RE: Early Use of Honorifics..

RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (Full Version)

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

Message

sunshinemiss -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 6:32:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ChasteDream Well, obviously, both you and your owner are entitled to do and call one another and others as you prefer. For me however, I wouldn't be talking with you if you didn't address me as I prefer, respectfully. This is my preference, and I'm entitled to it, too. And obviously since you're a slave and I'm a Master, its crystal clear which of us is right! And folks who are not "Masters" are absolutely entitled to do as we wish ... Dude, seriously, you need to get out more, you know, with real people breathing the same air you are. Just saying. Edited for removage of snarkage.

HannahLynHeather -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 7:31:45 AM)
honorifics are for fuckheads. period. if you need to be called sir or ma'am or even worse master or mistresss in order to assert your so-called dominance to yourself you aren't any fucking sort of dominant worth shit. you have a name, its good enough everywhere else, so why not just fucking use that? if some fuckwit demands you address him as sir just because he's a dom, then write back "yes of course sir fuckedintheheadbrainlessshitbreathingdogspermdrinker". unless of course you're in a crappy mood, in which case you could write something rude.

SimplyMichael -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 7:51:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather honorifics are for fuckheads. period. if you need to be called sir or ma'am or even worse master or mistresss in order to assert your so-called dominance to yourself you aren't any fucking sort of dominant worth shit. you have a name, its good enough everywhere else, so why not just fucking use that? if some fuckwit demands you address him as sir just because he's a dom, then write back "yes of course sir fuckedintheheadbrainlessshitbreathingdogspermdrinker". unless of course you're in a crappy mood, in which case you could write something rude. Its sad that young people today feel so repressed and awkward around sharing their feelings openly. I have a very successful process that I use to help young ladies open up and gain the confidence to use their voices to clearly tell the world what they think. It involves a great deal of anal sex, spanking, and being forced to say "yes sir" while watching Fox news... Hearing the right person say Sir or Master is intensely hot for me, hearing them say it because they say it to everyone is a huge turn off for me. Just because someone enjoys being addressed with those honorifics doesn't make them a dipshit. Like most things, you only know later if your timing was right but lets not throw out the baby with the bathwater!

DecadentDesire -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 7:56:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael while watching Fox news... You are the goddamn devil...

SimplyMichael -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 7:59:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DecadentDesire quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael while watching Fox news... You are the goddamn devil... You say the sweetest things but I bet you tell that to all the Doms in your life!

DecadentDesire -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 8:07:32 AM)
Only you, big guy

HannahLynHeather -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 8:36:24 AM)
quote: Just because someone enjoys being addressed with those honorifics doesn't make them a dipshit. fuck you, you're wrong. i'm fucking right! i always am* * this post was made as a special gift to confirm the beliefs of a few of my more ardent followers...

leadership527 -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 9:34:51 AM)
*I've been 'instructed' to call Dom's who I'm just starting to talk to (as in within the first few days) Sir.* By whom? *It grates me. It makes me feel like they are demanding a level of 'respect' higher than the one that they have earned.* It makes me feel the same way from the dom side. When someone offers me what I call "pretend BDSM respect" then they water down the real thing. From that point on I can never know how they really feel about me because they are prone to lying. That being said, there is another viewpoint. You and I both are treating respect as related to the individual. There is also respect for the role. When used that way, then the "Sir" only indicates that you are a sub who respects doms in a general sort of way. It's much the same way as we use honorifics to describe the president whether or not we think he's a buffoon. *how best do I express that I feel like they don't have the 'right' to demand a stranger call them Sir* You could go with something like, "Hahahahahaha.... you gotta be kidding me.... no seriously.... bwahahahaha" Honestly, the moment someone demands respect you absolutely and completely know they are not worth any. At that point, you can say whatever you want since their good opinion of you means nothing to you. More seriously, what I say when some sub does this to me is, "I very much prefer you do not use honorifics with me unless and until you actually feel that way. So how about calling me Jeff? If it really makes your blood boil to do that then go ahead and call me whatever. Just know that I don't like it."

