Pretentious Dom/mes - A Question

[_geisha_]

PYL's who don't mind an honest, no drama question, I'd like to ask you something. When you introduce yourself to someone who you aren't sure is in the lifestyle, do you make it a point through text to say My, Me, Mine, I, and you, your, yours, etc.?

I see Dom/mes do it, and it usually comes off as pretentious and self-serving to me, kind of like trying to prove how dominant one may be to a potential submissive.

Is that something you do? Why or why not? what do you think of others who do it?

Thank you,

-g

 

[catalina_francisco]

You've lost me, I'm not sure what your asking....then again, it has been a busy morning and I am distracted.

Catalina

 

[onyxvixen]

If I am not sure someone is in the lifestyle I tread very carefully. Even with those who are I do not refer to myself that way. I may be a Domme but that doesn't make the whole world my sub. It would make me feel like some old crone who treats everybody like an errant child - pissing them all off in the process.

In private, with a willing submissive, I will then release my inner Domme. If I need capital letters and pretentious titles in order to accomplish this though, I'm seriously losing my touch.

Pretentious Doms are usually those who have never had a real life encounter; sad, twisted little net-nerds who have spent too long inside school lockers with their pants up their asses. They pick big nasty nics and don't care who 'submits' to them online. They treat everybody like a slave. They get a kick out of being rude and nasty and getting their own back on the world in the process. They see becoming 'Doms' as a safe, consensual way to channel their retributive victim mindset. They are usually harmless but a minority are dangerously clingy and controlling because they have non existant self esteem. They want a sub because they think he/she will put up with all kinds of shit and never dare leave. They can become very dangerous people. Avoid them like the plague.

Not that I'm judgemental, you understand

 

[neonflux]

i don't think that i would ever refer to myself using that type of capitalization even if i wasn't a newbie and felt that i was qualified to call myself a Domme and even if i was straight Dominant rather than switch. when referring to myself, i only do the capitalization thing now, on this board, when describing a specific encounter I was involved with. while I'm not all that careful about revealing that I am kinky when it seems appropriate (except with youth), cannot imagine ever really writing to someone who wasn't in the life with the type of depth i do here, and wouldn't use those forms of capitalization anyway as in all likelihood they wouldn't understand them- would seem very silly. i do use this capitalization in a more general way on lit because i tend to value convention. am i making any sense? (it's too early in the a.m. here, why i'm also not using caps...) ~ neon

 

[catalina_francisco]

Ah, I was distracted!! I wondered what you were meaning by 'text', but as I was put off track by your referring to introducing yourself to someone you weren't sure was in the lifestyle or not, I assumed you were talking RL, face to face, not online or chat room stuff. Personally I am not into major capitalisation, or speaking to anyone apart from my own Master in terms of being in any particular lifestyle role, I talk to them as people. Even when I know someone is in the lifestyle, I still speak to them with the same respect I give anyone simply because who or what they are is of no consequence to me unless they are going to become part of a play scene with us, and even then we do not go overboard on formal BS. I am with onyxvixen in that many who expect this or practice it are more attuned to online games and char rooms than actual real encounters in a D/s flesh to flesh sense. It is another case of fantasy crossing the lines of some peoples perceived reality.

Catalina

 

[neonflux]

Even when I know someone is in the lifestyle, I still speak to them with the same respect I give anyone simply because who or what they are is of no consequence to me unless they are going to become part of a play scene with us, and even then we do not go overboard on formal BS. I am with onyxvixen in that many who expect this or practice it are more attuned to online games and char rooms than actual real encounters in a D/s flesh to flesh sense. It is another case of fantasy crossing the lines of some peoples perceived reality.

Catalina

Am I being naive or have I just been very lucky? (Perhaps both?) It's hard for me to imagine anyone treating or being treated by another with anything but respect, regardless of role. It's also hard for me to imagine anyone treating another with deference just because of the role they claim, unless in a scene or relationship together... I don't get why someone would ever see a sub as "lesser." Not rhetorical, but an honest question.

Also, do you also see using capitals, etc. when writing in general terms or referring to one's own experiences as evidence of "going overboard?"

One thing I will do: If someone is officially 24/7 collared and with their D in a community setting, I would follow protocol and ask permission of the D to talk to them - not because I see the s as anything "lesser" at all but out of respect for their relationship... (This has always been difficult for me, doesn't come naturally.) Neon

 

[Quint]

...........

