Dom verses Master
- Thread starter loneranger8921
- Start date
VelvetDarkness
Polysyllable Whore x
- Joined
- May 24, 2006
- Posts
- 6,521
I think there's a difference between referring to a M/s (master/slave) dynamic and debating a personal title like King Neptune. Lots of dominant guys like to be called 'Master' but they don't all have 24/7 real-life ownership of a slave.
For me, the definitions are something like this: -
Top/bottom: Where there is S&M play but not necessarily a power exchange. The bottom is masochistic but only tolerates pain that gratifies them.
Dom/Domme/sub: Where there is a power exchange but not necessarily S&M. This dynamic has rules, caveats and safewords. The degree of PE can vary from a bedroom only thing to almost total PE in a similar manner to M/s. There's quite a lot of overlap, which is why people often disagree about their chosen labels.
Master/Mistress/slave: Power exchange is total, which means the M can exert authority in any manner they wish, over any aspect of the slave's life. There are no safewords or limits as such, though most slave owners are aware that everybody has things that they cannot tolerate. Limits are therefore set by the M.
Log into the Lit chatroom under a username that sounds female and submissive however, and some horny teenage geek calling himself MasterDomlyKnickers or some such will demand to collar you forever in a matter of nanoseconds. As with all things in BDSM, there are no real rules or absolutes except the ones you decide for yourself and agree with others.
For me, the definitions are something like this: -
Top/bottom: Where there is S&M play but not necessarily a power exchange. The bottom is masochistic but only tolerates pain that gratifies them.
Dom/Domme/sub: Where there is a power exchange but not necessarily S&M. This dynamic has rules, caveats and safewords. The degree of PE can vary from a bedroom only thing to almost total PE in a similar manner to M/s. There's quite a lot of overlap, which is why people often disagree about their chosen labels.
Master/Mistress/slave: Power exchange is total, which means the M can exert authority in any manner they wish, over any aspect of the slave's life. There are no safewords or limits as such, though most slave owners are aware that everybody has things that they cannot tolerate. Limits are therefore set by the M.
Log into the Lit chatroom under a username that sounds female and submissive however, and some horny teenage geek calling himself MasterDomlyKnickers or some such will demand to collar you forever in a matter of nanoseconds. As with all things in BDSM, there are no real rules or absolutes except the ones you decide for yourself and agree with others.
00Syd
Secret Agent
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2007
- Posts
- 4,580
So would you say that a person's chosen title is dependent on currently being in a relationship, and what type of relationship that is?
VelvetDarkness
Polysyllable Whore x
- Joined
- May 24, 2006
- Posts
- 6,521
I wouldn't say that at all. If you are talking about the term 'Master' in reference to a certain type of dynamic however, M/s as I described it is what I would first assume you were alluding to, in the absence of any additional information. The OP was talking about 'Dom' and 'Master' as rungs on a kink ladder but as others have pointed out, many kinksters don't think like that. It's just a title they like the sound of, like King Neptune.
scarletnym
Loving Pet of Chgris
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2009
- Posts
- 7,877
I am very new at this so this will be a completely stupid and annoying question to most, but what does PYL stand for? Thanks for helping a beginner
nh23
Daddy's chunky monkey. :)
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2007
- Posts
- 3,591
scarletnym
Loving Pet of Chgris
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2009
- Posts
- 7,877
hehehehe that was simple, thank you
YourCaptor
Cute Girl Connoisseur
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2007
- Posts
- 4,550
Master and dom describe separate things, like golfer and whore. They aren’t really levels of intensity or different stops in the career of sexy beasts. They aren’t titles either unless someone makes them into a title… in which case they need a slap or something cause it is so cheesy.
I find them rather self-explanatory, a dom does domination, a master controls all. They are somewhere along that line.
I find them rather self-explanatory, a dom does domination, a master controls all. They are somewhere along that line.
SimonBrooke
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Posts
- 1,139
H'mmmmm....
For me ambiguity about consent is a very heady, dangerous and explosive aphrodisiac.
Which is another way of saying I'm pretty twisted up about this stuff. Consent is not fixed and is not binary. It ebbs and flows; it can be teased, twisted, played with, stretched. This is what the whole safeword game is all about, after all - playing with when no really does mean no, and when it doesn't quite.
