RE: Slave VS. Submissive

RE: Slave VS. Submissive (Full Version)

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

Message

porcelaine -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/25/2009 2:30:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: agirl I have NO idea what a submissive is, as it varies from one person to the next. The same could be said of slave(in terms of title)......but I suppose the bottom line, for us, is that I'm owned...in entirety......that includes the whole shebang. Everything that is good in me, he owns..everything that is bad in me , he owns. I'm not submissive but I ceded to him the right to have authority over me and all that's attached to me. He can alter any part of my life with a sweep of his hand. If I ever thought * you have NO right to.........* then, nah , I wouldn't be a slave. I might ask why....I might grumble about it, I might stamp my metaphorical foot in frustration .......but I never , and I mean never, question his right to do whatever he does. i like this. quote: ORIGINAL: agirl but if I don't accept that he has the right to tell me to sell my house, get a job, alter my life in any way he chooses, then I would not be a slave to HIM. I'd be someone he has influence over. I'd still be retaining my right to do what I think is best. and this. both were well articulated. [;)] porcelaine

ncbabe -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/25/2009 3:11:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: porcelaine quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero What this thread has been enlightening of is the recurring theme that many submissives who do not ID as slaves, in the right dynamic and with the right partner, could actually yield entirely to the point where they are. But that's best kept for another thread, I suppose. which i've mentioned before on some thread i can't recall. some are willing to explore that depth with an individual and find the achievement of slavery is possible because of Him, but would not offer the same degree of surrender to another. which i define as relational based slavery instead. then there are some who will always have a desire to submit in this manner regardless of the dominant they're involved with. it is merely how they yield. anything less would be unsatisfying. porcelaine This sums me up, I think. When I met him I declared that I was submissive and most definitely not a slave. But he inspires me in a way that no other has and exploring deeper submission with him feels extremely natural and satisfying. If I were to be looking again, I would still label myself submissive because that is essentially what I am. The extent of my submission would be dependent upon the dominant I chose to be with. I really do not spend time discussing with my owner what I am to him and coming up with names for it. Calling myself a slave is really to give others an idea of the depth of my submission.

agirl -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/25/2009 3:38:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 quote: ORIGINAL: agirl Agreed. I agree with your idea of what a slave is .....to all intents and purposes. The part I've always found irksome (about the term) are all the attributes someone is supposed to have to BE a slave. It's poppycock, basically. chuckles Trust me on this... no more irksome than the hundred jillion rules about being dominant. I've come to the conclusion that my short-term memory isn't good enough to be a true dom. There is no way in hell I could ever remember all the things I'm supposed to do or not do, all the clothes I'm supposed to wear or not wear, all the thoughts I'm supposed to have and not have. If I listened too closely my ears would bleed...........but I tend to lean toward the chinese proverb.... “The person who says it cannot be done should not interrupt the person doing it”. Yes...bad slave....bad girl...disobedient girl...wild girl.....selfish girl...all of which is owned and controlled by him...Uncomfortable girl... girl who recognises which side her bread is buttered...girl who trusts, respects and admires the bloke owning her. Who KNOWS what makes a slave a slave...and who knows what IS a slave, when faced with a load of typed up attributes. agirl

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/25/2009 6:02:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ncbabe quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA For us, we feel too many view the difference between sub and slave in the physical sense (i.e., kneeling, following orders, sexual limits, limits on freedoms, etc.), where we feel the difference is in the mental/emotional sense. As such, here's how we personally view the sub vs. slave thing: If the person's primary pleasure comes from: THEIR pleasure from submitting/submission itself, that's sub-wired Their PARTNER'S pleasure in their submission, that's slave-wired My owner considers me a slave, yet my primary pleasure comes from my pleasure from submitting. Does that make me a sub-wired slave? To us, you'd be considered a sub, as your primary motivation is to yourself, and not to your owner. Your owner (and you) can of course view you however you'd like.

