~slave vs sub~

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

~slave vs sub~

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> ~slave vs sub~

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 12:59:52 PM

Posts: 9
Joined: 1/31/2006
Status: offline

i`d enjoy hearing what people think the distinction is between slave vs, sub .To me it has always been a slave has no rights and gives her or himself completely. A sub on the other hand sets limts and boundrys and is not in sceen 24/7 and has rights .Also do you think a sub can be owned?I do however realize no one is a true slave since laws prevent it in this country.i am courious of what all have to say on this ,i am sure it has been disscussed before here but it is a worthwhile topic.~lord~baltizar~

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 1:05:46 PM

Posts: 2949
Joined: 11/17/2005
Status: offline

Yes submissives can be owned...

_____________________________

Wisdom is knowing what to do next, Skill is knowing how to do it, and Virtue is doing it.

(in reply to lordbaltizar)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 1:06:12 PM

Posts: 5
Joined: 4/17/2006
Status: offline

In my opinion, a slave gives up more of herself, her rights, and so forth. A submissive is simply that, submissive. As a slave, i feel my needs and wants are different than a submissives. For me, they're darker, stronger, and i thrive on being controlled. The more i give up to my Master, and the more He takes, the more owned i truly feel.

(in reply to lordbaltizar)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 1:14:38 PM

Posts: 391
Joined: 2/5/2005
From: Southeastern, MA
Status: offline

There have been a few threads that have covered this same topic recently. Here are a few of them:

http://www.collarchat.com/Does_submission_%3D_slave/m_339378/tm.htm
http://www.collarchat.com/Slave%2FSubmissive_not_the_Same_or_are_they%3F/m_323453/tm.htm

(in reply to lordbaltizar)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 1:33:12 PM

andal

Posts: 34
Joined: 1/10/2006
Status: offline

Ahh, the ages-old question. (As always, YMMV) One oft-answered, with as many different opinions as there are opinion-holders. But similarities do show up. The important thing is that all parties involved agree on the definition and people use them consistently. Some people say that slaves give up control once and permanently, while submissives give up control continuously. Some say that a slave has "no limits" and a sub has limits. Some say if you have a safeword you are sub, and slaves do not have them or use them. Just be aware of the many opinions and COMMUNICATE. (Personally, I think that labels are a good opening place for discussion in a relationship, but that is about all, simply because everyone sees things differently).

(in reply to lordbaltizar)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 1:40:00 PM

Posts: 2618
Joined: 12/7/2005
Status: offline

A slave is an extra hard drive and a sub is what you get at subway. Of course the slave is most helpful when you need to remember stuff and the sub, with regular diet and exercise, can help you lose weight.

Smiling mischievously
Loki

_____________________________

Loki, forum god of Mischief

Submission is not a gift... it is plunder!
Where there is a whip, there is a way!
Dom/mes of a feather, beat the f*ck out of slaves together

(in reply to andal)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 2:39:37 PM

Posts: 234
Joined: 12/23/2005
Status: offline

That a really difficult answer to give.

The impression I get is two fold. Persons calling themselves slave appear to want to not only give up a greater degree of autonamy and responsibility to another who will then tell them what to do. As well as to provide for the care, feeding, and maintenance of the slave. A few individuals who define themselves as slaves appear to be submisive to almost any person demonstrating a dominant personality.

However persons advertising for slaves appear to be seeking persons to serve more along the line as defined by the Webster definition. Interms of labor and service with no rights or freedoms.

Submisives often appear to be assertive, aggressive, sometimes confused as actually being a top, or dominant. The exception is that the submisive appears to surrender power and control to one person. Submiting on demand of the dominants slightest whim. The submissive also apears to require less management because he, or she, retains a greater degree af autonomy and self rule.

Haven't seen any personal adds, by dominants, for a submissive that I can recall.

Persons identify themselves as masters often leave me with the impression of wanting to have the maximum possible control.

