Internal Enslavement, some specifics

Internal Enslavement, some specifics (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

leadership527 -> Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 1:38:48 PM)
There's been a variety of posts I've seen on and off talking about "Internal Enslavement". Invariably, these posts are presented in vague generalities at which point other people argue against them in more vague generalities. So I thought I'd write up a specific, step-by-step cheat sheet. Here's at least one way in which it can be done supported by actual scholarly research rather than apocryphal stories told in darkly lit internet forums. This definition for Internal Enslavement comes from http://www.enslavement.org.uk We aim to develop practical techniques which use detailed examination of a female slave's thoughts, emotions and past experiences to establish and maintain a solid and inescapable state of ownership. Before I get started with specifics, I'd like to make clear that this is not something I would ever do myself, nor is it something I find ethically or morally sound. But yes, I do believe it can be done. Here's one take on it... #1) Don't tell the slave Lead the slave, step-by-step, through this excercise without fully divulging the final end-state. Claim that "They are not ready yet" to hear information that would, perhaps, cause them to reconsider. Most people would not agree if the actual truth were spelled out... "I'm going to change your worldview to the point where you are totally obedient to me. You will, if I so desire it, kill your friends and family, even yourself. You will NEVER be able to leave me no matter what I do to you or with you. I may give you away to someone else who you will also NEVER be able to leave." Honestly, that's going to be a really tough sell for most well adjusted humans. We're definitely going to want to go down this primrose path one step at a time. #2) Take control of the slaves environment. We're going to want to minimize outside influences here since friends, family, and a lot of other BDSM'ers might well say, "Woah Sally! That's kind of freaky." So, cut off contact with undersireable influences (read that as everyone who doesn't agree that this is a good thing. Identify role models that model the desired new thought processes. Detach the slave from society... job, et.al. As the slave's old support structure erodes, feed their own doubts about the old thought patterns. Suppress any questions that arise from the attack on the old thought processes. #3) Keep the slave off balance Institute lots of nonsensical and complex ritual. Ensure that the slave is never getting it right. Randomly withdrawing and providing emotional connection can be very efective here. Mess with the slave's sleep cycle. Cause them to do unfamiliar things and be in unfamiliar situations. Take away cherished pets. In general, we need to get the slave flexible and instilling a ton of confusion is the perfect way to do that. #4) Institute a series of rewards, punishments, and experiences to reinforce the new thought patterns.. Meet doubts with disapproval, punishment, or rejection. When questions are asked, make sure the slave understands that there is something inherently wrong him or her for even having the question. You know, a twue slave wouldn't be asking this question. Twue slaves obey without question. Self-hynpotic techniques can be used here quite effectively. Have the slave look in the mirror for 20 minutes daily and repeat some mantra. #5) Declare that the Master is always right Thereby ensuring that no successful challenge to the new world view can happen. Ensure that the slave understands that they are always incorrect. Ensure that the slave understands that the Master is not only always right, but always just. Leverage guilt feelings to curtail incorrect thoughts. Overall, assuming a trusting and reasonably submissive slave to start with, the whole process is neither complicated nor difficult. All that you're doing is deliberately eroding the pre-existing worldview through a variety of techniques, mostly encompassed by deliberately keeping the slave off balance and unsure of herself. Then, replace the ensuing confusion with a new worldview reinforced by the social group, reward structure, and authority figure. Random food for thought.

VivaciousSub -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 1:49:51 PM)
Leadership, Personally, I'd find this kind of thing intolerable, thus I choose not to participate in it. To each their own. My problem lies in the contradiction between what they say in their FAQ where they protest mightly that it's based on consent from the slave vs. the first section of their guide. The FAQ section of the site makes great deal out of the term "consensual non-consent". Specifically, they say that "IE is based on consensual non-consent". Then they go on to say that it's "giving legally valid consent to start the process of enslavement". So, why is the first part "Don't tell the slave"????????

sravaka -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 2:03:39 PM)
Forgive me, but this is deeply offensive. Believe it or not, this: quote: "I'm going to change your worldview to the point where you are totally obedient to me. You will, if I so desire it, kill your friends and family, even yourself. You will NEVER be able to leave me no matter what I do to you or with you. I may give you away to someone else who you will also NEVER be able to leave." ... is a cherished goal for a significant population of submissives. Not because they are reckless lunatics, but because their (generally hard-won) understanding of their own needs leads them there. For some, "can't leave" represents the ultimate security. For some, knowing that the dominant has a complete and absolute power to mold and control, is profoundly thrilling. Do I really need to say this? Having the power to make someone else do anything does not mean that power will be exercised. It is not an inevitable outcome of internal enslavement that the master sends the slave on a killing spree. Aaargh. I can't go on. I suggest you go read the thread on "playing to one's strengths (or weaknesses)."

