Dom Or Master

[sub4one]

what is the difference between Dom and Master?

How do you know if the Dom or Master is telling the truth about how much experience they have in the lifestyle?

If a Dom or Master is married is it wrong to be involved with them if their spouse doesnt know?

How long of a time spand to you give before allowing any type of bondage to happen?

 

[BiBunny]

what is the difference between Dom and Master?

Depends on the person.

How do you know if the Dom or Master is telling the truth about how much experience they have in the lifestyle?

You don't.

If a Dom or Master is married is it wrong to be involved with them if their spouse doesnt know?

Yes, but if somebody's determined to do something, there's not a lot we can do to talk them out of it.

How long of a time spand to you give before allowing any type of bondage to happen?

As long as it takes to feel comfortable.

 

[Chicklet]

what is the difference between Dom and Master?

whatever you want it to be - we say PYL because everybody Picks Your Label. Call yourself whatever you like as long as it's how you feel about yourself.

How do you know if the Dom or Master is telling the truth about how much experience they have in the lifestyle?

One thing you can do is ask for references. If they're involved in the kink community in their area you can ask around about them.

If a Dom or Master is married is it wrong to be involved with them if their spouse doesnt know?

I believe it is. But I don't know if I count as everyone. It's cheating, and in my opinion that's wrong.

How long of a time spand to you give before allowing any type of bondage to happen?

I wouldn't allow anything to happen until I trusted them, and for each person that time period would be different.

 

[Marquis]

what is the difference between Dom and Master?

Masters are cooler, like the super doms.

Actually there is no universal difference, although Master usually implies a more intense power exchange than Dom.

How do you know if the Dom or Master is telling the truth about how much experience they have in the lifestyle?

Polygraph?

I have a simple policy on this sort of thing. If a person makes a claim I can't verify, I don't put a tremendous amount of reliance on this claim.

If a Dom or Master is married is it wrong to be involved with them if their spouse doesnt know?

According to the bible, yes.

I'm not familiar with your personal ethical guidelines.

How long of a time spand to you give before allowing any type of bondage to happen?

Long enough for the bleeding welts from the whipping to go down.

Or just however long it takes for you to feel comfortable.

 

[WriterDom]

To me Master is a different level of commitment. It's not something I'd let anyone call me. But that's just me. Each to their own.

 

[Netzach]

1. Anyone can call themselves anything.

2. Anyone can say anything. How do you usually tell if a vanilla regular person is lying? Use those same skills.

3. Most people think so. Far more importantly, What do *you* think? If you're OK with it, you have logistical and emotional challenges to deal with. Are you up for them?

4. Till you feel like it and have reason to believe they're not going to harm you. I'd try it in a public play setting a few times first, but that's me.

 

[HottieMama]

what is the difference between Dom and Master?

IMO, Master is not a title that is self-given. It is a title that develops out of a committed relationship built on trust.

How do you know if the Dom or Master is telling the truth about how much experience they have in the lifestyle?

Well, you could trust them like i assume they trust you, or you could do some digging into their background and find out. Also, i have found that lack of experience tends to make itself obvious pretty quickly.

If a Dom or Master is married is it wrong to be involved with them if their spouse doesnt know?

For me, yes. Monogamy is NOT a requirement, but all parties at least having knowledge of the other is. i've been in a relationship with a so-called Dom who was sneaking around behind his wife's back. It didn't work very well for me.

How long of a time spand to you give before allowing any type of bondage to happen?

Till the foundation of trust is built.

 

[SubKekiLee]

Master or Sir

To me Master is a different level of commitment. It's not something I'd let anyone call me. But that's just me. Each to their own.

I agree with you to a extent I think it is the Dom's choice as to what he prefers to be called some like Daddy, some like Master and some like Sir. Mine loves Sir and it is demanded and he calls me his little slut.. so it is all in choices that are personal..

 

[RJMasters]

what is the difference between Dom and Master?

It depends on how much importance you place on honorific titles. I think there are two camps of thought concerning this(probably more than two). There are those who see them as completely seperate, and those who see them as pretty much the same thing. Thus your answers from a group will seem a bit confusing. It is important for you to understand that its not about this person being right or that person being right, because they both can be right.

