quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

I will agree that I may be nit-picking a bit but, I think there is a difference between someone who has worked hard or excelled at something or shown great talent and someone who woke up one day and said: "Ya know, I want you people to call me 'Emperor Michael' because well, because."



Peace and comfort,



Grand Exhaulted Emporer Michael

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist

Perhaps my age is showing.  It always rubs me the wrong way when I see the roots of BDSM fall into disuse.  Protocols respecting rank were at the heart of BDSM in its birth. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist
If a dominant is uncomfortable being addressed politely and with respect, perhaps they need to examine their understanding of the the language?  If they understand the terms of respect and are uncomfortable being addressed in their station, a position of power , perhaps they need to reexamine their role?

quote:

ORIGINAL: LongFellow4U

First of all, I can til you have no true training as to what this lifestyle is about.

Every one starts as Submissive or as a Dominate under a mentor or trainer.

As a submissive train under a Mentor or a Master/Mistress.
when you have enough trust in your trainer you can be raised to the level of a slave.

As a Dominate you are trained to become a Mistress, if you are a woman and/or as a Master if you are a man.
Again when your training has brought you to the level of knowledge of how to use the equipment of out trade.

It is your Mentor or Trainer who tills you when you can be called a Master or a Mistress.

What happens is new people who fine this lifestyle, Name them self with out any training and end up hurting others by there like of knowledge. and here is where we get the title of New bee's or want to bee's



So every one who is living this life style and has never trained under a Mentor, needs to do so, no matter if you have been a so called master or mistress for a long time. you still need to learn from the old school Master's and Mistress's


NOTE: NO CAP'S are used for a untrained master or mistress. only after they are trained do they get the Cap's on the titles

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

Being required to use poor English is a hard limit for me. Anyone who insisted on that was someone I didn't talk to any further.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

I've had subs that wanted to use "Sir" or "Master", and it seems to me that it would be a little churlish not to appreciate the respect that this desire implies.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

So no "slut muffin" moniker for poise then.

Alrighty.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Epytropos
Put simply: Leather is absurdly new, and the free-form inclusionary each-to-their-own methods are millenia older. If it pleases you to adhere to tradition, Leather is not the correct choice.

For my part, I'd rather see egalitarianism and free choice, but that is only my preference. Others may prefer to think of their way as "correct" at their leisure, but I am and will always be compelled to point out the illogic of that when they choose to impose those lessons on those who choose a different path. It is both unkind and impolite to voice such judgments, and frankly shows a lack of class which is (or should be) evident to a person of breeding. Your "protocols" are nothing more than a personal choice. Stick not thy nose into the business of others.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

quote:

ORIGINAL: Epytropos
Put simply: Leather is absurdly new, and the free-form inclusionary each-to-their-own methods are millenia older. If it pleases you to adhere to tradition, Leather is not the correct choice.

For my part, I'd rather see egalitarianism and free choice, but that is only my preference. Others may prefer to think of their way as "correct" at their leisure, but I am and will always be compelled to point out the illogic of that when they choose to impose those lessons on those who choose a different path. It is both unkind and impolite to voice such judgments, and frankly shows a lack of class which is (or should be) evident to a person of breeding. Your "protocols" are nothing more than a personal choice. Stick not thy nose into the business of others.

I'm somewhat curious about this and would like to have a word regarding why you posted it.

If the OP doesn't correct Me here, it seems to Me this was an open ended question.  There was even a mention of things being done in different ways in various cultures in the original post.  So exactly how is it that when someone with a leather background answers it are we sticking our nose into the business of others?

Granted, RS did expand into another topic related to the first, but it wasn't that far off from the original.  It still has to do with the way things are done in different cultures and it ties into the discussion.  Just because leather people are the minority opinion doesn't mean that our ways shouldn't be included.

Also, your bolded statement is not entirely correct.  While I'll absolutely give you the fact that inducing pain for kicks is who knows how old and non consensual slave ownership has history, those are completely different topics.  The 'each to their own' method is completely fine and personal choice, but at the same time, there is no 'tradition' connected with it.  By definition, the word tradition means something that is passed down and really is the exact opposite of to each their own.  If you would like to show Me another organization that has a longer history in consensual M/s or S/m, I'll be more than happy to listen.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

I've had subs that wanted to use "Sir" or "Master", and it seems to me that it would be a little churlish not to appreciate the respect that this desire implies.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

I'm somewhat curious about this and would like to have a word regarding why you posted it.

