The All Inclusive Calendar of 2008

[Etoile]

That's freaking brilliant. Thanks for calling our attention to it, Netzach.

 

[graceanne]

January 16th - words of Etoile

Might one also say that it's the dom's responsibility to not put up with that shit?

I think both partners have a responsibility here. The sub has to try to stop the inappropriate behavior, and the dom has to refuse to put up with it. That combination will fix the situation quickly.

Topping from the Bottom

 

[graceanne]

January 17th - words of Evil_Geoff

In my observations and to my way of thinking, there seem to be two schools of thought regarding "topping from the bottom":

"Topping from the bottom" in the sense of a D/s relationship is using deception, lying, manipulation to try to get the PYL to do something the pyl wants or needs done. At best, it is an inability to communicate honestly and directly between the parties in the relationship. At it's worst, it is deliberate, willful conduct, dishonest to the core, designed to decieve the Dominant about the true needs, desires, and nature of the pyl.

In the case of the inability to honestly communicate, serious issues exist, probably along trust lines, and this isn't something that a Dominant can work out of a pyl. This is something that everyone in the relationship will have to work on by learning to listen without judgement, speaking needs and desires openly and honestly, and working TOGETHER to achieve the needs and desires of the parties involved.

In my own relationships, if I found out it's a case of willful, ongoing deceit, I will show the pyl the door, I won't put up with one deliberately lying to me.

The second view of "Topping from the bottom" seems to be taken from SM play scenes. Personally, I think people are confusing the issue because in SM play having the bottom set their limits, negotiate the kind of play that may or may not occur, etc. is to be expected. For a scene, it's not a problem, it's a given, especially for people that are new to playing with one another.

And I don't see anything wrong with a bottom saying "OUCH! That HURT you bastard, STOP!" or "Beat on my ass more, my back hurts" as "Topping from the bottom" That's just letting me know I'm doing my job right... _I_ make the decision to ease off, stop, or change targets after all. It's MY decision, unless they safeword out of the scene.

Topping from the Bottom

 

[Etoile]

*blushes*

Thank you gracie, it always puts a HUGE smile on my face to be included in the calendar threads! Seriously, it makes me glow for days! And what a nice birthday present!

 

[graceanne]

*blushes*

Thank you gracie, it always puts a HUGE smile on my face to be included in the calendar threads! Seriously, it makes me glow for days! And what a nice birthday present!

You're welcome. *hugs*

Isn't your birthday not for a couple of days? Well my time, I guess it's tomorrow your time.

 

[graceanne]

January 18th - words of magdelena69

So I cried in front of M for the second time in a year. Difference this time is that it was something seriously emotional, not the fact he made me shake and scream. I'm afraid of getting too attatched. Funny, I will let him do anything to me, but I can't just tell him that I want to be with him. And I have barked and cum and spanked and almost everything else in front of him, but I am, for the first time, embarassed. Because I was crying and being emotional in front of him. This is not going the way I wanted (not that it was supposed to matter), but all of a sudden I am more afraid of myself than I anything else. Normal or not?

So I cried

 

[graceanne]

January 19th - words of madetotakeit

That is a normal fear. Not only to worry about being emotional in front of him, but also that fear of attachment. Definitely a relationship rather than BDSM question. In any relationship those fears are there. "If I show emotion, will it upset?" "If I admit the level of attachment will it be too much?" "If I put my heart out there will it be accepted or turned away?"

I completely understand the fear of becoming attached. You start off thinking things will be one way. At some point (sometimes sooner, sometimes later) you find the dynamic has changed in you (or recognize that it will.) It wasn't what was agreed upon at the outset, but there is no control over it. It seems to me to be a combination of fear of rejection and fear of the change of status quo. Neither are comfortable at first. You accept, adapt and move on whatever the outcome is. This is true in any human interaction.

I do wonder though if the BDSM aspect does increase or speed up those feelings? The level of trust is higher than in vanilla relationships. Does this then leave us more vulnerable to becoming more attached than planned if we are wired to do so?

So I cried

 

[madetotakeit]

Thanks for the nod Graceanne. I'm like Etoile...being included in the calendar gives me a great feeling. Glad you posted EG's for the 17th. I was going to submit that one too.

 

[FurryFury]

Thanks for including my post Netzach! I am honored.

