#Elman induction

[nocturnowlette]

I find it crazy when people religiously abide by the structural frameworks of hypnosis that have formed over the years for a great number of reasons.

First off, these frameworks are not things that managed to delve deeper into the topic of hypnosis to extract some special information. They are training wheels. They are imaginary lines drawn so that anyone who doesn't understand hypnosis could color within them and be able to put someone under.

They are systemic frameworks in a way different from topics more structurally consistent and with more actual axioms. The more you try to find hard lines in hypnosis, the more imaginary walls you are building around yourself. People imbue named techniques like Elman induction or PMR inductions with a near-religious efficacy, when in reality, they are as arbitrary as an induction someone makes up on the spot.

Anyone talking about "Yes Sets" and "Eyelid Catalepsy" aren't delving into the truth of hypnosis, they're living in a skyscraper where they can't see the bottom. You have no idea what the base is.

Scientific mysticism is grossly prevalent in hypnosis because it is unimaginably prone to confirmation bias. There are many times where the idea of something working is near indistinguishable from it actually working, and even further, that any sort of blueprint seems to work with the right tweaking. However, once one structure is built, people assume for some reason that it is there for some meritocratic reason and not just because that idea so happened to be popular.

Progressive Muscle Relaxation doesn't put someone into trance, at best it sells the effects of it so someone is more willing to believe it. It is a suggestion, not an induction.

Fractionation is a distinct effect of disorientation different from regular trance, but the rapid jumps from awake to "deeper" is mostly sold through the spectacle of it. More likely than not, the person hit their relative limit for that trance with just this method a couple ups and downs into it, but they just cannot tell because they go all the way up before going back down again. It's all greyer than you think.

People are essentially doing rituals without purpose because they assume the magic circle will break if they don't.

NLP is bullshit, Elman and Ericksonian and PMR inductions get one or two general principles right then a ton of unproven garbage; all of these share a nugget of truth surrounded by an orbit of intellectual waste. It's a poison of the mind.

The most ridiculous idea is that true understanding is achieved when you're able to 'switch between psychological structures smoothly' during trances. Swapping training wheels mid bike ride is impressive in some sense, but its utterly ridiculous compared to learning how to ride without it, and still leads to less maneuverability and versatility overall.

There are two things that matter in hypnosis: focus and suggestion. That is it.

True learning in hypnosis is gained by realizing that it isn't contained within blueprints; hypnosis is the piece of paper itself. You need to erase those lines and learn that you can write your own at any moment.

There's a reason I immediately wince when someone brags about being a hypnotherapist or that they learned through books or stage hypnosis. It's all limits, and they've convinced themselves there is nothing beyond the walls.

[tennfan2]

do you like doing inductions? if so, what's your favourite induction you've ever done?

if inductions aren't your jam to write about, what's your favourite post hypnotic effect you've ever caused to happen?

Do I like putting people into trance? Hell yes.

Do I do a lot of “inductions” proper in the sense of like, Elman, butterfly, arm drop? Not so much these days!

When I’m hypnotizing someone for the first time or if it’s their first trance, I’ll probably do some flavor of an Elman induction because it plays to a lot of modalities and feels very “hypnosis is happening!” in its flow.

But generally, I do a lot fewer inductions now when I’m hypnotizing someone - my style has kind of veered into conversational/free form sorts of things, which I generally like. I also tend to have a lot of kinesthetic components (when it’s been consented to!) as I’m talking.

I definitely don’t disdain more formal inductions! I should probably do them more, honestly. There’s a satisfaction in that sense of doing a thing in that way.

Also, this for some reason makes me want to do a dual Elman induction, which I don’t think I’ve ever really seen done.

See?? Asks=inspiration!

[mixedmindhypnosis]

Hypnosis: Elman Induction

What is the Elman Induction?

The Elman Induction is a way to bring someone into trance that has been proven to work for a lot of people and evokes a very strong feeling of trance.

Example 1

The very first Induction I taught myself was the Elman Induction. I was very nervous before doing my first in person hypnosis session. This was why I looked for a way that seemed very reliable to bring someone into trance.

Discussion

The Elman Induction is an induction that is used for recreational, show and most importantly medical and therapeutical hypnosis. The induction proved so effective that it is very commonly taught to people new to hypnosis as it rather short, effective, and easy to learn.

I am not saying that you must learn the induction, contrary I would not advise you on learning inductions by heart (but more about that in my future post about inductions). Learn the principles that are used in the Elman Induction as they teach you a lot of useful things you can benefit from in any other induction.

The Elman Induction consists of 4 to 5 stages:

Creating Yes Sets

Eyelid Catalepsy

Fractionation

Test for Physical Relaxation

Mental Relaxation

What are Yes Sets and what are they used for?

Yes Sets are something you can create in and out of trance. The principle of Yes Sets is that a person that repeatedly answers 'yes' to a series of questions, is likely to develop a tendency to say 'yes' to things that they have no strong opinion or are less sure about. This can be explained by a series of different psychological phenomena like availability, priming, ....

This is not a way to convince people of things they just don’t want to happen but can be a great way to ease people into a trance by starting with statements or questions that are true.

For example:

You are sitting comfortably.

You are here because you want to experience trance.

You are curious.

You can let yourself relax.

…

By doing this they build up an inner Yes response to the things you are saying. If you follow these statements by sentences that might or will be true, they are going to have this yes response as well. If you suggest something like “you will feel more relaxed” and their inner response is 'yes' just before they realize that they are actually relaxing their logical mind will become less sceptic about the things you say and therefore it can become much easier to accept more complex suggestions.

What is Eyelid Catalepsy and what is it used for?

Eyelid Catalepsy describes the state when a person has their eyes closed and can’t bring themselves to open them. Things like this are called convincers and they have the aim to convince your subject that the hypnosis/suggestion is actually working.

A lot of convincers do not really have much to do with hypnosis but are just built upon the principle of people’s susceptibility to suggestion. Whether it is Eye Catalepsy, not being able to move an arm, an arm raising up, all those things are completely possible without bringing someone into trance, but they all are amazing ways to show your subject that they are listening to you and reacting very well to your induction/instructions.

Example 2

Some time back I did an altered version of the Elman Induction with a friend. When I got the eye catalepsy part I asked them to open and close their eyes again to do some fractionation, but they didn’t open their eyes. I took this as a sign that they felt very comfortable in that state and were already in a very stable trance.

Later they revealed to me that they just didn’t want to open their eyes. This taught me that there is always the possibility for reactions you don’t anticipate.

What is Fractionation and what is it used for?

Fractionation describes the action of repeatedly dropping into trance and waking up again. This can be used to make it easier for a subject to go into trance again and might even effect how intense they experience the feeling of trance to be.

