Are slaves......

[Johnny Mayberry]

Have to agree...it would be hoped before submitting to being a slave you would at least understand what you were getting into, and have discussed the boundaries and limits before accepting that pretty collar that tempts some so easily to submit then run when all is not geared toward their own needs being met.

Same goes for Dominants. They need to know what they are doing before taking on the responsibility of a slave. While everyone learns new things and evolve, the basics need to be there before accepting responsibility for another and a relationship. If they don't they need to learn more before taking that big step.

And both sub/slave and Dominant/Master should have enough common sense and self knowledge to be able to assess before committing that the other person knows what is required, has a sense of responsibility and maturity, and above all can be honest and clear about the whole deal.

Catalina

The idea that a person is a "natural" Dom/Master/sub/slave, ranks right up there with "subs/slaves hold all the power" and "D/s relationships are deeper/stronger/more intense" in the list of myths about this lifestyle. No one is born knowing how to behave in relationships in general, let alone in a D/s sort of thang. You've got to figure yourself out first, and then deal with how you interact with different people in your life. Good things and bad don't just happen.

 

[catalina_francisco]

The idea that a person is a "natural" Dom/Master/sub/slave, ranks right up there with "subs/slaves hold all the power" and "D/s relationships are deeper/stronger/more intense" in the list of myths about this lifestyle. No one is born knowing how to behave in relationships in general, let alone in a D/s sort of thang. You've got to figure yourself out first, and then deal with how you interact with different people in your life. Good things and bad don't just happen.

LOL..well some slave/subs believe they hold all the power and some Dominants do little to discourage that misconception for fear of losing the pretty adornment and ego booster. Some create their own nightmare.

Catalina

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

LOL..well some slave/subs believe they hold all the power and some Dominants do little to discourage that misconception for fear of losing the pretty adornment and ego booster. Some create their own nightmare.

Catalina

Uh huh...some Doms allow a sub to believe that they are in control, which leads to trouble in the long term.

I'm not saying that a bottom cannot take charge, or that a masochist cannot also be a Dom...I'm saying that if you are calling yourself a submissive or a slave, then that should actually be your goddammed role, huh? Truth in advertising, anyone?

 

[snoozebutton]

Well the only thing about that is both Doms and subs are parasites. We feed off the energy of each other.I worry when I hear one side thinks it's more important.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

Well the only thing about that is both Doms and subs are parasites. We feed off the energy of each other.I worry when I hear one side thinks it's more important.

I hope you don't mean me...I'm just saying that each person has their role in the relationship, not that one is better or more important.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Well the only thing about that is both Doms and subs are parasites. We feed off the energy of each other.I worry when I hear one side thinks it's more important.

I disagree if both feed of each other we are not parasites, but we have a symbiotic relationship. A parasite has a one-sided affair with it host, a symbiont takes and gives back.

Francisco.

 

[FungiUg]

Well the only thing about that is both Doms and subs are parasites. We feed off the energy of each other.I worry when I hear one side thinks it's more important.

I'd prefer the term symbiotes myself. We jointly create an ecosystem that allows both of us to prosper... A parasitic relationship is entirely one-sided.

 

[ownedsubgal]

i disagree that the idea of someone being a natural Dominant, or natural submissive, is a myth. it is a fact that some people are just instinctively, innately, and unconsciously Dominant or submissive...it is who they are, and being in a relationship or not has nothing to do with it. now being a natural Master or slave...that is something else. i think one can be naturally inclined to be a slave or Master, but of course that does not mean that one automatically "knows" everything about how to live such a life.

i won't get into my own personal idea of abuse here, but suffice it to say, i do not consider a Dominant who strikes his property once or twice in anger as an abuser. with that aside, within an Owner/slave relationship, i do feel that a Master or Mistress has the right to abuse/mistreat what belongs to them. and that does not make them any "less" of a true Dominant. might make them an unfriendly person, a person most would not care to be with, but does not negate what it is to be Dominant.

 

[FungiUg]

Is there a difference between dominant and "a Dominant"? A difference between submissive and "a submissive"?

Also, there's is there a correct way to be "a Dominant/a submissive"? Is there a set formula that Dominants and submissives have to learn, or do we decide for ourselves?

In which case, isn't it entirely possible that a dominant person might decide NOT to practice bondage, etc? And yet still be dominant?

I do agree that dominance and submissiveness tend to be inherent qualities within a person.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Hello OSG,

I agree with you that a natural dominant is not a myth I have a very nice long going and heavily discussed thread about this.

But there is something I want you to think about and consider. What do you consider dominance because I have a feeling that what you consider dominance and what I consider dominance differ.

To me and yes this is just my opinion, dominance is about power and control. Not only power and control over your partner but also over yourself, yes if you hit someone in anger twice accidentally I would not consider that abuse but it is a sign of not being able to control yourself, so to me that means a sign not of dominance but of inadequacy in dominance.

