RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being

RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (Full Version)

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

Message

RRafe -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/10/2007 7:09:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner4SexSlave quote: ORIGINAL: breatheasone To the OP...I personally have about as much respect for a person that would call another "it", as they do for calling someone "it"....which is not much...if any. This is what my own of thinking had been regarding this as wel. However, I thought I would start a thread regarding this topic. See perhaps those among us that have lived in such an extreme relationship or desire it. I suspect if I had an account on the other side, I might have responses in private email regarding this thread. There have been times when people have wrote me in private due to posting so as to avoid being condemned by others. I have encountered a couple of slaves that wanted to live and breath and exist in life as "IT", and a few that have been "IT" or almost an "IT". This topic intriques me to degree, mainly because it conflicts with my own personal tastes, interests and views. I'm guilty of having thought or felt this was more the invention of Hollywood porn or novel reading myself. However, I've had to come to grips that this is valid flavor of the BDSM lifestyle, as extreme as it might appear to me or others. I have known bottoms like this. Here is what they communicated to my limited understanding. First, the wannabe it exists outside of the relationship as an entity in a form of stasis. They can be quite autonomous-but really yearn to be with someone who can help them fullfill thier model of freedom. Which happens to be a connection with a competent Dominant entity that will allow that. The top needs to be able to meet basic needs, and have some stability to offer. Once they are confident-and are accepted, they move along to the next stage-becoming an extension. Some may say that this was absurdly altruistic-but the more honest ones admitted it was actually rather self serving-they wanted to secure thier place in the relationship. The drive to be useful and accepted is extremely strong in the service version of these people. Others, who were less service oriented, were more interested in objectification. In this model the bottom has a use fetish-meat. And the depersonalization enforces that feeling-where being treated as a person would tend to tear it down.

TemptingNviceSub -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/10/2007 8:54:54 PM)
To the OP..IMO~wink~..an "it" is a fetish..a "being" is a relationship..Tempting

slaverosebeauty -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/10/2007 8:59:50 PM)
If someone wants an 'it' then they want an object, a doormat, an atomiton; as I am none of those things, any partner of mine has to want a partner, someone who will converse with them, challenge them on occassion, an all around partner. Like the message from MJ says on my page, He doesn't want someone who is 'mindless.' I do know some bottom-types who do refer to themselves as 'it' or 'thing' in the group I run on yahoo for bottom-types, we try to discourage such things, as if you can form a sentence online then you are NOT an object, you do have thoughts. I can understand how it can be used to 'break' a bottom-type; for my money, its not anything that I would or will ever engage in. If I wanted to be brainless and an 'object' or a 'thing' or 'it' I would have joined a cult or a faction of bdsm/Ms that supported such a thing, since I didn't; I am a person.

Owner4SexSlave -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/11/2007 4:14:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RRafe I have known bottoms like this. Here is what they communicated to my limited understanding. Thank you sharing this with me, some of what you posted actually makes sense to me. quote: First, the wannabe it exists outside of the relationship as an entity in a form of stasis. They can be quite autonomous-but really yearn to be with someone who can help them fullfill thier model of freedom. Which happens to be a connection with a competent Dominant entity that will allow that. The top needs to be able to meet basic needs, and have some stability to offer. I believe I can understand the freedom this model, in the sense, they simply want to be free of being a human being, for whatever reason(s). They just want their basica needs taken care of so they are not forced into not having to take care of their own needs and break the model. quote: Once they are confident-and are accepted, they move along to the next stage-becoming an extension. Some may say that this was absurdly altruistic-but the more honest ones admitted it was actually rather self serving-they wanted to secure thier place in the relationship. LOL, I enjoy your honesty in this posting. In terms of the sub/slaves/bottom (whatever) having a self serving interest. I've been at a bit of loss in understanding the self serving interests or aspects of somebody wanting this role. quote: The drive to be useful and accepted is extremely strong in the service version of these people. This I can totally relate to 100% and understand, this was helpful in making a connection in my mind. quote: Others, who were less service oriented, were more interested in objectification. In this model the bottom has a use fetish-meat. And the depersonalization enforces that feeling-where being treated as a person would tend to tear it down. Yes, I can see a person who's more into objectfication compared to service, being a such. Ironic that being treated as a person, would mean releasing them from the very freedom they have found in being an IT. To be free of many things and without any worries, with just basic need met. Again, thank you for sharing the other side of the coin, to the best of your understanding.

dawntreader -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/11/2007 4:17:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stephann I also enjoy 'owning' cats (though any cat 'owner' knows the truth there.) I suppose it shows my desire for creatures in my life with lots of personality. Stephan Greetings Stephann, i had to laugh at this as i am owned by 2 myself![:D] j

milkmaid42dd -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/11/2007 4:35:48 AM)
I feel pretty strongly about this. I'm not an "it" I am a *person! and any Master who is looking for an "it"can jolly well keep on looking. Now, I can see being an "it" temporarily in consentual play. But I know one guy who started calling me "it" with his second email; of course, I didn't understand the email and what he was talking about, finding indecipherable; it wasn't until about halfway through the first phone call that I suddenly realized that I* was supposed to be the "it" he was talking about!!!! And these were just "getting to know you" type conversations! I let him know right away that I wasn't comfortable, and he explained that it was just a protocol, rather like the I/i W/e stuff. I don't buy that. When you call someone "it" from the first five minutes of meeting them, you are setting the tone, a foundation. And that's not the foundation for any kind of relationship that I want to be in! Oh... and he STILL kept calling me "it" after I had told him I was not comfortable with that.

