Executioner Mentality

[windar]

This is a companion thread to "Victim Mentality" http://www.cruxforums.com/xf/threads/victim-mentality.7746/, in the interest of fairness, focusing on the mindset of the executioner (which can imply lethal or non-lethal abuse), male or female, rather than the mind set of the victim.

Do you prefer, either as the executioner or as their victim:

A. An executioner who is strictly business, doing a job for a brutal state or gang of criminals (are the two really different?).
B. One who operates strictly for their personal gratification
C. A mix

In my personal case, most of the characters in my stories operate from mixed motives, C, which I find inherently more interesting than A or B. After all, it's nice to enjoy one's work, isn't it??

 

[Typhor2434]

Now we're talkin

 

[Madiosi]

At the end, I miss the onlooker mentality.

 

[Barbaria1]

I’ll vote for C.

 

[Loxuru]

A professional (so : A), but preferably not a awarded his assignment because he was the lowest bidder.

 

[Migoz2]

Although I can see the appeal of playing and writing both A and B, I agree that C is by far the more interesting option for me. I like to think that there is a (perverse) relationship between the executioner and his/her victim that arises out of the conditions of scenarios A and B. Or, if there isn't, I want there to be. (I am not sure I am making myself clear here!)

One of these days I really am going to have to sit myself down and write this in a way that can appear here.

 

[StarbuckSlut]

This is a companion thread to "Victim Mentality" http://www.cruxforums.com/xf/threads/victim-mentality.7746/, in the interest of fairness, focusing on the mindset of the executioner (which can imply lethal or non-lethal abuse), male or female, rather than the mind set of the victim.

Do you prefer, either as the executioner or as their victim:

A. An executioner who is strictly business, doing a job for a brutal state or gang of criminals (are the two really different?).
B. One who operates strictly for their personal gratification
C. A mix

In my personal case, most of the characters in my stories operate from mixed motives, C, which I find inherently more interesting than A or B. After all, it's nice to enjoy one's work, isn't it??

I like the idea of A but only if they are doing it at the request of the sadist leader that requested it, and that person is nearby. The executioner is their tool

I love B and C too and often in my fantatsies the executioner is my husband and yes he gets off on the idea of executing me.... so he would definately be a C or B....

Great post!

 

[John Delves Richardson]

All three types are interesting and I like to use all of them in various numbers and configurations in my scenes.

 

[Calf #15]

I vote for C. A professional, who enjoys his work and thus knows several obscure techniques to make things more "interesting"

 

[Hugin&Munin]

I believe I woud prefer "C". Thats more interresting.

 

[Patrizio]

Absolutely A, even if he does it by profession, he certainly enjoys seeing his victims suffer, gratifying the public with his torture techniques, being able to use and abuse a body that has no chance to defend itself.

 

[malins]

Do you prefer, either as the executioner or as their victim:

A. An executioner who is strictly business, doing a job for a brutal state or gang of criminals (are the two really different?).
B. One who operates strictly for their personal gratification
C. A mix

As usual a mix is best...

I think just 'strictly business' makes the 'executioner role' too much that of a tool, he's just a cog, and his power is derived from others and not his own, he's not really exercising his own will. Yes there is an attraction to the inevitability of certain things but there has to be creativity in getting there.

I like the idea of A but only if they are doing it at the request of the sadist leader that requested it, and that person is nearby. The executioner is their tool

I'd agree with that ... and in between the screaming and writhing, ... who would my looks go to, ... to him and not the 'tool'...

I like to think that there is a (perverse) relationship between the executioner and his/her victim that arises out of the conditions

That's the heart of the matter! And if it's all scripted and in one direction that can't really happen...

 

[Loxuru]

I think just 'strictly business' makes the 'executioner role' too much that of a tool, he's just a cog, and his power is derived from others and not his own, he's not really exercising his own will. Yes there is an attraction to the inevitability of certain things but there has to be creativity in getting there.

OK, not everyone is qualified for the job. If you cannot see blood, or, let's say, too empathic of character, then, forget about it.

But against being a 'tool' or 'deriving power from others', I think, in a judicial context, this could fit very well. From the executioner's viewpoint, the job is perceived as sense of duty, carrying out justice, or in the interest of a higher goal for the people or society.

A curious mix not yet mentioned, is an executioner, silently fantasising about to be the condemned one day.

 

[malins]

as sense of duty, carrying out justice, or in the interest of a higher goal for the people or society

Yes I think that's a better scenario than the 'bald drooling brute' stereotype. The executioner/tormentor who is in principle an honorable person perhaps in service of a system that he can morally defend, that is a lot more interesting than the plain default 'bad guy'. Especially if there's a bit of internal conflict/depth to him ... "I can see where these rebels are coming from, their misguided desires for what they call 'freedom'. But if they succeed, they will tear everything apart, drown our country in blood and replace the system we have today - even if it's flawd - with anarchy that leads directly to tyranny... which they would the first victim of anyway ... so it is better for them to be the only victims ... I remember from my own childhood what civil war did to our country and my vow has ever been to never allow that to happen again ... so I will not have my heart softened by these begging eyes and pleas for mercy ... now where is the cattleprod again ..."