How I look at it is:

A person who is dominant can be a Dom or a Master depending on their outlook and degree of control. Some would say that a Master is a higher degree or more intense. Meaning that some feel that a really experienced Dom might be considered as a Master at what he does. This is not to be confused with a person who owns a slave. If I was to make any distinction between the two, the best one I could make would be infact that one owns a slave where one owns a submissive. By looking at the type of partner they have will often show an insight to their outlook and expression dominance that is satisfying to them.


How do you know if the Dom or Master is telling the truth about how much experience they have in the lifestyle?

Others have answered this question well enough. There are some things you can check into, but for the most part there isn't a way to do it. I think a lack of experience should reveal it self fairly quickly to someone who has expereince of their own but for new people who don't have that expereince, you can only go off what your gut tells you and the current expereinces you are having.




If a Dom or Master is married is it wrong to be involved with them if their spouse doesnt know?

Yes it is.



How long of a time spand to you give before allowing any type of bondage to happen?

the reason why most have said, for as long as it takes for trust to develop is because when you let someone tie you up you are in fact placing your life in that person's hands. Because of this, the sobriety of such a choice is important and then its easier to understand why its not a matter of time going by, but rather about reaching a level of trust in the maturity and skill of the one you will let tie you up.

 

[JMohegan]

I agree with RJ that there is no right or wrong answer to the question of how to define Dom or Master. In the absence of a universally accepted BDSM dictionary, each person can (and clearly does) embrace his or her own individual definitions for these words.

If someone were soliciting suggestions for such a dictionary, I would offer:

Dominant (n.) = someone who is aroused, satisfied, and fulfilled when exerting overt control in one or more aspects of a personal relationship.

Master (n.) = a Dominant who is interested in the Master/slave dynamic, i.e., a relationship in which the non-Dominant person is treated as owned property.


I have always had the desire to exert control in personal relationships, and done so for many years. However, I have never had an interest in owning a person as property. Therefore, per my definitions, I am a Dominant but not a Master.

 

[h_i_s]

Q.what is the difference between Dom and Master?

my Answer: I never had a Dom. I've always been owned by my Master. I never referred to Him as anything else. He's my Master because He is the only man who has ever made me comply to His wishes and desires and demands, even when I don't want to. He makes me actually WANT to obey, serve and please Him. He has mastered me and most times, my will.. He has the skill and power over me even when it isn't all fun and games and story book type D/s romance. In my opinion, that sets the two up as apples and oranges... a Dom and a Master may be in the same bowl of fruit..... but they aint exactly the same thing..


Q.How do you know if the Dom or Master is telling the truth about how much experience they have in the lifestyle?

my Answer: Truth serum? How about one of those special lasso ropes like Wonder Woman used? Best answer i can offer you here: You either do or you don't and if you aren't sure if what they have told you rings true or just doesn't ........ you either take your chances that they have lied or you don't. You can check references if they have them, but many [unless they are involved in local community events and/or clubs with BDSM and/or munches] won't have any to offer. You could play it safe and meet in public or hang out with others until you can trust your own instincts... and you could make use of safe calls. I never did any of this though. But that's just me and I did fine... and I was lucky. You may be too... or maybe not. We all have to decide for ourselves. You decide.

Q.If a Dom or Master is married is it wrong to be involved with them if their spouse doesnt know?

my Answer: Well, I am married and I believe that consent is a very important part of any relationship. I also believe that consent should cover all parties of 'intimate concern and commitment' who may be affected by that involvement. It's only right if the spouse doesn't WANT to know. And the only way to be certain of what their wishes could be would be to ask them. You up to that?


Q.How long of a time spand to you give before allowing any type of bondage to happen?

my Answer: That's gonna depend upon which time span you want to know about.
A:between the time we found each others profiles online to the moment we actually met?
OR
B:talking about the actual time span that we knew each other after meeting face to face?
OR
C:In the days, weeks, months and years afterwards?

A:about 18 hours B:about 3 hours C:As long as He wants, and as often as He wants, and any time of the day or night, or morning or afternoon..... that He wants.



***DISCLAIMER: "my Answer:" Is used to represent however the question applies to ME and my beliefs and is not to be misinterpreted as judgement of others and their beliefs etc ect ect.. regardless of how different they may be. These are loaded questions. You ask a whole forum of opinionated people and you are damn well likely to get a whole shitload of conflicting answers... You're gonna have to be responsible for arriving at your own answers.

