RE: Early Use of Honorifics..

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

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

Message

PeonForHer -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 4:04:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather honorifics are for fuckheads. period. God, I hope not. It gives me a hard on to call a woman 'Ma'am'. Especially if she gives me the impression that she absolutely deserves it and expects it of me. Hell, 'Ma'am' is the horniest word in the dictionary, to me.

LadyConstanze -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 4:14:00 PM)
It's not for me, it would make me feel like an old school teacher!

leadership527 -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 4:23:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt It's just to me, in the BDSM world, Sir (or Ma'am) means something beyond basic etiquette. In implies a connection and a sign of respect I don't have (and am never going to have) for the average desktop dom. That's my rub too. Like you, I have zero probably referring to a stranger as "Sir" or "Maam" in the business context. It is, in fact, how I'd likely start out any conversation with someone I didn't know... especially a customer. Honorifics in the BDSM world are not simply social grease though and so I'm a lot more careful about using them.

PeonForHer -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/22/2011 5:57:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze It's not for me, it would make me feel like an old school teacher! Shut up. You'll get called 'Ma'am' if I feel like calling you that, and like it. I won't tolerate femdoms who forget their place.

OwnedFemaleFlesh -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/23/2011 2:23:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ChasteDream ...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 this is why I (and many other submissives) wouldn't be talking to you at all. owned

sunshinemiss -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/23/2011 6:51:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze It's not for me, it would make me feel like an old school teacher! <<<< old teacher, was called "Ma'am" several times today. The suck ups...

LadyConstanze -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/23/2011 6:56:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze It's not for me, it would make me feel like an old school teacher! Shut up. You'll get called 'Ma'am' if I feel like calling you that, and like it. I won't tolerate femdoms who forget their place. Time to get that ball gag out...

LadyConstanze -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/23/2011 6:57:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sunshinemiss quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze It's not for me, it would make me feel like an old school teacher! <<<< old teacher, was called "Ma'am" several times today. The suck ups... I think it depends much where and when, but if somebody would address me as Ma'am who's around my age, I'd be running home and checking for wrinkles, but then I'm a bit paranoid about them anyway.

SexyBossyBBW -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/23/2011 10:01:54 AM)
I'm not a sub, and sort of growing up northern, I usually address people as Mr/Ms, or by their names. I've lived in VA, where everyone calls just about everyone, Sir, or Ma'am, and liked that respectful address. Outside of that, I wouldn't (if I were you) tend to take folks seriously, if they couldn't have a normal conversation, without immediate need for imposing ego stroking honorifics. M

Awareness -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/23/2011 6:05:30 PM)
I'll make this simple. Honorifics which don't arise naturally out of your response to the dominant are nothing more than a sop to his ego. Submission is an internal state which arises as a natural response to the dominant. If a Dom can't get you to this internal state by virtue of who he is, then he's simply not dominant enough for you. The honorifics will spring to your lips as a consequence of the deep respect you feel for him. For him to require this from you is an inherent statement of weakness.

DecadentDesire -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/23/2011 6:55:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness I'll make this simple. Honorifics which don't arise naturally out of your response to the dominant are nothing more than a sop to his ego. Submission is an internal state which arises as a natural response to the dominant. If a Dom can't get you to this internal state by virtue of who he is, then he's simply not dominant enough for you. The honorifics will spring to your lips as a consequence of the deep respect you feel for him. For him to require this from you is an inherent statement of weakness. Wow. My entire point of view, expressed with a crisp degree of clarity. I couldn't agree more.

