Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Definition please?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Definition please? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 12:27:15 PM   
OsideGirl


Posts: 14449
Joined: 7/1/2005
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShereKhan

Interesting... Seems like an oxymoron. It would almost seem as if the sub is attempting to top from the bottom.

Shere Khan


Ummmmm NO

I am a masochistic submissive to my Master. I enjoy being a sadistic Top to other women. My sadistic side comes no where near my Master, unless it is because he has given me permission to play and is watching a scene in which I am topping. How does this equal topping from the bottom?


_____________________________

Give a girl the right shoes and she will conquer the world. ~ Marilyn Monroe

The Accelerated Velocity of Terminological Inexactitude

(in reply to ShereKhan)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 12:30:49 PM   
OsideGirl


Posts: 14449
Joined: 7/1/2005
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RavenofPK

It's all in the *intent*. If a "submissive" intends to anger an authorative figure in order to get punishment, her "submissiveness" is a ruse. In effect, she is trying to manipulate the situation to being about her. Which places the dynamic in her hands, giving her power, thus eliminating her "submissiveness".


This is actually the difinition of a Brat or a SAM (Smart Assed Masochist) not a sadistic submissive. Damn, now we need a kinky dictionary.


_____________________________

Give a girl the right shoes and she will conquer the world. ~ Marilyn Monroe

The Accelerated Velocity of Terminological Inexactitude

(in reply to RavenofPK)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 12:32:33 PM   
kimmypuss


Posts: 47
Joined: 9/21/2005
Status: offline
Maybe a Super Dumb Question...

can one be a submissive without being a masochist?


(in reply to OsideGirl)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 1:10:41 PM   
IronBear


Posts: 9008
Joined: 6/19/2005
From: Beenleigh, Qld, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kimmypuss

Maybe a Super Dumb Question...

can one be a submissive without being a masochist?




I’m not sure as far as submissives go, but a slave generally has a need to submit to a Master or Mistress and to serve their owner and be pleasing. They will know that punishment will occur if they are disobedient, but their main drive is to serve.

A desire to serve does not equate necessarily with masochism or we would have service industries filled with masochists …. Hmmmmm maybe we do seeing the amount of times I see shop staff ignore customers until they are dragged over the coals by their supervisor…

< Message edited by IronBear -- 10/8/2005 1:11:22 PM >


_____________________________

Iron Bear

Master of Bruin Cottage

http://www.bruincottage.org

Your attitude, words & actions are yours. Take responsibility for them and the consequences they incur.

D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F.

(in reply to kimmypuss)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 1:21:35 PM   
ModeratorEleven


Posts: 2007
Joined: 8/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kimmypuss

can one be a submissive without being a masochist?

Of course.

XI

_____________________________

This mod goes to eleven.

(in reply to kimmypuss)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 1:54:23 PM   
JohnWarren


Posts: 3807
Joined: 3/18/2005
From: Delray Beach, FL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kimmypuss

Maybe a Super Dumb Question...

can one be a submissive without being a masochist?


Not dumb at all. The two are separate domains. One can be quite masochistic without being the least bit submissive, like Janet Hardy, the author, and one can be submissive but not at all masochistic like Smiler, one of my dear friends. A submissive wants to serve. A masochist enjoys what others call pain under certain circumstances.

The two domains interpenetrate in many people so there are a large number of masochistic submissives. But then there are also large numbers of submissives who are exhibitionists... and who enjoy pets or cooking.

Complicating the equation are submissives who tolerate pain if their dominant wants to inflict it. If they enjoy the symbol rather than the pain, I'd be reluctant to call them masochistic but if they want the title so be it.

_____________________________

www.lovingdominant.org

(in reply to kimmypuss)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 1:55:55 PM   
IronBear


Posts: 9008
Joined: 6/19/2005
From: Beenleigh, Qld, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: RavenofPK

It's all in the *intent*. If a "submissive" intends to anger an authorative figure in order to get punishment, her "submissiveness" is a ruse. In effect, she is trying to manipulate the situation to being about her. Which places the dynamic in her hands, giving her power, thus eliminating her "submissiveness".


This is actually the difinition of a Brat or a SAM (Smart Assed Masochist) not a sadistic submissive. Damn, now we need a kinky dictionary.



~ VWEG foloowed by a Huge bearish Grin ~ Ok Bobby, when are you going to puiblish it???? ~ Innocent look ~




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Iron Bear

Master of Bruin Cottage

http://www.bruincottage.org

Your attitude, words & actions are yours. Take responsibility for them and the consequences they incur.

D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F.

(in reply to OsideGirl)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 2:47:03 PM   
RavenofPK


Posts: 320
Joined: 6/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sfgrrl

Define away.

~stef


Very well.

Any dominant man is authoritive over any woman, submissive or not. Period. Now, before all you raging feminists start tossing your estrogen around in offense, I will explain.

All that is required is the acknowledgement of their authority. Actual action on a man's part is NOT necessary. Broken down to it's most natural, carnal, and barbaric definition.......a man is less likely to brain a female to death due to her defiance IF he simply is aware that she acknowledges his authority.

