quote:

ORIGINAL: MRandme
What is the difference between a Master and a Dom?
i know, it seems obvious almost.

Really, now? Obvious? I think not. We can't even agree on what constitutes Master or Dom much less ageeing on the differences betwixt the two.

I have found that bdsm is largely a self-indentifying entity. Since we don't have colored belts like karate there really are no standards. My submissive calls me Master and refers to me as her master so I guess I qualify as such, don't I? Applying the same logic - anyone who doesn't fit my mold isn't master material, right?

See what I mean?

quote:

ORIGINAL: MRandme

What is the difference between a Master and a Dom?

i know, it seems obvious almost. There is a lot of discussion about the difference (fuzzy as it is) between sub and slave but haven't seen this addressed.

It is a question someone asked, so i asked a few Doms in IRC the question and Their consensus was that there wasn't any. They felt that the only difference was 'what He wanted to be called'. (Note that none of the ones i asked identify as Masters)

Personally, i think the difference is in the amount of responsibility the D-type takes for His partner and Her actions.

i'm just really curious to see what the response here will be.

g

quote:

ORIGINAL: TallDarkAndWitty

That's my way of looking at it, anyway.  Doubt anyone on here views it the same way.

Taggard

quote:

ORIGINAL: TallDarkAndWitty

The difference between Master and Dom is the same difference as the one between sub and slave.  Everyone on this board will have their own definition, and no one will be wrong.  All you can hope for is to come up with are definitions that suit you and then be clear when using them with others.

For me, Master is a title while Dom is a poorly abbreviated form of dominant, (which, to me, is an inclination).  In other words, a Master is one specific type of dominant.  To go just a bit further, both Masters and dominants are types of tops.  Along side of Master, you have other titles, like owner.  Along side of dominant, you have other inclinations, like sadist and fetishist. 

You find the same thing on the other side of the slash.  I refer to the general category as bottoms, with titles like slave and property, and inclinations like masochist and submissive.

Hence, one is a top (being, in general on the toppy side of the slash), a Master (if he has earned, or let's be honest, given himself the Title), and a dominant (if the like the domination aspect of BDSM) all at the same time.

That's my way of looking at it, anyway.  Doubt anyone on here views it the same way.

Taggard

quote:

ORIGINAL: takenbyjohnr07

The world thrives on giving labels and titles. What you should go by is how the Dominant carries themselves and treats others. The ones who come on line here that are respectful and try to help others is a good indication that He/She is probably secure within themselves and are happy to help and pass on their knowledge with positive imputs. If you have to put a label on someone i would say that the wannabe's come on here and they don't respect others, they  bash others and they claim to have  a  housefull of subs and know everything there is to know. They try to impress people by all that they have and how great they are, but in my opinion. If you're so great, you don't have to toot your own horn to get attention, others will do it for you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: takenbyjohnr07

The world thrives on giving labels and titles. What you should go by is how the Dominant carries themselves and treats others. The ones who come on line here that are respectful and try to help others is a good indication that He/She is probably secure within themselves and are happy to help and pass on their knowledge with positive imputs. If you have to put a label on someone i would say that the wannabe's come on here and they don't respect others, they  bash others and they claim to have  a  housefull of subs and know everything there is to know. They try to impress people by all that they have and how great they are, but in my opinion. If you're so great, you don't have to toot your own horn to get attention, others will do it for you.

So take everyone on an individual basis, and if you need to title, call them what you feel they deserve to be called. Nicely of course.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CalifChick

quote:

ORIGINAL: takenbyjohnr07

The world thrives on giving labels and titles. What you should go by is how the Dominant carries themselves and treats others. The ones who come on line here that are respectful and try to help others is a good indication that He/She is probably secure within themselves and are happy to help and pass on their knowledge with positive imputs. If you have to put a label on someone i would say that the wannabe's come on here and they don't respect others, they  bash others and they claim to have  a  housefull of subs and know everything there is to know. They try to impress people by all that they have and how great they are, but in my opinion. If you're so great, you don't have to toot your own horn to get attention, others will do it for you.

To the OP of the thread, regarding this...

If you feel some masochistic urge to label everyone around you, that is.  But know that it is only your definition, and not their definition.

Cali
(shouting into the wind)

quote:

ORIGINAL: takenbyjohnr07

If you're so great, you don't have to toot your own horn to get attention, others will do it for you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MRandme

Evility, i guess it is obvious to me in that the M/s relationship implies more control for the top and less independence for the bottom than the typical D/s one.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

quote:

ORIGINAL: MRandme

Evility, i guess it is obvious to me in that the M/s relationship implies more control for the top and less independence for the bottom than the typical D/s one.

Really? It isn't obvious to me at all.