leadership527 -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 2:08:26 PM)
Yes, logical conundrums like "consentual non-consent" are a classic way of instilling confusion and eroding the old worldview. The statement itself makes absolutely no sense but the subject is asked to accept it as truthful. By breaking down the obvious barriers of truth, all sorts of additional messing around can be done. This is a lot like politicians asking us to fight a war for peace. The first part "Don't tell the slave" is there because it's necessary. The final end state is going to be utterly incompatible with the pre-existing world view of almost all people. People like this sort of thing when it is a theoretical goal. It's a fine romantic vision to say, "I belong to him completely" When you start talking about specifics in actual fact, it gets a lot dicier. It's a lot less fine to agree to murdering your loved ones if your master so desires. But let's try to keep this thread on track. If we go down the "is it ethical" path this thread will instantly self destruct. I was hoping to provide at least one specific and well supported example of how it could be done. Not whether it should be done.

scottishdove -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 2:09:27 PM)
i think this falls under the catagory of disparaging someone else's kink personally, i am intrigued by IE, and would be interested in engaging in it with a Master I trusted and wanted to be with. you are essentially taking their premise and not only mocking it, but making a whole bunch of assumptions. I think we need to worry about people misusing IE just like we need to worry about a serial killer using the BDSM lifestyle as a way of finding victims. quite possible, has most likely happened, but Masters and Doms are just busy having fun with their slaves and subs in a consensual way.

leadership527 -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 2:14:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sravaka ... is a cherished goal for a significant population of submissives. Not because they are reckless lunatics, but because their (generally hard-won) understanding of their own needs leads them there. For some, "can't leave" represents the ultimate security. For some, knowing that the dominant has a complete and absolute power to mold and control, is profoundly thrilling. Do I really need to say this? Having the power to make someone else do anything does not mean that power will be exercised. It is not an inevitable outcome of internal enslavement that the master sends the slave on a killing spree. You can be offended as you wish sravaka. Knock yourself out. But this thread isn't about the ethics of Internal Enslavement. I merely suggested a series of cookbook steps to actually do it. My opinion is that it is possible and I thought I'd support that. I would like to point out, however, that not only did I not suggest that it was an inevitable outcome, I also don't believe that. I merely pointed it out as a possibility. Such a thing is certainly included within the definition.

MmeGigs -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 3:50:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 But let's try to keep this thread on track. If we go down the "is it ethical" path this thread will instantly self destruct. I was hoping to provide at least one specific and well supported example of how it could be done. Not whether it should be done. How do you think that folks can discuss a thing like this without discussing the ethics of it? You said in the OP, "I'd like to make clear that this is not something I would ever do myself, nor is it something I find ethically or morally sound." It's pretty obvious that you know that there are ethical concerns with this kind of thing. It's pretty silly to suggest that these things could be discussed without considering the ethical components. I could employ those five steps to foster an unhealthy dependency in my partner, no doubt. This kind of thing is done every day. It isn't stuff that falls under the heading of consensual kink. We usually call it "emotional abuse", and strongly recommend that folks who are on the receiving end of this kind of thing get help to get free of it. I think that there are better definitions of "Internal Enslavement" that don't involve nonconsensual manipulation by the master. There are lots of folks - my hubby is one of them - who I think live in a state of self-selected, self-imposed subjugation of their self-will and self-determination to someone they feel is worthy.

leadership527 -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 4:42:06 PM)
MmeGigs: Of course there are ethical concerns for some people, myself included. But honestly, that topic has been beaten to death. Depending on how you perceive "consent", you will or will not have an issue with this. But I wasn't holding it up as something to do or not to do. I'm not going to do it. I'm just saying that these steps would work to actually train away someone's free will to the point where they could no longer choose AT ALL and would obey ANY command (as opposed to simply setting up a circumstance where the subject decides that enslavement is better for them than not being enslaved). Insofar as definitions, the definition I gave was up top in blue and quoted directly without alteration from the IE website. The rest of what I wrote was a training protocol, not a definition of anything. I'd be truly interested to see different spins on a training protocol that could actually achieve the LITERAL state of having no further free will. Such a protocol would have to be able to support heinous commands such as the example I gave since, as the authors of IE state so succinctly, "no limits means no limits". To be successful, any such training protocol would have to support ANY possible command. So since you did it (apparently) with your husband, care to give us a different spin?