You may not like it, but men are violent creatures. Women need to diffuse that violence instead of feed it.

Raven.

Author edit: You asked. I answered. Honestly.

(in reply to stef)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 2:55:13 PM   
EmeraldSlave2


Posts: 3645
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kimmypuss

Maybe a Super Dumb Question...

can one be a submissive without being a masochist?



Yes, as I said before, Ds is on a completely different axis from S&M. Many subs are not masochists, many doms are not sadists.

(in reply to kimmypuss)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 2:58:42 PM   
mistoferin


Posts: 8284
Joined: 10/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

You may not like it, but men are violent creatures. Women need to diffuse that violence instead of feed it.


I'm so sorry but I just have to....and I am not even a raging feminist. If I were a man I would be livid at your blanket generalization. Men are not violent creatures by nature. There are some men though who do not have enough emotional maturity or control to keep themselves in check. They have not developed the coping skills to deal with life in any manner other than that of throwing 12 year old temper tantrums. At least not until the cops arrive on the scene....then they somehow miraculously have full composure...even if they are standing over the woman they just brained. When they get to court they usually don't try to even convince the lady judge that they are authoritative over them. As a matter of fact, at that point they are usually pathetic creatures begging the poor woman for her leniency.

Instead of making women responsible for men's violence.....why don't we try to make people accountable for their own actions. Women's defiance is not the cause of men's violence unless men are not in control of their own reactions....and if they are not in control that hardly makes them seem to be very authoritative or Dominant. A little personal responsibility goes a long way.

_____________________________

Peace and light,
~erin~

There are no victims here...only volunteers.

When you make a habit of playing on the tracks, you thereby forfeit the right to bitch when you get hit by a train.

"I did it! I admit it and I'm gonna do it again!"

(in reply to RavenofPK)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 3:11:13 PM   
sweetpettjenny


Posts: 674
Joined: 11/7/2004
Status: offline
yes of course, there are many forms of submission..
quote:

ORIGINAL: kimmypuss

Maybe a Super Dumb Question...

can one be a submissive without being a masochist?




(in reply to kimmypuss)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 3:15:25 PM   
OsideGirl


Posts: 14449
Joined: 7/1/2005
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: IronBear


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: RavenofPK

It's all in the *intent*. If a "submissive" intends to anger an authorative figure in order to get punishment, her "submissiveness" is a ruse. In effect, she is trying to manipulate the situation to being about her. Which places the dynamic in her hands, giving her power, thus eliminating her "submissiveness".


This is actually the difinition of a Brat or a SAM (Smart Assed Masochist) not a sadistic submissive. Damn, now we need a kinky dictionary.



~ VWEG foloowed by a Huge bearish Grin ~ Ok Bobby, when are you going to puiblish it???? ~ Innocent look ~





A is for alpha, anal, damn I ran out of A's already.


_____________________________

Give a girl the right shoes and she will conquer the world. ~ Marilyn Monroe

The Accelerated Velocity of Terminological Inexactitude

(in reply to IronBear)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 4:37:27 PM   
kimmypuss


Posts: 47
Joined: 9/21/2005
Status: offline
thanks for all the answers.

... from a non-masochist

(in reply to OsideGirl)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 4:50:07 PM   
theRose4U


Posts: 3403
Joined: 8/22/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Any dominant man is authoritive over any woman


Got news for ya sweetheart I AM DOMME as far as any man having authority over me just because he was born with a penis...he needs to think again. the FIFTY MEN that answer to me for their very jobs would agree.

If this makes me a feminist in your narrow minded world then so be it...

<insults deleted>

[Mod note: Personal insults are not acceptable here. You're welcome to disagree with something a poster writes, but there is no call for comments like the ones I just deleted.]

< Message edited by ModeratorEleven -- 10/8/2005 6:39:54 PM >

(in reply to RavenofPK)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 5:07:43 PM   
krys


Posts: 611
Joined: 8/24/2005
Status: offline
Can we just skip the attack the poster and not the post thing for once in this thread? Just for a change of pace? Does disagreeing with someone's point of view really necessitate name calling?

_____________________________

Krys

(in reply to theRose4U)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 6:12:55 PM   
KittenWithaTwist


Posts: 490
Joined: 8/3/2005
Status: offline
An observation: Men seem very focused on gender domination. Submissive men are attached to the female supremacy fetish. They come to me often and question my disgust with this particular belief/fascination. Curiously, they never respond when I calmly outline why one gender is no better/faster/stronger/smarter/cooler than the other. Dominant men are equally attached to the female inferiority fetish. They boast often about how women all over the world are constantly in a submissive role because they were "bred" or "born" or "designed" to be that way because (insert deity) makes it so. Curiously, they never respond when I calmly outline why one gender is no better/faster/stronger/smarter/cooler than the other.

Women are no better than men. Men are no better than women. As two genders within the same species, we have certain characteristics that make us complimentary. For instance, women commonly produce more estrogen than men. However, women, like men, also produce testosterone. Some women produce more testosterone than estrogen. Women, naturally, are built with ovaries, which, when joined with the male's sperm, create an embryo. These things make a female mammal.

