slave/sub requests

[MissTaken]

Oh, and in addition to my previous post, I guess part of my point was that it isn't necessarily the words that denote D/s, but as shy suggests, learning how to make requests is part of how the relationship evolves.

What I might find offensive, might be perfectly acceptable to MissIntrigue.


And vice versa.....

*shrugs*

I hope esclava is getting what she needs, spanking or not!

 

[ownedsubgal]

I'm curious, osg - if the original wording isn't right for you, what words would you use?

as i said Etoile (hiya btw), it isn't just the wording, in itself. it's not as if i feel i could use different words with my Master, but mean basically the same thing. there is no place in my relationship for demands or manipulation, and such a thing would be utterly opposite my personality anyway. but how i would go about asking my Master for something i desired, like maybe a spanking (hard for me to imagine as spankings are not a major desire of mine)?....well again the situation would have to be right (meaning i've been a good girl, Daddy is in a good mood, it is not a time where i must be completely focused on his needs only, etc.), the time would have to be right, and of course it would have to be something i knew my Master would enjoy as well. it is extremely rare for me to just come out and make a personal request of my Master. when i have done so, it is usually in a quiet moment between us, when the two of us are resting or relaxing together. then i must gather up my courage...finally asking him in a soft, mumbled near-stutter, quickly to get it over with, then looking down at my hands or feet as i nervously await his response...fearful that he will think i'm being selfish and be disappointed in me, or even that he will simply be turned off by the particular thing i desire. so as to what words i use...it is difficult for me to recall...those are such embarassing, awkward moments for me. it always starts with..."Daddy?"...then he will say "hmm?" or "yes, sweetie?".. or some such thing....and there will be a long pause while i am trying to get up the nerve....and then i will just blurt it out, as fast as i can, as quietly as i can while still being heard, "do you think that well...i mean, may i...i mean...i just wondered if maybe...if you want...you could give me a spanking sometime?"...and almost instantly i am regretting making the request, maybe the time wasn't just right, maybe he didn't even understand my nervous gibberish, maybe it just wasn't enough of a desire to even mention to him in the first place. the last thing i expect is for him to grant me whatever it is i am requesting...he never fails to surprise me when he does.

 

[ownedsubgal]

MissTaken, i actually took "at your pleasure" to be as demanding as the rest of the statement...meaning well, hey fella, you can spank me now or five minutes from now if you wish, but spank me and do it soon. okay, i ad-libbed the "hey fella" part lol. it's just been my limited experiences, but usually when someone says "at your pleasure", they truly are referring to an immediate desire, and not something that they wouldn't mind not being fulfilled for a few weeks or even months, which is very much the case when i make a request of my Master.

 

[s'lara]

i agree wholly with your last paragraph lara...i never meant to imply that there is any one single "way" for a submissive to be, nor do i think of myself or my own submissiveness as any sort of barometer by which to judge the submissiveness of others.

now to answer your question, regarding the wording of the request....i wouldn't say it's simply the wording (though that definitely was like a scrape of nails against a blackboard for me), but moreso the personality one would have to have in order to make such a request, worded that particular way:

"Master/Sir/Ma'am, this one desires a spanking at your pleasure."

imo, that would be akin to saying..."i want a spanking, and i want a spanking now"...not merely stating a request (a desire for a spanking, in this case), but obviously speaking under the assumptions that 1. the Dominant involved desires to spank them; and 2. that they will, or should, receive something merely because they desire it...as if the relationship is one where the physical activities engaged in are intended for the mutual pleausure of both. that is why i likened it to a "player" situation. notice there is not even a question in the statement of the desire. it is simply "this is what i want, give it to me." which is a perfectly fine and acceptable attitude when neither partner has any power over the other, when it's "just for fun". but i personally can't even daydream that kind of scenario occuring between a Dominant and a submissive, much less an Owner and a slave. but then again i readily acknowledge the fact that many things occur every hour of every day that i cannot imagine.

i definitely do not view my making a request of my Master to be in any way similar to making such a statement as in the original post. one is almost a demand, waiting like the cheshire cat to be pleased; while the other is the nervous, fearful, shy admission of a desire, with no expectations.

Then it certainly is about perception of others and self-percetion as well. i don't believe the phraseology of the question necessarily lends towards an assumption that the sub will receive the requested spanking (arrogant undertones aside). i believe your personal ideals as the submissive you are, are in direct conflict with the question itself. i didn't read into the question as far as you have, but i can't make a baseless assumption that anyone who phrases a desire (as in Esclava's example) in this way is a "gimme right now" player and not a submissive. The core of the request is no different at its base than your "shy admission of desire" -- you (osg) and the fictional sub are both hoping to get what you want/need. The way you expressed your desire (shy, nervous, scared, expectationless) in no way takes away from the fact that you want something as does this fictional sub -- expectations or not. If you share the desire for a particular activity, of course you expect to receive it at some point, just not when you want it or maybe not at all -- this still doesn't detract from the fact that you requested the activity in the first place. Otherwise, you'd never ask or rather "nervously, fearfully, shyly admit a desire." i still think you're projecting your own standards (as the slave you are) upon the situation.

