RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway?

RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress

Message

MsFlutter -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/9/2009 3:39:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Wish I could say that I felt that about the word "Mistress", Lockit. Of course I'd use it if told. But it's "Ma'am", for me, that really turns me into knee-buckling, submissive jelly. Very, very special and to be used only for one woman. Sigh - one day. Peon ~ "Ma'am" with a British accent sounds like 'Mum' to Yank ears. Conversely, "Ma'am" spoken in the U.S. sounds similar to 'ham' and nowhere near as (forgive me) 'romantic.' Based on who is saying it, I almost prefer to be called 'Ms' than the hammered-flat pronounciation of "Ma'am." (unless of course its a southern boy and the word becomes a two-syllabled drawl of 'mayam' LOL) Just me thinking aloud :)

PeonForHer -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/9/2009 3:41:54 PM)
Thought so. "Master" has never had that association. It's such a shame.

Lockit -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/9/2009 3:46:02 PM)
LOL MsFlutter... that southern accent does funny things to me! I would allow many things I wouldn't just for the pleasure of the accent and hearing them speak! lol I do think there is one southern boy who can verify my liking for hearing him speak because I would make him say different words or phrases for me! I really love hearing a southern... bs.. just something about that phrase! I do find something about being called Ms very respectful too and I like it very much!

LadyPact -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/9/2009 3:48:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: igor2003 I don't feel that using the term "Mistress" is "supposed" to be either. In a very general way it is just a form of protocol for those that want to use it. Many women don't like being called "Mistress", partly because it makes them feel like "the other woman" or some similar reason. No matter whether "Mistress", "Ma'am", "Madam", or any other title is used it is generally meant as a form of respect and is simply a manner of approaching or addressing the lady instead of simply saying, "Hey you!" Just a thought, but that might be seen as a sub instilling the protocol without the D type's input. Quite a few of us have said on various occasions that one title or the other just doesn't do it for us. My personal one is Goddess. I have a hard time tolerating it for some reason. Might be the reality of the matter. I'm not suggesting "Hey You" either. If it's on the site, I'm more prone to suggest that a person use the screen name of whoever they are hoping to contact. In person, you don't get the cheat sheet if you're meeting someone new. Better to ask how they would like to be addressed than start off on the wrong foot. For the record, I get both Lady Pact and Mistress Pact. The latter more often in the last year. (Since HK mentioned the cap.) I have a habit of telling people that I'm Lady Pact every where, so they can find Me on various sites. In certain instances, I'll use Mistress *** (real name) but that's very rare.

feydeplume -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/9/2009 4:04:42 PM)
I use Ma'am as a term of respect the same as i would use the generic Sir if i were given no other clues and was pandering to the power differential. I am equally comfortable calling a female Master and a Male Ma'am/Mistress (based on genetics, person gender identification or whatever else) if they give a me a clue to their preference. I tend to be uncomfortable with Lord or Lady, unless they have the paperwork to prove it, as it is sort of disrespectful to the people I know who have Titles (hereditary or earned for services to country). But there are exceptions for that too, just that Lord or Lady are not the first terms of respect that pop out of my mouth (or fingertips). All that said, I will use NOT use a term of respect for someone I do not have reason to respect.

ShaktiSama -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/9/2009 5:43:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AAkasha Is use of the term "Mistress" in a dialogue supposed to be: Personally, the word never meant a thing to me until it was spoken in the right tone by the right man. I had many people use it, but there was no emotional impact--it was a title without any emotional or sexual spark attached to it. I have no idea what it is supposed to mean in every case where it is used, and I suspect the meaning is completely dependent on the person speaking and his or her intentions. If the person speaking is not in a formalized, mutually consenting Mistress-slave relationship, then it could be that they just think this is how you address a female dominant politely; in some cases they are forcing a woman to participate in their fantasies of being owned, dominated and humiliated without her consent; in some cases they are hoping to get her excited by being subservient, etc..

LadyPact -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/9/2009 7:36:00 PM)
We're not so far apart sometimes, Shatki. [:)]

RumpusParable -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/9/2009 7:47:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AAkasha Is use of the term "Mistress" in a dialogue supposed to be: 1. A turn on for the sub because he is forced to use it or expected to use it 2. A turn on for the femdom because the sub is forced to use it or expected to use it And no "50/50" answers, please! Interested to hear the POV of both subs and femdoms in this equation. Akasha "Mistress" isn't my prefered term for myself, but if offered with good feelings I accept it from the well-meaning. I'll answer this in regards to the terms I do like to have used: For me, it's just about structure. I'm primarily focused on power exchange and everything really comes back to that for me. Protocols, such as being called "Miss" or such insted of just my name, indicate and enhance the feeling of structure and status, remind of that power difference between me and my partner. Keeps it in the forefront... It also just reminds both pleasantly that our interaction isn't something we're getting everywhere else. I don't "force" anyone submitting to me to call me an honorific, just as I've no interest in forcing someone to submit. Either they do both because it's part of our compatibility or not.

