Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common Definitions"?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common Definitions"?

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

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common Definitions"?

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common Defini... - 9/24/2006 9:29:07 AM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
Status: offline

At one of the seminars being offered at the Folsom Fringe a presenter,national known in the lifestyle, required a common vocabulary for the audience. He was presenting a talk called "Servant Master". In and of itself very interesting, but I was wondering how you would react to his definitions concerning relationship dynamics.

Top/bottom = Physical

Dom/sub = Mental

Master/slave = Spiritual

He, and we, give no "good/better/best" qualifier to these definitions. Because of the unrelated topic he only provided one or two paragraph explanations for his position; actually it could have been a topic of another complete presentation.

What is your reaction to these definitions?

The Folsom Fringe was again a great experience. There were 32 different lifestyle subjects presented over two days; 33 if you include the yoga course. Two fantastic play parties in a major hotel ballroom stocked with a range of furniture including 20 St. Andrew Crosses - but you still had to wait a bit for one! We'll post the complete list of topics later. We're posting this from a room overlooking the Folsom Street Fair where we'll soon be walking the street. Me in my top hat leathers and beth in her Bridal hat and not much else.

Post #: 1

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 9:31:14 AM

Misstoyou

Posts: 1149
Joined: 9/4/2004
Status: offline

Regardless of personal response to the definitions, as a teacher I like the idea that the speaker gave them, to make sure that the audience was on the same page, at least for that presentation.

** Edited to say hope I run into you two at the fair.

< Message edited by Misstoyou -- 9/24/2006 9:32:20 AM >

_____________________________

~ Miss Marie

a.k.a. "mean Lady"

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 2

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 9:46:24 AM

happypervert

Posts: 2203
Joined: 5/11/2004
From: Scranton, PA
Status: offline

quote:

He, and we, give no "good/better/best" qualifier to these definitions.

Perhaps the qualifier isn't there explicitly, but using the word "spiritual" implies a relationship that transcends anything that mere mortals can achieve and therefore it is the "best". So that makes this definiton hogwash to me; the physical and mental definitions are just fine IMO.

I think this nationally known speaker would be better off avoiding trying to define a difference between masters/domw/subs/slaves if he can't do a better job than that.

< Message edited by happypervert -- 9/24/2006 9:48:30 AM >

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 3

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 9:53:23 AM

MasterFireMaam

Posts: 5587
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Charleston, WV
Status: offline

Definitions, like labels, are handy ways to clearly express what we want to express. I've heard these definitions before and like them; they are clear and concise to me...but then I seem to often things like the two "nationally know" people I can think of who use these definitions in their presentaitons. :-) They're part of my guru list.

Master Fire

_____________________________

The power of who we are can be intoxicating. The power of who we could be is humbling.
-----
Ms Relationship Books
-----
BDSM How-To Books

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 4

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 10:19:30 AM

UnvailedPurpose

Posts: 61
Joined: 8/24/2006
Status: offline

How does one accurately define a highly individualized imaginatively driven totally ambiguous ever evolving altering and changing frame of mind? Titles are nonsense, but no more so then the thinking or belief shared hallucinations and the mindset of the sociopath are capable of altering and/or changing a lie into a truth.

(in reply to MasterFireMaam)

Post #: 5

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 11:14:58 AM

charismagirrl

Posts: 297
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline

i personally like the definitions, for similar reasons as others stated. The only thing that i would add to slave (and maybe it's me or my own skewed view for my relationship) but i think that slave should encompass all of those attributes.

i don't think spiritual was meant as an "other worldly" type of thing or as over arrogant. Spiritual IMO would be the mark of a great relationship, what you would hope to attain. my Daddy/Master is spiritual and honorable himself. He is also trying to work with my inner spirit and soul, to make me a more peaceful slave...he not only cares for my physical needs or mental needs but also my spiritual needs.

(in reply to UnvailedPurpose)

Post #: 6

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 11:26:41 AM

BitaTruble

Posts: 9779
Joined: 1/12/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

At one of the seminars being offered at the Folsom Fringe a presenter,national known in the lifestyle, required a common vocabulary for the audience. He was presenting a talk called "Servant Master". In and of itself very interesting, but I was wondering how you would react to his definitions concerning relationship dynamics.

