Difference between subs and slaves

[subbie_333]

Heh. You got skills. They could just be ass-kissing skills, but skills nonetheless.

mmmmmm aaassssssssskkkkkiiiissssssssiiinnnggggggg mmmmmmm

 

[malinborn]

Stupid? Thanks for that

You're missing my point. I am just asking because if the sign of giving up a safe word is a sign of devotion.. of giving up limits.. then wouldn't someone who has limits who lets them get pushed past without calling out their safword be more devoted?

what is YMMV?

If the dominant doesn't push limits to the point that a safeword is needed, then, why should that be a judgment of the submissive/slave? On the other hand, not using a safeword when it is needed most of the time is the sign of a stupid submissive/slave. Or, the dominant doesn't realize that the submissive/slave is too far off into lala land to utter it. Does the relationship require an excessive amount of pain to be *the* way to prove devotion? Or, maybe the submissive/slave is more of a masochist than the dominant is a sadist. Basically, YMMV

 

[EmpressFi]

Just an off the wall thought here.. but maybe the discussion wouldnt turn so argumentative, so defensive, if it werent always ... always.. described as slave versus submissive. Think about it... versus, vs. it's two parties in a lawsuit or even more fitting for the discussion of slave and submissive..it's like Spy vs. Spy. Two characters, exactly the same, except one wears black clothing, the other wears white... yet all they do is try their best to blow up the other.

why cant we use "In comparison to" instead of versus.. versus implies a winner and a loser.

 

[BiBunny]

I just don't think limits and safewords are really an indication of devotion, commitment, or anything of the sort. They just mean that somebody either has or doesn't have limits and safewords.

I'm so tempted to throw in a bit here about a switch owning another switch and how that works on the Devotion Meter, but I won't make this any more complicated than it has to be, LOL.

 

[EmpressFi]

I just don't think limits and safewords are really an indication of devotion, commitment, or anything of the sort. They just mean that somebody either has or doesn't have limits and safewords.

I'm so tempted to throw in a bit here about a switch owning another switch and how that works on the Devotion Meter, but I won't make this any more complicated than it has to be, LOL.

*cheer* (at your point..not that you're not throwing it in there)

 

[BiBunny]

*cheer* (at your point..not that you're not throwing it in there)

I knew whatcha meant.

 

[subbie_333]

Stupid? Thanks for that

LOL It wasn't a comment about you, but, about some who think that by not using their safeword they are proving their devotion and that they are a "true" slave.

You're missing my point. I am just asking because if the sign of giving up a safe word is a sign of devotion.. of giving up limits.. then wouldn't someone who has limits who lets them get pushed past without calling out their safword be more devoted?

um, maybe you are missing mine. i don't think that a safeword is directly related to devotion. Some doms state that they don't need a safeword, even for someone new to them. And, some beleive that to show devotion they have to *not* use their safeword. i think that allowing limits to be pushed is a sign of trust

what is YMMV?

Your mileage may vary

 

[JMohegan]

I have a question for people here and for their ideas and ideals. No argument or otherwise sought just thinking aloud

If someone has a safeword they don't use, are they more devoted than someone who doesn't have one at all, since they don't even have the option of choosing not to use it? By this i mean.. the person has a safeword.. their Dom(me)/Master/Mistress or whatever clearly went passed their limits but they refuse to call out the safeword... would that mean their devotion is that much deeper/stronger/ or whatever word might be considered?

I get an enormous personal rush out of the knowledge that a partner could stop what I'm doing at any moment..... but chooses not to.

To me, that feels like a reinforcement of devotion and commitment, in the moment, every time.

(Of course, I don't want her to push herself past the point of physical or mental harm, but I don't think that's what you were suggesting.)

 

[intothewoods]

I agree with what you're saying here ITW- only one's heart can translate devotion to their Dominant/Owner.

However, in agreeing with Homburg, a submissive generally has the option of imposing limits on their Dominant- I don't think that means they are any less devoted in their submission, but I do think they are less devoted in their mindset.

