RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

kidwithknife -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 12:30:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Venalismihi
Correct however, for the old and potentially senile, such as myself, there used to be protocol and etiquette that those who followed the lifestyle adhered to and that gave us all a guideline to follow and not to cross. Much as traffic lights and speed restrictions. Where would we be without them? Those who j-walk and exceed, usually get hurt. I liked knowing what was what.
Yes, but that protocol and ettiquette didn't get handed down from the heavens on tablets of stone.  It sprang out of a specific cultural and social context.  And it was influenced by things that had gone before.  Things evolve and mutate. 

And if you're going to enforce a unified BDSM culture, am I allowed to enforce an Internet culture based on what it was like on here in 1993, simply because I had a good time and was here before most people? Maybe insist people read at least one William Gibson novel before they're allowed to use the net for their own purposes?

That said, if people want to hold events specifically geared towards 'old school' protocols and etiquette (as far as possible, anyway.  Technically neither of us can truly follow the Old Guard way of doing things because we're not gay males) that's cool with me.  In fact it strikes me as a far more workable way forward then expecting people to change how they behave at already existing events.




Venalismihi -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 12:36:25 PM)

kidwithknife, I am not going to enforce anything and thank the Lord am to old to be that bothered how the young and up and coming alter things to suit themselves. I do recall how things were when I was young. I stated this as in the past. I also stated that it was how I liked it, never once did I say that things ought to alter nor have I criticized anyone here for their opinion. Just presented mine.



 



PhlossophurDomme -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 12:59:14 PM)

When I see someone wearing a collar, I make no assumptions about their relationship status.  The person wearing a collar leading another person on a leash and collar does not confuse Me.  It is possible that the leader is a switch, or in a polyamorous situation where they are collared to another.  It could be a fashion statement or part of an ensemble that happens to have a neckpiece.  I find that in this lifestyle, the sheer variety of symbolic dynamics precludes snap judgements.

For example, I am in a poly arrangement where I own/married a switch and he owns a sub.  Technically, he could wear both a wedding ring and a collar to signify his marriage and submission to Me while being with his sub.  In this case, the collar and wedding ring have nothing to do with his relationship to her, even though they may be seen together in public.  She also wears a collar for him (which is one of his old collars to Me that I gave him to use with her), but it has no symbolic connection to her relationship with Me. 

Therefore, I feel that jumping to conclusions about how symbolic adornments are utilized is a mistake.  Always best to ask if there is a desire to interact with someone, plus it makes a good conversation starter! 

In terms of people at play parties that restrict their activities to public only, I have no objection to that kind of limit.  The only time I had difficulty with 'spectators' at a public venue was at the old Power Exchange in San Francisco when the tourists would walk through and heckle the players, wank too close to a scene, physically intrude, or try to rummage through stranger's toy bags.  This was in part because the PE did not have clear rules about healthy boundaries for their play space or visible Dungeon Monitors.  I learned to stay playing inside the chain link area and cordon My scene off from the dark masses of looky loos to keep My bottom (and My bottom) safe from their wandering hands.



NihilusZero -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 1:12:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HeavansKeeper

How do you feel about dominants wearing collars?

A little odd. A little confusing. But ultimately it's their prerogative...like a straight person going to a gay bar.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HeavansKeeper

How do you feel about unowned people wearing collars in public venues?

I'd be tempted to see it either as: a) for the equivalent purpose of single women who wear 'wedding bands', or: b) a fad fashion statement.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HeavansKeeper

Do you think we should strive for a more unified culture in public space?

No.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HeavansKeeper

Do you always assume a person in a collar is owned?

See question #2.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HeavansKeeper

What is your opinion of people who go to BDSM clubs (frequently or not, doesn't matter) to play, but do not keep a power exchange dynamic anywhere else?

I think they likely comprise a hefty percentage of the people attending such clubs.