 

[Musing]

Am I being naive or have I just been very lucky? (Perhaps both?) It's hard for me to imagine anyone treating or being treated by another with anything but respect, regardless of role. It's also hard for me to imagine anyone treating another with deference just because of the role they claim, unless in a scene or relationship together... I don't get why someone would ever see a sub as "lesser." Not rhetorical, but an honest question.

Think you've been lucky but it's much more of an online thing. People use sites like this one to flirt and pretend. One way of doing that without ever having to meet or commit is to refer to a 'Dom' online using a title or always capitalizing words like You, Sir, Master etc. These people need these distinctions, for whatever reason.

Personally, I and my Sir have never seen a need for this when writing emails and texts. I capitalize Sir as I would his name but that's all. I have always found the whole "W/we, O/our" thing needless and pretentious and clumsy to read, although some like it and fair play to them.

One thing I Do do: If someone is officially 24/7 collared and with their D in a community setting, I would follow protocol and ask permission of the D to talk to them - not because I see the s as anything "lesser" at all but out of respect for their relationship... (This has always been difficult for me, doesn't come naturally.) Neon

I think that's a whole different game. At that point, you know they are scene people, that they're in a RL relationship and that their relationship has this level of 24/7 dynamic. That to me is no more than respectful of them as a couple, as you said yourself.

 

[Musing]

Ladies like Shadowsdream pull off the capitalization with poise. She's just too classy and wise for it to be an offense, so I take it all into context. However, if my first impression of someone is their obnoxious syntax, then it's hard to me to give them a real chance to show me who they are.

Exactly. More often than not it's just posturing but some RL couples prefer to write this way and do carry it off beautifully.

Depends if they can manage anything more sophisticated than "Kneel before Me, bitch!"

 

[Aeroil]

Oh by the twins, the Y/you U/us thing, I despise that.

Bad grammar makes kitty sad.

 

[nymphee]

Oh by the twins, the Y/you U/us thing, I despise that.

Bad grammar makes kitty sad.

I think we might be soulmates x

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

Hello Geisha

I think the posts above are reflected in part of what I might contribute on the subject. I do not and will not alter text to reflect some Capitalization protocols with the exception of falling into the habit over the years of upper casing the word Dominant ( other example as above would be in the context of Sir ) and lower-casing the word submissive . This is not to say that I am inferring submissives are of less value by doing so. For me its a soft politeness. In RL there are many other ways of reflecting that in expression well short of inappropriately falling on my knees just because any Dominant is in range...........smiles.

I do know Domme that a very much the real McCoy living 'it' in RL that tend to a smaller degree use Capitalization when writing. They are also prone to inflecting their voices quite subtly to reflect that. The two in particular I am thinking of currently are friends of mine and I take no issue with Their choice to do so.

Here is an article I had that looks at the History of Capitalization. Gives one perspective of background.

I will be clear I am not presenting the content of the following as an endorsement of heavy use of Capitalization . Anyone can dig around in History enough and be selective to form a debate that supports their own view. Just providing it another source of comment on your questions.

Historical Use of Capitalization

Many people are introduced to the Lifestyle via electronic media such as chat rooms, message boards, mailing lists, and so on. Because these venues are based on written communication it is common for people who are new to the lifestyle to come across writing customs they are unfamiliar with. These customs may include the use of third-person speech by submissives, capitalizing the pronouns related to Dominants (He, She), and lowercasing a submissive's name.

Newcomers may be told a variety of reasons for this behavior: distinguishing a Dominant from a submissive online, formal displays of humility and respect, emphasis on status, etc. i, like many of these people, took this practice to heart as an outward display of D/s protocols. It was only when i began to encounter some opposition to these practices that I became curious about their origins.

After research, i discovered interesting historical aspects on this subject. i offer my findings here, not as to state "what you should do" but rather as a polite rebuttal to the perception that the use of lowercase names started as part of online roleplay. It is also intended as a rebuttal to those who veil pride behind the claim that forgoing modern capitalization is somehow less educated, and criticize the use of improper English.

