RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave

RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (Full Version)

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

Message

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/18/2009 1:15:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlesarbonn I'm going to come out in disagreement as well. I have zero self-esteem issues. Well, except for when I'm around people who are better than me. And there do appear to be quite a few of them. Like everyone that posted in this thread. I wish I was as good as them, or could live up to being able to post like them. But aside from them, I'm pretty strong on self-esteem. Well, there are a couple of others, too, now that I think about it. I remember they posted in other threads. Other than them, I'm pretty much good to go. Now that I think about it, I do want to say that I wish I was as good as most of the people who post on these boards. Those people are so much better than me, and I wish I was a lot more like them. So, aside from them....and all the people who have profiles on the other side...I'm pretty much good to go on the whole self-esteem side. Of course, away from the boards is a bit different because in the real world, those people who live the lifestyle are OBVIOUSLY better than me, and I can only wish I was allowed in their company. Come to think of it, I think the people who aren't even into the scene have it so much better, and I wish I had their confidence. But aside from those few exceptions, I have to say I completely disagree with the poster...although the poster seems kind of impressive, too..... Now THAT was funny!!! [sm=smile.gif]

DesFIP -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/18/2009 1:18:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TurboJugend quote: Because we're human? But that would mean the OP should have similar experience with "vanilla's". (still the answer is yes :P ) But that would require that he accept he is an ordinary person, and not 'better' simply because he likes rough sex. Instead he subscribes to the false theory that a bdsm relationship is somehow magically more 'real', more 'true', more intense. That such a relationship is by definition deeper than anything a vanilla person could ever know. And that therefore the online subs who get dumped after a week deserve much more sympathy than a vanilla woman whose husband of 55 years ever could. In other words, he has self esteem issues dealing with 'vanilla' people and choses to believe it's not his fault at picking a poorly fitting relationship, it's because vanillas are lesser.

TurboJugend -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/18/2009 1:26:55 PM)
I don't know. I don't read his post like that. Would be nice if he participated in his own thread and explained his question a little more.

IronBear -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/18/2009 2:15:22 PM)
A few new posters don't get too involved either because they are not on line in CM often or because they may have seen how some posts get torn apart. that takes some courage and certainly some degree of practice as well as a thick skin.

TurboJugend -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/18/2009 2:20:29 PM)
That is true...... A pity..the question he asked is interesting....on the other side..if he responded...it would be fuel on the fire.. lol

Focus50 -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/18/2009 2:25:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vasha now, i lothe generaliseing... most of the time its very wrong. however, it seems to me.. and feel quite free to correct me if you believe i am wrong.. that many, or even most, subs/slaves have some kind of self esteme issues. yes? no? why is this? thoughts? Then what's your generalised logic say about Dominants/Masters/Mistresses who are only attracted to subs and slaves? I mean, D/s or M/s is a complementing dynamic afterall.... The conundrum is that if the dominant mindset had "too much" self esteem to balance or complement the sub's alleged low self esteem, why would that make a submissive mindset attractive to us in the first place? And does that qualify anyone in the vanilla world with low self esteem issues as being a closet submissive, too? I think the answer is that needing to to defer to the will and choice of another has exactly ZERO to do with personal self esteem. And that intelligent people can't generalise about one (submissive) mindset without considering the complementing opposite! Focus.

IronBear -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/18/2009 2:31:56 PM)
Bloody good point.

Focus50 -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/18/2009 2:39:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IronBear A few new posters don't get too involved either because they are not on line in CM often or because they may have seen how some posts get torn apart. that takes some courage and certainly some degree of practice as well as a thick skin. Geeeezus IronBear, posting stuff that I actually agree with..!?! About time you started "doing it right"...! [sm=stickineye.gif] Is it the cold weather or the overall State of Origin result (which yours truly predicted 2-1 to Queensland)? But yeah (to TurboJugend), it does get annoying when people start topics then don't bother to manage them.... Focus.

TurboJugend -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/18/2009 2:41:46 PM)
Perhaps he is not generalising. Perhaps he did meet people with lack of self esteem. Might be coincidence...might be that they can use him as a listener ( that he is open for their problems). We guess a lott...but he hardly says anything in his first post.

