quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


My lady and I have been living together for about 18 months, now. Neither of us has any desire to ever get married, again so, that will never be an issue; this is as "committed" as we'll get.

The commitment is very real and she is submissive to me in all ways, at all times. I don't truck with the word "slave".

I can't disagree entirely with your assertion that we aren't exactly "equal" but, as I stated in a recent post: you had better bet your bottom dollar that I take her needs, wants, goals, and dreams into account in almost every decision I make (even my decision to go back to school).

What do I mean when I say that we aren't exactly equal? Well, our relationship is based upon the fact that if we just can't seem to agree on a particular issue, she has agreed - from the very beginning - to acquiesce to my judgment, wants, or desires. By that standard, I am more "important" (but please notice the quotation marks).







Screen captures still RULE! Ya feel me?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

Yes! Please explain it to me like I'm a five-year-old blonde?

Condescension isn't exactly a page out of Carnegie. Ya feel me?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aihal

I've been browsing this site and the message boards the past few days, and it seems most of these "Master/Slave" relationships are just online fantasies. Not that there's anything wrong with that, mind you.

But I'm curious how many of you Masters actually have a Slave, in real life, that isn't just your submissive spouse?

Are they live in Slaves? Is it a 'weekend warrior' thing, where you get to together occasionally, but otherwise lead your normal lives? etc

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aihal

I've been browsing this site and the message boards the past few days, and it seems most of these "Master/Slave" relationships are just online fantasies. Not that there's anything wrong with that, mind you.

But I'm curious how many of you Masters actually have a Slave, in real life, that isn't just your submissive spouse?

Are they live in Slaves? Is it a 'weekend warrior' thing, where you get to together occasionally, but otherwise lead your normal lives? etc

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aihal

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

Aihal, I'm not sure where you're getting your info from. I'm under the impression that very few if any regular posters have online relationships.

The dictionary definition you gave, references the vanilla definition, not the kink definition.

I do not wield utter dominion over my sub. I direct her occasionally when I feel she needs it. We're not 24/7 leather and chains. And we have lived together for three years.

Is it common here, to equate Submissives with Slaves?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aihal


And when it comes to Slave VS Submissive and what definition you use and why in your private life, is exactly that; in your private life. On this we agree. However when it comes to those definitions outside of your private life, you(generally speaking, not directed at IrishMist) must make sure to understand that those terms are probably being used the way they're supposed to be, and that your personal definitions do not apply. And this thread, the first few responses I got to it, is a perfect example of why that is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aihal

Which is why I didn't understand people referencing their spouses as Slaves, and what made me make this post to begin with. Because by every established definition of the term 'Slave', kink and non-kink, the position of a spouse and the position of a Slave (not a Submissive that you call a Slave because it sounds sexier to you), doesn't work logically or functionally. It's either not an actual Master/Slave relationship, or it's an extremely niche semblance of being in a relationship.

As everyone described above, they are adamant that both parties are equal in these relationships; for non-kink relationships this should absolutely be true, and for most kink relationships as well. But in a Master/Slave relationship beyond moral semantics about innate Human equality there is a very specific agreement that one is lesser than the other, it is essentially the entire point. You can't have equality and an actual Master/Slave relationship simultaneously. You can call your D/s relationships Master/Slave ones if you find it titillating, or if it pushes your buttons in all the right places; but do not mistake your fantasy for reality, please.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aihal

We'll do a very simple analogy.

Let's say I work for Microsoft. And in my personal life I like to pretend I am a CEO at Microsoft. Not hurting anyone by pretending, it makes me happier, it gives me confidence.

But I cannot then go into the real world, to a job interview and say "I was a CEO at Microsoft". It would be a lie, blatantly and unarguably not true. No one outside of my personal life is obligated to play along with my nonsense. And I certainly can't say "Well I have the right to define CEO however I want." "By my definition I was in-fact a CEO and you're being rude by suggesting otherwise."

That isn't how the real world works.

And I am not suggesting that anyone isn't allowed to pretend they're CEOs, I am saying it's disingenuous to charade as one, when you're personal life isn't relevant to the topic at hand.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aihal

quote:

ORIGINAL: PandoraFoxxx

We're doing our best trying to explain what this means to us, as a community, those of us who LIVE this type of relationship, in real life. The people who post here - for the most part - are not living in a fantasy world - so you're really getting the best answers that you possibly could hope to get.