AndySTL -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/25/2009 6:04:35 PM)
For me there is a difference. When a submissive woman starts to like a guy/girl her submissive feelings grow stronger....kind of like begining to love someone. If her Dom/me and her decide to enter into a d's relationship, she is agreeing to be his submissive. As the two become closer and the trust builds up, she will slowly begin to let more of herself go, so to speak. It isn't until she completly trust him enough to hand over herself completly that she is his/her slave. It takes time, just like in any relationship D's or vanilla. Thats just the way I look at it. Everyone has different opinions, this is just mine. :) I also wanted to say, as a former soldier it is nice to see things like your handle. Thank you, you have no idea what that means to us.

Elipsis -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/25/2009 6:24:08 PM)
Good read. I don't have a lot to contribute to this thread but I wanted to say that I enjoyed hearing your different perspectives. One thought I have is that the meaning of "slave" appears to be so contentious that if you're talking to someone who self-identifies as a slave it's probably not safe to make any assumptions as to what, precisely, they are looking for. So we can debate it all day, and as I said I enjoyed it... but realistically if you're a potential dominant looking to engage in a relationship with someone who self-identifies as a slave... the most important definition as to the meaning of the word is theirs.

Padriag -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/25/2009 6:31:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero (slave-hopeful? fledgling slave? near-slave?soon-to-be-slave?) I was going to go with proto-slave myself. [;)]

alittleevil -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/25/2009 6:35:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sravaka quote: There are great many rewards to being a slave, in my opinion. But they are often not the ones people without experience in this role imagine that they are. I wonder if you'd be willing to elaborate on this? What do you see as the rewards? Did your own sense of them come to differ with experience, vs. what you may have expected initially? Hello, I hope you don't mind if i respond as well. I hope i can actually do it justice. Sometimes it is hard to articulate, since it is so personal. I suspect as well that it is difficult to describe because it comes from a psycho-emotional place that 'predates' words. How does one describe, for another example, their love for their child? I'm no poet ;-). The most obvious reward is vicarious pleasure. I'm pleased not just that, but when, Master is pleased. Doesn't have to be through any acts of my own. I can also feel quite pleased with myself when his pleasure or satisfaction comes through something i have done. Such a pat answer, i know (but still true). In my life, i have to be able to find pleasure vicariously or through being pleased with myself, because Master is not a demonstrative man. He doesn't say "Oh, good girl!" at every little task. In fact, he rarely says anything like that at all. He simply expects to be pleased through and by me--it's nothing particularly special. The other side of that is that at most times in my life, i have rarely been pleased with myself. I fear disapproval almost pathologically. Here, I know exactly how to be approved of and to please. Obey. Serve. That's easy. The next obvious things are the rewards i get simply by being his--the benefits of being in this relationship and being part of those things which he takes care of. Nothing terribly different here from any two fundamentally compatible people except that to have it, i have to be his slave. It's that or nothing. A main difference lies in the degree to which he is responsible for those things he takes care of, including me. It is NOT a job i would want, nor one i am particularly suited for. I am a stronger, saner person because he expects me to be, there is no wiggle room. I like being better than i was. The rest of it is where i tend to fall all inarticulate. This is simply where i belong. I am home. I am comfortable in my own skin. I adore him. As far as the difference in expectations v. experience? Oh yeah, big time. In my expectations there was far more about me (the attention-rich bit that CaringandReal wrote of) involved in my slavery ;-). I suspect that's pretty common. But i'd much rather have this overall sense of peace in my life than 'cookies'. :-) Wishing you well, aj

Saffleur -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/25/2009 6:38:23 PM)
I'll never understand the debate behind this. Submissive is something you are. It's a visceral part of you. A slave is owned. It's property. You don't own submissive. Sure, I've waxed and waned upon this subject in the past because it seemed to have credence but I don't see the difference. A slave -is- a submissive person generally. Though a person can be enslaved against their will. Happens all the time in the real world. I'll take the hit that "submissives" might get angry when I say they can't be owned. It's conditional. Usually has contracts. It's a role. A slave is not a role, it's property. You enjoy it. You admonish it if need be. Occasionally you even let it have a pedicure.

