This blog contains information that is adult in nature. If you are underage please leave at once.

Thursday, November 29, 2012

More on those "s" Words

In the comments section tori and Malcolm both posed such interesting questions mouse decided they deserved their own place.
Tori asked: Sorry im back!

I have been thinking about this post and the aspect of fear. I wander if a lot of fear subs/slaves have is the fear of 'losing themselves'?, i mean like i get scared and have these irrational worries of what will happen if he leaves me, how will i manage when i have become so dependent on him and the very fact that im dependent on him scares me and i want desperatley to retain some control.

I also fear that i trust him so completley that i occassionally want to test the boundries to be assurred he wont leave me.

Do you think thats a natural part of slavery/submission?

Well, you touched on something that mouse was discussing with a good friend just recently. Now, this friend recently became fed up with her bossy, or as she put it, shrew-like attitude and wanted to surrender (for lack of a better word) to her husband. She slowly learned (much on her own -- with just a teeny bit of mouse help) that she was afraid of giving up control over certain things because they made her feel needed and important in her relationship with her husband.
One of the things mouse did tell her, was to take a hard close-up look at why it was important for her to feel that way.

Back to you tori, mouse would ask -- are you really afraid that you couldn't take care of yourself if he left? Or are you saying you would miss him and his control coupled with all he does for you are really irrelevant? This is how mouse kinda looks at it, if something were to happen to Daddy, would mouse have to relearn how to pick out her own clothing? Or would she miss the idea of having him do it? Has she forgotten how to pay bills, balance the checkbook or budget money? Has mouse forgotten how to bring herself to orgasm?

Let's be honest -- all those things are rather a bit like riding a bicycle. You never really forget how to do them. You just don't need to focus on them. Now if Daddy were to leave, yes mouse would be devastated, not for what he does (or did) but because she loves him. No amount of money in the world could replace what he is to mouse.

Testing the boundaries is common -- for any number of reasons -- to see if he really meant something, or just feeling snarky and petulant. Testing where lines are drawn to make sure he doesn't leave is something else.

Do you feel more loved or safe when he corrects you or takes the time to punish you after you've pushed a boundary? Why do you think that is?

Next was from Malcolm who asked: As usual, mouse, after reading your post I feel wiser and better informed. You are very good at describing your own thoughts and feelings in a way that can be understood by a rather literal-minded guy like me.

My wife is not a submitter and doesn't want to be. She has no conception of the relief that submitting (not necessarily to someone but simply letting go of control) can give.

I have recently been wondering just how much control we do have over our lives. You know there is a school of thought that teaches No free will. Maybe you have come across it. I often wonder, are we really in control of our lives, or do they just happen, while we misguidedly think we are doing it all? You must have come across the Buddhist teaching, "Events happen; deeds are done; but there is no doer thereof." What do you make of that, mouse?

I don't really expect you to answer that in your comments section, but I may ask you in the formspring part later because I want to know your thoughts on it, since you are one of the most intelligent and articulate of the writers of D/s blogs.

Well, thanks for the compliment! Oddly enough, this song lyric played in mouse's head the whole time she thought about how to reply.

"We are stardust, we are golden, we are billion year old carbon. And we got to get ourselves back to the garden."         --Woodstock, Joni Mitchell

It first should be said that mouse is very much agnostic/atheist and has no belief whatsoever in any religion/faith. Nor does she believe in the supernatural, miracles, astral projections, mythology, ghosts, paranormal -- or anything like that. What mouse does truly believe is good and bad (or heaven and hell) exist in all of us. The influence of the "divine" does not mean someone is a good person, since ideas can be corrupted -- look at "good" people who believe their children should be protected from homosexuals and the "gay agenda"and feel justified in their hatred.  Just like an absence of "divine" doesn't mean evil. Einstein was an agnostic.

How much control do we have in our day to day lives over what we do -- mouse would suggest not a whole lot. Not because she's a consensual slave, but because she lives in a society that has many, many laws that govern her and most people's lives. If a "choice" is made to drive above the speed limit, a possible consequence could be a ticket or worse an accident or injury.

Now is our planet/galaxy/universe a petri dish or science experiment on some being's table? Yes, it's possible, hence why mouse considers herself agnostic/atheist. Are our lives guided by some unseen hand? Probably not because there are just too many people in the world and everyone feels at times "someone" is meddling or nudging their lives. A better question might be, do our instincts come from our own mind and how those are interpreted determine our path? As humans, mouse believes that we are predisposed to look for faces in clouds, since the first thing we learn to focus on is a human face -- we are also prone to look for meanings or connections in random events. The earth quakes, there must a reason -- are the gods angry or dancing? How that was determined might depend on the damage it caused. Today, no one really believes that because we understand Tectonic Theory.

