RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave

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

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

Message

NihilusZero -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 5:30:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aldompdx This question raises the issue of healthy vs. unhealthy surrender. There is no substantial difference in the process. Only the results really end up mattering.

SlyStone -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 6:26:57 AM)
quote: 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. It seems to me that any theory based on evidence obtained from this website is pretty much useless, because unless you are talking about people whom you have met personally, there is no way that you can judge the mental capacity of someone based on an anonymous exchange on the internet, there are to many variables. Are they taking medication?, are they drunks?, drug addicts?, psychotics? etc. There is really no way to know unless you spend time with them face to face. As far as the statistical evidence you present from your personal experience I would say that it is quite possible that it says as much about you as it does about them, because after all, we are all limited by our own experience even psychologists. My experience differs, as most of the women I have met in the "lifestyle" have been strong capable women, self confident and aware of their needs. I don't know why our experience differs, but I know that it does. Finally, I think that debating whether or not BDSM draws people with low self esteem is kind of meaningless because what really matters is if it worsens or perpetuates the condition. My take on it is this; There are a great many wounded people out there, victims of rape and child abuse, some become submissives and most don't, but if they do I don't find it to be alarming at all, as long as people understand that no dynamic is going to change the pains of the past, leave that to time and therapy if needed. But in terms of BDSM, as I stated earlier, if it brings someone happiness and growth then I see no reason why it would not raise self esteem.

IronBear -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 8:37:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero quote: ORIGINAL: aldompdx This question raises the issue of healthy vs. unhealthy surrender. There is no substantial difference in the process. Only the results really end up mattering. I disagree. There is a substantial difference between someone who submits/surrenders willingly with his or her whole heart and someone who submits/surrenders our of fear or is given no option.

vasha -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 8:42:23 AM)
soo... this is what i return to. how lovely. yes, there was a lot more to the OP then that. no, i dont see any good reason to go further with it.. not now. seems many want someone to ridicule...well, i dont deserve, need, nor desire it. so, youll just have to pick somebody else from now on.

RCdc -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 8:57:07 AM)
Dearest vasha Please don't be defeated by a little ridicule. I'd just encourage you to take good discussion from the main core of responders and ignore the rest. Personally, I haven't seen an inherent link between self esteem and s-types. I have had varying experience with dominant types whom also suffer or relish their own self esteem issues but much of the time, it simply manifests itself differently. I would think that it has a lot more to do with being human, than the side of the leash one sits. But maybe what you are noticing is the different behaviours people exhibit depending on their orientation? the.dark.

sweetgirlserves -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 10:07:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IronBear quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero quote: ORIGINAL: aldompdx This question raises the issue of healthy vs. unhealthy surrender. There is no substantial difference in the process. Only the results really end up mattering. I disagree. There is a substantial difference between someone who submits/surrenders willingly with his or her whole heart and someone who submits/surrenders our of fear or is given no option. IronBear, He said there is no substantial difference in the process... the process of enslavement is still slowly taking the autonomy away from a person by making them more and more dependent upon the 'dom'. Whether that process is initiated because the person was in a 'healthy' state of mind or because the person felt some type of 'fear or other unhealthy motivation to surrender' doesn't really change the process. And in the end... what does matter is that the person who surrenders [hopefully] ends up all the better for it. Regarding the 'emotional issues' thing... we all have them... different circumstances in our life can exaserbate them for sure. I can imagine that 'sub/slave-like creatures' who naturally seek dominance in their life, would even moreso seek it during those 'life trials' that tend to exasperate the difficult emotional hurdles. That might be why one would think that subs have more emotional issues than others. I would say... if you are a dom seeking a sub but you don't want to deal with emotional issues, make sure they are not undergoing some major life change that is in fact going to cause difficult emotional pain. To take such a girl on, cause her to grow dependent upon you, and then drop her because of it, is totally irresponsible and in my opinion, dishonorable. Actually, any man who doesn't have a good measure of 'stick with-it-ness' has no business being a dom or Master, in my opinion. BTW...Some doms/masters take medication for nerves and anxiety... that is an emotional problem. So it does hit both sides of the kneel. ~sgs

