RE: submissive vs slave (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master



Message

panthergoddess -> RE: submissive vs slave (2/3/2005 7:52:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin

quote:

American's (overall) use the feet/yard and farenhite(sp) measuring systems, while the majority of the other countries use the metric and celcius measuring systems.


Let's not forget the online measuring system where 8 inches seems to equate to approximately 4 inches American.

Sorry.....just couldn't resist.



LMAO


ahhh communication.......gotta love it![;)]



Kinkypupper -> RE: submissive vs slave (2/6/2005 6:13:26 PM)

NOT even close.. a submissive "submits" hense the word.. "submissive"

a "slave" ( ok that is REALLY a bad "term" but heck its all we gots....)is one who gives ones total self to another. not for a "scene" or a period of time or "only when its conveniant... but Totally gives their body, their worldly possessions, there VERY SOUL so to speak.. to their MASTER. No reservations, no restrictions.. There level of trust in their Master is so complete and total that they give 10000% of themselves to them.
Their Mater in return knows and accepts this gift for the great thing that it is and cherishes their slave for that..



ShadeDiva -> RE: submissive vs slave (2/6/2005 11:07:50 PM)

For YOU maybe.

For *others* - mileage can and will vary.

Don't be so absolute all across the board, after all, you can really only speak for yourself with such unwaverable authority on such matters as that.

~ShadeDiva



realophelia -> RE: submissive vs slave (2/7/2005 5:37:33 PM)

I think role definition is a product of a relationship. But that's not really the same thing as defining a word. It's my understanding that words were originally defined by common usage which would be more like consensus (and standardized later).

I think it's important to keep in mind that standardization doesn't necessarily equal a single definition. When you look up slave in Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, for example, it gives a couple of different meanings. They're not BDSM specific of course but for me they're not too far off the mark either.

I also think it's interesting that the word slave actually derived from an ethnic group (the Slovak people). Sort of shows how words morph over time. Probably Merriam-Webster will list a more BDSM specific meaning sometime in the future.

~Ophelia



submissive71 -> RE: submissive vs slave (2/12/2005 3:27:41 AM)

now this is an interesting subject. by the definitions set here, then i am a slave.
but how can i be a slave if my Master is married with another family (vanilla). He does tell me how to raise my children, how to spend money and how to spend my free time. i work, get a paycheck, handle my own household to a point. although i may not make a major decision without His approval. can this be Master/slave relationship?



angelbear -> RE: submissive vs slave (2/13/2005 11:01:27 AM)

Sir Voltare:

Thank You for Your post Sir. Your words make sense to me and perhaps have helped me in my decisions to chose the course of my training.

submissively,
angelbear



angelbear -> RE: submissive vs slave (2/13/2005 1:12:36 PM)

lil i agree whole heartedly with that staement. As i have explored my submission and the lifestyle over the last several years, i have asked many questions of both Dominants and submissives in order to learn the ways and the true meaning of BDSM. i have never questioned in order to argue or defy but only to learn. i truly believe that because of my curiosity, i have become the type of submissive that is appreciated and valued. The answers to my questions have helped me better serve the needs of the Dominants that i have known. i believe the answers the guidance i have received has helped me to show the respect that Dominants and Masters should have.



mjc40769 -> RE: submissive vs slave (2/16/2005 11:40:42 PM)

I agree with Taggard, a slave is property. A submissive is an independent, free person who chooses to submit under certain conditions, limits, etc.
It is simple, in my opinion. But some people have other outlooks.
Tim



Kinkypupper -> RE: submissive vs slave (2/17/2005 4:39:35 PM)

NO WAY.....

a submissive is just that a submissiver person with their own control over themselves they allow the Dom in a scene to excert what ever level of control over them that they decide to give.

a slave... has no such decisions all control is from the Master. They have free will and their mind may or may not be enslaved but their body is under full control of the Master. In TPE cases the Master has full rights over the slaves mind, body and yes "soul" It is THAT gift of self they have given their master that makes them so precious to their Master. and deserving of respect, care and protection. The word "slave" is in reality not the correct word here as that word as connotations of being forced against ones "self" into a situation or lifestyle.. HERE that gift is freely offered to the Master..



Voltare -> RE: submissive vs slave (2/18/2005 12:16:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: angelbear

Sir Voltare:

Thank You for Your post Sir. Your words make sense to me and perhaps have helped me in my decisions to chose the course of my training.

submissively,
angelbear


My pleasure! Good luck in your training, and let us know how it goes!

Stephan



Chronos -> RE: submissive vs slave (2/21/2005 8:34:38 PM)

In my oppinion the difference between slave and subbmissive is one of choice.

