RE: Just a sub?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Just a sub?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Just a sub?

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 5:33:58 AM

spankmepink11

Posts: 1310
Joined: 9/28/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NastyDaddy

quote:

The post was intended as a generalization, indicative of generalized online BDSM community attitudes.

As far as your ON/OFF switch, I would guess it's somewhere between when you are lifestyle playing and when you are returning to your normal vanilla life.
The point being in the generalization is that most submissives are not 24/7 and those that are are likely not TPE lifestyles, more at a couple who play or scene. Slaves usually do not have vanilla lives unless their Master/Mistress desire such, and slaves usually do not have the option to say no... or safe words, etc... quite a bit different.

Not to be argumentative or disrespectful, but, while i agree that " Living a nilla life with an online Dominant is not what many feel consitutes ON 100% of the time."
I'm not sure that having to maintain some "vanilla" aspects in ones life negates their level of submission/slavery....devotion....etc.

I aplogize if i'm misconstrueing Your point., and to the OP for going a bit off topic...

(in reply to NastyDaddy)

Post #: 41

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 5:39:08 AM

zumala

Posts: 1121
Joined: 6/16/2005
Status: offline

To sum it up: No, I don't think one is better than the other.

Especially since no one can even seem to agree on what a submissive or a slave actually are. How can you say one is better than the other if there is no standard definition of the terms?

As for that website someone put up with the 1-9 scale... I rated an 8 because I have that level of committment in my marriage to my husband. I consider myself submissive 24/7 because as the wife I see that as my proper place. But by most people's definition, we live a vanilla life most of the time. So how do you separate a biblical marriage from the world of BDSM? Not by submission. Not by love. Not by committment. And of course, not by kinky sex. Anyone can do that. So, what is it? Floggers? Eating from a doggy bowl?

Honestly, I don't know. I only know that I have a submissive nature and that I accept the submissive role in my marriage as well. My committment to my husband runs very deep. Am I, therefore, truly a slave and just didn't realize it? Again... I have no idea. And I don't care. All that matters to me is the man that I love. What can I do for him to make his life easier? More enjoyable? More full? Then I do my best to do those things.

zuma

(in reply to mistoferin)

Post #: 42

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 6:15:11 AM

catize

Posts: 3020
Joined: 3/7/2006
Status: offline

There is so much written and debated on submissive vs slave, yet the controversy of categorizing each station is not carried over into the dominant venue. Have you ever seen a debate on a perceived value system of Dominant vs. Master/Mistress? I don't believe that I have ever heard anyone say "I'm 'just' a Dom/me". I doubt there is a Dominant who feels apologetic because he/she is not a Master or Mistress. In fact, I know several dominants who do not wish to be a master for various reasons.
I have been both submissive and slave, dependent on the dominant's desires. I have recently reconnected with a dominant who I have known for several years. After much conversation, we have started a Master/slave relationship. In most ways it feels the same yet on some levels it is different; not better, just different.
I spent the weekend with my Master and it went very very well. I'm grinning just as much as Truesub is, and to me that means it is not the label, it is the personal connection between two people.

_____________________________

"Power is real. But it's a lot less real if it's not perceived as power."
Robert Parker, Stranger in Paradise

(in reply to mistoferin)

Post #: 43

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 6:21:14 AM

marieToo

Posts: 3595
Joined: 5/21/2006
From: Jersey
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FloridaISIS

In my humble opinion, a sub or slave is never "just" a sub or slave.
I feel to use "just" negates their value, and makes them no better than a common vanilla.

In my humble opinion, no one is a "*common* vanilla", as that term negates *their* value.

(in reply to FloridaISIS)

Post #: 44

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 6:29:54 AM

LuckyAlbatross

Posts: 19224
Joined: 10/25/2005
Status: offline

The truth is that a great majority of people in wiitwd DO maintain a sliding scale of superiority as to what orientation is "better/deeper/more meaningful/intense" than another.

Most people won't openly cop to if you ask them directly though.

_____________________________

Find stable partners, not a stable of partners.

"Sometimes my whore logic gets all fuzzy"- Californication

(in reply to mistoferin)

Post #: 45

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 7:03:41 AM

MistressTigger19

Posts: 11
Joined: 4/19/2006
Status: offline

well - in the process of writing my thoughts on this Idea another 2 whole pages of opinions were added. How fun!

Well - my 2 cents

I think that as a society we have become rather lazy with our langauge structures and with high speech versus low speech (I am refering to Victorian Era speech) There is a human respect pattern that has been deteriorating in writing and langauge over the course of human history and that deterioration has been accelerating over the last 50-100 yeras.