While Persons identify dommes want power control, the few I have met seem to want the adoration and admiration of the ones they control or own.

Please fell free to correct my observations. as it isn't scientific or of a large enough sampling to be statistically accurate.

Mich

(in reply to Wulfchyld)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 2:45:14 PM

Posts: 1283
Joined: 4/6/2006
From: Boston area, Massachusetts
Status: offline

it is hard for me personally to be defined.

i consider myself, slave. i am owned, have a contract, no safeword, and no limits with my Master.

He Owns me, and W/we are agreed on this

but he wont call me slave, simply on the stigmatic prose that is connected with it [past and present]
i have been attacked by many Doms from CM on this matter, saying b/c He doesnt call me slave, He doesnt deserve me.

But this doesnt bother me, W/we try not to get too deep into labels b/c its frivilous.

(in reply to MichMasochist)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 2:52:36 PM

Posts: 249
Joined: 9/13/2005
From: Nashville, Tn
Status: offline

Most simple way I've seen it put ....

A submissive is a volunteer.

A slave is not a volunteer.

http://www.steel-door.com/Submissive_vs_Slave.html

Respectfully,
enthralled

_____________________________

A man never discloses his own character so clearly as when he describes another's.-Jean Paul Richter

(in reply to MichMasochist)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 3:09:02 PM

Posts: 2299
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

Dear Mr. Lordbaltizar, Ladies and Gentlemen;

Again, I am from an antiquated system, to which there were only two titles permitted. Master or slave. Master was used by females at the time, to which I see has been resurfaced and used again. Submissive was a state of being as well as dominant was a state of being back then.

As people who did not want to submit to the degree of what my timeline referred to as slave, People started to use Dominant and or submissive to denote the role they wished to pursue. It was not to the degree of Master/slave but, committed. However, it wasn’t set in stone and was more casual than formal Master/slave. However, when this change was taking place protocol was still practiced. Now days, one is hard pressed to find anybody even doing a ‘half effort in doing protocols.’

When this was still to much formality, Top and Bottom came up as a label. (My has time changed).

Slaves in my day had their “rights” and they did have a “voice.” But, it was done in respectful tone and not a ‘demand.’ Boundaries were known through communications as well as in my day, Senior Masters handled novice slaves, as not to be subjected to those who don’t know how to train, had no interest in training and or had no idea how important it is for a Master to keep physical, emotional, mental, spiritual and timing realms at a pace tailored for that individual slave. Slave sex was not that big of a deal. Senior slaves were assigned to novice Masters. The highest trained slave was assigned to the most inexperienced. By the slave’s service, that slave indirectly trains the Master, as the mentor points out what the slave is saying in the most silent means in service.

The first rules of slaves was, to protect themselves--even from their own Master. That was the most enforced rule in any household. Slaves were held harmless, if that slave left the premise without permission, etc.; as they were removing themselves from potential harm.

Of course in my day, that slave would immediately seek a Senior Master; especially if friendly to both parties as to be the advocate for the slave and work with the Master, to which caused the slave to be fearful and alarmed for their safety.

Second rule of slave was they have a right to say yes and no. However, it could be overridden by their Master. To say no as a slave, was to say; “Not if it pleases you.” All Masters would understand it as to say no and to change course. To say yes, the slave would say; “If it pleases you.” Then Masters knew it was ok to proceed.

There are other rules for slaves however, are common. The point is, that there are loopholes to which a slave can use to negotiate and or maintain boundaries.

My favorite expression for the difference between a submissive and slave is this; a submissive submits many times. A slave submits once.

Respectfully submitted,Lady Hugs

(in reply to MichMasochist)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 3:44:00 PM

Posts: 3
Joined: 4/22/2006
Status: offline

If a Slave feels comfortable and secure in their role as a "Slave"...who is any one to define what that role is except the Slave and the Master? To each his own....the sub/Dom or the Slave/Master....the rules are personal and between those involved.

