UllrsIshtar
Posts: 3693
Joined: 7/28/2012
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: evesgrden
I can only believe the existence of IE within the context of the D being charge as simply the default of all things. The s is used to compliance and that has generalized to anything that the D requests. But you'd drive someone insane trying to make them believe that every utterance from the D is right, is proper, is good.
Because everyone is wrong at times. And everytime the D is wrong and the s believed them, it will elicit doubt instead of trust. You can trust that someone will always have your best interests at heart, but I submit it's impossible to trust that someone will always be correct about everything.
You're operating from false premises. The D doesn't need to be correct all the times, all he needs is to be right more often than the s type would have been in the areas where he actually commands her instead of drawing on her talents and following what she thinks is right.
Lets say that Jeff (sorry for using you as an example, but it's easier than just typing D and s all the time Jeff) is great at managing money, numbers and planning ahead on a macro scale.
He's better at all those things than Carol is.
Let's say that Carol is great at cooking, driving, and planning ahead on micro scale.
She's better at all those things than Jeff is.
They're both excellent at social skills and reading people.
Jeff controls Carols mind, to the point that 'what Jeff X is X', so the daily operation of things would look something like this (if we assume Jeff is a sensible human being):
Carol drives everywhere, but has a standing order to let Jeff know when she's fatigued, or otherwise unable to drive at the best of her capabilities.
Carol cooks, and when Jeff sees her make what he thinks is a mistake while baking (getting salt instead of sugar for instance) he'll ask her "did you mean to get that salt" instead of telling her she's wrong.
Carol plans the household on a micro scale (planning groceries runs, managing the household supply and pantry, managing when and how to clean the house) with little or no input or interference from Jeff, except to cross reference with each other on budget and so on. If one day Jeff wants to throw off the entire schedule cause he wants to do X instead that day, he'll ask Carol what she had planned for that day, and the coming days, to evaluate if him throwing off her schedule will cause unwanted ripples in the long run that lead to undesirable outcomes.
Carol trusts Jeff to take care of the money, and what he says on that she accepts as a fact.
Carol trusts Jeff to plan on a macro scale, and what he says on that she accepts as fact.
When in a social situation, where reading people is important, they collaborate, by Jeff asking Carol's opinion, and after gathering all the available data, making a call.
Now look at that for a moment, and think about it.
Every single point where Jeff knows Carol is better than him, he won't just go in an assume that he can overrule her, because he knows that she is more likely to be right about the finer details than he is. Instead, he draws on her talents, and uses them to his advantage, so that, by doing so, Carol and Jeff as a team are less likely to be wrong than they would have been as individuals.
On every single point Carol knows Jeff is better than her at it, she trusts him to make the right call, because she knows that the likelihood of him being wrong is smaller than the likelihood of her being wrong. If she has a question she asks it, but if he insists he's right, she doesn't push the issue, because statistically she knows that it's more probable that he's right in that area, than that she is right.
By doing so, Carol and Jeff as a team are less likely to be wrong than they would have been as individuals.
Mix in the fact that Jeff is good at managing people, and Carol doesn't like to lead, and now you easily have a scenario in which "what Jeff X is X" IS the best possible outcome for them as a couple, because despite the fact that Jeff can be wrong, because of him drawing on the strengths of both of them, they as a couple are less likely to be wrong when working under the preset than "what Jeff X is X" than if they were not working under that preset.
Jeff doesn't need to be right 100% of the time for this to work... all he needs it for them as a couple to have a higher success rate at being right if Carol obeys him, than they would as two individuals on equal footing.
< Message edited by UllrsIshtar -- 8/11/2013 12:54:10 PM >
_____________________________
I can be your whore
I am the dirt you created
I am your sinner
And your whore
But let me tell you something baby
You love me for everything you hate me for
|
RE: Let's talk internal enslavement - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread