The Bratty Thread

[SimonBrooke]

I think this is really my main question, because everyone is talking about "brats" in one of these three ways. Some people seem to think its a mood, others a personality, and others a willful act. Whichever one a person thinks, seems to shape their attitude towards brats. So yeah, I think this is the main thing.

I think the definition of brattiness is that it's to some degree wilful. OK, some brats are more wilful than others, and some people are only wilful at times.

But, you know, I think this 'brattiness is good/brattiness is bad' thing is a matter of degree (ZRT has already pretty much said this). A sub who regularly did something she knew actively annoyed me in order to get a reaction would get very irritating very quickly, and wouldn't remain a sub of mine long. But equally someone who was a total doormat would not interest me very much.

I don't believe that being an occasional brat means one is less than submissive...

Exactly. It's often good to have a rule which exists simply to be broken, and the breaking of which leads to some particular punishment which I enjoy giving and she enjoys receiving. What that 'play' rule is depends on the relationship, of course. But BDSM is all about play, essentially, so you ought to be able to find one.

Oh, and - brattiness is essentially attention seeking. So if your sub is being brattier than usual, it's a good signal that she isn't getting enough attention.

 

[ecstaticsub]

<<snip>>

Oh, and - brattiness is essentially attention seeking. So if your sub is being brattier than usual, it's a good signal that she isn't getting enough attention.

Absolutely!!! I would hate to think I do this intentionally but I know that it is true. When I am feeling a little neglected i tend to be a bit sassy and bratty. My PYL picks up it sooner than I even relaize that I am doing it.

 

[SinfulSailor]

Oh, and - brattiness is essentially attention seeking. So if your sub is being brattier than usual, it's a good signal that she isn't getting enough attention.

Of course, that's (definitionally) by her criteria. So if you're ok with that in your relationship, then that's fine.

 

[JMohegan]

Of course everyone will have a different definition of what it means to be a brat, but if for one person it is part of who they are, and another person says that its just bad behavior, and they should learn (or "be taught" *shudder*) to not act that way... well, that, in my mind, is more than just a difference of opinion on the definition of a label. Its telling someone that something that's intrinsic to their personality is them just acting in a bad way, and that they should simply cut it out. That's a pretty large difference in understanding, and pretty hurtful.

brat = an ill-mannered immature person (per Webster); an annoying, spoiled, or impolite child (per Random House).

My view on this topic aligns with CM's. Rude, spoiled, and immature are traits for which I have zero patience in anyone - least of all, an intimate partner. Some may appreciate interaction with brats, as a challenge/entertainment/whatever. In that case, as CM says, rock on.

As for a negative response to brats being "hurtful," I've got zero sympathy on that score. People have a right to respond negatively to rude behavior. The brat may own his/her behavior, in the same way that a self-proclaimed asshole or aggressive, controlling bitch owns his/hers, and that's certainly better than denial. But to expect sympathy when faced with a negative response to these traits is absurd.

 

[midwestyankee]

What CM and JM said, for they did so much more eloquently and succinctly than I could have.

A tangent to this discussion is the one about what seems to be the goal of some willful brattiness: being punished. Sorry, folks, but that rug just won't fly with me. I'm into causing pain but I'm only into it on my terms and when it rocks my boat in the moment. Any repeated effort to manipulate me into punishment will produce a single, long-term punishment: my final "goodbye."

Now, this is not to say that I might not enjoy a partner for whom a certain degree of playful resistance is an admitted and open part of her nature. I haven't had the experience so I can only respond to the notion of willfully manipulative brattiness, which I have experienced. Once.

 

[subish2009]

So it sounds like to a lot of people, PYLs especially, bratty behavior is inherently rude, disrespectful, and manipulative, designed to actually make the PYL angry, hurt, or truly upset and provoked. That's a much darker definition than I originally had in mind. If that's the community consensus, then I would revise my position to say that I'm probably not bratty at all.

My feistiness or petulance or whatever you want to call it is entirely playful and designed to provoke arousal and humor in my partner, never hurt or anger. I would be crushed if I accidentally crossed such a line. It's in my personality to be sarcastic and be a smart-ass, but only insofar as my partner enjoys it, and only to provoke a 'punishment' that's not a real punishment at all, and that he only gives me if he is inclined to anyway.

So, that's not bratty behavior then? Is there a name for that? Or is that too unique of a dynamic to have a label?

 

[sadangel]

So it sounds like to a lot of people, PYLs especially, bratty behavior is inherently rude, disrespectful, and manipulative, designed to actually make the PYL angry, hurt, or truly upset and provoked. That's a much darker definition than I originally had in mind. If that's the community consensus, then I would revise my position to say that I'm probably not bratty at all.

My feistiness or petulance or whatever you want to call it is entirely playful and designed to provoke arousal and humor in my partner, never hurt or anger. I would be crushed if I accidentally crossed such a line. It's in my personality to be sarcastic and be a smart-ass, but only insofar as my partner enjoys it, and only to provoke a 'punishment' that's not a real punishment at all, and that he only gives me if he is inclined to anyway.

So, that's not bratty behavior then? Is there a name for that? Or is that too unique of a dynamic to have a label?

You and me both. Sir and I talked a little about this yesterday. I think feisty would describe perhaps more than bratty what I can be like. It's playfulness. Not for anger or hurt. I too tend to be sarcastic and try to curtail it when I feel it is out of hand.

My "brattiness" is not meant to top from the bottom, to be manipulative or rude or disrespectful or any such thing. It is, as I said, done in playfulness...such as telling Sir "grabs your ass, then runs away before you can catch me" type bratty behavior.

 

[ownedsubgal]

So it sounds like to a lot of people, PYLs especially, bratty behavior is inherently rude, disrespectful, and manipulative, designed to actually make the PYL angry, hurt, or truly upset and provoked. That's a much darker definition than I originally had in mind. If that's the community consensus, then I would revise my position to say that I'm probably not bratty at all.

My feistiness or petulance or whatever you want to call it is entirely playful and designed to provoke arousal and humor in my partner, never hurt or anger. I would be crushed if I accidentally crossed such a line. It's in my personality to be sarcastic and be a smart-ass, but only insofar as my partner enjoys it, and only to provoke a 'punishment' that's not a real punishment at all, and that he only gives me if he is inclined to anyway.

So, that's not bratty behavior then? Is there a name for that? Or is that too unique of a dynamic to have a label?

i think that what you are describing is the defining difference between a brat and a "sammie." if masochist doesn't fit, then perhaps bottom would be more accurate.

but i agree with JMohegan, there is nothing positive or cute about being a brat or bratty. i think perhaps many are quick to label any degree of feistiness as bratty behavior, when in actuality bratty behavior comes from selfishness, rudeness and a desire to manipulate others.

a submissive can be feisty, sure, but a submissive cannot be a brat. now of course i say that with a specific idea of "submissive" in mind, an overall relationship-type submissive or an overall personality-type submissive. however one could perhaps be a sexual submissive as well as a brat, or to use the more appropriate term, "feisty."

let's examine the definition of submissive:

–adjective
1. inclined or ready to submit; unresistingly or humbly obedient: submissive servants.

antonyms for submissive are listed as: rebellious, disobedient.

if someone is not particularly inclined to be obedient, and instead inclined to be disobedient from time to time...whether one's partner enjoys this or not, i would not describe that person as submissive. perhaps i would describe them as "normal" as such testing, questioning, pulling back, with the basic underlying desire for one's partner to be happy, is a common facet of vanilla relationships.

 

[SinfulSailor]

So, that's not bratty behavior then? Is there a name for that? Or is that too unique of a dynamic to have a label?

How about being playful and having fun?

 

[MisterSir]

My take on the issue seems to coincide with ZRT's, and that's a good thing because I hadn't previously stopped to refine my vague enjoying of bratty behaviour into anything more coherent.

It's a question of lines. Up until the point at which I draw the line, bratty behaviour falls into "feisty" territory and is not a bad thing; however, if she keeps going after I've made it clear she's crossed the line and should stop while she can, she's gone from "feisty" to "rude", which is a bad thing. Of course, where I set the line differs depending on how I feel at the time, but compare it to a mental POW camp - I set the line at the warning wire, the inner fence that prisoners were ordered not to cross. If she crosses the line, that's not a good thing but if she recognises and stops, crisis averted.

As always, I have to ask if that makes sense. So many of these things make perfect sense in my own head but turn to gibberish when I try to put it in words.

 

[subish2009]

<snip>
My "brattiness" is not meant to top from the bottom, to be manipulative or rude or disrespectful or any such thing. It is, as I said, done in playfulness...such as telling Sir "grabs your ass, then runs away before you can catch me" type bratty behavior.

That sounds VERY similar to my type of "brattiness," yes. I think we're on the same page, at least.

i think that what you are describing is the defining difference between a brat and a "sammie." if masochist doesn't fit, then perhaps bottom would be more accurate.

but i agree with JMohegan, there is nothing positive or cute about being a brat or bratty. i think perhaps many are quick to label any degree of feistiness as bratty behavior, when in actuality bratty behavior comes from selfishness, rudeness and a desire to manipulate others.

a submissive can be feisty, sure, but a submissive cannot be a brat. now of course i say that with a specific idea of "submissive" in mind, an overall relationship-type submissive or an overall personality-type submissive. however one could perhaps be a sexual submissive as well as a brat, or to use the more appropriate term, "feisty."

let's examine the definition of submissive:

–adjective
1. inclined or ready to submit; unresistingly or humbly obedient: submissive servants.

antonyms for submissive are listed as: rebellious, disobedient.

if someone is not particularly inclined to be obedient, and instead inclined to be disobedient from time to time...whether one's partner enjoys this or not, i would not describe that person as submissive. perhaps i would describe them as "normal" as such testing, questioning, pulling back, with the basic underlying desire for one's partner to be happy, is a common facet of vanilla relationships.

Can you tell me what a 'sammie' is? Urban Dictionary didn't help.

As for the rest of this...hmmm. I don't question whether this certainly can be true, but I have a problem with saying that this must be or always is true. I can be rebellious, but, again, not in a real way; it's a predilection in me, but I ultimately am happy, if not downright eager, to do what my PYL says. I just like to put up a mock fight first. Maybe the difference is that I'm a sexual submissive, but only just barely personality-wise submissive...that will require further thought.

How about being playful and having fun?

A very good point. I'm thinking "playing" is just way too much of a "to each his own" thing for us to reach a consensus on.

<snip>

It's a question of lines. Up until the point at which I draw the line, bratty behaviour falls into "feisty" territory and is not a bad thing; however, if she keeps going after I've made it clear she's crossed the line and should stop while she can, she's gone from "feisty" to "rude", which is a bad thing. Of course, where I set the line differs depending on how I feel at the time, but compare it to a mental POW camp - I set the line at the warning wire, the inner fence that prisoners were ordered not to cross. If she crosses the line, that's not a good thing but if she recognises and stops, crisis averted.
<snip>

I think this makes a lot of sense to me, and I think this may come down to a question of intent. A brat intends to cross serious lines, intends to be rude, intends to displease her PYL. What I and some other posters are talking about doing is crossing lines that are there to be crossed, that our PYLs want us to cross, almost as part of a foreplay game. That kind of "brattiness", that I think we're establishing is not really brattiness at all, but just couple-specific play, ultimately IS submission because we're playing within the PYLs rules and boundaries, NOT intending to cause any discord, as a prelude to being MADE to submit. The whole point of my acting that way is in the hopes that my PYL will respond with a display of absolute dominance that we'll both enjoy. Whatever form that takes is up to him. Whether he responds with such a display at ALL is up to him.

