Motivations

[impressive]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Gasp!

"Arousal -- The Secret Logic of Sexual Fantasies," by Dr. Michael J. Bader, Thomas Dunne Books, St. Martin Press, ISBN: 0-312-26933-1.

I'll add it to my shopping list! Thanks, mismused.

 

[rgraham666]

You wouldn't believe my reaction to the various observations on D/s posted here.

I snarled!

I know why too. Growing up I was under constant control, everything up to the length of my bowel movements was decided for me.

And that control wasn't a sign of love, it was a sign of proprietorship. I was property, and not very valuable property either.

I hated it!

Sorry vella, lucky. It works for you but not for me.

 

[cantdog]

Okay, I've thought about this overnight, and come unmuddled.

First there's the fear idea, as in Awful Arthur's post-- "Fear and immortality cover a hell of a lot of ground."-- and in my own-- "Isn't fear of starving, or drowning, good for keeping us alive?"

But other people, legitimately, I think, cover that same ground with love. Love of a thing will make you defend it, instead of fear of not having a thing. Gauche made this point most succinctly.

Since the results-- prudence, defense, wants, and needs-- look the same whether you attribute them to fear or to love, then I think it depends on the person. Some people see the world in terms of one and some in terms of the other.

The stern father sees the tendency of the child to be evil and concentrates on discipline. He values fear, he conceives it as a prime motivator. The nurturing mother sees that all children require support, validation, nurturing, and values love, sees that as a prime motivator. The result they want is the same, but the concept of the world is radically different.

Conservative thought takes a stern dad point of view. Discipline saves the world. Liberal thought takes the nurturing and loving point of view. It really has an entirely different feel to it.

Enter a new church, for instance, and you can feel the difference using small cues which are just everywhere. Some preachers feel required to tell everyone how to dress, what to think, how to act, how to feel. And many parishioners feel at home in that atmosphere. Liberal-minded people are repelled and seek further.

Shanglan said "It's not? I think for me it is." Exactly.

cantdog

 

[impressive]

Thanks, cant. I'm glad you're unmuddled.

I, however, only become more and more muddled as this discussion continues. The "Ah ha!" that was teasing me is getting further from my grasp. *sigh*

Still, I'm learning and discovering -- so the discourse is productive.

 

[cantdog]

Well, the part I came unmuddled over was about a global, everybody-does-it, sort of love. You seem to be more concerned with one-on-one, even though the thread starter sounded more general and inclusive.

I'm afraid I still have a gut reaction much like grham's about sub stuff. I only ever felt love slip away under tight authority, especially physical suasion. It made me hate. I gave up hate, of course, long since, but I never tried to love those people again.

cantdog

 

[lucky-E-leven]

And that control wasn't a sign of love, it was a sign of proprietorship. I was property, and not very valuable property either.

I hated it!

Sorry vella, lucky. It works for you but not for me.

No need to be sorry, but please do try to understand that there is one large difference between your thoughts about control and ours.

Yours was taken from you, not given by you. It makes a huge difference.

I get the feeling that people think that vella has no mind of her own when we are together. Like she becomes a puppet of mine. Not quite, folks.

~lucky

 

[Guest]

 

[lucky-E-leven]

I, for one, nevah thought that.

Thank goodness you showed up when you did.



Was beginning to feel very misunderstood. (Well, I still feel that way, but it's nice to know that you understand.)



~lucky

 

[impressive]

I'm afraid I still have a gut reaction much like grham's about sub stuff.

Until recently, I'd probably have agreed with you.

Lucky's distinction about GIVING control versus having it TAKEN is extremely significant.

The thought of someone feeling so strongly for me that s/he would voluntarily give that control is really heady. Takes my breath away, actually.

Similarly, the level of trust/love necessary for me to WANT to surrender my control is equally mind boggling. What an ultimate high that would be -- whether or not the other person chose to accept that control.

 

[lucky-E-leven]

Until recently, I'd probably have agreed with you.