The word just was used in the Middle Ages - it's a word from Middle English/French spelled "juste" and Miriams defines it as "reasonable, right, proper, lawful or deserved" Historically it descended into low speech patterns riding on the popular use of the definition "deserved" Phrases like "just punishment, just rewards" descended into definitions that included "exactly or precicely" to "directly" then "barely" and then "simply".

As a historical romance author I find the concentration on wordage and definition a facinating subject (not spelling though LOL) In my household I use a more Victorian Era level of high/low speech patterns. Within that speech pattern there are levels of courtesy even when the Lady of the House is speaking to a servant (I use the term servant as opposed to submissive so the equations in my house are servant versus slave) In my household the servant or submissive is dedicated to returning to his duties on a frequent basis, shows a high level of commitment to his role in the house and a high level of loyalty in his service to Me. But, like a Victorian Era servant, they return to their "village" and make the travel to come see me again. They can stay with me as their Lady Mistress or they can choose to go elsewhere. My level of dominance, reward and punishments, and what they receive to meet their needs determines whether they stay or go. My slaves however reside in my home, show a permanant level of commitment and loyalty and are "indentured" to my service. Unless the terms of that "indentured slavery" are met or broken, they remain in my household and serve regardless of my treatment of them

Are my servants or slaves one less than an another? Becuase both are part of the same household and often work side by side, I prefer to foster a level of continuity and companionship between them rather than competition. LIke any Lady Of Quality (victorian era) I prefer to have a household and life that runs smoothly and with as little strife and drama as possible so that my energies can bbe spent enjoying that life as opposed to playing peace keeper. But I don't necessarily see servants (submissives) as less in quality that slaves or vice versa.

Here's Why: Without the dedication and service, loyalty and passion, regarless of role or label definitions, of my slaves and servants I would end up a sexually and emotionally frustrated woman with a whip. It's their dedication that makes me a Just (see middle English definition of deserving) Female Dominant.

Miz Tigger

(in reply to LuckyAlbatross)

Post #: 46

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 7:09:36 AM

Ceyx

Posts: 89
Joined: 8/23/2005
Status: offline

I have my own rough definition of the submissive and slave dynamics-- I think I've posted them here before-- but as you say, that's not the point of your thread. My miss and I moved through a phase in which she related to me as a submissive, and she now calls herself my slave; I'm comfortable at this stage in calling myself her owner. The fact that she and I are happier together as slave and owner, and that the dominant/subsmissive dynamic was, for us, a step along this path, doesn't mean that a submissive is less valuable or worthwhile than a slave. I hope I've never said anything of the kind, and if I've implied it, then I shouldn't have. The important thing is that those involved in a relationship are happy with it and fulfilled by it; if that's the case, then it's a good relationship, whatever you want to call it.

(in reply to mistoferin)

Post #: 47

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 7:14:48 AM

MHOO314

Posts: 3628
Joined: 9/26/2004
Status: offline

smiles--good question erin--to Me, it is his submission that I want to enslave him to Me---

like krikket said---who the heck cares when its between T/two people--

_____________________________

SLUTS: Southern Ladies Under Tremendous Stress...

Mistress Hathor

(in reply to mistoferin)

Post #: 48

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 7:37:37 AM

babyblues

Posts: 80
Joined: 8/10/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: zumala

To sum it up: No, I don't think one is better than the other.

all i know is what is better for me, and for "us"....

i try not to do anything halfway....i cannot submit halfway....for me to be "just a sub" would mean that i had not given up complete control or that i still desired some choice in my life....

that is fine for some people, but it is not enough for me....

i have several friends, online, who discuss their desire to become slaves, to give up all control but they cannot allow themselves to do so, yet....they speak of slavery as a goal, a step they have yet to take....to themselves, they are "just subs" who have not yet made the deep commitment of slavery....

(in reply to zumala)

Post #: 49

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 7:45:38 AM

zumala

Posts: 1121
Joined: 6/16/2005
Status: offline

If the one you were committed to didn't want a slave, then what would you do? My commitment couldn't be more firm. I choose to submit whenever I see the opportunity to do so. When my opinion is wanted, I give it after serious thought on the matter. I fetch. I clean. Just what does that make a person?

Sub or slave, they're both submissive in nature. I think everyone's definition or feelings on the terms themselves is going to be different. So what is better or not better is always going to be subjective. So... it's a moot point, really. Unless you're just looking for a debate.

zuma

(in reply to babyblues)

Post #: 50

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 9:51:15 AM

Lashra

Posts: 4900
Joined: 2/9/2006
Status: offline

I don't know why people say this other than to try to devalue one label over another. Because thats all that they are is labels. I've seen it used by Masters/Mistresses who own slaves and believe that they are more submissive and service oriented thereby more valuable. I however do not agree with that at all. I think its quite individual actually.

