RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they?

RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (Full Version)

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

Message

caitlyn -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 3:38:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy That's her way of saying she's a bi-poly slave dominant. I'm the "Unidommer!"

willowheart -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 3:48:57 PM)
to scratchingpost: You wrote: "From My understanding and experience a slave has no say in the matter after the intial slave contract is negotiated...whereas a submissive does. A submissive will have some or a lot of imput into scenes. " Even as an unowned submissive personality-traited person, I never put much direction into the scene. That just isn't "me". Only once, did i go up to a respected Dominant at a play party and asked to be flogged. I missed subspace, and I simply asked if He would put me there with a simple flogging. Which He did nicely! And when I came down, i was ever so happy and grateful! Does that kick me out from being truly submissive? Gee, I hope not. My heart was in pure request mode. And He was Not my Dominant.... Did He become MY "submissive" by helping me? See how complicated this can get? I am -- heart and soul -- A submissive in core / basic personality. But does this mean I can't request my needs, politely ?And what if my Sir and i become Master and His slave?? Will i not be allowed to request something i need -- ever again??? Then what about the honesty a slave owes her Master? That He be informed of all matters concerning His property??? Including my preceived needs...?

willowheart -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 4:04:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level quote: ORIGINAL: PhoenixLM You might be a dominant and bottom I have met slaves who are expert tops. This does not make either person a switch. Some would disagree with that statement; I'll only say that at the minimum, they are switching. Hold it! If a Bottom can Top from the "bottom" then why can't a Dominant be a bottom -- WithOut being called a "sWiTcH" ?????? And .... if a slave / submissive is serving his or her Master / Mistress by acting as a "top" -- again -- why call them a "sWiTcH" ????? I was asked to act as a top once to someone. I literally became sick to my stomach after the scene, and could never see him in the same way again. Did that event turn me into a "SwItCh" ??? Even if it wasn't "me" ???

MsDebbie -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 4:21:01 PM)
A friend recently asked me the age old what's the difference between a sub and a slave question. I rolled my eyes thinking he had to be joking when he asked that question....then he said............trust. Simply trust. A submissive forms a relationship with his or her dominant person and as trust is established and deepens, the dominant and submissive grow into a Master/Mistress and slave relationship. This occurs when the submissive reaches the level of trust where she/he knows the dominant loves them, has demonstrated responsibility and the wisdom to care for their emotional and physical well being, would not knowingly make a decision for them that would result in harm to them in any way, and should harm occur, would accept responsibility for restoring the slave's emotional and physical state. I'm a dominant woman in a two year relationship first bottoming and over time growing to submit happily to a male dominant. My friend then asked me if there was anything I would refuse my dominant... my answer was no as he knew it would be. His reply was... you're a slave. I was horrified... my brain screamed NO...not me...I'm not even really a switch, it just doesn't fit how I see myself. Upon reflection, he was absolutely right, although I am still getting used to the idea. I was recently asked to become the dominant's owned property and happily accepted.

Level -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 4:27:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CERCKL My personal situation, I have only one name for lotus, that is lotus, the name I gave her when she first recognized me as owning her...she is not my slave, my submissive, pet or anything but my lotus... C ............this is some food for thought. Level

Level -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 4:29:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zensee What a great topic [:D] - which must be why it's been DONE TO DEATH! I nominate it, along with its sister subject "What's the Difference Between a Top, a Dominant and Master/Mistress?", to have their very own forums. While we are at it how about separate forums for; "Gasp! - My life partner of the last five (years/days) turned out to be an arsehole." and "Whaaaa! I am getting too many / not enough emails." and "Are Pros Whores?" and "My Kink's better than your Kink!" and "I'm just a slave who can't say NO." and "Why is everyone on this site a fake except for me?". The important question is - who pissed in my tea this morning? Z. Film at eleven. LMAO........thanks for that..... Level

