Difference between subs and slaves

[Qpet05]

That might be the best answer yet

One question for the slaves, Do you feel that you still need a "safeword" or do you feel that your Master knows you well enough to go without one?

No, i dont feel i "need" a safeword with Master. He knows me well enough that He can see that i'm at my limit of whatever the action is before i do!!

 

[rgraham666]

Thanks J. That objectification is one of the main problems I have with the slave label.

I've had to struggle very hard all my life to realize and maintain my own identity. Even though I'm fairly dominant I'm uncomfortable with the idea of asking someone to give their identity up.

Plus I'm not sure I'd enjoy dominating someone who has little will of their own. A lot of the fun is pushing against another person's strength.

On top of that, I'm not sure I personally would be happy being a slave's owner. I believe I'd find the role rather limiting and probably more responsibility than I'd be willing to take on. There's an aphorism that keeps popping into my mind as I read this, "A slave's chain has two ends."

The 'badass factor' and the social games implied therein don't really appeal to me as well.

My $0.02 and not meant as a criticism of anyone.

 

[callinectes]

I haven't read the entire thread so my comment may be irrelevant at this point..but I shall share it anyway.

Defining sub and slave are like trying to define the color red. As I drove home from work today I was behind three red vehicles. They were all different shades of red but they were distinctly red.

I don't understand this obsession with definitions or labels, they really serve no purpose.

 

[callinectes]

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.

Yup, B would say the exact same thing.

 

[callinectes]

nm.......

 

[Homburg]

I actually know many people who get caught up in the bottom/submissive definition.
.

Statistically, someone would have this problem. I understand less why people would have a problem with this particular distinction than with slave/submissive, but that's just me.

--

Ok, see, this is where I fall out with the sub/slave thing. It's the expectation on the part of most people that a slave is going to jump through flaming hoops 47 times a day just because Master tells her to. I mean, yeah, Master likes to beat his chest and let everybody think that he and super-slave keep surviving these constant tests of DEVOTION, but let's face it, if you're really so insecure that you have to have that level of hoop-jumping, do you really have any business with a slave?

I'm confused. Where is there talk of jumping through hoops?

 

[Homburg]

If a slave is supposedly more committed and devoted than a submissive, then is a Master more committed in a M/s relationship than a Dominant in a D/s relationship?

In my experience, yes, but only to the interplay, not the whole relationship. And, again, people keep landing on commitment to relationship. Near as I can, I am the only person who is arguing any difference in commitment, and I was very specific in saying things like "commitment to submission" as pointedly different from "commitment to relationship".

Anyway, I'll bite. I am assuming a lack of safewords and limits as an acceptable baseline by which to define an M/s relationship. If there are no limits, the Master really needs to know his slave bloody well. There is no handy limit list to avoid, checklists, or any of those other tools by which forgetful types can use to remind themselves "Oh yeah, she freaks out over needles, so let's put the sharps away". And if there are no safewords, the Master really needs to be able to read his slave bloody well to make sure that he isn't pushing her farther than he wishes to.

Yes, a dominant also needs to to know his submissive well, but he has checklists and such to fall back on. And he needs to be able to read her well also, but she can safeword if his judgement is lacking for some reason. In M/s, the responsibility lies on the Master in a scene. The slave may communicate distress, but Master is the final arbiter of the end of scene or cessation of activities.

I figure I might as well piss everyone off, top and bottom.

another thing...since I have no limits with my PYL that he hasn't already pre-set, therefor I am already doing everything and anything that he would want from me does that mean that I am not as committed or devoted to submission as a slave even though I am doing everything my PYL would want?


I would say that I am just as devoted and committed to the level of submission desired by my PYL as any slave is to the level of devotion and committment desired by their Master.

Did you mention your limits in negotiation with him and his aligned nicely, or did he just set them? Just asking out of curiousity, as if you have no personal limits, you have no personal limits. That shows serious commitment in my eyes. Do you retain a safeword?