leadership527 -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 9:43:59 AM)
quote: The notion that you have a "position" as a dominant in the online world that is deserving of an elevated degree of respect is nothing more than an ego-centric delusion. you've misunderstood DD. Well, you may not have misunderstood Rqrt but you have misunderstood what it means to apply titles to roles like that. For instance, in the MAsT communities I've been involved in it is typical that everyone call the masters "Master Bob" and the slaves "Slave Mary". It is a celebration of the two roles, not the individuals. This is, in part, a cultural thing. For instance you'd find Russian culture to be much more focused on roles than individuals. So us Americans struggle with this. Then, of course, we've had the relaxing of such standards in at least some parts of the country. So in California, sticking to "Sir" and "Ma'am" among strangers seems standoff-ish not "polite". So to me, using some construction like having a stranger call me "Master Hayes" does not seem polite, it seems ridiculous. I don't generally refer to doctors as "Doctor Smith" either. My feeling is that MD's already have way the fuck too much ego and desperately need to be put in their place -- that of a paid service provider. My point here is that while I sympathize with your view, you don't really have the alternate view understood correctly and it isn't always simply the puffed up narcissism of an internet dom.

subtlyAlpha -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 10:10:39 AM)
~FR~ lol Jeff - that response made me giggle. I usually give my screen a blank stare, and then figure out how to explain the unlikelihood of me calling them that. As far as who 'instructs' me - they do. If it was MY Dom telling me this, or even a protocol set up for an event - I would have NO issues behaving so. wrygrin Perhaps I've been a bit jaded by some of the 'dom's' I've encountered, because I don't respect ALL Dom's in a general sort of way. To be fair, there have been Dom's I've met in PERSON who got a Sir from me upon being introduced to them - but that's a whole nother kettle of energetic fish - I think it's only happened twice - and they were highly regarded by people I KNEW and trusted.

DecadentDesire -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 10:28:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 quote: The notion that you have a "position" as a dominant in the online world that is deserving of an elevated degree of respect is nothing more than an ego-centric delusion. you've misunderstood DD. Well, you may not have misunderstood Rqrt but you have misunderstood what it means to apply titles to roles like that. For instance, in the MAsT communities I've been involved in it is typical that everyone call the masters "Master Bob" and the slaves "Slave Mary". It is a celebration of the two roles, not the individuals. This is, in part, a cultural thing. For instance you'd find Russian culture to be much more focused on roles than individuals. So us Americans struggle with this. Then, of course, we've had the relaxing of such standards in at least some parts of the country. So in California, sticking to "Sir" and "Ma'am" among strangers seems standoff-ish not "polite". So to me, using some construction like having a stranger call me "Master Hayes" does not seem polite, it seems ridiculous. I don't generally refer to doctors as "Doctor Smith" either. My feeling is that MD's already have way the fuck too much ego and desperately need to be put in their place -- that of a paid service provider. My point here is that while I sympathize with your view, you don't really have the alternate view understood correctly and it isn't always simply the puffed up narcissism of an internet dom. I understand the use of titles and honorifics in MAST and Leather communities and never had much of an issue using them myself in that context. However, these are encapsulated social groups where the standards are part of the group's social norms and have no application outside of that context. I doubt any of the Leather folk I have met extend this honorific beyond their group and for example, expect that their boss refer to them as Master Bob. The same applies to the online world. Such norms do not exist beyond those isolated social groups. Therefore, to have an expectation that someone emailing your online profile show you a certain degree of respect for your position as a dominant, beyond normal civility, is unrealistic. Edited to Add: In fact, given this is the Internet, having an expectation that they respond with normal civility is probably unrealistic, too.

leadership527 -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 10:41:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subtlyAlpha lol Jeff - that response made me giggle. I usually give my screen a blank stare, and then figure out how to explain the unlikelihood of me calling them that. Yeah, I'm prone to making people giggle. It's a part of my domly mystique... or something.... As far as who 'instructs' me - they do. If it was MY Dom telling me this, or even a protocol set up for an event - I would have NO issues behaving so. They do? The nebulous "they". Is that like "the man"? LOL. I don't know about you but when some random individual presumes to "instruct" me, I generally laugh unless what they said makes a great deal of sense to me. wrygrin Perhaps I've been a bit jaded by some of the 'dom's' I've encountered, because I don't respect ALL Dom's in a general sort of way. It's not jaded. It's just that you're processing things like respect on an individual level rather than a role level. It's neither right nor wrong, just how you do it... which happens to be a lot like me and, for that matter, a lot of Americans. To be fair, there have been Dom's I've met in PERSON who got a Sir from me upon being introduced to them - but that's a whole nother kettle of energetic fish - I think it's only happened twice - and they were highly regarded by people I KNEW and trusted. chuckles OK, this made me laugh because it's happened to me twice now. I gave some sub my speech about actual respect. She then thought about it carefully and then went right on calling me "sir". In her mind, she had sufficient respect for me to do so. It's not my place to argue that position. Like you, this was one of those "knew me indirectly" sort of situations. It still freaked me out though to think that someone who was a total stranger to me saw me that way. In my own head, I'm just some guy.