As part of an induction fractionation can be used to show a subject that they are responding very well to suggestions and the trance is working. The experience of coming out of trance and going back down just by any kind of triggering action can be surprising for newer subjects.

It can also show a subject how it feels for them to be in trance as they get to experience how it feels to be in a trance and out of trance without much delay over and over again.

What are Tests for Physical Relaxation and what are they used for?

Test for Physical Relaxation are used as an indicator how well a person lets go during trance and if they are in trance.

There are two very easy to spot signs that someone is in trance:

Fluttering eyes (REM)

Very low tension in their body

You might not be able to see them with every subject, but they are there. The tension in the body is what is being checked by Tests for Physical Relaxation. Most commonly this is done by slightly lifting one arm and checking if your subject is helping of if the arm is completely limp.

Letting go of the hand while counting is commonly done in the Elman Induction as another way to intensify the feeling of trance. The sense of feeling the hand falling in trance can be used to strengthen the picture of 'falling' into trance even more.

What is Mental Relaxation and what is it used for?

Mental Relaxation is a state where one might feel their thoughts be freely flowing without sticking with them for long or even just feeling thoughtless. Mental Relaxation is something you can either suggest or heighten by keeping the brain busy.

Suggesting Mental Relaxation can take many forms:

Feel your thoughts getting very light and just float away as they come in.

Notice your thoughts become very heavy so you can just let them fall out of your mind.

Imagine your thoughts turn into liquid and flowing out of your ears just after they appear.

...

In the Elman Induction Mental Relaxation is achieved through giving the subject a task that keeps their head involved while continuously suggesting them that the task is getting more difficult. After some time, the task becomes so difficult that when you finally allow them to let go of the task, they feel a big relief and really enjoy their brain getting a break from doing anything.

You can find an overview of the post series here.

Also feel free to follow me on FetLife for more kinky content.

[binaural-histolog]

Hypnosis vs Trance

Here's my thesis: there is no hypnotic trance, it's hypnosis AND trance. Hypnosis and trance are often correlated, but they're not same.

Hypnosis is an intention to believe and follow suggestions automatically, an activity of phenomenological control. We can see this intention at the very beginning of the Elman induction, during the eye lock.

The Elman eye lock goes "Close your eyes. Imagine that your eyelids are so heavy that they just won't open. When they are so heavy that you know they won't open, then go ahead and try to open them." Right there is the core principle of hypnosis: believe these things are true, and behave accordingly.

Another variation is seen with the automatic imagination model, which asks the hypnotee to imagine not imagining through willing suspension of disbelief.

The format of these sessions resembled a normal conversation where the hypnotist simply asked a series of questions and gave clear instructions, and the subject remained awake and fully alert throughout. "Can you imagine that your hand is stuck to the table?" - "Can you continue to imagine that and also imagine that you’re not aware that you’re imagining that, like it’s happening by itself?"

and all people need is a context saying "we're doing hypnosis, here's how it works" to get started. Likewise, post-hypnotic suggestions imply that people can follow hypnotic suggestions without being in an explicit trance.

And because there's a thing called "waking hypnosis" in which the hypnotee responds to suggestions while being apparently fully conscious, without an induction or a trance... all that's left is hypnosis.

As an example, Martin Taylor is a hypnotist who does not use inductions. He does just fine.

There's no question that you can really zonk people out with hypnosis, whether you call it trance or not. Cardeña has a paper on deep hypnosis states and neurophenomenology but I'm not going to dig too much into it here. It does seem like hypnotic coma and plenary hypnosis are the same thing. I'm not going to go into what trance is, or exactly what zonking/deepening entails. Honestly, I think trance by its nature is subjective, and so is up to individual interpretation.

Instead, what I'd like to dig into are the attempts of Kirsch and Lynn to remove the brainworm of trance from the conversation in a series of papers over the years.

It's 1995. Kirsch & Lynn are not thrilled about the word or concept of trance, and detail the "state vs non-state" positions.

At one end of this continuum are scholars who espouse the concept of hypnotic state in its strongest possible form, as a condition that is fundamentally different from normal waking consciousness and from other altered states, such as daydreaming and relaxation. [...] At the other end of the continuum are theorists who use the term state to describe hypnotic phenomena but deny that it explains or causes those phenomena in any way; those who acknowledge allegiance to the state construct but then ignore it entirely in their theories of hypnotic responding; and those who explicitly reject the hypnotic state construct as inaccurate and misleading. Surprisingly, this latter group now includes some prominent Ericksonian clinicians (Zeig & Rennick, 1991) who maintain that the concept of trance has little explanatory value and claim that it only distracts from their preferred emphasis on hypnosis as an interpersonal process. Between the two extreme positions on the state issue, there is a concept of trance as an altered state, one that is not unique to hypnosis. [...] The problem with these definitions of trance is that they are too inclusive, loose, and imprecise to be subjected to empirical study. Without some means of determining whether a person is in trance, it is impossible to test any hypotheses about the effects of trance.

The paper continues in this vein, finally arguing that trance is not a useful way to think about hypnosis.

There are two sets of data that have led to a convergence of opinion on the state issue among most researchers. The first is the very modest effect of hypnotic induction on suggestibility. Most people are almost as responsive to so-called "waking suggestions" as they are to the same suggestions given in a hypnotic context (E. R. Hilgard, 1965). The second is the consistent failure to find any reliable markers of the hypothesized state. Erickson's (1941 /1980) hypothesized behavioral markers (literalism, catalepsy, and amnesia) have either failed to distinguish hypnotized from nonhypnotized participants (Green et al., 1990) or have been shown to be products of participants' perceptions of the hypnotic role (Orne, 1959; Young & Cooper, 1972). Similarly, no physiological or even self-report markers of a hypnotic trance have been found (Dixon & Laurence, 1992; Kirsch, Mobayed, Council, & Kenny, 1992). [...] Having failed to find reliable markers of trance after 50 years of careful research, most researchers have concluded that this hypothesis has outlived its usefulness.

It's 2000. Kirsch takes aim at the loose conceptualization of trance in this beautiful piece of snark.

A second point of agreement is that many hypnotized subjects experience themselves as being in a special state of consciousness denoted by the term trance. Nonstate theorists do not reject the proposition that these experiences are real , although in many cases they may merely be deep relaxation interpreted as a hypnotic trance because they happen to be occurring in a hypnotic context. [...] There is yet another variant of the trance position that must be considered. Some writers see trance as an altered state, but not as one that occurs only in hypnosis. Trance may be identified as a state that often occurs in nonhypnotic contexts, such as daydreaming, absorption, focused attention , or concentration. Spiegel (1999), for example, has identified the hypnotic trance as "just a shift in attention." This very popular type of definition is consistent with nonstate formulations of hypnosis. It may indeed be true that responding to suggestion requires absorption or concentration. But if the hypnotic state is merely narrowly focused attention or absorption, then most people are in a hypnotized state when studying for or taking an exam, driving a car, watching a film, or engaging in any other absorbing task. What is accomplished by calling these instances of hypnosis? It tells us nothing new about studying, driving, responding to suggestion, or any other activity that requires focused attention, and I cannot imagine us ever convincing the larger scholarly community that research on attentionally demanding tasks is by definition research on hypnosis . The term focused attention has the virtue of being more descriptive than the term hypnosis, and it has less surplus baggage associated with it. So if hypnosis is nothing more than a state of focused attention, perhaps we should consider names like American Journal of Focused Attention and American Society for Clinical Focused Attention as more accurate labels for our journals and organizations.