The first documented use of capitalization occurred around the 4th century A.D., with Roman slave scribes. Until this time, Rome used several types of monocased handwriting, such as Capitalis Rustica or Uncial. 2 It is theorized that Roman slave scribes began to develop a method of handwriting for less important communications, beginning with messages between themselves. This handwriting may have been the first to employ both upper- and lowercased letters, introducing the concepts of majuscules and minuscules. The slaves would "lowercase" their names and "uppercase" their Masters, as a form of differentiation. 7 This style of differentiation between subjects in handwriting became what is now called Half-Uncial, and was adopted when many of these slave scribes began to write books that gained renown.

Half-Uncial was adopted somewhere around 600 AD, by Latin and Greek philosophers to write their notes. Because many of their predecessors had lowercased their names, these philosophers and theologians continued to do so. Many were unaware that their predecessors had been very educated slaves. 3

With the introduction of the Carolingian script in about 800 A.D., the general public began to incorporate capitals and "smalls" in a single text, usually in informal writings. 4 This use of capitalization resembles the manner in which we use it today, but did not become ubiquitous for many centuries.

It became a hallmark of truly dedicated intellectuals of the 11th and 12th centuries to use lowercase when speaking about one’s self, as with "i" or "me", and to capitalize the names of gods, including the Christian deity ("God" or "Lord"). As an interesting side note, it is the authors of this time period that e. e. cummings (1894-1962) emulated when he lowercased his name. During his education he noticed Latin and Greek manuscript authors never capitalized their names, and he subsequently began to lowercase his as well.

When slavery flourished throughout what is now the Middle East and India, people incorporated a practice of naming their slaves after traits or positive life aspects in hopes to bring these qualities into their households. It became common to have slaves named such things as "wisdom," "dignity," "prosperity," etc. Female slaves, such as odalisques (harem girls), were often given soft names that described attractive things, such as "noor" (light). Some harem women were trained as spies, and named things such as "fahima" (disarming intelligence).10 Because these slaves were named after things, and not in the Muslim biblical naming practice, they were never capitalized.

Biblical literature began to use these conventions as well. While no part of the Syriac version of the Old Testament remains, the Armenian version (translated in 411 A.D. from Syriac to Armenian) shows that many testimonies were written with lowercased i’s and my’s, and employed third person speech to show humility before God. This version of the Christian bible was seemingly the first to begin capitalizing God, Lord, and the associated pronouns. 9

The Armenian version was later translated into a variety of other languages, but many of these revised versions retained the capitalization styles up until the 1700’s, when Christian scholars decided to make the text "easier to read" and moved to a more modern style of formatting. Editing out some capitalization styles, third person speech, abbreviations, and neumes (Byzantine musical notes to aid the reader in chanting scripture) were just some of the changes that were made. 8 Interestingly, the Christian bible still retains the capitalization for pronouns referring to divine beings in modern texts, such as the King James version.

Between the 1600 and 1800’s, there was an evolution of language as America sought to keep existing English traditions, employ new "bolder" styles, and draw from many sources such as Africa, France, the Native American Indians, and many language of the West Indies Islands. Capitalization, punctuation, proper grammar, and other rules of English were used loosely in some places, and stringently in others. 1 It is interesting to note, in European literature in this time, slave names, places, and dialects were written in lowercase to distinguish them from European equivalents. In Oroonoko, or the History of the Royal Slave (1688), the European slave master refers to her in lowercase as a term of debasement, to remind her that she is no longer a princess, but a slave. 6

The English language evolved and changed over time, making shifts from Old English to Middle, to Modern, and finally to present-day English. The dialect we speak (mainly American English in the U.S.) is actually very young, less than 200 years old. What some term proper English is not truly traditional in a historical sense. To deem the use of lower- and uppercase conventions as improper is an argument without historical standing. There are many reasons a person may not agree with using these customs, but a short look into history demonstrates "proper English" is an amalgam of various cultures. A common issue taken with these conventions is doing so is to ruin the language, or pollute it some way. As stated above, there is no real purity of the language, and this should be taken into account when using this argument as a defense.

No matter the origins of a habit and practice, there will always be those who follow it religiously, those who follow it casually, and those who will argue against it. There is no right or wrong way, but there are methods that have proven themselves over time. You must be your own judge on what will work for you. Do be aware that subscribing or not to a certain D/s community "rule" may affect your standing within social circles you may choose to associate with. We, as humans, thrive on creating social constructs to define our ourselves and our behavior.