A subbmisive chooses to allow her Top/Dom/e or whatever his or her position. it is given freely and without it the Dom/e looses any power he or she had. for example a decission or request by the Top can be questioned and even refused, the subbie has that option.. call it a get out clause if you like. as in the 'safety word' situation. the subbie doesnt like something, says the word and it stops.

A slave however is not neccesarily a willing participant, he or she may have misgivings about a request or order or rule set by the Top but he/she has no recourse or means of protest. By allowing the distinction between sub and slave, he or she has given up any rights to reply.

Perhaps i am oversimlifying but hey.. im a simple guy and in my experience the simplest answers are normally the truest.



Jayxkes -> RE: submissive vs slave (2/22/2005 4:31:47 AM)

I've just waded through this whole thread. It appears there are those who have contributed who want to help, share etc. Also there are those who appear far more interested in 'debate' than content.

As far as definitions go, you can only define something absolutely if it has an absolute definition!

I wanted a new blue tie, at the tie shop they had dozens of different coloured ties that were all blue. Each is defined accurately as being blue, but a blue tie has no absolute single definition.

Taggard, in order for you to get your definition of 'slave', you will need universal agreement. How likely is that?

More importantly, it will acheive next to nothing. You may be able to puff out your chest and say 'I did that', but people will still apply their own rules and definitions. That, mainly because one definition is just not enough.

Personally I find the people a whole lot more interesting and important than a word!



Gideon147 -> RE: submissive vs slave (2/22/2005 5:13:04 PM)

I may be getting in a little bit over My head in this conversation. As the previous five pages have admittedly dragged the subject into the ground, and almost every possible viewpoint expressed (and well I might add).

Do any of Yyou really think that Webster's will ever append their definitions of "submissive" and "slave" to conform to the needs of Oour lifestyle? This may sound overly cynical, but to Me that would mean that mainstream society would have to have done something that it has never been further from doing: Accepting the BDSM lifestyle as a social norm.

BDSM is real, it is with Uus, it is in Uus. It is Wwho Wwe are, and how Wwe choose to live. But every society must take responsibility for itself. Wwe have three rules generally accepted to be set in stone: "Safe, Sane, Consentual." But it seems that over the decades this urge to shirk mainstream society has also caused Uus to refuse to accurately define Oourselves. To accurately define "Safe, Sane, Consentual," simply because it means so many different things to so many different people. Wwe all basically know what a "Dom" is, or a "sub" for example.

But then Wwe get into Master/Lord/Owner/Top, slave/bottom/servant/pet. I do understand that most of Uus don't fit neatly into a specific category. But why this utter refusal to have an accurate name for Wwho Wwe are, what Wwe do, or how Wwe do it? This isn't limiting, it's a foundation on which Wwe can build. The freedom and liberty to have set a marker, to move on and set another, and another. How can Yyou know how far Yyou have come, unless Yyou find a rule by which it can be measured? I don't know if it really matters to anybody else, but it does to Me: how can Wwe as a whole be taken seriously, if Wwe don't feel that anything Wwe do can be wrong--as long as Wwe change the definition just a smidge? On the whole, it comes across somewhat childish and misguided.

I vote Wwe do this simple thing: Start with the basics, and build.

It appears I have only asked questions, not answered.


Gideon



TheFamily -> RE: submissive vs slave (3/4/2006 9:34:58 AM)

Another vote for:
"A submissive submits all the time, a slave submits only once."
keep it clear and simple, lets define it once and for all!

A slave is submitting and a sub may be called slave during a scene.
It would save a lot of time if the wiki just got dominant and said: its this!



Padriag -> RE: submissive vs slave (3/4/2006 3:08:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: lil

This is a comment that a Dom recently made to me, I am interested in the views of other Doms to see if my opinion is drasticly different.

"When a submissive agrees to submit to a Master she becomes his slave"

lil

In some cases, yes. In some cases, no. If this were the case then it would probably indicate that it was the submissives intent to become a slave, but that they didn't consider themselves a slave until they had a master. Some folks view the terms master and slave as titles which come only as part of an owner/owned relationship. In their view you cannot be a master if you don't own a slave (which always raised the question to me of what happens if you dismiss your slave... does your mastr card get revoked?), and you cannot be called a slave unless you are owned. Not everyone agrees with that. For some master and slave are orientations, a description of their nature and goals. If a person lists themselves as a slave on CM in their profile but has no master that can be viewed as a declaration of intent, they wish to become a slave.



Padriag -> RE: submissive vs slave (3/4/2006 3:15:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TallDarkAndWitty

Again, and for the twentieth time, I don't care what people call themselves behind closed doors. What I would love to see happen is a dissapearance of the "submissive vs slave" questions posed by the n00b of the week. It won't dissapear by people saying things like "it can only be defined by the people in the relationship." It could dissapear if there was a comprehensive and complete reference work that once and for all defined these terms in clear and objective terms, and that reference work was one of the first things shown to people entering the lifestyle.