My partner has to give absolute control over herself to me, so yes I do have the right if I would so desire to take a stick and beat her to within an inch of her life at least in our relationship. The judicial system might have a different opinion. Next to the fact that it is an act that would diminish the value of my property which in itself is a stupid act it is also an act not fitting of an honorable man and again a sign not of control but of the inaptness in dominance.

If you can not control yourself then how can you call yourself dominant of course this is just my opinion.

Francisco.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

i disagree that the idea of someone being a natural Dominant, or natural submissive, is a myth. it is a fact that some people are just instinctively, innately, and unconsciously Dominant or submissive...it is who they are, and being in a relationship or not has nothing to do with it. now being a natural Master or slave...that is something else. i think one can be naturally inclined to be a slave or Master, but of course that does not mean that one automatically "knows" everything about how to live such a life.

i won't get into my own personal idea of abuse here, but suffice it to say, i do not consider a Dominant who strikes his property once or twice in anger as an abuser. with that aside, within an Owner/slave relationship, i do feel that a Master or Mistress has the right to abuse/mistreat what belongs to them. and that does not make them any "less" of a true Dominant. might make them an unfriendly person, a person most would not care to be with, but does not negate what it is to be Dominant.

You can disagree, but you are wrong...*grins*...because I am ALWAYS right! Didn't you get the memo?

Actually, your post agrees with mine, in that I DO believe someone can naturally have the inclination towards something, but without work, effort, and education cannot actually be a Dom/sub.

As far as the abuse issue...here's the tricky semantics, so let me know if I lose you somewhere(it would probably be my fault, and I'll try again). I believe that a Master/Dominant can be abusive, and you do not. I am right, in that my definition for abuse is correct. No person can treat another person in certain ways and not be abusive.

On the other hand, no Master could ever abuse you, because of your unique outlook on things...your 'automatic submission and consent' thing. You do control the situation on your end, in that you accept and consent to whatever treatment you get with eyes wide open. I don't know how you do it, but I don't know how asprin works, either; but I do know that it works, and that what you do works for you.

 

[ownedsubgal]

You can disagree, but you are wrong...*grins*...because I am ALWAYS right! Didn't you get the memo?

Actually, your post agrees with mine, in that I DO believe someone can naturally have the inclination towards something, but without work, effort, and education cannot actually be a Dom/sub.

As far as the abuse issue...here's the tricky semantics, so let me know if I lose you somewhere(it would probably be my fault, and I'll try again). I believe that a Master/Dominant can be abusive, and you do not. I am right, in that my definition for abuse is correct. No person can treat another person in certain ways and not be abusive.

On the other hand, no Master could ever abuse you, because of your unique outlook on things...your 'automatic submission and consent' thing. You do control the situation on your end, in that you accept and consent to whatever treatment you get with eyes wide open. I don't know how you do it, but I don't know how asprin works, either; but I do know that it works, and that what you do works for you.

actually Johnny, i disagree that Dominant or submissive is something that one can become. it is what you are, who you are, how you are born, imo. being a Master or slave can be an inclination, can be what you become, but being Dominant or submissive is just what you are. imo of course. my entire life i have been a very submissive person, not because i was trying to be that way (actually, spent a great deal of years trying to be the opposite), but because it's just how i naturally respond. but i was not born a slave. that was something i had to become, although i realized early on i had a natural inclination to that sort of relationship, to that sort of place in the world.

now, as to the abuse thing...as i said, i do feel that a Master can be abusive, as in treat someone in a negative, damaging, harmful manner. but as Master he has the right to be so. of course there is the part of my brain that's like...well, since he is Master...how could he abuse what's his, as the term abuse implies something "wrong", doing something one has no right to do? but if we take the right and wrong out of it, and simply define abuse as mistreatment, then yes i believe and know a Master is capable of that. but is it "wrong" for them to abuse their own property? imo, no. now could my own Master abuse me? yes and no. yes, he can and does at times mistreat me, will do things or say things that cause significant harm to me physically or emotionally...by that definition, yes, he can abuse me. but does he ever do anything to me that he has no right to do? no, because that's not possible...there is nothing he has no right to do, with what is his.

 

[TNRkitect2b]

Is there a difference between dominant and "a Dominant"? A difference between submissive and "a submissive"?


I believe there is a difference. "dominant", refers to having dominant characteristics. "A Dominamant" refers to someone who has developed those dominant characteristics within a relationship. The same logic applies to "submissive" and "a submissive." the first is a characteristic, the second a role/description obtained through practice and development of your natural tendencies.

Also, there's is there a correct way to be "a Dominant/a submissive"? Is there a set formula that Dominants and submissives have to learn, or do we decide for ourselves?