A slave has surrendered everything they are to the person that owns them. There are no limits, no safewords, a deeper committment to the relationship, like Homburg said. There is no deciding what you think is best for you. There is just the trust that the person they have surrendered to, the person they call Master, their Owner, has their best interests at heart. I don't necessarily think this an increased devotion, but I do think like Homburg in that there's more of a level of committment.

It's kind of like a vanilla relationship really. A boyfriend/girlfriend situation, tends to have less of a committment level than a husband/wife situation. Sometimes even the levels of devotion vary.

Another really good definition I got on slave vs. sub is that a submissive depends on her Dominant's direction in taking care of his/her (the Dominant's) needs and desires. The slave knows her Owner's needs and desires and acts accordingly. Where a submissive may have a list of rules that emcompass everything from what to call their Dominant to what to wear, the slave has only one rule: serve and obey your Master.

I agree that a boyfriend/girlfriend relationship involves less commitment than live-in partners or a husband/wife relationship. I totally disagree that the comparison can be applied to submissives as compared to slaves.

I'm a submissive, and don't have a long list of rules or a long list of limits. I trust my PYL to take care of me. I can't imagine ever using my safeword with him. But I'm not a slave.

I don't find either label particularly helpful, frankly. I can't think of more than a few slaves or submisives who see themselves in the same way. Everyone has a different idea.

 

[Homburg]

I have a question for people here and for their ideas and ideals. No argument or otherwise sought just thinking aloud

If someone has a safeword they don't use, are they more devoted than someone who doesn't have one at all, since they don't even have the option of choosing not to use it? By this i mean.. the person has a safeword.. their Dom(me)/Master/Mistress or whatever clearly went passed their limits but they refuse to call out the safeword... would that mean their devotion is that much deeper/stronger/ or whatever word might be considered?

I know someone like that. She had a safeword and never, ever used it. refused to. I discussed slavery with her. Had some pretty darned good discussions and more than a few disagreements. I told her that her refusal to safeword, her refusal to sweat her own limits, her devotion to a Dom that was crap for her, and a variety of other personality traits made me think that she probably had slave-character (using this term as I can't really think of another way to term the particular combination of personality traits that says "slave").

She disagreed with this like crazy. She started a new relationship, and is a slave now, and is very, very happy. Not saying I had anything to do with that, as it is her owner that is the one making her so happy. Just saying that she said "slave" to me, and eventually found her way there.

This is not to say that every pyl that does this is a slave. Just sayin'.

And, honestly, your hypothetical non-safewording sub may well be more devoted. *shrug* I wasn't trying to make a point vis a vis devotion. I mentioned that the slaves I knew were beautifully devoted. Anecdotal evidence, that's all.

That said, I would still say that a slave is more commited to his or her submission than someone who has a safeword and chooses not to use. Just because you (generic 'you' as are the rest of these) choose not to use a safeword does not mean that safeword does not exist. You still possess the ability, you still have the power. You can still turn the scene off with one word. That you choose not to speaks of your devotion, but not of your commitment.

To use the word commitment another way, I used to roll with a Sombo group. Big sweaty, aggressive dudes tackling each other and rolling around on the ground trying to pin and force submission holds. I was pretty good at it, and really loved it (surprise, right?). Yeah, ITW, sweaty hetero-man-on-man action involving pain and submission holds.

Well, when you went in for a takedown or throw, you had to commit to that move if you wanted it to work. A double-leg pick is a serious charge, and if you do it half-assed, you won't get your man down. If you barrel in like a Long Island train, you have a better chance. So a limp pick was dogged for no commitment, whereas a balls-out charge that slammed the breath out of your partner was said to be fully committed. Fully committed was a damned big deal, as it meant you were laying your body on the line. If your opponent pancaked, or go the better of you, you could not recover, period.

I see this the same way. You can't recover once you have given up your safeword. You can't half-ass it. Once that beating starts, it doesn't stop until the beater is satisfied. To me, that is giving it your all, fully committed.

