RE: BDSM Definitions?

RE: BDSM Definitions? (Full Version)

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

Message

ShiftedJewel -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 6:37:18 AM)
quote: I disagree that you can't be dom or sub if it is in the bedroom only. *Where did I say that?*

SirLordTrainer -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 6:43:22 AM)
That pretty much sums it up.. course then theres the dreaded acronyms some use ''W/we, U/us, TPE/SSC etc etc etc..

juliaoceania -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 7:16:21 AM)
quote: The above quotes will offend some, make others laugh, and hopefull a couple of you think. I agree with some of it, some I think is or should be true, others were included just to shake things up. Made me laugh..geesh thanks for giving me a laugh before I haul my submissive ass to the gym (hee hee)

NYMaster101 -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 7:26:49 AM)
They all work for me. Thanks for taking the time to define the terms.

twicehappy -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 7:31:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: twicehappy So yes yours would be considered, *at least by us, to be a 24/7 M/s relationship. quote: ORIGINAL: justheather Why should someone with her own relationship, however functional or not, be concerned with what your family considers them? I really have no idea why someone would be concerned with what my family considered their relationship to be except perhaps that they were in a conversation with my Master (ScooterTrash) at the time. See below; quote: ORIGINAL: ScooterTrash To me, no dynamic is clarified solely by the mindset..it is the physical relationship as well. quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie Is she still considered something other than a 24/7 slave, by your definition? Perhaps before responding or commenting on a post you should go back and peruse in its entirety the post that sparked the reply. quote: ORIGINAL: justheather So, if you want to come up with your family's view of what's what, hey, more power to you. Just please don't expect everyone else to honor your definitions. Once again, you should have read the entire thread before commenting though in truth your comments leave me wondering if you read any of it at all. Here are some very pertinent quotes below that state rather clearly what i am looking for and why; ORIGINAL: twicehappy "So in the interest of finding out if we can agree on definitions i am asking everyone who cares to add to this to give their definition of certain terms." "After a week or so i will add up the ones that are similar and see how it came out then post the ones who were the most repeated or agreed with." On other threads a few folks have been discussing why bdsm is not more mainstream, why it is so misunderstood by vanilla society and the various things that would have to occur to bring it to the forefront much as the gay and lesbian movement once did and continues to do." "It was concurred that two of the biggest issues were that we would all have to be able agree, at least by a majority on something, well on anything for a start and that we needed to be able to give recognizable (within reason, allowing that there are many subgroups) definitions to some of our terminology." "This is an attempt to do so, at lest to see if it is possible at any rate." "those who are unhappy with the definition of switch i have a proposal; instead of telling me you guys are unhappy, flesh out your definition of switch and post it. What you stated above is great but some switches are truly only into the physical aspects of WIITWD." "Remember what i am trying to come up with are simple basic definitions that would be understood by any person including and especially those who are unfamiliar with WIITWD in the vanilla world. So we would want a basic easy to understand definition, leaving the infinite variety of possibilities for a later date." "As a better example when the gay/lesbian movement started they agreed on simply "gay and lesbian" with the greater understanding that within the group there were many variations like butch etc but that presenting themselves as a united front required simple definitions that the vanilla public could grasp." *"This is not nor is it intended to be a popularity contest.* If you disagree with all the definitions instead of disagreeing please post your definitions here, the purpose of the thread is to see if we can get a general consensus on the definitions, not to get everybody to agree with mine." "If they do fine, then they are already posted, if they do not then they need to post their own; who knows maybe someone else's will turn out to be what the majority concurs with but unless they post them we will never know." "I am trying to take it just a little further and find terms that are not only a starting point for those involved in the lifestyle but that would be comprehensible to those who are not." After you have read the entire thread if you can find one word where i state mine is the one true way, that everybody must agree with my definitions, please feel free to come back and post them here. Concerning coming up with my family's view of what is what, we do not need to, we already agree. Nor is it about forcing what we believe down everyone else's throat. It is about just what i stated in the OP.

justheather -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 7:40:03 AM)
I did read the thread. My whole point was that no matter what definitions you come up with, they arent going to be globally accepted or universal, so you might as well just do what you just did in that conversation, which is work out definitions between those having conversations as needed.

ownedgirlie -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 7:41:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: twicehappy quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie quote: ORIGINAL: ScooterTrash To me, no dynamic is clarified solely by the mindset..it is the physical relationship as well. What of a slave whose Master has absolute authority over all she does - her finances, her job, her family activity, her daily schedule, etc.? Yet she does not live with him? She is watched while at home, even as she sleeps. Is she still considered something other than a 24/7 slave, by your definition? If the emphasis is on the word solely, then that would mean simply that some form of physicality must exist, rather than a requirement somehow being that they must live under the same roof. Lol, i think last night when Jewel, Scooter and i discussed this his comprehension deepened some. It is really not that different than a slave who is home all day while the owner is at work provided as he previously stated above that there is a physical relationship as well. His only added comment was "but you would have to wait until she answered the phone and walked down the street to bring you a beer". So yes yours would be considered, at least by us, to be a 24/7 M/s relationship. Thanks for replying. The question was actually a hypothetical and not about me per se, as I do not typically ask others how they define me :) And in my case, well Master would have to wait for me to get in the car and drive to him, which trust me - he has done on occasion [;)]

