RE: Dominants Using Titles

RE: Dominants Using Titles (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

Slavetrainer2007 -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 4:06:19 PM)
I dont typically call people by their title. Like the OP pointed out , and I agree with, While you may have a list of references , merit badges, certifications, etc. It dont really mean anything even if it may to people in your circles. For the reason why it doesnt, refer to my signature. :) I dont expect anyone to call me anything. My own slaves/subs can refer to me however they wish as long as its respectful. Others can refer to me how they wish, though insulting remarks will end the conversation.

chiaThePet -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 4:12:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: laurell3 it's Mr. pet/plant thing chia then? Hang on......zip.......yep.....that'll do. chia* (the pet)

Shawn1066 -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 4:12:22 PM)
I do not address dominants by their titles just like I would not want a dominant to speak to me in the manner in which my Owner speaks. When she calls me names...it's endearing. When Lady Nobody/Sir Who attempts to use that talk on me, it's just insulting. So, calling me "boy" "slut" "slave" etc is pretty much the easiest way to get on my nerves. Also, some dominants just shouldn't be allowed to make up titles. I don't see how anybody could call themselves, "Lordmastersupercock" or something along those lines. I've seen WAY too many.

juliaoceania -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 4:16:58 PM)
There is also the other side of this, those who call everyone that identifies as a dominant person by some honorific they did not request... my Daddy has had this happen a few times, and he does not care for it when submissive sorts call him "sir" or "master". He has pointed this out to a few in the past, but has rather gotten sick of correcting people... For some people it can be seen as rude to call them "master" or "mistress", not all dominants want to be referred to this way anyhow

DomMeinCT -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 4:23:18 PM)
I was raised to always use Mr./Mrs./Miss titles and continue that with older folks, whom I believe are more comfortable being addressed with a title and my UMs have been taught to address all adults with the appropriate title. On email here, I'd simply say "Hello" and disregard a title, because to me these are usernames. If I continued conversation with someone, I'd likely ask them how they wished to be addressed if they didn't leave any cue to their name.

blushingflower -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 4:33:33 PM)
I actually just had an aborted conversation last night on CM with a man who called himself a master and considered it disrespectful that I wouldn't call him "sir." For me, it is more meaningful if the word comes out naturally because I truly feel submissive, rather than because you asked me to. And it puts me in a submissive headspace, which isn't where I want to be in a getting-to-know-you chat. I explained all this to the gentleman in question, and he decided I wasn't worth his time, and apparently that I wasn't respectful to him (though I think he was being disrespectful to me by not accepting that it was something I was uncomfortable with). As I said in my blog- calling yourself "master" doesn't make you one anymore than my wearing a tiara makes me a princess. I will call you "sir" when you prove yourself worthy of it.

CalifChick -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 4:36:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stephann For the s-types, do you feel compelled to use a stated titled? Stephan I tend to chafe at calling people by self-appointed titles. To me, titles carry a meaning, but when you give it to yourself, it means nothing. When I used to play in the <cough> SCA, I had no problems with titles because they were titles bestowed by the person's peers, or by those higher on the food chain. Even if I did not personally know them, they got the benefit of the doubt and I used their title because their peers felt they earned their title (yeah, great big fat generalization there). And heck, it kept me out of the King's line of sight and his wrath. The whole thing reminds me of self-appointed nicknames and one incident in particular. At the time, I did not live near family, so I had not met my mother's boyfriend until some time after they started seeing each other. I go home for a visit, and he introduces himself and says, "Call me Babe." Thinking I misunderstood, I said, "Excuse me?" He said, "Everybody calls me Babe." And I said something like, "Funny, you don't look like a big blue ox to me." He went on to explain that he liked being called "Babe" and so he decided that would be his nickname. Um, nooooo. He refused to tell me his real name, so he was definitely "hey you" for the time he was around. It could have been worse I guess. He could have wanted to be called something explicit <shudder>. Cali Edited to add: There are some people that I do call by their self-appointed titles, as a show of respect for who they are, their knowledge, etc. But if I know nothing about them, nope.