Which is where I differ in opinion from osg, I guess, because I very much see many layers of D/s in that dynamic; they're just not as overt as some others'.

 

[sadangel]

That sounds VERY similar to my type of "brattiness," yes. I think we're on the same page, at least.



Can you tell me what a 'sammie' is? Urban Dictionary didn't help.

As for the rest of this...hmmm. I don't question whether this certainly can be true, but I have a problem with saying that this must be or always is true. I can be rebellious, but, again, not in a real way; it's a predilection in me, but I ultimately am happy, if not downright eager, to do what my PYL says. I just like to put up a mock fight first. Maybe the difference is that I'm a sexual submissive, but only just barely personality-wise submissive...that will require further thought.



A very good point. I'm thinking "playing" is just way too much of a "to each his own" thing for us to reach a consensus on.



I think this makes a lot of sense to me, and I think this may come down to a question of intent. A brat intends to cross serious lines, intends to be rude, intends to displease her PYL. What I and some other posters are talking about doing is crossing lines that are there to be crossed, that our PYLs want us to cross, almost as part of a foreplay game. That kind of "brattiness", that I think we're establishing is not really brattiness at all, but just couple-specific play, ultimately IS submission because we're playing within the PYLs rules and boundaries, NOT intending to cause any discord, as a prelude to being MADE to submit. The whole point of my acting that way is in the hopes that my PYL will respond with a display of absolute dominance that we'll both enjoy. Whatever form that takes is up to him. Whether he responds with such a display at ALL is up to him.

Which is where I differ in opinion from osg, I guess, because I very much see many layers of D/s in that dynamic; they're just not as overt as some others'.

The bolded part. You just nailed the proverbial nail on the head for me. This is what I've been trying to say, to get across. It is within my PYL's rules and boundaries. I know if I am close to crossing that boundary and I stop of my own accord, for I don't want my Sir to be truly upset or cross with me. Thank you for saying it better than I could.


Now, I must go do things I am supposed to be doing. I've been lazy for a bit. Time to stop that and make my Sir proud of me for doing what I must.

 

[Homburg]

I can get the brat thing. There's a lot of negative judgement here, but I think it is a result of external observation, not involvement. There are "good" brats and "bad" ones, and ZRT pretty much lands on that. The "good" ones know when to tone it down.

It is a mindset and a personality. Some people are not wired to bend their necks easily, and need to be forced to do so. In my personal experience, it was the result of some serious issues in the girl's past, and it could be dead frustrating at times. Hell, often. I'm not personally set up to deal with a serious brat. Still, once I identified the parameters for the behaviour, it was much less difficult to deal with the "brat" moments.

A good portion of it is "alternative" communication. A brat may just not be able to ask for an ass-whipping. Yeah, I know, communicate, communicate, communicate. Sure, when you're capable, that's great. Some people can't do that. They aren't wired that way, and thus they act out in minor ways to get the sort of attention they need.

I remember way back when I was in 4th grade, we watched a film about attention. The film said that all kids wanted, and needed, attention from their families. And there were two types of attention - Warm Fuzzies and Cold Pricklies. Warm Fuzzies were hugs and attaboys, the happy and good stuff that kids like. Cold Pricklies were yelling and anger, but still attention. In the film, they explained that a kid that didn't get enough Warm Fuzzies would probably act out until they got Cold Pricklies, because they needed at least some kind of attention.

For whatever reason, that lesson stuck with me. It's weird, because I had no problem getting positive attention from my folks, and never felt deprived. So I didn't identify with the concept. But the lesson? Yeah, it stuck with me, and it was useful towards understanding brat behaviour. A brat doesn't just want Warm Fuzzies. They're wired so that they need those Cold Pricklies too. In the case of the girl in my own background, her first relationship as a teenager was highly abusive, and her response to it was to occasionally need those sort of moments, else it didn't feel "real" enough to her. Yeah, it was kinda fucked up. And? Not everyone is well adjusted, or even moderately adjusted.