The practice of distinctive communication conventions in this context is not unpopular in this age, but it should be noted that for the purposes of this argument i would like to express the major reasoning. Firstly, there is a distinct historical precedent. It has been established that these practices have been in use for hundreds of years. Secondly, the use of D/s-style conventions predates the current conventions. Thirdly, the practice itself is functional. For me, personally, i will continue to lowercase my name and capitalize titles and pronouns associated with my Master and other Dominants out of respect and training. These types of reminders and restrictions are helpful to me, helping to create an environment that keeps my submission in the forefront of my thoughts. However, knowing a little history doesn’t hurt either.

 

[_geisha_]

Thanks everyone for the great answers.

This has always been a peeve of mine, to talk with someone who hasn't asked me about the lifestyle, hasn't even approached the subject, but will continue to say things like, "Well, I and My girlfriend were driving in My car the other day, and I said to her, I'm waiting for My paycheck... " or something to that effect.

I hate when I know there's not a dominant bone in this person's body and s/he is simply using capitalization as a way to break the ice and introduce the idea of beating me for fun.

LOL

 

[catalina_francisco]

Am I being naive or have I just been very lucky? (Perhaps both?) It's hard for me to imagine anyone treating or being treated by another with anything but respect, regardless of role. It's also hard for me to imagine anyone treating another with deference just because of the role they claim, unless in a scene or relationship together... I don't get why someone would ever see a sub as "lesser." Not rhetorical, but an honest question.

Also, do you also see using capitals, etc. when writing in general terms or referring to one's own experiences as evidence of "going overboard?"

One thing I will do: If someone is officially 24/7 collared and with their D in a community setting, I would follow protocol and ask permission of the D to talk to them - not because I see the s as anything "lesser" at all but out of respect for their relationship... (This has always been difficult for me, doesn't come naturally.) Neon

LOL, I think you have been extremely lucky. There are many who see a sub or slave as needing to be treated like the scum of the earth and have no problem thinking it is also their right to give them orders, or advise their Dominant on where they are going wrong or how they could improve on the way they treat their submissive. There are even some who have taken exception to the fact I am a slave and yet I also moderate and do have an opinion and don't kowtow to someone just because they say they are a Dom/me or put Mistress or Master or Lord before their online name. I see those people as living in a fantasy where they are the star yet in RL often have no submissive or slave or have ever had one. There are a couple of threads around here about the misconceptions that subs are lesser beings or weak or stupid, as well as the thought slaves should be mindless robots without feelings or brains. Of course, there are also the subs who delight in playing the helpless, 'can't think for myself' role to the hilt....their choice, but certainly has never worked for the Dom/mes I have come across and found respect and connection with.

The capitalisation thing from my limited knowledge was a by product of chat rooms and in general internet BDSM. I use capitals for Dom/me and Master/Mistress simply because I see them as titles in a grammatical sense. We don't socialise much, basically not at all, but F has made it clear that if we are in that situation he will not be pleased to see me acting overly submissive, starstruck or in any way deferring toward another Dominant unless he has specifically told me to do so for a particular space in time and purpose. Like me, he sees other Dom/mes and sub/slaves as people first and given his impeccable charm, within reason treats them the same as he does everyone in a social setting and expects me to do the same. He also prefers my name be capitalised by me and others, as he does not feel it is the right of anyone but him to put me in an unequal position. Basically he has strong feelings about my submission and how that might be mistaken by someone else to be generic and not his right alone to possess.....gotta love that passionate Spanish blood running through his veins.

Catalina

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

Thanks everyone for the great answers.

This has always been a peeve of mine, to talk with someone who hasn't asked me about the lifestyle, hasn't even approached the subject, but will continue to say things like, "Well, I and My girlfriend were driving in My car the other day, and I said to her, I'm waiting for My paycheck... " or something to that effect.

I hate when I know there's not a dominant bone in this person's body and s/he is simply using capitalization as a way to break the ice and introduce the idea of beating me for fun.

LOL

laughs ........ and I bet you KICK Their ASS

 

[_geisha_]

Thank you very much Rebecca, it'a always a pleasure to know a little more about the foundation of something. I may not have been clear... If I know someone who is dominant and we have spoken about the lifestyle, and I have agreed that I will pursue more with this person in terms of the lifestyle, then capitalization is not an issue.