You asked what M/s means to US, you did not ask what M/s means to a dictionary, which is a generalization of a term broken down in simplest form based on roots. What it seems to me that you are doing is you are taking a word, and using it as a label, and projecting what that label means, then trying to legitimize, as you put it, our personal, individual experiences based on a generalization. If you want our opinions, we have given them, freely and happily.

Your tone would suggest otherwise with regards to respect, sir. If you want to be a part of D/s, then be a part of it, if you do not, then don't. But do not seek to "legitimize" others' working relationships in order to justify your own obvious confusion.

Well what actually happened is that a previous poster tried to spin things as if I was the one with the non-standard definitions. That's why this particular conversation is still happening at all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven


Excuse me? Are you dictating to all of us how we apply these terms?

I wouldn't take that shit from John Warren or Jay Wiseman. I'm definitely not taking it from you.

There's a reason that we're not using the terms as precisely as you'd like. It's because the terms aren't defined all that precisely.

---
So when people refer to M/s relationships within marriage, your assessment is that they're doing it wrong?

Have you ever heard of Paul's letter to the Ephesians? "Wives, obey your husbands. Husbands, love your wives."? Marriage does not have to have an equal sharing of power, which is what I assume you mean by "equality".

Edited to add: And I will argue that for centuries, marriage was not an equal partnership, and that the notion of equality is relatively recent. And not universal, as some Arab a nations and India show.


---
Are you accusing us of using labels which do not conform to your own definitions and are therefore (according to you) incorrect? Or flat-out lying?

You know, you have a lot of nerve wandering in here and telling us all we're doing everything wrong on your first day on the site.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aihal


...But I am trying to explain the difference, and why it doesn't make sense that someone would marry a Slave (not a Submissive).

A very hyperbolic, rhetorical series of questions would be;

Can you marry a table?

Can you marry you an automobile?

Can you marry a Slave?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aihal

I make a differentiation between Slave and Submissive. No one else here does, is my point. A Slave is submissive, but a Submissive is not a Slave. Submissives agree to soft and hard boundaries of their own design, while Slaves agree to their Master's boundaries. Because the axiom of the Slave is that they have no agency (or at least very, very little compared to Submissives), and they trust their Master to fulfill their needs.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PandoraFoxxx


Please, Mr. Domly Domling King of DomN8 tell us how the real world works and tell us - some of us who have been living this lifestyle since before you were a twinkle in your daddy's eye - that our definitions of M/s are wrong and yours are right.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aihal

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

Can a spouse not be a slave? and does you question include dominant women and slaves?

A spouse is something of an equal in a relationship yes?

quote:



A Slave can't exactly be an equal, to my understanding. I'm not here to bash on how people live their lives, but I am trying to understand what people actually mean when they use terms like "Master" and "Slave" in these communities.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aihal
A Master/Slave relationship is one where a person forfeits their agency, and they become closer to property than anything else. My goal was to ascertain exactly how common that particular lifestyle is; and it would appear that even in kink communities it is extraordinarily rare; despite what those kinksters would like to think of their own relationships.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aihal


Read this

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aihal


...But I am trying to explain the difference, and why it doesn't make sense that someone would marry a Slave (not a Submissive).

A very hyperbolic, rhetorical series of questions would be;

Can you marry a table?

Can you marry you an automobile?

Can you marry a Slave?

And

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aihal

I make a differentiation between Slave and Submissive. No one else here does, is my point. A Slave is submissive, but a Submissive is not a Slave. Submissives agree to soft and hard boundaries of their own design, while Slaves agree to their Master's boundaries. Because the axiom of the Slave is that they have no agency (or at least very, very little compared to Submissives), and they trust their Master to fulfill their needs.

If you're still confused, let me know.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aihal

You can call your D/s relationships Master/Slave ones if you find it titillating, or if it pushes your buttons in all the right places; but do not mistake your fantasy for reality, please.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

No, a spouse is not necessarily equal in authority.

We've lived together for the past ten years. I'm equal in value, I am not equal in authority.

I can tell him that if he wants tea in the morning, he must let me get to the grocery store, but if he wants to do something else then we don't go. He's aware of the consequence and decides for himself whether it's worth acceding to my request.

The problem here is how you are defining slave, which you obviously have a narrow definition of, but you aren't sharing it with the rest of us. So you could define broccoli as a creamy white vegetable and then declare that none of the rest of us eat real broccoli.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SeekingTrinity

~FRing it~

OP, you should just buy a parrot or one of those digital voice recorders. The parrot can be trained to just spew back words you want to hear and the recorder will predictably play your words right back to you. Because it seems like nothing short of just regurgitating what you want to hear is what you are looking for out of anyone here.