Top/bottom = Physical

Dom/sub = Mental

Master/slave = Spiritual

He, and we, give no "good/better/best" qualifier to these definitions. Because of the unrelated topic he only provided one or two paragraph explanations for his position; actually it could have been a topic of another complete presentation.

What is your reaction to these definitions?

Back in the days when I was still teaching, I would often tell my students that "We will use definition X to explain word Y" simply so everyone was on the same page. Doing this, in and of itself, can help facilitate discussion. That said, I don't find the definitions which the presenter used to be entirely accurate simply because they are just 'too' general. Top/bottom can incorporate mental aspects, D/s, at times, involves ones spirit and so on and so forth.

Seems just a bit too superficial for my taste, but to each their own and hopefully his audience got something out of the presentation which will help propel them along a path of more retrospection and research into themselves and what they all believe is the truth of their BDSM lives.

Celeste

_____________________________

"Oh, so it's just like
Rock, paper, scissors."

He laughed. "You are the wisest woman I know."

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 7

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 12:20:17 PM

LuckyAlbatross

Posts: 19224
Joined: 10/25/2005
Status: offline

I guess they work "well enough" but they really aren't accurate. I know of spiritual bonds that occur in many top/bottom scenarios and M/s relationships are certainly usually physical and mental also.

_____________________________

Find stable partners, not a stable of partners.

"Sometimes my whore logic gets all fuzzy"- Californication

(in reply to BitaTruble)

Post #: 8

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 1:23:34 PM

juliaoceania

Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Status: offline

I do not agree with them, but then again I do not care anymore how people define these things. I personally believe that all have components of the spiritual, the physical, and the mental. I do not like to split my being into nice tiny boxes, and I refuse to allow my relationship to be either.

I think disease is physical, mental and spiritual. I think being well again is also.

Vanilla relationships have these components too.

Here is an example. Someone has a bedroom D/s relationship. When they are engaging in their sexual side it is mental for them, and when they satisfy each other the spiritual exists in that moment. I think it cheapens human sexuality to separate it like that, and I also feel there is a "better than" quality to it all.

For anyone to put bedroom D/s as "base physical" and master/slave as "otherworldy spiritual" is putting one above the other, and in most religious traditions spiritual is seen as "better"... at least that is my interpretation. I remember learning about the "mundane": that which is commonplace and every day. I also learned about the sacred, and that which is awesome, spiritual, and otherworldly. I think these definitions sound like master slave is sacred, and the rest of us are mundane...

edited for clarity

< Message edited by juliaoceania -- 9/24/2006 1:55:03 PM >

_____________________________

Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert

Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 9

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 4:29:14 PM

Sinergy

Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

I do not agree with them, but then again I do not care anymore how people define these things. I personally believe that all have components of the spiritual, the physical, and the mental. I do not like to split my being into nice tiny boxes, and I refuse to allow my relationship to be either.

I think disease is physical, mental and spiritual. I think being well again is also.

Vanilla relationships have these components too.

Here is an example. Someone has a bedroom D/s relationship. When they are engaging in their sexual side it is mental for them, and when they satisfy each other the spiritual exists in that moment. I think it cheapens human sexuality to separate it like that, and I also feel there is a "better than" quality to it all.

For anyone to put bedroom D/s as "base physical" and master/slave as "otherworldy spiritual" is putting one above the other, and in most religious traditions spiritual is seen as "better"... at least that is my interpretation. I remember learning about the "mundane": that which is commonplace and every day. I also learned about the sacred, and that which is awesome, spiritual, and otherworldly. I think these definitions sound like master slave is sacred, and the rest of us are mundane...

edited for clarity

Hello A/all,

When I have been a teacher or presenter, I generally clarify or define any terms I will be using. I make sure to point out initially that these definitions suffer from being an attempt to pin down an intangible with a definition.

And having pointed those out, I would generally ask the student(s) to use my definition within the context of my presentation.

They are lovely definitions. I could argue why they are valid. I could argue why they are invalid. I imagine that they were excellent within the context of the person(s)' presentation.