NumberSix -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 4:49:07 PM)
Well, I mean, c'mon. I can clamp a vice-grip to someone's nuts, and by god they will see a bright light and their path will be cleared to do what I want, should I only remove the stumbling block. so in this consentual non-consetual bullshit, they gotta wanna in the first place, and the rest fairytale or enhanced viewing of the reality. Look, same as gardening, I can put the seed in good ground, water it, give it sun, juke certain properties so that everything is favorable and as efficiently environmentally supportive as can be, but the fuckin' seed has to be viable in the first place, you understand? you can't grow hair on a billiard ball, look at my picture......... 6

MmeGigs -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 5:13:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 I'm just saying that these steps would work to actually train away someone's free will to the point where they could no longer choose AT ALL and would obey ANY command That's a pretty good description of emotional abuse. That's not the foundation upon which healthy relationships are built, and if BDSM is about anything, it's about positive, healthy, mutually fulfilling relationships. quote: I'd be truly interested to see different spins on a training protocol that could actually achieve the LITERAL state of having no further free will. Such a protocol would have to be able to support heinous commands such as the example I gave since, as the authors of IE state so succinctly, "no limits means no limits". To be successful, any such training protocol would have to support ANY possible command. So since you did it (apparently) with your husband, care to give us a different spin? I didn't do anything. My hubby made the decision to hand all control over to me. He trusts that I'm not going to command him to do anything assinine, and he's right - I won't. That's part of the deal in real life kink, as I'm sure you know. As his owner, all I really care about is that he does what I want him to do. I don't give a rat's ass whether he'd be likely to obey some bizarre command I'm never going to give him. Your focus on LITERAL without regard to CONSENSUAL is really pretty silly. Without CONSENSUAL, you're not talking about kink. That is what separates what we do from abuse.

persephonee -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 5:14:25 PM)
Leadership~ If you wouldnt do these things...and dont think they are within your moral code to condone...why create the cookbook in the first place? And frankly, natural born abusers use these steps without forthought or inservicing of any type. They just know. May i ask respectfully, why you wanted to post this information if you didnt want to discuss the ethics of the action? peace perse edit to add that everyone else said it better than i did...didnt read beyond your op...but i have yet to hear why you wanted to discuss it or what part you wanted to discuss if not the ethics....hope that clears it up a touch.

MmeGigs -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 5:21:49 PM)
Another thought... Can it be considered "Internal Enslavement" if all of the factors that lead to the enslavement are externally imposed? If I'm using these coercive and abusive techniques to enslave my partner, isn't the enslavement external rather than internal? Doesn't "internal" imply that this is something that comes from the slave without coercion?

ExSteelAgain -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 5:32:08 PM)
Consensual or not, it seems kind of like a mickey mouse military basic training course. Making someone your slave is a much more involved, joint undertaking where gimmicks don't last long.

KnightofMists -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 5:32:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MmeGigs Another thought... Can it be considered "Internal Enslavement" if all of the factors that lead to the enslavement are externally imposed? If I'm using these coercive and abusive techniques to enslave my partner, isn't the enslavement external rather than internal? Doesn't "internal" imply that this is something that comes from the slave without coercion? it always amuses me when people use the term internal enslavement... but they are do much external to impose, manipulate or cause to be enslavement. I do think internal enslavement is possible... but it is more like gardner that tends the flowers.... you have the tending of the soil... you have the sun and rain... which all helps to allow the flower to bloom.... but in the end... you can't make a weed bloom into a rose... but you can affect how well a rose will bloom. I see internal enslavement as more allowing the inner nature of someone to thrive and bloom so that we can view it and enjoy it.