If a Dom/me has approached me and spoken to me about a D/s relationship and I've agreed... chosen to be the submissive, I'd have absolutely no issue with capitalization.

I do, however, have a great problem with someone not knowing anything about me and all of a sudden assaulting me with their Large Letters. This goes more for my submissive friends, as the only interaction I have with the community is here in BDSM Talk, but with BDSM Talk and the community being so close to the General Board, where I usually am, I deal with this a lot.

 

[Trinique_Fire]

Hello Geisha

I think the posts above are reflected in part of what I might contribute on the subject. I do not and will not alter text to reflect some Capitalization protocols with the exception of falling into the habit over the years of upper casing the word Dominant ( other example as above would be in the context of Sir ) and lower-casing the word submissive . This is not to say that I am inferring submissives are of less value by doing so. For me its a soft politeness. In RL there are many other ways of reflecting that in expression well short of inappropriately falling on my knees just because any Dominant is in range...........smiles.

I do know Domme that a very much the real McCoy living 'it' in RL that tend to a smaller degree use Capitalization when writing. They are also prone to inflecting their voices quite subtly to reflect that. The two in particular I am thinking of currently are friends of mine and I take no issue with Their choice to do so.

Here is an article I had that looks at the History of Capitalization. Gives one perspective of background.

I will be clear I am not presenting the content of the following as an endorsement of heavy use of Capitalization . Anyone can dig around in History enough and be selective to form a debate that supports their own view. Just providing it another source of comment on your questions.

Historical Use of Capitalization

Many people are introduced to the Lifestyle via electronic media such as chat rooms, message boards, mailing lists, and so on. Because these venues are based on written communication it is common for people who are new to the lifestyle to come across writing customs they are unfamiliar with. These customs may include the use of third-person speech by submissives, capitalizing the pronouns related to Dominants (He, She), and lowercasing a submissive's name.

Newcomers may be told a variety of reasons for this behavior: distinguishing a Dominant from a submissive online, formal displays of humility and respect, emphasis on status, etc. i, like many of these people, took this practice to heart as an outward display of D/s protocols. It was only when i began to encounter some opposition to these practices that I became curious about their origins.

After research, i discovered interesting historical aspects on this subject. i offer my findings here, not as to state "what you should do" but rather as a polite rebuttal to the perception that the use of lowercase names started as part of online roleplay. It is also intended as a rebuttal to those who veil pride behind the claim that forgoing modern capitalization is somehow less educated, and criticize the use of improper English.

The first documented use of capitalization occurred around the 4th century A.D., with Roman slave scribes. Until this time, Rome used several types of monocased handwriting, such as Capitalis Rustica or Uncial. 2 It is theorized that Roman slave scribes began to develop a method of handwriting for less important communications, beginning with messages between themselves. This handwriting may have been the first to employ both upper- and lowercased letters, introducing the concepts of majuscules and minuscules. The slaves would "lowercase" their names and "uppercase" their Masters, as a form of differentiation. 7 This style of differentiation between subjects in handwriting became what is now called Half-Uncial, and was adopted when many of these slave scribes began to write books that gained renown.

Half-Uncial was adopted somewhere around 600 AD, by Latin and Greek philosophers to write their notes. Because many of their predecessors had lowercased their names, these philosophers and theologians continued to do so. Many were unaware that their predecessors had been very educated slaves. 3

With the introduction of the Carolingian script in about 800 A.D., the general public began to incorporate capitals and "smalls" in a single text, usually in informal writings. 4 This use of capitalization resembles the manner in which we use it today, but did not become ubiquitous for many centuries.

It became a hallmark of truly dedicated intellectuals of the 11th and 12th centuries to use lowercase when speaking about one’s self, as with "i" or "me", and to capitalize the names of gods, including the Christian deity ("God" or "Lord"). As an interesting side note, it is the authors of this time period that e. e. cummings (1894-1962) emulated when he lowercased his name. During his education he noticed Latin and Greek manuscript authors never capitalized their names, and he subsequently began to lowercase his as well.