CatdeMedici -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/18/2009 3:20:53 PM)
Sorry, that's a load of horse shit. btw can I introduce you to spell Chick?[8\|]

LookieNoNookie -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/18/2009 5:15:42 PM)
) quote: generaliseing quote: ORIGINAL: vasha now, i lothe (loathe) generaliseing (generalizing).. most of the time its very wrong. however, it seems to me.. and feel quite free to correct me (I just did) if you believe i am wrong.. that many, or even most, subs/slaves have some kind of self esteme (esteem....I did it again) issues. yes? no? why is this? thoughts? (Don't know....sorry...I'm just the grammar / spelling police...that's my only area of expertise) (I do what I can).

daintydimples -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/18/2009 5:32:36 PM)
I did not read the posts (sorry I usually do). We are everyone of us living in a world that attacks our self esteem daily. Some of us have better defenses than others. It has nothing to do with sub/dom. If you truly want to engage me in a discussion about this, please message me on the other side. :-)

NihilusZero -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/18/2009 7:00:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vasha why is this? Because most humans have self-esteem issues.

KateyCaine -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/18/2009 7:08:21 PM)
That does seem a generalisation. All types of people can suffer from self-esteem issues or self-doubt - Dom/mes, subs/slaves, vanilla people, gay, straight.......we can't really assign these issues to just one orientation. k.

servantforuse -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/18/2009 7:18:02 PM)
As a submisive male I don't see it that way. I am very sucsessfull in my other life. I have no self esteem issues as I am able to separate one from the other..

vixenmoon -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/19/2009 11:14:50 AM)
I've met plenty of D-types who have low self esteem. I don't think it has anything to do with dominant or submissive, kinky or not. It just is. Of course, ideally, people in a relationship will help each other overcome that, regardless of role in the relationship.

LATEXBABY64 -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/19/2009 7:59:17 PM)
you can not fix other people you have to want to fix your self thats why chemical and medical dependency happens

Padriag -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/19/2009 10:16:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Focus50 Then what's your generalised logic say about Dominants/Masters/Mistresses who are only attracted to subs and slaves? What does logic have to do with a personal observation, which is all the OP appears to have been making? If that is what they've observed, that's what they've observed... any logic or pattern is another issue. quote: I mean, D/s or M/s is a complementing dynamic afterall.... The conundrum is that if the dominant mindset had "too much" self esteem to balance or complement the sub's alleged low self esteem, why would that make a submissive mindset attractive to us in the first place? Is it? You seem to be making a curious assumption. Why would one necessarily corellate to the other? Who is this "us" you refer to? Do you propose all dominants are alike in regards to what they find appealing? quote: And does that qualify anyone in the vanilla world with low self esteem issues as being a closet submissive, too? That's beyond what the OP asked. However, yes, I would say that those with low-self esteem have a tendancy towards submissive behavior. That is not the same as kinky Submissives. Another trend would be overcompensation going in the opposite direction towards domineering behavior. Would you like text book references for these phenomenon? quote: I think the answer is that needing to to defer to the will and choice of another has exactly ZERO to do with personal self esteem. And I could quote three behavioral psychology texts books from my personal library that would all say you are entirely wrong in that assumption. There is a clear and documented history of exactly that relationship between the two. Ah, but I forget, we aren't supposed to say so, isn't politically correct less people have to face the reality that not all submissives are strong, independent, intelligent, capable people... some of them are, in fact, basket cases... and most fall somewhere inbetween. But we aren't supposed to talk about that as it opposes the popular myth that submissive women are "strong, independent and intelligent". quote: And that intelligent people can't generalise about one (submissive) mindset without considering the complementing opposite! Oh? So if I disagree, are you insinuating I'm not intelligent? I don't mean to pick on you Focus, however, your post was one of the few I felt I could critque. One thing that has struck me in all these replies is how quick so many were to respond defensively. If anything, I think it belies how much insecurity actually does exist regarding the topic. In response to the OP, among the few things I can say with certainty are as follows. From a long study of behavioral psychology, I know that self esteem issues can lead towards submissive behavior... though not necessarily the kinky sort of Submissive oft discussed here (not the capitalization distinguishing a noun from an adjective). It can also lead to domineering behavior. I feel I've seen ample evidence of both on this web site alone. I have known submissives who did not have any significant self esteem issues, but from my personal experience these were in the minority and also tended to be above the age of 35 (roughly 1/3 or less). I have known submissives who did have significant self esteem issues, and per my personal experience these formed a majority (roughly 2/3 or more, though I'd have to do some considerable review to come up with a solid statistic) and tended to be younger than 35. I have known what I personally feel to be an alarming number of submissives who had been the victims of physical abuse and/or rape... probably somewhere around half. Those are simply my observations based on my personal experiences over the last roughly 15 years. In my personal opinion, and despite the PC view, this lifestyle does attract many people as submssives who do have self esteem issues, lack self confidence, or have experienced severe emotional trauma. YMMV