It's 2007. Lynn and Kirsch take another shot in Hypnosis And Neuroscience: Implications For The Altered State Debate. There's some pushback on their earlier papers.

Gruzelier (2000) proposed that an integration of neurobiological and socio-cognitive perspectives could promote the understanding of hypnosis and its humanistic applications. He further stated, ‘… hypnosis is an altered state of brain functional organization …’ (p. 51). Under a heading ‘The death knell of neurobiological investigation: the rush to judgment’, Gruzelier (2000) states, ‘Kirsch and Lynn (1998) and Wagstaff (1998) claim that no marker of a hypnotic state has been discovered after decades of investigation, and that the search for one should be discontinued. A neurobiological explanation does not exist. Neurobiologists may rightly wonder how such an unworldly view exists’ (p. 52).

And while they admit that they did say "trance should go live on the big farm up state" they also say that maybe if it could be measured in something other than handwavey feels it might be more useful.

In our 1995 review (Kirsch and Lynn 1995), we did state that after the failure to find reliable markers of trance after 50 years of careful research, ‘most researchers have concluded that this hypothesis has outlived its usefulness’ (p. 853). However, we went on to say that this state of affairs did not preclude the possibility that such indicators would eventually be discovered, and we underscored the importance of identifying the physiological substrates of hypnosis. Far from declaring the issue dead, we identified three ways in which scientists could usefully approach the question of identifying the physiological substrates of hypnosis: (1) identify the physiological substrate of the hypothesized hypnotic state; (2) identify the physiological correlates of differences in hypnotic suggestibility; and (3) determine the physiological substrates of responses to suggestions.

And it turns out that as of 2007, technology has advanced to the point where poking at brains does show that hypnosis does do some things.

The present chapter is written in the spirit of fostering a congenial dialogue between state and non-state theorists (Kihlstrom 2003). We will review studies relevant to each of the three ways we proposed to address the question of the physiological substrates of hypnosis, including studies that Christensen (2005, p. 286) identified as representing ‘replicated research over the past 2 decades supporting state-based theories of hypnosis’.

However, there's a problem. Trance is subjective, and trance itself may be a product of suggestions in the hypnotic induction.

The design also fails to address the critical issue of the causal role of the trance state in producing other suggested subjective experiences. Hypnotic inductions are suggestions to experience a trance state. [emphasis added] For that reason, they should produce altered subjective states in many people, and these altered states should possess neural substrates (Kirsch and Lynn 1995). It is not clear that the experience and neural correlates of trance would be the same for all hypnotized subjects or even all virtuosos. Having different pre-conceptions about trance might lead to different subjective states and therefore to different neural substrates. In any case, the altered state hypothesis does not concern the existence of these altered states, but rather their hypothesized causal role in producing other hypnotic phenomena.

And the paper's conclusion: those studies are just showing evidence of suggestions, rather than of a base hypnotic state.

[...] Research in this area has succeeded in finding baseline correlates of suggestibility, effects of induction procedures and effects of other specific suggestions. Perhaps the most important finding to date is the specificity of neurological effects in response to the specific wording of suggestions. The neural concomitants of suggested analgesia, for example, seem to depend on the specific suggestion that is used (Rainville et al. 1998). This finding, however, also points to one of the weaknesses of some of the research. In particular, there has been a tendency to confound induction with suggestion variables, i.e. subjects either receive or do not receive a hypnotic induction and then are given a suggestion to experience a particular effect. However, the wording of the suggestion following a hypnotic induction differs from the wording of the suggestion given without the induction. This confound renders it impossible to ascertain what is responsible for obtained differences, and this problem is compounded by the finding that neural activity may be exquisitely sensitive to suggestion wording.

It's 2010. The Clinical Handbook of Hypnosis has two chapters. One says that state might be a thing. The other one (Wagstaff, David, Kirsch, and Lynn) points to the first chapter and says state has still not been shown to be a thing.

No specific physiological markers of the hypothesized hypnotic states have been found (Lynn, Kirsch, Knox, & Lilienfeld, 2006; see also chap. 4, this volume)

It's 2016. A new book comes out, Hypnotic Induction: Perspectives, Strategies and Concerns. It says that trance is a thing, much to the consternation of Kev Sheldrake in his review.

I’ve been operating under the assumption that the induction was just a suggestion to enter an imagined hypnotic state, but I had to read this book to realise the ferociousness with which some academics still (and I mean still) imagine that state to be real. As a final thought, if there isn’t anything magical going on during an induction, and an induction is just made up of words (no mesmeric fluid or invisible energy passing from hypnotist to participant), and practically anything can be used in place of an hypnotic induction (placebo pill, for example), then what else could the induction be, other than a series of suggestions? And what, other than a suggested state, could those suggestions suggest?

It's 2020. Lynn & Kirsch are frustrated that papers are still turning up discussing "trance" as being inextricably tied to hypnosis.

Surveys of students from various countries (Green, Page, Rasekhy, Johnson, & Bernhardt, 2006) document the wide prevalence of a number of myths and misconceptions we review. A powerful engine driving these myths is the popular media, including movies, television, and the Internet, which capitalize on the core myth that hypnosis is “an altered state of consciousness quite different from normal waking consciousness” (70% agreed, Green et al., 2006); termed by many, a trance. The myth of trance is arguably the mother of all myths [emphasis added] and has birthed many related myths that we will discuss. The idea that hypnosis brings about a trance state was first popularized in Du Maurier's blockbuster novel, Trilby (Du Maurier, 1894/1999), in which Svengali—a name now synonymous with a brutal manipulator uses hypnosis to ply the ill-starred Trilby to his will. De Maurier portrayed hypnosis as a sleep-like trance state that produced amnesia, loss of control and willpower, and special abilities (e.g., Trilby became an opera diva). The term “trance” is still featured in titles (and contents) of articles in influential hypnosis journals (e.g., Wickramasekera II, 2016) and unfortunately still carries the baggage of its historical roots.

Again, the paper points out that trance is either not defined or defined so broadly as to be useless.

