the bottom who acts automatically: a problem? solution?

[Pure]

the bottom who acts "automatically".

supposing, for the sake of an example, i'm on the bottom, and the top asks me to lick her feet. one way to do this is just go on autopilot, blank the mind and carry it out. there is a kind of psychic distance: this is what i have to do, so i do it as ordered. IF the task is a bit distasteful, say, her feet are very dirty, i can avoid feeling the usual distaste if i carry out the instruction in this way. similarly, the order 'perform [sex act] with third party' can be executed in such a manner; or any unpleasant task. is automatic execution of an order a problem? i think so, from the bottom, as well as the top perspective.

the ability of a person to distance him or herself from a task assigned is well known. a person says 'i'm following orders,' and just does it. if a police officer is directed to 'subdue the prisoner,' and it involves beating him with a baton, which the officer finds objectionable, the officer can simply go into 'automatic' mode: " I hear the order, I follow it." the officer's personality and feelings may be humane, but they are set aside. he acts like an automaton.

it might be argued that automatism is desirable in some circumstances: orders *should* be unthinkingly carried out. perhaps in the military case, it's sometimes satisfactory to "just do as told." otoh, the elite units prize enthusiasm, i.e. whole hearted ("gung ho") response.

some will say, 'it's good for the bottom to act automatically'; i disagree: this confuses likelihood of execution with manner of execution. the bottom should certainly do as ordered, without reflecting on issues like purpose and outcome. but this is not exactly the same as going into automatic mode. i'm saying then, that the master rather than 'automatic mode,' wants an involved mode, and a wholehearted and sincere compliance.

why? because distancing allows the bottom to avoid the mental consequences of the act. there is a kind of deniability afterwards, as in the police officer example.

supposing i'm in the top or master position, i *want* the bottom to realize, that is, fully experience, for example, a degradation. i want her to embrace her task and status. i want to minimize 'distancing'. i insist that the bottom to look into the mirror and see herself, for example, scraping the cum off her face and eating it; and say "this is who i am; this is where i am."

from the bottom's perspective as well, if he or she *wants* the experience of serving, automatism is not desirable

i wonder if others, from either position, have ideas about this problem, and what to do about it. i've not said anything, yet, on the 'what to do about it' issue.

 

[catalina_francisco]

I'm with you on this one, Pure. For me, there is more value or attraction in doing (or at least attempting to) while fully engaged, than disconnecting and performing an order that basically then becomes disjointed from the one who orders it, and means little more from task to task....each tends to be on the same level no matter how disgusting, difficult, distasteful. I think in part this is why F is not a devotee of subspace as a place a pyl should and can routinely retreat to....the disconnection becomes a turn-off and doesn't serve his needs or desires.

Catalina

 

[the captians wench]

I have found that I am very capible of distancing myself from situations, if I choose to. What I find funny is the fact that when I realize how much and how often I am distancing myself from the orders given me, that tends to be when I re-evaluate the partnership I am in.

With the one fondly refured to as 'master asshole' I took myself...away....most of the time he was with me. I am not attracted to women, but I performed acts on them mindlessly because I was told to. I did things that were against my beliefs, because I was told to. And I kept taking myself to this place where I could justify me doing things I normally would not have, for one simple reason, I was afraid to disobey, and failure to complete a task was the same as disobedience in his eyes.

Maybe this is an extreme, but when I realized that I was...zoning out...more often than I was enjoying what was going on, well it was one of the signs that this person just was not right for me.

Jounar has had me do things that were not easy for me for one reason or another. But I have never had that same feeling, that seperation, as I did with the previously mentioned person. It means that I hesitate, and I sturggle, but not only does this make the event more real but I think it makes the sacrifice, the effort put into it all that more precious. I mean what is the satisfaction in some one blindly taking orders? Wouldn't it be more satisfying for some one to see the situation, feel the conflict, but do it anyway, perhaps with a bit of stuggle, because of the comitment they have given to you, not simply because they were following orders.

When you distance yourself from part of the situation, how can you not disance yourself from all of it? From the emotion and the feeling behind it. How is it a sacrifice for a computer to run a program it has been programed to do? Where's the love and emotion in that?