CuriousLord -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 4:40:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stephann Here's the real question; those who identify as dominants, and affix 'Master/Mistress/Miss" to your names, do you feel slighted when another dominant chooses not to address you as such? For the s-types, do you feel compelled to use a stated titled? Not at all. In chosing "CuriousLord", I didn't really even think it out that much, and, in retrospect, I wish it left something for others to call me that doesn't involve deferring to me as "Lord" or having to use the acronym, "CL" (although I am somewhat fond of "CL"- short and simple, as an alias should be). After all, "Curious" is more of an adjective, a little odd to call someone it as a reference. I agree with you on the feeling ackward addressing other people by such things. It seems to me as though position is something that needs to be earned, yet there are so many different hierarchies that it's just silly to expect them to be congruent. To be honest.. this lifestyle strikes me as odd. It feels like it's one big roleplay, in many ways. People think that they're "Master"s and "Goddess"es because they call themselves that and, to some extent, maybe a couple of people go along with it. But how many of these people are without power, finicially shifty, politically impotent, uneducated, and unknown? How much power do any of these people really have? Not to say that being Dominant means that one is necessarily poor! Nor even to imply that all Dominants are overstepping their bounds with inflated labels (although it is my impression that this is a characteristic of a substantial majority). Simply, that titles here do feel largely undeserved, so, in a way, they've become play.. for show and humor, but not for serious consideration.

Archer -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 4:46:19 PM)
I've been around for long enough that I get some folks who just have to out the honorific in my name, for whatever internal reasons. I accept it's use now as just a matter of being around for long enough. Until maybe 3 years ago I was one of those Don't call me Master Archer unless you have known me for at least 6 months RT. I've since gotten over that, as new people join the local community they are introduced to me by folks who use the honorific and some of them just continue to use it based on the "reference" of the person who introduced them to me. Although I do generally let new folks know I'm not going to be hurt or upset if they choose not to use it. There are some folks who I have come to expect it's use from and when they don't I kinda do an internal double check, but I have never been one to call anyone on if they choose not to use the honorific. There are also folks who use it after considered thought and observation of the way I conduct myself. Because I know without a shadow of doubt that if I did things that changed their opinion they would change their form of address.

mnottertail -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 4:50:36 PM)
I expect all slaves to use my horrorific title. Bela Lugosi

ThinkingKitten -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 5:40:44 PM)
Familiarity breeds contempt. It used to be (I suppose) that one addressed everyone else of equal/greater or unknown status with some form of polite title. Using a polite address helped to prevent contempt by keeping others at arm's length. Mr. or Mr is an English pre-nominal social title used for a man too old to be addressed as Master, under the rank of knighthood, and, supposedly though not really in practice, above some undefined level of social status (see below). In Britain, though not in the United States, the title also excludes those who have the title Dr. It is an abbreviation of Mister, though it is almost never spelt out in normal usage. The plural of Mr(.) is Messrs, an abbreviation for the French messieurs. (Source: Babylon.com) Indeed any victorian or edwardian novel will see a child being addressed as Master or Miss. "No, Master Robert, you may NOT have another cupcake". MissMiss is a title typically used for an unmarried woman (not entitled to a higher title). It is a contraction of mistress, originating during the 17th Century. Its counterpart, Mrs., is used for married women. (Source: Babylon.com) I simply could not call anyone "my lord" unless they truly were a knight of the realm (and I don't include SCA domains in that category). Anyone else would just make me want to laugh at them. Assuming airs above their station, I'd say. I have no problem with a store clerk referring to me as "Ma'am", as a polite form of address. But otherwise I prefer to be called by my real name by pretty much everyone else. I can see (and still do) like to use polite titles with those whom I have an arm's length relationship with, but it just seems silly with anyone closer, especially if the relationship is intimate. It would have to be a play title only.

