|
Padriag -> RE: Humiliation??? (5/2/2006 11:56:22 AM)
|
Kind of funny this should come up today as I was just discussing the topic with someone over lunch. I wrote an essay that is related to this one, dealing specifically with the difference between humiliation play and degradation. While it doesn't specifically answer the question of why some enjoy it, I think combined with LA's and others comments it helps shed light on it. Here then is the essay in its entirety.
Humiliation versus Degradation A lifestyle essay
By: P Sean ONeal, copyright 1998, 2006
Among various discussions I have heard the subjects of humiliation play, the use of degrading acts, and so forth has come up from time to time. People have differing attitudes regarding the subject, some of which is the result of misunderstandings. This essay is in part about sorting out what these words mean, what humiliation play is, and the effects of each when used in this lifestyle.
I’ll start with the two words themselves, humiliation and degradation, and look at their meanings. To humiliate is to humble someone, to literally make them not proud, not arrogant, to create a spirit of deference or submission. Comparatively to degrade is to devalue, to remove value, to strip away rank, to bring into low esteem. Though the words are often used interchangeably, they are not synonyms and in fact refer to two different processes. Specifically to humiliate or humble is to alter the attitude of someone, but to degrade is to reduce the value or worth of someone and this is an important difference.
So what is humiliation play? Generally speaking it is a category of play forms which involve placing a submissive in humiliating circumstances. In some regards, much of fetish play involves a degree of humiliation, but does not generally focus on this aspect. Humiliation can be achieved through either things done to the submissive, or things the submissive is required to do. As a rule a submissive will find something they are required to actively do more humiliating that something they must passively accept being done to them. For example, a submissive required to submit to a vaginal examination might find it humiliating, however if that same submissive is require to "open" themselves up for examination by using clamps, speculums, etc. that is likely more humiliating. What is actually considered humiliation play can vary widely depending on the individuals involved. This is in part because its also based on personal perspective, what each person perceives as being humiliating. For example, requiring a submissive who grew up with very conservative values to go nude in front of friends might seem terribly humiliating even verging on being degrading. Requiring a submissive nudist to do the same thing might be viewed as trivial, normal and even fun. In other words, there is no exact answer to what is or isn’t humiliation play, as it varies by individual. What does remain true is that humiliation play is any play form which has the intent and/or effect of humiliating the submissive.
Above I make the point that individual perspective plays a large role in what constitutes what is and isn’t humiliating. It is likewise highly subjective as to what differentiates humiliation from degradation. The key element in making that determination is shame. That is, an act that causes the submissive to feel ashamed afterwards can be said to have been degrading; an act that may cause embarrassment or which is humbling, but which did not cause shame can be said to be humiliating. In other words it goes right back to the definitions I gave above. If an act leaves a submissive feeling humbled, reminded of her status as a submissive, perhaps embarrassed, but her self worth is intact… then that act was humiliating for her. But if the act leaves her feeling ashamed of what she was required to do, ashamed of what was done to her, and/or feeling as though her self worth has been reduced or lost, then that act was degrading.
I make these distinctions because the effects of humiliation versus the effects of degradation are very different and with equally different consequences to the dominant / submissive relationship. Taking degradation first, what effects can it reasonably be expected to have on a the relationship? A submissive who is subjected to degradation, particularly if this continues over an extended period will begin to question their self worth, they will feel shamed and ashamed of themselves. This alone will tend to cause them to become increasingly shy and withdrawn. Degradation also tends to erode self confidence, which causes the submissive to become hesitant in performing tasks, and in some cases even in performing routine tasks. Over time these feelings can result in chronic depression, self loathing, and self destructive behavior. In short, degradation is destructive in its effect and for this reason alone it is undesirable as a tool for eliciting a submissive response. Yet some dominants insist on using it anyway. Speculating, it may be because it is the only method of dominating a submissive they know, but it may also be because they are simply a weak dominant. A degraded submissive is not particularly loyal and cannot be expected to be genuinely happy with their status. In fact, they are quite vulnerable and even receptive to outside influence that gradually rebuilds their self esteem and this may be enough to lure them away. As a reaction, some dominants using degradation as a tactic will attempt to isolate the submissive to prevent such influence. This is also usually accompanied by abuse and a downward, self destructive spiral that is not likely to end well for either the submissive or the dominant.