 

[ecstaticsub]

In an ideal situation all orders/tasks should be followed while the mind is fully engaged and not in a zoned out sort of way. However, there may be a task or situation in which the pyl can not bring themselves to do the perform (without getting sick, crying, etc) . I would think automation would be better than disobeying. Especially if disobeying would cause embarrassment to the PYL.

 

[the captians wench]

In an ideal situation all orders/tasks should be followed while the mind is fully engaged and not in a zoned out sort of way. However, there may be a task or situation in which the pyl can not bring themselves to do the perform (without getting sick, crying, etc) . I would think automation would be better than disobeying. Especially if disobeying would cause embarrassment to the PYL.

but if the purpose is to make you feel. to make you sick, cry, or just struggle in general to show your sacrifice, to show your dedication, then wouldn't automation be the same as disobedience?

 

[catalina_francisco]

I would think automation would be better than disobeying. Especially if disobeying would cause embarrassment to the PYL.

I think to a large degree it depends on the PYL, their focus, what they deem as most important, and whether it is really going to concern them what anyone else thinks if they choose to make it a public display. While some would see their reputation measured by the pyl's ability to perform no matter what it took, some would be focused more on whether the pyl could do it while still remaining connected mentally and emotionally to what is happening. Dynamics and preferences differ.

Catalina

 

[twysted73]

If i wanted a blow up doll I'd buy one.

The whole reason for Dominating (for me atleast) is the connection, the interraction and the responses.

These are my rewards for my efforts.
My motivations for putting myself & her through so much.

How else will we grow? How else can we learn?

I'd rather her not do anything at all if my orders are met with disconnect.


Fuck that

 

[ownedsubgal]

hmm, thought-provoking topic you've raised here Pure. while i can certainly understand your point from the Top/Dominant perspective, of wanting a submissive to always be fully aware and engaged while serving, it must also be taken into consideration that for some submissives going on "auto-pilot" is a deeply ingrained self-defense mechanism.

i tend to shift instantly into that mode when a particular task or situation is very emotionally difficult or painful. it is something i began doing as a child when i was sexually abused. it protected me (to an extent) then, and it protects me now. if i did not have this ability, if i did not zone out during these moments, then i would truly be incapable of bearing such a thing and it would not be long before mentally and emotionally i'd be irreparably broken.

so if you had such a submissive...one who had been so damaged through various past traumas and whatnot that they sincerely could not handle always being 100% there....really what would you prefer? that they learn how to prevent themselves from going into that little psychological safespace only to leave you with a shell of a person?

 

[ecstaticsub]

but if the purpose is to make you feel. to make you sick, cry, or just struggle in general to show your sacrifice, to show your dedication, then wouldn't automation be the same as disobedience?

I would assume in at least some cases, his purpose is to just get the task done. He knows me well enough and knows what would be a sacrifice and what would be easy for me to do. It would be similiar to a harsh beating--he doesn't need to hear me scream at the top of my lungs to know it hurts me. He want to me to suck it up and perhaps moan softly. It is simply my job to obey not psychoanalysis his purpose in given me the task.

I think to a large degree it depends on the PYL, their focus, what they deem as most important, and whether it is really going to concern them what anyone else thinks if they choose to make it a public display. While some would see their reputation measured by the pyl's ability to perform no matter what it took, some would be focused more on whether the pyl could do it while still remaining connected mentally and emotionally to what is happening. Dynamics and preferences differ.

Catalina

For example If my Daddy ordered me to perform a sexual act on someone and I didn't want to for some reason it would reflect very badly on Daddy and I would never want to disobey him, let alone in front of someone. He wouldn't care what this other person thought, but he would care that I refused to do something.

 

[ecstaticsub]

BTW, of course the activities that I would do "automatically" those that I would disassociate from are extremely rare. But I see where there would be some cases that it would be necessary.

The majority of the time I need and crave that humilation, pain, feeling of objectification etc. If I didn't, I wouldn't be a submissive.