 

[Marquis]

I have always had the desire to exert control in personal relationships, and done so for many years. However, I have never had an interest in owning a person as property. Therefore, per my definitions, I am a Dominant but not a Master.

Just out of curiousity, what would it mean, to you, to own someone as property?

 

[myinnerslut]

i see that this has been answered a few times already, but ill give my opinions (key word opinions) anyway

what is the difference between Dom and Master?

for me and A, Master reflects a 24/7 relationship. Sir reflects any other D/s relationship. i called him Sir for a good long while before he decided he didnt like it anymore becuase it was too formal. now i just call him by his name. he is still my dom, and was wheteher he was Sir or whether he is simply A.

How do you know if the Dom or Master is telling the truth about how much experience they have in the lifestyle?

i suppose you really dont. you can ask around in the local scene and see if anyone knows him.

If a Dom or Master is married is it wrong to be involved with them if their spouse doesnt know?

yes.

How long of a time spand to you give before allowing any type of bondage to happen?

this depends on you and him. make sure before you are put in a situation in which you are bound that you have a safeword and trust him to honor that safeword.

 

[JMohegan]

Just out of curiousity, what would it mean, to you, to own someone as property?

In the M/s sense, to me it would mean that I had the right to exercise overt control over every single aspect of that person's life. Interaction with family and friends, career, health, everything. Down to the last detail and moment of her existence, should I choose to do so.

The only constraints on my behavior would be the law, and any concern I had for her health, well-being, and utility to me in the future.

Out of curiosity, what would it mean to you?

 

[Marquis]

In the M/s sense, to me it would mean that I had the right to exercise overt control over every single aspect of that person's life. Interaction with family and friends, career, health, everything. Down to the last detail and moment of her existence, should I choose to do so.

The only constraints on my behavior would be the law, and any concern I had for her health, well-being, and utility to me in the future.

Out of curiosity, what would it mean to you?

I guess it would mean the same to me.

There's something about this that I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around, and I'm not exactly sure how to articulate it.

 

[JMohegan]

I guess it would mean the same to me.

There's something about this that I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around, and I'm not exactly sure how to articulate it.

There's a different mindset that goes with the owned-as-property thing, but it's much harder to describe.

 

[Marquis]

There's a different mindset that goes with the owned-as-property thing, but it's much harder to describe.

It seems so, but what I'm thinking is that just because a "Master" theoretically could exercise power over aspects of a sub's life that a "Dom" could not, this shouldn't obligate him to.

 

[JMohegan]

It seems so, but what I'm thinking is that just because a "Master" theoretically could exercise power over aspects of a sub's life that a "Dom" could not, this shouldn't obligate him to.

I agree, as a general principle. But how do you define or identify latent authority?

To me this concept only makes sense if the Dominant is seriously interested in exerting control, should he deem it necessary, and the submissive is seriously committed to deferring to his authority if he does.

The example of latent authority that I'd give from my own experience is control over health & physical fitness. Wielding authority in this area is rarely, if ever, necessary - and not something in which I would normally be interested. However, if I decide that she's letting herself go in a way I find unacceptable, I'll start issuing instructions and expect them to be obeyed. That's part of the deal, the terms of which were agreed to as the foundation for the relationship.

 

[RJMasters]

It seems so, but what I'm thinking is that just because a "Master" theoretically could exercise power over aspects of a sub's life that a "Dom" could not, this shouldn't obligate him to.

Grabs ass and begins talking....Take it for what its worth.

I agree with JM's perspective somewhat though I am more tolerate in the spectrum of where Masters might operate from.

I think the relationship often determines the level of obligation and in many ways reflects the differences between a Dom and Master. For example,

Dominant (n.) = someone who is aroused, satisfied, and fulfilled when exerting overt control in one or more aspects of a personal relationship.

The idea here which I bolded above is that a Dom is looking for companionship that carries with it a compatible power dynamic.

Where as a Master is not necessarily looking for a Personal relationship as much as they are looking for an obedient slave. This is not to say that a slave cannot be the best companion to a master as I am sure in many relationships they are, however what I think is key is that a master is not obligated to the exact same requirements that are needed to be in a companionship based relationship.