What am I? I don't know. I'm just me, I've never felt the need for a label. I enjoy tying women up, for sex. I enjoy exploring the limits of consent. I enjoy inflicting mild, transient pain but I know from experience that I hate inflicting severe pain, even when my partner really wants it. So I don't think I'm a sadist.
I don't want to be responsible for someone else's life 24/7, I'd find being waited on really annoying, and I don't want someone subservient. I don't think I want anyone else actually living full time in my space at all, any more. So I don't see myself as a master.
But the idea of having a woman (of my choice!) wearing my collar that she can't take off while going about her daily life is a big, big thrill, and the idea of having my name tattooed on her arse is an even bigger one.
No, I've never had a partner tattooed... yet...
scarletnym
Loving Pet of Chgris
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2009
- Posts
- 7,877
I agree. For me being tied up by anyone is a risk and a huge turn on, even though you may trust that person, you can never truly know what is in their mind. (If people knew what went though my mind, they would probably run screaming lol)
Homburg
Daring greatly
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Posts
- 13,578
I would, yes, but only because I feel like those "titles" only have meaning in an active dynamic. Dominant and submissive are personality packages, sure, but when used as titles are only applicable within given situation. Same with master, slave, top, and bottom.
I am called "Master" by viv and MIS, but in no way want anyone else referring to me in that manner. And they may be slaves within our dynamic, but, again, I am not going to be all that keen on other people calling them "slave" as a title or name. They have personal names, and that is what s acceptable for others to call them.
Or, to turn it towards someone else, I may know that you refer to yourself on occasion as a "submissive", but I would not use that term to introduce you to someone else at a party.
Used as labels, they have some small worth. As titles, they're useless outside of a relationship.
ZRT
The 'Yarch's Ass Kicker
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2009
- Posts
- 1,357
You're thinking of the old guy in the walker over there. *points at Homburg* I can still move, though the knees are somewhat creaky these days.
*grabs tongue* Oh thanks. I was needing one of these.
SimonBrooke
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Posts
- 1,139
Isn't that context dependent, too? If you knew someone who was at the submissive end of the spectrum, and you knew she was looking for a partner, and there was someone else at the party who you knew was at the dominant end of the spectrum, wouldn't it be a friendly thing to do to introduce them to one another and to let each of them have this important information about the other?
In a vanilla world, it isn't always easy for the kinked to recognise one another. Helping one another out is neighbourly.
VelvetDarkness
Polysyllable Whore x
- Joined
- May 24, 2006
- Posts
- 6,521
Although I do not impose limits on our play, there are aspects to this in M/s too. Master knows when I'm readily consenting, when I'm reluctant and when I'm complying out of sheer terror, desperately wondering how far he's going to go. All these things are very hot.
Depends on what you consider to encompass 24/7 control. Master has the ultimate right to interfere in any aspect of my life but that doesn't mean my every move is micromanaged. I have friends, family, a business and a whole heap of other stuff that rarely concerns him at all. I'm an intelligent, capable adult and he has no desire to treat me like some delicate, weak little thing who can't handle the real world. That's just us, but it works. He's not one to pick my clothes out in the morning but he expects me to wear stuff that he likes me in. He doesn't meticulously plan my day but he expects me to be productive and to keep him in the loop. On the face of it, we're perhaps more like a normal couple than many here would imagine.
As for subservience, I don't throw myself to the floor at his feet every time he enters a room. I don't sit around self flagellating if he goes out for the evening with his mates. There is tacit respect in all our conversation but more in the manner of a Captain and 1st Mate than anything else. He wants my opinion on things and he values it. If we're talking about life, the universe and everything, we're almost equals. I don't have to bow and refer to him as Master every single time I open my mouth. I have my subservient, service oriented days and then I have angry, PMT-fuelled ones where he's very much not the centre of my universe. It ebbs and flows but it's always there.
I wear a collar in the house and an engraved necklace outside it. It does keep my more mindful of my place I think and it's a symbol of his ownerwhip of me even when he's not feeling particularly dominant or controlling. We want to get tattoos but are being indecisive about it. That will be pretty much a joint decision, as tatts last a long time.