I firmly believe the answer ot this is no, as no two people are alike. Thus no two people will take the same path to developing their "dom/sub -iness" What works for one, may not work for another. We decide what we do for ourselves, and develop our own goals. The only reason that we are classified together is that we share common characteristics. The way we express those is unique to each of us.

In which case, isn't it entirely possible that a dominant person might decide NOT to practice bondage, etc? And yet still be dominant?

This can be exactly the case, as there are those that just don't care for dealing with ropes, or with causing pain or ..(pick your item here).

I do agree that dominance and submissiveness tend to be inherent qualities within a person.

FungiUg, from reading your posts, you and I share a lot of similarities in the way that we approach our "Dominant nature". I appreciate reading your posts as always, and will be adding my own when I feel I have something worthwhile to say.

 

[ownedsubgal]

Hello OSG,

I agree with you that a natural dominant is not a myth I have a very nice long going and heavily discussed thread about this.

But there is something I want you to think about and consider. What do you consider dominance because I have a feeling that what you consider dominance and what I consider dominance differ.

To me and yes this is just my opinion, dominance is about power and control. Not only power and control over your partner but also over yourself, yes if you hit someone in anger twice accidentally I would not consider that abuse but it is a sign of not being able to control yourself, so to me that means a sign not of dominance but of inadequacy in dominance.

My partner has to give absolute control over herself to me, so yes I do have the right if I would so desire to take a stick and beat her to within an inch of her life at least in our relationship. The judicial system might have a different opinion. Next to the fact that it is an act that would diminish the value of my property which in itself is a stupid act it is also an act not fitting of an honorable man and again a sign not of control but of the inaptness in dominance.

If you can not control yourself then how can you call yourself dominant of course this is just my opinion.

Francisco.

hello Francisco...what do i consider to be Dominance? well, that's a bit difficult to answer, but i definitely do not define a Dominant person as one who is in complete control of himself and all things related to him at all times, makes no mistakes ever, and always respects and has concern for those he is personally involved with, casually or seriously. i do not define Dominance as one who is a firm believer and liver of "SSC".

Dominance to me is a personality trait, an instinctive way of dealing with oneself and the world around them that simply comes naturally, like submission. one who naturally takes on leadership roles throughout life, who is not able to tolerate a position of subservience in any form. who is most at peace and comfortable when they are the ones ultimately in control...in their business life, in their personal relationships, just in general life. those qualities and others are what make a person Dominant in my eyes. a Dominant to me is not one who remains always cool, calm and collected throughout life, that would be, well, a stone. my Master is the most naturally Dominant person i have ever encountered or even heard of in my life. things will be his way, or no way. He has little tolerance or patience for people or things that are below his standards. so oh yes, he gets angry at times. imperfect drivers send him into rages daily, everytime he gets behind the wheel. ignorant people, lazy people, irk him to the nth degree. but his standards don't simply apply to the masses..first he applies them to himself. no, he doesn't consider himself perfect, but he has a high opinion of himself, definitely (and for good reason, in my biased opinion, hehe ). i admire him immensely, not simply because he has such total control of me, so effortlessly...but because he has such awesome control over himself. despite all his rages...despite the fact that he has once or twice done things to me that he did not intend to do...he has never allowed himself to lose complete control. if he did, the world would contain a few less people. if anything i think it only adds to his Dominance that he can "go off" a bit, but still never cross that line. my Master is a passionate man, he can hate as intensely as he can love, he can be as cruel and heartless as he can be tender and doting. the reason that he is not in prison today, the reason that all who have wronged him are still in one piece today, is because he is imo an ultimate Dominant. He might let himself go to the point of knocking out a few teeth, breaking a limb or two...but he will keep you alive and functioning, because somehow, he knows when and how to stop himself before it is too late.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Hi OSG,

I believe that BDSM D/s is what the people involved make of it. You and your Master seem to be two happy people so all the power to the two of you.

Your definition to me is more that of an alfa male than that of a Dominant. I do not happen to believe that is the same, yes there are common characteristics but they are not identical.

Of course a Dominant is not a stone and of course a Dominant has feelings and emotions, but a Dominant in my book tries to control the emotions, the more animal instincts, and yes sometimes the control might slip but slipping is not letting go.

Francisco.

 

[Etoile]

Sorry Etoile, no it does not make sense as abuse is not something I see on any respected site, in any club, or in any community group of BDSMers as having a place in BDSM culture. There is a difference between BDSM and DV, and it angers me when people use this community to try and excuse their behaviour when they are two distinctly different things.

You took my post kind of out of context - I meant I hoped that my language made sense, that I had expressed myself clearly. Whether or not it "made sense" in terms of being a reasonable explanation wasn't what I was going for with that statement.

Also, did you mean the Lit community, or the BDSM community at large?