ncbabe -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/25/2009 6:50:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA quote: ORIGINAL: ncbabe My owner considers me a slave, yet my primary pleasure comes from my pleasure from submitting. Does that make me a sub-wired slave? To us, you'd be considered a sub, as your primary motivation is to yourself, and not to your owner. Your owner (and you) can of course view you however you'd like. I don't want to try to argue anything here as I very much believe each to their own definition when it comes to the sub vs slave debate, but I do find this perspective interesting. My owner encourages me to place a high value on my own pleasure from submitting to him, because the more pleasure I get from it, the more I submit. This method has induced me to serve him in ways I would never have dreamed of before meeting him, and brought me to the point where I will obey any command he gives me. If I am putting my own pleasure first at his instruction, does that still make me a sub in your eyes?

Elisabella -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/26/2009 12:53:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero Expectations and the degree of surrender. A slave should have no facet which is not surrendered unto the M-type. The only marginal framework is her having decided that, prior to entering the relationship/dynamic, the M-type in question was one that had directives and goals at least semi-parallel to where xhe would prefer to see hirself go. A submissive, on the other hand, requires sovereignty over certain parts of hir life despite the surrender of others. Big difference. The reason some will say there isn't any is because people are free to use whatever title suits them (making the discussion difficult). If I suddenly decide to call myself a giraffe, however, it does not magically erase the differences between giraffes and humans. I really like this definition.

SubOnlyForHim -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/26/2009 1:07:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ncbabe quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA quote: ORIGINAL: ncbabe My owner considers me a slave, yet my primary pleasure comes from my pleasure from submitting. Does that make me a sub-wired slave? To us, you'd be considered a sub, as your primary motivation is to yourself, and not to your owner. Your owner (and you) can of course view you however you'd like. I don't want to try to argue anything here as I very much believe each to their own definition when it comes to the sub vs slave debate, but I do find this perspective interesting. My owner encourages me to place a high value on my own pleasure from submitting to him, because the more pleasure I get from it, the more I submit. This method has induced me to serve him in ways I would never have dreamed of before meeting him, and brought me to the point where I will obey any command he gives me. If I am putting my own pleasure first at his instruction, does that still make me a sub in your eyes? Things like this...and reading this whole thread, make me think of labels and wonder what Sir labels me as, (curiousity is natural part of being human, yes?) so then i start asking Sir questions, questions Sir feels i should already know the answer to and, thus, gets me in trouble! Why, when there are so many other truly important questions in life, would THIS matter? i must stop reading forums. i must stop reading forums. [sm=couch.gif] i must stop reading forums. Sir owns me. I am His. I suppose that's my label. slave, sub, sub-wired slave...These words will not change anything in my life, improve it or worsen it. They will not help me serve better or be more pleasing to Sir.

CaringandReal -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/26/2009 5:19:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kimveri G'morning, quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 Witness Kimveri's post below. For her, it is a question of where the driving force for the submission is. She feels that somehow, slavery is imposed from the outside which would, by definition, rule out all consensual slavery. To me, a person consenting to the process of enslavement imposed upon them by another most certainly qualifies as "consensual slavery". It does not remove the requisite external force for the subject of such force to be a willing & active participant. A slave needs the contribution of another party to bring that potential to fruition, much like a woman seeking to be pregnant. Wanting it, searching it out, being willing are all well & good but without that contribution from the external force, it ain't gonna happen. :-D Well wishes, ~Kimveri Brilliant response. I am in 100% agreement. A woman wanting to be pregnant is a woman wanting to be pregnant, not a woman who IS pregnant. The same, it seems to me, is true of a slave. I'm something of a materialist. I believe that things are not real until they are real. (LOL, don't ask me to explain that in theoretical terms!) Example: There is no non-delusional "I am a doctor" when the idea of beocmming a doctor is still a dream and there is no paper from the certification board. There may very well, "I am a healer by nature and have an intense vocation to be a doctor" or "I am almost a doctor, one more board to pass and I'm in" but until that deciding moment, you are just not a doctor! And until somebody is owned by another person, whatever their mindset or even real qualifications may be, they are just not a slave.