 

[Homburg]

I don't get my knickers in a wad about any of this, but I do call bullshit on generalized rankings of emotions or universal relationship goals by dynamics - regardless of the comparison made.

Instead of saying something like: "D/s makes communication much easier for me," all too often people make insupportable and outrageous generalizations, such as: "People in D/s relationships communicate better than vanilla people do."

Trust, communication, commitment, devotion, a deep and lasting bond. These are considered positive traits and desirable goals by most people in strong personal relationships of any flavor. The idea that the expression or attainment of these goals can be ranked by dynamic is asinine, because the strength and success of any union will be determined by the compatibility and efforts of the individuals in the relationship, not the flavor of the dynamic itself.

Perhaps one reason that submissive vs. slave discussions are frequently problematic is that this particular distinction is often defined as an increase in the possession of those positive traits and attainment of those desirable goals.

Eh. I don't see this as an emotional issue. It is an empirical one for me. While I have seen more devotion out of the slaves I personally know, that is not a generalisation I would extend to all slaves. The "commitment to submission" thing that sticks in the craw of so many people is simple power mechanics to me. If you retain a safeword, you retain power. If you retain limits, you retain power. To me, that is simple logic.

If you (generic) retain power, you are not as subject to my whims as someone who does not.

"Tied up alone in a room with another person" means Bob and Kate are in his basement, she's tied up, and there's no one else around.

Missed that "with another person" phrase previously. Yay me.

 

[Homburg]

I've had to struggle very hard all my life to realize and maintain my own identity. Even though I'm fairly dominant I'm uncomfortable with the idea of asking someone to give their identity up.

The slaves I know have plenty of identity. I don't go in for the hard objectification thing though, so my girls have their own identities. I have told them many times that I do not want a drone, or a mindless yes-girl. If I want that, I'll get a dog.

Plus I'm not sure I'd enjoy dominating someone who has little will of their own.

*snort* Please tell nh23, catalina, sinnocence, or any of a number of other willful, damned recalcitrant, feisty slaves here that they've no will

Sure, there are slaves with no personal will, but, at least in my personal experience, they are not the rule.

On top of that, I'm not sure I personally would be happy being a slave's owner. I believe I'd find the role rather limiting and probably more responsibility than I'd be willing to take on. There's an aphorism that keeps popping into my mind as I read this, "A slave's chain has two ends."

I'll paraphrase Evil_Geoff here. A good slave is like a cruise missile. You point her in a direction, give her a job, and let her do her job. In short, a good slave does not need to be micromanaged. She serves to the best of her ability because she wants to, and part of that is learning your needs in and out. I actually have less to worry about with viv as my slave than I did with her as my sub.

Geoff does a better job of explaining it, sorry.

 

[ecstaticsub]

Did you mention your limits in negotiation with him and his aligned nicely, or did he just set them? Just asking out of curiosity, as if you have no personal limits, you have no personal limits. That shows serious commitment in my eyes. Do you retain a safeword?

We never really had a negotiation. We were friends and well frankly phone sex partners for a number of months first. During this time we really got to know what each others interests , fantasies and more importantly each others values. I knew before the subject of a D/s relationship ever came up what his limits were--and they matched mine. It really comes down to one main concept--Family First. We both put our marriages and our children before anything else, including our relationship.

I do have a safe word but I have never used it. I have "yellowed" though not using that word, but just needed to slow down a few times. I have asked for "clarification" on certain demands/orders sometimes because I felt I was unable to do as he asked, but with his encouragement and assistance I was able to obey. I have no objection to watersports, scat play, blood play or if he just wants to fuck for 6 hours straight. He can share me with whoever he wants (and has). It doesn't matter I know he won't physically cause me harm or do anything to harm my family or my relationship with them including my husband. I have watched him have sex with another woman. I know he loves me and treasures me. i don't need to negotiate anything with him.