----

Just an off the wall thought here.. but maybe the discussion wouldnt turn so argumentative, so defensive, if it werent always ... always.. described as slave versus submissive. Think about it... versus, vs. it's two parties in a lawsuit or even more fitting for the discussion of slave and submissive..it's like Spy vs. Spy. Two characters, exactly the same, except one wears black clothing, the other wears white... yet all they do is try their best to blow up the other.

why cant we use "In comparison to" instead of versus.. versus implies a winner and a loser.

Probably true, Fi. Good point.

 

[intothewoods]

Except that it all depends on the individuals involved. The truth is that a slave always has the option to walk away.

 

[Bandit58]

I asked Sir just now why He's into BDSM, He reckons He's into it for the sex He says He can't be bothered with the whole micro managed 24/7 part - but in the bedroom He loves to be Dominant.

I also asked what He considered me to be, He said I am definitely sub. I do tend to carry my submission over outside the bedroom, because I'm a "people pleaser" and love to serve the One I love. However there are certain things I haven't given up control over, and in fact I am in charge of things like finances simply because it suits Him that I do so and it is one less thing He has to worry about.

I still have my safe word, alhough it's not been used in quite a while. Sir refuses to play without one, and I feel safer for having it although I do trust Him.

We do what works for us. This is the main reason why I hate labels - people tend to get upset if their submission/slavery/devotion to the lifestyle gets called into question. I'll just quote my sigline and then I'm done:

Isn't diversity great? We're all different and there's plenty of room under the big BDSM tent for all of us.

 

[intothewoods]

Just an off the wall thought here.. but maybe the discussion wouldnt turn so argumentative, so defensive, if it werent always ... always.. described as slave versus submissive. Think about it... versus, vs. it's two parties in a lawsuit or even more fitting for the discussion of slave and submissive..it's like Spy vs. Spy. Two characters, exactly the same, except one wears black clothing, the other wears white... yet all they do is try their best to blow up the other.

why cant we use "In comparison to" instead of versus.. versus implies a winner and a loser.

I'll be honest. I find post after post applauding the favorite poster du jour to be equally distracting and unhelpful. I don't think it encourages a variety of opinions.

 

[Homburg]

Homburg, your description of the progression of your marriage makes perfect sense to me, and it would be goofy beyond belief for me to question or disagree with your assessment of the relationship that you, as an individual, have with your wife, as an individual.

My disagreement comes when you extrapolate from your personal experience and make generalized comparisons about the level of devotion and commitment in D/s vs. M/s relationships overall.

Eh, I am not basing my comments on devotion solely on my relationship with viv. I have quite a few friends in the scene that are M/s and many that are D/s. I'm not wildly active in the local scene, but I get around. I've seen the players, and I've seen the serious ones that mean it. I've read the posts by people here, and talked extensively with bottoms, subs, slaves, tops, doms, and owners. I've read articles and books and websites and poetry. I do not base my opinions solely on personal experience.

Bob and Kate's M/s may involve far less devotion and commitment than Tom and Tina's D/s, or even your grandmother's mainstream marriage. It depends on the individuals and the specific circumstances of their unique relationships. That's my point.

I will agree that devotion can't be tracked purely by the dynamic, though it has been my experience that I can make such comments about the people I specifically know.

I will continue to argue that commitment to submission is more serious in M/s.

I get an enormous personal rush out of the knowledge that a partner could stop what I'm doing at any moment..... but chooses not to.

To me, that feels like a reinforcement of devotion and commitment, in the moment, every time.

(Of course, I don't want her to push herself past the point of physical or mental harm, but I don't think that's what you were suggesting.)

Eh, I get the same rush. Short of me tying her down 24/7, she can walk out any time she wants. She reinforces her devotion and commitment every day she spends with me. But I get a stronger rush knowing that she trusts me so implicitly as to forego any chance of stopping me cold should I go too far.