Hypnotic trance is rarely clearly or explicitly defined by researchers or clinicians, and the nature of this hypothesized state has been described in a plethora of contradictory ways (see Kirsch & Lynn, 1995). One definition is that hypnotic trance is “the cognitive end state produced by a hypnotic induction procedure” (Halligan & Oakley, 2014, p. 111). While the authors are among the few to actually define “trance,” broad definitions place no constraints on the nature or constituents of this state, which is often the case when this term is used. In the absence of reliable physiological markers, it is generally operationalized by self-report of its presence.

The paper then goes on to break down some myths that you can reliably test for a hypnotic state. It's a great overview, you should check it out.

Despite concerted attempts, researchers have not succeeded in finding purported markers of the hypothesized hypnotic state. For example, Lynn et al. (2008); see also Lynn & Rhue, 1991) found no reliable evidence that hypnotic and nonhypnotic conditions differ in terms of (a) literalness of response to a series of questions (e.g., saying “no” to the question or negative shaking of the head in response to the question, “Do you mind telling me your name”); (b) trance logic (i.e., heightened tolerance for logical incongruity/saying a hallucinated person appears transparent), or the hidden observer phenomenon (i.e., a hidden part of consciousness directs behaviors/experiences, while another part, separated by an amnesic barrier, is unaware and responds in a manner consistent with suggestions). Either no differences are evident across hypnotic and nonhypnotic comparison conditions (e.g., nonhypnotized imagining participants or individuals who role play or simulate hypnotic responses: literalism, trance logic) and/or the findings are determined to be the product of suggestion or experimental demands (i.e., hidden observer) rather than an altered state unique to hypnosis (Kirsch & Lynn, 1998). [A larger study] failed to find support for the claim that eye behaviors index a hypnotic state.

It's 2024. The Routledge International Handbook of Clinical Hypnosis just came out. Lynn argues that hypnosis is independent of trance explicitly.

A cornerstone of our theory is that hypnosis unfolds independent of a background “trance” or special state of consciousness unique or specific to hypnosis. We argue that such a state is rendered irrelevant by findings that different hypnotic suggestions (i.e., direct imaginative suggestions) elicit diverse experiences and attendant alterations in consciousness (e.g., sensations, cognition, emotions, perceptions, memories), behaviors, and psychophysiological responses (Landry et al., 2017; Lynn et al., 2007), and no special state is required to experience a gamut of suggestions.

Let's hope it takes this time.

[pruning-the-minds-garden]

Index of Hypnokinky Teachings

This is a list of my current writing that teach various topic on how to do Hypnosis, Hypnokink, or that relate to learning about the various technical facets of the practice and the kink. It will be added to over time as I publish more articles on the subject:

Hypnokink Basics / 101:

So You Wanna Get Hypnotized?: There are a lot of guides written on how to be a hypnotist, but this one is on how to be a better subject.

How do I (erotically) Hypnotize Others: This is exactly what it sounds like - a guide on how to do erotic hypnosis, focused on how to be a hypnotist. (by @hypnodolls )

How to do Hypnokink: The Basics of Inductions: This is the other half of the above. It covers the basics of actually doing an induction, the pieces and parts it consists of, and what you as a hypnotist have to accomplish for it to work well.

Hypnokink Basics: Types of Induction (pt 1): In this article I cover the some of the most Traditional kinds of hypnotic induction that you are likely to encounter, more often in a hypnotherapist's office than in hypnokinky play, and describe along with their advantages/disadvantages. Types covered are the PMR, Fixation, Elman and Body Scan.

Hypnokink Basics: Types of Induction (pt 2): Here I cover some of the more Modern kinds of hypnotic induction that you are likely to encounter. Some of these are more common in the hypnokink community than a hypnotherapist's office, but that's just because updating clinical practice takes time and some people haven't caught up yet. Types covered are the Confusion/Overload, and two types of Conversational Induction.

Hypnokink Basics: Special Techniques (pt. 3): In this final part I cover some of the more common non-induction techniques seen in the hypnokink space. These are: Fractionation, Rapid/Instant Induction, Neurolinguistic Programming, and Conditioning/Brainwashing.

Hypnokink 101: My set of living notes on what I would or will present to beginners if ever leading a presentation on the eponymous topic at a munch or general kink gathering.

The Five W's of Hypnokink (Hypnokink Basics): A basic article answering who, what, where, why, and when you can do hypnokink. How is covered elsewhere as that's a topic worth its own article.

Hypnokink Misconceptions: Exactly what it sounds like. I hope that people will reblog the post with additional questions and answers, and that there will be a good back-and-forth. I want it to be a living document, like some of the others.

Hypnosis is a Two-Way Street: Some advice for people seeking to message hypnotists on Tumblr and elsewhere, seeking to get hypnotized.

Advanced Topics:

[Under construction]

Associated Topics:

How to Start a Local Hypnokink Group: A list of detailed steps and things to look out for on how to start a local hypnokink interest group - really full of good advice! (originally by @spidersays)

On Imposter Syndrome, FOMO, and Social Media: Miscellaneous observations on what I am (mostly a nerd who likes hypnokink), what I'm not (a devious cuntroller with an army of brainwashed hypnoslaves), and how distorted perceptions and lenses in social media can lead that to be more of a Thing than it needs to be.

Exploring my Attitude Toward FemDom: This specifically discusses my experience with the FemDom community on FetLife, though that tracks with many - though not all - dommes I've seen elsewhere. In it I talk about the (unfortunate for me) common overlap between femdom and feminization and/or sissification, and my personal unease with the latter. It's an ongoing journey and not one I'm done with or decided on, and it's also personal so I grant that not everyone - heck, not most people - will share my views on this.

My Dominance: A Rant: A rant where I talk about the nature of my Dominance, and how not being a hard, cruel or sadistic Dom does not make my Dominance inferior. I also already know that to a degree, but it bears repeating as the inverse message is very common within the wider BDSM community.Your Natural State: A bit of poetry on the natural state of people, women especially, and people who tend to pigeonhole them into "traditional" roles without asking them first.

[lotusmi]

Warning: Long Ask

Hi, I'm the anon who talked about hypnosis earlier. To this anon and anyone else who was interested in more information, I'll provide you with some resources.

Elman Induction and Elman Induction on Self and Elman Induction Demonstration

Float Induction

Betty Erickson Induction

Grace Smith Induction

Another Simple Technique

Important to remember that these are techniques created to assist in inducing a trance state. Elman induction is my personal favorite, but I tend to mix elements and do them as I see fit. I do not follow along with any YouTube video or recording. I do this several times a day.

No matter what, your assumptions and your dwelling state are king. There is no method or routine anyone can provide that can change that. However, hypnosis has been my most loved tool for entering and remaining in a state. Sometimes when talking about law of assumption, it's hard not to be vague. "Change your state" "Assume differently" "Live in the 4D" When you are confused, reading that can just make you go, "yeah, sure. fuck you too." But when you experience a changed state, it's really the only thing that makes sense. Just remember that hypnosis isn't a get-out-of-jail card from that basis. That said, it makes it a hell of a lot easier. Hypnosis is the basis of my routine for a reason.

