RE: A Question of labels.

RE: A Question of labels. (Full Version)

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

Message

lusciouslips19 -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/3/2008 5:51:16 PM)
Honestly, I am not quite sure either. I melt into submission and am happy to follow you if you are wise and I trust you. I do have opinions and ideas and brains and I am very honest and open with my ideas and feelings. I am not a doormat. At times I would like more direction, My sir is laid back and one who wants to please me. However, in scene or when the chips are down he is in complete control. he just does it so effortlessly no one even realizes he was steering. Since I like my opinions and feelings to matter I guess I am submissive and not a slave or maybe a bottom. Who really cares so long is you find one to mesh with.

ProfJoe -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/3/2008 6:14:09 PM)
In this relationship I began as dom. I became Daddy and Master as she grew. I didn't change, just found new opportunties to be what I am. Same, I'd guess, for her. ProfJoe

subtee -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/3/2008 6:15:53 PM)
Dom to a dyslexic=Mod...think about it. Or not.

lusciouslips19 -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/3/2008 6:19:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol quote: ORIGINAL: gypsygrl It was not a progression and slavery is not a deeper form of submission. In my experience, its not submission at all and I'm less submissive as a slave than I was as a submissive. It puzzles the hell out of me because its counter to everything I've learned/read but thats the way it is. This was truly interesting to me. I have so often read that slaves are levels up from submissives... That masters were bigger than Dom/mes... people are so obsessed with labels (thank you, colouredin), it's refreshing to read of a different invididual experience. Thank you for that, gypsygrl. I don't really know if the term fits, because I'm gobby and opinionated, but I suppose for all intents and purposes I am a submissive. I still have trouble with that particular word, though, and even just typing it here made me feel a little bit uneasy. I've battled with these feelings of submission all my life. But I'm a twue submissive, I swear, Miss - it's who I am, it's what I do (not always very well, but I'm working on it, and that's what matters, right?). When I "started" I was a bit of a switch. I had a lot of fun experimenting with that, but it didn't really do anything for me. Sometimes these feelings come back (wouldn't it be fun to torment colouredin for a few hours?), but no... they belong to the realm of fantasy. I don't think I could Domme anybody: I haven't got it in me. But my signature line comes partly from that experience. I prefered switching girls, incidentally - boys were far too demanding. But really, when I read people debating ad nauseam about the true nature of these labels I can't help but think it's a little bit silly. We are what we do, yes, but we also are what we feel - and feelings don't go with sticky labels. I also wonder whether people don't adapt their personnae to the roles they want to take on, in part thanks to these boards, where so much info is found on these subjects. Yes, you're not the only strong jewish princess who have struggled with their submission. Arent we after all supossed to be kinda Domme? How can we be strong ,opinionated and submissive??? I think we can! My submission is derived from someone who has the strength to command me,control me and earn my respect and submission. For me its that manliness...well, you know me, pull my hair and be a rough gentleman. I'll puddle at your feet!

gypsygrl -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/3/2008 7:58:05 PM)
quote: That masters were bigger than Dom/mes Pretty much everyone I've ever been involved with in this stuff have called themselves Masters as opposed to Doms. I didn't really know there was much of a difference, and I still don't. Even so, I never called myself a slave, until recently. One guy I was with for a little while had servants but considered himself a Master. I'm pretty sure I called him Sir, but understood his self-identification. We weren't together long enough for me to feel comfortable calling him Master. Even now, with my Master I have a hard time calling him that in front of people. For me, dominant is an adjective. So is submissive, for that matter. And, I try to use those words in grammatically correct ways. I have talked to a couple people who have been doing this stuff for a long time, and it seems that the terms Dominant and submisseve are releatively new, going only back to the early 1990's. Before that it was just Master/slave or, alternatively Master/subordinate. I've never come accross any histories of heterosexual SM or bdsm (I'm an academic historian so I've always got my nose to the ground sniffing for reliable information.) but it'd be really interesting to know the geneology of the lables.

tahlly -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/3/2008 10:12:32 PM)
quote: Did you start off calling yourself a sub and change to slave? or did you call youself a Dom and change to sub, did you initially consider yourself a switch then choose one or the other as your label? What changed? Has anyone changed lots of times, sub to Dom back to sub again? None of the above. I am a woman who happens to be in a relationship that fits my personality. If my owner refers to me as ‘his property’, that is his prerogative to do so; if he were to refer to me as ‘his bitch’, that would be fine also. No label takes away from the fact that I am still just a woman who happens to be in a relationship that fits my personality.