I find it interesting that you enjoy that moment to moment ephemeral rush of the possibility of a safeword, yet only find long-term relationships meaningful in any way. It is an interesting dichotomy, and I mean that literaly. It is interesting. While I only find long-term relationships meaningful as well, I prefer the long-term satisfaction from the trust that is implicit to surrender of the safe-word.

 

[nh23]

I know someone like that. She had a safeword and never, ever used it. refused to. I discussed slavery with her. Had some pretty darned good discussions and more than a few disagreements. I told her that her refusal to safeword, her refusal to sweat her own limits, her devotion to a Dom that was crap for her, and a variety of other personality traits made me think that she probably had slave-character (using this term as I can't really think of another way to term the particular combination of personality traits that says "slave").

She disagreed with this like crazy. She started a new relationship, and is a slave now, and is very, very happy. Not saying I had anything to do with that, as it is her owner that is the one making her so happy. Just saying that she said "slave" to me, and eventually found her way there.

This is not to say that every pyl that does this is a slave. Just sayin'.

Hmm.. I do believe that you're referring to me here. And you're right. Like I posted earlier. I refused for a very long time to admit that I was a slave or had a slave like mindset. I always identified as a submissive. But now it's at a point where I've got to call a spade a spade..lol. At this point I'm in a 24/7 M/s relationship and I've never been happier.

Yeah it is my owner that is making me happy, but I would never have gotten to this point if it hadn't been for you and Bunny. You two cared enough to give me the truth even though it hurt badly. You guys helped me find the real me. For that I'll be eternally grateful.

As to Malin's question earlier about safewords..or on the subject of safewords. Before when I identified as submissive I had a safeword. I absolutely refused to use it. Not because I was stupid, because I knew he needed to take things as far as he did. I didn't want to use that safeword and take away from what he needed. It was just another way of serving him in my mind. I don't have a safeword anymore. If my hands are going numb if something is going horrible wrong, I will tell him in plain english the problem and he chooses to fix it or not.

When I was in a D/s relationship I was allowed to have limits. I was allowed to say no to certain things. I never once did. I never said a word when he pushed things that he knew were limits. He never heard me utter the word no...but I still had that right. In my relationship with Master I don't have that right. I'm not allowed the right to say no, and all limits went out the window when we started this relationship. I am allowed to voice if I don't like something, but he will do as he sees fit. And honestly at the end of the day I"m better for it. He knows me well enough to know when I need pushed.

 

[JMohegan]

I will agree that devotion can't be tracked purely by the dynamic, though it has been my experience that I can make such comments about the people I specifically know.

Fair enough. We agree.

I will continue to argue that commitment to submission is more serious in M/s.

Assuming that one's definition of "submission" matches mine, i.e., an actual, tangible, active (not merely latent) ceding of control in one or more areas of a personal relationship, then I would agree that the level of commitment to submission itself becomes more serious as the scope of submission expands.

However, I would also say that the level of commitment to submission itself says nothing about the level of commitment involved in the relationship overall.

I have non-kinky friends who debate, negotiate, and compromise in an ongoing effort to equitably allocate household chores. In my relationships, dictating who does what chores, when, has always been essential to my concept of personal control. By itself, this comparison says absolutely nothing about the relative levels of seriousness of our relationship commitments.

Increased scope of submission does not necessarily equate to increased commitment to the partner or relationship. It just means that the relationship functions in a different mode.

Eh, I get the same rush. Short of me tying her down 24/7, she can walk out any time she wants. She reinforces her devotion and commitment every day she spends with me. But I get a stronger rush knowing that she trusts me so implicitly as to forego any chance of stopping me cold should I go too far.

I find it interesting that you enjoy that moment to moment ephemeral rush of the possibility of a safeword, yet only find long-term relationships meaningful in any way. It is an interesting dichotomy, and I mean that literaly. It is interesting. While I only find long-term relationships meaningful as well, I prefer the long-term satisfaction from the trust that is implicit to surrender of the safe-word.