(music from Star Trek surges in the background)

I refuse to boldly split infinitives that no man has split before.

Just me, etc.

Sinergy

(editted to conform to proscriptions against stating redundent comments more than once)

< Message edited by Sinergy -- 9/24/2006 4:31:38 PM >

_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle

(in reply to juliaoceania)

Post #: 10

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 5:03:07 PM

Caitriona

Posts: 327
Joined: 8/28/2006
Status: offline

As far as general definitions go, these are somewhat similar to how my husband and I define those roles in our marriage. However, I do agree with the other posters in regards to how a spiritual aspect in one seems to imply that it is more "important" than the others. I think that there can easily be a spiritual aspect to any of those labels, not just one.

_____________________________

Property of Shadowraven
Serving alongside ciarra

(in reply to Sinergy)

Post #: 11

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 5:39:51 PM

Devilslilsister

Posts: 1262
Joined: 8/3/2006
Status: offline

i like em

_____________________________

My ability to cope with BS is at an all time low - me

i may look like i'm doing nothing, but i'm very busy at a cellular level

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 12

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 6:12:48 PM

Frank01

Posts: 270
Joined: 9/7/2006
Status: offline

I dislike labels that set hierarhcal statuses.

(in reply to Devilslilsister)

Post #: 13

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 7:03:03 PM

LadyHugs

Posts: 2299
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

Dear Mercnbeth, Ladies and Gentlemen;

I am aware of the presenters that have used such terms, as they had used them at the Master-slave conferences.

Top/bottom - physical
Dom/submissive-mental
Master/slave-spiritual

In the explaination of Top/bottom by a presenter, was attaching the physical as to whom was in the position to penetrate their partner in a sexual manner, to which invites anybody "doing" the penetration or the dominant stance, e.g. sex, whip work, etc.; as the TOP. The receiving party the 'bottom.' This would apply to those who switched. In my mind's eye, the presentor(s) implied that such exchange was physical, as in getting physical satisfaction and or gratification.

Dominant/submissive being more mental, the presenter seemed to imply that the engagement of the Dominant and submissive transends the physical gratification or "do me" needs and wants, go more into the mental mindsent that established a power exchange, to which the D/s role was consistant, reliable and engaged trust and logic as it linked into the physical aspects--more or less, pulling physical and mental into the relationship between to individuals.

Master-slave, to include Mistress-slave being spiritual, to which the presenter implied that pulling elements of Tops/bottoms, Dominant/submissive incorporates that and includes the emotional and spiritual relationship that can exist between a Master/Mistress-slave.
A M/s relationship would provide a state of happiness, where both are content and have a multi-level/faced layers of energy and power exchanges with each other. Having an unique connection, as to seemingly have a sense of the other, anticipating the other's needs/wants and or movements within the relationship, nearly merging or entirely merged into one mind.

These three designations work fairly well in the elementary definition to which can really take on a life of their own, as personal lives much like cooking, will have a recipe that is unique to the one cooking.

I agree, that when the presenters touched on the topics afore mentioned, it really could have gone for hours.

Respectfully submitted for consideration,
Lady Hugs

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 14

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 7:24:58 PM

juliaoceania

Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Status: offline

Respectfully Lady Hugs, that still makes no sense to me. If you look at the definition of spiritual I just do not get it. The most spiritual relationships I have ever seen that fit the category you stated would be marriages I have seen that made it happily past 20 years. I have known a few vanilla marriages that lasted beyond 50, my step grandparents died within months of each other after 50 plus years of marriage... that is a very tight connection. Marriage is often sanctified by a religious figure and it is seen as actually sanctified by God, what could be more spiritual than that? I am not someone that thinks that marriage is the only spiritual union out there, but to be frankly honest, I do not think that M/s dynamics are not anymore spiritual than any other dynamic. I have read on this very board where masters intentionally will not love a slave or deeply care for her beyond physical needs. It is desired by both parties that this be so.

I desire a spiritual relationship as what you describe, but I certainly believe many paths lead to the same place, not just one.

