|
Awareness -> RE: Relyfe Programming. What do you think? (7/30/2011 8:26:26 PM)
|
I hate to break it to you, shagnuts, but what the fuck do you think 'training' is?
Fundamentally, most conceptual ideas of slave or sub training are pretty much conditioning in action. And that involves messing with people's heads. What you're essentially saying is that doing so with techniques which cut to the chase are somehow more immoral than those which don't.
Frogshit.
Now don't get me wrong. I've no desire to pick up a broken sub with the aim of fixing her. That's a lot of work for me and it's fraught with peril because this shit is not an exact science. I leave that to the professionals. However I have encountered those who were unable to work with professionals because - and this seems rather common - those professionals were completely incapable of establishing the rapport necessary to allow therapeutic intervention to occur. And I suspect a lot of this has to do with the reality that professionals are on the clock and that fact is hammered home every time they say "time's up".
In those circumstances, I might do what I can to nudge away their aversion to seeking further professional help.
In every interaction between two people, there is always one whose reality is stronger than the other's. And the stronger reality dominates. Always. The degree of difference between influence via conventional means; slave/sub training; and trance-based deep change work is far less than most people realise.
The notion of consent is implicitly tied into the notion of free will. And there are very clear indicators that suggest that free will is an illusion. That essentially much of what we do is influenced by DNA, peers, upbringing and the various routines we've incorporated into ourselves through the accumulation of experiences. There's also evidence to suggest that our reasons for decisions are actually post-decision rationalisations we construct for ourselves AFTER having made the decision. Which suggests that - to a large degree - our decisions may actually be driven by the unconscious parts of our mind and it's our need for identity which insists that we actually choose.
I'd hate to believe that, but I think to a large extent it could be true. I think it takes a tremendous effort to wake up from the autopilot state which most people spend their lives in. I believe conscious decision IS possible, but it requires a high degree of self-awareness and honesty which is rare.
Point is, you're bleating about the removal of consent. I'm saying consent is nebulous anyway and it's not the technique which matters, it's the intent. If a sub expresses a desire to change in a particular way but feels powerless to do so, is it abusive if I use what I know to enforce that change at a deep level?
There's a rather large difference between creating a physiological dependency via drugs and using trance states/hypnosis. The drug addiction is about control. Explicitly. Trance states are a means to make many things happen - and yes, it's possible to create associations which increase control, but that's a personality issue, not a technique issue.
When a sub is dropped deep into subspace, consent becomes something of a non-issue, doesn't it? Do you have a distaste for subspace because the sub has no self-determination in that state? Or is it okay that the state is only temporary? Wouldn't such a stance seem a tad hypocritical?
I have no stake in this, because what you believe really isn't my concern. It's just apparent to me that you haven't thought this through and your reaction is an emotive one, not a logical one.
|
|
|
|