KnightofMists -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 4:33:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: knees2you Even a Master or Mistress who have a Slave would still talk to them about wanting to do something to them, right? I can't speak for others... Only my relationships with alandra and kyra..... sometimes they are told in advance and/or it is discussed... sometimes it is sprung on them at the moment.... the decision on approach/method to use is dependent on countless things... but the goal doesn't change -- "Do my will... Harm none" Editted to add I will add my own perspective of the slave/submissive debate. MY slaves will are enslaved to My will and thus I Do My will them but I am limited by my choices. My submissive's will is not enslaved to My will and thus I do My will with them but I am limited by the submissives choices. As far as others that label themselves Slaves or Submissives... Well frankly... It's irrelevant to me.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 4:36:18 PM)
I can't believe all these people are actually throwing these sorts of definitions around with a straigh face. Would they ACTUALLY go up to someone and say "Yeah, I trust my dom more than you do" or "Yeah I have a deeper relationship than you do" or "Yeah you really just can't let go while I can" or "Yeah your master wanted information about your fantasies and input about the scenes you do AND allows you to top others- you're definitely not a slave, no matter what you claim." Seriously, I want all of you to come see me with my local partner and tell me these things to my face- that I trust him less, that I hold back on him, that I'm not as deep with him, that I don't want to give my all, that I don't want to make him happy. Frankly, he should have SOMEONE tell him because I sure won't. I really can't believe that.

ICGsteve -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 4:58:54 PM)
Sub: one who keeps ownership of their identity and the right to change it. Slave: one who includes their identity in the TPE. A slave agrees at the front end to change who they are to suit the will of their master if the master so chooses and is skilled enough to make it happen. The master if wise will only attempt to change the slave into that which is already in the slave's nature. The submissive always is in control of who they are, thus only change who they are to match the will of the DOM if they consciously decide to do so. Obviously this definition is hard core. According to it a lot of people who are calling themselves M/s are really D/S. Also, many who are at times M/s fall into D/S when the SUB rebells and the DOM is not strong enough and/or wise enough to bend the SUB to their will. BDSM is a power game, Slaves are playing at a higher level than subs. Likewise Masters are playing at a higher level than Doms. M/s relationships are more unstable than Dom/Sub relationships because it is more difficult to maintain the higher level of power play. The Master must be strong enough to bend the identity of the slave, the slave must be supple enough to bend without breaking, and when one can no longer do it the relationship must downshift into D/S at least for awhile.

wytchywoman -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 5:01:10 PM)
Where did the person who said "subs top from the bottom go?" He no longer has a profile here on this site.

Level -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 5:03:09 PM)
Thank you for your colorful post....... quote: willowheart wrote: Hold it! If a Bottom can Top from the "bottom" then why can't a Dominant be a bottom -- WithOut being called a "sWiTcH" ?????? And .... if a slave / submissive is serving his or her Master / Mistress by acting as a "top" -- again -- why call them a "sWiTcH" ????? I said: "Some would disagree with that statement;" ..... a fact if there ever was one. "Some" do think differently. I did not say I was one of those, nor not one of those lol. I also said: "I'll only say that at the minimum, they are switching." I'll stand by that statement until the cows come home, and they ain't due for quite some time. .......I don't know if I have much use for these labels. Any of them. I am what I am, and I want what I want. The woman that I intend on finding will simply be mine. That's the only label that will be used. My profile is gone until I decide how to reflect these things. "Some minds remain open long enough for the truth not only to enter but to pass on through by way of a ready exit without pausing anywhere along the route." ------- Elizabeth Kenny

NeedToUseYou -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 5:15:56 PM)
Hmmmm, I must be simple minded. A Submissive is submissive to her/his Dom though it may or may not be totally submissive behaviour at all times. There is a lot of wiggle room here as the submissiveness of any individual sub will vary depending on the situation, Dom, trust, and personality of each saying they are a submissive. A Slave, in theory, is Submissive to her/his Master though they should always be submissive to their masters will, in the bounds of their agreed limits. This varies not to much from sub except for the lack of choice of not being submissive to their Master is eliminated(except those limits stated in contracted and understood limites between Master/Slave) To me and I'm not implying it applies to anyone else here. A sub could function in the same capacity as a slave and still identify as sub out of preference really. Or a person could identify as a slave and still function as a sub. Sometimes I think it just boils down to the fact some romanticize one or the other and like the title so call themselves that. Who am I to tell them they're not though, or incorrectly classified, unless they're mine. No one elses opinion is really necessary at that point. Thanks

Tikkiee -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 5:33:43 PM)
Master/Dominant, Submissive/Slave, Top/Bottom No two definitions will ever match, because no two people are the same. You can go to every dictionary in the world, get every definition that there is of these; and yet, when you present the definitions to another, they will be interperted differently. Even between two people ( or more ) in a relationship, 90% of the time, the interpertation of these words will differ. I define myself by my own set of interpertations; I do not rely on others to define me. All the responses in this thread have pretty much stated the same thing. Yet, the underlying intent seems to be "my definiton is better than yours'. It just seems to be a very narrow-minded way of looking at things.

