Warping sexuality

[Pure]

Warping the sexuality of the subordinate

Much has been written about 'denial' and 'chastity.' Little about purposeful indulgence. Sexual gratification being a strong reinforcer, once it's directed all{correction: many} things are possible by way of warping or molding the person's sexual proclivities. Assuming the goal is humiliation, shame, etc., all kinds of scenarios present themselves. Got any ideas?

I think for instance of seeing to it that the bottom 'comes' through unseemly oral ministrations, slimy tongue jutting from rotted stumps of teeth.** The bottom is directed to a routine of masturbation to appropriately disturbing or offensive pictures, the idea being to condition a sexual response that, in the circumstances, is unavoidable and shameful; to develop some {added: apparently} new buttons that can be pushed for the amusement of the top and the degradation of the bottom.

{Added: The purpose, of course, the amusement of the top, the sheer joy in the top's excercize of power to the discomfort and shame of another, the gratification of the top, in any number of ways that degrade the bottom.}

**thanks to roscoe for the germ of this example.

{{Added: this is not represented as being an example from roscoe; perhaps it's twisting one to suit my own corrupt purposes.}}

 

[catalina_francisco]

Interesting concept, though I think you might find many sub/slaves already have thought of it and a few have even pursued the idea to reality with or without the assistance of a Dominant. Humiliation and degradation are areas we both appreciate the beauty and endless expanse of, and which can easily become a mindfuck to the extreme and repeatedly, every now and then changing the stimulus to keep it from becoming predictable.

Catalina

 

[Never]

Pure
"Direct routine masturbation to appropriately disturbing or offensive pictures, the idea being to condition a sexual response that, in the circumstances, is unavoidable and shameful; to develop some new buttons that can be pushed for the amusement of the top and the degradation of the bottom."

Your methods leaves much to be desired.

If someone handed me a picture of a slimy tongue coming from rotting teeth and told me to masturbate to it I'd end up rubbing myself and bored as hell. Now, if you wanted to cause some sort of negative response, you could have me masturbate until it was painful. I believe that's a method used on pedophiles.

 

[AngelicAssassin]

Laughing ...

i'll get back to you on this Pure.

... Your methods leaves much to be desired ... Now, if you wanted to cause some sort of negative response, you could have me masturbate until it was painful. I believe that's a method used on pedophiles.

His choice of material perhaps, but you can find other things to warp. i highlighted a portion of your response for one particular case, the masochistic partner(s). While you may gain a negative response from a pedophile, you get quite a different reaction from my singled out type of partner. You end up having to mop the partner(s) off the floor and get a bucket of subbie at the end of such a session.

On the surface non sequitur: How absolutely delicious ... http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-8/363868/yelrotflmao.gif

 

[Pure]

If someone handed me a picture of a slimy tongue coming from rotting teeth and told me to masturbate to it I'd end up rubbing myself and bored as hell.

Read carefully before dismissing. There was no mention of a picture in this case.

 

[Never]

AngelicAssassin,
Please explain your amusement at my post as I feel there's something I'm missing.

Pure,
Okay, you go out and find a nice homeless man with rotting teeth and pay him $50 to go down on your subbie, making certain to feed him a mixture of gack and poprocks with soda beforehand so his tongue and mouth are approachably slimy. Either, the sub gets off on the humiliation or they spend their time fantasizing about spraying their genitalia down with bleach and hot water.

I don't see that you've created a 'new button' either way.

 

[Netzach]

I just make the conflicted bicurious ones whack off to gay porn only, it's easier.


Like Never said, it's not a "new button." It's either there or it's not. As the Top, I'm also not about to engage in scenarios I personally find repulsive just to prove a point or push the theories of embarrassment. I am going to seek out situations I do find erotic.

 

[Marquis]

Liking the av Netz.

On topic, I believe it is possible to program a sexual response from just about any stimuli. It may take a more advanced method than Pure was stating in his post, but I do believe the basic concept holds.

I think there is too much evidence that people eroticize things in or from their environment to deny this.

 

[Never]

Marquis:
" On topic, I believe it is possible to program a sexual response from just about any stimuli. It may take a more advanced method than Pure was stating in his post, but I do believe the basic concept holds.

I think there is too much evidence that people eroticize things in or from their environment to deny this."

There are a number of stimuli that you can't 'program' the majority of people to erotize. I'm also certain that people can't be 'programmed' in the nice, clean way you're suggesting.

I think it wouldn't be difficult to get a person to crave the smell and taste of leather and rubber or to sexualize these materials in their mind. The extreme nature of Pure's first post seems more the subject of fantasy than reality, however.

 

[Marquis]

I think that Pure, as his name implies, prefers an A Priori to an empirical approach. I may be mistaken, but it seems to be a pattern in his posts.