Personally my sub isnt just a sub, he's nothing short of wonderful.

~Lashra

(in reply to OsideGirl)

Post #: 51

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 9:57:47 AM

caitlyn

Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline

Some day when I grow up, I hope to work myself up to such a high level of submission, that before being collared, master actually kills me ... just to prove that I'm not topping from the bottom.

(in reply to Lashra)

Post #: 52

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 10:02:48 AM

Lashra

Posts: 4900
Joined: 2/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

Some day when I grow up, I hope to work myself up to such a high level of submission, that before being collared, master actually kills me ... just to prove that I'm not topping from the bottom.

Well he could always have you stuffed as a loving momento to show how he adores you...

~Lashra

(in reply to caitlyn)

Post #: 53

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 10:07:23 AM

caitlyn

Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lashra
Well he could always have you stuffed as a loving momento to show how he adores you...

And I wouldn't need a safe word, of course.

(in reply to Lashra)

Post #: 54

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 10:07:48 AM

Chaingang

Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline

caitlyn:

It's just not enough!

_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to caitlyn)

Post #: 55

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 10:20:40 AM

juliaoceania

Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: catize

There is so much written and debated on submissive vs slave, yet the controversy of categorizing each station is not carried over into the dominant venue. Have you ever seen a debate on a perceived value system of Dominant vs. Master/Mistress? I don't believe that I have ever heard anyone say "I'm 'just' a Dom/me". I doubt there is a Dominant who feels apologetic because he/she is not a Master or Mistress. In fact, I know several dominants who do not wish to be a master for various reasons.
I have been both submissive and slave, dependent on the dominant's desires. I have recently reconnected with a dominant who I have known for several years. After much conversation, we have started a Master/slave relationship. In most ways it feels the same yet on some levels it is different; not better, just different.
I spent the weekend with my Master and it went very very well. I'm grinning just as much as Truesub is, and to me that means it is not the label, it is the personal connection between two people.

Actually I have heard this "debate" in other venues. One dominant questioning the domliness of another dominant. The dominant I am seeing used to have a "mistress" constantly infer he was a submissive. I have seen dominants on this board that state if you do not do XY or Z then you are "just" a service top.. which was obviously less desireable than being a "Master". I have seen dominants that have their submissives call themselves slaves because they did not feel they could be called "Master" without an "s" person that self identified as a slave... it is NOT just a submissive thing, although it maybe more subtle since there are not entire threads discussing the differences....smiles

_____________________________

Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert

Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

(in reply to catize)

Post #: 56

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 11:28:42 AM

ownedgirlie

Posts: 9184
Joined: 2/5/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lashra
Well he could always have you stuffed as a loving momento to show how he adores you...

And I wouldn't need a safe word, of course.

So the elitism and ridicule works both ways, I see...

(in reply to caitlyn)

Post #: 57

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 11:35:53 AM

sublace

Posts: 201
Status: offline

I think there is a difference. When I'm a sex slave, I have no say in how I'm being used for sexual gratification. But as a sub, I atleast can discuss what I'm going to do or not do. A slave has no say and a sub can discuss options. As a slave you give yourself 100% but as a sub, I'm still a person who can make choices.

sublace

(in reply to juliaoceania)

Post #: 58

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 11:47:06 AM

Tikkiee

Posts: 1099
Joined: 4/6/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 4u2spoil

I think "just a sub" can be fine, but overall think it's a level.

For me, bottoms are people who enjoy having BDSM activities (spanking, whipping, etc) done to them, but are not looking to give up any power or control. The activity is the purpose of play or a relationship.

Submissives are people who enjoy BDSM activities as a reminder of the power exchange and/or loss of control that can take place in a D/s interactions. For subs the power exchange and pleasing is the purpose, the physical activity just becomes a way to demonstrate it. Also, this is the one thing that describes someones nature. As debated in other threads, submissive can be a noun or adjective. A person can be submissive whether serving someone or not.

Slaves are generally submissives who dedicate themselves to a person or group, and the power exchange is absolute. It's not just during a certain period of time, or during a certain act, submission to the dominant partner(s) rules and desires is a way of life.

Just my definitions.

Edited for spelling

I will argue definitions till everyone is blue in the face

but the words here, probably come the closest.

_____________________________

~~@ cass @~~

(in reply to 4u2spoil)

Post #: 59

RE: Just a sub? - 5/30/2006 11:47:12 AM

zumala

Posts: 1121
Joined: 6/16/2005
Status: offline

But sublace, can't a slave just up and leave a relationship if it becomes intolerable to them? Ultimately, they do have a say. It's just that they choose not to use it the majority of the time. Of course, there are some subs that choose not to as well.

zuma

(in reply to sublace)

Post #: 60

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Just a sub?

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.094