|
GrizzlyBear -> RE: slave vs. submissive (1/9/2007 4:07:46 PM)
|
Yes, it does seem that many people confuse all those S words - slave, submissive, slut - and use them interchangeably these days. Makes you just grit your teeth sometimes.
You could just do what most everyone else does - define it however you like so that it shows your own relationship in the best possible light, then insist that everyone else's definition is lacking in some esoteric way, and yours is the one that "just makes sense" anyway.
Add some mythical authority to back you up, and you're good to go.
"Truth is, all those other people are just full of it cause MY definition is the only Twue definition, and I learned it as part of my training from childhood by the Secret European Thousand Year Old Order of True Dominant Masters! Besides, it just makes the most sense..."
;)
(I envison something like the Bud Light commercial with the Men of the Square Table, deciding what the requirements are to call yourself a slave, vs a mere submissive... except the room is stone, hung with tapestries, and lit with torches in cressets, and candles. And they aren't drinking Bud Light. Or Paga, either.)
OK, after all that build up, here is what I mean when I use the word slave, vs submissive, vs bottom.
A bottom is someone who gives up a very limited control, if any, and agrees to have certain things done to them for a short period of time, that bring them a form of pleasure. They are generally more concerned with their own pleasure than that of the Top. A bottom is always entitled to withdraw consent, and almost always has a safeword. A bottom may or may not have any relationship with their opposite, a Top, outside the negotiated scene. If there is any such relationship, it is more or less egalitarian with only very limited amounts of power exchange.
A submissive may negotiate giving up much but not all power for a limited amount of time, or a limited amount of power for an extended period of time, but does not negotiate giving up all power for an indefinite period of time. Although they do expect at least some of their needs for pleasure to be met, they will also expect to at least occasionally do things just to please their partner, rather than themselves, things they might actually find unpleasant. A submissive is entitled to withdraw consent at any time, and usually has a safeword. There is nearly always some sort of relationship that exists outside a scene with their opposite, a Dominant. That relationship will contain some aspect of power exchange. The power exchange may be of nearly any degree, but will not be total and will always exist in some form.
A slave negotiates giving up all power for an indefinite period of time. That may even include giving up their right to leave, even though the law will always insist that they must retain the ability to withdraw consent. Thus, what they are negotiating, is giving up their will to withdraw consent. They do not have a safeword as such; their limits are only those of their Owner. Although there may be love or romantic aspects, the relationship with their opposite, their Owner or Master, is always based primarily on power exchange rather than love or romance. The power exchange may be extreme, to the point that the slave may be treated as property rather than a person. The pleasure of their Owner is of primary concern, and they should expect to receive only that pleasure which it pleases him to give them. Therefore, it is good if they can derive sufficient satisfaction just from being pleasing.
A submissive may have some of the characteristics of a slave; a slave has all of them in some degree.
Note that there was no mention of collars, or sex, one way or another. Do note all the hedge words. Your mileage, of course, may differ.
|
|
|
|