*Smiles....I hope no one gets the idea that I know 'it all'..I don't...it's just that limits are not set by a group, right? I am a submissive and I surely don't want anyone defining who I am

Hugs
Magnolia

(in reply to LadyHugs)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 3:52:15 PM

Vancouver_cinful

Posts: 1911
Joined: 2/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wulfchyld

A slave is an extra hard drive and a sub is what you get at subway. Of course the slave is most helpful when you need to remember stuff and the sub, with regular diet and exercise, can help you lose weight.

Smiling mischievously
Loki

Okay, that's the best answer to this darn question EVER!!! ::applauds::

Cin

_____________________________

Cin

quote:

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

http://cinful.wordpress.com

(in reply to Wulfchyld)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 4:09:23 PM

Posts: 614
Joined: 11/7/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wulfchyld

A slave is an extra hard drive and a sub is what you get at subway. Of course the slave is most helpful when you need to remember stuff and the sub, with regular diet and exercise, can help you lose weight.

Smiling mischievously
Loki

Damn, I wish I had thought of that I'm so sick of this topic.

Good one, Loki

ALL submissives are NOT slaves but ALL slaves ARE sbmissives.

Mr. Pete

available & looking

(in reply to Wulfchyld)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 4:16:11 PM

Posts: 433
Joined: 4/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyHugs

Dear Mr. Lordbaltizar, Ladies and Gentlemen;

Again, I am from an antiquated system, to which there were only two titles permitted. Master or slave. Master was used by females at the time, to which I see has been resurfaced and used again. Submissive was a state of being as well as dominant was a state of being back then.

As people who did not want to submit to the degree of what my timeline referred to as slave, People started to use Dominant and or submissive to denote the role they wished to pursue. It was not to the degree of Master/slave but, committed. However, it wasn’t set in stone and was more casual than formal Master/slave. However, when this change was taking place protocol was still practiced. Now days, one is hard pressed to find anybody even doing a ‘half effort in doing protocols.’

When this was still to much formality, Top and Bottom came up as a label. (My has time changed).

Slaves in my day had their “rights” and they did have a “voice.” But, it was done in respectful tone and not a ‘demand.’ Boundaries were known through communications as well as in my day, Senior Masters handled novice slaves, as not to be subjected to those who don’t know how to train, had no interest in training and or had no idea how important it is for a Master to keep physical, emotional, mental, spiritual and timing realms at a pace tailored for that individual slave. Slave sex was not that big of a deal. Senior slaves were assigned to novice Masters. The highest trained slave was assigned to the most inexperienced. By the slave’s service, that slave indirectly trains the Master, as the mentor points out what the slave is saying in the most silent means in service.

The first rules of slaves was, to protect themselves--even from their own Master. That was the most enforced rule in any household. Slaves were held harmless, if that slave left the premise without permission, etc.; as they were removing themselves from potential harm.

Of course in my day, that slave would immediately seek a Senior Master; especially if friendly to both parties as to be the advocate for the slave and work with the Master, to which caused the slave to be fearful and alarmed for their safety.

Second rule of slave was they have a right to say yes and no. However, it could be overridden by their Master. To say no as a slave, was to say; “Not if it pleases you.” All Masters would understand it as to say no and to change course. To say yes, the slave would say; “If it pleases you.” Then Masters knew it was ok to proceed.

There are other rules for slaves however, are common. The point is, that there are loopholes to which a slave can use to negotiate and or maintain boundaries.

My favorite expression for the difference between a submissive and slave is this; a submissive submits many times. A slave submits once.

Respectfully submitted,Lady Hugs

LadyHugs,

This slave thanks you for such a clean and clear definition

_____________________________

Peace
His slut

"Your firm hand and compassionate heart are what guide me in my journey....I am Yours, Sir" His slut

(in reply to LadyHugs)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 4:17:01 PM

Posts: 2325
Joined: 9/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

A slave is not a volunteer.

Actually, a slave is a volunteer. But only once.