agirl -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/23/2011 8:34:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness I'll make this simple. Honorifics which don't arise naturally out of your response to the dominant are nothing more than a sop to his ego. Submission is an internal state which arises as a natural response to the dominant. If a Dom can't get you to this internal state by virtue of who he is, then he's simply not dominant enough for you. The honorifics will spring to your lips as a consequence of the deep respect you feel for him. For him to require this from you is an inherent statement of weakness. Well, I agree almost unreservedly Awareness...and in almost all interactions, this is the case over many years...... There is a however though.... ....He sometimes requires it of me because he KNOWS I am unwilling to give it.....out of stubborness, out of my own pride. Sometimes, just sometimes, it gets wrenched out of me because I'm a vile, stubborn person who'd NOT say it purely out of stubborness. Shocking that anyone could own such a person for so many years. :) agirl

leadership527 -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/23/2011 9:04:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DecadentDesire Wow. My entire point of view, expressed with a crisp degree of clarity. I couldn't agree more. Neat. I'll be sure and tell Carol what a great sop to my ego she's been then. She'll also be really pleased to learn that I'm not dom enough for her. Man that little tidbit is going to get her out of so much of that tedious obedience thing right there. And finally, she'll be greatly relieved to learn how weak I am. I'm assuming after I show her this post she'll be filing for divorce tomorrow. "Quick. Hire a teenager while they still know everything." -- one of my favorite t-shirts ever Dude. Agreeing with Awareness should've already told you that you had to be wrong. Yes, I have for periods of time commanded Carol to use the title "master". Just because awareness cannot conceive of anything beyond his own limited imagination doesn't mean the rest of reality doesn't exist. It just means he's not aware of it.

DecadentDesire -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/23/2011 9:26:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 quote: ORIGINAL: DecadentDesire Wow. My entire point of view, expressed with a crisp degree of clarity. I couldn't agree more. Neat. I'll be sure and tell Carol what a great sop to my ego she's been then. She'll also be really pleased to learn that I'm not dom enough for her. Man that little tidbit is going to get her out of so much of that tedious obedience thing right there. And finally, she'll be greatly relieved to learn how weak I am. I'm assuming after I show her this post she'll be filing for divorce tomorrow. "Quick. Hire a teenager while they still know everything." -- one of my favorite t-shirts ever Dude. Agreeing with Awareness should've already told you that you had to be wrong. Yes, I have for periods of time commanded Carol to use the title "master". Just because awareness cannot conceive of anything beyond his own limited imagination doesn't mean the rest of reality doesn't exist. It just means he's not aware of it. It's not the way I saw it at all. I think his statement fits the context of the thread which is "Early Use of Honorifics". And that's exactly how I feel about honorifics that are required during the "dating" phase. They are hollow to me. Later, in the course of the relationship, I incorporate "Yes, sir" and "No, sir" into my relationship, but at that point, it's not some arbirary, hollow requirement I am enforcing, but a representation of her internal feelings of submission that are present in response to a mixture of respect and chemistry. I doubt Carol's use of the word "Master" in reference to you was some meaningless obligation imposed on her as a burden, but something she was more than willing to do, because it was, in part, a natural expression of how she genuinely feels towards you even without the honorific. Your M/S relationship with Carol, from what I have seen, can exist independently from the honorifics and doesn't need the honorifics to define it. It's the result of your leadership skills and the bond between the two of you. Therefore, the use of "Master" is a natural response, because you define the word and the word is not merely something you are requiring someone to call you. So in light of that, I don't see how I am wrong or Awareness, in how I read his writing, is wrong. And I certainly don't think your use of honorifics comes even close to the sentiment being expressed here.

leadership527 -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/23/2011 9:41:09 PM)
I forced her to use the honorifics. No, they were not natural to her lips. Nor did they arise as a "natural response to me". I forced them. His point was very plain and we fit the criteria. His limited view of possible motivations has been pointed out by myself and agirl. "Awareness", in his typical style, made a complicated thing "simple" -- simply wrong. Now... to your timing thing. I'll grant that even though this was largely at the early parts of our transition to WIITWD now, that's not the same as a new couple "dating". But seriously, my same thinking applies. There are more reasons under heaven and earth than simply the ones mentioned. Sure, those MIGHT be the reasons. But then again, there may be entirely different reasons.... lots and lots and lots of entirely different reasons. Off the top of my head. Boy meets girl. Boy and girl find out they both spent too many hours reading Gor books in their impressionable years. Boy says to girl, "Call me Master now, slave!" Girl gets all drippy. Everyone has wonderful time. Boy's ego remains unchanged by the title "master" but is probably feeling pretty good about the hot sex. I could spin totally healthy scenarios off the top of my head for hours. Not everyone has a weak ego.

