19:58 PM)

The anatomy of trust in long term M/s

By Mistress Suzan and slave ziggy
11/18/05

It goes without saying that of the many aspects of M/s, trust is an essential component. However, it is also the one aspect that people make the most assumptions about. We are often led to believe that trust is automatic and permanent in M/s. From my prospective trust is not only earned but it needs regular maintenance. In this essay W/we would like to explore the anatomy of trust and fear as it pertains to M/s.

At the risk of slaying the sacred M/s cow, I will begin with this idea. None of what we understand as important in M/s can happen without the first component, which is willingness. Willingness is the footers you dig before you lay your foundation. Without willingness nothing else is possible; willingness to serve, love, or obey, just to name a few. But what happens if we stop being willing? What causes that shift and how do we make the shift back?

I would suspect that for most folks the shift occurs when there is a breech in trust. Before we can understand that breech, it might be worth looking at trust itself and what role trust has in M/s beyond the dungeon.

If I understand human nature correctly, I would have to say that much of what we do is fear based. We work out of fear of not being able to provide for our families. We get in relationships with people based on an innate fear of loneliness. I know that is an over simplification of both those fears, but in the essences of time we will leave it at that.

There are other fears too, most of which remain hidden until we find ourselves in a relationship. These are what many refer to as unconscious fears, driven by our past experiences. We know the obvious fears as phobias and as far as relationships are concerned, these types of fears are relatively easy to address and deal with. However, those fears that cause the greatest challenges are those that are hidden until we are in relationships of a M/s nature. Why? Because, trust is assumed and required and we fail to see where trust and fear are polar opposites.

If we look at fear and trust in the sense of a balancing board, a scale or even a seesaw, we find as we raise trust we lower fear and as we raise fear we lower trust; all of this is an internal struggle for both the Master and the slave and is often triggered by the person we trust the most.

Can we get to the point where eliminate fear all together? I would have to answer that with a big fat NO. Fear is by nature inherent in all of us. It is what drives us and enables us to survive and self protect. I think that for most of us, the best we can hope for is to identify it and manage it.

In a Master slave relationship fear can also be the catalyst for looking at our fears and dealing with them. (We see this all the time in difficult play scenes where the top works with the bottom to change their perception of a particular type of play, such as needles or electricity.) It can be away of managing our fears with the help and support of our partners in power. The roadblock here is that fear can also be contagious especially if those fear responses are unconscious. Our fear responses can drive a hard wedge in what makes M/s work.

Teasing out and looking at those unconscious fears can put a strain on any relationship; the work here is in learning how to change our perceptions of those things that trigger our fears; but it’s the work we must do if we hope to reach the goal of not only trust, but also obedience.

So how do we manage fear?

The first step is taking responsibility. If we are exhibiting behaviors such as resistance, disobedience or even lack of motivation or willingness it does both partners in power no good to look the other way. Ignoring those behaviors will surely lead to resentment and eventually will place a huge crack in the foundation of your M/s relationship.

The second step is identification. It is important to locate and define the origin of our fears. There could be some connection to ones past that triggers such responses and, as we well know some of those origins can go as far back as childhood. I have to add here that finding the origin or a cause for such responses in no way relieves us from our responsibilities for our behaviors within our present relationships; instead it makes us even more responsible.

The third step is in determining what triggers those responses is asking our partners in power for help in identifying what triggers certain responses, and addressing those responses in away that creates a safe environment. This does NOT mean that if I disobey that there should not be repercussions for my undesired behaviors, but rather after a consequence is imposed that there should be time to process what happened and how to work towards eliminating that behavior or response in the future.

The forth step is self-awareness and reshaping how we respond to those fear responses. Sometimes that means that, as with play, our partners in power may choose to have us revisit those triggers until we become aware of those responses and self adjust. The goal here is to experience the trigger or fear, observe it and let it go. The goal also is to trade those responses for a more desired response like “yes Sir, as you wish Sir” or some variation of that.

Managing fear, so that trust can flourish in you r M/s relationship is in fact a challenge. However, as your relationship deepens and the work you do intensifies, trust and fear find their balance. Looking at fear and our responses to it, helps provide opportunities for growth both as individuals and as a couple.













CaptainsPet -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 3:07:57 AM)

I really enjoy reading your posts, Slaveboiz. You provide me with some deep and thought-provoking topics. I do agree with your interpretation on fear/trust. Manage the one; obtain the other. It sounds simple, but it's a lifelong pursuit for me. Thank you for such a well written piece. I look forward to more of your insights.



sweetpettjenny -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 3:08:39 AM)

I have always managed my fear with a open line of communication. Most of my fear was quickly lost due to the task of talking through it. Example: I was petrified of the violet wand...yes me the masochist. It took me saying Master i am terrified of that thing. He said he would use it on me , but introduced it in a way i couldn't resist, instead of coming at me head on with it. He sessioned me hard for over a hour and a half, and let me go to sub space ( tied on a spanking bench) . Then He and a friend finsished with the wand , using it to do fire play( a favorite of mine) , and wala no more fear of the wand. The point im saying is, He was going to use it on me regardless of my fear, but.... he made it so id enjoy it the first time. It all started with COMMUNICATION.



fldrkhorse -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 3:13:31 AM)

The opposite of fear is love.