I have pasted the definition of spiritual down because I genuinely do not understand why one has to exist as physical, mental, or spiritual. I think there is a danger in couching things in these terms for some esoteric reasons... such as we as human beings tend to disconnect these aspects of self in a very destructive way. I can see if the top/bottom scenario is only a casual play incident without exchange of anything but physical pleasure that it might be seen this way, but people engage in bedroom D/s and leave it at the door of their bedroom and when they are engaging in it I believe it can be extremely freeing on a spiritual level.

I hope I made sense and I am genuinely confused by this

Main Entry: 1spir·i·tu·al
Pronunciation: 'spir-i-ch&-w&l, -i-ch&l, -ich-w&l
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French & Late Latin; Anglo-French espirital, spiritual, from Late Latin spiritualis, from Latin, of breathing, of wind, from spiritus
1 : of, relating to, consisting of, or affecting the spirit : INCORPOREAL <spiritual needs>
2 a : of or relating to sacred matters <spiritual songs> b : ecclesiastical rather than lay or temporal <spiritual authority> <lords spiritual>
3 : concerned with religious values
4 : related or joined in spirit <our spiritual home> <his spiritual heir>
5 a : of or relating to supernatural beings or phenomena b : of, relating to, or involving spiritualism : SPIRITUALISTIC
- spir·i·tu·al·ly adverb

< Message edited by juliaoceania -- 9/24/2006 7:26:39 PM >

_____________________________

Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert

Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

(in reply to LadyHugs)

Post #: 15

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 7:53:43 PM

LadyHugs

Posts: 2299
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

Dear juliaoceania, Ladies and Gentlemen;

I do believe that in the M/s context of "spiritual" is not to be confused with religion, faith and spirituality.

In my mind's eye; we do have our own spirit within. It keeps us to our individual belief system per se. In listening to the presenters, to where they had implied the spiritual factor, is a unspoken bond and or connection. The ability to have catharsis with and keeping with 'the spirit of intent' in keeping within the Master/Mistress-slave dynamic.
It is not a replacement for one's faith/religion/belief system.

It is unknown if you have ever attended a Native American Indian Pow Wow and the drumming. The drumming is the 'heart beat' to which it is interesting how somebody else drumming can change my heart beat outside the dance circle and or as an observer. The drumming effects your body and when it is finished, I've felt relief, peace, state of happiness and or renewal. In my mind's eye, the Master/Mistress in the context of the given definitions of presenters; touches the slave spirit in a manner, as to cause a slave to want to serve rather than 'have to serve.' Its the spirit/will per se, which keeps you connected in the power exchange.

In a way, in my mind's eye--a Master/Mistress-slave relationship is similiar to marriage. It certainly is a commitment, a relationship with the desire to make it last.

In my own personal experience, when I had my slaves-- my heart ached when we separated due to this or that, called real life. It seemed that my slave had ESP, knowing I really missed him. And, I seemingly knew when to call, as if I know I was on his mind. To me--this is the spiritual exchange my slaves and I had with each other.

Respectfully submitted for consideration,
Lady Hugs

(in reply to juliaoceania)

Post #: 16

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 8:33:00 PM

juliaoceania

Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Status: offline

I did not intend to give the impression that the only way to be spiritual is to have a religion as I do not have one myself. I am aware the belief that everything is imbued with spirit, which is called animism (Native Americans are often referred to as animists). I believe that every living thing does have a spiritual presense, and I still am confused as to why this connection cannot exist between any two people. I guess that I do not think any two types of relationships bear comparison, such as my bond to my child when he was young, which the bond has changed but not diminshed, that is a soul connection relationship. I do not think that we can judge what someone's soul connection is based upon the label they have. Like I said, I have personally known vanilla people that died for the lack of each other.

I guess that is my trouble with the term "spiritual", because it insinuates that other relationships lack it, and I just do not think this is true. I think that anyone that has a certain type of relationship that suits their needs is going to find it more fulfilling and "better than" other relationships. I have read this time and again from people in M/s dynamics (not by you or the OP BTW,....smiles), but it is this type of discussion that tends to lead to the belief that one relationship dynamic is more meaningful or deeper than another.

