RE: slave vs. submissive

RE: slave vs. submissive (Full Version)

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

Message

ErinHolian -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/6/2005 4:10:52 PM)
Excuse me, I just arrived at the site (and have no experience in the culture) and I've been reviewing this topic and associated string. What I've gathered is that there is a wide range of opinions with regard to what is a submissive and what is a slave. Would it be accurate for me to say that the definition of a submissive and a slave depends on each dominant, and each submissive or slave that I talk to? I want to get a grip on submissive and slave before I start asking stupid questions about dominants and switches. Tops and bottoms are on my list of questions, too, now.

Wolfie648 -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/6/2005 4:54:47 PM)
My 2cents :-) Insert typical disclaimer here (personal opinion not set in stone blah blah blah) a submissive has a safeword. a slave does not. To me, the submissive has the power, (I'm sooo gonna catch heat for that one :-) - he/she/insert other descriptor as needed, has the ability to say "No" to something - whether it being stopping a 'scene' (and even what is allowed to happen in a scene) or to give over control of finances, etc. (the list is loooong) All of this needs to be negotiated - typically over years although many basics can be dealt with before anyone even meets or plays. A slave does not have the right to say No. Ever, to anything that the Owner/Master/insert other descriptor as needed, decides to do to or for them. Every Owner has their own limits and their slaves limits are the same whether they like it or not (remember now that they consented to this lifestyle, they weren't grabbed off a corner in a van). Owners come from nice and understanding to mean arse sob. The trick is to match the right kind of slave or sub as desired with the right kind of Owner, Dominant. Took me 5 years to find my first slave (and she didn't start out as my slave) - once I figured out what exactly worked for me, which also took 5 years. Frankly I thought I'd go to my grave without ever finding her so whatever you do don't give up and ALWAYS BE IN A SAFE ENVIRONMENT (because Nutcases exist - they should have their own website! Crazy nutcase seeks emtionally unstable psychopath for general mayhem...) emotionally and physically - until and if you decide otherwise. Now all I need to find is my second (and last) female slave :-) D (owner of j)

nephandi -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/6/2005 5:07:39 PM)
i dont have a safeword, i can not stop a sence, yet i call myself a submissive not a slave. Let me try to explain, for i think that the best way for me to explain my point in this discussion is to explain why i call myself a submissive. i have a goal in life, it is to be the best occultist i can be, it is not pleasing my Master it is studying a thing many pepole call nonsense but that to me is my graest passion, it is what drives me, it is me, period. i am also submissive by nature, i dont like to take charge, i prefer to be lead and have somone take care of me, i need to be taken care of, i also happen to be a marchosist, i am a sadist to, however hardly ever practice that. So my lover and i begin to discuss if a D/s relationship is not perhaps the best for us, it will make day to day life more easy as we have clear leadership, make BDSM play more fun, make me have more suport in the work knowing i am his, generaly it would be best for us, so i give some, but not all, of the authority over my life over to him, i say, you be boss, you deside and i will obey, i dont say i live for you, or my only will is to pleese you is say, you deside this, take this autority. Now if i was a slave, i would not say that i would simply say, i will give myself to you, you now own me, i am your thing, i would still be anja, i would still adore the occult, and be me, but he would ahve total say over me, for i would be his, i could not longer say, you can rule such and such but this, this i will rule myself, i could not say but i will always study the occult, i would ahve to say, Master may i study the occult. Perhaps seeing how miserable i would be whitout he would say yes, but if i was slave, that would be his coice. And that is why i never can be slave.

ProtagonistLily -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/6/2005 5:15:54 PM)
quote: a submissive has a safeword. a slave does not. That's about the weirdest thing I've ever heard.