i agree the question does come across in tone, a bit on the sly side, but it is still an expression of a desired act. imo, it doesn't matter how that desire is expressed as long as it is within the parameters defined by the Dominant. Obviously, in your relationship, your Master wouldn't stand for it, and i am guessing, there are others who wouldn't as well. That said, i don't believe requesting an activity in a direct, coy or teasing way is defining the D/s relationship as one where both are on equal footing. Conversely, it just might be the personality of the submissive and that personality might be appreciated by the Dominant -- i gather there are varying types of Dominants out there as well and wouldn't necessarily deem one as weak and lacking control if His/Her submissive was allowed to teasingly, but arrogantly request an activity.

Some subs are meek in their submission, while others are warriors. i don't believe a sub has to be fearful, shy, or nervous in order to express a desire. That said, our flavors are unique to ourselves and ourselves only. Doesn't change the fact that while we can ask, in a simpering, fearful, bold or pathetic way... it doesn't mean we will be granted a particular desire. That factor is ruled only by the Dominant alone and if He/She feels a sub has stepped out of place, i am sure a reminder will be swift in coming.

lara

 

[ownedsubgal]

"i agree the question does come across in tone, a bit on the sly side, but it is still an expression of a desired act. imo, it doesn't matter how that desire is expressed as long as it is within the parameters defined by the Dominant. Obviously, in your relationship, your Master wouldn't stand for it, and i am guessing, there are others who wouldn't as well. That said, i don't believe requesting an activity in a direct, coy or teasing way is defining the D/s relationship as one where both are on equal footing. Conversely, it just might be the personality of the submissive and that personality might be appreciated by the Dominant -- i gather there are varying types of Dominants out there as well and wouldn't necessarily deem one as weak and lacking control if His/Her submissive was allowed to teasingly, but arrogantly request an activity."

"Some subs are meek in their submission, while others are warriors. i don't believe a sub has to be fearful, shy, or nervous in order to express a desire. That said, our flavors are unique to ourselves and ourselves only. Doesn't change the fact that while we can ask, in a simpering, fearful, bold or pathetic way... it doesn't mean we will be granted a particular desire. That factor is ruled only by the Dominant alone and if He/She feels a sub has stepped out of place, i am sure a reminder will be swift in coming."


lara, i think what it all comes down to really are our own individual ideas/beliefs as to what it is to be a submissive. while i do not feel that there is any one way for a submissive to be, i definitely have strong beliefs as to what a submissive is NOT. a "warrior" would be among those things. someone with an aggressive nature, or an authoratative nature, i also would not personally view as a submissive. this does not mean that i believe a submissive must be "weak", i just believe there is much more to being "a" submissive than being submissive to a particular person in a particular kind of relationship. so naturally, when i read such a statement as the example in the original post, i think, "no way such words could ever come from the mouth of a submissive". ...one night, my Master and i were playing at a private dungeon, and another couple there, who identified themselves as Master and slave, were playing nearby. i was blindfolded so could not see what was happening, but could of course hear the sounds of her Master's hands and paddle hitting her flesh. after one particularly firm whack, she very loudly shouted, "ouch! what the %$@! are you doing?!!"....it was clear then to my Master and i that she was not a submissive (at least not by our understanding of the term) and he not much of a Dominant. though Esclava's example was no where near as extreme of course, i get that same feeling of...a submissive just wouldn't say that. but i admit that this is based on my own beliefs as to what defines a submissive.

 

[SweetDommes]

Hmm I guess I didn't read into the wording that it had teh timbre of being a demand.

"at your pleasure" seemed in keeping with who is in control and who is not.

Further, I would assume esclava's physical demeanor would be one of a humble submissive when making such a request. Her body language would portray some of those qualities that her text does not.

But thank you for clarifying, osg.

That's pretty much how I read it too Miss T - "at your pleasure" means that the sub will accept it if I/We decide that is not our pleasure to give the spanking ...

 

[A Desert Rose]

That's pretty much how I read it too Miss T - "at your pleasure" means that the sub will accept it if I/We decide that is not our pleasure to give the spanking ...

Yes.


Many fine examples of "my submission is better than your submission" in this thread.

s'lara... written very elequently, as always. Thank you.

 

[shyly curious]

That's pretty much how I read it too Miss T - "at your pleasure" means that the sub will accept it if I/We decide that is not our pleasure to give the spanking ...

which this sub recognises as proper ... SHE decides, ...

 

[s'lara]

"i agree the question does come across in tone, a bit on the sly side, but it is still an expression of a desired act. imo, it doesn't matter how that desire is expressed as long as it is within the parameters defined by the Dominant. Obviously, in your relationship, your Master wouldn't stand for it, and i am guessing, there are others who wouldn't as well. That said, i don't believe requesting an activity in a direct, coy or teasing way is defining the D/s relationship as one where both are on equal footing. Conversely, it just might be the personality of the submissive and that personality might be appreciated by the Dominant -- i gather there are varying types of Dominants out there as well and wouldn't necessarily deem one as weak and lacking control if His/Her submissive was allowed to teasingly, but arrogantly request an activity."