twicehappy -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 7:46:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OhReallyNow [*but what you and your owners seem to be missing is the fact that MOST of us are already able to describe ourselves to others;* While there is much you have written i would comment on i am instead going to do this; Write out and post your own personal definition of all of the terms i stated in the OP. After all you made a good start in the thread titled" M/s versus D/s" as reposted below; quote: ORIGINAL: OhReallyNow *this slave is owned property; she has given total control over to Master* *if this slave had not given up total control, then her relationship would be that of Dominant / submissive* Funny thing is these two definitions are almost exactly like my own. I would question however given you are so virulently opposed to any definitions of WIITWD because as you stated; quote: ORIGINAL: OhReallyNow Nor would this slave think that a newcomer would be so unintelligent as to not be able to understand a dictionary definition; and then take that definition and fit it to their own needs, wants and desires. Why you bothered to post them on another thread.

ShiftedJewel -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 7:52:13 AM)
quote: And in my case, well Master would have to wait for me to get in the car and drive to him, which trust me - he has done on occasion [;)] I was thinking about that subject just a few minutes ago and came up with the perfect example ownedgirlie... thank you for posting this. Ok... I have always stated that I believe that a slave is "owned property" and after reading and participating in this thread and seeing some of the responses I've come to realize something. Owned property is ... well... owned property. Let's say I went out and bought a stove because I needed one or wanted one.. whatever... then lets say that I decided to put it in someone else's house. It's still my stove, right? And the fact that there will be times when I do not have free access to that stove doesn't mean it isn't mine. And because I'm so prone to beating a dead horse.. it also doesn't make it a refridgerator.[sm=paddle.gif] *Jewel*

twicehappy -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 8:01:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Celeste43 The only person who can manage your work is your boss, not your dom. So how much time is left to control? I doubt the dom can exercise control over the commute and traffic nor over what is bought at the grocery store. Clothing purchases? Only if she can afford to spend money on things that he wants or if he's willing to buy them for her. If your Dom is unhappy with the commute distance to your job, your work environment, your hours or your boss he can instruct you to apply for a new one that makes him happier, he can tell you to return to school to learn skills for a new one. He can and some often does have control over what you purchase in any store, do you buy a certain brand because he has said to? He is controlling your purchase. Do you no longer buy ice cream because he wants you to lose weight? He is controlling your purchases. Do you buy black underwear because you have been instructed to wear only black? He is controlling your clothing purchases. This does not mean you should be required to live above or below your means; if any dominant is attempting to do that they are not being responsible for you, their property. Not saying you must agree to any of these things, only saying it is possible for these things to be controlled.

OhReallyNow -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 8:03:18 AM)
if you go back to the beginning of this post, you will find that this slave stated that she agreed with the general definitions that you stated. However, this slave does not agree with the idea or theory that a select group of people has ANY right to decide what definition should be used by whom, and how. your desire to come up with a generally accepted code of definitions as it pertains to the lifestyle is foolish at best for the simple reason that individuals are diverse and unique in how they interpert certain things. To adopt a 'code of definitions' that are 'generally' accepted by 95% of the populace will not eradicate the confusion of newcomers to this lifestyle. It will only force them to either enter the mainstream of thinking, or become outcasts when their own interpertations differ from that of the mainstream. *this slave see's no reason to force that on anyone; not even for the sake of 'easier' communications.*

ShiftedJewel -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 8:05:48 AM)
*I think she forgot to mention... as her owners we do control her work... by not having her work outside the home.* *Jewel*

twicehappy -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 8:08:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: justheather I did read the thread. Then you obviously missed parts or you would not have asked; quote: ORIGINAL: justheather Why should someone with her own relationship, however functional or not, be concerned with what your family considers them? Or stated; quote: ORIGINAL: justheather So, if you want to come up with your family's view of what's what, hey, more power to you. Just please don't expect everyone else to honor your definitions. Which is not the same statement as this; quote: ORIGINAL: justheather My whole point was that no matter what definitions you come up with, they arent going to be globally accepted or universal, so you might as well just do what you just did in that conversation, which is work out definitions between those having conversations as needed.

twicehappy -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 8:10:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie And in my case, well Master would have to wait for me to get in the car and drive to him, which trust me - he has done on occasion [;)] LMAO.......bet he is antsy when it is more than beer he wants......WEG!

ownedgirlie -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 8:12:00 AM)
LOL that's one way of putting it. But he always acts so casual when I arrive and makes me wait. Smart man that he is.

