|
undergroundsea -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (3/15/2007 4:51:20 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs
Just for clarification, I never said complete insight, I said any insight into submission.
Perhaps I see a mixed message in your posts. For sake of clarification, you say:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs
So thats why I don't think that Person A who switches will gain any insight into other submissives.
I take that to mean that anyone who switches will not gain even a single insight about any other submissive. Your use of the word any suggests you think there are zero insights gained. That you describe the idea as misguided suggests to me you think that through such an experience one does not gain any insight (zero insights) about any other submissive.
Yet at times you allow that one might gain insights from her personal experience that may apply to some others.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs
I think they will benefit from their insights on themselves based on their own journey that may be applicable to other people, but certainly may not be.
And at times your words, as below, suggest to me a reference to a complete experience:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs
The problem though is that the submissive psyche, experience, emotional difficulties you face, and the way you process physical sensations varies wildly depending on the person. I don't think there is a generic "submissive experience" that all submissives or slaves experience that we all understand within each other - I think submissives and slaves are wildly different people with different motivations, filters, experiences, and ways to process things. So thats why I don't think that Person A who switches will gain any insight into other submissives. Person A, however, will gain tremendous insight into themself.
In any case, let's proceed.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs
So using your child rearing example, and assuming all other conditions being equal, I believe that someone who has had three different children has a richer breadth of experiences and insights about parenting than someone who has experienced childhood themselves but has no children. Similarly, I believe that all other conditions being equal, someone who has had three different submissives has a richer breadth of experiences and insights into dominance than someone who has experienced submission themselves but has no submissives.
Someone who has had three different children has richer breadth of experiences and insights about parenting than someone who has experienced childhood themself but has no children. If this parent also draws upon childhood experiences about what behavior from her parents she found frustrating and what she found rewarding, she has another set of insights to consult.
You seem to assume a dichotomy that I don't see to exist. I don't think drawing upon experience as a bottom or submissive precludes gaining insights through interaction with others and intuition.
Also, if you feel that submissive experiences are disjoint so that one's own experience as a submissive has no relevance to that another submissive might have, why does a dominant who has had experiences with three different submissives have a richer breadth of insights? After all, if your theory about each submissive experience being disjoint from every other is correct, this person's experiences with the three submissives have no value when dealing with a fourth submissive for, as you suggest, each other submissive will be entirely different.
If you think experience as a bottom or a submissive has no value, then, all other things equal, do you give the same level of insight to a dominant who has neither topped nor bottomed as to a dominant who has not yet topped but has bottomed?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs
We (the BDSM community) can't even agree on a common definition, I'm not remotely convinced that there is common fabric. I see commonalities with myself with some submissives/slaves, but definitely not with all submissives/slaves. So I just don't feel confident enough to talk about the submissive experience like its some mamothian generic experience or psyche. What I do feel comfortable talking about is my own experience and philosophy.
The common fabric is the interest in submission, which sets us apart from those who do not have an interest in submission. Within this lot, there are other patterns that do not exist across all submissives but are seen frequently enough to be called patterns, which allows that one's personal experience allows insights towards not all but some others.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs
I've seen a little bit of overlap in terms of SM tastes (i.e. liking to do and receive needleplay) but nothing terribly significant so your theory on someone seeking to top someone precisely how they bottomed so thus they would know what’s going through the persons mind isn't something I've found to be true.
I think you understate how much commonality there is between a person's style for dominance and submission. Still, even with your statement above as is, that little bit of overlap you have seen alone supports the idea I present. Here is my statement from my prior post:
quote:
ORIGINAL: undergroundsea:
If a submissive later becomes a dominant, chances are at least some of her dominant interests will mirror her interests as a submissive. In that event, subs compatible with her will have some interests she held as a submissive. So chances are, she will have insight about some aspects of her sub's submission.
Thus, I do not claim that there is an exact reflection of interests, but that there will likely be some reflection, and that some insights from the tops personal experience as a bottom with respect to the common area could apply.
My position is:
- While submission/bottoming is a subjective experience, there are common patterns that allow a submissive/bottom to have insights towards some others.
- A top or dominant who has experience as a bottom or submissive has insights that will apply to some submissives/bottoms, and, to that extent, will help the dominant or top in her role.
- While these insights can be had through discussion, interaction, and intuition, it does not change that personal experience is yet one more avenue towards such insights.
- I don't claim that a dominant who has experienced submission is necessarily better than a dominant who has not done so. My position is that a notion that experiencing submission can help a dominant is not, as you say, misguided. It is the use of the word misguided with which I disagree.
Cheers,
Sea
|
|
|
|