Adakgirl
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- May 6, 2006
- Posts
- 6,285
Here's what an old- school Mistress says about this topic.
This Article courtesy of Mistress Steel
DOMINANT vs MASTER
DOMINATRIX vs MISTRESS
Those just entering the BDSM world will find the abundant usage of both of these words by members of the online community.
This is primarily due to the rapid growth of access and the restrained attainability of quality texts to correctly interpret what these
words mean within the community itself. Up to a few years ago the BDSM world was a tightly closed and almost secret society.
Membership in this society was kept totally private and hidden with significant effort. Entree into the community was by referral
and accompaniment only. Protocols or rules of conduct were strict and strongly enforced, not from some control standpoint but
because those rules emerged from bitterly hard lessons in survival.
A Dominant is a person with a dominant aspect in their personality.
A Master is a Dominant with significant real life BDSM experience.
They are not the same. It can be fairly said that all Master/Mistress's are Dominant. It cannot be said that all Dominant's have
earned the title of Master/Mistress. The Dominant person will range from lightly, moderately and heavily dominant. They may
desire to engage in a relationship which is infrequent and strictly limited by rules, boundaries and limitations. These light
Dominant's will generally have a very limited desire to have a significant D/s relationship, this is sometimes due to conflicting
life events and other times due to being 'barely dominant'.
There is a second group of light Dominant's or persons with a desire to control without the adequate understanding or tools to do so.
I sometimes call these person's low level Dominant's. Their range or sphere (their world) is small, they can be poorly educated,
relatively low paying jobs, somewhat narrow minded and may be subject to 'dominant bursts', or short term barely or uncontrolled
violent outbursts. These low level Dominant's are often abusive and were generally bully's or victims of abuse as children. They
may be full of justifications for their 'actions' often assigning 'blame' or directing by means of fear, intimidation or threat of pain.
They are often without honor, courage and veracity as individual's and when encountered in the BDSM world should be avoided
or not sought out to be in a relationship with.
The moderate Dominant is the most common Dominant and will characteristically be interested in a 'relationship', though often
they may not desire a full time relationship when they are fairly new to the community. They tend to have a broader range and
more committed style than the light Dominant and the submissive will find them to be more stable. They will tend to be decently
educated, interested in their outer world, midrange job. They may tend to control through a blending of thought and the
accentuating of traditional type disciplines. They are most likely to have 'sides', wishing and desiring their submissive to 'share' in
decision making choices.
The heavy Dominant can be distinguished primarily by a clear, strong and compelling desire to live in a 24/7 relationship with one
submissive. This Dominant will generally have been in the community for a long time or be seasoned, will have explored the
'abundance' of many D/s events, meetings, scenes and partners. They can be more tolerant and more strict than any other
Dominant. A high percentage of heavy Dominant's will have spent some portion of their BDSM life as a submissive, learning from
the inside. These Dominant's often allow few limits and believe that their submissive must trust in them to direct them in a safe,
sane manner. They are generally well rounded and quite stable. Holding to simple, firm rules with a strong desire to maintain the
health and well-being of their chosen mate.
One of the most significant traits which identifies or distinguishes a member of this community is the basic 'desire to serve for the
pleasure of another'. This aspect trait is shared by both Dominant and submissive though manifested in entirely different ways.
When 'in scene' the Dominant is 'serving' the needs of the submissive by giving and/or directing that submissive in a manner
which is pleasurable to the core being of the submissive. In those terms the Dominant is the giver, the submissive the receiver.
In a good or well rounded relationship this flows back and forth between both Dominant and submissive. The submissive is
'giving' obedience and consent to the Dominant, the Dominant is 'giving' direction and control to the submissive.
Additionally you have those who go by the name of Top. This person is generally an individual who enjoys scening from the Top
position. S/he may or may not have a strong dominant aspect. Many Top's will openly indicate that they do not consider themselves to be a Dominant, they generally have little desire to be in a controlling position of another person's life. Many see themselves in dual roles and may identify themselves as switches, or having the ability to switch from Top to bottom role. I also need to mention the Sadist here. A Sadist may or may not be a Dominant, in much the same way as a Top. Often a true Sadist will openly identify themselves as a Sadist. They scene because the inflicting of pain upon another being brings them pleasure. In many cases the Sadist has no desire to live in a controlling position over another person. Also the true Sadist is very attuned to 'scene limits', they can and may be a stickler for very precise identification of what is permissible and what is not. In general terms they are not oriented toward 'serving the pleasure' of the person they scene with though often they are very skilled, very intelligent and very careful.
