RE: Just a comment

RE: Just a comment (Full Version)

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

Message

Aine -> RE: Just a comment (3/6/2007 8:30:39 AM)
pulls on her galoshes

valeca -> RE: Just a comment (3/6/2007 10:58:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: valeca The problem with using a 'common definition of the word slave' is: there isn't one. Not as it relates to BDSM. That's why we see the 'what is a slave?' and 'what is a sub?' threads so often. Actually valeca, that's wrong. There are indeed definitions...Devon, Miller, Wiseman have definitions in their books and John Warren...yes, the John Warren from this site...has written thoroughly about BDSM...including BDSM slaves...in his book. The thing is, as respected as they are, none of them are the definitive word on definitions. Each will define 'slave' in their own way as it relates to them/their lives. Glad we agree on the second point, though. Edited for spelling...eeesh.

mixielicous -> RE: Just a comment (3/6/2007 11:12:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FORCEFULL11229 As a Lifestyle Dom in the life for over 25 years, it still amazes me to read the various ads from females who claim that they are slaves, but yet in thier ads they dictate what they will and wont do. How they expect the "Master" to behave. Funny, I always thought a slave does as the Master wishes, not the other way around. I also understand that the Master always has the slaves welfare at heart, making sure that no harm befalls her. i see i am late to this thread, and if this has been said already, please excuse i find it every bit valid to have things like that in profile. after all, we choose whom we want to submit to, do we not? and if this person is not one who i will get along with, feel safe around and respected [yes even as a slave] then how can i bring myself to submit? granted, i am talking a loving relationship here, and while i see not all go for the soul mate M/s road - some prefer to be used and abused. that is all well and good, but how is the relationship supposed to get ANYWHERE if you are not compatible? hard limits are something i could take or leave, it depends on the people involved - how long have they been doing it, how many relationships have they had like this, and why wont they do it, all are worth consideration when viewing hard limits. why would you want to be in a relationship with someone whom there is no give and take with? granted, TPE it is all give, BUT there must be something there for you to connect with. most slaves are not going to go for a master to use and throw them and their feelings away. from what i find M/s generally[not always or even most] is out of a mutual attraction/love for e/o bah i digress, my point is, how are you supposed to commit to someone without knowing what they are ready for, mentally, physically, experience wise, et al. unless they lay it out for you in lamens terms right from the get go does this make ANY sense???

TrueCalling -> RE: Just a comment (3/6/2007 11:21:16 AM)
Since online life has allowed people to bring what is honorable to a new low, 'slave' has been corrupted, contorted, and twisted to mean whatever a person wants it to. I stand by my motto, 'always and all ways' based on my life experience. Calling something what it is not is yet another black mark on what is simply life as intended for some. I speak for myself only, based on my being of traditional principles/values/beliefs.. colleen

CreativeDominant -> RE: Just a comment (3/6/2007 11:40:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mixielicous quote: ORIGINAL: FORCEFULL11229 As a Lifestyle Dom in the life for over 25 years, it still amazes me to read the various ads from females who claim that they are slaves, but yet in thier ads they dictate what they will and wont do. How they expect the "Master" to behave. Funny, I always thought a slave does as the Master wishes, not the other way around. I also understand that the Master always has the slaves welfare at heart, making sure that no harm befalls her. i see i am late to this thread, and if this has been said already, please excuse i find it every bit valid to have things like that in profile. after all, we choose whom we want to submit to, do we not? and if this person is not one who i will get along with, feel safe around and respected [yes even as a slave] then how can i bring myself to submit? granted, i am talking a loving relationship here, and while i see not all go for the soul mate M/s road - some prefer to be used and abused. that is all well and good, but how is the relationship supposed to get ANYWHERE if you are not compatible? I too prefer to be in a D/s relationship with my romantic partner. That being said, it does not mean that there are not D/s relationships out there where the furtherance of dominance and/or the furtherance of submission is the goal, not the furtherance of the romance. An example of that on here...and I hope they will not mind my evocation of them...is Knight and his ladies. Whether you meant it or not, your paragraph above seems to indicate that those D/s relationships not based on a loving relationship cannot get beyond a certain point or that there exists a larger potential for abuse if a romantic aspect to the relationship is not involved. T'aint necessarily so... quote: hard limits are something i could take or leave, it depends on the people involved - how long have they been doing it, how many relationships have they had like this, and why wont they do it, all are worth consideration when viewing hard limits. why would you want to be in a relationship with someone whom there is no give and take with? granted, TPE it is all give, BUT there must be something there for you to connect with. most slaves are not going to go for a master to use and throw them and their feelings away. from what i find M/s generally[not always or even most] is out of a mutual attraction/love for e/o bah i digress, my point is, how are you supposed to commit to someone without knowing what they are ready for, mentally, physically, experience wise, et al. unless they lay it out for you in lamens terms right from the get go does this make ANY sense??? Sure. And the viewpoints on what should be stated about what you consider yourself as as you are laying all these things out run the gamut.