 

[Homburg]

We never really had a negotiation. We were friends and well frankly phone sex partners for a number of months first. During this time we really got to know what each others interests , fantasies and more importantly each others values. I knew before the subject of a D/s relationship ever came up what his limits were--and they matched mine. It really comes down to one main concept--Family First. We both put our marriages and our children before anything else, including our relationship.

I do have a safe word but I have never used it. I have "yellowed" though not using that word, but just needed to slow down a few times. I have asked for "clarification" on certain demands/orders sometimes because I felt I was unable to do as he asked, but with his encouragement and assistance I was able to obey. I have no objection to watersports, scat play, blood play or if he just wants to fuck for 6 hours straight. He can share me with whoever he wants (and has). It doesn't matter I know he won't physically cause me harm or do anything to harm my family or my relationship with them including my husband. I have watched him have sex with another woman. I know he loves me and treasures me. i don't need to negotiate anything with him.

I would have no problems with that sort of arrangement. Sounds similar to M/s without the label, and the caveat that you two are deeply involved in your own families. I've said before that I really dig your arrangement, and how well you all handle it.

 

[EmpressFi]

We never really had a negotiation. We were friends and well frankly phone sex partners for a number of months first. During this time we really got to know what each others interests , fantasies and more importantly each others values. I knew before the subject of a D/s relationship ever came up what his limits were--and they matched mine. It really comes down to one main concept--Family First. We both put our marriages and our children before anything else, including our relationship.

I do have a safe word but I have never used it. I have "yellowed" though not using that word, but just needed to slow down a few times. I have asked for "clarification" on certain demands/orders sometimes because I felt I was unable to do as he asked, but with his encouragement and assistance I was able to obey. I have no objection to watersports, scat play, blood play or if he just wants to fuck for 6 hours straight. He can share me with whoever he wants (and has). It doesn't matter I know he won't physically cause me harm or do anything to harm my family or my relationship with them including my husband. I have watched him have sex with another woman. I know he loves me and treasures me. i don't need to negotiate anything with him.

*applause*

 

[the_pet]

slave =

no safeword
no choice

choice, opinion, etc. is mute unless asked
i serve at his leisure

pet

 

[ecstaticsub]

In my experience, yes, but only to the interplay, not the whole relationship. And, again, people keep landing on commitment to relationship. Near as I can, I am the only person who is arguing any difference in commitment, and I was very specific in saying things like "commitment to submission" as pointedly different from "commitment to relationship".

Anyway, I'll bite. I am assuming a lack of safewords and limits as an acceptable baseline by which to define an M/s relationship. If there are no limits, the Master really needs to know his slave bloody well. There is no handy limit list to avoid, checklists, or any of those other tools by which forgetful types can use to remind themselves "Oh yeah, she freaks out over needles, so let's put the sharps away". And if there are no safewords, the Master really needs to be able to read his slave bloody well to make sure that he isn't pushing her farther than he wishes to.

Yes, a dominant also needs to to know his submissive well, but he has checklists and such to fall back on. And he needs to be able to read her well also, but she can safeword if his judgement is lacking for some reason. In M/s, the responsibility lies on the Master in a scene. The slave may communicate distress, but Master is the final arbiter of the end of scene or cessation of activities.

I figure I might as well piss everyone off, top and bottom.

I call my PYL "Daddy" even though I wouldn't call our relationship a Daddy/girl type. It is a D/s relationship but he doesn't like to be called Sir or Master and really I call him by his real first name quite a bit also.

Maybe it is because we have been a LDR for 3 years and will forever be a LDR the more physical activities of our relationship are not the important. How hard he can beat me or hurt me does not define our relationship. It is all mental. I totally submit to his will. 100%. He even as a "Daddy" and not a Master is fullly committed to owning me. Of course we both have jobs, families other parts of our life but he readily takes on the responsibility of owning me seriously.