Again, on a purely philosophical level I do believe we are Skinner boxes, although we can obviously never brainwash someone all that "cleanly" because we are embodied beings.

So I suppose we are disagreeing on a matter of degree.

 

[Miss Diva]

All this program stuff got me to thinking about Pavlov's dogs:

The work that made Pavlov a household name in psychology actually began as a study in digestion. He was looking at the digestive process in dogs, especially the interaction between salivation and the action of the stomach. He realized they were closely linked by reflexes in the autonomic nervous system. Without salivation, the stomach didn't get the message to start digesting. Pavlov wanted to see if external stimuli could affect this process, so he rang a metronome at the same time he gave the experimental dogs food. After a while, the dogs -- which before only salivated when they saw and ate their food -- would begin to salivate when the metronome sounded, even if no food were present. In 1903 Pavlov published his results calling this a "conditioned reflex," different from an innate reflex, such as yanking a hand back from a flame, in that it had to be learned. Pavlov called this learning process (in which the dog's nervous system comes to associate the sound of the metronome with the food, for example) "conditioning." He also found that the conditioned reflex will be repressed if the stimulus proves "wrong" too often. If the metronome sounds repeatedly and no food appears, eventually the dog stops salivating at the sound.

I am sure this can be applied to a certain extent to humans.

 

[rosco rathbone]

I never wanted to make women O by being licked by a gnome.

I wanted to make them make gnomes O; and suffer humiliation and degradation most sublime.

Who cares if they O or not?

fuck's sake.

 

[BlueSugar]

This reminds me of Clockwork Orange. Disturbing pictures to good music. He just happened to like the music though ... so presented with either ... sadistic happenings, or his favorite musician (bethoveen) he would be instantly sick. It was just another aversion training pavlov therapy.


I could see this twist happening, enough twisted things make me wet - I don't know if I could step up to this one or I'd need a leak guard in my panties to save me from embarrassing public moments. (even though that is just another facet to this as well!)[/silver]

rape fantasy, leather, bondage, hearing a belt jingle, looking through everything on stockroom.com ... and that is just the beginning of our minds.

 

[catalina_francisco]

IMHO conditioned reflexes can be used extensively for a variety of reasons and they can have interesting effects but it also has its limitations. The first and most important rule to remember is that for conditioned reflexes to work you need a “reflex”. The rule of thumb is: a conditioned reflex needs a reflex. You create a connection between a certain behavioral pattern and a reflex. Pavlov's experiments proved the sensory pattern that triggers a specific response can be altered. Using 'conditioning' a new association between the new stimulus and the original response pattern can be created, the most famous example being the bell and the meat.

Lets say that we want to create a conditioned reflex between a certain word and orgasms. The theory would be to continuously repeat that word every single time when your pyl has an orgasm. For this to have any change of success a lot of discipline is needed. This would actually not be considered a conditioned reflex but operant conditioning that is a terminology that comes out of behaviorism and has evolved out of Pavlov theory. The main difference between the two being that for conditioned reflexes to work there has to be a reflex while with operant conditioning you try to create or stimulate behavioral patterns not reflexes. There is a lot more to this but I am not an expert on psychology so the rest eludes me.

I am a very big fan of the theory and have applied it with varied results. I have found that the most successful and easiest conditioning happens when you have a very willing subject and you are trying to condition a reflex that is strongly present. Examples to this are for example reinforcement of sexual activities, or stimulating orgasm to a higher degree.

If you have subject that has a certain fantasy it is quite easy to create operant conditioning for it. For example if your subject fantasizes about being humiliated then by using this stimuli you can create a new connection, a new button which will have he same result, the teeth are a good example. I always like to try to create connections between words and certain emotions or feelings.

This is a very interesting subject and I am very interested in seeing more reactions.

Francisco.

 

[Pure]

rr: I never wanted to make women O by being licked by a gnome.

I wanted to make them make gnomes O; and suffer humiliation and degradation most sublime.

point taken

Who cares if they O or not?

fuck's sake.

Unlike some here, I don't see the bottom's O as an entitlement or part of the 'erotic exchange' of an alleged respectful relationship.

But the O, without inherent value, is a means to an end (molding). Consider why most hookers do not allow themselves to O.

 

[Pure]

Never said,

There are a number of stimuli that you can't 'program' the majority of people to erotize. I'm also certain that people can't be 'programmed' in the nice, clean way you're suggesting.

I think it wouldn't be difficult to get a person to crave the smell and taste of leather and rubber or to sexualize these materials in their mind. The extreme nature of Pure's first post seems more the subject of fantasy than reality, however.

