RE: differences

RE: differences (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master

Message

OsideGirl -> RE: differences (12/21/2015 4:31:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Therealslavelife A Master must take responsibility for every aspect of another persons life. Three fails in that sentence: The word "MUST" and the idea that a Master should control EVERY aspect of the S types life or that it's even possible to control every aspect of an S types life. quote: Dom's negotiate limits. Masters do not. Bullshit. My limits are nonnegotiable. There is nothing you could possibly do to change those limits and if you tried - you'd find yourself without a dynamic.

LadyPact -> RE: differences (12/21/2015 4:37:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV I see top & bottom, in this culturally misappropriated definition, as disconnected to dominants and Masters. Actions are not mindsets. A submissive female may be excellent with using a flogger, and better with two, yet derive no pleasure in using them on someone. A dominant can perform oral sex on their sub, simply because that's what they enjoy doing, without becoming a 'bottom' in any sense. Nobody said that actions and mind-sets are synonyms. Just like us het folks, you must accept that there are other cultures besides yours.

Greta75 -> RE: differences (12/21/2015 4:39:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV My definition for a top comes from being gay, where you're either the fucker (top) or the fuckee (bottom). Versatile means you enjoy both. The funny thing is, I've often introduced myself as a bottom instead of a sub. And when I do it, male doms accused me of being a male disguised as a female, because no female would call herself a bottom. Only gay men do lol. So I've reverted to sub.

JVoV -> RE: differences (12/21/2015 4:59:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV I see top & bottom, in this culturally misappropriated definition, as disconnected to dominants and Masters. Actions are not mindsets. A submissive female may be excellent with using a flogger, and better with two, yet derive no pleasure in using them on someone. A dominant can perform oral sex on their sub, simply because that's what they enjoy doing, without becoming a 'bottom' in any sense. Nobody said that actions and mind-sets are synonyms. Just like us het folks, you must accept that there are other cultures besides yours. That statement seems unwarranted, if not catty. I'm simply pointing out that dominant/submissive cannot be defined by actions. And none of that has anything to do with being a master. Masters control the full dynamic, within their abilities, even by delegating tasks to their slave(s)/sub(s). A Master knows the limits of their s, and knows which can be pushed and which cannot. Obviously, such restricted activities aren't important to the M, otherwise the relationship would fail miserably before it starts. Just as some s's have interests that go beyond a prospective M's. The only people that can define each other in any relationship are the ones that are in it. But this is the internet, so OP can be whatever his little heart desires.

JVoV -> RE: differences (12/21/2015 5:02:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV My definition for a top comes from being gay, where you're either the fucker (top) or the fuckee (bottom). Versatile means you enjoy both. The funny thing is, I've often introduced myself as a bottom instead of a sub. And when I do it, male doms accused me of being a male disguised as a female, because no female would call herself a bottom. Only gay men do lol. So I've reverted to sub. I can see that. But then those guys are probably gay, or at least bi. It could be a little test of your own?

OsideGirl -> RE: differences (12/21/2015 5:15:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV But this is the internet, so OP can be whatever his little heart desires. Essentially, yes. I'm fond of saying "The rules are all made up and the points don't matter".

Cell -> RE: differences (12/21/2015 6:21:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: Cell That's an interestng way of putting it. I wonder how far that definition could stretch. It seems pretty nice at first glance. Although perhaps not a good definition for Gorean. And I wonder, what do you think about 'self-mastery' in the grand scheme of M/s? Most people are not "self-Mastered," anymore than slaves who are free speak of their servitude. Is it not your way that any person who would wish to be free, without an owner, is free, themselves? Without an Owner, are they not Free Women? So, a Gorean could claim the title of "Master" by only of the benefit of a flesh and blood penis. All a person need be to be a "master," is to claim himself Gorean. It is not required among you to have even the slightest understanding of your philosophies. Not even so much as to bother to do any research. I'm not Gorean myself LP, but I find it interesting that there are so many different takes on the 'philosophies'. Those non-paths to being a master you mention above could probably be convincingly argued backed up by random stuff from the books. And they could also be decried backed up by the same. It depends who's doing the arguing. But anyway, are you saying that it's the researching and delving into the philosophies that make the mastery? I'm not sure I would agree. If being a (gorean) master was a topic or skill or tallent then maybe, but I think the being is a separate matter. And it very much starts with the self. I feel like that's where a lot of self-proclaimed goreans fall down actually... But here's me having never proclaimed myself as either, lecturing about gorean mastery... I probably don't have the credentials lol Aside from the gorean stuff though. In regards to self-mastery, I'm talking about self-control/self-determination but in a more encompassing sense when I mention self-mastery. That would seem to be a requisite for mastery in general wouldn't you say? Before the mastery comes what it takes to get there? (The internal stuff) Just speaking generally of course, in BDSM terms, if someone has a 'slave' I guess they can call themselves a master lol

