quote:

ORIGINAL: PlayfulOne

Knight,

Exactly, we have a very playful relationship and enjoy teasing and laughter.  It never crosses my mind to label our interactions as "bratty" on her part.  I couldn't function if I had to discard my playful side.

When it is done simply as a way to get attention, or a desired effect then it becomes a problem

K

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vancouver_cinful

quote:

ORIGINAL: wytchywoman
They established protocol before anyone wanted to give them the right to breathe. They did it and never made apologies for it. They were (are) what they are, and I seriously doubt that if any of them that are stilll alive and wandered onto this site would even recognize that what we are now chatting about has anything to do with what they started and made their own.

I know that there are some in the gay community that still relate to the Old Guard. I've met a few, myself. They definitely don't expect everyone to adopt their ways. As a matter of fact they tend to enjoy being somewhat exclusive.

Many of the Old Guard traditions were brought about, I believe, because of the need to be discreet and to protect themselves from being outed to regular society.

I'm very curious as to what Lily meant by traditions in her post.

Cin

quote:

ORIGINAL: wytchywoman

Good point! There are no "traditions" in this lifestyle that we lead other than the ones we make up. Other than those who can really call themselves "Old Guard". Those would be gay WWII vets who had a very established heirachy. I have expressed an inteterest in Old Guard in my own profile...not because I claim to live it or have any connection to it, but rather what they did interests me and does command respect for what they did in their own time.

They established protocol before anyone wanted to give them the right to breathe. They did it and never made apologies for it. They were (are) what they are, and I seriously doubt that if any of them that are stilll alive and wandered onto this site would even recognize that what we are now chatting about has anything to do with what they started and made their own.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SirPrize

quote:

ORIGINAL: wytchywoman

Good point! There are no "traditions" in this lifestyle that we lead other than the ones we make up. Other than those who can really call themselves "Old Guard". Those would be gay WWII vets who had a very established heirachy. I have expressed an inteterest in Old Guard in my own profile...not because I claim to live it or have any connection to it, but rather what they did interests me and does command respect for what they did in their own time.

They established protocol before anyone wanted to give them the right to breathe. They did it and never made apologies for it. They were (are) what they are, and I seriously doubt that if any of them that are stilll alive and wandered onto this site would even recognize that what we are now chatting about has anything to do with what they started and made their own.

ARGGGG  More "Old Guard" Misinformation.  Repeat after me.  "There was no Old Guard.  The Old Guard is a myth."  It is unfortunately a myth that has been repeated so often and by so many that it has become truth for many, but there is no truth to it. 

Yes, there were groups of gay men during the post WWII era who formed bdsm oriented groups.  Though they didn't call it bdsm.  Some were veterans, some were bikers.  But this notion that they invented WIITWD is just wrong.  The notion that they were a single unified group with homogenous rules and protocols is equally wrong.  Each group did their own thing, and had their own rules if they had any rules at all.  They took some miltary tradition, some biker tradition, and did what worked for them.  They certainly hold an important place in our history.  But it's not the only important part of our history, nor is what they did more valid than what we or anyone else do now.  To make them some sort of mythical creators is to dishonor what they did do.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightofMists

it really depends on what your definition of "BRAT" is.

I agree the term does often have a negative conetation to it, but not always.  some bratiness if you will is more playful and fun as comparied to spoiled attention getting behavior.  I am not to quick to assume what another person determines the word to mean.  What makes it really confusing is that often people use the term to describe both sets of behaviors, both meaning the Postive side as well as the negative side of the coin.  I suppose it would be easier if we all used the exact same word for the exact same behaviors, but then of course we would have to perceive the specific behaviors the same way to use that exact word.  So, really often it doesn't make sense to put to much into a specific word.... instead have a dialogue of words.  We tend to do better than just listening to a single word.

This leads me to my second point... who are you to determine what bratty behavior is acceptable for others in their D/s relationship and what is not?  If they are happy in their relationship with the behaviors and all... why do you care.  No one is forcing you to be friends with them.  You don't even have to talk to them if you don't want to. If they want to mix it in with their D/s... who are you to say it's wrong for them.  Obviously it's wrong for you.  But, frankly your going past that line and calling it simply wrong!  So wrong that you could throw up.  So I guess when you have the universal expertice of all things D/s I suppose you can state what is ok for others and isn't ok for others. 