MasterRobert1 -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 3:55:09 AM)

One aspect you didn't mention; control. Or, more correctly, giving up control. Most people are hesitant to give up control, hesitant to turn that control over to another. And, let's face it, control is the key.



candystripper -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 4:35:11 AM)

i liked the Op post but it doesn't fit well with a woman my age. So many fears have been faced and conquered, there is little or no fear-based activity in my life. It is always dangerous to generalise, but women are usually heavily invested in their children. If the kid reaches adulthood as a good person with the tools to make their own way, that frees up a woman's head space to a large degree.

The next point to consider is a woman my age is (usually) at her sexual peak; meaning her libido is at the highest point it has ever been. Woman 10, 20, 30 years younger than i cannot imagine the fuel this provides to be sexual.

Then consider that at 50, most women have the majority of their working lives behind them, and today's baby boom generation has mainly working women who have a body of work to "rest their laurels" upon.

Insecurities about appearance and attractiveness have fallen away after 40 years of being pursued by Men.

Fear of an unwanted pregnancy have been eliminated or greatly diminished. Since mine was the 1st generation to have the Pill and legal abortion, and because we were (presumably) so much more sexual than our parents had been, we feel at 50 yrs old a freedom from fear of pregnancy in a way our mothers did not.

Success in various areas of life have given a woman my age great personal power. This is the time of life when a woman (and perhaps a Man) involves herself in volunteer work or political activisim for different reasons that younger woman; it comes from a sense of accomplishment and a desire to improve one's community, however that is defined.

For whatever sociological reason, woman today at 50 are sexual, attractve individuals who are not viewing themselves -- or being viewed -- as "over the hill". Whether because of better nutrition or better cosmetic/medical care, we reach 50 with beauty and we let our hair grow, keep our natural color and dress slightly provacatively. This represents a huge shift in perception from one generation to the next; at 50, our mothers considered themselves old and used blue hair dye.

Because of these factors and others, the Op post is inapplicable (IMO) to many/most women my age. Since i am a pleasure submissive with hard limits as to pain and humiliation, i cannot speak for 50 year old masocists. However, ropes and chains and leather cuffs anf blindfolds and costumes and all sorts of other things are very exciting to me...and i hope to find my One asap and begin playing.

candystripper



orfunboi -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 5:22:19 AM)

That was very well written and thought out...thanks for sharing with us. :O)



Rover -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 5:59:49 AM)

quote:

It goes without saying that of the many aspects of M/s, trust is an essential component.


Isn't trust an essential component of any healthy relationship, regardless of lifestyle?

quote:

None of what we understand as important in M/s can happen without the first component, which is willingness
.

I would take this as the functional equivalent of "consent", and agree.

quote:

But what happens if we stop being willing? What causes that shift and how do we make the shift back?

I would suspect that for most folks the shift occurs when there is a breech in trust
.

I believe that most folks stop being "willing", whether they are lifestyle or vanilla, long before there is a breach of trust (which I see as a symptom, rather than the underlying problem). Most relationships end because one or both parties cease to care, cease to work at the relationship, because the emotional passion burns out and there is nothing more "substantial" in the foundation of their relationship, and in some cases they cease to respect one another and in those circumstances can bring themselves to participate in an act that violates trust. Just my observations and opinions, of course.

quote:

If I understand human nature correctly, I would have to say that much of what we do is fear based. We work out of fear of not being able to provide for our families. We get in relationships with people based on an innate fear of loneliness.


If that were correct, I think it would be groundbreaking work in human psychology. Frankly, the people I know work because they desire, not because they fear. And they get into relationships because they love, not because they fear. Of course, it could just be the circles I run in.

quote:

There are other fears too, most of which remain hidden until we find ourselves in a relationship. These are what many refer to as unconscious fears, driven by our past experiences. We know the obvious fears as phobias and as far as relationships are concerned, these types of fears are relatively easy to address and deal with. However, those fears that cause the greatest challenges are those that are hidden until we are in relationships of a M/s nature. Why? Because, trust is assumed and required and we fail to see where trust and fear are polar opposites
.

This walks awfully close to the "lifestyle as therapy" line. Not someplace one wants to go, unless you're a mental health professional. And yes, I fail to see trust and fear as polar opposites. We do things we are "fearful" of all the time, out of trust for another, out of necessity, for pleasure (fear and excitement are intimately intertwined), etc.

quote:

If we look at fear and trust in the sense of a balancing board, a scale or even a seesaw, we find as we raise trust we lower fear and as we raise fear we lower trust; all of this is an internal struggle for both the Master and the slave and is often triggered by the person we trust the most.