LadyPact -> RE: differences (12/21/2015 10:45:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV That statement seems unwarranted, if not catty. I'm simply pointing out that dominant/submissive cannot be defined by actions. And none of that has anything to do with being a master. Masters control the full dynamic, within their abilities, even by delegating tasks to their slave(s)/sub(s). A Master knows the limits of their s, and knows which can be pushed and which cannot. Obviously, such restricted activities aren't important to the M, otherwise the relationship would fail miserably before it starts. Just as some s's have interests that go beyond a prospective M's. The only people that can define each other in any relationship are the ones that are in it. But this is the internet, so OP can be whatever his little heart desires. Not catty at all. Just saying within all of our different subcultures, there are different ways of looking at it. Actions, I tend to delegate to the top/bottom category simply because the person doing isn't necessarily the person in charge. There are plenty of Dominants out there who enjoy bottoming for the sensations and lots of submissives who enjoy topping. Also, with the way terms within BDSM are evolving, there are a lot more people who are identifying as just top or bottom because they are interested in the play only aspect, with no interest in the control aspect within their relationships.

LadyPact -> RE: differences (12/21/2015 11:49:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cell I'm not Gorean myself LP, but I find it interesting that there are so many different takes on the 'philosophies'. Those non-paths to being a master you mention above could probably be convincingly argued backed up by random stuff from the books. And they could also be decried backed up by the same. It depends who's doing the arguing. But anyway, are you saying that it's the researching and delving into the philosophies that make the mastery? I'm not sure I would agree. If being a (gorean) master was a topic or skill or tallent then maybe, but I think the being is a separate matter. And it very much starts with the self. Trying to come up with the best way to do this. Both cultures (Leather and Gorean) run across this bump in the road. Older leather folks call this insta-leather. Basically, these are folks who get exposure to any bit of leather culture and poof, they decide they are leather people. The difficulty about this is darn near most leather people start out this way. Quite often when folks go to their first big leather event, see that folks actually live this way and get up in what some folks call 'con energy,' and get that 'coming home' feeling that is the kick starter that gets a number of people wanting to follow a leather path. That's great! Now, what do you do with it? From that point, some people don't do squat. They just decide they are leather and that's it. They don't bother learning about the culture, the community, or leather history. They miss the fact that these things are a part of a leather person's life. Basically, it's the equivalent to what happens when Gorean folks read the first book, decide it's cool, puff their chest, but don't internalize anything besides, "I'm a guy, therefore a Master." ToS prevents me from outright naming the shining example of this, but I'll bet every Gorean on this forum knows exactly who I mean when I mention the A&t show. quote: I feel like that's where a lot of self-proclaimed goreans fall down actually... But here's me having never proclaimed myself as either, lecturing about gorean mastery... I probably don't have the credentials lol I don't, either. Most of what I know about Gorean folks came about from talking with them in attempts to understand them better. Kind of cultural exchange discussions that amount to 'when a Gorean says this it's what Leather people interpret as that' and 'Leather folks do it this way and here's where Goreans are different.' It's the only way to understand each other, really. If I pointed at a red fruit and called it a tomato, but to you it was an apple, we wouldn't get anywhere. quote: Aside from the gorean stuff though. In regards to self-mastery, I'm talking about self-control/self-determination but in a more encompassing sense when I mention self-mastery. Self-Mastery is a different concept. Anybody can claim self-Mastery. It's really not that difficult to Master your own domain or chose to handle whatever life throws at you in your own way. A lot of the people who claim self-Mastery are the types who are emotionally stunted that don't cry from grief when losing their father, but oh, they are supposedly in control. quote: That would seem to be a requisite for mastery in general wouldn't you say? Before the mastery comes what it takes to get there? (The internal stuff) It would depend on the individual, wouldn't it? Some people are in pursuit of being a better person in general and other people don't work on anything at all. A person who pays their bills and manages not to engage in activities that allow them to avoid getting arrested could say they have Mastered themselves. quote: Just speaking generally of course, in BDSM terms, if someone has a 'slave' I guess they can call themselves a master lol As with most other things, I don't fool with other people's dynamics. It's not up to me to decide if the slave in question feels the person who is running their life is a Master or not. I'm not the important person in the scenario.