If the OP doesn't correct Me here, it seems to Me this was an open ended question.  There was even a mention of things being done in different ways in various cultures in the original post.  So exactly how is it that when someone with a leather background answers it are we sticking our nose into the business of others?

Granted, RS did expand into another topic related to the first, but it wasn't that far off from the original.  It still has to do with the way things are done in different cultures and it ties into the discussion.  Just because leather people are the minority opinion doesn't mean that our ways shouldn't be included.

Also, your bolded statement is not entirely correct.  While I'll absolutely give you the fact that inducing pain for kicks is who knows how old and non consensual slave ownership has history, those are completely different topics.  The 'each to their own' method is completely fine and personal choice, but at the same time, there is no 'tradition' connected with it.  By definition, the word tradition means something that is passed down and really is the exact opposite of to each their own.  If you would like to show Me another organization that has a longer history in consensual M/s or S/m, I'll be more than happy to listen.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Winterapple

What have you read or heard about Cleopatra that
was kinky? Offhand the only thing I can
think of is she rolled herself up in a rug
to get in to meet Julius. A sort of
mummification. And in hindsight
Ancient Rome looks like a kinkfest
but it was just day to day life.
I'm not disagreeing with you. S&M is
as old as mankind. Rituals and protocols
to. And of course the words master and
slave once had very concrete meanings.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Epytropos
It was an open ended question, and my thoughts as regards Leather were not specifically directed at the OP (though obviously there is a common thread). I posted it as a response to RS and a clarification that what he was interpreting as my endorsement of his statements was in fact quite the opposite. That said, the overall idea is one that I've seen many times here - that Leather is the "traditional" (and therefore "correct") method.

As to your larger question as regards consensual BDSM, I would direct your attention to the Marquis de Sade, Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, the Ancient Romans (Julius Caesar being the most famous, but far from the only, example), Cleopatra, and if memory serves the Ancient Babylonians, though that last may not hold up. While there may not be an organization that I'm aware of, I fail to see how that's relevant. Tradition is inherently the process of passing down a methodology or pattern of behavior without enforcement of its provisions. Can we not call table manners traditional? There's no organization for them, but clearly they have been passed down through the generations in slightly differing forms. Same could be said of horse training techniques or methods of sculpting. Since Leather coopted much older techniques to be "theirs" we can only call them the upstarts and the rest of the world the traditionalists.

For an thought experiment less emotionally charged, let's take chess. I don't know the history of it, but it's a thought experiment, so bear with me. Let's say that chess was recorded as existing for 2500 years. Then one day, an organization formed around chess and said "chess is ours now" and started creating regimented methods for playing and for interacting with other players. Would you say that not following that group was an inferior, unorthodox path (as RS did a moment ago and many others have in the past, here and elsewhere) or would you say that they have chosen to make their own codified set of rules and therefore separated themselves from the greater tradition of playing the game?

Again, I have no problem with Leather any more than I have a problem with anyone else, so long as they recognize that their way is not The Way and don't lay claim to a tradition which is in no way theirs, or at the very least do so quietly amongst themselves. It's the moment when people start to make exclusionary remarks or talk about the shift away from Leather as some sort of social entropy that I feel the need to point out the distinction.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact


The list that you are presenting isn't quite working for the same angle.  Yes, the names that you have on it were absolutely within the subjects that we are discussing here, but I don't see it in quite the same way.  For example, de Sade left us all of his wonderful writings, but who was the person after de Sade that wanted to live the same way he did?  Tradition isn't just passing down.  It's also who you are passing to.  So far, I haven't met anyone who has decided to live the was de Sade did just because they were kinky.

I like your chess analogy, so let's run with that.  I've decided that I am going to create a new game that uses the chess board and the pieces.  (Hierarchy implied works well.)  However, I'm going to implement certain things from other games and add them in.  When I'm done, whatever new game that I've concocted isn't really chess anymore, is it?  People who are used to playing chess would recognize what I started with, but they would also identify the rules that I made that sound an awful lot like checkers, and the dice that I incorporated and whatever elements I had used to make pulling them all together to create a unique game.

Go a step further and let's say that you are quite an accomplished chess player and you want to play My game.  Some of the things that you'll have to know are what makes it different than chess and what the rules the players have to follow.  Since it's My game, I'm going to point out the differences so you can understand how to play.

That's not saying that the rules for chess are wrong for chess.  It just means they don't necessarily work for My game.  The rules for My game are the way we are doing things if that is what we are really going to play.

So, when leather people come on and say that something isn't the way we do things as leather people, all we're doing is explaining the rules for the new game that has certain recognizable elements to it. 
[/color]