I'm not sure I want to debate you on possibilities of sexual conditioning in this thread. But elsewhere if you like. In any case you've agreed some highly artificial connections can be made, e.g., with rubber. Whether some connections are impossible is not the main issue here. Nor are my examples.

I'm glad Marquis, Miss Diva, and to some extent Francisco are open to the possibilities. To Never, I'd add, and for the Marquis too, on the fantasy or 'a priori' proposal. No. I think the conditioning of ourselves and others is pretty obvious. Ask yourself if your taste in porn has changed, and how; through exposure to certain types, often in a planned way. How also was your taste for sadistic acts developed?

Francisco, there are some minor flaws regarding conditioning in your otherwise accurate account, but theory is not the topic of the thread. There is of course, an 'reflex,' namely arousal and orgasm that we're working with.

The point, however, is to forge a connection that will be shameful.
Netzach has the gist of it. Whether and to what degree the 'button' pre-exists is not an interesting question. It's a metaphor.

Extending the idea, to start associating the subordinate's arousal with homosexual stimuli (non pictorial, but actual) might well be a another example, *where that person has aversion or shame [homophobia] in the matter.* Further, you have grasped the idea that the warping may be for the amusement or gratification of the top.

One last note to Catalina: There's no claim these ideas are absolutely novel, just that they aren't discussed around here very much.

I hope those dedicated simply to hostile arguments on concepts and science will find a thread more to their liking. I've simply asked, "For any of the purposes of the top, how may the sexuality of the bottom be corrupted through a specially designed course based on indulgence [subordinate's arousal or orgasm]?"

Only Netz has actually contributed a specific strategy. Thanks N.

 

[Netzach]

Welcome. They like the gay porn, they just hate that they like it to varying degrees. Some of them get over the hating, and the "re programming" enhances existing fantasies of feminization, don't ask me where the minds of men connect being a girl with smooth swimmers builds doing one another, but mine is not always to question. LOL.

If the aim is to just create revulsion, I don't think you are going to maintain interest.

I mean, Marquis is right, even I could eventually come to get off by rubbing myself with sandpaper, plastic spoons or the tongues of the peridontally disadvantaged and old -- so could you....

begs the question, what for?

 

[catalina_francisco]

One last note to Catalina: There's no claim these ideas are absolutely novel, just that they aren't discussed around here very much.

There are many things not discussed around here Pure. I am surprised you haven't noticed that by now. Why? Mainly IME from those I have brought to the board because people feel it is not welcomed nor is the environment one where such things are usually discussed seriously and positively on a regular basis....it is unpredictable and has many limits imposed. Living it is more often than not fun, discussing it happens usually on closed boards and between small groups of people who share similar experiences and/or tastes, or at least an appreciation there can be more to it.

I have hopes we can move to that one day on Lit where it is more inclusive of the lifestyle as a whole, but for now it isn't working as it is not an environment where the majority want to or are willing to stray outside the expected and middle of the road type flavour. I respect that as the wishes of this community and for those more in depth discussions about more serious issues that confront those within a D/s relationship I go to a community where that is acceptable. All discussion boards will have their own accepted flavour, sometimes it can grow and sometimes it can't.

Catalina

 

[Pure]

N said, {note to Blue S}

If the aim is to just create revulsion, I don't think you are going to maintain interest.

I mean, Marquis is right, even I could eventually come to get off by rubbing myself with sandpaper, plastic spoons or the tongues of the peridontally disadvantaged and old -- so could you....

begs the question, what for?

The aim was not just to create revulsion. The aim was to induce a shameful leaning in the bottom. What for? As your example suggested, perhaps you find the bottom's jerking to gay porn amusing? or a demonstration of your power?

This is *not* simply the task of creating revulsion in the bottom, as some have read the proposal. It's creating (or greatly strengthening, if the tendency is already there) or fostering a drive, and a craving, the execution of which will be shameful; and in some cases *revolting* to the subordinate even while s/he craves and wallows in it-- and, in a while, wants it again. {Note: the molding of a desire into a shameful craving is understood, almost by definition, to maintain the 'interest' of the party.}

The other aim, of course, a constant one, is to increase the subordination of the bottom. To the extent that his/her sex arousal is manipulated an awareness of (relative) powerlessness is enhanced.

PS. Thanks to Blue Sugar for his/her contribution.

 

[Netzach]

Ok, yeah, generalized shits and giggles on the part of the Top are a good reason to do something.

I think there has to be a conflict between pleasure and pain in the most successful of these kinds of situtations, it's almost like predicament bondage for the brain and I think it follows the same rules and patterns.

You do not want to set up a lose/lose situation unless you have a person who needs one. I know that seems tautological, but for most submissives I know who are focused on service too much emphasis on lose/lose is damaging to the goods. For some people whose focus and need and desire hinges on the elimination of excessive ego, it's a good tool, but you do have to tread with caution.