aldompdx -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 1:08:02 AM)
This question raises the issue of healthy vs. unhealthy surrender. In my experience, the majority of those who surrender do so as a bargain of giving to get love. In reality, that is not surrender. It is manipulation to take from another. For example, a master goes to work and "surrenders" to an employer, by giving labor in order to get money, which is used in fulfillment of their life. That is not really surrender, but is bargaining from a place of power and authority. Healthy surrender comes from strength, free choice, and self will. It is not psychological bargaining, but is unconditional sharing of the love one always has in the only place it is ever felt -- one's very own heart. The feeling of love/fulfillment is never given or taken, but openly shared. Such awareness is the essence of self esteem, because there is not doubt about fulfillment depending upon the judgment or validation of another.

Focus50 -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 5:11:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Padriag quote: ORIGINAL: Focus50 Then what's your generalised logic say about Dominants/Masters/Mistresses who are only attracted to subs and slaves? What does logic have to do with a personal observation, which is all the OP appears to have been making? If that is what they've observed, that's what they've observed... any logic or pattern is another issue. Transferring an "observation" to written form for others to make sense of requires a level of logic from the author - IN MY OPINION. But hey, substitute any other word (for "logic") you like, if that's all your petty beef is here.... quote: quote: I mean, D/s or M/s is a complementing dynamic afterall.... The conundrum is that if the dominant mindset had "too much" self esteem to balance or complement the sub's alleged low self esteem, why would that make a submissive mindset attractive to us in the first place? Is it? You seem to be making a curious assumption. Why would one necessarily corellate to the other? Who is this "us" you refer to? Do you propose all dominants are alike in regards to what they find appealing? My "curious assumption" is that I believe in Nature's balance in all things. Around here it can be Yin & Yang. If these are new concepts to you then that's your problem. quote: quote: And does that qualify anyone in the vanilla world with low self esteem issues as being a closet submissive, too? That's beyond what the OP asked. However, yes, I would say that those with low-self esteem have a tendancy towards submissive behavior. That is not the same as kinky Submissives. Another trend would be overcompensation going in the opposite direction towards domineering behavior. Would you like text book references for these phenomenon Wrong - self-esteem is very much the flavour of the topic! How you interpret the subject and present your opinion of what was stated or implied is entirely irrelevant to my post, though probably unsurprising to your own shrink. quote: quote: I think the answer is that needing to to defer to the will and choice of another has exactly ZERO to do with personal self esteem. And I could quote three behavioral psychology texts books from my personal library that would all say you are entirely wrong in that assumption. There is a clear and documented history of exactly that relationship between the two. Ah, but I forget, we aren't supposed to say so, isn't politically correct less people have to face the reality that not all submissives are strong, independent, intelligent, capable people... some of them are, in fact, basket cases... and most fall somewhere inbetween. But we aren't supposed to talk about that as it opposes the popular myth that submissive women are "strong, independent and intelligent". Hey, if the lifestyle is nothing more than psychological research for you then take it up with the site owners rather then pretending you're one of us. This lab rat bites.... quote: quote: And that intelligent people can't generalise about one (submissive) mindset without considering the complementing opposite! Oh? So if I disagree, are you insinuating I'm not intelligent? Close...! You're rapidly presenting as someone who's quite intelligent but a real dope with it. I mean, really, these are your arguments on a community message board - psychology text books; semantics; sophistry and "intelligence" manifesting as superior, posturing petulence? Yep, a real dope! quote: I don't mean to pick on you Focus, however, your post was one of the few I felt I could critque. One thing that has struck me in all these replies is how quick so many were to respond defensively. If anything, I think it belies how much insecurity actually does exist regarding the topic. Well of course you don't; I'm not intelligent enough (by your lofty standards) to discern anything else! I'm nothing if not a free lunch.... ;-) But since you're such an expert, explain to all of us the devil in being "defensive", especially if it's even possible to disagree with someone without being branded defensive! Fair dinkum; it's the contemporary "witch" slur for arrogant fops who spend too much time reading about life in their personal libraries and none at all out there living it (with real people, anyway....). Focus.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125