quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas
I meant no offense in using the honorific "Mistress" as it is used in BDSM and Gorean communities for a dominant woman.

quote:

For sure, your perception of the honorific "Mistress" does not match that held generally in the BDSM or Gorean communities. That definition is included below for your future reference.

quote:

I suppose I could simply always use the term "master" to stay out of trouble but this is also a mine field with a woman who takes offense with the normally masculine honorific.

quote:

p.s. Wait, wait...maybe "goddess" would work from now on?

quote:

ORIGINAL: VaguelyCurious

Yesssss! The ability to romance women via hummus and baba ganoush strikes again! 

quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1

As for me, since I don't cook, I am quick to reply what type of restaurants I want to go to. :)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyNTrainer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas
The mistress’s point is unclear to me.

This is an odd way to communicate, but I assume you meant me.  I do not  identify as a mistress of any sort, as I am neither a kept woman nor dating a married man.  I don't personally consider it to be an appropriate title for a female dominant due to its negative connotations which are far more submissive than dominant in nature.

My point was that gender assumptions - like your assuming that I fall into the "Mistress" category - are inherently flawed, even if they might be correct some of the time.  There are quite a number of gay male Masters, and a fair number of biological females, heterosexual and otherwise, who identify as Masters.  So if you are actually asking for the input of heterosexual males who identify as Masters, it is a good idea to specify. 

Not that you can limit who gets to post to a thread on CM based on your personal preferences, but it still helps if you make it clear which demographic you're asking. 

I meant no offense in using the honorific "Mistress" as it is used in BDSM and Gorean communities for a dominant woman. Frankly, it would be rare to use the masculine honorific "Master" for a woman unless one is addressing BDSM doms without regard to gender, as in a paper or book text. Perhaps you intended this. Perhaps not. You did say this which puzzles me:

quote:

I don't personally consider it to be an appropriate title for a female dominant due to its negative connotations which are far more submissive than dominant in nature.

For sure, your perception of the honorific "Mistress" does not match that held generally in the BDSM or Gorean communities. That definition is included below for your future reference.

I suppose I could simply always use the term "master" to stay out of trouble but this is also a mine field with a woman who takes offense with the normally masculine honorific. Here is something I am sure is always true: one cannot satisfy everyone in the online world of CM and so I do not try.

Here is the definition from Wickipedia references seaching on the term Master and BDSM and how it is generally used:

The term "Master" can be gender-independent but is mostly used only in reference to males. There is otherwise no male-specific equivalent. The female equivalent is "Mistress".

A dominatrix (plural dominatrices or dominatrixes) or mistress is a woman who takes the dominant role in bondage and discipline, dominance and submission or BDSM.


p.s. Wait, wait...maybe "goddess" would work from now on?

I'm going to save Myself some time and reprint a partial reply regarding a very similar topic yesterday.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

I have said this multiple times when this discussion has entered this particular forum before.  I am a person who practices the leather lifestyle.  Unlike the Gorean lifestyle, the title of Master is not one held by men alone.  This is something that is a significant difference between us.  In the leather lifestyle, it is a title that can be held by a man or a woman.  In fact, our protocols have much more to do with experience in living this way.  Not whether someone has a penis or not, but rather how long they have successfully run their M/s dynamics in their authority.  Even amongst Master's themselves, that is what determines whether one is junior or senior to another.  Our protocols specifically state that gender is not to be a factor when showing courtesy and respect for each other.

There may not be as many leather people on these boards as there once were.  That does not make our lifestyle any more or less valid than anyone else's.  I probably hold higher requirements for Myself in the title than a heck of a lot of people on these boards do. 

I was granted My Master's Cap by the leather community in April of 2008 with My husband and My side and My boy at My feet.  It wasn't something that I asked for and truthfully, most people who receive one don't think it is something they deserve.  My leather family and community thought that I did.  I'm not going to disrespect their opinion for some random message board.

Should an OP choose to ask for male opinions alone, that would be her right.  Not that it is a requirement on this board for anyone to restrict their answers.  However, that was not what she asked for.  Perhaps, if she had, I may have indulged her, even in her display of unpleasantness.

The definition that you brought from Wiki is, in fact, incorrect by leather protocols.  Unlike Goreans, we do not use those titles without a qualifying name unless there is a M/s dynamic in place between the parties.  The only person on these boards, for example, who should be calling Me "Mistress" is My own slave. 

Not all of the BDSM community uses the same protocols and the titles may mean different things for different groups.  I have always found that it is better to learn about our differences, rather than to make mistakes in My own lack of knowledge.

quote:

ORIGINAL: VaguelyCurious

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zevar

No woman who identifies as submissive and or slave should be marginalized and talked about as though something is flawed about her due to her singleness.