Now, Buddhism is something mouse can rather get behind and is kinda fascinated by (in fact she's working on a post on her own journey to meditation, which did not come easily). The Buddha was not, at least technically, a god, but according to the legend, rather a naturally born enlightened individual. Enlightenment, he taught (or believed and this is a very watered down version) isn't the destination, but more the journey and what you learn of yourself along the way. Now it should be said, mouse is in no way an expert on Buddhism or Tao Buddhism, Taoism, etc. However the idea that there is no doer...doesn't sit well with mouse. Again if mouse speeds and causes an accident -- she is the "doer" in that mess. We make things happen, we create things in our image not the other way around.

A final thought, addiction therapies and 12-step programs often talk heavily about handing over their addictions to a creator or "god as they know it." if they don't succeed it's not god's fault, the fault is theirs for not having enough faith in that deity, to take away their troubles. But if they remain sober they praise god for seeing them through (another thing mouse has a hard time understanding). If there is no free will, then it wouldn't matter what you did because nothing you would do could change the outcome -- that kind of forced helplessness that Alpha imposed on mouse more than 17 years ago. That just seems rather sadistic -- don't you think?

Honestly, mouse has many more thoughts on this subject but for now will hush, except to thoroughly agree letting go of control can be an enormous relief! And to thank you again for the thoughtful question. Also, we did see the questions you asked on formspring. If mouse didn't cover it in her reply (which was based on the comment left on the blog) please let her know and she will answer it.

Finally final. If you or anyone anyone else has differing views to share to Malcolm's question please feel free to jump into the discussion in the comments section below!


  1. I enjoyed your answer to Toni, and it's given me thought for today as I am currently in a power struggle over control and not wanting to have it anymore, but not being able to trust enough to let go.

    What if the person you are with just isn't capable of handling everything?

    I currently do not feel like I can let go of decisions, finances, things with the kids... but I ever so deeply need a reprieve from these things right now that I'm actually considering going it alone because I almost resent feeling like I have to do it all with someone else in the house who doesn't just step in(I don't know if that makes sense..)

    I guess that depends on who you happen to be married to. Maybe my Husband just doesn't want to lead.
    I guess I never thought of that - and I maybe just answered my own question.

    Anyways, thanks for answering those and posting.

    I needed fodder for my think tank today.



  2. Having it explained the way you have has given me clarity and its like why couldnt i see that. Yes i could manage without him on a practical level, im more than capable of managing bills and making decisions but all that is taken out of my hands i might have the odd grumble but i feel safe knowing that he is control.

    So yes it would be him i missed because i love him and yes the control/security he provides me with.

    Do you feel more loved or safe when he corrects you or takes the time to punish you after you've pushed a boundary? Why do you think that is?

    We always have an in depth discussion when i do push the boundries he likes to get to the very bottom of why i did it, when i would rather he just got the punishment over and done with..i really dont like these types of discussions because they make me have to confront 'issues' i would rather leave not good at the whole opening up talks.

    I do feel safe and loved and gosh (lightbulb moment) im realising that its because it demonstrates to me that he cares and he wants and loves worth (not sure thats the right word im looking for) him putting the time and effort in, so when i do push each and every time he doesnt back down the boundries stay as they were.

    Thankyou mouse, this has given me lots to think about in a good way.


    1. It is completely, tori, the right word, "worth" or worthy of the trouble. A friend once said to mouse that she wished her house was more clean. So she made rules about cleaning. The problem was, and this is just mouse's interpretation, her husband didn't really care, so if she didn't keep the house clean, there was no real consequence, which in turn mouse believes made her feel like he doesn't care.


  3. Thanks for your thoughtful answer to my question, mouse. I have recently become very interested in the subject of free will and power of choice, the obvious existence of which for almost all of my life I and the majority, including you mouse and your fellow D/s bloggers, have taken for granted.

    But now I seriously doubt that we have the choice, and I have found that I have good company: that there are serious thinkers (including, apparently, the Buddha) that also doubt it or even refute it.

    I will have more to say about control and free will, on my blog and elsewhere, when I have finished reading Richard Oerton's book "The Nonsense of Free Will: Facing up to a false belief". Oerton is an English lawyer, and writes well and amusingly. You would enjoy it I think, mouse.

    1. Malcolm Sir,

      Been thinking about what you wrote and mouse's reply, specifically to the part about free will. While she can't speak to determinism, which in the little reading she did is somewhat wrought with issues...quantum theorists might call "possibilities" there's no real evidence suggesting determinism outside of the realm of cause and effect, nurture v nature, etc. Free will, mouse believes doesn't exist at least in the way we think of it. We are constrained by our genetics, our nature, our society, our upbringing, and even our gender. All those things play a part in every decision we make each day. We do have choices. Coke or Pepsi or a different caramel colored carbonated beverage that contains sugar? Those are choices.

      Determinism seems to be that given a set of certain conditions there exists only one outcome. But that's really a limited pretense. If a tornado forms, it's likely property will be damaged. But which property? That's an unknown variable, since tornadoes are known to change direction.

      Anyway might add more to this, curious to hear your thoughts.



All comments are moderated.