 

[madetotakeit]

January 20th- words of Bandelero

Not sure if you want a reply from a PYL who is also inexperienced, but here is mine anyway:

At this stage in my voyage through both the brightly lit streets and the dark dank corners of BDSM, I want a pyl who has a firm knowledge of what they want....more years ago than I like to remember I fumbled, gasped and giggled with girls who were as virginal and untutored as I.

Some of that was fun and I would not trade one particular experience for a years worth of orgasms ....BUT add in the complications of BDSM and that whole process of just finding out what's what is going to take up too much time that could be better spent learning more about what DOES work.

So the bottom line for me is going to be that I would never turn away untried ANY pyl who indicated that they might mesh with me, but if I am going to actively seek a pyl out then I am going to look for someone who at the very least can confidently state both hard and soft limits.
The actual number of HAVE DONE as opposed to MIGHT TRY is of little significance to me just so long as there were some of both.
Above all I want that pyl to have a mind that is at least as strong as mine
One thing I am absolutely certain of is that pyl is NOT a label for "pathetic yowling lackwit"
The strength of mind needed for a pyl simply to be who they are can be just as mighty as my own, merely focused from another plane.

I am also completely certain that somewhere out there is the pyl who will fit my PYL like a delicate hand in an iron glove....and if it takes several fittings to get that perfect fit then the time would be very well spent indeed.

Experience vs New Explorer

 

[madetotakeit]

January 21st-words of catalina_francisco

I'm in the camp of not thinking it is possible to make a vanilla kinky. That is not to say you mightn't have something buried inside in which case it is possible (though not if it is in a different direction to the one wished for), but from my experience if you are vanilla to the core, kinky just is not going to be who you are. I also advise people seeking to be something to please another to think long and hard as it is destined for either failure when you can no longer pretend just to please, or a lifetime of frustration, sadness, and often lowered self esteem by trying to live the life of someone you are not. If you are not the type of person another requires and desires, no amount of acting can make you that person or the right person for them, nor is it fair to you to expect you can live the life of someone you're not..***** is too short to waste in such ways.

Now assuming there is a spark somewhere inside you, fearing you are harming your partner beyond what is OK is not a sin, nor a sign you are not going to be able to please them and yourself. I have yet to talk to a PYL who has not had moments when they have questioned certain aspects and needed time to grow to a point where it becomes acceptable and not so scary, sometimes even a huge turn on. It is natural as we are raised in the mainstream with a whole different set of ethics and beliefs about what is and isn't right in loving relationships....moving beyond that without guilt can be quite a challenging journey in itself, but not impossible. I know in our relationship alone, we have both moved beyond points and acts we once thought were not possible or acceptable, and all without harm. Explore you and find out if you have any sparks of genuine interest in kink, then take steps from there.

Catalina

how does a vanilla girl turn kinky?

 

[madetotakeit]

January 22nd-words of Homburg

Now, why would you want to do that?

Back on topic, we've talked a good bit here about building up to intensity so pain can be interpreted as pleasure, what about the mental and emotional trickery used to just drop the bottom into that space?

There are times when I do not worry about the ramp-up. I just grab her by the back of the neck, force her bent over some handy fixture, and start to lay hand on ass. She squirms, yelps, and cries out for those first few swats, but my hand tangled in her hair and a growled "Stay!" serve to slam her into proper headspace. It is pain and pleasure thereafter.

Subtle endorphin manipulation is fine and good, but sometimes I just need to take.

Building Pleasure through Pain

 

[madetotakeit]

January 23rd-words of Twysted73

Ah, clit slapping.

As far as I've been concerned, (and I am fully aware this is so indicative of my nature being what it is) I like someone who fills in where I am lacking and vice versa.
For example, I am a budding sadist. I love the thought of being mean and truly evil when the opportunity presents itself.
Why? because it's an opportunity to express a side of myself that give me pleasure despite the discomfort of the other who's with me.
That being said, if my partner knows more about drawing out my sadistic nature then I am so enthralled to learn, learn, learn.

If I know more then she does, and she wants to learn what I know, I'm happy to inflict it on her.

I look for balance. If I know a lot and she knows a little, then good. And vice versa. But if she knows as much about things that I'm strong in then where's the suprise? Where's the squirming? Where's the excitement of that unexpected scream when I hit the right spot?

*shivers*

Maybe I need a shower. Grrrrrr..... A cold one.