I'm sorry, I don't agree with this at all. Even if you want to limit it to B/D S/M activities, the attraction for some of the edgier play (knife play, for instance) is partly due to "fear" (that is exciting) despite the fact that one may have complete trust in their Top. But on the larger scale, fear has only a minimal (and very specific) relationship to trust. As you begin to trust someone, you no longer fear that they're an escaped mass murderer, for instance. But your fear of heights is unchanged. You may no longer fear that they'll clean out your bank account. But your fear of needles remains.

I would, alternatively, suggest that as trust in an individual increases, the fears associated with self-preservation (ie: healthy fears, sometimes called "skepticism") decrease.

quote:

Can we get to the point where eliminate fear all together? I would have to answer that with a big fat NO. Fear is by nature inherent in all of us. It is what drives us and enables us to survive and self protect. I think that for most of us, the best we can hope for is to identify it and manage it.


Well, that seems to negate your earlier assertion that as trust rises, fear falls, in direct relationship to one another. Or, it may mean that we can never fully trust anyone (meaning we can never fully eliminate fears).

"Identifying and managing" fears is a far sight different than the earlier assertion. And while I agree that fear helps us survive and protect ourselves, I don't think very many (healthy) people are "driven" by fear. In fact, I believe that would be (serious) cause for concern.[/b]

quote:

In a Master slave relationship fear can also be the catalyst for looking at our fears and dealing with them. (We see this all the time in difficult play scenes where the top works with the bottom to change their perception of a particular type of play, such as needles or electricity.) It can be away of managing our fears with the help and support of our partners in power. The roadblock here is that fear can also be contagious especially if those fear responses are unconscious. Our fear responses can drive a hard wedge in what makes M/s work.


In play scenes, Tops often utilize fear as a tool to create a desired perception and/or response. It's frightening to suggest that we use them as a "catalyst for looking at our fears and dealing with them". That surely crosses the line of "lifestyle as therapy" (unless you mean to suggest that familiarity reduces fear, in which case this isn't a lifestyle issue at all).

quote:

Teasing out and looking at those unconscious fears can put a strain on any relationship; the work here is in learning how to change our perceptions of those things that trigger our fears; but it’s the work we must do if we hope to reach the goal of not only trust, but also obedience.


Same as above. This is "lifestyle as therapy".

The rest of the article is pretty much more of the same... "lifestyle as therapy". If people have fears that preclude their ability to function happily in a healthy relationship (lifestyle or vanilla), then they need a mental health professional. The last thing they need is some self-styled Master playing psychotherapist because he stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

John



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 6:17:49 AM)

Great post but IMO this is simply about trust in ALL relationships. I didn't see anything inherently unique towards M/s type relationships in the essay.



MistressFire70 -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 7:11:44 AM)

As always, a wonderfully written essay. But then, I expect such things from you, ziggy. Mistress Susan has every right to be proud of you!

Fire



MistressFire70 -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 7:19:06 AM)

This is a very interesting comment. I can see where this is coming from. I'm wondering if the opposite of fear is different for slave than it is for Master. The opposite of the slave's fear, for the slave, is trust. The opposite of the slaves fear, for the Master, is love.

If all things from the Master are given in love, then it benefits the slave. If the slave trusts that these things are given in love, then the slave can work through fear. The key, of course, is to always give in love, for the betterment of both.

Fire



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 7:23:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MistressFire70

This is a very interesting comment. I can see where this is coming from. I'm wondering if the opposite of fear is different for slave than it is for Master. The opposite of the slave's fear, for the slave, is trust. The opposite of the slaves fear, for the Master, is love.

If all things from the Master are given in love, then it benefits the slave. If the slave trusts that these things are given in love, then the slave can work through fear. The key, of course, is to always give in love, for the betterment of both.

Fire



Which completely falls apart given the fact that many M/s relationships aren't even based in love and some don't even have love as a component to them.

Not to mention, trust has nothing to do with love. You can love someone who is completely untrustworthy. Someone doing something for me in love doesn't really mean anything to me in terms of trust.



JohnWarren -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 7:24:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rover

quote:

It goes without saying that of the many aspects of M/s, trust is an essential component.


Isn't trust an essential component of any healthy relationship, regardless of lifestyle? [/font]


While that's true in the vast majority of cases, I've played with people who wanted terror scenes and for some of them trust was the "buzz killer." For example, one woman whose scenes I talk about in The Loving Dominant (Railroad and Severed Nipples for example) after about six month established so much trust that I wouldn't really hurt her, that she withdrew from the relationship.

Just goes to show that there isn't any "always" in this world.