A curious mix not yet mentioned, is an executioner, silently fantasising about to be the condemned one day.

Now that kind of fantasising could of course be for him/her, a way to redirect doubts and feelings of guilt ..." what if the tables turned and I was punished for what I have done?"

Many stories have explored the idea of the victim who are compelled by their fantasy to eventually seek out its realization ... including going so far as to commit the transgression just in order to be punished in the way they've fantasised.

A different twist would be the captor/overseer/executioner who ... driven by that fantasy of being the condemned one day ... in a critical moment decides to sabotage the system and arrange for the rebels to escape from their dungeon cells ... and while being tortured by them in retribution ... the very last secret he/she would give up is, 'it was me who set you free...'

 

[windar]

OK, not everyone is qualified for the job. If you cannot see blood, or, let's say, too empathic of character, then, forget about it.

But against being a 'tool' or 'deriving power from others', I think, in a judicial context, this could fit very well. From the executioner's viewpoint, the job is perceived as sense of duty, carrying out justice, or in the interest of a higher goal for the people or society.

A curious mix not yet mentioned, is an executioner, silently fantasising about to be the condemned one day.

Yes I think that's a better scenario than the 'bald drooling brute' stereotype. The executioner/tormentor who is in principle an honorable person perhaps in service of a system that he can morally defend, that is a lot more interesting than the plain default 'bad guy'. Especially if there's a bit of internal conflict/depth to him ... "I can see where these rebels are coming from, their misguided desires for what they call 'freedom'. But if they succeed, they will tear everything apart, drown our country in blood and replace the system we have today - even if it's flawd - with anarchy that leads directly to tyranny... which they would the first victim of anyway ... so it is better for them to be the only victims ... I remember from my own childhood what civil war did to our country and my vow has ever been to never allow that to happen again ... so I will not have my heart softened by these begging eyes and pleas for mercy ... now where is the cattleprod again ..."


Now that kind of fantasising could of course be for him/her, a way to redirect doubts and feelings of guilt ..." what if the tables turned and I was punished for what I have done?"

Many stories have explored the idea of the victim who are compelled by their fantasy to eventually seek out its realization ... including going so far as to commit the transgression just in order to be punished in the way they've fantasised.

A different twist would be the captor/overseer/executioner who ... driven by that fantasy of being the condemned one day ... in a critical moment decides to sabotage the system and arrange for the rebels to escape from their dungeon cells ... and while being tortured by them in retribution ... the very last secret he/she would give up is, 'it was me who set you free...'

Or the executioner who was punished in the same fashion many years ago (non-lethally, obviously) and was so fascinated by the whole experience that she became a punisher herself and maybe still longs to receive punishment again. I'm not thinking of any specific character, of course...

 

[twonines]

I’ll vote for C.

I`m with you, lethal situations are not really my thing, although I respect the views of those prefer this scenario. In judicial situations, theoretically , the executioner should be in the A camp, but it is so much more interesting if he/she has some personal reaction with the victim ,who preferably is an attractive vulnerable female. Whether this is a reaction to a slight, real or imaginary, an antagonism to an annoying personal trait or just pure sadistic instinct ,does not really matter, because it all serves to add interest to the situation.

 

[Barbaria1]

I`m with you, lethal situations are not really my thing, although I respect the views of those prefer this scenario. In judicial situations, theoretically , the executioner should be in the A camp, but it is so much more interesting if he/she has some personal reaction with the victim ,who preferably is an attractive vulnerable female. Whether this is a reaction to a slight, real or imaginary, an antagonism to an annoying personal trait or just pure sadistic instinct ,does not really matter, because it all serves to add interest to the situation.

Yep, good story telling often makes use of the plausibly unpredictable.

 

[twonines]

Yep, good story telling often makes use of the plausibly unpredictable.

Yes, stretching credibility is so much better than shattering it.

 

[willowfall]

Usually when I am writing a story I try to put myself into the mind of the executioner so I can make more realistic.

Option "A" (which I have used) is a bit more scary. That someone could look at torturing and executing a person strictly as a business transaction. I do in a way find this (from a victim's perspective) more erotic. You are merely a thing to the executioner not even, really, human. It adds to the humiliation.

Most of the time I find option "C" is more realistic. Everyone wants to do what they like and I suspect that those who performed this function long term had a sadistic streak in them where they found a great deal of pleasure in inflicting pain. The concept fo being nothing more than a toy to be played with and broken when no longer interesting is also very erotic.

kisses

willowfall

 

[KageKamen]

Hmm... the key things to think about are often "why did they take this job" and "why do they still do it". Of course, what the job is matters quite a bit - are they strictly a killer, or is 90+% of their work floggings? Likewise who their victims are - I suspect pretty girls are rarer than art would suggest, and might bring doubt to one who wouldn't hesitate with a man or a crone.

But then, who says all executioners are huge men? In an egalitarian enough society (or a sufficiently segregated one) girls could take on the role too.