Experience vs New Explorer

 

[madetotakeit]

January 24th-words of Netzach

I honestly don't care. I love 'em experienced. I don't mind 'em more experienced than I am, because sometimes it's nice to have the chance to learn new things on a new body that knows itself well, and then challenge yourself with variation and style rather than the activity itself. I don't mind inexperience either, as long as the brain is brought to the table too, which is sometimes left at home.

I have no issue being told about past experiences - H was pre-owned and his last Mistress was totally different from me, the stories are a gas and I admire the woman's style. I guess if his last owner was a late 20's early 30's type who rosco rathbone would call "carrie brownsteinlike" I might get a little sick of being compared, but as an apple I am unthreatened by oranges.

Experience vs New Explorer

 

[madetotakeit]

January 25th-words of DeservingBitch

I'm adding my voice to what others have said: it's not going to go away.

That's the assumption you have to start from in making your decisions.

Talk to him. There are more than one possible outcomes from being honest and open with him, and the relationship ending is certainly one of them. But remaining quiet about these desires and needs of yours for fear of losing him is basically denying him his right to make the best choice for himself.

I also think that you're denying yourself the possibility of being happy and satisfied by keeping those desires hidden.

I'm aware that all this is easier said then done. But I do think that the potential for immediate pain is never going to be worse than the cumulative pain of denying who you are and what you need for the years to come.

Lost

 

[Etoile]

You're welcome. *hugs*

Isn't your birthday not for a couple of days? Well my time, I guess it's tomorrow your time.

You're right, it is the 18th, but what are the chances I will say something brilliant between now and then?

 

[graceanne]

January 26th - words of rosco rathbone

Of course we are fucking intimadating. That's the whole point.

Smart Doms - Intimidating or not?

 

[twysted73]

January 23rd-words of Twysted73



Experience vs New Explorer

Again, it's never the ones you think will catch another's eye for consideration, but the ones where you're just being....yourself.

Slainte` m2ti.

 

[Homburg]

My thanks to MP and madetotakeit for considering my words so highly.

 

[madetotakeit]

January 27th-words of GnomeDePlume

I'd say you've hit it. The essence of willing submission is, after all, trust. "I'm going to allow You to tell me what to do, to do with me largely what You will. I'm going to trust that You won't harm me, and that what we do will be good."

Submission isn't really the gift we give to Dominants... it's the trust that's humbling, or damned well should be.

And the only people I know with more control issues than many submissives are Dominants.

Submission is like a an unending series of "trust falls;" falling backwards blindly, trusting someone else to catch you.

My Most Beloved Mistress just commented that the trust isn't a gift, but rather something earned by the actions, words, demeanor, etc. of the Dominant. I think that's true, but ultimately it's the submissive who decides to let go, trusting that the Dominant will catch him or her.

Topping from the Bottom

 

[DeservingBitch]

January 28 -- Words of myinnerslut

it might help if you think of BDSM like a giant buffet. fill up your plate with whatever looks good to you, leave what you dont want, and feel free to go back for seconds.

Got room for another newbie?

 

[graceanne]

Thank you, bdsm librarian for linking this post, otherwise I might not have noticed it.

January 29th - words of serijules

I wrote this awhile back....been a few years but my opinions are much the same.

What's In a Label?

I've oft times thought that people into spanking and BDSM ought to come with labels. You know, like the nutrition labels found on packages at the store, breaking everything down to every gram, ounce and calorie, leaving little for the imagination. 50% submissive, 30% brat, 20% switch equals 100% pervert? *grin*.

Nearly all the disagreements and misunderstandings I see in this lifestyle, in person, on message boards or in chat stem from a difference of opinion when it comes to the basic labels we classify ourselves and our peers into, or a misuse of the labels to overly-generalize people in unfair or uncalled for ways. Personally, I despise labels. I feel they do nothing but generalize others in ways that we have no business generalizing them into. To say that subs are doormats, or brats are immature, is really no different than racism in its finest. Yet on the other hand to be without these labels we would be hard pressed to communicate with others where our interests and personalities lie, so to some extent they are a necessity as a base to build communication. The key is understanding the various ways people define each label and keeping an open mind about the ways in which the mold fits each person as an individual. To blatantly assume every person you meet that calls themselves a sub matches your own definition of the word will get you nowhere, fast.