Win/cost is a better way to look at predicaments than win/lose, it's about the consequence, not about the impossibility of the situation.

So, in the situation you've floated, I'd have to have the person incredibly massively painfully horny and turned on before switching things out. To me it's sweet because the sexual desperation would make that bottom do anything and be licked to a finish by anyone. Those are my druthers, and that's an example of win/cost, instead of lose/lose.

 

[Pure]

Netz said,

Win/cost is a better way to look at predicaments than win/lose, it's about the consequence, not about the impossibility of the situation.

So, in the situation you've floated, I'd have to have the person incredibly massively painfully horny and turned on before switching things out. To me it's sweet because the sexual desperation would make that bottom do anything and be licked to a finish by anyone. Those are my druthers, and that's an example of win/cost, instead of lose/lose.

I can see the 'win/cost' view, and there's something to it. I also see the massively horny requirement. At the same time, I think there is a nuance here, in a 'corruption' scenario. 'Cost' may come in various forms: To use one example of yours, having the bottom masturbate with sandpaper certainly brings in cost in the form of pain during and after. The difference is that the 'cost' I'm thinking is in the form of shame, for example; how could I do this?

The second difference is that horniness is a requirement, yes, but not massively so. One isn't after something in the moment.
Given the sexual drive, the idea is to corrupt its form, so that, say, the person is driven to masturbate on the tops soiled underwear. The cost, then, is not an abraded dick, but shaken sense of identity. (Asking oneself, "Am I this sort of person?")

All this would take some time, but given the strength of the sex drive and the reinforcing properties of its gratification, I think various kinds of 'molding' (formation of associations) can occur, as for instance when masturbation must occur while drinking the partner's piss.

So another difference of shading is in the repetition. In your first case, the cost is imposed, and continues to be so. In my examples, the bottom ends up routinely seeking out gratification, eager for the 'cost' to be attached. The cost having taken on erotic value.

I appreciate your thoughts in this matter.

 

[Netzach]

well, I actually did the 80 grit whack-off scene, and I have to say, almost any situation brings up a myriad of ramifications, there are emotional dimensions to even a physical act.

In this case, whacking off with the sandpaper was not a punishment but a reward, sort of. He was on chastity for 3 weeks. I got the, begging, pleading after a week and a half.

I'm such a soft touch, I said, sure. Ok. Only once.
With sandpaper wrapped around the dick.

The pain was secondary to the reaction of "holy shit, she's got me so re-wired that I can even get off this way."

It seems completely plausible that this could be done, I mean most masochistic subs are trained in to eroticize certain kinds of pain or shame over time, why not whacking off on my panties if that's your thing?

I still disagree that masssive horniness is not necessary. I think that creating the association of the erotic with the unpleasant requires enough immediate gratification, at least the first few times out, that the *pleasure* is embedded in the brain, more than the negatives. That creates the desire to revisit.

 

[Pure]

I think we're on the same wavelength, here, and appreciate your examples. Of course I've learned from our previous discussions, so I have not illusions of being all that original.

I like the re-wiring metaphor, and have used it myself. Further, as you say, it associates with powerlessness--"I'm so re wired, look what happens [in my response]." All the senses can be involved, as for instance the bottom trained to arousal in the scent of the top's piss; to enjoy drinking it during masturbation.
In this instance, disgust associations play a role in the 'warping' or 'corrupting' scenario.

Again, I find the topic not well explored in these environs, and I'm not entirely sure why. Perhaps because of the 'equality' and 'respect' slogans that get made into the top's main concerns.

 

[Netzach]

Maybe warping someone to enjoy being flogged simply has a wider fan base than warping someone to drink pee. I don't think this kind of play can't happen in a fairly egalitarian yet perverse relationship.

 

[Pure]

I think these 'expanded horizons' cases are cousins of what i'm talking about. Someone enjoys the whip, and then is introduced to flogging, the top intending that it too will serve the intended purposes, possibly including arousal. These extensions are bread and butter topics. Sometimes there is intensification, from say, a thin needle to a thicker one, or a five pound weight to a ten pound one. What they have in common is that the self image is not altered. "I loved being whipped. Now I also love occasionaly a good flogging." Indeed we hear *proud* announcements "Now I can take a ten pound weight on...."

Contrast "I used to love pussy, but was bicurious about gay porn" to "I really get off on gay porn." This in a person with discomfort or shame aroung the issue. Contrast "I used to enjoy directed masturbation, but now I prefer its leading to licking the cum off the sole of her shoes." I used to enjoy eating puss, now I'm turned on by felching her ass after another has enjoyed it.