ownedjulia -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/6/2005 5:17:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: nephandi i dont have a safeword, i can not stop a sence, yet i call myself a submissive not a slave. Let me try to explain, for i think that the best way for me to explain my point in this discussion is to explain why i call myself a submissive. i have a goal in life, it is to be the best occultist i can be, it is not pleasing my Master it is studying a thing many pepole call nonsense but that to me is my graest passion, it is what drives me, it is me, period. i am also submissive by nature, i dont like to take charge, i prefer to be lead and have somone take care of me, i need to be taken care of, i also happen to be a marchosist, i am a sadist to, however hardly ever practice that. So my lover and i begin to discuss if a D/s relationship is not perhaps the best for us, it will make day to day life more easy as we have clear leadership, make BDSM play more fun, make me have more suport in the work knowing i am his, generaly it would be best for us, so i give some, but not all, of the authority over my life over to him, i say, you be boss, you deside and i will obey, i dont say i live for you, or my only will is to pleese you is say, you deside this, take this autority. Now if i was a slave, i would not say that i would simply say, i will give myself to you, you now own me, i am your thing, i would still be anja, i would still adore the occult, and be me, but he would ahve total say over me, for i would be his, i could not longer say, you can rule such and such but this, this i will rule myself, i could not say but i will always study the occult, i would ahve to say, Master may i study the occult. Perhaps seeing how miserable i would be whitout he would say yes, but if i was slave, that would be his coice. And that is why i never can be slave. Interesting..... I became my Master's slave after 3 years of being his submissive. To me being a slave is about giving up a lot of yourself in order to serve your Master as well as 'losing' some of your rights and options. We used a safeword for the first year or so we were together then slowly as we got more and more comfortable with each ther 'rights' were removed then after some consideration and talking to others i decided to become his slave. There were a few changes to get used to but most of them I was already unconciously doing!! The only area where M/s is NOT allowed is my work - As we both have somewhat difficult jobs we always leave work and M/s aside but as soon as i am at home i am slave and thats it.

Mercnbeth -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/6/2005 5:28:23 PM)
quote: quote: a submissive has a safeword. a slave does not. That's about the weirdest thing I've ever heard. Lil, Hi! When you coming back out to this part of the world? Has is snowed there yet? [8D] Anyway... I happen to agree with Wolfie. But how about phrasing it a bit differently? A submissive has a safe-word; a slave doesn't need one. I'm not talking about someone who becomes a slave over the course of a week-end or an intense web-cam "session". I'm referring to people who after a long, detailed, and soul-baring period of communication and disclosure; decide to live as Master/slave.

SirSix72 -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/6/2005 9:52:22 PM)
Greetings, There are matter of fact definitions for the roles or positions that a submissive/slave, Master/Dom takes on whether a lifestyle commitment or just a bedroom fanatic There was a book written by Dr. gloria G. Brame The name book "Come Hither" A Common Sense Guide to Kinky Sex and she can be contacted on the web http://gloriabrame.com I found the book very informative and well researched as well

Wolfie648 -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/7/2005 12:21:39 AM)
We all have our own perspectives and want to express them in the way that comes naturally to us. D (owner of j)

LadiesBladewing -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/7/2005 2:43:57 AM)
Just a thought.... For my definition, a submissive belongs to hirself, but yields a portion of hirself to someone else, under conditions that xhe finds acceptable. ...a slave is -owned-. Hir life is no longer hirs, and any goals and plans that xhe had for hir life are now subject to modification by the owner. It is difficult, in our paradigm, to -make- the commitment to slavery. Making such a commitment would require that one would accept that some of the things that are crucially important to oneself might have to be set aside if that is what the Owner requires. However, I think it -should- be difficult to make such a profound choice. I think we should debate it with ourselves extensively, weigh out the pros and cons, and really have to -look- at what the context of slavery infers within the Bladewing paradigm. The time to assess and weigh is in the years (yes, it takes years with us before a submissive is accepted as a slave) before one yields up that life to whatever the fates, in the form of the decisions of one's owner, may bring. One of the previous posters mentioned her esoteric training--I thought that her reasons for calling herself a submissive, rather than a slave, were very close to my own thoughts. She wants to hold on to her esoteric explorations. No matter how much she yields up, she doesn't want to yield up -that-. As a slave, she would have to, and would have to trust that her Owner would recognize and cherish her desire to continue her explorations, and would value those explorations enough to continue to allow her to learn. If her owner no longer thought her explorations valuable, as a slave she would have to give them up (as we define slavery). As a companion thought, there is the difference between the Dominant and the Owner for me. A Dominant can accept submission without taking responsibility for the whole of the life of that person. It may not matter whether the submissive is doing well with his or her graduate work, or whether he or she is excelling in hir job, because the Dominant's focus is really on only those portions of the submissive's life that he or she touches. On the other hand, if there is something that a submissive really treasures, the dominant feels no real distress if that thing is held out of his or her control. As long as there is control in the areas that the two (or more) have agreed on, all is still right with the dynamic and the world they create through it. An owner, on the other hand, MUST be willing to take up what the slave has yielded. If a slave is in University and yields up his or her life, the Owner must determine not -only- whether or not the slave's university studies are important to the owner, but whether or not those studies will make the slave a healthier, stronger, and more useful asset. Xhe (the owner) would also need to assess what impact it might have over the long haul to limit those studies, whether the owner might ever need the knowlege that the slave is acquiring, and, if the decision is made to allow one's property to continue in school, to make sure that the slave has the resources to -succeed-. Everything about guiding a slave to his or her full potential becomes the responsibility of the owner to oversee. I see submission as the perfect solution to the desire to yield when there are parts of one's life that one needs or wants to hold on to. I see slavery as akin to giving one's life. One may still do the exact same things as before--the difference will be that as a slave, whether one does those things or not is not under personal control, but under the Owner's control...and doing what one does can never be taken for granted, because the owner may decide to make a change, and the slave has already given up the right to hold on to those things, in yielding -all- of his or her life. You may not agree with my definitions, but that's OK...unless you happen to be my slave. Lady Zephyr