No one label will likely fit one person to the T, and there is nothing wrong with being a mix of many different types and roles. Sometimes I think people get so stuck in a rut, afraid to branch out and try different things or explore different interests because of stereotypes that exist in connection with many of the labels we commonly use in the spanking and BDSM community. I have come across many of these stereotypes and misconceptions in the few years I've explored my kinky desires, and it always amazes me how the spectrum varies from person to person. My intentions with this essay are to portray some of the most common definitions of the usual labels found in the lifestyle and hopefully dispel some of the myths and stereotypes associated with them. Please do keep in mind that these are merely my own observations and opinions, and will vary as much as the next persons. It is up to you to form your own unique view regarding labels, and to use that view wisely. Every person and every relationship is extremely unique, and no one word or definition will ever fit perfectly.

Top, Bottom and Switch

Top, bottom and switch are the broadest labels I've found, and my personal favorites because for the most part, they are safe from the common misunderstandings that use of other labels can cause. I tend to compare them to chocolate, vanilla and twist...there is no doubt what flavor they are and no mistaking one for something it is not. No matter what flavor of BDSM you are into, these three labels exist, and you rarely find someone that does not understand the basic concept of them or define themselves as one of the three in some sense.

In most cases, a "top" can be used to describe anyone that gives the sensation in a scene or relationship, and the "bottom" is the receiver of the sensations, regardless of other labels or titles both may choose. In a master/slave relationship, the master would be the top and the slave a bottom. In a daddy/daughter relationship, the daddy is the top, the 'daughter' the bottom. When using these terms, they are usually not interchangeable; meaning, a bottom will always be a bottom and never take on top tendencies and vice versa. Which brings us to a switch.

A switch is someone who has an interest in both topping and bottoming, although not always on equal levels. Some switches have more interest in one role than the other, but still play both ways. Some have an equal level of interest in both roles, and play accordingly. However, it needs to be noted that a switch is not technically a switch in a given scene or relationship...they are either one role or the other. A switch might top one person and bottom to another, but not usually at the same time or with the same person. When they are with someone that tops them, they are very much a bottom, and vice versa. The difference is, they have an interest in both topping and bottoming at different times, which is where the use of the word 'switch' comes in.

Some tops and bottoms will switch on occasion with the right person or right setting, however, since those instances depend completely on a certain set of circumstances and are fairly rare, these people usually do not consider themselves switches.Often times, even if a top does become the bottom for a particular scene, they still consider themselves a top even during that scene. If a Dom decides he wants an erotic spanking from his sub, he would consider himself to be a 'top' in the d/s role and a bottom for the scene. Some just decide to 'switch' for that moment for whatever reason, perhaps to test a person they are teaching's skills with an implement, to participate in a game or role-play, or just because their partner has asked for it and they wish to indulge them.

There is often talk of switches not being "true" tops or "true" bottoms when in those roles because of their interest and experience in the other side, however, this is a blatant stereotype and a rather narrow minded concept in my opinion. Some of the most skilled tops I have met have admitted to being switches, and their understanding of both sides of the scales is a definite advantage when it comes to intense and memorable play. However, it is not a necessity at all, and just as many awesomely skilled tops have never felt the other side of the implements they wield.

There is also the myth that all good tops or all good bottoms should "try" the other side at least once to gain a better understanding of what the other deals with. While this certainly poses to be an advantage if you wish to explore it, I do not believe it is necessary in order to be skilled at your own chosen role. Understanding your partner, respecting limits, and communication go a lot further than a test run down a slope that doesn't curve towards your interest level. Each and every top, bottom or switch is unique in how they react and what an experience will do for them, so a trial run will likely not gain you any more insight other than to prove to yourself that your chosen role IS the one that is right for you. The act of topping or bottoming is not what makes one a top or a bottom, but the mindframe in which they do it. Playing with sensation won't change that.

On the spanking scene in particular, top and bottom can take on a slightly more defined meaning. The role of top or bottom is often used to describe someone who's only interest is loving, pleasant, sometimes sexual spanking, most limited to handspankings while over the knee or moderate variations of that. Some of the other themes such as punishment, discipline, heavier pain-centered play, most severe implements etc, are usually not a part of the scene these two roles create.

There is also the roles of top and bottom present in most domestic discipline relationships. Domestic discipline roles usually use spanking as a means of discipline only and other than pre-agreed on punishments, the top and bottom dynamic does not exist in the rest of the relationship, sometimes not even sexually. Spankings are usually given out by the top for discipline in areas that the bottom needs them, and other aspects of their lives are equal as far their roles to each other. This is mostly found amoungst romantically involved or married couples that have an interest in behavioral spanking but in none of the other dynamics of BDSM or spanking relationships, or on a separate level than the domestic discipline itself.