But as challenging as that relationship was, there was never a moment where I thought or said "This is not a "real" submissive." An odd submissive? Sure. Non-standard, definitely.

I personally think that a lot of the negativity going on here, aside from being a very valid response to perceived bad behaviour, is also based on "This is not compatible with my tastes." I don't personally have a problem with "This ain't my thing," as it is valid to have those feelings, and I certainly don't blame anyone for disliking the occasionally awful behaviour of brats in public. Goodness knows that it drove me nuts too. I'm not really cool with saying "This is NOT a submissive," though. Submissive is a pretty broad tent, and can be used to describe anything from bottom with submissive leanings to full TPE slave. Saying that a bratty submissive is not a submissive because of widgey communication is judgemental as all get out.

That said, I know more than one bratty type that isn't really comfortable with the term submissive anyway, so *shrug*. I just think that there's some unnecessary harsh going on here because aspects of this personality type don't quite jive with a given person's experience on what they find compatible.

Or, to provide a concrete example, Kajira Callista has described herself as a brat. Is she not a submissive?

 

[SimonBrooke]

Oh, and - brattiness is essentially attention seeking. So if your sub is being brattier than usual, it's a good signal that she isn't getting enough attention.

Of course, that's (definitionally) by her criteria. So if you're ok with that in your relationship, then that's fine.

Any relationship - even a soi-disant 'master/slave' relationship - is an act of ongoing negotiation and compromise. Yes, OK, you don't have to respond to every attention seeking wile, but if you ignore her long enough she'll walk. If you're cool with that, that's fine. If not, you need to respond - not necessarily in the way she's inviting you to, but in some way, certainly.

So, that's not bratty behavior then? Is there a name for that? Or is that too unique of a dynamic to have a label?

Well, you know, I think that probably does qualify as 'bratty' behaviour, but in exactly the same sense as what we doms do qualifies as 'domestic abuse' and/or 'domestic violence'. Within the context of our relationships, a certain amount of what would normally be categorised as 'abuse' is, by mutual consent, acceptable and even welcomed. Equally, within the context of our relationships, a certain amount of what would normally be categorised as 'bratty' may, by mutual consent, be acceptable or even welcomed. What we - kinked people - do is play with behaviours which are normally unacceptable. Brattiness is (I believe) not different from violence in this sense.

a submissive can be feisty, sure, but a submissive cannot be a brat.

That's like saying a dom can't be a bully. And I strongly believe that a dom who is inherently a bully is a dangerous and abusive person, whom any sub ought to avoid. But that doesn't mean a dom should not from time to time act as a bully. Similarly a sub who was inherently a brat in the sense you have described is probably best avoided, but that doesn't mean that it can't be fun for everyone involved if the sub from time to time plays the part of a brat.

if someone is not particularly inclined to be obedient, and instead inclined to be disobedient from time to time...whether one's partner enjoys this or not, i would not describe that person as submissive. perhaps i would describe them as "normal" as such testing, questioning, pulling back, with the basic underlying desire for one's partner to be happy, is a common facet of vanilla relationships.

For many couples, some level of regular punishment is an essential part of sexual play. So you have two choices - the dom acts as an abusive bully and administers unmerited punishment, or the sub acts as a brat in some mutually accepted way and 'earns' the punishment both partners desire. There really does not seem to me anything wrong with either of these behaviour patterns, if it is what works for both of you.

 

[Homburg]

Can you tell me what a 'sammie' is? Urban Dictionary didn't help.

SAM is an acronym for "Smart Assed Masochist." This is the sort of person that might tell a top during a flogging, "Was that a mosquito? Ooh, no, a flea." in response to a hit not being quite hard enough. They tend to be wise-crackers and mouthy. It is a term used less as a perjorative usually than to describe someone like Graceanne for instance what is submissive, but doesn't necessarily sound like it because she's sassy (and funny as hell).

