|
SusanofO -> RE: Machevelli Domination (3/5/2007 11:14:47 AM)
|
[:)]Well. I think when people speak of "punishment" and "discipline", that since it is obvious to me, even more from reading this thread, that the two words "discipline" and "punishment" can mean different things to different people, from now on I intend to ask someone what they mean exactly when they refer to it - not assume what they mean, if it's used in a bdsm context on these forums (unless I have good reason to believe I absolutely do know what someone else means).
Thanks to all for the thoughts on what each sees as discipline and punishment. Much appreciated by me. Yes, I do see a difference, between the two words, (but only kinda) as I stated earlier - only in the sense that I think the term "discipline" can indeed mean more than 1 thing to many people - in fact, as I said, I think it can mean any of 3 things, depending on the context and who you're talking to, whereras usually I've seen people mostly give "punishment" a negative connotation, and mostly after that then see it as vengeful only, much of the time, when the intent could in fact be "even-handed, correction" instead. Padriag shed new light on this for me (in a very clarifying way).
***What seems to stand out (to me) from this entire discussion is that, regardless of whether "discipline" is viewed as "corrective" discipline" or as "punishment" (yet still intended to be corrective, and not merely vengeful and appeasing to the Dominant - intended for true "correction") it seems very important that the"punishment" or "correction", if you will, "fit the "crime" if it is meant to "correct" bad behavior - so as not to merely appease a Dominant's bad mood - over valuing its likely value in doing that, and instead be viewed a "vengeful" or over-the-top, by the submissive. *Hopefully, a submissive knows how her Dominant views such things as "correction" and what kinds of negative behavior might merit "correction". And hopefully, any submisive with much foresight, as far as choosing a Dominant would value knowing enough about a Dominant to trust he would not use "punishment" in "anger" (more on this, below).
For many here on the boards (and myself) I still think the word "discipline" can be taken 3 ways -
1) In a casual or "play" (bdsm activity) context, as in: "I am going to "discipline" you, you naughty sub" (and both people involved know it's pleasurable in intent). Using it in this way, IMO, is not where confusion usually has arisen, from my obervations (at least, not today, lol! [:D] unless - someone says they don't ever enjoy this in "play or bdsm activity" (as in: "I've never enjoyed and S/m activity, not even mild spanking"). I'd doubt that was true, if someone claimed it, but I suppose it could be true. This isn't what we're trying to define here, though, really, at all. So on we go to - context number...
2) The word "discipline" meaning something in a somewhat nuetral sense, If one sees the word "punishment" only as vengeful or retributive (but it still, in this #2 sense, can mean "corrective" in the sense one is forming a new habit (disciplining someone, or oneself, to lose weight, or arise earlier, for example).
I can see in this context where "discipline" could be "corrective" in the sense it might be "correcting" something someone sees as a "flaw" in themselves, OR a Dominant asking (or demanding) a submissive discipline themself this way, as imposing a "mere" form of "control", which could, IMO, in the right circumstances be viewed as "corrective" only (nuetral) - after all; you're "correcting" a weight problem if you go on a diet, period, IMO, no matter what the reason or who has asked you do do it,or who has "imposed" the demand on you - because the underlying problem, overweight, is being lessened or "corrected".
However, this reference to supposedly "nuetral" (in it's intent) discipline, could also be viewed as "punitive" (forced weight loss to atone for something, for example) and so as a "correction" for some other bad behavior, IMO. In this case, it is "punitive" as in also "correcting" behavior, but more as some see the word "punishment" in a retributive sense of the word, even in a bdsm context, for some reason, even if it is intended by many Dominants,as "corrective" as well, and even if the "punishment" in not vengefully motivated (*hence such phrasea we hear as: "Never punish in anger" given as "advice" on "how to be a responsible Dominant, on bdsm site references on the topic, and probably in many books written on the topic, too.
To me (obviously, and to many others I'd guess) however - this is where the waters can become muddied, and confusion can arise and I can see why people would want "discipline" to mean either one definition or the other - and not two things instead (and yet, it does mean two things, really, to many).
***However - I feel compelled to ask this: After Padraig's clarification of the word in a bdsm context, how "retributive" and "vengeful" can the term "discipline" OR "punishment" really be - if the intent is to "correct" bad behavior, and is not revenge or vengeful, because the "punishment" indeed does "fit the crime?" (or even, IMO, if the intent for such is clearly there?) In this way, I see "discipline" no differently than "punishment" if it "just and "fair" and is not "Revenge", but is an act that seeks to "correct" bad behavior, by imposing a consequence for it (as "discipline" in the right context, can also do).
I appreciated Padriag's (and Lizzie's) added thoughts (that some other Dominants, and others, have echoed before, and here, on the forums) that "punishment" in the sense a responsible and even-handed Dominants would use it, would never value (or try darn hard not to, anyway) salving a bad mood or "need for revenge" over the value it might have in actually "correcting" a submissive's negative behavior. *Thus we hear such phrases as "never punish in anger", as "advice" on how to be a good and responsible Dominant (on many site references on the topic, and threads on this forum I've read).
*Does that mean no irresponsible Domiants exist - anywhere? No, of course it doesn't. Anymore than saying good submissive don't exist anywhere, simply because "gamey" submissives actually do exist, IMO.
Interesting thread!
- Susan
|
|
|
|