EmeraldSlave2 -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/7/2005 5:08:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wolfie648 a slave does not. A slave does not have the right to say No. The problem with both of these statements is that they can be quite easily be negated by one thing: "Unless the owner says so" If the owner WANTS the slave to have/use a safeword...and then it's perfectly fine. For example, the Owner expects me to keep myself secure and taken care of when not together. I had a sucky experience at Leather Retreat with the person who bought me at auction, he somewhat stalked me and tried to force me into something in broad daylight. I'm not used to safewording, I just use basic communication. However, after the first few forceful and loud "NO!'s" didn't stop him, I switched over to saying "Red, Stop, Safeword NOW Red Stop" I think that's a good example of how using a safeword can be used by a slave. BTW this was quite an isolated incident, I was extremely supported by those around me and the LR event as a whole is something I highly recommend. One dork in the bunch is hardly an issue. Secondly, the Owner absolutely expects me to say no to him if I feel it's appropriate. FOr example, I was driving him to the airport one day in rush hour traffic. The lane next to use began to move much faster and he told me to move into that lane. I said no because I knew the road and they were only going faster for that stretch because of an exit coming up and that our lane was ultimately the better lane. He smiled and said I was a good girl for knowing when to say no to him. So...I see where you're going, but it just doesn't pan out.

imtempting -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/7/2005 5:08:45 AM)
I dont think it can be defined as slavery. I beleive your given more power to your dominant. Noone will obey every command. There will be a command you will say no too. Example. If your dominant wanted to throw scolding hot water over your face and eyes would you let them? Before people say this is not in the masters best interest, its still your masters decision to scar you for life, even though he might get rid of you a few days later. Like EM said now things will probabley start to get nasty although I must remind our friendly mods ive been good. :)

MistressMelissa -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/7/2005 5:40:39 AM)
Well...I'm going to have to disagree with you. By what you have posted if a "Master" loses his "slave" for any reason then he would resort back to being a dom. I don't see where you have said one nice thing about "dom's" What where you before you collared your girl? If you could not be a Master until she submitted were you not a dom? Some feel that the term "Master" is earned and the title presented by a peer group of other masters in reconition of knowledge gained in the lifestyle. That would be "Old Gaurd" if you are unsure. The Gorean's say that a Free Man is "Master" simply because he is free. If I substituted the word "abuser" for every time you use the word "dom" then I would be more likely to agree with you. As for the original question of slave verses a submissive, you can bedate all day. I know a slave when I see one. The rest are submissives and even then most are really just bottoms but that is my opinion.