A Dominant may be sadistic and will often have a strong sadistic side which allows them the ability or range to interact with the
submissive in an intense sensory stimulation way.
A multiple partner Dominant can be any of those above mentioned. The individual's stability can best be judged by the duration of
those poly-relationships. Also there are those that take on or desire to take on 'stables' of submissives. In most cases this is a
fantasy wish fulfillment type of ego stroking. Functionally, the more people within a relationship the harder it is to manage.
It is quite difficult to manage a single relationship well, every division of time, energy and focus reduces the overall quality to
everyone.
THE MASTER ~ MISTRESS
The Master/Mistress is beyond the last level of the Dominant. They are generally well experienced, often having lived as a full time
slave for up to several years as part of their training. This title used to be given within the local communities in a ceremonial way
when the individual had earned this title by the estimation of a majority consensus agreement of the Dominant's within that local
community. It was considered to be a high honor and carried with it a measure of instant respect by all those so encountering it.
In addition there is a further title of Grand Master/Mistress. This title is awarded even more rarely and should you encounter any
individual with this title, you should offer extreme respect and understand that this title was awarded for demonstrable and long
term consistent actions.
The vast majority of Dominants 'emerge' in their mid-thirties. A full emergence often takes as long as seven years as they work
through and integrate all the conflicting information inside of themselves (this is identical for the submissives also -
though many female sub's emerge in their late 20's). During this 'emergence' process they can be somewhat unstable,
moving from person to person and sometimes from orientation to orientation as they seek to understand what is happening to
them and who they really are.
A few other misconceptions to address. The term 'Lady' is often seen. Lady can be an indicator of both Dominant or submissive.
Many Alpha or number one submissives are called 'Ladies'. Usage of this term as it applies to a Dominant Female is somewhat
unclear though it 'may' indicate that the Dominant is or has been a switch. I should note that many of the Dominant's are former
submissives who carry forth their education and training quite proudly. The term Lord is also commonly seen here and is often
used as in 'Lord and Master'. Being called a 'Lord' does not mean that the individual is a Master but appears to be a term of
endearment given by the submissive to that Dominant. Sir and Ma'am also fall into the category of endearment honorific title terms.
Many Dominant's have no desire to assume the identity of a Master and require their submissives to call them Sir to be used as the
reverent title of choice. This also holds true for Ma'am though I should note here that 'Madame' can be interpreted as a slur due to
it's association with prostitution.
Also, a submissive is not allowed to address an individual as Master or Mistress unless they are within the collaring process with
that Dominant. When wearing the 'collar of consideration' the sub/slave moves within the relationship circle of that Dominant's
realm and should then address that Dominant in the manner so indicated by that Dominant's rank or desire. This continues
through the 'training collar' stage and becomes permanent in the 'slave collar' stage. Proper protocol and etiquette should be taught
to the new submissive/slave to prevent accidental embarrassment of the Dominant in situations where the submissive/slave may
encounter other Dominant's, Alpha subs and submissive/slaves.
by Mistress Steel
This Article courtesy of Mistress Steel
DOMINANT vs MASTER
DOMINATRIX vs MISTRESS
Those just entering the BDSM world will find the abundant usage of both of these words by members of the online community.
This is primarily due to the rapid growth of access and the restrained attainability of quality texts to correctly interpret what these
words mean within the community itself. Up to a few years ago the BDSM world was a tightly closed and almost secret society.
Membership in this society was kept totally private and hidden with significant effort. Entree into the community was by referral
and accompaniment only. Protocols or rules of conduct were strict and strongly enforced, not from some control standpoint but
because those rules emerged from bitterly hard lessons in survival.
A Dominant is a person with a dominant aspect in their personality.
A Master is a Dominant with significant real life BDSM experience.
