RE: Controlling Yourself (Full Version)

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



Message


agirl -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/9/2006 11:32:00 AM)

I think it likely is a double-edged sword, yes......or it can be, depending on your personality.

I was trying to think of what self-control actually IS in an *overall* sense.  We may have it in certain areas of our lives but not others. We might find that it fluctuates even in areas that we have it, depending on circumstances.

I was independant and self-sufficient before I was owned, but I wasn't in control of lots of things.

People choose to be in relationships of all types for an a huge range of reasons. How willing they are to stick with the relationship also involves a huge range of reasons.

agirl




MagiksSlave -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/9/2006 11:33:42 AM)

You cant give away something you dont have. If you have no controll over yourself then you cant give it to a Master... though that begs the question even if you cant give it cant the Master take it??

Magik's slave




agirl -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/9/2006 12:03:27 PM)

You most certainly can. Lack of control rarely covers every aspect of a person's life.  Controlling me and my life didn't really require me to have anything other than an agreement to accept that he had the authority to pick up the reins.

agirl




MagiksSlave -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/9/2006 12:09:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: agirl

You most certainly can. Lack of control rarely covers every aspect of a person's life.  Controlling me and my life didn't really require me to have anything other than an agreement to accept that he had the authority to pick up the reins.

agirl



Yeah that makes sence and i guess thats why I can see it both ways.

Magik's slave




alandraofMists -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/9/2006 1:37:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kyraofMists

What do others think of this?  Do you think that both need to be in control of themselves to build a healthy relationship or does that responsibility lie solely with the dominant?

Knight's kyra


In my opinion both need to be in control of themselves in a mature and healthy manner. With that being said though there is also  the need for there to be an acceptance form both the Dominant and the submissive that mistakes will be  made, and there maybe the occasional loss of control.

no matter how in control a person can be, there can be something or sometime that life just brings out the worst in us.  With any loss of control i would look deeper into what was happening in and during that time to see if there were other factors involved.

Outside influences to ones state of control does not take away the responsibility for the loss of control, but does bring a clearer picture to what and why such a loss happened in the first place.

Knight's alandra




LordODiscipline -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/9/2006 5:11:31 PM)

I agree to a great extent that people "should be in control of themself" (as far as I determine that to be)
- and- 
I believe that both partners share responsibility for a relationship no matter the dynamics.
 
However, the entire premise of "being on control of oneself" is one of those things which is exceptionally subjective and can be talked to death by everyone concerned without benefit of an understanding about what "control of oneself" means to the majority.
 
And, invariably - someone makes a statement that is totally unreasonable stating that they should never be emotional (or, something akin to that).
 
I just see no point in making such a speciously poor statement at all, let alone trying to ascribe such things to both parties.
 
I have related the story in the past about the submissive who left her dominant when he could not shake a depression that was a result of his mother passing for a period of time - and, how she stated that he had 'no control over himself' - hence her descision.
 
Another innocent victim of 'Castlerealmania'
 
~J

quote:

ORIGINAL: kyraofMists

I often see this concept of "If a dominant is not in control of themselves then they cannot control anyone else."  I agree with it to a point.  However, I also think the flip side is just as relevant.  If a submissive is not in control of themselves then they do not have any control to give any one else.

What do others think of this?  Do you think that both need to be in control of themselves to build a healthy relationship or does that responsibility lie solely with the dominant?

Knight's kyra




RopesBurn4u -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/9/2006 5:11:30 PM)

It is a mutual sharing. You do need a submissive to be in control of some part of herself.  By her knowing exactly what she is looking for and what draws her to become a submissive is a good indication that she is in control of herself. The inability to think in a rational way and be able to answers deep questions about herself, reveals weakness and an unstable behavior, something that is not good at all




juliaoceania -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/9/2006 7:07:22 PM)


I
quote:

have related the story in the past about the submissive who left her dominant when he could not shake a depression that was a result of his mother passing for a period of time - and, how she stated that he had 'no control over himself' - hence her descision.
 
Another innocent victim of 'Castlerealmania'

 
I have to say as someone that admires self control and discipline in my Dom, and find this aspect essential for our power exchange, I believe it was a cop out on the part of this submissive to leave her dominant when he needed her because of "castle realm" (which not having read that site in several years I am unfamiliar with this concept being on that site). If one models their relationship based on an internet website to that extent they definitely lacked control over themselves, and were being controlled by castlerealm, they were not even being controlled by their dominant.

I would not leave my dominant for such a flimsy reason, and it says a lot about the commitment of the submissive, and nothing about the concept of control being a positive attribute of a power exchange dynamic. She would probably have left if he showed any humanity at all, whether it be an illness or job loss, or whatever.

Just my opinion




BeingChewsie -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/9/2006 7:29:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MagiksSlave

You cant give away something you dont have. If you have no controll over yourself then you cant give it to a Master... though that begs the question even if you cant give it cant the Master take it??

Magik's slave



Yes. My owner -took- control over my life. I didn't give him control. I didn't have control over my life. If I could manage myself effectively I would have no need to be owned.  He contains me, provides me with direction/boundaries, defines the rules of engagement. I have self-control now..because I operate within clearly defined and enforced rules. I live within extremely tight boundaries.




Noah -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/9/2006 8:01:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BeingChewsie

quote:

ORIGINAL: MagiksSlave

You cant give away something you dont have. If you have no controll over yourself then you cant give it to a Master... though that begs the question even if you cant give it cant the Master take it??