mixielicous -> RE: Just a comment (3/6/2007 11:46:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Whether you meant it or not, your paragraph above seems to indicate that those D/s relationships not based on a loving relationship cannot get beyond a certain point or that there exists a larger potential for abuse if a romantic aspect to the relationship is not involved. T'aint necessarily so... that was not the intention, to make it sound like there is a greater potential for abuse in non loving relationships, i meant the term "use and abuse" figuratively to represent no strings attached bdsm activities, please excuse i use the term a lot. but i do believe that a relationship WITH love has potential to go further than being owned by a Master you dont love, simply because of the natural devotion it evokes. imo.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Just a comment (3/6/2007 11:52:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mixielicous quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Whether you meant it or not, your paragraph above seems to indicate that those D/s relationships not based on a loving relationship cannot get beyond a certain point or that there exists a larger potential for abuse if a romantic aspect to the relationship is not involved. T'aint necessarily so... I suppose that is the way it is for some. I don't deny that it would be more likely that way for me. Of course, I could play Devil's Advocate and ask whether you are referring to romantic love or just love in general but that would be a hijack of the thread and the topic of whether or not love vs. romantic love and whether or not either needs to be present in order to keep a D/s relationship going has been discussed in other threads.

mixielicous -> RE: Just a comment (3/6/2007 11:55:04 AM)
yes i am afraid hijacking threads is a hard limit of mine [sm=flying.gif]

CreativeDominant -> RE: Just a comment (3/6/2007 12:03:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mixielicous yes i am afraid hijacking threads is a hard limit of mine [sm=flying.gif] I knew that angelic look wasn't just a guise...[8\|] [:D]

browneyedrose -> RE: Just a comment (3/12/2007 12:41:53 PM)
I agree with you. I think once you have establlished the Master/slave relationship and are totally entrenched in it, the slave has no say. I am very much on that way with my Master. He may ask my opinion but that doesn't mean he will go along with it. Also he has my best interest at hand and says I am his prized possession. The Master should protect his slave at all costs.

Darkhaven80 -> RE: Just a comment (3/12/2007 1:00:37 PM)
Maybe some put it in their profile as to say, if you're looking for this, I dont do it, so don't even bother trying? I never put much in my profile, things come out when they do at their own rate. It's strange though, as I used to have some hard limits I would never consider, then found myself changing my mind easily enough when with the right guy. Hopefully the same will happen with these women if they 'over list' themselves.

SimplyMichael -> RE: Just a comment (3/12/2007 2:18:04 PM)
Creative Dominant, John Warren would be the last to list hard and fast definitions and you can bet his would differ from Jay Wiseman as they are VERY different people. The problem with labels is my definition of submissive is more hard core than some slaves and some bottoms are more than both combined. Same goes with TPE and PPE, topping some mousy little girl with no self confidence and doing so completely, say to the point of cutting things off is far less impressive to me than someone getting a headstrong women to simply sit quietly at a play party.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Just a comment (3/12/2007 6:00:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael Creative Dominant, John Warren would be the last to list hard and fast definitions and you can bet his would differ from Jay Wiseman as they are VERY different people. The problem with labels is my definition of submissive is more hard core than some slaves and some bottoms are more than both combined. Same goes with TPE and PPE, topping some mousy little girl with no self confidence and doing so completely, say to the point of cutting things off is far less impressive to me than someone getting a headstrong women to simply sit quietly at a play party. I understand that Michael...that is why I stated in my post that : I have a basic definition of submissive and dominant and slave in my head. I have a basic definition of Total Power Exchange and Partial Power Exchange. These definitions... which are based on what I have read and what I have learned and which are colored more by people like Warren and Devon and Miller and Wiseman than they are by Norman and Rice ... are still only my definitions and are only important when I am speaking with someone and they ask me to clarify my viewpoint. I can put them out here and I can ask for input and yeah, every once in awhile, I will disagree with someone. In stating that, I felt that I had made it clear that I had a *basic* butnot a definition taken from only one source but rather, one which had been colored by all of the people named...and unnamed...that I had learned from. It is that coloration which makes it much more open and flexible than it would be if I were to use just Wiseman's or just Miller's definition or only the definition of just some dominant who's a friend of mine. It also gives me my base starting point. If my post did not make that clear the first time, then I hope this one does.

Page: << < prev 5 6 7 8 [9]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125