 

[ataxia.girl]

i am a self proclaimed brat but i define it a bit differently. In my own case it would be an emotionally immature, owned pyl who had not fully surrendered to the idea that they have little to no power in the relationship or one who rebels when confronted with the reality of said powerlessness.

i'm a big tantrum thrower myself. It is a release of sorts and for me it has also become the door through which i enter an ageplay "little" space fairly regularly. i generally do not brat in jest. i don't hold back and am unconcerned with trying to keep things acceptably "playful". i find i am not able to feel dominated or controlled if i am practicing so much restraint that i am dominating\controlling myself or relying on my own ability\will to continually submit.

Repeatedly losing, battle after battle, in a never ending war of wills. It can be quite fun actually and never gets dull. For us it has made a great space to really play with reluctance, resistance and rape type play as well as the more taboo ageplay stuff.

 

[ownedsubgal]

For many couples, some level of regular punishment is an essential part of sexual play. So you have two choices - the dom acts as an abusive bully and administers unmerited punishment, or the sub acts as a brat in some mutually accepted way and 'earns' the punishment both partners desire. There really does not seem to me anything wrong with either of these behaviour patterns, if it is what works for both of you.

there is nothing "wrong" with any particular behavior pattern in a relationship between two individuals, if that is what works for them. i just do not think that any and everything falls under the heading of D/s, or submissive.

also, your sentence that i put in bold above...that makes no sense to me. punishment, real punishment, is not "play." when i have a punishment coming to me, it is not woo hoo fun and games, it is a very sad time for serious reflection, penance and hopefully forgiveness.

now if two people are just into mock punishment or as some have coined, "funishment," then play on. but please do not call it something it is not. that is an issue that i often have within this lifestyle, that terms are commonly redefined and tweaked every which way until they no longer have any universally understood and accepted meaning.

 

[Ravenwind]

Also, does everybody see any amount of disobedience to be bratty? Or does it have to get to a certain level to become bratty? Or a certain type of disobedience?

And again, also, why is disobedience inherently a bad thing? Is it only a bad thing within a relationship where that isn't part of the dynamic? Is it a bad thing for a submissive, no matter what?

I think ZRT, ownedsubgal, and MisterSir put it best. There are lines a sub can cross and still remain a sub... be it in play, not understanding their place fully, the "off day", feistiness, and so on. But it depends on the mood, conditions, and standards the Dom(me)'s put in place to determine where the "do not cross" line is. What a Dom(me) may consider "feisty" one day may be downright "bratty" the next (or simply *because* it is the next day, it'd be bratty...).

With my Husband and I, because of our own rather unique dynamic, I strive to be an extension of him, and he one of me- we work toward everything as "one mind in two bodies"... a sort of M/s mindset but lacking most of the formalities. To disobey him would be working against what I want as well, therefore being a brat, or any sort of disobedience for that matter, does me a disservice both internally (from guilt of not achieving what is best for both of us) and externally (from any resulting discipline). For me, disobedience is out of the question- that's not to say I'm perfect, but to willfully disobey (as opposed to attributing my failings to forgetfulness or general ineptitude, or choosing to be "feisty" out of play) simply cannot be an option.

A sub's "job", by very definition of the word, entails that they are subservient to their Dom(me)... their focus is on the pleasure of the Dom(me)- if They enjoy the occasional (or constant) brattiness, then the sub is *still* serving Their interests by being bratty. If They don't, even in the slightest, then the sub is not submitting to what They want if they cross that line, and continual brattiness at the behest of the Dom(me) is akin to a power struggle- they want attention, even if it is negative attention... it becomes about what the sub wants, instead of what the Dom(me) wants, and hence the sub isn't being submissive anymore. The expected power dynamic of "You submit to me/i submit to You" is broken and becomes "I want you to submit to Me, but you aren't/I am not showing interest in submitting to you anymore"- innately a bad thing (for sake of equivocal argument, replace "submit" with "be faithful" and you can see why it's bad).