The way I see it, any bottom, submissive, slave, or curious non-kinkster, who allows him or herself to be tied up alone in a room with another person, is trusting the Top/Dom/whatever with his or her life.

A safeword is only as strong as the honor of the one to whom it is entrusted. The same holds true for any promise not to harm.

 

[nh23]

I agree with what you're saying here ITW- only one's heart can translate devotion to their Dominant/Owner.

However, in agreeing with Homburg, a submissive generally has the option of imposing limits on their Dominant- I don't think that means they are any less devoted in their submission, but I do think they are less devoted in their mindset.

A slave has surrendered everything they are to the person that owns them. There are no limits, no safewords, a deeper committment to the relationship, like Homburg said. There is no deciding what you think is best for you. There is just the trust that the person they have surrendered to, the person they call Master, their Owner, has their best interests at heart. I don't necessarily think this an increased devotion, but I do think like Homburg in that there's more of a level of committment.

It's kind of like a vanilla relationship really. A boyfriend/girlfriend situation, tends to have less of a committment level than a husband/wife situation. Sometimes even the levels of devotion vary.

Another really good definition I got on slave vs. sub is that a submissive depends on her Dominant's direction in taking care of his/her (the Dominant's) needs and desires. The slave knows her Owner's needs and desires and acts accordingly. Where a submissive may have a list of rules that emcompass everything from what to call their Dominant to what to wear, the slave has only one rule: serve and obey your Master.

I like that Nala..beautiful.

 

[nh23]

Just thinking as I've been reading over the posts. I know threads like this always end up getting heated. It's really hard to define the differences between a sub and a slave because to everyone it's different. Each PYL has their own definition of how they expect their pyl to act. And each pyl has their own definition of how they are to act etc..

What I posted are my personal experiences from having both a D/s LDR relationship. (By LDR I mean R/L but not seeing each other on a daily basis), and now being in a 24/7 TPE relationship. I don't think by stating the differences anyone means to say one is better than the other. In my mind submissives/slaves, Master/Dominants are all on the same level. One is not better than the other. They are just different. But there has to be some way of defining the difference between the two.

I am by far not a perfect slave, I still have a lot to learn. I wouldn't even begin to try to say that I'm better than other slaves or submissives. I'm sure there are people out there subs and slaves alike that would beat me in any pyl contest. *shrugs* It's just a bunch of us trying to say in our own experience what the differences are.

 

[MasDom]

The power that I took was based on an understanding and a sincere choice between us. It was for us the next level in our relationship, where things were headed. I expect my slave to give the true devotion that is in her heart. For her this was absolute. With her choice to acknowledge my place as Master I revoked her right to say no, or to disobey me because it was our need to make this so complete. And as we find a fulfillment from it, we look back and realize this is what we were seeking and that's why everything felt so off.

As for slave vs. submissive, It's not about which one is better, But about why each person had a difference in need. Those things that make us feel complete.
One needs to give up total control to find existence in another's embrace, and the other needs to find their own existence but still give up what control they choose to.

Both with their fair share of troubles and benefits, more fitted to a persons true needs regardless.

I personally don't see any competition between the two, just what each of us needed to finally be happy in the end.

 

[madetotakeit]

...However, I would also say that the level of commitment to submission itself says nothing about the level of commitment involved in the relationship overall...

Increased scope of submission does not necessarily equate to increased commitment to the partner or relationship. It just means that the relationship functions in a different mode...

This states very well the idea that I have in my mind when I refer to commitment.

One does not have to be involved in 24/7 TPE to be completely committed to his/her PYL. To be completely committed means to put that person first in thought, heart, and mind. It does not require giving over control 24/7 to do that. I can see relinquishing safe words with the right Dom. Does that mean that I would be more committed to him? Not in my eyes. To me it simply means that I trust him to not break his toy. Trust and commitment are not the same thing to me.

I was recently told I would make an excellent slave due to how I described how I would be in a relationship. Putting my partner first, trusting him implicitly in a scene, anticipating his needs...submission is more than just following directives. I believe that each should know the other better than they know him/herself. Knowing the person is how you know what the PYL needs, not by agreeing to 24/7.