Magik's slave



Yes. My owner -took- control over my life. I didn't give him control. I didn't have control over my life. If I could manage myself effectively I would have no need to be owned.  He contains me, provides me with direction/boundaries, defines the rules of engagement. I have self-control now..because I operate within clearly defined and enforced rules. I live within extremely tight boundaries.


Well said, Chewsie.

I've seen plenty of sloppy drunks "give" control they utterly lacked to bouncers or cops. I'm sure a few ended up "giving" the control they lacked to jailers.

If you look at it another way, MagiksSlave, the control that an individual has reliquished is just laying there for anyone to pick up and take--unless the out-of-control person in question reasserts him or herself.

So whether you look at it practically or theoretically, either way I don't see much value in that little Rule of Life you stated.






kyraofMists -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/9/2006 8:26:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Noah

If you look at it another way, MagiksSlave, the control that an individual has reliquished is just laying there for anyone to pick up and take--unless the out-of-control person in question reasserts him or herself.


That little bit right there just put several pieces in place for me.  Thanks, Noah.

The downside that I see to this, is that "anyone" could turn out to be very unhealthy for the individual who is out of control.  Of course they could also be very healthy as well.

Knight's kyra





LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/9/2006 8:51:45 PM)

Hehe, on the other hand, a lot of subs/slaves are control FREAKS due to a SENSE of lacking control, and need to learn how to LIMIT their need for control and just CHILL.




kyraofMists -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/9/2006 8:59:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross

Hehe, on the other hand, a lot of subs/slaves are control FREAKS due to a SENSE of lacking control, and need to learn how to LIMIT their need for control and just CHILL.


Hey!!  I resemble that remark.  *w*




ownedgirlie -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/9/2006 9:51:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kyraofMists

The downside that I see to this, is that "anyone" could turn out to be very unhealthy for the individual who is out of control.  Of course they could also be very healthy as well.


You are very right, kyra.  That was me a long time ago, in the hands of the wrong person.  Fortunately I got out before more damage was done.  I got lucky the day my Master introduced himself.   It was a chance meeting and an instant connection, and he is the healthiest relationship I have ever been in.

I also have to agree with everything chewsie said. The only reason I am as healthy and self-controlled as I am now is because of the tight rules my Master has placed on me. If he had not come along I would probably be dead by now.




SirLordTrainer -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/10/2006 6:11:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kyraofMists

I often see this concept of "If a dominant is not in control of themselves then they cannot control anyone else."  I agree with it to a point.  However, I also think the flip side is just as relevant.  If a submissive is not in control of themselves then they do not have any control to give any one else.


Knight's kyra


Exactly right.. The submissive must have something there in order for the Dominant to recieve. Mutually inter-dependent.




Noah -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/10/2006 7:36:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kyraofMists
quote:

ORIGINAL: Noah

If you look at it another way, MagiksSlave, the control that an individual has reliquished is just laying there for anyone to pick up and take--unless the out-of-control person in question reasserts him or herself.


That little bit right there just put several pieces in place for me.  Thanks, Noah.

The downside that I see to this, is that "anyone" could turn out to be very unhealthy for the individual who is out of control.  Of course they could also be very healthy as well.


Well that's right too, I think.

As for the notion that someone who lacks all self-control cannot relinquish control to another, I think there are other problems with a sentiment stated so broadly.

Clearly, no-one lacks all self control. Even the incontinent can pin on their own diapers, or ask someone else to. So why can't we see that this applies just as well to financial incontinence, say, or emotional incontinence?

Anyone who accepts the control of another person in in fact controlling herself in accord with that person's wishes, isn't she? Unless he is grasping her appendages and physically guiding her every action, pouring her thoughts into her head, etc. Which of course cannot happen.

Every act of acquiescence--beyond submitting to sheer overpowering physical control--is indeed also an act of self control. The claims people make about how an out-of-control person can't relinquish control just fail to acknowledge a lot of what goes on within and between people, things which aren't simple, nor are they black and white.

"Control" isn't a word which applies to just one sort of thing, in one sort of way.

A certain kind of person tries to paint the world in black and white and then declare the painting reality. Whether this arises from an inability to deal with ambiguousness, vagueness, and complexities -- or whether it arise from a fear of them, either way it blocks the view of life's gray areas and--to milk the metaphor dry--it makes the colors in life very hard to appreciate.

Oversimplifying things and needlessly complicating things are the ravines sitting on either either side of this road we're all walking along. The less we slip into them the further we can go and the better the view along the way.

Sometimes, in response to a certain kind of threat, it might be adaptive to oversimplify or overcomplicate a thing--to slide temporarily into one of those ravines. It might preserve us from a threat we can't handle in a more elegant way at the moment or it might allow us to scramble around some impediment in the road. But by and large I think it tends to be the best policy to acknowledge a thing just as it is, with whatever degree of complexity, vagueness or ambiguity it might happen to have.




SusanofO -> RE: Controlling Yourself (12/10/2006 7:46:43 PM)

I think it's okay to want to give someone else "control". Isn't that why we submissives and slaves are here? I mean, I can "run my own life" (I did it via default, for years, and, barring surprising circumstances, think I did a fairly good job of it). I am confident I can "handle it".

But - I don't want to - I want the thrilling feeling of knowing I am "turning (parts of it, or all of it) over" to someone else. I like getting advice, and "routines", and  know there are other people out there "smarter" than I am (or at least appreciative another perpective). I do agree with the above statment, btw.

But I am not sure why this "out of control" idea is even a question-problem. Even, if you think you're really "screwed up", I can almost guarantee there is someone out there, somewhere, willing to try to "take on the job," so to speak. I think maybe remaining open to learning new things might be crucial, though, if that's the case. To each their own.

- Susan




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875