LadiesBladewing -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/7/2005 8:15:07 AM)
This has always been a debatable issue. It is certain that most of us have consciences that would balk at certain demands, and some of us have a sense of self-preservation that would keep them from saying 'yes' to abusive things -- however, there are certainly slaves who do things that they would normally feel a twinge (or 2x4-over-the-head) of conscience from, because in their slavery, they know that they can place the responsibility for the action on the master (I was only following orders). What is interesting is that this is a common phenomenon, psychologically, even outside of the lifestyle. Many people will do terrible things because a superior told them to, even if, on their own, the acts they commit would be psychologically damaging. They justify these acts by the same language (I was only following orders.) Many of us say that we would not do a certain thing, but when the alternative is losing the connection to and approval of someone that we admire, we may do things that we would normally never consider on our own. At the same time, there are many people whose need to belong is much higher than their sense of self-preservation. They will participate in acts that are -known- to be dangerous, or even potentially lethal, because they are told to do so by someone from whom they desire attention, affection or a sense of belonging...and I'm not talking about in the D/s lifestyle -- this is common in the big old vanilla outside world. Add in a -true- sense of being owned (often with promises of that ownership being "forever") and the mind-warp that comes with the gradual re-shaping of a slave's mind into a mindset that is willing to yield up his or her entire existence to someone else's control and there is a definite possibility that an enslavement relationship could develop in which serving the Owner becomes more important than protecting one's own life. If you think that I am overstating, consider the vanilla individuals who make up the Secret Service. They make a solemn vow to do whatever they have to do to protect the lives of those individuals entrusted to them -- including being willing to take a bullet and die to insure that safety. They yield even their very lives to their service. As another example, I've done -years- of pastoral counseling for victims of domestic violence. We've taken them to safety, and given them alternatives -- yet almost half of them go back to their abusive mate within a month of being freed of the situation. When asked why, many of them say that their mate "needs them". Some of them, we know to our sorrow, will be dead within a year. They know -exactly- what they are going back to, and yet the fact that their mate needs them is enough to cause them to set aside any sense of self-preservation, to meet that need. Why is it so difficult to believe that the same mindset might develop in a slave who has been nurtured in such a way (or compelled cruelly in such a way) as to insure that there is no question that he or she is no longer in control of even whether he or she lives or dies. This is why it is -very- important to think about what one is taking on when one agrees to take on a slave, at least if one is making that decision within our paradigm. We recognize that something very valuable is being laid at our feet, and that it is a heavy burden to carry one's own life, AND, someone else's. In a collective like ours, we often are carrying our own lives and SEVERAL others. In the same way, as Abbess of our spiritual community, I am gifted with the spiritual lives of all of our members. It is a HUGE responsibility. I think that many times, both parties do not think through the actual possible outcomes of such profound choices -- and as much as it pains me to say so, it is not any flaw in a submissive that causes it to be that the dominant may be the one to have to put on the brakes. Most submissives -- especially those with the seeds of slavery in their hearts -- want nothing more than to be needed, cherished, and to have their talents used for the benefit of the dominant. They are willing to take risks, and it is often the dominant who, because of the realization of the importance of the responsibility that he or she is taking on, must counsel patience, and taking the time to learn whether this is the right place to be or not. Lady Zephyr quote: ORIGINAL: imtempting Noone will obey every command. There will be a command you will say no too. Example. If your dominant wanted to throw scolding hot water over your face and eyes would you let them? Before people say this is not in the masters best interest, its still your masters decision to scar you for life, even though he might get rid of you a few days later. Like EM said now things will probabley start to get nasty although I must remind our friendly mods ive been good. :)

imtempting -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/7/2005 8:19:05 AM)
I dont think your over stating but I dont agree about being called a slave in the lifestyle. Ive said my bit so we can agree to disagree

Evanesce -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/7/2005 9:30:25 AM)
quote: Excuse me, I just arrived at the site (and have no experience in the culture) and I've been reviewing this topic and associated string. What I've gathered is that there is a wide range of opinions with regard to what is a submissive and what is a slave. Would it be accurate for me to say that the definition of a submissive and a slave depends on each dominant, and each submissive or slave that I talk to? I want to get a grip on submissive and slave before I start asking stupid questions about dominants and switches. Tops and bottoms are on my list of questions, too, now. Actually, the sub/slave thing is really easy to decipher. A slave is property. Submissive is a personality trait. Denise the Kaptin's wench

EmeraldSlave2 -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/7/2005 9:41:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Evanesce A slave is property. Submissive is a personality trait. Denise the Kaptin's wench[/color] But there are many submissives with dominant personalities. And many vanillas with submissive personalities. IMO submissive (in terms of bdsm) is an orientation, not a personality trait.