 

[catalina_francisco]

.

Also, did you mean the Lit community, or the BDSM community at large?

BDSM community as that is what I think in terms of, and is what is being used repeatedly worldwide in court cases as a defence for murderers and abusers.

Catalina

 

[snoozebutton]

I disagree if both feed of each other we are not parasites, but we have a symbiotic relationship. A parasite has a one-sided affair with it host, a symbiont takes and gives back.

Francisco.

As long as in a couple that works yes, but my point was if it doesn't the balance isn't there to allow a symbiotic relationship.

 

[Kajira Callista]

Just to toss something a little different in....
What are the differences between a dominant and a Master/Mistress, what does the word Master/Mistress mean to you? Is it different from dominant or the same...or maybe a step above dominant? Just interested in everyones take on this.

 

[JooJoo]

for some reason the word "master" or "mistress" kinda scares me, i imagine a master or mistress as some cruel person that enjoys hitting ppl... a dominant is just somebody that knows your ever action before you do it, they can predict you and they love to do it and you love bieng predictable, you love them, and so you would do anything just to make them happy, even if they do not love you as well, just getting to make then happy is a pleasure, as for the subject of slaves not being treated like humans... i'm not gonna name any names, but i know that there are many cases where the slave doesn't want to be treated human

 

[Kajira Callista]

for some reason the word "master" or "mistress" kinda scares me, i imagine a master or mistress as some cruel person that enjoys hitting ppl... a dominant is just somebody that knows your ever action before you do it, they can predict you and they love to do it and you love bieng predictable, you love them, and so you would do anything just to make them happy, even if they do not love you as well, just getting to make then happy is a pleasure, as for the subject of slaves not being treated like humans... i'm not gonna name any names, but i know that there are many cases where the slave doesn't want to be treated human

I find that very interesting JooJoo, part of my opinion of dom vs. master is i feel safer with a master. If i may ask, what makes you think a Master is scary and cruel?

 

[AnelizeDarkEyes]

I find that very interesting JooJoo, part of my opinion of dom vs. master is i feel safer with a master. If i may ask, what makes you think a Master is scary and cruel?

So, KC. How exactly do you know that you are dealing with a "master"? Do you have them fill out some sort of application? Is there a special "master" card that someone has to show you? Seriously though, do you ask for references, and do you check them? Seems to me, that would be the only REAL way, aside from actually playing with the person, that you could find out the level of experience of the person you were considering.

Personally, I wouldn't take his word on it. Any Tom, Dick, or Harry out on the net, can....and does, call himself MasterWhatever. Happens all the time.

My point is this--for you newbies out there. Just because someone calls himself a master doesn't guarantee that he's going to be safer than someone who calls himself a dominant.

Play safe, ya'll.

~anelize

 

[Kajira Callista]

So, KC. How exactly do you know that you are dealing with a "master"? Do you have them fill out some sort of application? Is there a special "master" card that someone has to show you? Seriously though, do you ask for references, and do you check them? Seems to me, that would be the only REAL way, aside from actually playing with the person, that you could find out the level of experience of the person you were considering.

Personally, I wouldn't take his word on it. Any Tom, Dick, or Harry out on the net, can....and does, call himself MasterWhatever. Happens all the time.

My point is this--for you newbies out there. Just because someone calls himself a master doesn't guarantee that he's going to be safer than someone who calls himself a dominant.

Play safe, ya'll.

~anelize

You are right, just because the name says Master doesnt mean it is so. I am probably overly cautious and it takes a long time for me personal to be able to trust and get to know someone before play even gets thought of. I have met a few who actually had references which was strange to me, but i prefer going slow and really knowing someone... i am in no rush to find someone, and im willing to take the time to be sure.

 

[Etoile]

Just to toss something a little different in....
What are the differences between a dominant and a Master/Mistress, what does the word Master/Mistress mean to you? Is it different from dominant or the same...or maybe a step above dominant? Just interested in everyones take on this.

Hmmmm. I think "dominant" is more descriptive of a personality type. It's likely that Masters and Mistresses are going to be dominants, but someone who is dominant may not want to exert the total control that I see a Master or Mistress as having.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Just to toss something a little different in....
What are the differences between a dominant and a Master/Mistress, what does the word Master/Mistress mean to you? Is it different from dominant or the same...or maybe a step above dominant? Just interested in everyones take on this.

To me those titles mean nothing, I am a Dominant, I am not going to call myself master or any other popular title.

In the US there was a movement called old guard, in that movement according to legend and myth the title was earned and given as an honorary title to those who deserved to be called such.

In Greece according to popular legend the place where modern BDSM came from. The title was passed on by a Master to his most promising slave on his dead bed.

There are many stories and popular myths; however the sad truth of the matter is that in current days anyone can call himself master and get away with it.

Francisco.