quote:

As someone who has never been in D/s BDSM relationship, she thinks that she can define the roles as absolute?

quote:

So, you might be able to understand how I was offended by a conversation where a novice slave (self proclaimed and non-Gor) is explaining to Master that a slave is a higher level than a submissive, how being a slave means a higher level of trust and how a submissive always has limits.

quote:

quote:

As someone who has never been in D/s BDSM relationship, she thinks that she can define the roles as absolute?

quote:

Mercnbeth:

well, for any relationship SHE would be involved in, don't you think it is a GOOD thing that she has a clear definition of what she thinks the roles should be?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

Let's involve some irrational and imaginary numbers, shall we? Suppose we say a true master is pi, dominant is e, submissive is -e, a real slave is -pi, and vanilla is i.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

well, for any relationship SHE would be involved in, don't you think it is a GOOD thing that she has a clear definition of what she thinks the roles should be?

quote:

Not really. She was relating her beliefs, just because they don't match yours, why must you take offense?

quote:

The absence of micromanagement doesn't define submission, neither does operating autonomously. this slave is aware of a few slaves who operate much the same way you do, yet they don't insist on classifying themselves as submissive and NOT slave. Do you have a limit about being referred to as a slave?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

Let's involve some irrational and imaginary numbers, shall we? Suppose we say a true master is pi, dominant is e, submissive is -e, a real slave is -pi, and vanilla is i.

OK now I think I could understand that better if there was some type of mathamtical equasion we could all reference to?


Peace and Love

quote:

Well - I guess that depends how you read it.

quote:

Is your definition of BDSM D/s the same as before you had your first Dominant?

quote:

And I am quite surprised by the response here, seeing as yourselves have always been such an advocate of 'Masters are not Masters unless they own'... and visaversa?

quote:

ORIGINAL: angelic

i thought a slave was below a submissive. i consider myself a slave (no i am NOT Gor) and truly believe that i am at the bottom of the 'food chain' so to speak. That a submissive has rights and limits and, if i was owned, i would have none.

quote:

this slave read it as they were doing interviews. this potential third expressed her ideas of BDSM D/s and her thoughts about a potential relationship with them--nothing wrong with that, she isn't "owned" by them, er---Him, yet, right? Obviously, she wasn't a good match for them, why let it get to ya'?

quote:

So, you might be able to understand how I was offended by a conversation where a novice slave (self proclaimed and non-Gor) is explaining to Master that a slave is a higher level than a submissive, how being a slave means a higher level of trust and how a submissive always has limits. This woman somehow thinks that someone else could trust Master more than I do? She somehow thinks that I am less submissive than she is? Never mind that a Master/submissive relationship can be no limits? As someone who has never been in D/s BDSM relationship, she thinks that she can define the roles as absolute?

quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

So, you might be able to understand how I was offended by a conversation where a novice slave (self proclaimed and non-Gor) is explaining to Master that a slave is a higher level than a submissive, how being a slave means a higher level of trust and how a submissive always has limits. This woman somehow thinks that someone else could trust Master more than I do? She somehow thinks that I am less submissive than she is?

I don't very often rant about things like this, but this hit during a PMS moment for me, so it irritated me beyond belief. <sigh>

Okay, I feel better now.