Lucky's distinction about GIVING control versus having it TAKEN is extremely significant.

The thought of someone feeling so strongly for me that s/he would voluntarily give that control is really heady. Takes my breath away, actually.

Similarly, the level of trust/love necessary for me to WANT to surrender my control is equally mind boggling. What an ultimate high that would be -- whether or not the other person chose to accept that control.

*insert deafening strains of Hallelujah!*

That's where it's at, baby.

~lucky

 

[Guest]

 

[impressive]

*insert deafening strains of Hallelujah!*

That's where it's at, baby.

~lucky

*blush* I gotcha on the love front, dear.

 

[Guest]

Thank goodness you showed up when you did.



Was beginning to feel very misunderstood. (Well, I still feel that way, but it's nice to know that you understand.)



~lucky

Lucky, you know that I understand very well, too.

And if anyone thinks I don't have a mind of my own and am always being controlled. Um, no.

I WILLINGLY give up all control, but only during a "scene", i.e. for sexual reasons. It's what I want. Heck, it's what I crave!

BIG difference, as you said, between that and having that control forcefully taken from you.

I've been reading your posts with great interest, btw. Very good stuff.

Lou

P.S. To everyone else: Vella isn't the only sub in this thread to have given her thoughts. I don't usually say something if posts have mine have been over-looked, but it just seems that some are just "picking on" (probably poor choice of words there) Vella.

 

[matriarch]

Just to set the record straight....at no time did I EVER direct my niaive comments at any specific person. I would never do that.

Vella and Lucky have an incredibly close and loving relationship, I also know that you, Lou, are 'wired' (I hate that word, but can't think of another way of expressing it) the same way, but to assume that any of you were being controlled or controlling against your own or the other person's wishes never entered my head.

I'm probably making it worse with my clumsy explanations, but I hope you can see what I'm saying.

I should probably never have entered this discussion, not really having any experience of the topic. I was theorising, trying to get things straight in my own head. If my words caused offence, to any of you, please accept my apologies.

I will now butt out and leave it to those who know of what they speak.

 

[Guest]

Mat: don't be daft.

It never, at any point, entered my mind that you thought that way.

Oh, and yes, I am "wired" that way. Good way of putting it, in my opinion.

Lou

 

[impressive]

I don't usually say something if posts have mine have been over-looked ...

Never overlooked, love. You're far too dynamic for that!

 

[mismused]

Lucky's distinction about GIVING control versus having it TAKEN is extremely significant.

The thought of someone feeling so strongly for me that s/he would voluntarily give that control is really heady. Takes my breath away, actually.

Similarly, the level of trust/love necessary for me to WANT to surrender my control is equally mind boggling. What an ultimate high that would be -- whether or not the other person chose to accept that control.

=========================

I'm not a religious person, my personal feeling being that whatever happened wasn't truly recorded properly, and what was recorded was messed with significantly.

However, I also had to remember that these guys weren't geniuses, only people that in my opinion were trying to either solidfy their own local position, or keep from Constantine's rath.

Still, they often goofed, and left some peculiar niceties for us to ponder over, should we ever really choose. Mismused, what the heck has this to do with what Lucky said that Imp is referring to? Okay, okay, back off. Here tis:

In Hebrews, C 4, Vs. 12, it speaks of the word of God (say what you will, but listen up here at what comes next) is quick and powerful . . . and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Lucky is literally speaking of intent. Her intent, Vs the intents voiced by RG and cant are very distinct.

It is one of the few places where I've seen intent treated as a powerful driving force in our lives. (It's a stretch, but try to extrapolate, and find how it is that iodine is bad for us if we take it full strength, but necessary or helpful in trace, or minute amounts. Not all is as it seems, all the time, RG.)

The control Lucky and Vella speak of is seen on their faces (hateful Vella, sucking up all that love, and the even worse Lucky giving it all, it's downright disgusting).