BOUNTYHUNTER -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 1:16:50 PM)

We attend a lot of events and Diane always wears a beautiful collar, when ask why  she is a Mistress wearing a collar she always points to me and tell them to ask me why she wears a collar,Yes she is mine totally, the same reason she wears a heart shaped ring on her finger....There is no set protocol on wearing one as it tends to just sets off a beautiful woman......



ShaktiSama -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 1:26:45 PM)

Fast reply: I have worn a collar as jewelry (as in my profile picture) and as armor--a gorget is sometimes just a sensible thing to wear, if you don't want your throat to be vulnerable--and I've also worn one as a model, when trying to help friends who were male dominant photographers capture female submissive themes in their art. It didn't occur to me at the time that anyone would take offense to it, although I suppose it might send the wrong signal if I was single and looking for a submissive?

I do tend to assume that anyone wearing a collar, especially one with a lock attached, is a collared submissive belonging to someone else. In fairness, though, I also assume that anyone wearing a ring on the third finger of the left hand is married to someone else. It doesn't affect my treatment of them, except to the degree that I would avoid saying or doing anything that could be considered "hitting on" them, which I consider rude when someone is wearing a visible symbol of their intimate relationship.



thetammyjo -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 2:17:28 PM)

This will never change for me but when I see someone in a collar, a collar, not a necklace or fashion statement, I think "sub" it's automatic.

So on that same automatic level I get a bit pissed when folks just bop around in things that look like collars. Makes me crazy on a gut level. Plus part of me notes that it's mostly women wearing these as fashion statements and that can get my political side annoyed -- though there are some hemp necklaces now I've seen young men wear that are similar.

Beyond all of this it really isn't my business what you are wearing unless you are trying to impress me. If that is so, when you wear something tight around your neck, I'm going to assume that you are a bottom and if you aren't then you've failed to impress me.

Big deal. Who cares if you impress me?



MarcEsadrian -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 2:20:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: marie2

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarcEsadrian


quote:

ORIGINAL: marie2
At any rate, we don't own fashion.


While I generally understand that sentiment, I see it somewhat inversed: we all own fashion, and are responsible for the way we express it, or else so many teens wouldn't use it to annoy their parents and there wouldn't be so much to-do about Sarah Parker's gaudy green dress. [:D]


True.  And if that gaudy green dress was paired up with a color-coordinated hood pulled down over her face, it would make for an exquisite ensemble. 


How could I ever argue that?



MarcEsadrian -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 2:44:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: colouredin


quote:

ORIGINAL: MarcEsadrian
Why do so many analogies come back to football? Rest assured, I find team numbers and names stamped across shirts in general society equally amusing, if not irksome. You might feel the same way about suits and ties. Don't mind me and my opinions; I'd never foist my tastes on the rest of society even if I could, but the little corner of the world that is mine is most certainly a dictatorship.


Fair enough, I just wondered what made it funny. You raise an interesting point though, your fashion choice is your own, you may never wear something that I think looks wonderful, thats cool, its a shame though that rather than just accepting people have their own definitions on style some people decide to ridicule them. But then I guess thats just each to their own to be honest.


It's amusing (or is it depressing?) to me when I realize the collar is worn only as an ornament or a stylish gimmick in public to get attention. Based upon the significance I place on displayed collars, my use of the word "amusement" is a show of restraint, I assure you. But again, that's me and my values—not my take on What Is. To address your closing point, the OP did ask us for our opinions.



Lynnxz -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 2:51:48 PM)

quote:

I realize the collar is worn only as an ornament or a stylish gimmick in public to get attention.


It's a fashion statement, not limited to the BDSM community. I was wearing collars, and tight necklaces years before I got involved in kink. I wear them now, not to fluff my ego about being owned, but because C has put together some spectacular pieces, including one that has to be riveted on...(sometimes anyway... usually I just thread a ribbon through the holes to save my neck. )

I'm confused as to why people believe that Kinky people "Own" the right to wear chokers and collars.