MsEmpwr2 -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/9/2009 8:23:52 PM)
I reserve Mistress for use with my personal slaves. Ma'am or Ms. Celeste or Celeste is fine for me with others. Recently my slave started calling me Goddess, a term I have NEVER cared for until he said it. I literally felt the flutter and one of those, Oh My! feelings. The reverence and love that he exudes when he uses the word is what I am responding to. I feel the same way when he uses my given name. So for me the charge comes in the depth of meaning. Celeste

igor2003 -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/9/2009 9:10:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: igor2003 I don't feel that using the term "Mistress" is "supposed" to be either. In a very general way it is just a form of protocol for those that want to use it. Many women don't like being called "Mistress", partly because it makes them feel like "the other woman" or some similar reason. No matter whether "Mistress", "Ma'am", "Madam", or any other title is used it is generally meant as a form of respect and is simply a manner of approaching or addressing the lady instead of simply saying, "Hey you!" Just a thought, but that might be seen as a sub instilling the protocol without the D type's input. Quite a few of us have said on various occasions that one title or the other just doesn't do it for us. My personal one is Goddess. I have a hard time tolerating it for some reason. Might be the reality of the matter. I'm not suggesting "Hey You" either. If it's on the site, I'm more prone to suggest that a person use the screen name of whoever they are hoping to contact. In person, you don't get the cheat sheet if you're meeting someone new. Better to ask how they would like to be addressed than start off on the wrong foot. For the record, I get both Lady Pact and Mistress Pact. The latter more often in the last year. (Since HK mentioned the cap.) I have a habit of telling people that I'm Lady Pact every where, so they can find Me on various sites. In certain instances, I'll use Mistress *** (real name) but that's very rare. I didn't suggest or recommend any form of address as being right for everyone....or for anyone. Simply stating that there are various forms of address and that none of them, in my opinion, are "supposed" to match either of the statements in the OP. Personally, when I first contact a dominant woman I will use the name used in her profile or just simply say, "Hello." If she writes back and signs her letter I will use whatever form she uses in her signature until and unless she says something differently. If she doesn't sign her letter, but does want further correspondance I will usually ask if she has any preferred way of being addressed. And I would hope that people would understand that the, "Hey you!" was mentioned tongue-in-cheek. Still not sure why you would have thought that anything I said could be seen as the sub instilling protocol without the D type's input. It certainly was not intended that way.

LadyPact -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/9/2009 9:24:37 PM)
It was actually this statement here. quote: ORIGINAL: igor2003 In a very general way it is just a form of protocol for those that want to use it. It implies protocol on your terms, rather than the Dominant you are addressing.

LovingMistress45 -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/9/2009 9:30:14 PM)
It gives me a warm feeling if it is used by one that belongs to me. However, it is not forced and I don't like to be addressed as Mistress by random subs.

igor2003 -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/9/2009 10:15:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact It was actually this statement here. quote: ORIGINAL: igor2003 In a very general way it is just a form of protocol for those that want to use it. It implies protocol on your terms, rather than the Dominant you are addressing. It only implies that if you read "those" as being no one but submissives. If you read "those" as being dominants that WANT that term used it implies no such thing. And as mentioned at the beginning of that sentence, this was a very gereralized statement...not something that specifies any particular person or group.

LadyPact -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/9/2009 10:55:39 PM)
I took it to mean this: You are a submissive, are you not? If you are initiating the email, using the term "Mistress" by choice, that is implying that you (the sub) are instilling the protocol. Unless the title is part of the person's screen name that we don't know from interaction with each other, we generally don't call each other by title. (Any of the D types here can clarify that if you have a different experience.) At least not for personal emails that we write between us. Forum posts are another matter. If I'm directly speaking to Madame4a, for example, I'd probably use the whole screen name. The shorter version, 4a, would be difficult to spot. It would also be My opinion, after reading so many posts from the regulars here, that the majority do not want to be addressed only as "Mistress" without a qualifier by a sub that she does not share a dynamic with. (Please see the earlier comments.) So, yes, both of these items led Me to believe that the term "those" in your post was reflecting submissives.