NumberSix -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 5:38:50 PM)
He trusts that I'm not going to command him to do anything assinine, and he's right - I won't. LOL, Gigs, I hope to fuck he hasn't given you command of the spelling. Never mind me, I am just having a good time. Ron

leadership527 -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 5:54:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MmeGigs Your focus on LITERAL without regard to CONSENSUAL is really pretty silly. Without CONSENSUAL, you're not talking about kink. That is what separates what we do from abuse. Hey, you're preaching to the choir here. But I didn't make up the "Internal Enslavement" stuff and the original authors were very very very specific. *By their definition, if there is a single command you theoretically could* issue which your sub would not obey without hesitation, then they are not a slave, they are merely roleplaying a slave. All I did was take the goals as clearly written on their site and say, "here's how you could accomplish that." quote: ORIGINAL: MmeGigs May i ask respectfully, why you wanted to post this information if you didnt want to discuss the ethics of the action? Certainly. I am a creature of extremes. As such, I flirt with the edges of Internal Enslavement. I personally won't go there, but where I am going is not far off. So such things have interest to me in general. Now, specifically why I wrote this post is because so many people on these very boards say that it isn't possible. My opinion, backed up by tons of various cults, military efforts, and god knows what else, says that you certainly CAN train someone into an entirely different worldview than what they started with. So the post was meant to discuss the factual question of "is it possible" Discussing ethical systems on these boards is pointless. Nobody has enough skin in the game so everyone's position is immovable. The best you ever get to is "agree to disagree". quote: ORIGINAL: ExSteelAgain Consensual or not, it seems kind of like a mickey mouse military basic training course. Hey, you're call. If you think the published scholastic works of a doctor of sociology are "mickey mouse" booyah for you. In fact, when you do even cursory reading on mind control, brain washing, cults, and religious organizations, you quickly see that the steps I listed, while derived primarly from one doctor's work, are pretty much common across most of the published papers. This is how you brainwash someone. If you don't like the term "brainwash", then substitute, "Here's how you replace someone's current worldview and ethical system with a different one". quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists it always amuses me when people use the term internal enslavement... but they are do much external to impose, manipulate or cause to be enslavement. Hogwash. The "internal" in internal enslavement refers to the fact that the bonds keeping the slave enslaved are internal, not external. What I described was a way to put those bonds in place. Once there, they are internal. For the record, the authors of the internal enslavement website point out the many similarities to what they propose and brainwashing and specifically caution prospective slaves to think it through carefully. So I don't really think I'm way out on a limb here. All I did here was to take the informtion they themselves write and put it down in a "mickey mouse military basic training course" so that it's feasibility could be discussed.

RedMagic1 -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 6:00:54 PM)
For the life of me, I can't see why people get so bent about this topic. Don't you know vanilla couples whose relationship is such that, not only would they die for each other, but they live for each other every day? People make overarching life commitment to political causes, and even to the violin and ballet. I dated a professional violinist recently. She's been serving the violin since the age of five. "It's all I know. I can't do anything else. I didn't choose it; it chose me." She has molded her mind, her body, and every aspect of her life so she can sound a particular way. This includes entering a mindspace where she cannot imagine doing or serving anything else -- consensual removal of consent. How is committing your life in service to a goal an ugly act? If the goal is ugly -- a professional neo-Nazi, for example. But to make beautiful music, to improve the lot of humanity, to serve a human being you respect and love... those all sound noble to me. They don't require torture techniques to achieve either. When people get pissed pissed pissed about the evil of "consensual removal of consent" I always wonder about their ability to engage in deep life commitment. It's certainly something I have used as a tool on myself, when I wanted to get good at something, or when I was in love with someone. And I am (supposedly) a Dom.

NumberSix -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 6:01:26 PM)
*By their definition, if there is a single command you theoretically could* issue which your sub would not obey without hesitation, then they are not a slave, they are merely roleplaying a slave. Perhaps the original authors are as asinine as the next one, here and there, excepting they have a website wherein they can bray it to the world. Now, I can envision a sityaton in which I am getting my nut on, and I could say to the party of the second part in that little drama, you move one goddamn muscle right now, cause I am coming and I will kill you, and she would freeze and obey. Internal enslavement? You decide. 6

marieToo -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 6:16:22 PM)
I do think all of this (the methods listed) is possible, but I think you would need a weak and desperate mind to work with in order to have any success with it.

MercTech -> RE: Internal Enslavement, some specifics (10/3/2008 6:20:58 PM)
If that technique works at Parris Island, it should work with slaves. You could always wear a campaign hat and insist they call you Drill Instructor, Sir! Ok,, being silly, but it does sound like typical boot camp technique. Stefan

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125