But that's just my own opinion, take it with a grain (or spoonful) of salt, as you will.

 

[ataxia.girl]

With Daddy i am an owned but willful little girl. He does not really allow my willfulness or brattiness to get in the way of his needs being met. Daddy takes. Nothing is really dependent on my being obedient or submissive beyond showing up. i find this both freeing and very safe. i am able to be wholly myself and in the moment with him. i don't really get punished but i do get corrections if he gets annoyed. Occasionally i escalate to the point a correction is necessary, other times i am a perfect angel. The end result is mostly the same either way. Not being able to really change the nature of the relationship by any other action than walking away from it gives me a very real feeling of powerlessness and security. The fact that i've tried to end it a few times and simply cannot stop engaging only intensifies the feeling that he holds all the power.

Actually Daddy just laughed at me for telling him i "mostly" obeyed the last visit. He says i can't even admit i was a good girl cuz i hate the idea too much.

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

Fugeddaboutit

 

[intothewoods]

I agree with osg, in that a lot of people label feisty behavior as bratty. I tend to associate truly bratty behavior with some variation of age play.

I have a "brat" shirt that I wear to events sometimes and I used to joke around with a few casual play partners about my brattiness. And then I played with a guy who is a switch, and self ids as a bratty bottom. We had a great time just verbally sparring during the play session. But there's not really a childlike or immature aspect to any of it. It was all in good fun.

I'm not a brat in my relationship, though I have had moments in past relationships. I don't know. I think sometimes a strong personality needs a strong personality. I mean, shit, I'm no doormat. Har har har, kidding people.

 

[rida]

[bad humor hijack]


"WIPE YOUR FEET SOMEWHERE ELSE! " said the bratty-doormat


[/bad humor hijack]

 

[eastern sun]

Just to add one more kink to the thread - I have an oppositional nature. As a child, even though I did everything that was asked of me, I operated with huge internal resistance to what I was doing. So now, many years later, I am still working with this knee-jerk impulse to resist.

Slavery works for us, because it side-steps the endless cycles of fear, analysis, procrastination and self-sabotage that result from my kind of internal resistance to life.

We love to play and joke and often take the piss out of each other. That's one kind of "bratty" - and it stops on a dime with a look or a smack or change in direction.

But then there's another kind of resistance that is part of my habit-driven behavior. He experiences it as frustrating and difficult. I experience it as self-preservation. That kind of "bratty," in my opinion, is not founded on my present circumstances at all, it's driven by these old habits and fears. Almost invariably, because the slavery requires me to overcome the resistance and take action in spite of my fear, I discover that I don't need to protect myself as much as I think I do. I can let go of some of that annoying "bratty" behavior. And it's totally liberating. . .

 

[ownedsubgal]

[bad humor hijack]


"WIPE YOUR FEET SOMEWHERE ELSE! " said the bratty-doormat


[/bad humor hijack]

okay that was cute.

 

[yourmissl]

brat = an ill-mannered immature person (per Webster); an annoying, spoiled, or impolite child (per Random House).
My view on this topic aligns with CM's. Rude, spoiled, and immature are traits for which I have zero patience in anyone - least of all, an intimate partner. Some may appreciate interaction with brats, as a challenge/entertainment/whatever. In that case, as CM says, rock on.

As for a negative response to brats being "hurtful," I've got zero sympathy on that score. People have a right to respond negatively to rude behavior. The brat may own his/her behavior, in the same way that a self-proclaimed asshole or aggressive, controlling bitch owns his/hers, and that's certainly better than denial. But to expect sympathy when faced with a negative response to these traits is absurd.

By this definition, I'd say the "brat" title can't be confined to plys., but must include number of PLYs as well, no?

Also, a question: Is the questioning/pushing/challenging always a negative, or only in an established PLY/ply relationship?