I'm a monogamous person by nature. It is the only way I can function in a committed relationship. I was in a relationship that lasted 10 years. Had there been a ring on my finger and a piece of paper filed with the local government, I would not have acted differently. Having had those things would not have shown that I was more committed to him. In either case I could have walked out at any point. As was stated earlier, a slave does have that option.

I riled a bit when I read that in opinion a submissive can not be as committed as a slave. It is stating that what I would have to bring on an emotional level as a submissive is lesser than what I would bring as a slave. It also does not mean that my commitment to my submissiveness is not as great as that of a slave. I know in my heart that I can and will be completely committed to my Dom. When I find the right one, just as in my vanilla context, I will be for one and one only. I would not compare as a group subs vs slaves as a gauge of submissiveness, devotion, or commitment, but individuals. The label I define and choose for myself has nothing to do with these things. It simply means I need a different dynamic.

 

[Homburg]

Hmm.. I do believe that you're referring to me here. And you're right. Like I posted earlier. I refused for a very long time to admit that I was a slave or had a slave like mindset. I always identified as a submissive. But now it's at a point where I've got to call a spade a spade..lol. At this point I'm in a 24/7 M/s relationship and I've never been happier.

Yeah it is my owner that is making me happy, but I would never have gotten to this point if it hadn't been for you and Bunny. You two cared enough to give me the truth even though it hurt badly. You guys helped me find the real me. For that I'll be eternally grateful.

As to Malin's question earlier about safewords..or on the subject of safewords. Before when I identified as submissive I had a safeword. I absolutely refused to use it. Not because I was stupid, because I knew he needed to take things as far as he did. I didn't want to use that safeword and take away from what he needed. It was just another way of serving him in my mind. I don't have a safeword anymore. If my hands are going numb if something is going horrible wrong, I will tell him in plain english the problem and he chooses to fix it or not.

When I was in a D/s relationship I was allowed to have limits. I was allowed to say no to certain things. I never once did. I never said a word when he pushed things that he knew were limits. He never heard me utter the word no...but I still had that right. In my relationship with Master I don't have that right. I'm not allowed the right to say no, and all limits went out the window when we started this relationship. I am allowed to voice if I don't like something, but he will do as he sees fit. And honestly at the end of the day I"m better for it. He knows me well enough to know when I need pushed.

Absolutely, darlin. And I am so glad to see you happy like this.

 

[NALA CAYENNE]

I like that Nala..beautiful.

I was just thinking the same thing about your post that Homburg quoted.

 

[NALA CAYENNE]

As for slave vs. submissive, It's not about which one is better, But about why each person had a difference in need. Those things that make us feel complete.
One needs to give up total control to find existence in another's embrace, and the other needs to find their own existence but still give up what control they choose to...

I personally don't see any competition between the two, just what each of us needed to finally be happy in the end.

Very well expressed.

 

[Homburg]

Fair enough. We agree.

Assuming that one's definition of "submission" matches mine, i.e., an actual, tangible, active (not merely latent) ceding of control in one or more areas of a personal relationship, then I would agree that the level of commitment to submission itself becomes more serious as the scope of submission expands.

However, I would also say that the level of commitment to submission itself says nothing about the level of commitment involved in the relationship overall.

Complete agreement on both points. To slide it back a bit, and remove it from slave/submissive, I could make a similar comparison between bottoms and submissives, and I doubt that anyone would get their knickers in a wad. It's all points on the spectrum, and, as you said, commitment to submission is directly related to the scope of that submission.

I am not sure why people get hot over slave/submissive comparisons, but not submissive/bottom comparisons. Probably because so few folks here identify as bottoms. *shrug* Or because bottoms aren't so worried about it.

I have non-kinky friends who debate, negotiate, and compromise in an ongoing effort to equitably allocate household chores. In my relationships, dictating who does what chores, when, has always been essential to my concept of personal control. By itself, this comparison says absolutely nothing about the relative levels of seriousness of our relationship commitments.