Some general tips. Feel free to follow or ignore as you like. This is just my personal advice.

Don't follow along with a recording. Also, don't listen to anything while doing a hypnosis session. If you're following along with a recording, it's very easy to not be where the recording wants you to be. You could be ready to move on, or need more time and the recording will be expecting something entirely different. Also, it's just something you want to be able to do by yourself without the assistance of a recording.

Sitting up while doing hypnosis is great, but lean against something because slumping over in an uncomfortable position while in a trance will not make you want to stay in that trance and affirm.

Don't be afraid to repeat steps from your induction in the middle of a session to deepen the trance or because you felt yourself go out of trance a little and you want to get back in.

Tell yourself the instructions as you are doing them or before you do them. "I will count down from three and when I reach zero I will be ten times more relaxed." This is especially helpful when starting out because otherwise it just feels like you're doing this weird routine. I guess you could say this out loud if you want to, but I've never done that. I always say it in my head.

Don't be too worried about really being in trance before starting your affirmations. If you're on the final step of your induction and you don't feel like you're in trance, you can repeat a step you found helpful and go back to that final step. I find that when counting down from 100 (final step of Elman) I get caught on a number and want to keep repeating it. Or I forget what number I just said or what I'm on. Or just blank out and my brain goes, "what's a number?" All of these are find places to move on and start saying suggestions to yourself.

Have an exit when you're done with your session. I like to say, "I am in my desired state. I am awake, aware, and refreshed. When I reach the count of five, I will be totally awake. 0-1-2-3-4-5." Then I open my eyes. When I don't do this and I just open my eyes, I am so groggy and tired. I will fall asleep very quickly (which is odd because I don't fall asleep during hypnosis).

Make it a practice. Do it multiple times in a day. Manifestation is all getting into a state, making those assumptions, and persisting. For me, doing a few sessions (even short sessions) throughout the day is what puts me into that state and keeps me in it.

I've struggled a lot with staying in a state and even when I try to affirm while going about my day and doing something else, I've struggled. Hypnosis has really changed that for me. I feel like I have a hack to the hack of life. Manifestation loves routine. It loves a practice. And hypnosis is the practice that I've found the most success in. Honestly, number one piece of advice is build a routine and stick to it.

Thanks lotusmi for letting me rant, I hope everyone found my advice and experience helpful.

Tysm for this ask angel. I know this will help a lot of people! Also this is so amazingg!!! I will take time to read all of it 💓again, tysm for taking your time and sharing this!

[writtenbynath]

Today's thoughts: Failure

Ella and Cammie are posting something every day, and I figured I could do something similar. For them, the pressure of a challenge like this helps them write, and for me… not so much. So I thought I'd spend this first day musing on why that is. Tomorrow, I'll get into more kinky thoughts.

My fear of failure is debilitating. My neurodivergent brain punishes me for every little hint of failure. I've had to invent work-arounds and levels of "good enough" in order to learn to be happy with anything I've done.

If there are rules or steps to follow, like in a recipe or an induction, my brain initiates the feelings of punishment as soon as I don't follow every rule or step perfectly. This is why I thought I'd never be a good hypnotist, because I can never follow all the steps perfectly.

Like, for example, the Elman Induction was designed to be so easy to do, any layman can just follow all the steps and end up with a hypnotised person at the end. No talent or skill in hypnosis required. Elman specifically designed it like that. But the Elman induction has many steps and I always mess up the correct order and I dislike some of the steps and then I feel like a failure.

What helps me with my neurodivergent brain that punishes me for "failure" like that, is to take away the rules. If I can just improvise and play around, there is no failure. Fuck around and find out is such a satisfying thing to me for that reason. If there's no steps I need to absolutely follow, if the goal is just a vague "I'm going to hypnotise you" and I can just feel around how to get there, suddenly all that fear is gone. Suddenly I can use any induction, I can do anything I want.

So, if there's no rules about me having to post every day for x amount of days, if I'm just free to post something whenever I want, there is no penalty, and no fear. Just the satisfaction of writing something and sharing it with you.

[hypnosisliker]

Road Testing a Colloquial Explanation of Hypnotic Fractionation

I've been reading through some conversations about what hypnotic fractionation is, and I wanted to try my hand at explaining it in a way that makes sense to me. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated!

While fractionation is a concept discussed among hypnosis practitioners, it isn’t native to the space. It’s actually better known as a chemistry term. For instance, blood fractionation refers to the separation of blood into red blood cells and plasma. We do this by inducing the plasma into a ‘phase transition,’ changing its state of matter into something more solid by affecting its temperature or acidity.

Fractionation in hypnosis, colloquially, has less to do with the ‘dividing one thing into multiple things’ part and more to do with the ‘phase transition’ part. But the states being changed aren’t states of matter, but ‘states’ (perceived or otherwise, don’t get me started) of ‘trance’ (or the experiences we associate with the concept, don’t get me started here either).

Time for an abbreviated history lesson! Fractionation was introduced into the hypnosis meta (lol) by Dave Elman in the 1960s as part of his Elman Induction—a notably fast and direct path into trance. Part of the induction involves asking the person being hypnotized to repeatedly open and close their eyes, suggesting that their relaxation doubles each time they do so. Assuming a rough association like open eyes = out of trance and closed eyes = in trance, that repeated mental shift is your phase transition. We now often replace the eye opening and closing with other actions or suggested sensations, but the process is otherwise largely the same.

My theory as to why it works? Any phase transition costs energy, whether that’s a state of matter or mind. Beyond any hypnotist-supplied suggestion for relaxation, it’s essentially a more pleasant form of whiplash. That would explain the oft-described increased disorientation, sensitivity, and perhaps even focus if the hypnotist establishes any sensory or conceptual anchors prior to the process.

[thelazyhypnotist]

Elman induction walkthru- ines simpson from Ines Simpson on Vimeo.

Considered the Gold Standard in Hypnosis Inductions. Here is my complete Walkthru - with today's language

[nocturnowlette]

There seems to be a lot of unquestioned arbitrary rules inserted into place for what people think a trigger is in hypnosis.

The actual definition is very simple, at least from my perspective. A hypnotic trigger is anything that causes recall of a hypnotic suggestion. Anything.

The trigger itself doesn't need to be reinforced or have even been said before for it to be a trigger so long as it causes recall, it does not have to be a word or a sound. So long as the subject's brain can recognize it as a distinct thing, then it counts. It's closer to ontology than anything.

That being said, you need to understand properties of triggers and how every single aspect of a trigger will affect how the conditioned suggestion is received.