When slavery flourished throughout what is now the Middle East and India, people incorporated a practice of naming their slaves after traits or positive life aspects in hopes to bring these qualities into their households. It became common to have slaves named such things as "wisdom," "dignity," "prosperity," etc. Female slaves, such as odalisques (harem girls), were often given soft names that described attractive things, such as "noor" (light). Some harem women were trained as spies, and named things such as "fahima" (disarming intelligence).10 Because these slaves were named after things, and not in the Muslim biblical naming practice, they were never capitalized.

Biblical literature began to use these conventions as well. While no part of the Syriac version of the Old Testament remains, the Armenian version (translated in 411 A.D. from Syriac to Armenian) shows that many testimonies were written with lowercased i’s and my’s, and employed third person speech to show humility before God. This version of the Christian bible was seemingly the first to begin capitalizing God, Lord, and the associated pronouns. 9

The Armenian version was later translated into a variety of other languages, but many of these revised versions retained the capitalization styles up until the 1700’s, when Christian scholars decided to make the text "easier to read" and moved to a more modern style of formatting. Editing out some capitalization styles, third person speech, abbreviations, and neumes (Byzantine musical notes to aid the reader in chanting scripture) were just some of the changes that were made. 8 Interestingly, the Christian bible still retains the capitalization for pronouns referring to divine beings in modern texts, such as the King James version.

Between the 1600 and 1800’s, there was an evolution of language as America sought to keep existing English traditions, employ new "bolder" styles, and draw from many sources such as Africa, France, the Native American Indians, and many language of the West Indies Islands. Capitalization, punctuation, proper grammar, and other rules of English were used loosely in some places, and stringently in others. 1 It is interesting to note, in European literature in this time, slave names, places, and dialects were written in lowercase to distinguish them from European equivalents. In Oroonoko, or the History of the Royal Slave (1688), the European slave master refers to her in lowercase as a term of debasement, to remind her that she is no longer a princess, but a slave. 6

The English language evolved and changed over time, making shifts from Old English to Middle, to Modern, and finally to present-day English. The dialect we speak (mainly American English in the U.S.) is actually very young, less than 200 years old. What some term proper English is not truly traditional in a historical sense. To deem the use of lower- and uppercase conventions as improper is an argument without historical standing. There are many reasons a person may not agree with using these customs, but a short look into history demonstrates "proper English" is an amalgam of various cultures. A common issue taken with these conventions is doing so is to ruin the language, or pollute it some way. As stated above, there is no real purity of the language, and this should be taken into account when using this argument as a defense.

No matter the origins of a habit and practice, there will always be those who follow it religiously, those who follow it casually, and those who will argue against it. There is no right or wrong way, but there are methods that have proven themselves over time. You must be your own judge on what will work for you. Do be aware that subscribing or not to a certain D/s community "rule" may affect your standing within social circles you may choose to associate with. We, as humans, thrive on creating social constructs to define our ourselves and our behavior.

The practice of distinctive communication conventions in this context is not unpopular in this age, but it should be noted that for the purposes of this argument i would like to express the major reasoning. Firstly, there is a distinct historical precedent. It has been established that these practices have been in use for hundreds of years. Secondly, the use of D/s-style conventions predates the current conventions. Thirdly, the practice itself is functional. For me, personally, i will continue to lowercase my name and capitalize titles and pronouns associated with my Master and other Dominants out of respect and training. These types of reminders and restrictions are helpful to me, helping to create an environment that keeps my submission in the forefront of my thoughts. However, knowing a little history doesn’t hurt either.

becca-boo....you made my head hurt.

 

[Chicklet]

I actually logged in for the first time in a month specifically to come here and start a thread about this very thing.

I've been struggling to find someone I might be compatible with, both in the bedroom and out, and one of the things that annoys me most is when I end up corrosponding with someone who refers to themselves with a capital letter. capital "I" is so understandable, but it annoys me to DEATH to get "I'm so glad you chose to respond to Me. I hope you'll tell Me what your interests are, and W/we can get to know one another better." I know these might possibly be perfectly good men, but I'm deleting the emails without ever responding because they annoy me SOOOO much.

On a related topic (this might be a thread hijack, I'm so sorry...) the men who refer to you instantly as "little one"... it's not a name I'd *ever* want to be called, and ESPECIALLY by a near stranger.

I think this is mostly a rant about the fact that I'm looking for a *relationship* and not just a cyber quickie. Or even a quickie play time in person.