I miss my Daddy in that way you spoke of, and I ache for him, and I am not in his collar yet. I have been married and when we were happy and could not be together everything I did he was in my thoughts. Everything I saw made me think of him and the desire to share it with him. I think that the trouble I have is that the labels that people attach to themselves often do not fit the reality of a "spiritual" connection. I also think that just because you do not hand over complete control over every aspect of your existence (which on some level that desire is there for me) does not mean it is because you lack connectedness to the one that you exchange power with. It could be because both lives do not function at peak effectiveness in such a situation. All I can say is that in my interactions with the my Daddy is that when I have someone telling me how to phrase my words to get to my heart it creates much more than a mental bond. What about the heart place? Isn't being in your heart place with someone, loving them, isn't that a spiritual connection?

I mean no disrespect to M/s relationships, they are what they are, and they are the right dynamics for those who engage in them. I mean no disrespect, I just do not understand and I am somewhat surprised that many within the lifestyle talk like this. I know that it is not supposed to rate one relationship above the other, but for someone that has spent a couple of years integrating all these aspects into a more cohesive part of my whole self, it is a little disheartening to read that. I meditate, exercise, and try to feed my mind to create wellness within because at one point I was very unwell from not honoring all these aspects, I guess it is a spiritual concept (meaning my inner spirit, not a religious one) to me and that is why I am having a strong reaction inside to it... please do not take this personally like I think that other people are "wrong".

_____________________________

Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert

Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

(in reply to LadyHugs)

Post #: 17

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 8:45:54 PM

LadyHugs

Posts: 2299
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

Dear juliaoceania, Ladies and Gentlemen;

As with anything, presenters are individuals with an independent mind and opinion on the very topics we speak, savor and practice on the forums.

I'm sure if given the time, the presenters could expand on their meanings to which were offered by the original poster.

Each relationship goes through phases or stages if you will and perhaps the Top/bottom could be the dating phase; the Dom/sub could be the engagement phase and the M/s could be the marriage phase.

Just like marriage, it is as hard to define as BDSM and or the D/s and or M/s exchanges.

In my personal reflections, I would like to see a more graded presentation/workshop, where the presenters would address beginners, intermediate and senior levels on the same topic. Its hard to address everybody's many levels into a short time.

Respectfully submitted for consideration,
Lady Hugs

(in reply to juliaoceania)

Post #: 18

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/24/2006 11:11:48 PM

Archer

Posts: 3207
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline

I've met the speaker in question and I can assure you the man does NOT have the opinion that Top/bottom has NO SPIRITUAL element to it. He is of the opinion that there is a continuum from TOP/bottom to D/s to M/s and that the spiritual aspect of the relationship generally increases as you shift along it towards Master/ slave. Now he is also one who will tell you that you might very well not have the same label in his universe that you place on yourself in yours.
That meaning that you may call yourselves Dominant/ submissive while he may consider you to be Master/slave.
The behavior has not changed but the definition used has. He does not begrudge you your self chosen label and he'll use whatever label you want to use for yourself, but he will still consider you in his mind to be _______.

(in reply to LadyHugs)

Post #: 19

RE: Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common De... - 9/25/2006 6:37:56 AM

MisPandora

Posts: 2911
Joined: 4/7/2004
From: Philadelphia, PA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer

I've met the speaker in question and I can assure you the man does NOT have the opinion that Top/bottom has NO SPIRITUAL element to it. He is of the opinion that there is a continuum from TOP/bottom to D/s to M/s and that the spiritual aspect of the relationship generally increases as you shift along it towards Master/ slave. Now he is also one who will tell you that you might very well not have the same label in his universe that you place on yourself in yours.
That meaning that you may call yourselves Dominant/ submissive while he may consider you to be Master/slave.
The behavior has not changed but the definition used has. He does not begrudge you your self chosen label and he'll use whatever label you want to use for yourself, but he will still consider you in his mind to be _______.

Thanks Archer...I know who it was as well, and you've explained him far better than I could have spelled out.

_____________________________

Pandora
Ms World Leather 2004
Ms Philadelphia Leather 2004

"Simply put, if you want a real femdom to love you, give her reasons to love you." Gloria Brame

(in reply to Archer)

Post #: 20

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> Folsom Fringe Presentation Provides "Common Definitions"?

Page: [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

0.074