Owner4SexSlave -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/11/2007 4:36:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TemptingNviceSub To the OP..IMO~wink~..an "it" is a fetish..a "being" is a relationship..Tempting Tempting, Yes. A lot of things become tempting, when one is exploring their current options. Surrounded by many temptations, kinda of like exploring New Kinds of foods to eat! Ummm... What flavor? Oh yum yum, they all look so good. I actually encountered a couple of prospective slaves on the "otherside" that were looking to become nothing but a mere "IT". I had a difficult time wrapping my brain around it outside of Scene play. The day-to-day 24/7 full time variety of "IT" I've never done before. Needless to say, it made me explore thoughts regarding what I myself and willing or not willing and capable of doing. I have developed my own skill sets for being Master. I'm used to doing M/s a with a certain style and flavor of my own. So yes, these encounters actually made me explore thoughts such as, could I honestly do a 24/7 lifestyle using the "IT" model as the center of it all. Case in point where in the process of exploring my options, the encounters at the very made me stop and do some Thinking that I otherwise would have never done. Meaning, I've never met anybody who simply was looking to be "IT" in this fashion. Perhaps if I had in the past, I might have embraced the idea and tried it for a 24/7 model. However, that's not the case. When I am with somebody with no or fewer limits, I tend to be drawn towards doing more extreme things. If I was to ever hook up with an extreme painslut, I would realize my full sadistic side. Call it full self actualization of my sadistic side. Perhaps I would or would not make an excellent owner of an "IT". My encounters with other people on CM, had at least made me mentally explore thing a little deeper.

milkmaid42dd -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/11/2007 4:37:06 AM)
I'm owned by 3... 2 Maine Coons and a feral kitten who came in from the cold one January :) quote: ORIGINAL: dawntreader quote: ORIGINAL: Stephann I also enjoy 'owning' cats (though any cat 'owner' knows the truth there.) I suppose it shows my desire for creatures in my life with lots of personality. Stephan Greetings Stephann, i had to laugh at this as i am owned by 2 myself![:D] j

Owner4SexSlave -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/11/2007 4:42:37 AM)
Cats... since people are posting about owning cats. 24/7 lifestyle animal roles is something that I question as well along with "IT". I don't mind it for Scene play or something to do from time to time in a relationship. I just can't wrap my mind around it for a full time committment. Basically for an M/s relationship, I want it to be with a human being. Not a Cat, Not a Puppy, or some other animal. Perhaps, I'm just too damn shallow or picky here?

Owner4SexSlave -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/11/2007 4:52:46 AM)
Perhaps, I am too set in my ways. I feel comfortable in owning a person in a M/s relationship. I have my own set of Protocals, style and techniques established and figured out. I'm comfortable in this skin and what I do. Now for me, owning an "IT" or somebody as an Animal 24/7 would be rather new and different for a 24/7 day to day basis. Actually, I don't know If I could do it. I actually see myself perhaps getting bored with it, to be honest. Not a problem for scene play. I'm pretty Eclectic when it comes to BDSM, and IT's, Cats and Puppy Dogs.. just I find these things rather limiting and a sort of rut to be stuck in. I hate ruts. I rather be with somebody that could play these roles and change them up. In terms of scene play, or role play. It could be for a day or a week. Whatever, time period. However, after awhile be able to change it up. I have passed up "IT's", Cats and Little Puppy Dog Girls on the other side, for this very reason. Again, call me shallow.

Rule -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/11/2007 4:56:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner4SexSlave For you sub/slaves out there who would rather be Owned as an "IT" compared to a "Being"? There are indeed slaves that are its, deep ocean troughs as it were. A sub can never be an it according to my model of the various types of human minds. In this analogy a sub is a stupendous mountain. There was an it that briefly posted on these forums. She was breathtakingly beautiful and sexy. If I had been rich and not have the herpes virus, I would have claimed her. I recall her nick. She was scared of the (in her eyes weird and dangerous) doms here, though, and eventually asked if she could tell her dad about her nature and ask him to dom her. Shortly afterwards she inactivated her CM account. I see no theoretical reason why an it should not access the internet and communicate with other people or leave the house. After all there are plenty of devices that communicate with people, such as traffic lights, and there are plenty of objects that one may take from a house, and bots also access the internet.