 

[myinnerslut]

i find acting on auto pilot to be an undesirable trait in myself. even when it somes to something like subspace, there are times i request that Master "keeps me here". a lot of the time i want to experience what is happenening, and i see zoning out as a bad thing as it doesnt allow me to pay attention to my Master

 

[BiBunny]

I look at it in a different way, I guess. I don't have slaves, so if something's truly distasteful to the other person, then he or she can always say, "No, I'm not going to do it." If the sub needs to zone out a bit to do what I ask, then that's fine. It gets done either way, right? Whatever he or she needs to be able to look in the mirror tomorrow. *Shrug*

 

[Homburg]

i find acting on auto pilot to be an undesirable trait in myself. even when it somes to something like subspace, there are times i request that Master "keeps me here". a lot of the time i want to experience what is happenening, and i see zoning out as a bad thing as it doesnt allow me to pay attention to my Master

In this case, she is referring to something like ropework. Rope sets her off in her happy place very quickly, and it does require work to keep her around. Sometimes she will ask that I do so simply because she wants to watch the tie progress and ask questions. It is not a response that I want to try to train out as, frankly, it is a useful trait at times, and it is not that difficult to keep under control.

Anyway, I also dislike the automaton concept. I tend to avoid such responses, and if I get the idea that some act is happening on auto-pilot I tend to modify the situation or simply do something vile to break her out of the protected mode. I want my bottom in the headspace that I want her in.

 

[ataxia.girl]

i do think it can work as a way to try something and find out you can live through it to perhaps experience more fully another day or even later in that same session. i have gone on auto pilot before as a way to begin to do something i was afraid of or found distasteful but i am not actually able to remain on autopilot and often find myself thinking "oh this isn't so bad, i can actually do this and hey i am starting to kind of dig it." i think it can be used as a tool and it would seem the Top could also encourage the bottom not to use it as a crutch by asking questions and requiring some engagement while they were performing the task when they felt it was time for the bottom to experience what they were doing on a deeper level.

 

[Netzach]

I look at it in a different way, I guess. I don't have slaves, so if something's truly distasteful to the other person, then he or she can always say, "No, I'm not going to do it." If the sub needs to zone out a bit to do what I ask, then that's fine. It gets done either way, right? Whatever he or she needs to be able to look in the mirror tomorrow. *Shrug*

I'm also an "ends thinker" I guess. I'm lazy like that and maximizing conflict isn't interesting to me for its own sake.

 

[EmpressFi]

I was discussing this with Master.. to see what his take was...

He said, if it were safe, then yeah, he'd expect me to do whatever I needed to do to get the task done. If it werent safe, or if I didnt feel it was safe... then he would want me to talk to him and to say no, explaining why I didnt feel safe doing it. But, he said it would also test my trust in him to believe he would never tell me to do something that wasnt safe.

 

[the captians wench]

Maybe it's just because I have a negitive connection with going on auto. I only did it because I was hiding from the fact that I was in a situation that not only did I not want to be in, but that was not good for me.

I connect subspace with something different. While I do have an out of body type feeling in both situations, when I hit subspace sinsations are hightened as well as my awarness, when I'm in auto, I'm a lifeless zombie.

 

[Adakgirl]

Ok, I am becoming a little confused here. If a submissive is told to do a task that is a little distasteful, a little dirty, out of their comfort zone...isn't that pretty normal situation in a submissive's life? It's quite understandable for some to have the need to step out of themselves in order to get themselves started doing it. Girdle their loins whatever. But once they begin shouldn't they be able to get past that and re-engage themselves?
The strong desire to please, to serve, to obey... even if it's distasteful, is whats submitting is all about isn't it? In my view if you are not fully mentally and emotionally engaged in the act, then you are not really submitting. You are not giving it all up because your not all there. You are only submitting your body, not your mind.

 

[bridgeburner]

Dissociation in and of itself isn't the issue for me, but rather WHY one dissociates.

If it's distancing to reduce nervousness or fear in a situation where one is only uncomfortable but not feeling endangered by the PYL then I think it's something that everyone does to some extent in all kinds of situations. In this instance I agree with BiBunny and Netzach. If pyls were always cheerily and fully present and eager all the time there'd be no fun in the world for those who get their kicks from dominating and torturing them.

On the other hand, ownedsubgal and the captain's wench bring up a different kind of dissociation. It occurs when things really aren't okay, the pyl -- or the vanilla or the person in general, this doesn't only happen within BDSM by any means--- does feel endangered and powerless to affect the events he or she is caught up in. In such a case it is useful to gain mental/emotional distance until such time as the unpleasantness is over with. As osg mentioned it can become habit for those who have suffered abuse.