littlesarbonn -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/10/2009 2:58:40 AM)
I've only ever used the term when I was owned by someone, and usually at her direction. At one time, I used to live in a previous mistress's home, which was also a well used house of domination. There were about a dozen women working there at any time, and the women always had no problem giving me instructions to do things, if they needed something done. My mistress was quite fine with that. But one thing that used to drive me nuts, even though I never verbalized it, was ALL of the women, even the dedicated submissives, would always refer to any other woman there (when talking to me) as Mistress (Someone). So, it would be "duane, go help Mistress Suzie clean up her dungeon after her session of being a submissive to some dominant guy." I don't know why that used to bug me, but it always did. The only one I ever considered my mistress was my Mistress, so it was always a bit weird. But why ruffle feathers when it's not necessary?

OttersSwim -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/10/2009 6:16:09 AM)
My Lady asks that I call her Milady, and so I do, but not all the time. When it is right to do so. I certainly agree with others that calling someone Mistress when you do not have that dynamic with them is a writ large NO NO. But I do enjoy using terms of respect and putting an honorific of Miss or Ms. in front if I am communicating with a Lady. [:)] Sorry....I did not answer the question Ms. AAkasha posed, but I think honestly it varies...

properlyobedient -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/10/2009 6:52:07 AM)
I can't speak to other subs or women, only myself. First, as a submissive, if I am told to use the term, I do, simple as that. However, my personal inclination is that it is not a term I really like or associate with the glorification of the feminine. For me it conjures up images of a woman who is "kept" on the side in an illicit relationship, an extra-marital liaison. The concept of a man with "the little woman" dutifully staying at home and raising "his" family while he is off with the far more exotic and stimulating "lady of the world" is the one I most associate with the term. Thusly, it isn't something i particularly like, of my own accord. I have noticed a number of womyn of authority who are very specific that they do NOT want to be addressed by subs they do not know as "Mistress". I have also seen those who demand that the term be used. Frankly, I see it as the woman's prerogative in how she wishes to be addressed.

LunaVenus -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/10/2009 6:53:33 AM)
I personally dislike being called Mistress over and over. Seems silly to me. There are other titles of respect that feel less stilted. But I don't like hearing any of them used so much that it sound ridiculous. Personally it could only possibly be a slave getting off on it because, I prefer REAL respect in actions, instead of just slinging around empty words ad nauseam.

properlyobedient -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/10/2009 6:59:52 AM)
quote: I reserve Mistress for use with my personal slaves. Ma'am or Ms. Celeste or Celeste is fine for me with others. Recently my slave started calling me Goddess, a term I have NEVER cared for until he said it. I literally felt the flutter and one of those, Oh My! feelings. The reverence and love that he exudes when he uses the word is what I am responding to. I feel the same way when he uses my given name. So for me the charge comes in the depth of meaning. Celeste I have actually come to like the term "Goddess", which I used to find distasteful as I felt it was wrong to raise a human to a God-like state. As a student of medieval history, though, I find the term to be less deifying than an acknowledgment of the feminine mystique. Thusly, I have come to find the term very exciting; a way of acknowledging the supremacy of the feminine.

PeonForHer -> RE: "Mistress" - whose rocks are getting off by this anyway? (3/10/2009 8:35:02 AM)
[/quote] Peon ~ "Ma'am" with a British accent sounds like 'Mum' to Yank ears. Conversely, "Ma'am" spoken in the U.S. sounds similar to 'ham' and nowhere near as (forgive me) 'romantic.' Based on who is saying it, I almost prefer to be called 'Ms' than the hammered-flat pronounciation of "Ma'am." (unless of course its a southern boy and the word becomes a two-syllabled drawl of 'mayam' LOL) Just me thinking aloud :) [/quote] Does it really sound like "Mum" to Americans? The "Marm" used here for the queen is quite rare - mostly "Ma'am" is pronounced the same way as in the USA - though probably more clipped. A man would avoid, like the plague, pronouncing it as "Mum" because that's the most common way of addressing one's mother. I've heard the way "Ma'am"s said in the deep south of the US. Like "Mayhem" without the "H". Appropriate for some dominants, I'd imagine. [;)] As a matter of interest, are there any dominants, anywhere, who like to be addressed as "Boss"? I'd guess not, but you never know . . . Also as a matter of interest, my friend once had a partner who really did have the honorific "Lady". She was a peer of the realm. She utterly, completely, hated it and would fly into a rage if it was ever used - especially at the dole office.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.171875