leatherette -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/11/2007 6:03:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble quote: ORIGINAL: Owner4SexSlave I realize there are those who have an opposing view to this school of thought. But what are the Benifits of Owning an "IT" over a "Being"? For you sub/slaves out there who would rather be Owned as an "IT" compared to a "Being"? For you Master/Doms out there why do you enjoy owning an "IT" over a "Being"? Who here agrees with the same lines of thinking as I do? I don't see them as mutually exclusive. There are many facets to my own nature which are fed in different ways and a steady diet to feed only a single part of me will not nourish me any more than a steady diet of chicken will give me all the vitamins I need to sustain my body in a healthy manner. Being owned as an 'it' is not enough and being owned as a 'being' is not enough. I need to be owned as Celeste, all the parts of me fed by the proper diet so that it doesn't die of starvation. Sometimes I'm fed by objectification, sometimes by love, sometimes by pain, sometimes by service and a myriad of other diets for each of my unique characteristics. The benefit (to me) of having my 'it' fed is that it often manifests in feeding another part of me as well. If I'm a foot stool, that feeds my 'it' but it also feeds the part of me that would whither without being able to serve, so it's a two-fold benefit. It benefits the part of Master who wants the comfort of a fleshy footstool and to indulge exercising his power to command his slave to be a foot stool. In other words .. it's this and that.. not this or that. [;)] Celeste [:D] So well put... as usual. TY Celeste! Let me add: Being "it" once in a while doesn't exclude one from being a fully functioning whole human being or take away from any service mindset or action. Objectification is a game, or training or enhancement of what is or is to be - and need not truly 'depersonalize' in any real or harmful way. Not to mention - the top does not become a one sided, impersonal stereotype figure or object either. They too, remain a whole multifaceted human with needs. Both can grow, as such - in unity and trust.. Each mentally healthy and living a mutually satisfying life - together . Dynamic concept, hard to understand? take care..

Owner4SexSlave -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/11/2007 6:30:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leatherette quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble quote: ORIGINAL: Owner4SexSlave I realize there are those who have an opposing view to this school of thought. But what are the Benifits of Owning an "IT" over a "Being"? For you sub/slaves out there who would rather be Owned as an "IT" compared to a "Being"? For you Master/Doms out there why do you enjoy owning an "IT" over a "Being"? Who here agrees with the same lines of thinking as I do? I don't see them as mutually exclusive. There are many facets to my own nature which are fed in different ways and a steady diet to feed only a single part of me will not nourish me any more than a steady diet of chicken will give me all the vitamins I need to sustain my body in a healthy manner. Being owned as an 'it' is not enough and being owned as a 'being' is not enough. I need to be owned as Celeste, all the parts of me fed by the proper diet so that it doesn't die of starvation. Sometimes I'm fed by objectification, sometimes by love, sometimes by pain, sometimes by service and a myriad of other diets for each of my unique characteristics. The benefit (to me) of having my 'it' fed is that it often manifests in feeding another part of me as well. If I'm a foot stool, that feeds my 'it' but it also feeds the part of me that would whither without being able to serve, so it's a two-fold benefit. It benefits the part of Master who wants the comfort of a fleshy footstool and to indulge exercising his power to command his slave to be a foot stool. In other words .. it's this and that.. not this or that. [;)] Celeste [:D] So well put... as usual. TY Celeste! Let me add: Being "it" once in a while doesn't exclude one from being a fully functioning whole human being or take away from any service mindset or action. Objectification is a game, or training or enhancement of what is or is to be - and need not truly 'depersonalize' in any real or harmful way. Not to mention - the top does not become a one sided, impersonal stereotype figure or object either. They too, remain a whole multifaceted human with needs. Both can grow, as such - in unity and trust.. Each mentally healthy and living a mutually satisfying life - together . Dynamic concept, hard to understand? take care.. Thank you for these comments. I enjoy reading things such as this. I started this thread to gain some further insight. While I have taken a complete break from the "otherside", killed my primary acccount off and then remember I had this second account. Logged in and killed it off from the "otherside". I'm here to simply to use the message boards. This topic is of interest to me, if nothing at all to perhaps come to a better understanding of it. I created this thread, so as to explore how other people thought or feel about this. To perhaps recieve posts that challenge my own thinking some on this subject. There have been those I've encountered on CM, that have challenge me to explore thoughts further. Plus, there are a number of people that simply read the threads to gain a higher understanding of BDSM. Thank you again.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/11/2007 12:53:32 PM)
I prefer to own a "being". One that understands that being owned means that there will be occasions when she is treated as an object but that said time periods are temporary and....usually, though not necessarily always...for her pleasure as well as mine. I see no sense in owning an "it" for a lengthy period. I crave too much of those things that separate an "it" from a "being"...at least in the manner you have described...for that type of objectification to go on for long.

camille65 -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/11/2007 12:57:38 PM)
I could play as an 'it' but I really don't think I could maintain that for long. The flow of emotion that I need doesn't seem compatable with 'itness'.

brattysarahjane -> RE: Slave it vs. Slave Being (10/11/2007 1:18:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: camille65 I could play as an 'it' but I really don't think I could maintain that for long. The flow of emotion that I need doesn't seem compatable with 'itness'. i agree with this completely. i am way to emotional to be an it for long. However, i could play an it for a short time. bratty sarah jane

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125