One of the most common and baffling mistakes I see both in trances and in triggers is the "active time" of the trigger; that's to say, the amount of time the brain needs to be acting on that suggestion.

I've always despised visual of an elevator or an ice block, because the subject needs to be hyperfocused on a very slow climb and fall which is near impossible to maintain the consistency of, especially if they need to focus on other things too.

In contrast, a trigger or suggestion that takes place near-instantly or over a few seconds only requires a moment of making an active change, which is simpler and more consistent, and allows for variability in the strength of the effects since you don't have the last minute of change to compare it to.

If this drop trigger only worked 80% as well as the last one, it's a lot harder to notice with a chunk of time of nothing happening between them. Even consistent, small bursts are better than a constant change, like stepping down stairs instead of going down an elevator.

Snaps are the most common form of signifying a trigger because we can make it with our hands, but more importantly, because they're sudden and loud.

The aesthetic of a sudden and loud sound translates to the subject's brain how to interpret the feeling of that trigger. This also means, though, that if you have a trigger that isn't meant to be a burst, that you may not want to use a snap at all.

This also extends into the idea of "suggestion equivalency", as I would call it.

Essentially, you want the aesthetics and potency of the trigger to reasonably match up to the effects of the suggestion itself. The reason a snap is powerful is because you're condensing a very strong effect into one moment. However, if you try to stretch that intense potency to multiple seconds, it'll simply fail. There is only so much focus, there is only so much trigger potency.

One of the myriad reasons I despise key elman inductions is the suggestion of "doubling trance" every time you blink. There is a cartoonish, absurd potency required for that idea that anyone who knows hypnosis at all from the hypnotist or subject side (or just like, the wheat and chessboard tale) would get severe cognitive dissonance from attempting to follow it.

Another issue to consider is the generality and widespreaded-ness of a conditional trigger.

One file from MissLilith that I think was rather silly (and I'm only ragging on her here because I like her work) tries to give the suggestion that any time you see any plant at all, you get aroused. Furthering the idea of keeping up intensity over time, if a stimuli is so ubiquitous that someone experiences it constantly, the spectacle of it is simply gone. That suggestion will, optimistically, exhaust itself within hours.

That's not even to mention that fact that seeing something does not have nearly as much of a spectacle and intense impact as a sudden sound or word. There's a reason why movies have stingers to signal sudden scary moments or realizations.

From a community perspective, you should also avoid the most common trigger words unless you want someone to be dropped accidentally or have your suggestions lumped in with ones from other hypnotists and files.

The last issue is another practical one, the idea of stimulus generalization.

Shortly after an intense session I had involving snaps one time, I watched a 2 hour long video by Nexpo about Petscop (good and atmospheric overview, though Nexpo is terrible when it comes to actually analyzing media himself).

Thing is, the text changing sounds in the game sound a scary amount like a snap. So, every single time there was gameplay audio, I'd get triggered by it, essentially fractionating myself due to continually bringing myself up right after it happened.

Clicker sounds can be set off by pens, snaps by other sudden, high-pitched single noises, even general obedience suggestions can be triggered by another person to your subject if they act similar or have a similar sounding vocal tone to you, among other things. One must always consider that possibility.

Overall, words as triggers are common for a reason, but you can do essentially anything, so long as you recognize many of the common shortfalls of doing so.

Good luck, and happy hypnotizing.

[tennfan2]

What would a dual Elman look like? Are there any other classic inductions that you think would be fun as a dual? (How about a duel?)

I have no idea! Probably just two hypnotists, one in each ear, trading off on the elements of the induction as it went, maybe doing some bonus confusion-y bits?

I’m less sure about other inductions specifically as duals. I suspect nearly all could get adapted, though!

As for duels? Secret confession: they’ve never been my thing. I have always found them kind of boring! Why do that when you can do mutual trance instead?

[mixedmindhypnosis]

Hypnosis: A to Z - A Post Series

I want to write a post series about hypnosis where I will be releasing one post per week to demystify and educate about hypnosis.

Currently hypnosis is shaddow banned on FetLife and this does not help at all to get rid of the stigma and false assumptions people have about it.

I am fully aware that people won’t be able to find it by searching it, this is why I ask you to share it with all the people you know could be interested.

How to read 'Hypnosis: A to Z' posts

My posts will always contain a short explanation of what the term discussed means. You can look at it as the definition of the term when mentioned in my writings.

There will also be a longer discussion about the term, what it has to do with hypnosis, helpful tips, and safety information.

I will try but cannot promise to have at least one example of a trance where the topic of the writing came up to give a more practical insight into the matter.

About me:

I'm not a trained professional (in clinical hypnosis) nor have I been doing it for decades. I know a lot, but I'm aware that there’s probably a lot more I don't know.

I want to pass on my knowledge and give other people the chance to rethink and reform their opinion on hypnosis. Hopefully this will help people uncertain about their interest in hypnosis to give it a shot and overcome the stigma that still surrounds it.

There is a community out there. You are not alone.

Also feel free to follow me on FetLife for more kinky content.

Hypnosis: A to Z - The Basics

Agency

Behaviour

Creativity

Depth

Elman Induction

Focus

Goals

Hypnosis

Inductions

Just - About Adopting Others Words

Kink

Landmines

Modalities

Negotiation

Obstacles

Possibilities

Quality

Rapport

Safety

Triggers

Utilisation

Visuals

Wonder (End of Hypnosis A to Z Series)

[binaural-histolog]

Hypnosis and Sleep

Another deep dive, this time into the relationship between hypnosis and sleep.

Hypnosis, especially following suggestions in hypnosis, is mutually exclusive with sleep. It can work but it's very easy to wake up your partner from sleep, and while it's possible to go from sleep directly to hypnosis, this means that your partner is not sleeping… and your partner needs to sleep. If your partner is highly suggestible, then there are studies that show that highly suggestible people can be given suggestions while in stage 1 sleep, and will follow them with full waking amnesia. However, highly suggestible people follow suggestions just as well after a normal hypnotic induction, or indeed without any induction at all. People who are not highly suggestible do not become more suggestible in their sleep.

People do absorb information information in their sleep. There is implicit memory for words heard during sleep. Several studies support the notion that simpler forms of learning such as habituation and classical conditioning are possible during sleep, but this is extremely limited -- the research along the lines of associating bad smells, puffs of air, and recognizing repeated sections of white noise. It is implicit learning, but only just.

This doesn't stop people from some very dubious research, such as attempts to get boys to stop biting their nails by whispering to them in their bunks. There is a strong folk wisdom that hypnosleep is some powerful mythic backdoor into the mind, capable of reprogramming people. I think the reason for that is Dave Elman.

Elman has a chapter on hypnosleep in Hypnotherapy (1964), and it is almost entirely consent violations. It starts off with this anecdote of a man with a problem.