Domestic discipline can also exist as a type of relationship that other roles use in their lifestyle (ex: a dom and sub might use domestic discipline in their d/s relationship) however, I feel it is worth noting as a separate type of top and bottom role. Switching may or may not be involved in the relationship, or the top or bottom may switch outside the domestic discipline relationship or role with others. (aka, receive discipline from their spousal top and be submissive or dominant to other play partners outside the relationship).

To sum it up...tops, bottoms and switches are found in every flavor of sensation and desire imaginable in the BDSM/spanking lifestyle, and can be molded to fit just about any role. If in doubt about the more defined nature of the role someone has chosen or displays, using one of these three terms is likely a safe bet and plenty enough to communicate to others the general nature of your interests.

Dominant and Submissive

Dominant and submissive is one of many more defined areas of the broad subject of tops and bottoms as described above. There is a higher instance of so called power exchange here, with one role giving up a part of themselves to the other, which is where the dynamics in the relationship come from. There is no right or wrong way to define a dom or a sub, however, that doesn't make it any easier to decide if this label suits you or not.

Dominants, or Domme's as female dominants are usually called, are most often tops who's interests lean more towards BDSM, obedience and erotic sensations rather than just pleasant, nurturing spankings. There is as much focus on the emotional exchange as the physical one, and the list of ways in which a dominant exerts control over a submissive is endless. There is a thrill in being able to be so in tune with another person that you are able to demand their complete control and to have them give it without question. For some, submitting is not always about submitting to another person, but to the pain or emotions involved, even sort of like a personal challenge, with the top or dom merely being a partner or prop to the submission itself. More of a personal journey and less of a mutual one.

Submissives are often bottoms that have intense desires to please another and to allow another person to have a certain amount of control over them. Characteristics of some submissives include a desire to obey, willingness to explore where a combination of pain and pleasure can take them, and a need to be able to let go of their independence into the hands of another and be able to savor the security of being controlled in some form or another. There is much pleasure, satisfaction and personal growth to be obtained from having strength enough to trust your most intimate self in the hands of another. To be able to overcome your doubts and trust your own judgment enough to choose someone to submit to is a display of strength that really injects a lot of intensity into a D/s relationship. Subs may enjoy physical sensations to many parts of their bodies, and enjoy giving their partner as much as they are getting. Sexual play is usually a large part of a D/s relationship, as may be humiliation, bondage, and other sensations other than just spanking play.

One of the most common misconceptions of submissives is that they are "doormats" or are highly insecure. Most submissives I know are intelligent, successful, and secure individuals who crave a deeper level of intensity and sensation than their everyday lives or even purely spanking relationships offer. Submissives are often more direct in sharing what they want and need with their tops, and less likely than less submissive bottoms to act out if that attention isn't granted, or to do so in more subtle ways. Being punished or disciplined shows a submissive that they have displeased their dom, and for someone who enjoys pleasing their partner, this can be a setback they wish to avoid at all costs. For others, punishment and discipline make them feel secure in the relationship, in where they stand, and in themselves; without it, don't feel as complete.

There is often a notion that Doms are all ego, and get off on having power over another. Some imagine a dom as as leather-clad, whip snapping demanding SOB. I know a few like that, I don't call them doms, usually go straight for the SOB part However, in my experience a dom that knows his experience and skill level and respects that will give just as much as they get in return, and won't need leather props and loud demands to prove their dominance.

D/s relationships and the people they consist of vary. You only get out of the relationship and the role what you put into it. For some, it is merely a bedroom game, toying with the fantasy of a strong partner to overpower them and handcuff them to the bed for a night of wild passion. For others, it is a very valid part of who they are, and take every chance they can to explore and nurture that part.

Master and Slave

I think of the master and slave dynamic as another direction of dominant and submissive, with the dynamics between the two roles being focused more so on a stricter obedience and a heightened level of control. A slave is usually a bottom who is owned by another, although the level and definition of ownership greatly varies depending on the relationship. A master is a top who claims ownership over a bottom and has control of some or all aspects of their life. The female form of master is mistress.