LadyConstanze -> RE: differences (12/22/2015 8:51:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl quote: ORIGINAL: Therealslavelife A Master must take responsibility for every aspect of another persons life. Three fails in that sentence: The word "MUST" and the idea that a Master should control EVERY aspect of the S types life or that it's even possible to control every aspect of an S types life. quote: Dom's negotiate limits. Masters do not. Bullshit. My limits are nonnegotiable. There is nothing you could possibly do to change those limits and if you tried - you'd find yourself without a dynamic. Yup, most masters don't feel like they should be babysitters, if you are moving away from fantasy land and into reality, it's people who meet and usually join a dynamic, masters don't run around and capture women and then keep them chained. If they violate limits, the slave or sub will simply leave and the guy can master his own fantasies because that's all he's left with. Works pretty much the same way in every relationship, BDSM is no exception.

littleladybug -> RE: differences (12/22/2015 9:14:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Therealslavelife Then I think my third girl, who had 10 years on me, said to me " have you considered that you might be much more than a Dom? She stated you appear to me to be a Master. This something that I've seen a lot over the years, and I have yet to be able to wrap my mind around it. The concept of hierarchy. That "Master" is more than "Dom" which is more than "Top". I guess it's no wonder that so many people seem to feel the need to self-identify as "Master".

DesFIP -> RE: differences (12/22/2015 9:44:35 AM)
Most of the people I've met who call themselves master, shouldn't be trusted to master their way out of a paper bag. Whereas the ones who just describe themselves as dominant to someone else, are the ones I'd feel safe leaving my wallet with. And really if you aren't self aware and have self control, then you aren't ready for any relationship except a clusterfuck.

Cell -> RE: differences (12/22/2015 9:52:21 AM)
Well like you say. There's a difference between identifying as/with something, or embodying it. And I don't really think the former is needed (or even desirable in some cases,) to do the latter. Kinda like that Margaret Thatcher quote about being a lady. But I could very well be lumping ideas about dominance in with mastery here and them terms don't seem to be interchangeable, so I'm happy to look at it your way for the moment. 'Outside of the self it is!' It does have a certain elegant simplicity about it and would seem to mesh well with most people's sensibilities. I'll have to remember to not use the term self-mastery around you... I don't want to come off as being emotionally stunted =X I do know who you're referring to when you talk about chest puffing etc... And to tell you the truth, while I know he was the target of a lot of derision because of his views and comments. I actually think a lot of the people that I saw doing the mocking and belittling demonstrated less goreanly behaviour than him. But eh... I duno what to say about all that stuff. Probably better left unsaid whatever it is anyway lol (BTW did I read somewhere that you had distanced yourself from Leather LP? I seem to recall you mentioning not liking what goes along with it these days, or something along those lines. Or am I talking out of my ass? My memory is shocking =\| If so, what exactly didn't you like? Is there leather chest puffing? >_<)

NookieNotes -> RE: differences (12/22/2015 9:54:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littleladybug quote: ORIGINAL: Therealslavelife Then I think my third girl, who had 10 years on me, said to me " have you considered that you might be much more than a Dom? She stated you appear to me to be a Master. This something that I've seen a lot over the years, and I have yet to be able to wrap my mind around it. The concept of hierarchy. That "Master" is more than "Dom" which is more than "Top". I guess it's no wonder that so many people seem to feel the need to self-identify as "Master". To me, none are more than the others. A dominant cannot be more than a top, in that in my view, being a dominant does not encessarily include being a top. Personally, I can state there are many tops out there far more skilled than I in their chosen actions (ropes, single-tails, needle play). They are better than I am in those areas. I am better than most I know in the dominant/thought realm, which is why I teach and write. Master is a two-fold term that gets confusing. I have used it both as a term of respect (someone has mastered something, and has gained my/others' respect) and as someone who owns another mind, heart, body, and soul. This last definition is more self-applied, and is like dominant on crack. My Pet has wondered if I am not a Master, at least of him. I see no need for that title in that way. It doesn't suit me.

littleladybug -> RE: differences (12/22/2015 10:12:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NookieNotes Master is a two-fold term that gets confusing. I have used it both as a term of respect (someone has mastered something, and has gained my/others' respect) and as someone who owns another mind, heart, body, and soul. This last definition is more self-applied, and is like dominant on crack. My Pet has wondered if I am not a Master, at least of him. I see no need for that title in that way. It doesn't suit me. Inasmuch as these things can be described objectively, the "ownership model" makes sense to me.