"When I enrolled as a student of Mr. Elman, I did it for only one purpose. I wanted to learn how to hypnotize my wife in her sleep and give her suggestions to make her stop picking on me and nagging me. Mr. Elman said I couldn't do it -- that I wouldn't be successful. I've been more than successful. I hypnotized her while she was sound asleep. She'd never let me hypnotize her while she was awake but I did it when she was asleep, and she didn't even know it. I talked to her unconscious mind-told her how much her picking and nagging was disturbing me, and suggested that she never do it again. She hasn't henpecked me for over a year, and I'm very proud to say that as a result I've been much happier. And maybe she has been much happier."

Elman claims that hypnosleep provided "better anesthesia than was possible with the Esdaile state of hypnosis" but his experiments involve telling people in his class to sleep with posthypnotic suggestions, which... took three hours to become effective? I think they just took a nap while people talked to them.

After struggling with that, Elman stuck with reinduction triggers, and said the results were spectacular. But he doesn't elaborate. There's no evidence that doing this is any more effective than regular hypnosis, and good reason to think it would be less effective and may lead to impaired sleep and a very grumpy partner.

Du magnetisme animal en France (1826) and De la suggestion et des ses applications a la therapeutique (1886) establish that a sleeping person can be given hypnotic suggestions and will remain asleep.

Around 1953, EEG was used to determine hypnosis and determined that whatever hypnosis was, it wasn't sleep (Krakora, 1953; Heiman & Spoerri, 1953).

T.X. Barber attempts to split the difference in “Sleep” and “Hypnosis”: A reappraisal (1956), saying that hypnosis may not be deep sleep, but might involve a state of light sleep.

Barber's Comparison of Suggestibility during "Light Sleep" and Hypnosis (1956), later written up as Experiments in Hypnosis (1957) goes more into the concept of suggestions during sleep. Barber approaches the subject and whispers "Clasp your hands together." Out of 22 subjects, twelve responded as if they were in some stage of hypnosis. There were no significant differences between responses between "light sleep" and after a hypnotic induction, but no EEG was used to determine the level of sleep. This is one of the rare studies that has pictures and is written for Scientific American so it's very casual.

Trance induction under unusual circumstances (1964) mentions specifically some cases where people are brought into a state of hypnosis directly from sleep.

The literature pertaining to when a person can or cannot be hypnotized is conflicting. [...] Kroger (1963) and Fresacher (1951) also mention the possibility of hypnotizing persons without their knowledge or consent by leading them from natural sleep to the trance state.

This is also a fun read, with a bunch of case reports.

Cobb and Evans start to dig into the details. Specific Motor Response during Sleep to Sleep-Administered Meaningful Suggestion: An Exploratory Investigation (1965) calls Barber's study into question.

While the recent study of Barber (1956) reported that suggestions during sleep were successfully responded to during sleep, no objective criteria, such as EEG, of the presence of sleep were used. The interpretation that Ss remain asleep during such suggestions, however, is called into question by a more recent study by Borlone, Dittborn, and Palestini (1960) employing EEG monitoring. In their investigation of the induction of sleep by direct suggestion and repetitive stimulation, these investigators reported the successful induction of EEG sleep patterns showing theta waves, and in one instance delta activity. They reported that such induced sleep could be turned into hypnosis by appropriate suggestions, but during verbal interactions between E and S, EEG patterns with waking alpha activity were shown, even though S had been instructed that he would remain asleep throughout.

and reports success only with highly hypnotizable subjects in stage 1 sleep.

All 4 highly hypnotizable Ss did respond behaviorally to the sleep-administered verbal suggestion and remained physiologically asleep. However, this only occurred when the suggestion was administered in emergent Stage 1 sleep. [...] All 4 low hypnotizable Ss failed to respond behaviorally to the sleep-administered verbal suggestion.

The short paper Response during sleep with intervening waking amnesia (1966) expanded into Verbally induced behavioral responses during sleep (1970) showed that in some high suggestible subjects, a verbal suggestion given during sleep can still be effective five months later.

This study explored the possibility of eliciting motor responses from sleeping Ss. Nineteen Ss slept in the laboratory for 2 nights. Some Ss responded behaviorally, while remaining asleep, to verbal suggestions which had been administered previously during stage 1 sleep. Many responses were obtained without eliciting alpha activity during the suggestion, after the cue word was administered, or before and after the response. When a successful response occurred, alpha frequency was not significantly different from the slowed frequency occurring spontaneously during stage 1 sleep. The average response latency was 32 seconds, and this increased as the temporal dissociation between the administration of the suggestion and the cue word increased. After the S awakened, he did not remember the verbally presented material, nor could he remember responding, and he did not respond to the cue word while awake. When S returned to sleep the next night, or even 5 months later [emphasis added], the mere repetition of the relevant cue word (without repetition of the suggestion itself) was sufficient to elicit the appropriate response. It is concluded that a subject is capable of some interaction with his environment while he is asleep.

The 1965 paper had a very small sample size, so a similar study with better design is Sleep-induced behavioral response. Relationship to susceptibility to hypnosis and laboratory sleep patterns (1969), which found that people are prone to waking up during suggestions.

A complex relationship was found among the frequency of sleep-induced response, susceptibility to hypnosis, and how well the S slept. Insusceptible Ss were less likely to respond while asleep and had less opportunity to respond because they awakened when cue words were presented. They had also reported that they were poor sleepers outside of the laboratory situation. Response to sleep-induced suggestions was not correlated with waking motor suggestion, nor with hypnotic passive and challenge suggestion. Rather, sleep response rate was significantly related to hallucinatory and posthypnotic clusters of hypnotic behavior (which can be experienced only by deeply hypnotized Ss), particularly with responses obtained when there was temporal dissociation between the suggestion and the cue word.

There's another study from Evans which I cannot get hold of, Hypnosis and Sleep: Techniques for Exploring Cognitive Activity During Sleep (1972). Evans shows up in multiple places in hypnotic amnesia, antisocial suggestions, and so on. If there's an odd factoid about hypnosis, Evans was probably involved in it somehow. From his obit:

A study performed with William Orchard suggested that sleep learning might be possible after all, so long as the learning is characterized as semantic, or perhaps implicit, in nature. A more extensive (and controversial) series of studies explored the possibility that subjects could respond to hypnosis-like behavioral suggestions while remaining asleep. Taken together, these studies can be viewed as pioneering attempts to explore the role of sleep in learning and memory.

I also cannot find the Orchard study. Please reblog/comment if you see it.

Kratochvil publishes Prolonged Hypnosis and Sleep (1970), which attempts to keep people hypnotized through several sleep cycles.