DecadentDesire -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/23/2011 9:48:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 I forced her to use the honorifics. No, they were not natural to her lips. Nor did they arise as a "natural response to me". I forced them. His point was very plain and we fit the criteria. His limited view of possible motivations has been pointed out by myself and agirl. "Awareness", in his typical style, made a complicated thing "simple" -- simply wrong. Now... to your timing thing. I'll grant that even though this was largely at the early parts of our transition to WIITWD now, that's not the same as a new couple "dating". But seriously, my same thinking applies. There are more reasons under heaven and earth than simply the ones mentioned. Sure, those MIGHT be the reasons. But then again, there may be entirely different reasons.... lots and lots and lots of entirely different reasons. Off the top of my head. Boy meets girl. Boy and girl find out they both spent too many hours reading Gor books in their impressionable years. Boy says to girl, "Call me Master now, slave!" Girl gets all drippy. Everyone has wonderful time. Boy's ego remains unchanged by the title "master" but is probably feeling pretty good about the hot sex. I could spin totally healthy scenarios off the top of my head for hours. Not everyone has a weak ego. You are more than welcome to take his post how you want to, but I simply don't see it the same way, even after having said that I use my own form of honorifics in my relationships. And, much like you, there is a period of time when those honorifics are being forced. Very few people refer to their partners by Sir, Master, Lord or whatever in a natural way and its a protocol that has to be trained. However, if I felt that the sentiment behind the honorific was being forced, that the person didn't really perceive me as dominant or respect me, then I won't be in a relationship with them, much less bothering with an honorific. And because the sentiment behind it isn't forced, it eventually becomes a smooth and natural part of my relationships. That's what I saw being expressed in Awareness's post. And even if you see it in a completely different light, that is MY viewpoint. Edited to Add: In regards to your example of the hot sex, I don't see that being the same context as all. The words are being used to express a completely different sentiment. It's not a gesture of respect, but a form of sexual expression, akin to calling someone a "slut" or a "whore". Sure, it's hot during sex, but has a completely differnet, often negative, meaning when used in other contexts. I see the same kind of difference between "Master" being used in the bedroom and "Master" being used in a relationship.

Arpig -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/23/2011 10:09:46 PM)
quote: However, if I felt that the sentiment behind the honorific was being forced, that the person didn't really perceive me as dominant or respect me, then I won't be in a relationship with them, much less bothering with an honorific. Personally I don't see how anybody could respect a person who insisted on being called Sir, Lord, Master, or whatever. Sorry, but doing so just screams immaturity and insecurity to me.

DecadentDesire -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/23/2011 10:14:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig screams immaturity and insecurity That's kind of how I feel about adults who still play D&D [;)]

LadyPact -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/23/2011 10:19:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig Personally I don't see how anybody could respect a person who insisted on being called Sir, Lord, Master, or whatever. Sorry, but doing so just screams immaturity and insecurity to me. Depends on how you look at it. When I go to a high protocol or a leather event, I really do expect people to address Me properly. This isn't especially for My sake. The host of such an event is attempting to create a certain ambiance for the evening. In that sense, I am supporting the host and the preference for the type of event that they are trying to provide for the guests. Perhaps a different turn, but this isn't limited to s types alone. We leather folks are just as particular when it comes to each other when we're talking about the other side of the kneel.

OwnedFemaleFlesh -> RE: Early Use of Honorifics.. (7/24/2011 12:37:26 AM)
Totally agree with leadership. I didn't call him Sir because my amazing respect for him sprang unbridled from my lips merely days after we first started talking. Nor did I call him Sir because I naturally recognised his immense superiority and domliness over me right from the beginning. I called him Sir because it was hot, and it made him hot and it made me hot, which was precisely the purpose of things at that time. This is probably why the idea of saying Sir to a random person feels so inherently wrong to me. owned xxx

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875