Mercnbeth -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/7/2005 9:48:14 AM)
quote: imtempting: Noone will obey every command. There will be a command you will say no too. Example. If your dominant wanted to throw scolding hot water over your face and eyes would you let them? tempting, you're missing one important aspect; lifestyle slavery is consensual slavery. Meaning that a slave becomes a slave based upon a conscience decision. If that decision is taken seriously a long period of evaluation was conducted prior to that commitment. In our case, I refused to accept beth as my slave until she understood exactly the consequence of that decision. It's why I documented and had her read rules for the contemplated relationship. It's why I demanded that we be separate for a period of time, so that she wouldn't be distracted by the "sensations" of being together. I told her that her decision to become my slave would be her LAST decision. But I made sure that she knew it wasn't play for a day, weekend, week, or an 'extended vacation'. It would be forever, sealed by a mark on her body that would last as long as she did. After all that, when that last decision was made, after an extended period of being together, she KNEW that although "theoretically" I had the ability to "throw scolding hot water" I wouldn't. That goes for all the other mayhem and maiming that's brought up when people debate the concept of "no limit slavery". beth is a "Merc no-limits slave". That's all that's required. quote: Mistress Melissa: By what you have posted if a "Master" loses his "slave" for any reason then he would resort back to being a dom. Melissa, I don't know about the wording "resort back to being a dom"; but without a slave there is no "Master". Excluding those titles assigned or "earned" is some groups, "Master" requires a Mastery over someone. I'd go as far as say it requires owner-ship. It requires a slave. Without that, you can be a master at putting little fish on a hook to catch a big fish, but you own nothing but yourself. I don't see what the label does for anyone anyway. A steer may look like a bull, but without getting his balls back, he's not a bull. You can call him anything you'd like. He can call himself anything he likes. But at some point he goes home alone, and the only thing he can me Master of is his domain. Which may or may-not be a struggle. I didn't consider myself a Master until having a slave. My skill set or level didn't increase the day acquiring a slave occurred. Anyone I played with may have complimented me on my flogging technique or scening skills but I wasn't their Master. I am not anyone's Master but beth's. beth is only a slave to me. For that reason, when we are in a public forum, I never refer or introduce myself as Master. I use my regular name. Sometimes people need to label themselves with titles to generate confidence. But if anyone thinks just because someone calls themselves "Master" that it means something or establishes credibility, they are setting themselves up for disappointment. The thought should be similarly applied to self-appointed slaves, even those that don't come with a long litany of conditional limits.

Evanesce -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/7/2005 9:50:54 AM)
quote: But there are many submissives with dominant personalities. Which is why I do not acknowledge that there is any such thing as "A" submissive. The terms submissive and dominant are in diametric opposition to one another, and it is, in my opinion, impossible to be both. quote: IMO submissive (in terms of bdsm) is an orientation, not a personality trait. And, IMO, top and bottom are orientations, while submissive and dominant are personality traits. Neither view is necessarily right or wrong. Denise the Kaptin's wench

Soulhuntre -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/7/2005 10:01:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subversiveone How do Y/you communicate that needs are not getting met in the relationship? While I suspect we woudl disagree radically on what is a "need" or a "desire", in short those in my service are welcome to use any method they choose to communicate problems - provide the time is appropriate and the manner is respectful. quote: ORIGINAL: subversiveone Do you play games like leaving notes or dropping hints? I don't consider written communication to be a "game" at all. quote: ORIGINAL: subversiveone Do you (for sexual needs) try to make yourself more desirable? In this house that woudl in fact be their only recourse for that particular issue. They certainly are not in a position to demand more sex and I have no intention of having more sexual contact that I desire to just to make them happy... so their only option would be to increase desire. quote: ORIGINAL: subversiveone How aggressive do you pursue it? They can pursure it up to the limits of respect and as long as it doesn't interfere with their service tasks. quote: ORIGINAL: subversiveone Do you have some elaborate meeting or do you find it easier to just chat over coffee? over the knee/bench? ;) No set format.

Soulhuntre -> RE: slave vs. submissive (10/7/2005 10:15:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: camigirl Not a flame but i do disagree...Dominance is about a persons character. Dominance is not an issue of character - it is a description of power. Someone is dominant in a situation if they can compel or inspire compliance. SOmeone who can do that in many areas is "dominant" as a descriptor. Stalin was dominant without a doubt, he was also a murderous evil thug. These things have nothign to do with one another.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875