Rover -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 7:41:05 AM)

Of course, there are no absolutes in the world, though I am hard pressed to imagine a healthy (operative word) relationship devoid of trust.

I would hasten to add that scening and playing do not (in and of themselves) make for a "relationship" in the sense used by the author in this article. Though, the relationship you had (and mentioned) may have.

John[/b]



fldrkhorse -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 7:43:50 AM)

quote:

Which completely falls apart given the fact that many M/s relationships aren't even based in love and some don't even have love as a component to them.

Not to mention, trust has nothing to do with love. You can love someone who is completely untrustworthy. Someone doing something for me in love doesn't really mean anything to me in terms of trust.



I disagree. Every realtionship romantic, platonic, parental, employer/emplyee, etc is either based in love or fear. That's not to say a relationship cannot change (love today and fear tomorrow). But every relationship is either based in one or the other.



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 7:57:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fldrkhorse
I disagree. Every realtionship romantic, platonic, parental, employer/emplyee, etc is either based in love or fear. That's not to say a relationship cannot change (love today and fear tomorrow). But every relationship is either based in one or the other.

OK if you're going to get into the CWG "ultimate foundations" of things, yes.

But if we're talking about the complexity of relationships and such, no. We can't discuss the true complexity and fluidity of relationships if we only stick to two dimensions (or one dimension with two ends).



MsIncognito -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 8:07:06 AM)

Interesting, but I think it misses the mark. This piece assumes that the fear exists in the bottom and trust is defined as the bottom's trust in their Top (I'm using bottom and Top generically, the point I'm trying to make can apply just as equally to slaves, submissives, Doms and Masters).

First of all what if the situation is reversed and it is the Top who is dealing with fears which lead to destructive self-protective behaviours? Please, let's not trot out the usual rot about how a Top has to be in control of themselves, blah, blah, blah. Top's are human and can have their own fear and trust issues due to issues in their past.

As for trust my perspective is different than most. Surely, I will not play with or commit myself to someone I think is unsafe. That's a given. That aside I have a lot of trust - in myself. It's not about trusting the Top to respect my safewords. It's not about trusting the Top to never, ever do anything that will hurt me. It's about knowing the risks I am taking and trusting myself to be able to deal with the possible negative outcomes should they occur. I know that I am strong enough to deal with the potential outcomes and come out the other side OK. I retain full responsibility for my choices by trusting myself to be able to deal. All too often I find that "trust" involves the bottom abdicating personal responsibility because they "trust" the Top. When things go wrong, it's all the Top's fault. That kind of reasoning just does not sit well with me.



candystripper -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 9:00:52 AM)

quote:

The rest of the article is pretty much more of the same... "lifestyle as therapy". If people have fears that preclude their ability to function happily in a healthy relationship (lifestyle or vanilla), then they need a mental health professional. The last thing they need is some self-styled Master playing psychotherapist because he stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Rover/John


i agree with You, John. i would add the nomeclature used by the Op makes the discussion murky. What the Op seems to refer to is probably better descibed as "phobias" or "discomfort"; etc. "Fear" is a specific, fleeting survival instinct which may, e.g., empower a woman to lift a car off her infant.

IMO, anyone experiencing "Fear" regardless of the situation should follow that instinct.

Edge play; or any play which arouses anxiety or even phobic responses, is a personal choice. Submissives and slaves should follow their hearts. And of course with potentially dangerous types of play, Doms and Masters and Dommes should be certain They have mastery of the technique and can address any emergency that may arise.

candystripper



candystripper -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 10:48:02 AM)

quote:

While that's true in the vast majority of cases, I've played with people who wanted terror scenes and for some of them trust was the "buzz killer." For example, one woman whose scenes I talk about in The Loving Dominant (Railroad and Severed Nipples for example) after about six month established so much trust that I wouldn't really hurt her, that she withdrew from the relationship.

Just goes to show that there isn't any "always" in this world.

JohnWarren


i know there is a theory that people who seek physical danger have a different setting somewhere in their brains or endocrine systems that makes them crave the endorphines real danger brings. The ones i know that have been studied are those who engage in extreme sports, like skydiving from the roofs of buildings or unchartered cave diving.

Would You consider the woman You spoke of to have a similiar physiological "settting" or would You consider her mentally ill?

candystripper



sunshine333 -> RE: The antomy of trust (11/29/2005 10:53:48 AM)

quote:

quote:

If I understand human nature correctly, I would have to say that much of what we do is fear based. We work out of fear of not being able to provide for our families. We get in relationships with people based on an innate fear of loneliness.


i do experience fear and can easily become very reactive to it. however, i choose to live more proactively for the most part. fear does not govern most of my behavior and decisions. seems to be the difference in people who view life as a bowl of cherries and those that see it as a battlefield (for example).

humbly,
sunshine




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125