They are not the same. It can be fairly said that all Master/Mistress's are Dominant. It cannot be said that all Dominant's have
earned the title of Master/Mistress. The Dominant person will range from lightly, moderately and heavily dominant. They may
desire to engage in a relationship which is infrequent and strictly limited by rules, boundaries and limitations. These light
Dominant's will generally have a very limited desire to have a significant D/s relationship, this is sometimes due to conflicting
life events and other times due to being 'barely dominant'.
There is a second group of light Dominant's or persons with a desire to control without the adequate understanding or tools to do so.
I sometimes call these person's low level Dominant's. Their range or sphere (their world) is small, they can be poorly educated,
relatively low paying jobs, somewhat narrow minded and may be subject to 'dominant bursts', or short term barely or uncontrolled
violent outbursts. These low level Dominant's are often abusive and were generally bully's or victims of abuse as children. They
may be full of justifications for their 'actions' often assigning 'blame' or directing by means of fear, intimidation or threat of pain.
They are often without honor, courage and veracity as individual's and when encountered in the BDSM world should be avoided
or not sought out to be in a relationship with.
The moderate Dominant is the most common Dominant and will characteristically be interested in a 'relationship', though often
they may not desire a full time relationship when they are fairly new to the community. They tend to have a broader range and
more committed style than the light Dominant and the submissive will find them to be more stable. They will tend to be decently
educated, interested in their outer world, midrange job. They may tend to control through a blending of thought and the
accentuating of traditional type disciplines. They are most likely to have 'sides', wishing and desiring their submissive to 'share' in
decision making choices.
The heavy Dominant can be distinguished primarily by a clear, strong and compelling desire to live in a 24/7 relationship with one
submissive. This Dominant will generally have been in the community for a long time or be seasoned, will have explored the
'abundance' of many D/s events, meetings, scenes and partners. They can be more tolerant and more strict than any other
Dominant. A high percentage of heavy Dominant's will have spent some portion of their BDSM life as a submissive, learning from
the inside. These Dominant's often allow few limits and believe that their submissive must trust in them to direct them in a safe,
sane manner. They are generally well rounded and quite stable. Holding to simple, firm rules with a strong desire to maintain the
health and well-being of their chosen mate.
One of the most significant traits which identifies or distinguishes a member of this community is the basic 'desire to serve for the
pleasure of another'. This aspect trait is shared by both Dominant and submissive though manifested in entirely different ways.
When 'in scene' the Dominant is 'serving' the needs of the submissive by giving and/or directing that submissive in a manner
which is pleasurable to the core being of the submissive. In those terms the Dominant is the giver, the submissive the receiver.
In a good or well rounded relationship this flows back and forth between both Dominant and submissive. The submissive is
'giving' obedience and consent to the Dominant, the Dominant is 'giving' direction and control to the submissive.
Additionally you have those who go by the name of Top. This person is generally an individual who enjoys scening from the Top
position. S/he may or may not have a strong dominant aspect. Many Top's will openly indicate that they do not consider themselves to be a Dominant, they generally have little desire to be in a controlling position of another person's life. Many see themselves in dual roles and may identify themselves as switches, or having the ability to switch from Top to bottom role. I also need to mention the Sadist here. A Sadist may or may not be a Dominant, in much the same way as a Top. Often a true Sadist will openly identify themselves as a Sadist. They scene because the inflicting of pain upon another being brings them pleasure. In many cases the Sadist has no desire to live in a controlling position over another person. Also the true Sadist is very attuned to 'scene limits', they can and may be a stickler for very precise identification of what is permissible and what is not. In general terms they are not oriented toward 'serving the pleasure' of the person they scene with though often they are very skilled, very intelligent and very careful.
A Dominant may be sadistic and will often have a strong sadistic side which allows them the ability or range to interact with the
submissive in an intense sensory stimulation way.
A multiple partner Dominant can be any of those above mentioned. The individual's stability can best be judged by the duration of
those poly-relationships. Also there are those that take on or desire to take on 'stables' of submissives. In most cases this is a
fantasy wish fulfillment type of ego stroking. Functionally, the more people within a relationship the harder it is to manage.
It is quite difficult to manage a single relationship well, every division of time, energy and focus reduces the overall quality to
everyone.