Hippiekinkster -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/3/2008 10:18:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subtee Dom to a dyslexic=Mod...think about it. Or not. And sub = bus. I'm sure there's something profound here, somewhere. Some linear algebra should clear it up. [8D]

colouredin -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/3/2008 11:30:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: gypsygrl I've never come accross any histories of heterosexual SM or bdsm (I'm an academic historian so I've always got my nose to the ground sniffing for reliable information.) but it'd be really interesting to know the geneology of the lables. That would be interesting, I love etamology and transformation of words I think that its really interesting. I think that struggling with the label and indeed the feelings can be hard whether you are jewish or not, I had a real problem divorcing the whole strong confident woman thing from submission. I felt like I was being anti feminist and all that jazz initially now I dont feel that same extent of shame. So tahlly, outside of the relationship you wouldnt refer to yourself as anything? What about before you met him? Was it just a coincedence that he was Dominant?

MasterFireMaam -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/3/2008 11:31:41 PM)
I began as Mistress Fire. When I discovered the spirituality of this and felt a calling, I was lead to be Master. There's a subtle difference to me, kinda like the difference between an orange and a grapefruit. I was a Mistress because I am Dominant. I am a Master because I feel spiritually called to be. If you'd really like the details, here's an essay I wrote about it some time ago. http://masterfiremaam.livejournal.com/201797.html Master Fire

ChihirosCurse -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/3/2008 11:54:28 PM)
What a great thread, I really enjoy hearing everyone's interpretations. I think thats the only meaning of the labels: what it means to you, in your experiences, or even just a a certain time in your life. I mean, on a basic level, there are certain "definitions" to guide us, but there's so much more to it. It gets interesting when it gets personal, inside the mind. When it starts getting complex and intricate. As for myself, I'm still trying to figure out my own label status within the broad umbrella-term "submissive". :)

Skully7000 -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/4/2008 12:01:43 AM)
I identify as Dominant. as a personality trait not a Title. Personally I don't like Titles. Don't call me Sir, Master, Lord. no matter how hard I try I will always think of some form RennFaire/Gaming Geek. or perhaps I'm to humble for such a title. don't confuse that with a lack of confidence I'm fully aware of my abilities and my limitations. sadly I'm years ahead of many who call themselves master...and yet infantile when it comes to some who just are who they are. but for the sake of your polling: I'm a Dom my girlfriend is a Slave to her Daddy and a Domme to everyone else (except me we are power neutral)

SailingBum -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/4/2008 12:03:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: colouredin Ok this isnt about one true way or anything but INDIVIDUALS and their own experances. I have seen a couple of threads that seem to suggest its a progression from sub to slave, Dom to Master etc I personally dont agree with this however I would like to know just out of interest if many people have changed the label that they identify with and their reasons for it. Did you start off calling yourself a sub and change to slave? or did you call youself a Dom and change to sub, did you initially consider yourself a switch then choose one or the other as your label? What changed? Has anyone changed lots of times, sub to Dom back to sub again? Im really just curious this isnt about whats right or wrong just a general interest. Thinks of it as matureing, learning. No different than growing up. The process of going from boy to man. ppl are constantly evolving as their life expereinces shape who they are. BadOne

UncleNasty -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/4/2008 12:35:26 AM)
Labels? Well, for several years I just stuck with me name, Glenn. Then I changed to Uncle Nasty. Who knows what the next transition will be? Uncle Nasty

tahlly -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/4/2008 2:54:31 AM)
Colouredin It’s an interesting question, I am sure; but one that hardly changes what I would call myself. I could be with any man, Dominant or not; I would still be just a woman who happens to be in a relationship that suits my personality. Outside of a relationship; nothing would change. I would still be a woman who happens to have very specific personality traits. I believe this answers two of your questions. As for whether or not it was coincidence that he was dominant. I could not answer that. I do not respond physically or mentally to ‘what’ a person chooses to call themselves. I do, however, respond, to THE PERSON.

kittinSol -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/4/2008 5:17:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subtee Dom to a dyslexic=Mod...think about it. Or not. I always thought dominatoreleven had a nice ring to it [8D] .