THis was especially true the last time my husband was deployed. My husband felt much better knowing that Daddy would be watching over me, checking up on me every day, many times a day. Daddy went into ultra-protective mode during this time over myself and my children. During this time he also went into ultra-domination mode. He knew that being more strict with me would also make me feel more secure. I don't see where being a Master would have made him more comiitted.

 

[EmpressFi]

I call my PYL "Daddy" even though I wouldn't call our relationship a Daddy/girl type. It is a D/s relationship but he doesn't like to be called Sir or Master and really I call him by his real first name quite a bit also.

Maybe it is because we have been a LDR for 3 years and will forever be a LDR the more physical activities of our relationship are not the important. How hard he can beat me or hurt me does not define our relationship. It is all mental. I totally submit to his will. 100%. He even as a "Daddy" and not a Master is fullly committed to owning me. Of course we both have jobs, families other parts of our life but he readily takes on the responsibility of owning me seriously.

THis was especially true the last time my husband was deployed. My husband felt much better knowing that Daddy would be watching over me, checking up on me every day, many times a day. Daddy went into ultra-protective mode during this time over myself and my children. During this time he also went into ultra-domination mode. He knew that being more strict with me would also make me feel more secure. I don't see where being a Master would have made him more comiitted.

more and more I see how similar our relationships are..

 

[ecstaticsub]

more and more I see how similar our relationships are..

Yes, I have noticed that, too.

 

[BiBunny]

I'm confused. Where is there talk of jumping through hoops?

Chest-pounding. Jumping through hoops. Bullshit posturing by self-identified Masters and slaves. It's all the same. I'm with JMohegan on this one. Most of that stuff seems like more like "Oh, look how cool I am" than anything else.

"My slave is more devoted than your sub" is more of the same old crap. I'm sorry, H. You know I like you. But that's exactly the way you're coming off in this thread.

 

[nh23]

I turned 50 in March, and have been talking to people who incorporate power and pain into their encounters or relationships for more than 30 years. Out of the thousands of discussions in which I've participated, I would agree that the most meaningful are those held in private. The tendency to posture in public is widespread indeed.

In the interest of saving time (which is short at the moment), I'll respond to your question with a cut & paste from one of my posts on DB's Ownership thread, as follows.



The property thing doesn't interest me personally, but I'll be happy to pass on some of what I've heard from hetero guys on this subject.

The most frequent reason given for ID'ing as a Master of owned property is what I'll call the "badass factor." From a BDSM cultural perspective, Masters are frequently granted more respect by peers, and further, there is often a tremendous amount of pressure on submissives in certain circles to be collared - as sort of the ultimate way of having arrived in the BDSM sense.

"The Master designation gives me exalted status in the community, makes her happy, turns her on, and does fit at least some aspects of our relationship, so why the hell not?" That seems to be the gist of it, for most of the guys I've talked to privately. What is achieved with the M/s ID (relative to regular D/s) is: perceived status in the community, and enhanced arousal and satisfaction within the relationship.


The second most frequent reason given for ID'ing as a Master of owned property is what I'll call the "ultimate control goal." The guy on Top wants to retain the right to exert either latent or active control over every aspect of his mate's life, as well as their interaction with one another. In many cases, there are significant areas in which latent control never becomes active - and the relationships therefore bear marked de facto resemblence to other unions that do not ID as M/s. But the sense of "well, I could if I wanted to...." brings added comfort and satisfaction to all.


Another reason given for wanting to own women as property is what I'll call "ultimate objectification", or "the chair thing." The guys I have spoken to who embrace this dynamic seek access to a woman whom they can use in whatever manner they please, whenever they choose to, without having their behavior constrained by the obligations of marriage or their choices limited by the fact that the quality of the relationship might suffer from her disappointment or other emotional reaction if they do X, Y, or Z.