The author demonstrates the possibility of developing prolonged hypnosis of a waking type, ranging from 16 hours to 7 days, with preserved normal waking-sleep rhythms. Persisting rapport, duration of a prearranged distorted reaction to date-questioning, and subsequent total amnesia were taken as criteria for prolonged hypnosis. They were met by five of ten trained, highly susceptible Ss. Normal sleep can apparently occur parallel with hypnosis, without interfering with it. Implications for a theory of hypnosis are discussed.

The study hypothesizes that the subjects may immediately enter waking hypnosis on waking.

One question is: Are the Ss really hypnotized while asleep? An alternative hypothesis is that they are in normal sleep (not hypnotized), but re-enter hypnosis immediately upon awakening, according to an implicit posthypnotic suggestion.

Sleep in Hypnosis: A Pilot EEG Study (1972) asks "can a person sleep in hypnosis and awake hypnotized, and react to suggestions while asleep?"

Six highly susceptible Ss were hypnotized and allowed to sleep in the laboratory during the night. Hypnotic rapport was tested after each of two awakenings, and simple suggestions were also administered in different stages of sleep. After awakening, hypnotic rapport was still present. In sleep, the Ss did not react to suggestions in stages 3 and 4. They sometimes reacted in stage 2, but usually woke up either during listening or during responding to the suggestion. In stage REM the Ss usually responded well to the suggestions; they sometimes woke up and sometimes not. The results are taken as a proof that hypnosis can continue after periods of sleep which occur during hypnosis. The question whether hypnosis and sleep can occur simultaneously or only alternately is discussed.

And the study establishes that you really have to be awake to follow suggestions.

Hypnotic phenomena evidently work better if the EEG shows a waking pattern. As long as sleep stages are on the record, the possibility for responding to suggestions is considerably limited. The S necessarily tends to wake up fully, if he is to demonstrate typical phenomena of deep hypnosis. These findings favor the explanation that hypnosis and sleep are interfering processes rather than processes that could coexist independently.

Hoskovec identified some Russian research in Recent Literature in Hypnosis from the European Socialist Countries (1966). The paper is by Svyadoshch (also spelled as "Sviadoshch"): Sviadoshch, A. M. Vospriiatie i zapominanie rechi vo vremia estestvennogo ma. (Reproduction and memorization of speech in natural sleep.) Vopr. psikhol., 1962, 8, 1, 65-80. Cooper and Hoskovec tried to replicate this study in Hypnotic Suggestions for Learning during Stage I REM Sleep (1972).

Eleven highly hypnotically susceptible XS participated in a sleep-learning experiment which involved sleeping in the laboratory on two successive nights. The first night served as an adaptation period, and the second, an experimental period. Ten simple Russian-English word pairs were learned in the waking state upon awakening from the adaption night. Prior to going to sleep on the experimental night, the Ss were hypnotized, and given suggestions to perceive and remember the words to be presented. A second list of ten Russian-English word pairs were presented during emergent Stage I REM sleep monitored electroencephalographically and electromyographically. It was found that the 8s learned an average of 90% of the material presented under the waking condition, but only an average of 30% under the Stage I REM sleep. It was concluded that learning during sleep as here defined was possible but not practical.

Evans follows up with Hypnosis and Sleep: the Control of Altered States of Awareness (1977) which is about napping.

[...] it does appear that hypnotizable subjects have the ability to fall asleep easily and in a wide variety of circumstances. While this finding does not imply any basic similarity of sleep and hypnosis, it does indicate that there may be a common underlying mechanism involved in the capacity to experience hypnosis and the ability to fall asleep easily and maintain control of basic sleep processes.

Finally there is one last paper from Evans, Behavioral responses during sleep (1990). I do not have this, but it does not appear significant.

[lotusmi]

Btw this is just a general thing that works (very well) for me, but it's also for that anon who said affirming doesn't work for them. Like lotusmi said, if you assume it doesn't work, then it won't.

That said, I've found affirming while in a trance or hypnotic state is really effective. Many hypnotherapists have videos on YouTube explaining how to hypnotize yourself, but I've found the Elman Induction and the Float Induction to be my favorites. This is how I get into a state and I personally think it works better than meditation. Doing it a few times a day to help me remain in a state is what I've found to work best (in my opinion).

Unrelated, but very related, finding hypnosis info on Tumblr is a bad idea because apparently some people have a hypnosis kink and Tumblr is where they post about it.

Omgg this an amazing tip!! Ty angel! 💗

And hypnosis... kink... ewww 😭

[nychpnokinkgroup]

Date: Wednesday, November 28th, 2018 from 7:30 - 10 PM 

TES Hypnokink Group Presents: Getting the most out of your Elman with MrTaqtiks

This class takes an up-close look at one of the most basic inductions and demonstrations techniques to enhance efficiency. Attendees will discuss skills in establishing rapport, identifying opportunities in the pre and post-talks, and analyzing the basic sections of the Elman induction to see how to get the most out of it the first time around.

MrTaqtiks- is a certified hypnotist, was a founding member of the Charmed Hypnosis conference, and currently helps to run the Black Rose Hypnosis Special Interest Group (Washington, DC area). He has presented at multiple events including BlackBEAT, Weekend Reunion, TES, Black Rose, Tawse Manor (New Zealand) and many others. As a member of the erotic hypnosis community he works to promote positive consent, risk aware practices, inclusivity, and community development.

Class @ The Alchemical, 104 W 14th Street, 3rd floor (studio 3C,) NYC, NY 

*Please note at the moment we have stairs & limited freight elevator use to get up to the space - we are currently looking for more accessible space.* - To arrange use of their freight elevator, please contact The Alchemical directly.

Fetlife RSVP- https://fetlife.com/events/710430

Cost: TES members $5, students/military w/ID $10, reciprocal groups $10, non-members $20  Cash Only

Art by D-Artagnan

 @the-perfect-monster​ @diaryofasnowflake​ @hypnokinkwithmrdream @hipster-dracula​ @valdemarvspretory​ @hypno-moon-gazer​ @hypnosisnewjersey​ @recreational-hypnosis-resource​ @h-sleepingirl​ @downwardspiralcomic​

[ellaenchanting]

Hypnovember Day 11: On Display

"And now, my hypnotist will display the Elman induction"

"What?" he said, blinking to awareness.

"Nothing dear," she said. "You were going to hypnotize me, right?"

He shook his head to clear the fogginess. "Right. Umm-Ok. Imagine making a fist so tight..."

He proceeded through the induction by rote, enjoying the feeling of focus and sympathetic trance that came from watching his wife go under. It was lovely to see her this relaxed. The rapport felt especially good today. As she counted backwards he could almost feel himself responding- as if he was the one falling deeper and deeper...

The numbers stopped.

His eyes slammed shut.

After a moment of silence, her eyes suddenly opened. She rolled her neck, took a deep breath, and smiled at the class.

"Mmm- that was lovely. Good boy, hun," she said, patting her dozing spouse on the knee. He smiled dreamily.

"Ok, any questions from the class?"