Now for me personally.  I don't want a submissive that is bratty in an attention getting or self-serving manner.  My girls are both very playful.  BUT, actually very few ever see it.  Simply this playful nature is private with me and a few good friends.  My girls are very aware of the appropriate behaviors I want and enjoy.  I really don't give a shit how others behave.  I don't care what other Dominants let their property do or not do, that is there choice not mine.  However, when I interact with people.  I have some minor expectations on how they would behave with me and how I will behave with them.  If our personalities do not click, welll it's very easy, I just don't socialize with them or them with me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SirPrize
To make them some sort of mythical creators is to dishonor what they did do.

quote:


My Karma Account is huge, but I just can't seem to make a withdrawal!!

http://cinful.wordpress.com

(in reply to SirPrize)

quote:

ORIGINAL: wytchywoman

SirPrize:

You read  Guy Baldwin. He didn't have to use the term "bdsm". He said it all just by using the terms that were the only one used at the time: "tops and bottoms".

Just an excerpt from Guy Baldwin's essay:

"Bottoms may not own collars unless a particular Top has allowed that bottom to be the custodian of the Top's collar. A bottom wearing a collar is a slave, and belongs to the owner of the collar who, presumably, has the keys. Other Tops are not to engage a collared bottom in conversation, but other bottoms may do so. Should such a relationship end, the collar must be returned to the Top."

He did not use the term bdsm, but what do you think he meant by tops, bottoms, and collars if not bdsm oriented? Hmmmmm?

quote:

ORIGINAL: SirPrize

And to speak of an old guard culture is as meaningless as to speak of European cuisine.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SirPrize

quote:

ORIGINAL: wytchywoman

SirPrize:

You read  Guy Baldwin. He didn't have to use the term "bdsm". He said it all just by using the terms that were the only one used at the time: "tops and bottoms".

Just an excerpt from Guy Baldwin's essay:

"Bottoms may not own collars unless a particular Top has allowed that bottom to be the custodian of the Top's collar. A bottom wearing a collar is a slave, and belongs to the owner of the collar who, presumably, has the keys. Other Tops are not to engage a collared bottom in conversation, but other bottoms may do so. Should such a relationship end, the collar must be returned to the Top."

He did not use the term bdsm, but what do you think he meant by tops, bottoms, and collars if not bdsm oriented? Hmmmmm?

------------
I've read him.  I've read others who say he's full of shit.  There are people out there who've done legitimate historical research.  Guy talks about the gay leather culture that grew after WWII.  Nowhere does he spout the nonsense that many atribute to the old guard.  Nowhere does he claim they were a unified group with universal rules and protocols.  They were men.  That's all.  They carved a place for themselves where there was none.  They were no better or worse than we are, and what they did was no more valid than what we do.  And to speak of an old guard culture is as meaningless as to speak of European cuisine.

quote:

ORIGINAL: masochistecstacy

This whole bloody thread has honestly pissed me right off. Lilly, you posted, asking for others' opinions. So, you get them. What do you do? Every single opinion different from yours, you shoot down, cold, hard, fast. It's- irritating, it's annoying, and it's RUDE. And although I'm sure you'll shoot it down, same as the others, here's my opinion... Although gee golly wiz, I don't know if you can take the opinion of *GASP* a BRATTY SUBMISSIVE!

There isn't anything wrong with disagreement. It's called "debate" in some countries.

*sits back and waits to be shot down*

Well...........at least you're not melodramatic or pessimistic lol.

PS... no offense is meant to any Goreans. I have a bit of Gor in me myself, and my first remark was only meant in jest. I do apologize if I've offended anyone. *smiles warmly*

quote:

ORIGINAL: fullofgrace

i pride myself on having opinions and a personality and stuff to talk about, because, well, a whole 24/7 D/s relationship just cannot be completely floated on beatings and kinky sex, and besides, if either of our lives revolved around just the traditional sm and sexual elements of the relationship, we'd get real bored, real quick. i submit to Him always, and i retain my own personality while i'm at it. i used to have bratty tendencies, just because i like to see how far i can go at times, but then i learned that it's much easier and classier to just ask nicely for the whipping. i don't know. i imagine if i was dominant i'd get bored quickly with a "bratty sub."

quote:

There isn't anything wrong with disagreement. It's called "debate" in some countries.

quote:

Well...........at least you're not melodramatic or pessimistic lol. 

quote:

masochistecstacy wrote:

Oh yes, I am a big fan of debate. I even took debate and several philosophy classes that I didn't need, simply because it was refreshing to have wonderful, intellectual debates. The disagreement wasn't what angered me. *smiles* What angered me was the fact that apparently, Lilly has no regard at all for other opinions. Only Lilly can be right. Of course.

quote:

masochistestacy wrote:

Heh. I try not to be. I've got enough drama in my life without creating more.

quote:

ORIGINAL: IrishMist

quote:

I have never liked 'bratty submissives', especially the ones who make it a point to be a brat for the attention value (oh come now, you know exactly what I'm talking about).