LadyPact -> RE: differences (12/22/2015 11:03:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cell Well like you say. There's a difference between identifying as/with something, or embodying it. And I don't really think the former is needed (or even desirable in some cases,) to do the latter. Kinda like that Margaret Thatcher quote about being a lady. But I could very well be lumping ideas about dominance in with mastery here and them terms don't seem to be interchangeable, so I'm happy to look at it your way for the moment. 'Outside of the self it is!' It does have a certain elegant simplicity about it and would seem to mesh well with most people's sensibilities. I'm the first to admit my definition has expanded over the years. I know what it is to me and what works for me and I have to accept that it may not match with what works for others. Pretty much the same as the sub/slave business. Thankfully, nobody has put me in charge of making the determination for kink individuals everywhere. (Geez, there would be a job, eh?) More often than not, if folks are happy in their relationship, I'm just happy for them. quote: I'll have to remember to not use the term self-mastery around you... I don't want to come off as being emotionally stunted =X LOL. Let me assure you I don't think that way of everyone. There's a difference between allowing the utter need for control to supersede processing basic human emotions and controlling one's actions when they actually FEEL something. I might not be explaining that one well. quote: I do know who you're referring to when you talk about chest puffing etc... And to tell you the truth, while I know he was the target of a lot of derision because of his views and comments. I actually think a lot of the people that I saw doing the mocking and belittling demonstrated less goreanly behaviour than him. But eh... I duno what to say about all that stuff. Probably better left unsaid whatever it is anyway lol While Gorean folks don't seem to exactly have a reputation for sugar coating issues, I was always under the impression that calling things the way they were seen seems to mesh with what I know. Again, not an authority in the area, so my opinion may mean little. quote: (BTW did I read somewhere that you had distanced yourself from Leather LP? I seem to recall you mentioning not liking what goes along with it these days, or something along those lines. Or am I talking out of my ass? My memory is shocking =\| If so, what exactly didn't you like? Is there leather chest puffing? >_<) No, you read correctly. I will say I've participated in some things lately that have restored my faith a bit. [:)] It's pretty much the same stuff that seems prevalent in the BDSM community as well. The last five or six years or so have shown us we've got some serious issues with serial consent violators, outing, and other areas where we're just not doing a great job fixing. Of course, that is for an entirely other thread. I'll save my soap box for that.

Cell -> RE: differences (12/22/2015 12:30:05 PM)
Thankfully I wasn't interested in your definition on behalf of kink individuals everywhere, but for my own info. I'm interested in interesting ways of looking at things and it fit the bill. [8D] (It wasn't a lack of sugar coating I was referring to but actual bitchy and snide behaviour at times. I mean if someone wants to call a fool a fool straight up, fine. And many people did just that... But there was also a lot of stuff I seemed to remember which had an indirect, snarky tone to it. But of course no ones a saint here, and I do remember some pretty unimpressive stuff coming from him as well. It's not a topic worth the typing really.)

LadyPact -> RE: differences (12/22/2015 12:39:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cell Thankfully I wasn't interested in your definition on behalf of kink individuals everywhere, but for my own info. I'm interested in interesting ways of looking at things and it fit the bill. [8D] Thank goodness. Can you imagine how much work that would be? LOL. I will admit, I'm hard on the 18 year old Masters. It's a rare individual who has a lot of life experience at that age and they are still learning about how to navigate relationships. I just try to hold my tongue.

Cell -> RE: differences (12/22/2015 1:07:04 PM)
We could split the workload if you like. I'll assign them their definitions and you can be the complaints department.[8D]

NorthernGent -> RE: differences (12/22/2015 1:09:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kingbasham What is the difference between a dom and a master? I don't know why I didn't ask that before. I see it as more of a matter of intensity, as opposed to the extent and reach of your control.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

5.859375E-02