MasterDarkSadist -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 4:11:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lynnxz

quote:

I realize the collar is worn only as an ornament or a stylish gimmick in public to get attention.


It's a fashion statement, not limited to the BDSM community. I was wearing collars, and tight necklaces years before I got involved in kink. I wear them now, not to fluff my ego about being owned, but because C has put together some spectacular pieces, including one that has to be riveted on...(sometimes anyway... usually I just thread a ribbon through the holes to save my neck. )

I'm confused as to why people believe that Kinky people "Own" the right to wear chokers and collars.


When I say that I believe that collars are to be worn by owned slaves, that is my take on the subject.  If I see a girl, in a setting where the likelihood of her being a sub (and I use girl, because I'm not into guys, nothing more) is high, then I assume she is owned.  Does it make it so?  No.  Furthermore, I don't believe we "own" the right to wear chokers/collars at all.  If everyone wore a ring on their third finger on their left hand, would married people get up in arms and say that they own the right to wear a ring there?  Most likely not.  Would it diminish the value placed on the symbolism of doing so, most definitely.  I guess that where I am going with this is;  you have the right to wear whatever you wish, however in my opinion (read carefully, opinion) you disgrace the meaning of it when you use it for anything other than the symbolic purpose of what it represents.  My rules for the girl(s) that I am with is this:  you will wear nothing around your neck unless it is a loose hanging necklace, or if you are owned by me, you will wear only the collar I provide.  May someone else do something differently, of course.  Should you?  I would say you should not, as it is disrespectful.  But again, that is only my opinion, and how I operate. 

On the topic of having a more defined unity within the lifestyle;  I do believe that more uniformity would provide a general base for everyone to stand on.  The way I see it, the whole "we can't even dare to agree on terminology" speaks volumes about why we are so fractured.  We are fractured because we see ourselves (and somewhat thrive) on the social incorrectness of our chosen lifestyle, however since we are so "taboo" by vanilla standards, we are trying to be so politically correct within our own little niche that we are forgetting that we are creating our own version of vanilla hell.  Hell, even vanilla world can create a dictionary that defines words better than we can, even when we have terms that are generally accepted to mean something, they still can't really mean it.  Hence the whole Master/Dom/sub/slave/top/bottom debate.  I once suggested that having a generally accepted definition of these terms would allow us to more accurately portray who we are/what we wanted in a discussion (with less diatribe) and I was unanimously beaten to death by the whole "i don't want to categorize myself" crowd.  Whether you like it or not, you fit in to a multitude of categories, and your lifestyle identity is one of those categories, no matter if you agree with me on the particular word that is used to describe it.  Political correctness strikes again.



Greyslade -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 4:29:53 PM)

The day BDSM becomes a "unified culture" with rules and regulations is the day I leave running. You want to wear a collar as a dom/me? Fine by me. Want to wear your underwear on your head? Fine by me. Want to be snippy about what I'm doing because it doesn't jive with your unified culture? Again, fine by me.

I've always been a tad uneasy about the focus on collars and "owning" someone. If a sub didn't want to be with me, I wouldn't want to be with them. As a accessory, I find them rather cute, but the symbolism rubs me the wrong way if taken too far.



LadyLupineNYC -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 4:34:35 PM)

Along the same lines...before SSC I am sure there was a general understanding of the principles it identified but by giving it a more formal terminology a more uniform understanding was created.  When SSC was no longer sufficient alone, RACK was developed.  Personally, I think there is definitely a value to this.  However, despite the fact that I was the one who originally made the disparaging comment on another post about a Domme in a collar (again, collar not choker), I don't actually have any interest in uniforming dress code etc. I was merely expressing a personal pet peeve.  This is a pet peeve along the same lines as those who also have issue with the whole 'online collar' or collaring after a very short period of time or first meeting.  So, yes...anyone may do as they wish, however it is equally not appropriate when (in my case) male s-types get pissy because I will assume their ownership by their 'fashion statement'. 



littlewonder -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 4:40:00 PM)

Waaayyy back when I did the whole clubbing thing, waaaay before I ever even heard of bdsm, wwaaayy before anyone ever wore collars for the bdsm meaning and before bdsm was the new trendy fad....