 

[rida]

Dissociation in and of itself isn't the issue for me, but rather WHY one dissociates.

If it's distancing to reduce nervousness or fear in a situation where one is only uncomfortable but not feeling endangered by the PYL then I think it's something that everyone does to some extent in all kinds of situations. In this instance I agree with BiBunny and Netzach. If pyls were always cheerily and fully present and eager all the time there'd be no fun in the world for those who get their kicks from dominating and torturing them.

On the other hand, ownedsubgal and the captain's wench bring up a different kind of dissociation. It occurs when things really aren't okay, the pyl -- or the vanilla or the person in general, this doesn't only happen within BDSM by any means--- does feel endangered and powerless to affect the events he or she is caught up in. In such a case it is useful to gain mental/emotional distance until such time as the unpleasantness is over with. As osg mentioned it can become habit for those who have suffered abuse.

Very well put.

I would also like to add a variable that has not been mentioned: whether we are talking a D/s dynamic with an underling emotional relationship or a merely play type of situation. I would imagine that in a play type situation with a strong focus on the psychical aspects, the PYL might not care what makes the pyl do the task as far as it gets done as the scope of the relationship is limited. While in a deeper emotional relationship, the scope being broader, the disconnection, especially if constant could be negative and detrimental to the dynamic, and needs to be addressed.

 

[Pure]

thanks to all for great responses. here are some reflections to which i hope some will respond.


i think as bb and others have indicated, there *are* a number of "automatic" strategies or subjective states. as cat said _putting oneself in 'subspace' _ is a variation of the theme, of not being there.

another variant doesn't have to do with distance so much as LACK of wholehearted involvement, whether it "happens" or is chosen. as pointed out to me by a person who bottoms (not in this forum), there is "loss of motivation." certain directions cause a turning off of the erotic response, because it's replaced by "I'll grit my teeth and do it, no matter how distasteful."

this way of avoiding whole hearted--or engaged--actions, is related to others, such as compliance with [inner] resentment or inner insult: "the idiot is sticking a dildo in me when he could be fucking me."

as to the point raised by osg, bibunny and netzach. i agree with osg the state of 'distance' might not be avoidable for some people and some tasks. i would not, when i am top, hold that against a bottom, but i'd expect her as one poster said, to say 'i'm not here, master." i might then proceed, regardless. a defensive reaction is not going to alter my agenda.

there are many ways to deal with distance, as other posters said, including doing nothing at all (accepting). but as to "ends" --i.e. the bottom has gotten the job done, so why worry--i'm not sure i'd agree with these three. every assignment has an educative component, *some of which has to do with process*, not just an 'end,' like item X is inserted in orifice Y.' or "orgasm occurs in situation Y."

certainly distanced or resentful compliance undermines that goal--or at least the process--, as does 'distance', if the feelings are held in concealment.

i think the answer to both, as others have said, is the bottom's disclosure. this allows the master, if she or he chooses, (in homburg's words) to break her out of the protected mode if that is desired. it need not be done with a vile act; it could be done with a kiss.

from a bottom perspective, i think one reaches the same conclusion: distance is generally not desirable as a choice (catalina's first post concurred). when i'm on the bottom i want to be engaged. *all* distance states or negative feelings NEED NOT operate against that goal; i believe that by disclosing such states and feelings, engagement can be furthered, if the top so desires. the top can use resentment, for example, as 'grist for the mill.'

do people have further thoughts on the above points?

 

[Homburg]

i think the answer to both, as others have said, is the bottom's disclosure. the allows the master, if she or he chooses, (in homburg's words) to break her out of the protected mode if that is desired. it need not be done with a vile act; it could be done with a kiss.

Of course. The implication to my words was that I consider willfully going on autopilot to be a trangression. I want presence and engagement, generally speaking. If I consider it a consequence of much needed personality defense, I will change the situation. If it is just a consequence of distaste or resentment, well, that is when the vile things happen.