THE MASTER ~ MISTRESS
The Master/Mistress is beyond the last level of the Dominant. They are generally well experienced, often having lived as a full time
slave for up to several years as part of their training. This title used to be given within the local communities in a ceremonial way
when the individual had earned this title by the estimation of a majority consensus agreement of the Dominant's within that local
community. It was considered to be a high honor and carried with it a measure of instant respect by all those so encountering it.
In addition there is a further title of Grand Master/Mistress. This title is awarded even more rarely and should you encounter any
individual with this title, you should offer extreme respect and understand that this title was awarded for demonstrable and long
term consistent actions.
AHHA DESCRIPTION OF OUR BELOVED HOMBURG. dON'T U AGREE?
The vast majority of Dominants 'emerge' in their mid-thirties. A full emergence often takes as long as seven years as they work
through and integrate all the conflicting information inside of themselves (this is identical for the submissives also -
though many female sub's emerge in their late 20's). During this 'emergence' process they can be somewhat unstable,
moving from person to person and sometimes from orientation to orientation as they seek to understand what is happening to
them and who they really are.
A few other misconceptions to address. The term 'Lady' is often seen. Lady can be an indicator of both Dominant or submissive.
Many Alpha or number one submissives are called 'Ladies'. Usage of this term as it applies to a Dominant Female is somewhat
unclear though it 'may' indicate that the Dominant is or has been a switch. I should note that many of the Dominant's are former
submissives who carry forth their education and training quite proudly. The term Lord is also commonly seen here and is often
used as in 'Lord and Master'. Being called a 'Lord' does not mean that the individual is a Master but appears to be a term of
endearment given by the submissive to that Dominant. Sir and Ma'am also fall into the category of endearment honorific title terms.
Many Dominant's have no desire to assume the identity of a Master and require their submissives to call them Sir to be used as the
reverent title of choice. This also holds true for Ma'am though I should note here that 'Madame' can be interpreted as a slur due to
it's association with prostitution.
Also, a submissive is not allowed to address an individual as Master or Mistress unless they are within the collaring process with
that Dominant. When wearing the 'collar of consideration' the sub/slave moves within the relationship circle of that Dominant's
realm and should then address that Dominant in the manner so indicated by that Dominant's rank or desire. This continues
through the 'training collar' stage and becomes permanent in the 'slave collar' stage. Proper protocol and etiquette should be taught
to the new submissive/slave to prevent accidental embarrassment of the Dominant in situations where the submissive/slave may
encounter other Dominant's, Alpha subs and submissive/slaves.
by Mistress Steel
Last edited:
00Syd
Secret Agent
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2007
- Posts
- 4,580
My only reason for asking is because I know many, many single people who use titles like "master" as part of their permanent scene name, whether they are currently in a relationship or single. Personally, I have no problem with that.
IMO, titles hold meaning for each individual, and while for you they may only hold meaning while in an active dynamic, for another they may hold the meaning to describe themselves, whether in a relationship or not. I guess I'm thinking of them less as labels or as titles but as descriptors that everyone has the right to use.
At first, when meeting people who put "master" (or some other such thing) permanently in front of their name, I thought something like "how silly" or maybe even "how rude" but now it barely even registers with me. Some people enjoy being known as "master" to everyone, and some enjoy only being known as "master" to a few, and I am fine with both. I think people can call themselves whatever they like, or not call themselves whatever they like. Whatever works for them, you know?
Homburg
Daring greatly
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Posts
- 13,578
My knees are actually not that bad. Now. They sucked before, but I pretty much licked that problem. Correcting my style of lift and seriously strengthening my hip flexors did a lot, and glucosamine chondroitin handles the rest.
--
This is why I said they had uses as labels. I am treading a fine line in differentiating between titles and labels, but I think it is a useful line to tread.
"This is Syd, she's on the submissive side of the fence."
"This submissive is called 'Syd'."
Different sentences using very similar language.
--
The farthest I'll go is to toss a "Miss" in front of an Fdom's name. I accept that there is a serious amount of baggage in the scene regarding chauvinism and don't mind recognising Fdom's in that manner. I don't use "Master/Mistress" in front of anyone's name any more than I use "slave" because I don't see it as culturally supported.