Hence the broadening in my view of thinking of the spectrum in which Masters can operate from. What is persistant is the idea that the slave is owned property, but the master can operate along a spectrum of obligation that they hold themselves accountable to. On one end of the spectrum you can have little to no personal relationship but more of a business type of an agreement (for lack of a better word to describe it). On the other end of the spectrum you have masters who allow for a lot of personal relationship based expressions. At this end of the spectrum it is much harder to distinguish between a Dom and a Master who operates in this way, perhaps the only difference would be the level of PE or TPE that exists.

I personally think that regardless of how you slice it, there must be or always will be some level of Obligation on the part of a Master. Even with a car which is property, you are obligated to take care of it or risk losing it. When it comes to human beings in the context of being owned property, it is my view that a Master is obligated to provide food, clothes, a place to live, and protection. I think it is rare however to find such a basic relationship exist. It is more likely that more is involved that just the basics in most M/s relationships from what I have observed.

I think it was EG who a while ago was speaking about looking for a slave. He made it clear that he already had a companion in Janey and was not looking for another companion because that area of his life was completely fulfilled. He was clear that he was looking for a slave. No doubt a slave that would be welcomed in his home and well cared for by him, but EG would not be obligated as far as meeting things that are required to sustain a personal relationship with this slave as he does currently with Janey. Two relationship that are clearly power dynamic driven, however one relationship's goal is clearly that of companionship, the other not.

I don't think every M/s relationship follows the above mold, as I said I think there is a spectrum in which a Master's relationship may include little to no personal companionship or it can have the ultimate expresion of it. I may be wrong but based off my observations I think Cat and F are a good example of this in that though there is a clear line establish that Cat is an owned slave, there is a high degree of companionship also present in their relationship. The fact that they are married and other things Cat has shared, it is clear that it is F's desire that she not only be his slave, but also his companion in many ways. She is not a companion perfoming the duties of a slave, she is a slave obeying the desires of her Master in fulfilling also the role of companion to which I am sure she feels blessed to be owned by such a man.

So I guess I would say that I do believe that a Master is obligated at some level and there is no escaping that, and that I would slightly amend JM definition as follows...

Dominant (n.) = someone who is aroused, satisfied, and fulfilled when exerting overt control in one or more aspects of a personal relationship.

Master (n.) = a Dominant who is interested in the Master/slave dynamic, i.e., a relationship in which the non-Dominant person is treated as owned property and other aspects of a personal relationship may or may not be present depending the outlook of both Master and slave that would define why the realtionship was establish to begin with.

You certainly will have Doms who are called Master and Masters who are called Doms, and honestly all the above might be interesting to think about but may really have no practical application in the level of complexity it is enshrouded in. Basically whatever works for two people and the way they see themselves is ok.

 

[JMohegan]

Just to clarify, RJ -

The point of my phrase "personal relationship" was to distinguish between a Dominant and someone who assumes authority as part of a position in broader society, such as boss at the office or captain of the football team or woman who organizes a neighborhood clothing drive for the local charity.

 

[catalina_francisco]

It seems so, but what I'm thinking is that just because a "Master" theoretically could exercise power over aspects of a sub's life that a "Dom" could not, this shouldn't obligate him to.

For me this is more the reality than the more popular notion that a Master has to be present and watching over every minute detail of their property's day....and I think this idea is why so many feel 24/7 TPE is impossible. In our relationship, being owned property means that he owns me and everything I previously owned, as well as he has the right to do with me what he wishes and I don't have the right to refuse and/or leave. Some of my duties entail taking care of the financial side of our lives and being answerable to him if we run out of money or get into a tight spot financially.

His role as Master means he chooses how much overt control he exercises on a minute to minute basis, while covert control is always there. Though I don't see the contemporary M/s relationship entirely the same as historical ones, in some ways it is similar. People tend to think of historical slavery from the POV which is most often chosen to portray in fictional dramas etc., and forget that often a slave was a valueable assett of their Master/Mistress with huge responsibilities, trust and duties which were not under the constant eye of their owner. They were no more free to leave, nor were they unowned, but they were utilised in a way which served the needs of the Owner, not that of the slave.

The BDSM version of M/s often gets trapped into thinking that to be owned means the Owner has to be constantly working to overtly maintain that ownership which in turn ends up with the Owner running themselves ragged while the slave sits pretty and awaits every minute detailed order, and basically does very little. IMHO a slave should be an asset to their Owner, not a burden requiring 100% attention. Sheeesh, how on earth did (historical) Owners manage to control 100's of slaves if each and every one required constant and individual on the spot attention to maintain the control over factor while they were required to be working in several different locations at the same time (eg. field slaves, house slaves, clerical slaves, drivers etc.)?

