quote:

ORIGINAL: RRafe

quote:

ORIGINAL: NControlofU

I don't call this breaking a sub. I call this a good time on any given day in the life of me and my slave. It looks like you did return at some point or you woulnt be here now writing about your experience. And you did move on. You were still emotionally yourself and you have a happy memory of the event. So what about you was broken by being whipped and tortured to the point of screming and crying out and tears running down your face? Shit, if my slave was broken just by crying and screaming she would be broken several times a week. Guess we have a differnt idea of what being broken is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: silkenfire
To me, I was broken once. It was emotionally intense. But what I mean by broken is tortured and whipped, etc, to the point of no return. To the point of screaming and crying out and tears running down my face. The ultimate giving in until it could not go any further. That whipping that just goes so much farther than anything else and truly shows that side of me that was submitting to Him. I was emotionally myself. But I was then *His* and will always have a soft spot for him because of what he made me, even though it was long ago and we have both moved on. When someone says breaking a sub, that's what I think of-- and it's a happy memory.

Yes. To me, breaking implies breaking through-something. Not just a brief session of emotional intensity. So if there was no lasting effect-what changed?

quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

I'd say from her post that there was a lasting effect.

quote:

But I was then *His* and will always have a soft spot for him because of what he made me

I wouldn't say it was a complete breaking, but it was a definite letting go and yeilding of the will.

Edited to add: What is being broken here is resistance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NControlofU

quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

I'd say from her post that there was a lasting effect.

quote:

But I was then *His* and will always have a soft spot for him because of what he made me

I wouldn't say it was a complete breaking, but it was a definite letting go and yeilding of the will.

Edited to add: What is being broken here is resistance.

Well it sounds like it was just a temporary break and what was broken was later unbroken and her will came back since they "have both moved on". So where's the lasting effect? I dont see letting go and yeilding to the will the same as being broken. My slave has been yeilding to my will since before we had our first meeting and I didnt have to do a thing to break her. She was whole and unbroken and ready, willing and able to yeild to my will and she still is without me having to do a thing to break her. Why would there be a need to break a slave's resistance? If she's resistant to yeilding to her master's will and to serve what kind of slave is she? Who wants a resistant slave?

quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

The lasting effect is the change in her that persists now, as stated, she will never submit to a man who cannot take her to the same place again.

FWIW, and this is just my opinion and theory

A slave is naturally resistant, a submissive is naturally yielding.

quote:

ORIGINAL: silkenfire

I do realize I have a different image of broken and I'm not trying to shove mine out on you all, only to further explain what I was trying to say the first time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: silkenfire

quote:

ORIGINAL: NControlofU

quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

I'd say from her post that there was a lasting effect.

quote:

But I was then *His* and will always have a soft spot for him because of what he made me

I wouldn't say it was a complete breaking, but it was a definite letting go and yeilding of the will.

Edited to add: What is being broken here is resistance.

Well it sounds like it was just a temporary break and what was broken was later unbroken and her will came back since they "have both moved on". So where's the lasting effect? I dont see letting go and yeilding to the will the same as being broken. My slave has been yeilding to my will since before we had our first meeting and I didnt have to do a thing to break her. She was whole and unbroken and ready, willing and able to yeild to my will and she still is without me having to do a thing to break her. Why would there be a need to break a slave's resistance? If she's resistant to yeilding to her master's will and to serve what kind of slave is she? Who wants a resistant slave?

If he had ever asked me to stay I would have; I was his at that time. Now I have become attached to others and have submitted enough to others that I would not have hurt them to return to him. However, at the time this happened, it was really casual play. I suppose a friends-with-benefits, but in the BDSM realm. He was involved with someone else, is currently married to his collared sub (wasn't married then, nor was she collared).

I also do not mainly identify as a slave but more of a submissive instead. I know that I don't give in completely in all fashions and would be horrible at 24/7 TPE (unless for just a weekend, etc...) so breaking me was not to break me into a slave. I wonder if he ever realized that I would have been his slave without a shadow of a doubt, at that time... I never had the courage to tell him what it meant to me.

And as I have said that I have moved on, I certainly won't tell him at this point in my life because I'm looking for someone myself, not a foolish grasp into the past of someone I cared for years ago.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: silkenfire

First, I don't have time to read the whole thread so I cannot swear that this is even pertinent.

I also realize this is "Ask a Master" but I feel like sharing a totally different view and definition than what I found in the few posts I did skim.

To me, I was broken once. It was emotionally intense. But what I mean by broken is tortured and whipped, etc, to the point of no return. To the point of screaming and crying out and tears running down my face. The ultimate giving in until it could not go any further. That whipping that just goes so much farther than anything else and truly shows that side of me that was submitting to Him. I was emotionally myself. But I was then *His* and will always have a soft spot for him because of what he made me, even though it was long ago and we have both moved on. When someone says breaking a sub, that's what I think of-- and it's a happy memory.

You are a submissive, not a natural slave. So what you experienced is not pertinent to the transformation of a natural slave into the Goddess of Slaves that SFM and I have commented on. In our opinion breaking the ego of a submissive is to turn her into a worthless husk, which is an abomination and a sacrilege.