While I agree with you in spirit Taggard, there are a few problems with the idea. One of the main problems is there is no one to create those universal definitions. For that to happen the BDSM community would actually have to become a genuine community, elect some form of governing body and that governing body would then have to create those definitions. I frankly don't see this happening on a large scale. It does happen sometimes on a smaller scale with various clubs, munch groups, houses and organizations; but other than these it then falls to the individuals to muddle through finding their own definitions.

Even if, say you and I, could sit down and come up with completely objective, rational, well thought out definitions and actually succeed in that endeavor they still would not be accepted. The reason being is that many don't care about objective, rational and well thought out. They're using definitions that are personal, romanticized and emotion to which they have formed personal attachments and nothing you, I, or a governing body can write or say will change how they feel.

It took a government to standardize what a yard is (and thus create a universal yardstick) or a foot or a pound. And even then, then came metrics.

I agree, it would be nice to have some widely accept definitions, a glossary we could point newbies too and say,"here ya go, read up on this and it'll cover the basic terms and concepts." But I don't see it happening in the forseeable future which means these questions and ensuing debates will continue.



Padriag -> RE: submissive vs slave (3/4/2006 3:16:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Voltare

For what some people have stated is only a question of semantics, there certainly are a lot of raised hackles on the backs of peoples necks.

That's true, lots of strong reactions, and I think I may know why.

I mentioned in another post about people personalizing their definitions. Its true, and in doing so for many that definition becomes attached to and part of their personal identity. That is, their self image or self identity begins to become that of a master, a dom, a sub, a slave, etc. according to their own beliefs. When any of us suggest creating one definition, we're literally threatening their self identity, and they react as if we had made a personal attack (which in effect we have without intending to do so). People, generally speaking, are not objective about this... it does tend to be personal, emotional and irrational. We are a community of individualist... which is no community at all, but more organized chaos.

Now here's the funny part... the question keeps getting asked and debated and there are attempts to create a definition of these terms. And that indicated to me a desire on some level to have that... by those self same individualists, which is quite a paradox. I have said before that one of the reasons I think Gor has been popular with many is that it does offer standardized definitions of various roles. Ask any Gorean what a master is and you'll get generally the same definition, same thing if you ask them what a slave is, or what the roles of each are supposed to be. You'll hear common ideas and concepts in most of the answers. Sometimes I think these debates are really about people who do want a sense of community trying to find some commonality... and going about it very badly. Hell... maybe I ought to wright 25 novels based on this lifestyle and publish and see if that helps! LOL



HoosierScorpio -> RE: submissive vs slave (3/4/2006 8:50:25 PM)

I know there is some slave who was trained as a sub before they decided to be a slave.
I also know there some subs that have a slave mindset with the right person but in a social setting they are subs. I would not agree with that comment for it is up to you do decide if you are a sub or a slave. A sub has her own mindset while a slave focuses on the Masters pleasure and his happiness than over her own. Every one has their own viewpoints but do your home work to discover what you want to be or who you are. Are you a sub or slave do not let any one dictate what you should be unless that is who you are inside. If you do not then you will not be happy and regret this lifestyle and the one you accept as your Master or Dom



BitaTruble -> RE: submissive vs slave (3/5/2006 1:36:51 AM)

My personalized label - wife, bi, poly, masochistic, submissive female, owned, servant with a sadist/artistic twist to be used and utilized at Himself's discretion for his pleasure at his whim, limits set by him upon prior negotiation that such were also acceptable to me, having no rights save those afforded to any human, sans property, paychecks, and choices through his ability to 'take' all such from me.. ::no gifts from this girl:: with the expectation that Himself will see to my needs in a thoughtful manner and allow me his dominance such as he sees fit.

My 'soul' remains my own and I don't believe can be given to someone else, though can be lost through my own misuse and abuse. My background, life experiences and everything I was prior to meeting him are part and parcel of the package and cannot be gifted nor taken away. I retain identity, humanity and self, including ego, superego and id. Some would call me a bottom, some a submissive, some a switch, some a sicko, some a lunatic and some a slave and all those definitions would fit some part of who "I" am, but none of them tell the story completely as I'm a human, therefore complex. None of us are one dimensional creatures .. and I would venture to say that even in such a narrowly defined alternative BDSM world, most have many facets.

He calls me His and that's what works for me and how anyone else chooses to label 'me' has little bearing on my life and the living of it just as how I may view someone else really doesn't effect them in the long run.

Celeste



WDMsub -> RE: submissive vs slave (3/6/2006 10:44:30 AM)

This is probably an over-simplification, but I also thought a slave was one who was not able to say, "NO" at any time and a sub could set limits.



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 5 [6]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.96875