 

[ownedsubgal]

it's true that there are many different types of distant states. i think that it's important for the Dominant (assuming this is a significant relationship and not a casual encounter) to be able to recognize when his submissive is in such a state and to recognize the difference between a distance rooted in resentment, depression, subspace, or whatever else. that way it can be determined whether or not such a state is positive or negative (in regards to serving the Dominant's needs).

as far as letting one's Master know directly that one is just not here, the thing about being in such a state, especially if like me it's brought about by traumatic situations and is wrapped around despair and depression, it may not be possible to articulate such a thing. also it may not even be appropriate in the situation.

for example, if i am serving another man who is very frightening, hurting me physically and emotionally a great deal, and i start feeling sorry for myself thinking about how this will not be the last time i will be in such a situation and wondering why it all has to be so hard, and on and on....that is about the time the wall comes up and a part of me checks out. but to say or do anything about this to my Master in the moment, even if he is inches away, would just be unthinkable. it would be rude to the other i'm serving, and embarassing to my Master. instead i zone out and continue serving to the absolute best of my abilities, without hesitation or complaint. being distant does not hinder me from listening or being obedient, it just keeps me from completely falling apart and not being able to serve the way a slave should.

 

[ecstaticsub]

it's true that there are many different types of distant states. i think that it's important for the Dominant (assuming this is a significant relationship and not a casual encounter) to be able to recognize when his submissive is in such a state and to recognize the difference between a distance rooted in resentment, depression, subspace, or whatever else. that way it can be determined whether or not such a state is positive or negative (in regards to serving the Dominant's needs).

as far as letting one's Master know directly that one is just not here, the thing about being in such a state, especially if like me it's brought about by traumatic situations and is wrapped around despair and depression, it may not be possible to articulate such a thing. also it may not even be appropriate in the situation.

for example, if i am serving another man who is very frightening, hurting me physically and emotionally a great deal, and i start feeling sorry for myself thinking about how this will not be the last time i will be in such a situation and wondering why it all has to be so hard, and on and on....that is about the time the wall comes up and a part of me checks out. but to say or do anything about this to my Master in the moment, even if he is inches away, would just be unthinkable. it would be rude to the other i'm serving, and embarassing to my Master. instead i zone out and continue serving to the absolute best of my abilities, without hesitation or complaint. being distant does not hinder me from listening or being obedient, it just keeps me from completely falling apart and not being able to serve the way a slave should.

Yes, I can understand this completely. Well said.

 

[Marquis]

Fascinating thread, Pure.

i wonder if others, from either position, have ideas about this problem, and what to do about it. i've not said anything, yet, on the 'what to do about it' issue.

Well, I don't think you've put forth a "problem" so much as an observation.

The observation being that somewhere in between enthused service and refusal/inability is emotionally bare physical response.

The only time there is a problem, and I think you can take this statement as broadly as you like, is when someone isn't getting what they want.

In my case, I like to see the automaton every once in a while. Let's me know I'm keeping it challenging, doing my job. Sometimes you get the phony automaton thing, but a quick slap to the face will reveal how thin that veil is when she starts punching your chest and cursing you out.

If I want her to remain present, I back up a bit. Slow down. I don't really consider it something she can control.

Dissociation in and of itself isn't the issue for me, but rather WHY one dissociates.

If it's distancing to reduce nervousness or fear in a situation where one is only uncomfortable but not feeling endangered by the PYL then I think it's something that everyone does to some extent in all kinds of situations. In this instance I agree with BiBunny and Netzach. If pyls were always cheerily and fully present and eager all the time there'd be no fun in the world for those who get their kicks from dominating and torturing them.

On the other hand, ownedsubgal and the captain's wench bring up a different kind of dissociation. It occurs when things really aren't okay, the pyl -- or the vanilla or the person in general, this doesn't only happen within BDSM by any means--- does feel endangered and powerless to affect the events he or she is caught up in. In such a case it is useful to gain mental/emotional distance until such time as the unpleasantness is over with. As osg mentioned it can become habit for those who have suffered abuse.

I'm trying to understand the distinction here and I'm having a tough time with it. You know I'm not fucking with you, so humor me.

but i'd expect her as one poster said, to say 'i'm not here, master."

....

i think the answer to both, as others have said, is the bottom's disclosure. this allows the master, if she or he chooses, (in homburg's words) to break her out of the protected mode if that is desired. it need not be done with a vile act; it could be done with a kiss.

...


do people have further thoughts on the above points?

Yes.

I think you're caught in a paradox.

A person in an automatic mode cannot emote or affect fair indication of being in that mode.