MsHonor -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/4/2008 5:46:38 AM)
I've been called Domme, Master / Mistress, Ma'am, Syr / Sir, Mom, Daddy, Captain, and more. I generally allow a sub or slave to refer to me by any respectful title they are comfortable with, up to and including my given name. The essence of who and what I am does not issue from my subject calling me by a given title. What and who I am transcends those titles, and any abililty or power anyone has to apply a lable to me. As an imperfect illustration, you can call a shark a shark, a water-tiger, a seagoing predator, or a Mondo Super-Guppy, and you'll still be just as bitten in half at the end of the encounter. On the other side, I generally think of "submissive" as being a larger, more general class of beings than "slave". I prefer slaves, but many who fit just fine in my requirements are more comfortable with* 'submissive', 'sub', or even just girlfriend. And, similarly, so long as s/he adheres to my requirements and serves my purposes and interests, I really don't care if s/he wants to be called my personal exectuive assistant or my pokey little puppy. Edit to add: And yes, it matters that they're more or less comfortable. I own my horse as surely as I own my shoes, but if she works better with a certain saddle, and I like that saddle fine, I'm not going to make her use another saddle just to "prove" I'm in charge. All I'd be proving is that I can place meaningless obstinance above functional elegance & effectiveness.

Mercnbeth -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/4/2008 6:23:03 AM)
quote: Did you start off calling yourself a sub and change to slave? it depends on what you consider as the jumping off point. the parents insisted this slave came out Dominant, but for the love of everything holy, she can't remember being so demanding...apparently, all she had to do was breathe in and out and there was a bevy of family that posed as servants to attend to her every need/want/whimper.[:)] she was a desperately WANTED addition to the family. shortly after that blessed event, they began training her to submit to their rules and expectations, to obey those in authority over her, how to treat other creatures, to communicate her thoughts at the appropriate times, to wipe her own ass and clean the house. throughout the wee formative years this slave was taught that until she worked for it and bought it with her own money, NOTHING belonged to her---and when someone else was in authority over her (read: first parents, then good husband), she'd be doing the right thing by putting THEIR wants/needs/desires/rules first, or suffer whatever consequences they chose to mete out. nobody ever said anything about the labels folks use around here in the context they are used in, in the context of fulfilling intimate relationships. she didn't even know they existed until the age of 36. a caring, responsible, nurturing, supportive, masculine, dominant relationship partner wasn't referred to as a "Daddy Dom" or a "Master"---that was a "Good Husband" or, in the case of homosexual friends, "Devoted Partner". this slave had medical issues that forced a decision as to bear offspring or not, at age 20. she didn't have a "Good Husband" to turn to, but after consulting with those in authority over her, she conjured up a "willing participant" and had them anyway, to everyone's delight. this slave and the offspring were financially and emotionally supported by the parents, and this slave did as they wished---serving the wee ones was job 1 until such time as they could serve themselves. this slave joked with them often that she wasn't their "slave" she was their "indentured servant". neither was ever intended as a pejorative label, but a more accurate descriptor than the typical "mom" scenario and relationship. once this slave was made aware of BDSM, D/s and M/s relationships, and an acceptance of sexual sadism and masochism, of which she had always been an avid fantasizer, she sought to understand the vocabulary of the participants, and has found the labels folks use, and the reasons they give for using them absolutely fascinating! this slave started out looking for friends and possible relationship partners in this "lifestyle", self-labeling as a "lonely submissive" and now identifies as a "fulfilled slave". the relationship this slave enjoys with Master made the difference, in both the change of adjectives and identities of the label.

kittinSol -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/4/2008 6:43:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MsHonor I've been called Domme, Master / Mistress, Ma'am, Syr / Sir, Mom, Daddy, Captain, and more. I generally allow a sub or slave to refer to me by any respectful title they are comfortable with, up to and including my given name. The essence of who and what I am does not issue from my subject calling me by a given title. What and who I am transcends those titles, and any abililty or power anyone has to apply a lable to me. I think it rocks that you aren't hung up on a title - seems to me as though so many people's self-esteem is reliant upon their self-annointment as "master" or "lord" or what have you... I like that simple respect does it for you.

Tantriqu -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/4/2008 6:51:18 AM)
I am always Dominant. I am what I am. As for what my subs call me: it's usually 'M' in public, and behind closed doors, 'please, Mistress!', 'oh, God!', or 'Christ!'. But since it precedes certain -- acts -- I find being called 'Master' very, very arousing.

sweetnurseBBW -> RE: A Question of labels. (4/4/2008 6:52:35 AM)
When I started out I identified as a sub, as I got more experienced and learned and researched more I felt like I identified with being a slave. For me it isn't a progression but just me learning more about myself and what it was I felt more comfortable labeling myself with.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125