SirJohnMandevill -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 5:49:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stephann Here's the real question; those who identify as dominants, and affix 'Master/Mistress/Miss" to your names, do you feel slighted when another dominant chooses not to address you as such? For the s-types, do you feel compelled to use a stated titled? Stephan I don't consider myself "Master" anybody, so I wouldn't mind at all. In a public or private setting, or online, any Dom/Master is welcome to use my first name. No surprise, but I feel differently about submissives. During play, or in any public BDSM setting (munch, club, whatever) I certainly expect my submissive to refer to me as "Sir," and would expect any other submissives to call me by that generic title as well. If a sub initiates contact with me online, she gets bonus points for using "Sir," although I don't require it in online conversations once I get to know her. Make sense? Les (Purveyor of Fine, Handcrafted Kink)

decstorm37 -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 6:29:53 PM)
Well having been raised around the military i tend to call/address men as Sir and women as Ma'ma. It was a told to me that i may not respect the person but i will respect the rank. So i still tend to do that. For My Master i do call him Sir b/c that is what he wants. As for Master's and Mistress's online I will call them Sir or Ma'ma until they prove they don't have my respect.

laurell3 -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 6:35:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I expect all slaves to use my horrorific title. Bela Lugosi Count Ron?

kyraofMists -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 6:39:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stephann For the s-types, do you feel compelled to use a stated titled? I am not allowed to address anyone by Master or Mistress. I am only allowed to address a dominant by sir or ma'am after they have earned my respect or his respect through direct interaction. Knight's Kyra

breatheasone -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 6:54:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stephann Growing up, my mom made it very clear to me that I should use Mister, Misses, or Miss for adults. As an adult, I do my best to make use of titles, respectfully, when they are due. I've had several interviews where an important person was introduced to me as "John" or "Mike" or "Dave" yet I persisted on using Mr Smith/Jones/Daniels, simply because I didn't feel there was a casual enough of a relationship to warrent a first name basis. Yet, in the BDSM world (especially in an online format) I have a difficult time using titles of any sort, unless I absolutely feel they're warrented. People who post as Master/Mistress, for me, I feel it's fine that they use that title for themselves. But in speaking directly to them, I'm completely uncomfortable addressing them as Master John or Mistress Jane. I feel while their title may have been earned in their circle, and they very well may be worthy of the title, I feel the implication is that I'm expected to defer to their status in some fashion. Am I out of my gourd? I'm certainly not above giving respect to those who have earned it. I'm also completely comfortable with folks referring to me as Sir in correspondence (or even Master, from the odd slave who identifies as a kajira), should they feel it's warrented. I expect both my slave and submissive to refer to me as Master and Sir, respectively, and I require my slave to refer to others in the lifestyle as Sir, Ma'am, or Miss unless otherwise instructed by the dominant in question. Here's the real question; those who identify as dominants, and affix 'Master/Mistress/Miss" to your names, do you feel slighted when another dominant chooses not to address you as such? For the s-types, do you feel compelled to use a stated titled? Stephan Speaking as a "s" type ..... I personally do not refer to anyone online by anything other then their "name" If they call themselves Hi ho king of the ding dongs....thats what I'll call them...Unless they offer their real name, then I will use that. I use the name that is used when a person is introduced to me. Is that wrong?...I was zero help right?....LOL

batshalom -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 7:28:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stephann For the s-types, do you feel compelled to use a stated titled? Stephan In a situation or at an event that calls for heavy protocol, I use "Sir", "Master" or "Mistress". In regular run of the mill life it makes me feel odd unless the person requested the title usage specifically.

AnimusRex -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 7:45:47 PM)
I insist on a girl calling Me "Lord God Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth" Only because it pleases Me to see them giggle. Plus when they scream "oh, God I'm cumming" it seems so much more of a personal compliment.

Lumus -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 7:49:46 PM)
People can call me Spanky for all I care. Although a few nicknames have recently risen up for me, including Lumie, the Luminator, and Grand Master Long Dick Whitey. [:D] If I wanted everyone to call me Sir I'd send a letter to the Queen. I'm fine with just plain old "Lumus", though. Or my real name. Which some here know.

RumpusParable -> RE: Dominants Using Titles (12/7/2007 7:52:56 PM)
I prefer and use the title of "Miss" but do not feel slighted by it not being used. Honestly, I prefer only those who feel submissively inclined towards me to use it... especially if it's someone I, in return, feel dominant towards and/or an affection for in that way. If a fellow dominant, an equal, or a sub/slave who does not feel so towards me uses it it feels a bit odd or uncomfortable.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.076172E-02