Men produce more testosterone than women, but they also produce estrogen. Some menproduce more estrogen than testosterone. Men, naturally, are built with penises, which carry the sperm, created in the testicles, which is spit from the member during ejaculation. The sperm combines with the ovary, or egg, to produce an embryo. These things make a male mammal.

This is where our differences end, naturally, biologically. You can say that some men are more inclined to muscle mass. This is true in *some* men but not all men. Some women are more inclined to muscle mass as well. This is true of some women, but not all women. Some men, in your example, are authoritative. This is true of *some* men, not all men. Some women are authoritative.

Must I continue, or are you getting my point?

Humans are unique from most other species of mammals, and even from our closest relatives, the apes. Most mammal species, though hardly all, are active in small groups, controlled socially by a male, but ecologically and biologically by a female, or several females. Look at the Lion. The male lion is socially dominant. Yet, he does not kill his food when in a pride. He does not feed his young, and is oft times seen as a danger to them. He is, essentially, a figurehead. A female lioness is perfectly capable of protecting her young. She hunts for and kills her own food. She can hold her own in a fight. She is probably only protected by the male because *he* needs HER to keep his family tree intact. He's lost without her.

My point, in all this?

Human being are unique in that we need each other to live. In this society, in the Western World, we do not have "natural" enemies. There is no need to protect the woman from lions and tigers and bears (oh my!) or even from natural disaster or disease. At least, no more so than there is a need to protect the men. Naturally, biologically, we are all of the same value.

Socially, women can carry as much authority as men. Look at Martha Stewart. Check out Elizabeth the First, Queen Victoria, and Hillary Clinton. Admire such incredible women as Rosie O Donnell, Madonna, and my own mother, who is the most dominant woman I have ever met, who cared for and protected her own young, provided their food, and fought off danger.

I fully respect your desire to be Gorean. I understand that it is something you believe in and desire. But when you attempt to impose your beliefs on others, you will meet a whole host of intelligent women, both submissive and dominant in their own relationships, who can quite calmly show you that in the real world, outside of D/s, outside of Gor, outside of S&M, we're all the same.

Simply put, no one is better.

(in reply to RavenofPK)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Definition please? - 10/8/2005 6:57:55 PM   
stef


Posts: 10215
Joined: 1/26/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RavenofPK

Author edit: You asked. I answered. Honestly.

Your rather interesting definition doesn't change my question.

What if that sadism isn't directed towards an "authoritative figure in order to get punishment"? What if it's not directed at any authoritative figure at all?

~stef

_____________________________

Welcome to PoliticSpace! If you came here expecting meaningful BDSM discussions, boy are you in the wrong place.

"Hypocrisy has consequences"

(in reply to RavenofPK)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Definition please? - 10/10/2005 10:03:24 PM   
gratefulangel


Posts: 5
Joined: 10/9/2005
From: Philadelphia,PA
Status: offline
Im not sure how to explain "what" exactly a "sadistic submissive" is but i do know someone "who" is a sadistic submissive. Me.

(in reply to krazysubbiekat)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: Definition please? - 10/11/2005 7:17:49 AM   
night101owl


Posts: 83
Joined: 8/15/2005
Status: offline
Raven,
I get that you're just being honest, and it's good for people to get in touch with their beliefs. I'm glad that I don't have to interact with a lot of people who share your beliefs, though-- if a man needs me to acknowledge his authority over me in order to feel good about himself (or to be able to control his violent impulses), then he's bound to be disappointed (and if incapable to controlling his violence through other means, incarcerated). I guess that's just called incompatibility.


But to get back to the thread-- there are several references here to obnoxious submissives being sadists. I think that gets away from one core aspect of sadomasochism within the BDSM context, which is consent. If someone is nonconsensually causing another person pain (physical or emotional), well that's sadism in the strict dictionary sense, but not the fun or ethical sense.

If you get right down to it, a clever sadist plays consensually, because willing and eager masochists will come back for more.

So sure, sadomasochism can incorporate emotional manipulation and such, but I wouldn't automatically think of that kind of manipulation as a common tool of sadistic submissives-- the submissive sadists I know are far more skilled at using knives, canes, needles, and whips. They just may require their dominants' permission in order to use them.

< Message edited by night101owl -- 10/11/2005 7:19:05 AM >

(in reply to RavenofPK)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: Definition please? - 10/11/2005 3:00:02 PM   
Phoenixandnika


Posts: 748
Joined: 4/22/2005
From: Aberdeen Maryland
Status: offline
Greetings,

My Master agrees I am not only His slave but I am both a sadist and masochist. Does that make me any less of a slave. I don't think so. That is like saying I can not walk and chew gum.

Nika, Phoenix's Gothic Slave

< Message edited by Phoenixandnika -- 10/11/2005 3:43:16 PM >


_____________________________

"Life is neither a bed of roses nor a carpet of thorns, it's just what you make of it."



(in reply to night101owl)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Definition please? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094