"Master" and "slave" both refer to a position within a dynamic, not a position within the scene en toto. My friend "into" is a slave to his mistress, but just plain old "into" to me.
I don't particularly look down on people that use titles in their scene name, I just choose not to follow their convention. I'm not obnoxious about it, I just avoid using the name at all.
About the only time I can see it is in the Leather context. "Master" is a title that means a whole helluva lot in the Leather community, and it is earned (from what I understand), not just some self-descriptive thing. In that context, I am less put off by the usage. It is similar to being a Master Plumber or Master Electrician. Your society of peers awarded that title due to competence and experience.
So the short answer is that I consider the usage of those titles in scene names to be a bit pretentious. It may sound borderline insulting (and I don't mean it that way), but I don't personally see the need to tell someone that I'm dominant in my scene name. It should be obvious enough, and, moreover, it should also be utterly unimportant unless one of us is trying to get the other into bed.
Fortunately, the response people will perceive from me "Whatever works," much like yours. Call yourself "King Neptune", to use that excellent phrase, if it floats your boat.
Corylea
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2008
- Posts
- 885
People can call THEMSELVES whatever they like. But names are usually handles that other people call us by. If someone wants to think of him- or herself as "Grand Poobah of the Universe" in their own mind, I have no problem with that. But if a person expects to be addressed as "Grand Poohbah of the Universe" by someone else, especially if that person expects to be addressed as such by people with whom they have a casual, acquaintanceship sort of relationship, well, then that person has their head up their ass. Not that I'm judgmental or anything.
I hold parties in my home from time to time, and there are a few people on my guest list who call themselves "Master This" or "Master That." I call them "This" or "That" when face-to-face with them, and they have not complained.
As far as I'm concerned, no one should call me "Mistress" unless I give them permission to do so. (And I never do -- when someone is my submissive, they call me "My Lady;" I've never liked the term "Mistress.") To me, calling someone "Master" or "Mistress" when one is not in that relationship with them is like calling them "husband" or "wife." My husband can call me his wife. My girlfriend could do so if she wanted to, though she wouldn't. For anyone else to do so, well, no one else ever would -- they're not in that relationship with me, and they know it. To me, BDSM titles are the same way.
And titles aren't substance. I've never called any man "Master" or any woman "Mistress," and the sort of person who insists on those titles with all and sundry is exactly the sort of person that I would never feel the urge to submit to. And the sort of person who calls all women "Mistress" is exactly the sort of person I would never want for a submissive. When I take on a sub, I want that person to want to submit to ME, not to any woman who happens to be available. I've never wanted to submit to "a dominant," I've only ever wanted to submit to specific people who brought that out in me, which is quite a rare occurance. (And most of the tiny handful of people that I could imagine submitting to ran screaming for the hills at the first sign that we might be headed in that direction. I seem to be a lot scarier than I'd realized. Me? Sweet little ole me?
And they didn't realize how they'd been complimented -- I'm anything but a "natural" submissive; on the rare occasions when someone brings out that side of me, I'm always flabbergasted.)As far as I can tell, the truly powerful folks don't need to have J. Random Scenemember call them "Master" or "Mistress;" calling them that is a privilege that they bestow only upon their chosen submissive(s).
Lobo_8
Why is the sky blue...
- Joined
- May 11, 2008
- Posts
- 1,165
I guess I'm one of those "rung people" everyone hates. When I first take a sub, she is just that, a sub. I will call her by her name or another name other than her birth name should she desire it. I will be addressed as Sir or by a name of my choosing. As our relationship grows a point will be reached where my sub will be collared. After the collaring she becomes my slave in title. She can be addressed by this or by her name. I then gain the title of Master to her and her alone. I can then be addressed as Master, Sir or the name I chose depending on the situation. Everything is discussed with my sub and should she not agree to this then a compromise would be made in some fashion (as an aside I have never had this happen).
-Burns
-Burns
ZRT
The 'Yarch's Ass Kicker
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2009
- Posts
- 1,357
Hey! I need..wait a second that might actually be nice for Master.
Oh, I'm sure he has plenty of uses for it, and I'm not going about stealing other men's property, so I'll mail it to him and let him decide if he wants to give it back to you.
