She resists the unknown, so the dome introduces her to the new INSTEAD. She will resist at first. If the resistance continues over a longer period of time, the plan should be reconsidered. If she lets herself go, he breaks her resentment with it.
“Breaking” i.s.v. “to rape/to let do something against the declared will” is borderline, if not previously agreed exactly like that. After all, it is about more than breaking a taboo, it is about physical integrity. Whoever masters the game of breaking and uses it gently but firmly makes the true Dom. He must be able to feel what is going on in his sub in every situation and master breaking. And if necessary “break off”! That makes the difference.
I like to feel my limits. I want it extremely for the brain and my body, I want to be allowed to look at His drawings, our session – still long me, yes. Also, a strange man can kick me very much. Packaged as a little surprise for me as a sub … I have real friends to talk to. To catch. To correct. I always emphasize the play nature. You experiment with each other, but the game has a beginning and an end. I don't let my personality be broken. There are plenty of combat subbie who get their own personal erotic kick out of having their individual will temporarily “broken”. Be it playfully in a session or more long-term in a 24/7 relationship. The tastes are here, as everywhere, more than just different.
For my taste, it becomes deeply critical when the limited game “breaking will” – real breaking personality becomes. The free spirit in me simply reacts to the latter with chronic mental nausea. I would formulate it superficially times in such a way: I as a sub have my own will, my own opinion, my own pride. In addition, I as a private person do not always want to have the last word and also have a big mouth now and then. My Dom, meanwhile, has the task of imposing his will on me (which is, of course, consensual; somehow I'm into it). To achieve this, HE must “break” my private person, that is, HE must bring me to the point that I obey HIM and just give up my private character traits (for the game, sometimes longer).
This can be compared to breaking in a horse, whose wild horse character must first be domesticated. In extreme cases, “breaking” is brainwashing, like in cults that make their members give up their own identity partially or completely. This is achieved with deprivation, with putting under pressure, with punishments, with isolation and and and ... so all known practices … To break completely I consider irresponsible and against human dignity; however, playfully or also extending into private life, as a partial or permanent play relationship in consensual action is ok.
Well after all there is something like `Geneva Conventions' for BDSM practitioners – SSC, RACK. Interesting for me is the `Sane' in SSC - the reasonable. From which a counter-question develops for me: "Why should I permanently, perhaps irreparably, break the spirit, the personality of a being I respect, cherish and perhaps even love?" For me, that would be paradoxical. Breaking` is one of those words that sets a link with a bitter aftertaste – it has a very negative connotation. Arguably, I can scrape something free, demand it, drive it, torment it, use it, shape it, build it, prune it, grow it, etc. – but I don't really like to break it in two. With what should I then still 'play' – with a smoothly shaved zombie?