Focus50
Posts: 3962
Joined: 12/28/2004 From: Newcastle, Australia Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sugarcoatedscamp quote:
ORIGINAL: Focus50 quote:
ORIGINAL: sugarcoatedscamp quote:
ORIGINAL: Focus50 A Master is always a Dominant but a Dominant is not a Master unless validated by owning a slave. A slave is always a submissive but a submissive is not a slave unless owned by a Master. And what of J, one of my dearest friends, who is dominant in her own right, but chooses to be slave to one? Not sure what 'J' has to do with a total stranger like me but since you ask.... I haven't the foggiest what you mean by J being "dominant in her own right" - izzat like assertive? Because the vast majority of fem/subs I've come across are quite assertive, as opposed to ..... sayyyy...., passive. As far as I'm concerned, if J is someone's slave, she ain't no Dominant - but she is validating a Dominant as being a Master (or Mistress?). And like I posted originally, that's MY definition. What's yours, now that you're here? Speaking generally (and not aimed at you personally), I'm glad I got in early on this thread because I knew it'd end up a "pig's breakfast" with all manner of vague exceptions and words/phrases getting twisted, thus turning what should've be an interesting topic from a *lifestyle* perspective into a "free for all". Death and taxes, people, DEATH and TAXES!!!! Crikey, we even ended up with that old nonsense about "if a tree falls... blah blah. Until such time as someone actually records a tree falling in total silence, EVERY freakin' falling tree makes a sound! Whether or not there's someone there to witness it is human arrogance at its most moronic! Focus. Outside of her M/s relationship, she's a Domme. Inside an M/s relationship, she's been known to have submissives of her own. I was just arguing the point that sometimes one doesn't have to be submissive in order to be slave. She chooses to humble herself for one. Seems to me that if she's a Domme here and a slave there, I would define that as a switch. Just as I define myself as a Dom because I'm not nor ever have been anyone's sub/slave, nor have any inkling to try it just once. Not even when I've had a few to drink.... lol It's all in the "wiring" as far as I'm concerned. I'm not wired to switch; I'm a Dom. I've never been in a D/s relationship with anyone but fem/subs - none of whom were wired to switch, either! Switches have their own unique wiring and anyone who can or has switched is a switch; regardless of whether they do or don't switch within individual relationships. Slaves submit to the whim and will of a Master/Mistress/Owner etc = ALL slaves *are* submissive. So I disagree with your point.... The above are (once more) MY definitions. However 'J' defines herself is entirely up to her - and anybody who might seek a relationship with her. Focus.
|