VideoAdminTheta -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 11:45:09 AM)
A number of posts have been removed from this thread. If your post is missing it was because it was a personal attack, it resonded to or quoted a removed post or mentioned a member that wasn't on the thread. Thank you

subtlyAlpha -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 12:05:57 PM)
~FR~ They = the Dom's I'm talking to - not quite as nebulous as 'the man'. lol I think humor should be one of the 99 Domly Powers. ;) I think that's one of the reasons I started this thread - I wanted to be sure that I wasn't missing some information that WOULD allow it to make a great deal (or even a small deal) of sense to me. K.

Rochsub2009 -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 12:07:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 quote: The notion that you have a "position" as a dominant in the online world that is deserving of an elevated degree of respect is nothing more than an ego-centric delusion. .....For instance, in the MAsT communities I've been involved in it is typical that everyone call the masters "Master Bob" and the slaves "Slave Mary". It is a celebration of the two roles, not the individuals. This is, in part, a cultural thing. Jeff, I agree with your MAsT example. I have attended FemDom events where ALL of the men serve, pamper, and cater to ALL of the women. When a woman asks us for something, we reply "Yes Ma'am", regardless of who she is. By calling all of the women "Ma'am", it shows our respect for their womanhood, and it also expresses the exalted position that their womanhood grants them at this particular event. This is the accepted protocol at these particular events, and anyone who has a problem with it would probably not have been invited to the event in the first place. However, that is very different from what RqrCS was describing. It sounded to me like he believes that ALL Doms/Dommes deserve elevated status at all times simply because they self-describe as "Dom/Domme". That, to me, is pure self-aggrandizement.

leadership527 -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 12:28:57 PM)
It's also worth noting though that at these MAsT meetings, nobody DEMANDED those titles. My own sensibilities about not using them were perfectly acceptable. None of the people there felt any need to demand a title. That, in and of itself, probably made me better about using them at least in some cases. Conversely, had the group culture demanded titles I would've never returned. I would've seen them all as "wannabe dominants" rather than "real" (my own bias). I'd have seen them all as insecure. So yes, even as I recognize that the use of honorifics is a HIGHLY cultural thing and HEAVILY influenced in the American culture by several different major themes I still have a hard time with someone demanding a title... a police officer, a doctor, a judge (outside of a courtroom), anyone. If you have to demand it then you don't deserve it is my rule.... as culturally biased as that is.

sunshinemiss -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 1:38:44 PM)
quote: That being said, there is another viewpoint. You and I both are treating respect as related to the individual. There is also respect for the role. When used that way, then the "Sir" only indicates that you are a sub who respects doms in a general sort of way. It's much the same way as we use honorifics to describe the president whether or not we think he's a buffoon. That's an interesting point. I agree with this - respecting the position even if I don't respect the actual person. I remember being shaken down by some cops in Bolivia and saying Senor over and over - I respected the gun and not the man. I respected the situation, that he could make me disappear. Never once did I feel respect for the man.

DesFIP -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 2:17:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ChasteDream Well, obviously, both you and your owner are entitled to do and call one another and others as you prefer. For me however, I wouldn't be talking with you if you didn't address me as I prefer, respectfully. This is my preference, and I'm entitled to it, too. And obviously since you're a slave and I'm a Master, its crystal clear which of us is right! If you are in a real time o/p relationship, then you are a master to one, and she or he agrees that you're right. If your individual relationship agreement states that she is to agree with you on all occasions no matter what happens because you were dead wrong. "No we don't need to stop for gas" followed by being stranded for lack of it. "Why didn't you tell me we were out of gas?" 'You told me never to contradict you'. Here we operate more sensibly than that. YMMV To the rest of us, you're nobody. And therefore have no rights which have been consented to. Or have you forgotten that all relationships here start with giving people rights? If you take them without consent, you're a kidnapper.

windchymes -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 2:23:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ChasteDream Well, obviously, both you and your owner are entitled to do and call one another and others as you prefer. For me however, I wouldn't be talking with you if you didn't address me as I prefer, respectfully. This is my preference, and I'm entitled to it, too. And obviously since you're a slave and I'm a Master, its crystal clear which of us is right! Entitled? No, you're not. And no one is obligated unless they choose to be.

DesFIP -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 2:25:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 It's much the same way as we use honorifics to describe the president whether or not we think he's a buffoon. Judging by P & R, nobody does that either.

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625