Increased scope of submission does not necessarily equate to increased commitment to the partner or relationship. It just means that the relationship functions in a different mode.

We agree on this.

The way I see it, any bottom, submissive, slave, or curious non-kinkster, who allows him or herself to be tied up alone in a room with another person, is trusting the Top/Dom/whatever with his or her life.

A safeword is only as strong as the honor of the one to whom it is entrusted. The same holds true for any promise not to harm.

Absolutely, though I would argue that anyone that lets someone tie them up and then that person leaves is not trusting their top with their life. they are trusting the whims of fate. That is some scary shit.

 

[Homburg]

The power that I took was based on an understanding and a sincere choice between us. It was for us the next level in our relationship, where things were headed. I expect my slave to give the true devotion that is in her heart. For her this was absolute. With her choice to acknowledge my place as Master I revoked her right to say no, or to disobey me because it was our need to make this so complete. And as we find a fulfillment from it, we look back and realize this is what we were seeking and that's why everything felt so off.

As for slave vs. submissive, It's not about which one is better, But about why each person had a difference in need. Those things that make us feel complete.
One needs to give up total control to find existence in another's embrace, and the other needs to find their own existence but still give up what control they choose to.

Both with their fair share of troubles and benefits, more fitted to a persons true needs regardless.

I personally don't see any competition between the two, just what each of us needed to finally be happy in the end.

Absolutely fantastic post, MasDom. Spot on, man.



----

I riled a bit when I read that in opinion a submissive can not be as committed as a slave. It is stating that what I would have to bring on an emotional level as a submissive is lesser than what I would bring as a slave. It also does not mean that my commitment to my submissiveness is not as great as that of a slave. I know in my heart that I can and will be completely committed to my Dom. When I find the right one, just as in my vanilla context, I will be for one and one only. I would not compare as a group subs vs slaves as a gauge of submissiveness, devotion, or commitment, but individuals. The label I define and choose for myself has nothing to do with these things. It simply means I need a different dynamic.

It has nothing to do with emotions. It is a hard, empirical difference in the scope of submission between slaves and submissives.

Do you consider your commitment to submission to your PYL to be deeper than that of a bottom's?

There is a lot of heartfelt romanticism going on here, and I only get it but so much. If you are a bottom, and you allow spanking and tying up, but nothing else, are you as commited to submission as a submissive that allows significantly more? What is submission if not giving yourself over to the will and whims of another. How much of yourself do you really give when you have a long list of things you won't do? How subject are you to will and whim when there are places you will not go? Now, how subject are you to that dark impulse when there are no places you will not go inservice of that impulse? What is difficult to understand about this?

If you have limits, you are retaining power.
If you have a safeword, you are retaining power.

If you have neither, you have no power. This is why we call it Total Power Exchange. And when you give over all of your power, are you not more committed to your submission?

And why do people see some implication that less commitment is bad? If it is what you need, it is what you need. I know people that I could concieve of taking on as a submissive but that I would never ask to be a slave. I have good friends that bottom to me that I would never want as a submissive. Different folks have different needs, so why worry so much that other might go deeper than you do? It does not somehow dirty or lessen the beauty of your experience.

--

Keeping in line with Malin's general question earlier, how many of the non-M/s people here know M/s people well? Not a challenging question, just something I am interested in. Many times I've heard "I never met anyone in an M/s relationship before, so I didn't know what to expect. You guys are really normal." Much as nh23 was saying, she avoided the slave term because of misconceptions she had about slavery. How many people here are discussing slavery based on stuff they've seen in fanfic? How many M/s folks do you know well enough that you've seen them in the quiet moments outside of scenes?

Again, I stress that this is not a challenge. This is an honest question based on my personal experience that many people have some weird ideas of what M/s looks like day to day. There is weirdness out there, don't get me wrong, but, wow, it is not as freaky or extreme as some people seem to allude to.