Padriag -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 10:22:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Focus50 quote: 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.... Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion, which you suddenly seem quite willing to waffle on. If you didn't really mean "logic" an we can substitute any other word... then what did you mean? quote: 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. The concepts aren't new to me, nor am I apparently the one with a problem. However, you've yet to explain yourself or exactly how your belief applies here. You made some very critical remarks regarding the OP, I questioned them because I don't see them as being valid points. Your response so far has been dismissal and childish name calling. I don't think I'm the one with a problem here. [ quote: 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. And where do you suppose I said self-esteem wasn't the topic? Are you sure you read my post? All I stated was that speculating on whether someone outside the lifestyle with low self esteem was a closet submissive was beyond the scope of the OP. And again, with the petty insults. Is that the best arguement you can muster? quote: 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.... You seem very confused. Just above you claim self esteem is the central focus of this topic (implying I had said it wasn't, although I never stated any such thing). Here, I've quoted and bolded where you seem to be implying self esteem has little to do with these choices. Care to make up your mind? I disagreed with you in my reply, stating that self esteem very much is at issue her and does affect the choices made by some submissives and supported that statement. You're response is yet more name calling and now imperiously declaring I'm not actually part of the lifestyle. And on what do you base that pronouncement? Or again, is the best reply you can manage simply more personal attacks and name calling? quote: 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! And you descend further.... still nothing in the way of a rational argument to support any of your claims however. I do wonder though if you are really this threatened by anyone who apparently has more of an education than you. quote: 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.... ;-) Actually Focus, I stated I wasn't picking on you and chose your post to critique because I thought... of those posts I disagreed with, yours was the most coherent and intelligent... and the one post I thought I might get a rational response from. Sadly, this has been a disappointment. quote: 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....). The "devil of being defensive" as you put it is simply this. The OP made an observation and asked for others opinions. There was nothing in what the OP said that was directed personally at anyone. Since no personal attack was made, there was no rational reason for anyone to become defensive. Despite that, many did. When someone reacts to a simple statement as though a personal attack had been made, it often indicates a degree of insecurity on their part... which can stem from lack of confidence, low self esteem, etc. In short, people who become defensive over impersonal statements are saying a good deal about themselves... and their own issues. I don't have to brand you as being defensive, you've done that and more yourself. I suspect at this point many are likely viewing you as being rather juvenile since that was the tenor of your entire reply to me. You've pretty much run the gamut of slurs here. You've called me names, you've implied I'm not "real and twue", you've made flimsy attempts to discredit and attack me personally. All this is a bit over the top considering no where did I ever call you any names or make any personal attacks on you... I simply disagreed with you. But you have done nothing to support your own argument which remains without a rational basis. That leaves me with no choice but to assume all your affrontry is a cover because you have no basis for your opinions. I'm also done discussing it with you... and calling your tirade a discussion is being charitable.

sweetsub1957 -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 10:49:20 AM)
~Fast Reply~ Interesting topic. All I can say is that, since I've discovered bdsm the better part of a year ago & that being submissive is "okay," my self-esteem has grown by leaps & bounds & is better than it's ever been. Before my eyes were opened, I had always thought there was something wrong with me, but no more. Now I know I'm okay. [:D]

Prinsexx -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 11:07:59 AM)
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? Do you mean self-worth? Excuse me for nit picking but by self-esteem i mean how I esteem myself in relationship to another and by the nature of the way I do Master/slave then I do not objectify my self, I do not esteem myself higher than my Master. However if you mean self-worth then this is how I esteem myself. Now in my case my self-worth fluctuates. Doesn't everyone's? It has nothing to do with which side of the whip one is but more to do with the wear and tear of life changes.My self-worth fluctuates according the my hormones in the most part oh and a good or bad day with the teens can throw me off guard. But as a slave I never lose my self-worth 'cos when I have it's fucked my head really bad. In service, during humiliation and sensational pain r punishment my self-worth has to sustain. Resiliance s everything.

Danemora -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 11:12:15 AM)
Based on my own observations and education, I would have to say that the generalization that most submissives/slaves have self esteem issues is an incorrect one. As others have stated, self esteem issues are not limited to one subset of the population.

TurboJugend -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 11:15:44 AM)
quote: self esteem issues are not limited to one subset of the population. agree but it doesn't mean that there can't be a higher concentration here then there. People posting here probably don't have the self esteem issue anyway..and will answer with a negative.