These roles can be very similar to dominant and submissive, with the major difference being the claim of ownership. Some such couples even go so far in making the ownership process as near real as possible by drawing up contracts, being tattooed or branded with their master's mark or name, and turning over their finances and rights to make their own decisions over to their mistresses. Many master and slave relationships are not so severe however, but the person needs or wants a level of control that the role of a dominant does not quite meet. Some masters want their bottoms to display a level of submission and obedience beyound what many submissives can give, and someone who has slave characteristics and desires are better suited to them. Thus, the roles of master/mistress and slave.

Many people discredit master and slave relationships as being role-play or fantasy, and have little respect for those that lead such a lifestyle. By history's definition, a BDSM master and slave relationship is certainly an entirely different realm, but the people involved are often intelligent, unbiased individuals that have a deep need for control or lack of control on a level that the master and slave roles are well suited to. Slaves, unlike the history definition, DO choose to be slaves and do have a say in what aspects of their lives are controlled. Once again, for some it is only 'bedroom play' where the roles are used to spice up their sex lives. For others, it is a true lifestyle and they wouldn't want to live any other way.

The roles also exist outside the ownership spectrum. Many that would otherwise call themselves submissives take on the label of slave because they enjoy serving others, either domestically or sexually. I remember one time I was a slave for a day, for a dominant friend. With the added push of pleasing him, cleaning house was a lot more fun and erotic, especially the things I had to do in the nude! In the same regard, some dominants enjoy being served but do not get anything out of the ownership ideal, so may be a master to a bottom that considers themselves submissive but not a slave. The roles are certainly not limited to their mate-roles, many labels coexist with each other quite well.

Master and mistress is also used as a title of respect and many bottoms, submissive and slave alike, use the terms to show respect regardless of the relationships.

Sadomasochists

Webster himself defines a sadist as the deriving of sexual gratification from inflicting pain, extreme cruelty or emotional abuse on others. A masochist is defined as someone who sports a willingness or tendency to subject oneself to unpleasant or trying experiences or whom derives sexual gratification from being physically or emotionally abuse. These roles can be summed up into sadomasochism, which is the combination of sadism and masochism, in particular the deriving of pleasure, especially sexual gratification, from inflicting or submitting to physical or emotional abuse.

Somehow I doubt Old Webster ever dabbled in BDSM.

This is perhaps one of the most misunderstood labels in BDSM/spanking. I most often hear or see the words used in a negative way, to describe someone that likes to give or receive pain at a level that is intolerable or even disgusting to them, as the dictionary itself indicates. Other words associated with sadists in particular are uncaring, heartless, dangerous, and sick. Terms I've seen associated with masochists have varied from doormats to accusations of wanting abuse. By dictionary definition, these terms might be synonymous with the definitions of the words, however, in the scene itself, they tend to take on a more humane, if not still startling definition.

Sadists are tops that enjoy giving pain or humiliation. Their motivation is creating sensations that are unpleasant or painfully intense for their partners and enjoying their reactions. It is often a turn-on to create a situation or scenario in which their bottoms have to endure uncomfortable situations for the sadists pleasure. This is not always as harsh as it may sound! A top that enjoys embarrassing a bottom might be called a sadist, even though no real physical pain is being dished out. Many people seem to be under the impression that a sadists' ONLY interest is to give pain and unpleasant sensations, and have no room in their cold hearts to enjoy giving pleasure as well, or to be concerned about the well-being of their bottoms. This is far from the truth in the case of most tops that consider themselves sadists, and a 'good' sadist lives by the creed that ANY good top does; to keep their bottoms safe, secure and happy. There just might be an awful lot of pain to endure in the process, and that is something a sadist enjoys, and would not enjoy it unless they truly knew their partner was consenting to it and enjoying it on some level as well.

As I just noted, a masochist enjoys receiving and enduring this pain from a sadistic top. Most masochists have very high pain tolerance levels, and their arousal depends upon on a certain amount of pain being involved. The type of play and sensation a masochist enjoys and desires is perhaps closer to edgy or harsher than many bottoms would want or tolerate. Masochists are no more insecure or unstable than any other type of bottom, they simply enjoy a higher level of sensation, and get a personal thrill out of enduring that at the whims of another and use pain as an arousal factor. They still require the same level of caring, attention and security that goes with any other bottoming role in the scene, and have other needs and wants that are not only centered around their masochistic desires.