ownedgirlie -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 8:15:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ShiftedJewel quote: And in my case, well Master would have to wait for me to get in the car and drive to him, which trust me - he has done on occasion [;)] I was thinking about that subject just a few minutes ago and came up with the perfect example ownedgirlie... thank you for posting this. Ok... I have always stated that I believe that a slave is "owned property" and after reading and participating in this thread and seeing some of the responses I've come to realize something. Owned property is ... well... owned property. Let's say I went out and bought a stove because I needed one or wanted one.. whatever... then lets say that I decided to put it in someone else's house. It's still my stove, right? And the fact that there will be times when I do not have free access to that stove doesn't mean it isn't mine. And because I'm so prone to beating a dead horse.. it also doesn't make it a refridgerator.[sm=paddle.gif] *Jewel* Oops I'm reading posts out of order. My ADD is kicking in. Yes, exactly. Or you could own a condo that you don't live in. You still own it. You still decide all things in regards to it. Sometimes you utilize it for your own pleasure more than others (hey maybe it's beach front), but it is a comfort to know you can rely on it being there whenever you want it, in the same condition you expect it to be in, decorated exactly as you want it decorated, etc.

twicehappy -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 8:15:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OhReallyNow *However, this slave does not agree with the idea or theory that a select group of people has ANY right to decide what definition should be used by whom, and how.* Try telling that to Mirriam-Webster, or the entire school system, or English professors, or the medical profession, or air traffic controllors, or the Dept of motor vehicles, or the state senate. Or when you are attempting to teach a two year old that the round thing he drinks from is called a cup and he insists it is called a grrugglhe do you agree with him?

juliaoceania -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 8:20:05 AM)
When Websters defines my life as a "slave" I will adopt that title.

adaddysgirl -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 8:24:20 AM)
The first 'dom' i ever met labelled himself a Master. He referred to me as 'slave'. Since i had no idea at all about D/s, i freely accepted those labels. In a nutshell, he really was not a Master. He dominated in the bedroom only; he ended up wanting to switch; and then admitted he was a crossdresser and bisexual. When i left that relationship, i read up on all kind of 'slave' things. i joined M/s groups. i even ventured into a brief M/s relationship and found it was not for me. In short, i realized i was not a slave but willing to submit to a partner within defined parameters. i then met a dom who said he was dominant but he was not a Master. Great! (Although i wasn't sure exactly what that meant.) Again, in short, i found he was a Daddy Dom, he introduced me to the Daddy/girl dynamic, it worked for us, and that is what i have identified with ever since (although it appears to be a minority within a minority...lol). In any event, it worked for us because we shared similar ideas/goals with regards to what D/s meant for us. During roleplay, sometimes i was a slave, and he a Master....and if that is what we chose to call each other then, who cares? But what bothers me is when people misrepresent themselves on personals sites such as CM. If you put the word 'Master' in the search box, you will come up with a thousand hits....and i would bet most of them are self proclaimed Masters....those that have never been trained as such nor owned a slave, or whatever. Or how about the dom who met a sub in chat, collared her a month later without ever meeting her, then calls himself a Master? What a joke! i would much rather see a dom say he is dominant but has an interest in being a Master...that i can understand. But for someone to randomly label themselves as a Master and present that to others is just misrepresentation to me. i say the same for females who label themselves slaves. Have they lived as a slave in RL? It's a lot different than reading about it or doing it online, that's for sure. But perhaps they identify with that role. Again, that is fine....but make that clear in your profile. There is a big difference between what we have tried and know we are (or are not) than what we aspire to be. i just thinks it's fair to clarify that when trying to meet a suitable partner. When i was vanilla, i dated a few guys who were dominant (and kinky) in the bedroom. But i would no sooner refer to them as Masters than i would many self proclaimed Masters i have spoken with. i think if everyone was just true to their experience level and what they eventually hoped to live, it would be a lot easier to find a comptatible parnter. Just my 2 cents, anyway. Daddysgirl

OhReallyNow -> RE: BDSM Definitions? (9/27/2006 8:26:10 AM)
quote: Try telling that to Mirriam-Webster, or the entire school system, or English professors, or the medical profession, or air traffic controllors, or the Dept of motor vehicles, or the state senate. Or when you are attempting to teach a two year old that the round thing he drinks from is called a cup and he insists it is called a grrugglhe do you agree with him? this slave's daughter called it a sipper until she was almost 12 years old. This slave never corrected her; never felt the need to correct her. She knew what she wanted, she knew what it was, she knew what the dictionary definition was; yet she still called it a sipper. In addition to this, this slave knew what she was saying when she used that word, and this slave is more than aware of what the dictionary defines a cup as. We understood what she was referring to, and as far as this slave is concerned, that is all that mattered. When her daughter went to her grandparents or aunts/uncles house, she used the same word. Never was it questioned, and never was she told that she could not use that word because it might be confusing. You seem to want to ignore the fact that this slave does agree with the terms and definitions that you posted. Yet, you seem unable to comprehend that she may find it unnecessary in today's day and age to force others to agree with her. This slave welcomes the diversity that is within this lifestyle; she enjoys seeing and hearing how others define their own relationships in relation to hers; and she finds no confusion in doing so. furthermore, this slave finds no confusion from newcomers when she explains her own relationship. Nor does she find confusion from them when they express that their idea of submission or slavery differs from hers. She has found that most who are intelligent enough to understand the basic concept, are also intelligent enough to form their own opinions on what would work for them.

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

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.1503906