"Breaking"

[VK****]

I've stumbled across this a few times and yet in mainstream BDSM terminology it's not mentioned at all. To me it would suggest that the 'Top', whatever flavour they choose to annoint themselves as, has exceeded limits by a considerable distance. I get that a 'Bottom' wanting to get into Sub Space expects to have to go through quite a bit of ***. Tearful, mascara running ***, but if it's understood upfront that this is the necessary journey..or the 'Top' checks in, alarmed and makes damn sure that the Bottom wants to press on, then fine. Trust, consent, SSC, RACK etc. Help me with 'Breaking' a Bottom folks, just seems to jar, badly, given what Kink is meant to be. 

[Li****]

Never enjoyed the term. Regardless of role/position, we aren't horses to "break". Makes me cringe.
I'm sure there's others who don't want it to be a ***ful, uncomfortable, traumatising experience,

[VK****]

5 minutes ago, LittleSoulTease said:

Never enjoyed the term. Regardless of role/position, we aren't horses to "break". Makes me cringe.
I'm sure there's others who don't want it to be a ***ful, uncomfortable, traumatising experience,

Thank you very much indeed. seems I was not alone in my abhorrence of the term. 

[d3****]

You will never have complete control over a submissive and you will never have true power unless a real contract is created and signed until that happens you are stuck in the tip top of the lifestyle

[VK****]

2 minutes ago, d3volo said:

You will never have complete control over a submissive and you will never have true power unless a real contract is created and signed until that happens you are stuck in the tip top of the lifestyle

WTAF? A contract can be torn up in seconds by a Sub if her "Top" steps out of line, so no..no..and thrice no. You will never, ever have complete control over anyone because they have the option to walk away. Astonished that you don't understand the basics here. 

[VK****]

3 minutes ago, VKD said:

WTAF? A contract can be torn up in seconds by a Sub if her "Top" steps out of line, so no..no..and thrice no. You will never, ever have complete control over anyone because they have the option to walk away. Astonished that you don't understand the basics here. 

Just calling you out now...if your idea of a contract means that the Sub has to subjugate herself to all manner of extreme punishments to escape your 'control'. You have a special place in Hell reserved for you. Many Subs have endured extreme trauma, for you to..... well words fail me. 

[Matttster]

One thing I have learned is that terminology in kink is not very solid. Things are not well defined. To some breaking may mean healing to break down inhibitions so one can pursue things they have been afraid of. But to others breaking could mean breaking someone’s will to do things they do not want to do.

I will note that a quick glance at some people’s profiles can give you an indication as to what breaking may mean to them.

[Looking4love69]

If you don't know and understand this then you are truly lost!

[VK****]

15 minutes ago, Looking4love69 said:

If you don't know and understand this then you are truly lost!

A punchy reply, but to what do you refer exactly, Breaking? 

[MrJim]

It doesn’t take *** to put a sub in subspace, multiple ***d orgasms can’t put a sub there too

[ey****]

I can understand why people might not like the term, but it's really just a figure of s***ch

 

[VK****]

6 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

I can understand why people might not like the term, but it's really just a figure of s***ch

 

Kindly elaborate. I can't find mention of it in the net,  "BDSM broken"  etc brings up nothing specific, just broken relationships. One lady above agrees it's got no place in the scene, a "gentleman" implies that I'm clueless for not knowing.

 For once I revel in my  Fake Dommery. I am proud to announce that I have never "broken" any lady, nor would I wish to.

[ey****]

ok - so particularly as part of a long, intense scene (though doesn't have to be long)

at the start - sub is a regular human being (or their bratty selves, whatever)

end, they're maybe in sub space, a little docile, floaty - and often at that point very suggestible - they're "broken"

it is why of course it is important around consent and lines drawn up front - because once you get someone to sub space they're often more likely to go through with most things asked, so it's important to have the trust that at that point there's not going to be a shock to the system.

[VK****]

24 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

ok - so particularly as part of a long, intense scene (though doesn't have to be long)

at the start - sub is a regular human being (or their bratty selves, whatever)

end, they're maybe in sub space, a little docile, floaty - and often at that point very suggestible - they're "broken"

it is why of course it is important around consent and lines drawn up front - because once you get someone to sub space they're often more likely to go through with most things asked, so it's important to have the trust that at that point there's not going to be a shock to the system.

What an unpleasant phrase to use for something which both participants desire. I absolutely get the idea of Sub Space, to couch it thus seems to make it an inhumane, barbaric achievement.

Schooled. Unhappily so. Will never enter my lexicon.

[Matttster]

I have not seen the term broken used as when someone has reached subspace. I am apt to agree with VKD that it seems to be an unpleasant phrase. Subspace can be a beautiful thing and broken sounds like such a negative term for this.

I would also note, as I mentioned before, that definitions in kink are vague. For example, eyemblacksheep comments that the term is used when someone reaches subspace and is in a suggestible place. But by looking at the profiles of some of the other commenters, I would guess that they don’t see the term ad “suggestible” rather they seem the type to view the term more like “conquered”.

[QXX666]

It’s only a fantasy term used by newbies who likes to think in term of bdsm pornography. They get aroused of the thought to be broken/***d. 
the only time it’s suitable to use is in a Master/s dynamic when the subject is actually in need to be put into a blank slate status. 

[Go****]

Completely valid question, in my opinion, and those who think otherwise have some learning to do. Those that aren't willing to ask questions are invariably the ones that make more mistakes through not willing to learn/admit when they're wrong.

Anyway, to your question...

Speaking for myself, and myself only, I do occasionally use the term, however, not in the way that you described re: breaking limits.

For me, I refer to it as my body being used by my D type, within the pre agreed limits, until I'm exhausted and unable to take any more. Be that *** or any other type of play. It can also mean impact to the point of an emotional release; the breaking point. Again though, all within limits.

[ma****]

I don't like that term... or, more precisely, the phrase "breaking someone" - which implies creating damage. BDSM, D/s relationships aren't meant to create damage.

[QXX666]

4 hours ago, maryioni said:

I don't like that term... or, more precisely, the phrase "breaking someone" - which implies creating damage. BDSM, D/s relationships aren't meant to create damage.

Some subs like to be crushed, cut, bruised, bleed, stapled, covered in black and blue. It’s not because you don’t like it that’s it’s wrong or not meant to. It’s not one dimensional concept or vison.