This isn't to say that they don't prize or even care deeply for their "property". But they get off on treating her like I do the chair in my den. I may leave it for months at a time to hang out on the deck in the summer, invite friends over to use it at will, sell it when I'm ready to redecorate, etc. I don't expect my chair to complain, display emotional distress, or in any other way attempt to restrict my behavior with regard to any of those decisions - and the same expectation holds true as the goal for the human "property" in this dynamic. It may be difficult to understand why some women would want to be used this way, but there are in fact some who do.

That in my opinion is not a Master. That's an asshat. Those were some of my huge concerns before entering into this relationship. Just from other things I'd heard and read. In my relationship it's not like that. He cares about my feelings. He takes them into consideration before every decision he makes..Yes I'm his pet/slave. But first I'm his love.

 

[nh23]

Thanks J. That objectification is one of the main problems I have with the slave label.

I've had to struggle very hard all my life to realize and maintain my own identity. Even though I'm fairly dominant I'm uncomfortable with the idea of asking someone to give their identity up.

I belong to Master, but I'm also a mother, a nurse, a daughter, a sister. I have an identity of my own. I choose to surrender to his will, that's a part of my identity.

Plus I'm not sure I'd enjoy dominating someone who has little will of their own. A lot of the fun is pushing against another person's strength.

LMAO! I'm sure Master will agree that I have plenty of will. As I'm sure it's apparent to him at times that I don't always like the things he wants me to do. I'm allowed to voice that, then I go with the decision he makes. Never once in my life have I been accused of having no will..lol. Usually it's the opposite.

 

[ecstaticsub]

I would have no problems with that sort of arrangement. Sounds similar to M/s without the label, and the caveat that you two are deeply involved in your own families. I've said before that I really dig your arrangement, and how well you all handle it.

Thank you.

 

[Breaker_Morant]

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

I was wondering when somebody would bring that up and figured it would be either you or the evil critter known as bi-bunny.

 

[Breaker_Morant]

I haven't read the entire thread so my comment may be irrelevant at this point..but I shall share it anyway.

Defining sub and slave are like trying to define the color red. As I drove home from work today I was behind three red vehicles. They were all different shades of red but they were distinctly red.

I don't understand this obsession with definitions or labels, they really serve no purpose.

I agree.

 

[BiBunny]

I was wondering when somebody would bring that up and figured it would be either you or the evil critter known as bi-bunny.

I'm sorry. I've just spent enough time around clueless rednecks to be patently unimpressed with Billy Joe Badass behavior from anybody, male, female, or clueless tranny person.

I have offers left and right from men to come be my slave. Does that make me some uber-Mistress? Nope. It just means that they're desperate, and I just happen to be their target for the day.

I'm far more impressed by the cute little sub boy I've been seeing the past couple of months who's still struggling with accepting who he is. At least he's honest and doesn't feel the need to get caught up in trappings that, when you get right down to it, don't really mean a damn thing.

 

[Breaker_Morant]

I'm sorry.

Nothing to be sorry for, your "evilness" comes from being so blunt - which I love (even when you diret it at me and I'm not ready to admit it myself). And I've noticed you've tried to be nice for once - what's up with that?

 

[Homburg]

Chest-pounding. Jumping through hoops. Bullshit posturing by self-identified Masters and slaves. It's all the same. I'm with JMohegan on this one. Most of that stuff seems like more like "Oh, look how cool I am" than anything else.

"My slave is more devoted than your sub" is more of the same old crap. I'm sorry, H. You know I like you. But that's exactly the way you're coming off in this thread.

Fuck it. I don't have the energy for this today. I have never mentioned jumping through hoops or tests of devotion. Never said anything remotely close. Haven't said that slaves were more devoted to the relationship. Said fuck-all about budgets, careers, or any fucking thing other than discussing power and submission in the limited scope of comparing subs to slaves. Either I'm being obtuse or people are just hell-bent on seeing the message they want. Either way, I honestly don't have the necessary give a fuck right now.

My apologies for this rant. Today has basically shit on me from top to bottom and my care factor is exceedingly low. I think I used up what I had in my last round of replies. Y'all have fun talking about how there is no difference.