And another related note, does anyone know where I could go that might get me more results?

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

Thank you very much Rebecca, it'a always a pleasure to know a little more about the foundation of something. I may not have been clear... If I know someone who is dominant and we have spoken about the lifestyle, and I have agreed that I will pursue more with this person in terms of the lifestyle, then capitalization is not an issue.

If a Dom/me has approached me and spoken to me about a D/s relationship and I've agreed... chosen to be the submissive, I'd have absolutely no issue with capitalization.

I do, however, have a great problem with someone not knowing anything about me and all of a sudden assaulting me with their Large Letters. This goes more for my submissive friends, as the only interaction I have with the community is here in BDSM Talk, but with BDSM Talk and the community being so close to the General Board, where I usually am, I deal with this a lot.

That kind of conduct ( 'enforced' gratuitous use of Capitalization the second someone gets a hint that your D/s orientated ) smirks of insecurity to me. A Dominant is not measured by their ability to type in that style as I am quite sure you are aware Geisha . They may not be 'players/roleplayers' in all cases however its a tiny red flag and sometimes an endorsement of such if they add a few other behaviours that don't sit well with me. Makes me a little wary.

After all I can 'type someone to death' with the best of them if I so choose to waste the energy doing so.........

Ahh its a funny World we live in huh.........smiles

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

becca-boo....you made my head hurt.

HA HA thought you weren't listening Miss Trini .glimpses up at your current AV and smiles

 

[Trinique_Fire]

HA HA thought you weren't listening Miss Trini .glimpses up at your current AV and smiles

i always listen.

and if you like my AV now, wait'll you see my christmas one.

 

[Trinique_Fire]

hey G...

anyway, I know how you feel. I personally don't like it when a self-proclaimed Dom/me uses the capitalization randomly. It seems like a shot at "feel good" superiority and makes me question not only that person's motive but also their confidence level.

unless it was someone i trusted and expected this from, i.e. my OWN Domme....i'd probably laugh the person out of IM or chat or whatever and block them.

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

I actually logged in for the first time in a month specifically to come here and start a thread about this very thing.

I've been struggling to find someone I might be compatible with, both in the bedroom and out, and one of the things that annoys me most is when I end up corresponding with someone who refers to themselves with a capital letter. capital "I" is so understandable, but it annoys me to DEATH to get "I'm so glad you chose to respond to Me. I hope you'll tell Me what your interests are, and W/we can get to know one another better." I know these might possibly be perfectly good men, but I'm deleting the emails without ever responding because they annoy me SOOOO much.

Oh I can live with the Me , My but don't do that weird slashy stuff with M/me. The only exceptions being D/s and the occasional PYL /pyl thang . I will have revenge on Angelic for that one day.......smiles

On a related topic (this might be a thread hijack, I'm so sorry...) the men who refer to you instantly as "little one"... it's not a name I'd *ever* want to be called, and ESPECIALLY by a near stranger.

ewwwwww , sorry Chicklet 'little one' and refering to woman well past 30 as 'girl'. Though in the case of 'girl' I might learn to live with that as I age . Why ? Because it may suit me to do so.....smiles

Terms inferring intimacy are far more appropriate in established relationships as far as I am concerned. It comes across as insincere to me used by people I am not well familiar with. I tend to get cranky with people that seem to devalue D/s with antics / expressions such as that. Not all use is malicious and or manipulative though and I do try and keep that in mind Chicklet.

I think this is mostly a rant about the fact that I'm looking for a *relationship* and not just a cyber quickie. Or even a quickie play time in person.

And another related note, does anyone know where I could go that might get me more results?

Can't advise on this one. I am on an extended hiatus from relationships currently until I get over my recent bout of cynicism towards most male Dominants.

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

i always listen.

and if you like my AV now, wait'll you see my christmas one.

Sweety as long as those fingers don't migrate to your nasal passages I look forward to it immensely

 

[Chicklet]

Can't advise on this one. I am on an extended hiatus from relationships currently until I get over my recent bout of cynicism towards most Dominants.

I'm sort of afraid I'm turning into a man hating bitch, not specifically cynical towards dominants as to EVERY DUMB MALE IN THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE WHO CAN'T FOCUS ON ANYONES NEEDS BUT HIS OWN...