We called them "fuck me necklaces".

....whether you were male or female.

Owned? Hardly




LadyLupineNYC -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 4:40:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greyslade

*snip*

I've always been a tad uneasy about the focus on collars and "owning" someone. If a sub didn't want to be with me, I wouldn't want to be with them. As a accessory, I find them rather cute, but the symbolism rubs me the wrong way if taken too far.


I think this brings up an interesting point as to why I think there is such a class on this topic- there are those who are involved in 'ownership' culture and those who aren't.  Those within the ownership culture, I suspect, feel protective about the heavy symbolism given to things like collars whereas for the other group it is more about freedom,  fashion, and appropriating elements that they like for no other reason alone.  Neither side could be said to be more 'right' but both sides have the desire to define themselves as such due to the underlying principles they are attaching (either a more formalized role vs a more individualistic one). 

Edited to add:  For those doubting the power of the roll of ownership culture within the BDSM community, need I point out that this website is called 'Collarme' as in, people looking to be 'collared'.  Obviously that is not everyone on here, but the strength of that imagery speaks for itself for a good many people.  



RedMagic1 -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 5:43:21 PM)

For what it's worth, the BDSM item is a "collar," and the fashion accessory is a "choker" or "choker collar."  Hot Topic even sells a "genuine leather choker collar," which might make MarcEsadrian's eyes roll [image]http://www.collarchat.com/image/s4.gif[/image] , but it's an accurate description of the product: an honest-to-Pete choker collar that happens to be made of leather.

I don't think anyone wearing the one is trying to make people think they're wearing the other.

I was just at a heterosexual wedding in which the groom wore a skirt.  Apparently, where he comes from, lots of hetero men wear skirts.  I grew up in a rural part of the United States where that just wasn't done, ever, even if you called what you were wearing a "kilt."  But just because I became used to people wearing things a certain way, didn't affect other people from getting used to wearing things differently.



heartcream -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 6:06:22 PM)

Dominants in collars, huh? Fashionwise I suppose maybe?

Plentyoffish is a dating site. I dont think fish is the thing. Lavalife, I dont think it is about volcanoes.

This is a site where folks can do what they like here as long as they dont disrupt TOS stuff, I'd say.

Fashion-wise collars are not anything I am drawn to.

Kink-wise the whole slavery/animal thing is not my thing. I am not interested in wearing anything that looks like it goes on a pet or a prisoner, that is me.

I dont think chokers are thought to be BDSM. Native American Indians had chokers and so did White people as Cameo's on black velvet ribbon for two examples, and I dont think these had anything to do with BDSM.







VampiresLair -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 6:10:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LATEXBABY64

I do not agree with you  there has to be rules to the game or it is just cheating and not worth playing 


Well, if you see the lifestyle as a game thats your problem. I see it as my life, where I will wear what I please when I please and I really dont care much for what anyone else is going to say. Its a very simple way to separate folks out, honestly. Anyone shallow enough not to want to interact with me because I happen to like certain jewelry that doesnt "fit my station in life" isnt someone I want to be in my circle of friends anyway.

DV



subtee -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 6:22:29 PM)

Well, I'm just glad that we all completely agree that Dominants should never, ever, EVER have pierced nipples. Whew!



MarcEsadrian -> RE: Dominants Wearing Collars (4/8/2009 6:29:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lynnxz

I'm confused as to why people believe that Kinky people "Own" the right to wear chokers and collars.


Probably because some of us "kinky people" are opinionated jerks? That's my guess.



Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
6.152344E-02