Catalina

 

[RJMasters]

All of my comments above were in the context of a relationship between two people whether it was a Dom and submissive or a Master and slave. None of my comments assumed a broader role of society. The word spectrum was used within the context of a relationship...so I am not clear as to your comment. I perfectly understood that your comment was describing a Dominant or Dom within a D/s relationship. So I am a bit lost as to your clarification.

 

[catalina_francisco]

I may be wrong but based off my observations I think Cat and F are a good example of this in that though there is a clear line establish that Cat is an owned slave, there is a high degree of companionship also present in their relationship. The fact that they are married and other things Cat has shared, it is clear that it is F's desire that she not only be his slave, but also his companion in many ways. She is not a companion perfoming the duties of a slave, she is a slave obeying the desires of her Master in fulfilling also the role of companion to which I am sure she feels blessed to be owned by such a man.

LOL, I do feel blessed most days. For us, although the companionship is present in some ways, it is not the deciding factor of our relationship. There are times he doesn't feel like bothering with sharing his time with me and thus expects me to perform my duties, fetch coffee, and basically not bother him at all in any way until he feels like being bothered. There is also the factor we both sought a M/s relationship first and foremost, so the companionship is reliant on that factor, not the other way around. We did get married, but that was not as a result so much of thinking marriage was the ideal as it was in making a lot of the legalities of my moving country quicker and less problematic. The marriage is still important to both of us, but once again, it comes second to the M/s dynamic.

As to taking care of his property, it is true he earns the money to pay the bills, but for the most part he sees it as my responsibility to take care of myself as part of his property and part of my role as property. He may indulge me with a massage from time to time, or tell me to put my feet up when I am ill, but not always and not predictably. If I need medical attention or anything else, he prefers I take care of it instead of bothering him. He sees it as my responsibility once again to take care of his property, not to be running to him every time I need to see a doctor or take care of something else to do with my well being. It seems strange to some but works for us as it makes sense in the way of thinking I do not have the right to damage or neglect something which he owns, in this case myself, but it is my place to serve him and respect and take care of his property.

Catalina

 

[JMohegan]

All of my comments above were in the context of a relationship between two people whether it was a Dom and submissive or a Master and slave. None of my comments assumed a broader role of society. The word spectrum was used within the context of a relationship...so I am not clear as to your comment. I perfectly understood that your comment was describing a Dominant or Dom within a D/s relationship. So I am a bit lost as to your clarification.

Ack! Sorry for the confusion. I'll try again.

In your earlier post, you quoted the definition of Dominant that I had offered and added your own interpretation of the closing phrase:

Dominant (n.) = someone who is aroused, satisfied, and fulfilled when exerting overt control in one or more aspects of a personal relationship.

The idea here which I bolded above is that a Dom is looking for companionship that carries with it a compatible power dynamic.

Where as a Master is not necessarily looking for a Personal relationship as much as they are looking for an obedient slave.

The point I was trying to make is that when I used the phrase "personal relationship", I was not alluding to anything having to do with companionship. The sole purpose of the phrase (when I used it) was to distinguish between a Dominant and someone who assumes authority as part of a position in broader society.

I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong, obviously, since there is no right or wrong here.

But since you quoted the definition I had drafted, I just wanted to clarify that you seem to ascribe a different meaning to the phrase "personal relationship" than I do.

 

[RJMasters]

Ack! Sorry for the confusion. I'll try again.

In your earlier post, you quoted the definition of Dominant that I had offered and added your own interpretation of the closing phrase:

The point I was trying to make is that when I used the phrase "personal relationship", I was not alluding to anything having to do with companionship. The sole purpose of the phrase (when I used it) was to distinguish between a Dominant and someone who assumes authority as part of a position in broader society.

I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong, obviously, since there is no right or wrong here.

But since you quoted the definition I had drafted, I just wanted to clarify that you seem to ascribe a different meaning to the phrase "personal relationship" than I do.

Ah ok I get ya. I think I would say that I agree with your use of it as you menat it, only I also include the idea of companionship as being part of a personal relationship. So to what degreee i added to or misquoted you, I am sorry. I am still comfortable in what I said because I think it agrees to what you meant by the phrase, but also adds in my own thoughts with it.