There are always exceptions of course, and I am sure there ARE people out there who are as sadistic or masochistic as old Webster defines them. However, the words are most often adapted to further define a particular desire in a top or bottom. There is rarely any real form of nonconsensual abuse present between a sadist and a masochist in the scene, and neither role has any interest in being abused or an abuser. If anything, they depend on one another to meet each others needs, and together it can be a beautiful exchange.

Like the song says, can't have one without the other.

Brats and SAMs (Smart Assed Masochist)

Brats are strong personalities who like verbal sparring and who often like eventually to be overwhelmed by 'force' from their Tops. Our old friend Webster defines a brat as a child, especially a spoiled or ill-mannered one. As adults with an interest in spanking, a brat might be more aptly defined as someone who acts like a child and tries to earn a spanking or attention by being verbally or physically rambunctious or silly. Some brats are not as forceful as others, and engage in gentler, more humorous attempts to vie for attention. Hiding a tops implement when they know they are in for a spanking, smacking teasingly or calling them a name, or being verbally disrespectful is all in a days work for a brat. Earning a spanking or some other mild form of 'punishment' for their behavior is more of a reward for a brat than it would be for a sub, and brats usually have less focus on pleasing their tops with their behavior, and enjoy the challenge of testing limits and getting reactions.

In the same way that a parent might find their bratty child's antics cute and enduring, a top that enjoys brat play will likely feel the same way about their bratty bottoms. Brats often have a deep set need to be in the center of attention as much as possible, and their behavior will sometimes worsen if they don't get the attention they seek. I find brats to be more likely to go to extreme measures to get the spankings they want, rather than admit they want them. When matched with a top that does not have the patience for childish antics, this can get very old very fast, so it is especially important for brat bottoms to focus their energies only on those tops that have an appreciation for their style of play.

A common misconception associated with brats is that they are immature or selfish. In some cases, this is true, there are always those in every role that can't or won't respect limits or keep their role in perspective. However, bratplay when done right can add a lot of cleverness, creativeness and fun to a spanking relationship, and both partners usually get a lot of pleasure from engaging in the challenge of coming up with the best ways to annoy your top or the most effective ways to keep a brat in their place! The reasoning behind most bratting antics is to give a scene more of a nonconsensual feel, the thrill of being caught and chastened for their behavior. Most brats WANT to be caught and having their behavior ignored or brushed off defeats the purpose. For others, bratting is also a way to let their top know that they are okay with the level that the scene or play is at, and want more. By acting out or being sassy, they are effectively letting their partner know they want a heightened level of play.

Being a Smart Assed Masochist to most people is just another form of bratting. This is one label I have seen a lot of debate and different definitions for. Some define a SAM as something of a cross between a somewhat masochistic sub and a brat, with the bratty nature leaning more towards sassiness and smart-assed comments than the antics or disobedience often associated with brats. Usually they have more submissive tendencies along with the bratty attitude or don't relate to some of the more childlike ways of bratting. I see this definition more amoungst spankos.

From the opinions of some, a SAM seems to be more of an insult, used to describe a sub that 'tops from the bottom' or pushes just to get punished or to get attention. Some say the motivation for a SAM most often is challenging themselves by aggravating and provoking the top. It's the battle that they get a lot of their thrill from as well as the eventual intensity of sensation. There are some tops out there that require an extreme level of obedience from their bottoms and won't tolerate anything less...and a sub that is sassy or bratty would at times be called a SAM or brat, neither term being meant positively. Once again, the key to a successful relationship if this is a label you relate to is to find someone that shares your definitions and relates to your own ideas.

Parental Role and Child

Many tops associate spanking and loving discipline with a parental role, and enjoy playing a nurturing role to a bottom such as a mommy or daddy. The bottom often takes on the role of a child (see Ageplay in Terms and Definitions for more information) in need of a dominant parental figure in their lives. These roles do not usually involve sexual play at all, with the spanking and stimulation being purely disciplinary and doting. For some however, sexual play is a part of it, depending on the people involved, but even then the play may be discipline or parental care related such as being bathed and cleaned, giving or receiving an enema, wearing a bottom plug for being naughty, etc. For some it is necessary that sexual touching and stimulation not be a part of the role at all, for others, it is not an issue.