CaringandReal -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/26/2009 5:32:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 Your definition doesn't align well with that of other people... or mine for that matter... which is the real answer to the OP's question. Speak for yourself, buddy. :/ (and stop speaking about others) I am "other people" to you, and her definition aligns perfectly with me. So what you said above is just patently incorrect, unless you think the being typing these words is really a German Shepard or (heaven forfend) a gooeyduck. [8\|] Seriously, don't you find that drawing upon the technicalities of wording in the opening thread remarks to be a little lame when trying to disqualify an opinion/definition of slavery that doesn't agree with your own? Speaking of the thread starter's remarks... let's remind ourselves what supportourtroops actually said in her starting post: "What do you consider to be a slave VS. a submissive? I have always called and considered myself a submissive as I have limits. The DOMs I meet always tell me I'm a slave to the bone. I've asked and their comments are, "I know a slave when I see one, and, you have slave written all over you" I would like to know how you decide and your honest opinions on the difference. " The above is all worded in second person. There's no mention of how "other people" feel about slave vs. submissive and how your opinion meshes or does not mesh with some vague invisible "other" that any of can define in any way that we so please (or that supports our personal opinion, perhaps?), the thread starter says "You" meaning you, and me, and most certainly Kimveri. She wanted personal opinions and that was exactly what Kimveri was doing, thus her response is very appropriate and absolutely to the point in the thread. Before people start going on and on about "real answers" to an "OP's" question, I wish they would go back read the actual "real questions" the OP asked. Which, in this case, are, and I quote: 1.What do YOU (emphasis mine) consider to be a slave VS. a submissive? and 2. I would like to know how YOU (emphasis mine) decide and YOUR (emphasis mine) honest opinions on the difference... (...assumed: between a slave and a submissive).

leadership527 -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/26/2009 8:36:32 AM)
I stand corrected on all counts.

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/26/2009 9:30:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ncbabe quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA quote: ORIGINAL: ncbabe My owner considers me a slave, yet my primary pleasure comes from my pleasure from submitting. Does that make me a sub-wired slave? To us, you'd be considered a sub, as your primary motivation is to yourself, and not to your owner. Your owner (and you) can of course view you however you'd like. I don't want to try to argue anything here as I very much believe each to their own definition when it comes to the sub vs slave debate, but I do find this perspective interesting. My owner encourages me to place a high value on my own pleasure from submitting to him, because the more pleasure I get from it, the more I submit. This method has induced me to serve him in ways I would never have dreamed of before meeting him, and brought me to the point where I will obey any command he gives me. If I am putting my own pleasure first at his instruction, does that still make me a sub in your eyes? First, I haven't felt we're "arguing" in any way... just having an exchange of ideas. Secondly, with regard to your question... with regard to the way WE (i.e., our personal view of the dynamic) view the difference between the two, it's not something that a one person could order/instruct... it's just the way a person is wired. And if that wiring is "slave" oriented, all the instruction in the world wouldn't change that a slave's primary focus (and motivation) would be to please their owner first, and themselves second. It's just a mental thing... a way someone is wired. It'd be akin to ordering/instructing a mother to put her needs over those of her child; all the "instruction" in the world wouldn't change that... she's always going to put her child first. This is not to say a mother doesn't ENJOY the time she spends on herself... but ultimately the focus remains on placing her child's needs, wants, and desires above her own, and that's where the FOCUS always is. No amount of "instruction" can change that. That's about the closest analogy I can provide. I hope that kinda makes sense? Lastly, I feel I need to emphasize again... neither sub or slave is any better or worse than the other... just different. There are Toppy types that prefer subs... those that prefer slaves... and those who don't care either way. Again, neither is better or worse than the other any more than the color RED is better or worse than the color BLUE. Just different.

