quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

In my mind, a slave is a much deeper and more spiritual role than a submissive. For a slave, your Dominant is the main focus of your entire life. With all the people I know in the local BDSM scene, there are only two couples I actually consider to be engaging in 24/7/365 Master/slave relationship. You have to witness the difference to truly understand it, I feel. This does not mean I feel that slaves are superior to submissives. Each has a valuable place.

I'm in agreement with Beach's quote and add another aspect to it.

The implication of a submissive identity to me is that they are interested in submitting to sensation which may or may not include an element of dominance. The idea of surrendering in total or outside the boundaries of limits is not a goal.

However, that would be my distinction assumed by just the self imposed label. Then again, I have the opinion that it is impossible to be a "slave" without a owner, or a "Master" without a slave; therefore all singles seeking would only be Dom or sub. Then, again, again, what's the importance of any self label beyond the simple Top/bottom until getting to the point of a relationship where the relationship defines the roles?

Most important though is the high-lighted line of Beach's quote; "Each has a valuable place." My experience was built through contact with people, with varying degrees of submission and intensity and varying focus on physical and mental aspects.

This again gets into semantics, but pragmatically a profile should give the activities of interest or experience, and give the insight of the person's goal being that of submissive, slave, dom, Master, switch. Alone, these represent personality traits. The actual and agreed interaction with another person or persons even if the relationship is casual provides and gives meaning.

quote:

ORIGINAL: emeline

and please...i do not want any mean posts over this
this is an honest question

why do so many men....only wish "slaves" not submissives
it's like...we(meaning i)....are some how lacking because i am not a slave
i just don't get it

quote:

Interesting comments, Merc...as always.
Your view of submission is different in mine in that I see submission as involving more than just the reception of sensation... an almost purely physical thing. What you describe as submissive in your paragraph that I have boldened is my description of a bottom. If my interpretation of what you have said is wrong, please let me know as I do note that you later alluded to there being a mental aspect to submission.

quote:

ORIGINAL: emeline

and please...i do not want any mean posts over this
this is an honest question

why do so many men....only wish "slaves" not submissives
it's like...we(meaning i)....are some how lacking because i am not a slave
i just don't get it

quote:

ORIGINAL: emeline

i guess i should clarify..
almost every one who has contacted me...has decided that i must be a 'slave' because of the way
i answer questions, and i want the right to say "screw you..i ain't doing that" if it's something
that i just don't think i want/feel i should/ or just find plain disgusting..icky what have you

and...it seems that most i have spoken too...and i know they aren't worth my time
but it has got me wondering....but they act as though i shouldn't *want* a safe word
i even had a dom tell me that i didn't need a "safe call" upon first meeting....(we never met because of that)
but..it sure does wonders sometime to self esteem when the only ones that seem interested
seem only out to make sure you become a doormat

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

Interesting comments, Merc...as always.
Your view of submission is different in mine in that I see submission as involving more than just the reception of sensation... an almost purely physical thing. What you describe as submissive in your paragraph that I have boldened is my description of a bottom. If my interpretation of what you have said is wrong, please let me know as I do note that you later alluded to there being a mental aspect to submission.

CD,
I have a business appointment today and didn't flesh this out as I wanted.

quote:

The implication of a submissive identity to me is that they are interested in submitting to sensation which may or may not include an element of dominance. The idea of surrendering in total or outside the boundaries of limits is not a goal.

You are absolutely correct. The "may or may not included an element of dominance" was consideration to mental submission. My experience ran the gamut. I've been with deeply mentally submissive people who wanted no part of any physical play beyond bondage. At the other end of the spectrum there were heavy impact players who weren't satisfied until their bodies looked like one big bruise, but would end the relationship if I interjected any form of mental domination or referred to them in a way they felt was humiliating.

It was for that reason that I referred to Beach's comment regarding each having a valuable place, and neither being assigned a qualitative good, better, or best value. I consider all these experiences very valuable. They helped me form my definitions and directed me to my relationship goal.

In my search I specified a desire for a "slave". It was a form of test, because I hoped that the first of many questions to be asked by anyone I contacted or contacted me, was my definition of that label. It generated a lot of conversation and helped to form a foundation to any interaction. Most of the time, our definitions and goals didn't match and I failed to achieve my goal. But being clear and understanding is much more important than agreement. Failure comes and should be expected all the time. You only have to succeed once.