IronBear -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 12:36:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sweetgirlserves IronBear, He said there is no substantial difference in the process... the process of enslavement is still slowly taking the autonomy away from a person by making them more and more dependent upon the 'dom'. Whether that process is initiated because the person was in a 'healthy' state of mind or because the person felt some type of 'fear or other unhealthy motivation to surrender' doesn't really change the process. And in the end... what does matter is that the person who surrenders [hopefully] ends up all the better for it. ~sgs This too has been my experience and it is surprising the time it does take. Yet my comment still holds true. Perhaps not so often in many Western Countries but when taking a wider look and the way people can be isolated by a number of methods or situations the balance changes and some with a more defined submissive propensity can be controlled easier, thus increasing undue pressure to comply rather than in what we could refer to as the "normal" situation. Also I dare say, the "process" is shortened too.One only has to look at the way that some cults do this and in a relatively short time have some members under control and submitting, for example.

sweetgirlserves -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 1:09:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IronBear quote: ORIGINAL: sweetgirlserves IronBear, He said there is no substantial difference in the process... the process of enslavement is still slowly taking the autonomy away from a person by making them more and more dependent upon the 'dom'. Whether that process is initiated because the person was in a 'healthy' state of mind or because the person felt some type of 'fear or other unhealthy motivation to surrender' doesn't really change the process. And in the end... what does matter is that the person who surrenders [hopefully] ends up all the better for it. ~sgs This too has been my experience and it is surprising the time it does take. Yet my comment still holds true. Perhaps not so often in many Western Countries but when taking a wider look and the way people can be isolated by a number of methods or situations the balance changes and some with a more defined submissive propensity can be controlled easier, thus increasing undue pressure to comply rather than in what we could refer to as the "normal" situation. Also I dare say, the "process" is shortened too.One only has to look at the way that some cults do this and in a relatively short time have some members under control and submitting, for example. Okay. I see what you are saying... i suppose the process itself would be somewhat different and certainly curtailed depending on the state of mind, etc that the submissive was in when they entered into the process. Thank you for taking the time to clarify. ~sgs

IronBear -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 1:52:24 PM)
My pleasure lass.. You are more than welcome.

Padriag -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 2:08:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TurboJugend quote: self esteem issues are not limited to one subset of the population. agree but it doesn't mean that there can't be a higher concentration here then there. People posting here probably don't have the self esteem issue anyway..and will answer with a negative. That's an astute observation. Those who post regularly on these forums form a very small vocal minority of those who read but never post anything. Rough guess, but I'd say there are fewer than 100 regular posters on these boards. But a quick check as I write this shows 2,244 people currently reading them. We can only speculate... and with very little evidence... into what catergory that silent majority might fall.

aldompdx -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 3:23:47 PM)
The original question is whether subs/slaves have some kind of self esteme issues. The original question did not address process, and neither did I. The question of process has been fabricated and interjected in this instance. Does the end justify the means? Ask Dick Cheney. The concept of Due Process in the U.S. posits in the negative. It is not the destination as much as the path which matters. When we reach one "destination" it is but our current position along the ongoing path of life. The "result" is the process. A person's autonomous power is never given or taken. Only their authority to exercise it can be altered. It is similar to the distinction between potential and kinetic energy. Such awareness brings self esteem (self worth) and helps clarify the dynamic in a polarized interaction of control/surrender.

Danemora -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 4:36:25 PM)
The only way you are going to be able to answer your own question is to conduct a psychological study on the subject with a statistically significant sample of submissives, slaves and then compare those results to other statistically significant samples of dominants, vanilla-types, etc, etc, etc. I personally do not subscribe to the originally proposed generalization that "many, or even most, subs/slaves have some kind of self esteme [sic] issues."

daddysliloneds -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 4:58:27 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? i believe you are correct, so my answer is yes. most sub/slaves have some kind of self-esteem issues, be that good, bad or indifferent, and for that i am very thankful... it proves they're human, just like you!

NihilusZero -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 5:19:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IronBear I disagree. There is a substantial difference between someone who submits/surrenders willingly with his or her whole heart and someone who submits/surrenders our of fear or is given no option. Of course there is. But a decision is either sensible or stupid completely irrelevant of the state of mind of the person making that decision. So whether surrender is "healthy" or not is only actually measurable against the end result.

Prinsexx -> RE: Self Esteme, & the sub/slave (7/20/2009 5:27:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aldompdx The original question is whether subs/slaves have some kind of self esteme issues. The original question did not address process, and neither did I. The question of process has been fabricated and interjected in this instance. Does the end justify the means? Ask Dick Cheney. The concept of Due Process in the U.S. posits in the negative. It is not the destination as much as the path which matters. When we reach one "destination" it is but our current position along the ongoing path of life. The "result" is the process. A person's autonomous power is never given or taken. Only their authority to exercise it can be altered. It is similar to the distinction between potential and kinetic energy. Such awareness brings self esteem (self worth) and helps clarify the dynamic in a polarized interaction of control/surrender. In my view self-esteem and self-worth are entirely different concepts.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875