_____________________________

Denise

Give a slave what he truly needs, and he will do what you want.

"There's never a hero in a battle of ego." - Big & Rich

(in reply to enthralled)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 4:21:10 PM

Posts: 143
Joined: 1/11/2004
Status: offline

Submissives are the smart ones. They know how to find the key to the cuffs in the morning.
Slaves are the pretty ones

(in reply to lordbaltizar)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 5:20:13 PM

LadiesBladewing

Posts: 944
Joined: 8/31/2005
Status: offline

In actuality, in the current paradigm both of these terms are truly "in the eye of the beholder". There are plenty of assumptions about what the words mean, but, if they are defined in accordance with the world that we live in, the way that someone in service serves, and what is required of him or her, are truly defined by the individuals involved.

In our home, we found -both- of those terms to be unsatisfactory. Slavery is not only a legal impossiblity, it also implies a measure of non-consentuality. We wanted those who came to serve with us to serve with full consent and understanding of what they were giving and what such giving fulfilled in them. On the other hand, "submissive" is not a noun -- it is an adjective, and an individual can be submissive, and yet not be actively -choosing- to serve. We, here in House Bladewing, tend to call these people "perpetual victims". We didn't want victims. We wanted this to be an empowering process for both individuals, reflecting both the deep need to serve, and the capacity to guide and direct such service, respectively. Because of that, we chose to call those who came to serve here "servants"... fully respecting that each and every day was a choice -- they could choose to obey, or not... they could choose to stay, or not... but if they served, and if they stayed, they would have to progressively yield everything within themselves to the service... and from that, we shaped and grew them.

It isn't what you -call- someone that makes him or her committed to the service... it is the dynamic between you, and both of your commitment to the level of service you require, and a constant striving for perfection, though it can never be reached. If those are in place, you can call her "wife", "pet", "slave", "servant", or "starfish", and it won't impact the dynamic between you.

Lady Zephyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: lordbaltizar

i`d enjoy hearing what people think the distinction is between slave vs, sub .To me it has always been a slave has no rights and gives her or himself completely. A sub on the other hand sets limts and boundrys and is not in sceen 24/7 and has rights .Also do you think a sub can be owned?I do however realize no one is a true slave since laws prevent it in this country.i am courious of what all have to say on this ,i am sure it has been disscussed before here but it is a worthwhile topic.~lord~baltizar~

_____________________________

"Should have", "could have", "would have" and "can't" may be the most dangerous phrases in the English language.
Bladewing Enclave

(in reply to lordbaltizar)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 6:34:33 PM

Posts: 779
Status: offline

I've said it before, and I'll say it again,

Its all in the eyes of the beholder.

There are no guidelines in this feild. To make guidelines is rediculous.
But there are many sites out there that try and make these standards, these universal definitions, and its bullshit.

You are what you say you are, and nobody can call you anything different.

Do I see a difference between Slave and Submissive? no

Because there is no difference.

_____________________________

I am KarbonCopy's signature

(in reply to LadiesBladewing)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 6:52:23 PM

Posts: 19224
Joined: 10/25/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyHugs
My favorite expression for the difference between a submissive and slave is this; a submissive submits many times. A slave submits once.

quote:

Actually, a slave is a volunteer. But only once.

See I'm not sure how that got invented or even what it really means. I don't think subs go around deciding at every turn "OK do I really want to obey here?" and I don't think slaves NEVER question.

The whole idea that a "sub submits every time while a slave submits once" just doesn't make sense to me. They are both obeying, they are both DOING the same thing and MAKING the same choice every time.

_____________________________

Find stable partners, not a stable of partners.

"Sometimes my whore logic gets all fuzzy"- Californication

(in reply to LadyHugs)

RE: ~slave vs sub~ - 4/24/2006 7:08:02 PM

Posts: 1793
Joined: 6/4/2004
Status: offline

LOL! Nice one!

(in reply to Wulfchyld)

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> ~slave vs sub~

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.078