We experience here in this existence, and yes, we change. Why all this is, I have no idea, nor does anyone else, but we do.

Right now, Lucky and Vella are on a roll towards what may lead them to enlightenment as is spoken of by Buddhists and Hindus (who've also very often screwed with their holy words. Like us, too much form, and little substance.

Surrender such as Vella gives/does is no different than the surrendering Lucky does when she accepts her role. She has to relish her part in this to be effective for their love, and thus also a submissive to their love, just as Vella is also dominant in demanding Lucky be as she is for their love.

Ooops! Hey, it's all love, huh?

Enough. Go back to sleep, mismused.



No, not really a flower child.

mismused

 

[mismused]

I don't usually say something if posts have mine have been over-looked, but it just seems that some are just "picking on" (probably poor choice of words there) Vella.

=========================

That's what Vella gets for having Lucky's love plastered all over her face for us mere mortals to look at.

She/they're more than disgusting, she/they're hateful.

So there!

mismused

(strewn about on their sweetest of paths of love)

 

[rgraham666]

Oh, I quite understand.

Undoubtedly due to my upbringing, there is a strong Domme side to my personality.

And except for the times I (rarely) let it out in my stories, it's going to stayed locked up, with both its hands visible and no sudden moves.

There's a reason my favourite saying is, "What you resist, you become."

More than anything, I fear becoming the people who taught me so many bad lessons.

 

[mismused]

Oh, I quite understand.

Undoubtedly due to my upbringing, there is a strong Domme side to my personality.

And except for the times I (rarely) let it out in my stories, it's going to stayed locked up, with both its hands visible and no sudden moves.

There's a reason my favourite saying is, "What you resist, you become."

More than anything, I fear becoming the people who taught me so many bad lessons.

========================

In keeping with this thread, isn't it possible that you are submissive to your fear, and have thus unwittingly surrendered your whole life to it?

I only ask/say that because I know you're a good man whose intents are of the noblest kind.

Maybe you can surrender yourself to your own love. (No, sillies, not masturbation, at least not now, not here.)

If you think about it, we're all giving in to something, be it good, or be it bad. That's our world of experiencing, of becoming. How we do it, well, that's a lot of what makes us individual, what makes our habits that we're seen by.

Love is something that can be seen in many lights, and in many ways. Let your mind wander, let it experience love in pleasant ways, and follow the streams that have sweet waters.

mismused

Imp, sorry if I hijacked your thread. Abject apologies.

 

[rgraham666]

I'm aware of that. It's something I've been working on my whole life. It took me forty years to get to the point of realising my fear. It will probably take forty before I'm fully over it.

As far as love goes, I don't think that is in the cards for me. I've stopped looking for it.

 

[impressive]

Imp, sorry if I hijacked your thread. Abject apologies.

It's all good, mismused. We're all learning. No one's sniping or being hateful. I love it.

 

[mismused]

I'm aware of that. It's something I've been working on my whole life. It took me forty years to get to the point of realising my fear. It will probably take forty before I'm fully over it.

As far as love goes, I don't think that is in the cards for me. I've stopped looking for it.

=========================

(Smiles) I don't think it's a matter of looking for it, it's a matter of looking at it. We all have it, IMHO, and live with it always. Uh, none of us has ever really, definitively defined what love truly is, nor why it is as we so often perceive it.

Pleasure, and, uh, you do like and seek that in many, and diverse ways, has to be tied to love, again, IMHO.

It's a part of what we are, and like it or not, we do surrender to it daily, just not as we normally think of it. The rest is just confusion (by us, and too often, by others that affect us in many ways).

mismused

 

[Guest]

=========================

That's what Vella gets for having Lucky's love plastered all over her face for us mere mortals to look at.

She/they're more than disgusting, she/they're hateful.

So there!

mismused

(strewn about on their sweetest of paths of love)

I don't think you got what I meant. Never mind...

 

[Guest]

Never overlooked, love. You're far too dynamic for that!

I wish.