|
MarcEsadrian -> RE: Humiliation: how does it work? (10/1/2009 2:44:35 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: marie2
Yes, I think humiliation can be a turn on. Liking it doesn't negate the fact that it's still humiliation, that's like saying if you're turned on by physical pain, it isn't really physical pain. Humiliation is defined as an embaressment or "shame" of sorts, it's not defined as a feeling that a person dislikes. For me it falls into that whole dichotomy masochistic thing where we sometimes enjoy what we don't enjoy. But whether we enjoy it, hate it, or have a conflict of both emotions doesn't change the fact that it's still humiliation.
Interesting points, Marie. I have always considered humiliation as an injury to one's sense of dignity, particularly in a public context. Webster's Unabridged describes the act of humiliation as a painful loss of pride, self-respect or dignity. I accentuate painful as that is where I believe the qualifier for humiliation lies, as opposed to say, general embarrassment.
Your comparisons to the enjoyment of physical pain gave me pause, however, and on first pass, I can see the analogy. But mental pain is a little different than physical pain. I think this is why so many view the context in which someone strikes another in BDSM as important, or why an abuse victim will often say the words hurt more than the hitting. For most, a bruise, a welt, a cut or laceration heals in time, and no real harm to the integrity or structure of the inner self is done. In humiliation, there is internal pain, shame, extreme mortification and memory of it that doesn't heal like a bruise does.
When I think of actual humiliation, I think of it in those terms. I tend to feel the masochistic version of it is really a different animal in that those who profess a desire for it are still in a general safe zone, psychologically. I tend to feel that if you extract them from the real borders of that safe zone, it won't be so fun anymore. Perhaps enjoying a particular humiliating act is progressive, where at first you resist, but then come to accept and associate it with something positive in some way—a pleasurable conditioned reflex response to negative stimuli—but at that point, is it really humiliation any longer? Can one be a masochist in a literal humiliation context, truly? Is "humiliation" simply part of the nomenclature the BDSM culture has adopted from standardized definitions? These are questions that have come up for me here and there over the years. I understand and have experienced many things in this way of life (from both dominant and submissive orientations), but I'll admit I have trouble pinning this down, and it may well be due to my "textualist rigidity".
I understand the desirability of humbling and of erotic embarrassment or degradation—but humiliation, while arguably effective as one among many tools in breaking someone (which can certainly be useful in some training contexts), doesn't seem like something that is really meant to be enjoyed. Perhaps I'm not really meant to understand it. If someone could perhaps explain it to me (if that's even possible), I would be thankful.
|
|
|
|