Often people assume that these roles, especially daddy/daughter play, are indications that the top has phedophilia desires. Most of the daddy's I know have no interest in children at all, and very much expect their partners to be adults. It is the childlike qualities displayed in an adult partner that is the turn-on for them and the motivation behind the role. Not all daddy/daughter play or similar roles involves ageplay, with the bottom staying very much the adult age they are at all times, yet desiring the nurturing, caring role of a "daddy" top to take care of them and make them feel safe. The common elements of diapers, bottles and babytalk is not a part of this level of the relationship at all. There is also often the assumption that the childlike bottoms are not capable of making adult decisions or acting like the adults that they are, and this is also not true in most cases. The desire to relive some of the best parts about being a child and the innocence and worry-free mentality of childhood does not have to be an indication of immaturity or inability to cope with an adult lifestyle.

Many tops and bottoms role-play these titles without actually desiring the roles on a long term basis. Mommy, daddy, uncle, aunt, teacher, niece, nephew, daughter, son, etc...the list of role-play possibilities are endless, but some tops and bottoms take on the roles permanently in the relationship or in their spanking play and it is a part of their every day lives.

So, What's In a Label?

So, all that being said, what IS in a label?

The answer is simple. Whatever works for you.

The examples and characteristics are only a few of many many more, each as unique as the person defining them. There will always be exceptions to every case, those that use BDSM and spanking as escapes from issues in their lives in an unhealthy way, and there will always be those that hide behind the stereotypes associated with a label and use it as an excuse for inexcusable behavior. Those that truly embrace spanking and BDSM as a desired lifestyle rather than a game will not use a label to define who they are, but rather as an aid in helping communicate their desires and style with others. There is a certain amount of pride in having found and in sharing your chosen niche in the lifestyle, and this helps build a common ground with like-minded people, however loose it may be.

The best way to find that niche is through exploration and experience. You may have a general idea of what you want or desire, but are unsure of where those desires fit in the larger scope of things. You might find yourself to be a general mix of all the labels and roles available, and even some that no one else has thought of but you. The nature of roles and labels is that they constantly shift as you grow and experience more. A role that fit you at one stage may not work at another. There is no rule that says a brat will always be a brat, and it is advisable to always respect the shifts and changes that a person goes through in relation to roles. Part of earning respect from your peers is a willingness to respect the definitions they apply to the roles they have chosen, without generalizing them into your own opinions. There is room enough for everyone and their version of the variety of labels, that is what keeps the lifestyle fresh, interesting and ever-growing. The most successful way to avoid sinking into the rut of stereotypes and generalizations often associated with labels is to avoid dishing them out yourself.

The only one that can define what label fits a person...is that person themselves. Me? I'm a bi-sexual masochistic, submissive pony slave. *grin*

label me this, batman:

 

[snowy ciara]

January 30th: words of sinnocent

This is from the Submissive vs. Slave thread, started by Texas Jennie.

What's the difference between being a Dom's sub and being his slave?

How about we first outline what is NOT the difference? Because, you know, I hope.... that the topic is almost guaranteed to go up in flames with the heavy stench of holier than thou screams of passion, at some point? heh

NOT the difference: Better.
Better than is NOT the difference.
Also not the difference: Not as good as.
Not as good as is NOT the difference.

Submissives, slaves , doms...... ALL are people. People are not all the same. They do not have neat little labels sutered to the napes of their necks which read: ONE size fits ALL .

Even if we take just one , say submissives perhaps...... even among submissives, as a group.. we still will find many many differences (with regard to likes, dislikes, and especially in HOW they serve). However, the basics which set the foundation for who they are is a constant (for me at least). All apples are round, have brown seeds, have a white inner flesh. But some are sweet, some tart, some red, others green or yellow. But.. they are ALL apples. And they don't grow in neat little segmented sections like ALL oranges do. Each has similarities. Each has differences. And both are different, and not better than the other. Unless you happen to dislike oranges. Opinions opinions opinions.. blah blah blah.

Different is just that, DIFFERENT.
Nothing more and nothing less.
Apple, orange, blah blah blah.

The whole post was great, but I felt this part bears repeating.

 

[bandelero]

22nd Jan Words of Betticus From thread "Samette, the other girl smurf"

Sammie facts you rabid otterbutt.

 

[Stegral]

Jan 22nd 2008...

Wise words I just HAD to post...
They are in the "modern menstrual hut"
It has to do with defining the pain cramps can cause in terms a Male might understand better..

This just isnt fair...I want men to know what its like....like putting their nuts in a vice grip...