ScooterTrash -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 5:38:31 PM)
Age old question isn't it, what's the difference between a sub and a slave? Doubtful this will ever be permanently resolved. But after reading through all the posts to this point I did see one thing that did make me chuckle, the part about subs being prone to topping from the bottom. I don't agree with that at all, perhaps I don't agree it even exists...in reality, once that last shackle clicks shut...there better be trust, because at that point, topping from the bottom doesn't exist anymore. Anyway- This is simple & short and I am sure the particular dynamic and relationship you are in dictates what works and what doesn't, but the best description I think I ever heard on this subject of sub vs. slave was; "A submissive submits daily, a slave submits but once".

ICGsteve -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 5:42:42 PM)
Definitions matter even when we define ourselves. The fact that definitons are not agreed upon does not mean that discussion of them has no value. The words have power only to the degree that they have definitions that are agreed upon. Our exercise in giving the labels meaning and agreeing to these meanings gives the words the power to be indentifiers. The words identify who we are to ourselves and to others.

sweetbbwsub31 -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 5:49:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: maybeican There is a total difference between a slave and a submissive. A slave devotes their life to the One they serve. A submissive trys to control from the bottom. This submissive doesn't try to control from the bottom. Just for the record.

feastie -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 6:22:46 PM)
The only definitions that matter are the ones that we give ourselves within the context of our personal lives and point of view. Although, I have to admit that it REALLY bothers me to see a person that is obviously a bottom referring to herself as a submissive or slave. Actually, I don't refer to myself as a submissive, as I don't particularly care for the adjective becoming a noun. I call myself a submissive woman.

ICGsteve -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 6:39:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: feastie The only definitions that matter are the ones that we give ourselves within the context of our personal lives and point of view. It is neccisary for one to decide for themselves their own definitions because there is as of yet no standard definition. What bothers me is for someone to say that there is no point in trying to reach a common definition. My telling someone that I am a master or whatever means nothing because the word can mean whatever I want it to, it is jibberish. If somone tells me that they are a slave owned by a master I must question them for sometime before I will know what they are talking about. Having an agreed definition would save a lot of time, and a lot of hurt caused by the current difficulty in communication. My understanding is that old school BDSM impossed definitions and one could either agree to them or leave. There is good reason for leadership to have done that.

Lashra -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 6:44:13 PM)
My understanding is a sub retains more control/rights in the relationship, whereas a slave has the right to Obey or Leave. I've known two slaves in my life so far, one works and lives in 24/7, drives, she is allowed hobbies that she enjoys and to attend social functions, she can have friends and is allowed to speak to people. The only time she has to check in with her Master is if she's running late. She has to do all the cooking/cleaning when she comes home from work and gets kind of pissy sometimes because he comes home and sits playing on his computer. She seems happy with their arrangement most of the time when she's not telling her friends what a slacker he is. Seems he has a problem keeping his promises. The second one isnt permited to work, drive, to attend social functions, not allowed to go anywhere without her Master (nope not even outside for fresh air), she cannot speak to anyone without permission online and off (this includes family). She cannot have any money and she has a strict housework schedule she must follow. Her Master follows her closely and checks up on her all the time. Well I guess I should say he DID because she finally got tired of being locked in the apartment all the time and called a relative from a payphone to come and get her, she'd had enough. Now the four subs I've known all work or go to school, most of them wear the clothes they want to wear, they own cars, they have friends, they attend social functions and most take care of their own finances. I haven't heard any complaints out of them so far. ~Lashra

Tikkiee -> RE: Slave/Submissive not the Same or are they? (4/10/2006 7:20:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ICGsteve quote: ORIGINAL: feastie The only definitions that matter are the ones that we give ourselves within the context of our personal lives and point of view. It is neccisary for one to decide for themselves their own definitions because there is as of yet no standard definition. What bothers me is for someone to say that there is no point in trying to reach a common definition. My telling someone that I am a master or whatever means nothing because the word can mean whatever I want it to, it is jibberish. If somone tells me that they are a slave owned by a master I must question them for sometime before I will know what they are talking about. Having an agreed definition would save a lot of time, and a lot of hurt caused by the current difficulty in communication. My understanding is that old school BDSM impossed definitions and one could either agree to them or leave. There is good reason for leadership to have done that. Ah, ok. I understand now what you were trying to say. I don't agree with it, but I do understand it. [:)]

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.492188E-02