This page sponsored by JT's Stockroom    [other banners]

	TSR : Web boards : Internal Enslavement : "Comparison with Conventional Bonding" Comparison with Conventional Bonding (8) This post is on the Internal Enslavement web board. Sun 29 Mar 09, 4:10 AM EvaMaria US(CA), 3 yrs Internal Enslavement shares many commonalities with conventional bonding. (Significant others, parent/child, friendship, etc) How do you feel it differs in effect? In practical application? In theory? Eva (The property formerly known as Camille ) 30 Mar 09, 12:54 AM Malkinius US(IL), 5 yrs Greetings Eva.... EvaMaria wrote: Comparison with Conventional Bonding Internal Enslavement shares many commonalities with conventional bonding. (Significant others, parent/child, friendship, etc) How do you feel it differs in effect? In practical application? In theory? Eva From a biochemical aspect, it probably doesn't. I think the same hormones come into play. The mental bonding of knowledge and trust are, I think, similar to the same as well. Be well.... Malkinius 31 Mar 09, 12:34 AM Master_Odin US(KS), 3 yrs EvaMaria wrote: Comparison with Conventional Bonding Internal Enslavement shares many commonalities with conventional bonding. (Significant others, parent/child, friendship, etc) How do you feel it differs in effect? In practical application? In theory? Eva I think the M/s relationship is much more intimate than conventional vanilla. It requires more commitment and more time spent on it. As in everything, the greater the risk, the greater the reward. Of course, YMMV Selah. There is no authority, only responsibility. 31 Mar 09, 8:28 AM Bella_Ragazza US(RI), 5 yrs EvaMaria wrote: Comparison with Conventional Bonding Internal Enslavement shares many commonalities with conventional bonding. (Significant others, parent/child, friendship, etc) How do you feel it differs in effect? In practical application? In theory? Eva In my opinion I believe the M/s relationship is far more intense then the conventional relationships we see. I for one believe that trust and communication play a very big part within the M/s relationship then does the conventional one. I also believe because of that communication and trust there is a different type of bonding. Sure both types of relationship can have the same strength of love, but I think there is also something else that goes into it, when it comes to the M/s relationship. I think there is also more respect, or that the respect given is seen more clearly withing the M/s relationship. I also believe things within the M/s relationship go smother, for example, there are fewer arguments. The roles are defined, there are no power struggles, and everything is mapped out. Not that every relationship that is an M/s or likewise relationship is perfect, but the issues are a lot different. just my opinion Bella 31 Mar 09, 11:53 AM Malkinius US(IL), 5 yrs Greetings Odin.... Master_Odin wrote: I think the M/s relationship is much more intimate than conventional vanilla. It requires more commitment and more time spent on it. As in everything, the greater the risk, the greater the reward. Of course, YMMV Selah. There is nothing inherent about any M/s relationship that it has to be better or worse than any given one that has no BDSM components to it. Any relationship that both parties work at will be better than ones where they don't. The more effort they put in and the more they work and try the better it will be. Sorry to burst your bubble but it just doesn't work that way in reality. You get out of it what you put into it. Be well... Malkinius 31 Mar 09, 8:57 PM EvaMaria US(CA), 3 yrs I can see logic in all responses here, but the thing I want to understand is the nature of IE in and of itself. (Theory, process, application) On these boards in general, there is a clear distinction held between IE and other forms of bonding. While I do respect Tanos' writings on the subject, they don't specifically address this idea. I have a fairly clear understanding of most forms of psychological bonding and my thinking is an assortment of thoughts on and/or examples of why and how IE is different will be helpful to me. Thanks Eva (The property formerly known as Camille ) Edited 31 Mar 09, 8:59 PM by EvaMaria 1 Apr 09, 12:22 AM Master_Odin US(KS), 3 yrs Malkinius wrote: Sorry to burst your bubble but it just doesn't work that way in reality. You get out of it what you put into it. No worries, my bubble is just fine. We may have to agree to disagree. In the (imaginary) generic vanilla relationship the ideal is a 50-50 partnership. Each partner is expected to give to the relationship, but hold a part of themselves back. An M/s relationship is based on at least 100% from one party, and probably more than 50% from the other. I agree that anyone gets out of a relationship what they put into it. I submit that in an M/s relationship the parties are putting more in. Selah There is no authority, only responsibility. 1 Apr 09, 12:27 PM Malkinius US(IL), 5 yrs Greetings Odin... Master_Odin wrote: No worries, my bubble is just fine. We may have to agree to disagree. In the (imaginary) generic vanilla relationship the ideal is a 50-50 partnership. Each partner is expected to give to the relationship, but hold a part of themselves back. An M/s relationship is based on at least 100% from one party, and probably more than 50% from the other. I agree that anyone gets out of a relationship what they put into it. I submit that in an M/s relationship the parties are putting more in. Selah That may be but I really believe you are working from false assumptions and by doing so you are getting wrong answers. Mundane relationships can give 100% to each other...it doesn't have to stop at 50%. Many D/s or M/s don't give 100% from either side. So your assumption that one only goes so far and the other all the way is false. Be well.... Malkinius 3 Apr 09, 9:57 PM Master_Odin US(KS), 3 yrs Malkinius wrote: Be well.... Malkinius As I said, we will have to agree to disagree Selah There is no authority, only responsibility.