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/26/2009 9:42:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SubOnlyForHim quote: ORIGINAL: ncbabe quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA quote: ORIGINAL: ncbabe My owner considers me a slave, yet my primary pleasure comes from my pleasure from submitting. Does that make me a sub-wired slave? To us, you'd be considered a sub, as your primary motivation is to yourself, and not to your owner. Your owner (and you) can of course view you however you'd like. I don't want to try to argue anything here as I very much believe each to their own definition when it comes to the sub vs slave debate, but I do find this perspective interesting. My owner encourages me to place a high value on my own pleasure from submitting to him, because the more pleasure I get from it, the more I submit. This method has induced me to serve him in ways I would never have dreamed of before meeting him, and brought me to the point where I will obey any command he gives me. If I am putting my own pleasure first at his instruction, does that still make me a sub in your eyes? Things like this...and reading this whole thread, make me think of labels and wonder what Sir labels me as, (curiousity is natural part of being human, yes?) so then i start asking Sir questions, questions Sir feels i should already know the answer to and, thus, gets me in trouble! Why, when there are so many other truly important questions in life, would THIS matter? i must stop reading forums. i must stop reading forums. [sm=couch.gif] i must stop reading forums. Sir owns me. I am His. I suppose that's my label. slave, sub, sub-wired slave...These words will not change anything in my life, improve it or worsen it. They will not help me serve better or be more pleasing to Sir. In truth, I think the "label" is more important to those on the Toppy side of the slash when "shopping" for their little slut-monkey. "So, have you decided on a car? Will it be the red one with the stick-shift, or the blue one with automatic transmission; or would you like to test drive 'em both again?!!" [sm=rofl.gif] LOL

ncbabe -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/26/2009 10:12:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA quote: ORIGINAL: ncbabe I don't want to try to argue anything here as I very much believe each to their own definition when it comes to the sub vs slave debate, but I do find this perspective interesting. My owner encourages me to place a high value on my own pleasure from submitting to him, because the more pleasure I get from it, the more I submit. This method has induced me to serve him in ways I would never have dreamed of before meeting him, and brought me to the point where I will obey any command he gives me. If I am putting my own pleasure first at his instruction, does that still make me a sub in your eyes? Secondly, with regard to your question... with regard to the way WE (i.e., our personal view of the dynamic) view the difference between the two, it's not something that a one person could order/instruct... it's just the way a person is wired. Ah, so this is where we differ then - I believe it is possible to re-wire someone's mind, to train them to perceive and process differently. After that, you could instruct them to behave in a way that would not have felt natural to them previously. But I digress. Going back to the OP's question, NZ's definitions are the ones that work for me.

boldfinger -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/26/2009 11:29:42 AM)
Submission is done one act at a time. Slavery is an overall context. Someone who is submissive wants to submit. That is a transaction. Each time they do it they get their fix. Someone who is a slave wants to be owned. That is a condition. It is established once, and then everything they do maintains their place. The submissive views domination as a source of discrete instructions to obey. The slave views ownership as an ongoing way to belong. Do you like being told what to do so you can obey, or do you like to be obedient so you can be told what to do?

DavanKael -> RE: Slave VS. Submissive (10/26/2009 9:37:01 PM)
If there is a continuum that denotes the s-side of the kneel, imo, a slave would fall on the extreme end of said spectrum where the degree of power exchange is as near to total as can be achieved. People do take a lot of liberties with terms. I would also note that slave is a noun while submissive is an adjective and, thus, begs another word to follow it, for example: submissive wife, submissive partner, submissive male, etc. I am not sure that I delineate any single factor that would place a person in a submissive role versus that of a slave and I would not make a value judgment as better of lesser for each with the exception of what is more or less suited to the needs of particlar people and within specific relationships. Davan

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

5.078125E-02