/clears throat
I ummm, resemble that remark
/looks away and whistles

quote:

Perhaps, it's that people don't have the vocabulary to indicate exactly what they are. From my perspective, it's perfectly fine to be a bratty bottom (if you can find someone or someones who will put up with that behavior) and not only get away with it, but play it for all it's worth. There's nothing wrong with being someone who wants to swim in the SM pool; but when you start mixing your D/s and your SM and come out with 'bratty subs' and the like, I start to throw up a little.

quote:

Part of the problem is the labels we use.  We are a community united by a vocabularly that we all define differently.  The Tower of Babel has nothing on us.  Put up a post asking everyone to define sub, slave, dominant, brat.  I doubt you will get any 2 replies remotely the same.  And guess what?  Words that everyone defines differently have no meaning.

quote:

Simply, because it's supported, many times by the so-called "dominants" themselves who gladly rise to the occasion of feeding the ego-centric thrill ride of the brat—in turn becoming nothing more than enablers of bad behavior.

quote:

 everyone has different interpretations of the word "brat"

quote:

quote:

I think that I fall into that category. I like being a bratty subbie. I am not a slave in any way. I like to be "forced" to do things by physical acts, I do submit to them only in so far as there is a perceived threat that something bad will happen if I don't. I truly enjoy the bondage aspect of play because I am physically unable to fight my way out. I like to say "no" so that the physical force becomes greater. I feel, for me, that forced submission is where I get the most satisfaction.

I think that a plain sub is somewhere between a brat-sub and a slave..... Maybe....

I am not a slave. I do not do as he asks. I do not voluntarily serve him in any way. I do not call him "Him" and I do not refer to myself as "i". I have my safe word. I have only said it once when the pain got to be too much. He respected it and backed off. It is my only defense from him.

Then why do you self identify as a 'sub' at all? You appear to be a female person who enjoys SM play, and does not wish to give up control on an ongoing basis, or serve your partner in any way.

~drum roll please~ There's nothing wrong with this. Nothing in the least.

Except that maybe you don't realize that while you say exactly what your conditions are and under which you will submit, from where I sit, this is not submission at all. This is bottoming. And I know lots of bottoms and they are absolutely fine people. But they ain't submissives and they sure as hell aren't slaves.

quote:

Clothespingirl is right Lil, you have to allow people to relate to each other as they please. "bratty subs" is just another label for those seeking "subordinate dominants". "bratty slaves" are perfect for "servant masters". It's like in the loan business; "there is a seat for every ass!" 

quote:

There are brat subs and doormat subs and slave subs and service subs and 24/7 subs and only on weekend subs and when-my-kids-are-with-their-dad subs. So what? It won't cheapen or lessen your particular variety of submission just because you don't happen to like or agree with it.

quote:

I think there is another issue too, in that when I was new, because I loved to be beaten everyone told me I was a sub -- albiet a smart-mouthed, sassy, asking-for a butt-whipping sub but I was never rude or disrespectful. Since then I've figured out that I'm not really a sub at all. I'm a MASOCHIST. 

quote:

"Submit: 'to yield oneself to the authority or will of another'..... 'to defer to or consent to abide by the opinion or authority of another'....taken from Merriam-Webster's dictionary. 

Words mean something. We can decide to call ourselves whatever we wish, but that alone does not make it so. I can start saying that my car is purple, but it's still going to be silver.

The problem, at least the way I see it, is that we've put too much of a gold-standard on certain types here. Being a "kinky sex player" is, or should be, a wondeful thing! But too often too many folks look down on it. "It isn't real". Bullshit! It is real, and exciting. Is it submission?? Maybe not...............but so?"  

quote:

ORIGINAL: CanadianGuy

I have to say I can't stand the concept of submissive girls who call themselves "brats" and pride themselves in being obnoxious and hard to deal with.
Same goes for people who say "I'm submissive but I won't submit unless you know exactly how to make it happen... I don't even really like submitting but I want to know if there's anyone who can make me do it.  I'm a total out of control brat and I'm not going to make it easy!"
Drives me up the frickin' wall!  That's not submissive, so call yourself what you are - a boring vanilla with personality issues.