QFT

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

I
Refusal to give honest answers about preferences:
Moi Where would you like to go for dinner?
Her Oh, anywhere you like.
Moi What kind of cuisine do you like?
Her Oh, anyhthing.
Moi How about Chinese
Her I hate Chinese
Moi There is a new Mexican resturant I've heard about. How about that.
Her Oh, ick. I hate Mexican
Moi Then, let's just go to Cracker Barrel. Meat and two veg is always ok.
Her Oh they are so greasy.
Moi If you don't let me know your preferences you may well get a tastless cold hot dog from 7-11.
Her Oh, anything you like is fine with me.
.... Obviously not. She could not understand why I just took her home and left. I don't ask questions unless I want an answer. A person willing to leave you guessing over something as simple as restaurant choices is going to leave you guessing about a whole lot more important things.

Stefan

quote:

ORIGINAL: femasoslave

I'm curious....I have read many subby/slave women profiles on here and they have been single for a loooong while....in YOUR opinion....why do you think that is?

As a sub/slave myself, I have my own persnal opinion...that is that they have too many restrictions....in my opinion they should be and act sub/slave....which means that they should expect their limits to be expanded instead of being a definate.

When I was single and made up my mind that I definately 'needed' and 'wanted' a Master....I did NOT have a list of HARD limits.....i always believed that limits with a compassionate, caring and loving Master can always be expanded...its all a part of the leanring curve to be a sub/slave.

Maybe I was naive.....BUT maybe I wasnt....I have now the most wonderful, loving, adoring, romantic, passionate Master one could EVER wish for and truth be told......it didnt take long for me to find him!....His profile said it in spades to me.......since then....I have read many, many Dominant profiles.....and so many men are genuine here!.....it makes me wonder if the subby women really have no idea what they want....I am on the side of the Dominant men...not the subby women who if they were GENUINELY looking for a Dominant man...they would do ALMOST ANYTHING for them.
(i wont bother replying to sub women....i am not interested in your opinions)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub

~fr~

Now that I know I am single because I am fake, I will sleep so much better!  I thought it was because I am fat!

Collarme is so fukn educational!

quote:

ORIGINAL: xkittenx

In her quote, at the very top, she indicated it was a fast reply.

I picked up what the FR meant after being here for less than two weeks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: appleofdaddyseye

Has it occurred to anyone because its certainly occurred to me that the Op's Master might be loves young dream to her but we might consider him a total asswipe and wouldnt touch him if the propagation of the spieces relied on it? Hell, its easy to snag the dickheads, they are everywhere. Most submissives are inundated with offers, maybe she simply has lower standards and is blissfully unaware. I am so envious of girls with low standards.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

Greetings kitten.

I am mildly amused by your attempt to educate me especally since you are making some false assumptions in providing that education. Those assumptions are that I'm interested in your experience level here and that I am not looking for direct input from her.

Arturas

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyNTrainer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas
I meant no offense in using the honorific "Mistress" as it is used in BDSM and Gorean communities for a dominant woman.

I am not Gorean, and while I respect everyone's right to choose the lifestyle they prefer, Gorean dynamics and honorifics do not and should not apply to people outside that community.  Please feel free to do your thing with your consenting partners, but please respect that other people do it very differently and may not appreciate your applying Gorean conventions to them.

In the greater pansexual BDSM community, it is not rare for dominant women to consider the word "mistress" to be demeaning or annoying.  In the strictly het and mostly online-based community that doesn't intermingle much with the genderqueer or GLBT crowd and has no ties to the leather community or its history, it is a common default.   It's probably a good idea to know who you're talking to before you slap a cultural convention on them; it might not be applicable, and it might mean something entirely different where they come from.

quote:

For sure, your perception of the honorific "Mistress" does not match that held generally in the BDSM or Gorean communities. That definition is included below for your future reference.

Have no idea what Goreans do, and don't care much.  Again, I think your idea of the BDSM community is a bit skewed and does not include the leather community nor the greater GLBT/pansexual community.

quote:

I suppose I could simply always use the term "master" to stay out of trouble but this is also a mine field with a woman who takes offense with the normally masculine honorific.

Anything wrong with just using people's names until or unless it becomes appropriate to use a particular title for them? 

quote:

p.s. Wait, wait...maybe "goddess" would work from now on?

You're missing the point.  It's rather presumptuous to label other people with special titles that they may or may not use or appreciate.  Making up titles to fit other people, without asking them first, is not actually very polite at all. If you wish to extend courtesy to someone who is outside your Gorean culture and does not necessarily fit into Gorean categories, I would suggest using normal Earthling manners.  Addressing people by their names works fine, and so does asking someone individually how they identify and what they would prefer to be called.

My screen name has all the hints you need.  Folks can call me Lady, or Trainer, or N, or LNT, or LadyNTrainer.  I don't really give a hoot which, because all of those things are a variant of using the name I choose to present with.  Is the general idea of what I'm getting at becoming clearer?  You show respect by actually respecting people and their choices, not by forcing them into a pigeonhole that you make up for them.