Humiliation as a tool is very different in its effects because it is not inherently negative or destructive. Using humiliation as a tool, a dominant can accomplish several things with regards to the submissive. First, as already stated, it can directly work to humble the submissive, a generally desirable attitude. Second, it teaches the submissive and reminds them about their status and place in the relationship, one of subservience to the dominant. Third, it is itself an expression of dominance which though the submissive may not enjoy the humiliating act, they do enjoy the expression of dominance it represents. In short, when humiliation play is used as a tool towards these goals it can be useful in establishing the roles within the relationship and reinforce them over time. Since humiliation does not attack the self worth of the submissive, their confidence also tends to remain intact. In some cases it may actually increase, as the submissive learns through being challenged by humiliating acts that they are capable of more than they had previously believed. Because the submissive is also not shamed by the humiliation, they don’t experience feelings of guilt or self loathing and are not thus made inclined towards self destructive acts. If the dominant also uses other methods to build the submissive’s self esteem, especially as a submissive, the result is a submissive that is happy in their role and willingly accepts the humiliation. Further, such a happy submissive is less susceptible to outside influences, and so there is no need to isolate them for fear of losing control over them.
An act does not need to be embarrassing to be considered humiliating in this context (typically embarrassment and humiliation are thought to be interconnected, but this is not always the case). Any act which succeeds in humbling the submissive has humiliated them, even if there is no feeling of embarrassment. For example a submissive who enjoys being locked in a cage may not consider that as humiliating because they do not feel any embarrassment from it. Yet if this activity reminds them of their status and role in the relationship, if it acts to alter their attitude to either keep them humble or to humble them, then it has succeeded as an act of humiliation.
Acts intended to be humiliating can unintentionally become acts of degradation if care is not taken. Not everyone reacts the same way to the same situations, but further, the same person may react differently under different circumstances. A submissive who enjoys being kept on a leash and treated as a pet as an act of humiliation may suddenly feel degraded if another person, say a family member for example, were to see them doing so. A wise dominant knows their submissive well enough to be aware of these factors and how the submissive is likely to react, and takes precautions to safeguard the submissive from situations which would turn the situation into one of degradation.
In addition to perspective there are some general factors that can separate acts which are humiliating from those which become degrading. For example, suppose a submissive is shackled, naked in a room and required to clean it. By itself there is nothing inherently harmful about this situation. A submissive might feel some embarrassment at her circumstance, particularly if this is her first experience with the circumstance. In short, in and of itself it is a mildly humiliating situation. The shackles remind the submissive her freedom is limited to what the dominant allows and can be restricted at any time. Being nude reminds her she is not entitled even to simple modesty, the dominant controls whether her body will be covered or exposed. Being assigned a menial task, such as cleaning, reminds her of her status and her subservient role. However, this same task which is mildly humiliating could become intensely degrading if the circumstances were changed. For example, if the submissive were told she were stupid, that such was all she was good for, if she were otherwise insulted in ways that questioned her self worth, her value as a submissive, her ability to serve, the circumstance would become degrading. Likewise, a submissive in the above circumstance who was suddenly being observed by friends of the dominant who began ogling her, taking photographs, and making lewd remarks might very well feel degraded, particularly if she were very uncomfortable with public nudity, were conscientious about her body, or had conservative values which made her feel such was morally wrong. Comparatively, a submissive lacking such inhibitions and especially one who enjoyed such attention (i.e., enjoyed exhibitionism, enjoyed verbal humiliation, enjoyed being photographed) might feel the same situation was merely humiliating and even enjoyable. Again, a emphasis must be stressed on the importance of a dominant knowing their submissive well enough to understand how they are likely to react to various situations and circumstances.
Degradation is, without question, destructive to the submissive. Its consequences are unhealthy and potentially disastrous to the relationship. As a tool to achieve dominance it is a weak form and unreliable, leaving the submissive more susceptible to outside influences that can destabilize the relationship. Humiliation as a tool can be useful in altering the submissives attitude without destroying their self esteem. It can be useful in establishing and reinforcing roles within the relationship. Combined with other positive methods, it can help produce a submissive that is happy in their relationship and their role and thus less susceptible to other influences, helping to make the relationship more stable. With an understanding of how to use humiliation as a tool, and the destructive nature of degradation, a dominant can work towards creating a better relationship and a more responsive submissive.
|
|
|
|