"Some subs are meek in their submission, while others are warriors. i don't believe a sub has to be fearful, shy, or nervous in order to express a desire. That said, our flavors are unique to ourselves and ourselves only. Doesn't change the fact that while we can ask, in a simpering, fearful, bold or pathetic way... it doesn't mean we will be granted a particular desire. That factor is ruled only by the Dominant alone and if He/She feels a sub has stepped out of place, i am sure a reminder will be swift in coming."


lara, i think what it all comes down to really are our own individual ideas/beliefs as to what it is to be a submissive. while i do not feel that there is any one way for a submissive to be, i definitely have strong beliefs as to what a submissive is NOT. a "warrior" would be among those things. someone with an aggressive nature, or an authoratative nature, i also would not personally view as a submissive. this does not mean that i believe a submissive must be "weak", i just believe there is much more to being "a" submissive than being submissive to a particular person in a particular kind of relationship. so naturally, when i read such a statement as the example in the original post, i think, "no way such words could ever come from the mouth of a submissive". ...one night, my Master and i were playing at a private dungeon, and another couple there, who identified themselves as Master and slave, were playing nearby. i was blindfolded so could not see what was happening, but could of course hear the sounds of her Master's hands and paddle hitting her flesh. after one particularly firm whack, she very loudly shouted, "ouch! what the %$@! are you doing?!!"....it was clear then to my Master and i that she was not a submissive (at least not by our understanding of the term) and he not much of a Dominant. though Esclava's example was no where near as extreme of course, i get that same feeling of...a submissive just wouldn't say that. but i admit that this is based on my own beliefs as to what defines a submissive.

Firstly, osg, if you don't use paragraphs on occasion, i will have to stop reading you ... those blocks exhaust me. (joking - i'm emoticon challenged).

Secondly, i agree it does come down to personal beliefs in terms of how one views their own submission and others. The example you mentioned is surely to the extreme, while the example Esclava cited isn't necessarily worthy of the "fake sub" stamp. As to warrior, aggressive or authoritative, i don't believe directness, assuredness of demeanor and strength of desires makes one non-submissive ... that makes someone not you osg or what your Master wants. Period. As you said yourself, there is more to being "a" submissive. There is more to being "a" submissive than shyness, fear of one's Dominant, and nervousness. While there are things about you, to your way of thinking, which embodies the definition "submissive", there are other ways to live in our submission which does not negate the submissive nature itself. You may not be able to live in such a medium, but that doesn't mean others don't exist quite happily and submissively in this world (sans shyness, fearfulness, etc.).

lara

 

[ownedsubgal]

Firstly, osg, if you don't use paragraphs on occasion, i will have to stop reading you ... those blocks exhaust me. (joking - i'm emoticon challenged).

Secondly, i agree it does come down to personal beliefs in terms of how one views their own submission and others. The example you mentioned is surely to the extreme, while the example Esclava cited isn't necessarily worthy of the "fake sub" stamp. As to warrior, aggressive or authoritative, i don't believe directness, assuredness of demeanor and strength of desires makes one non-submissive ... that makes someone not you osg or what your Master wants. Period. As you said yourself, there is more to being "a" submissive. There is more to being "a" submissive than shyness, fear of one's Dominant, and nervousness. While there are things about you, to your way of thinking, which embodies the definition "submissive", there are other ways to live in our submission which does not negate the submissive nature itself. You may not be able to live in such a medium, but that doesn't mean others don't exist quite happily and submissively in this world (sans shyness, fearfulness, etc.).

lara

lara, what i obviously have failed to make clear here (not just in this particular thread but likely in general) is that i do NOT consider myself to be the epitome of submissiveness or any such thing...i do not judge another person's submissiveness or lack thereof based on my own personality traits. as i know myself better than i do any other submissive, i will use myself as an example often, but that does not mean i view myself as this ultimate submissive creature.

what i do believe is that there are major personality traits that submissives share (and no, shyness or fear of one's Dominant would not be among them)...the main trait being...*drum roll*...a submissive personality! stating the obvious to me, but i know many others in the lifestyle feel that one doesn't necessarily have to be submissive, in order to be "a" submissive. that's a whole other topic however. basically i just wanted to say to you here (and to ADR as well) that i don't judge what is or is not submissive based on what i personally would or would not do. so, the issues i have with the "at your pleasure" example have nothing at all to do with the fact that it's something ownedsubgal would never say...it is just something that a submissive (from my own beliefs as to what that means) imo would never say, any more than a talking pig would say he loves bacon.

(btw i will work on the paragraph thing)

 

[SweetDommes]

what i do believe is that there are major personality traits that submissives share (and no, shyness or fear of one's Dominant would not be among them)...the main trait being...*drum roll*...a submissive personality! stating the obvious to me, but i know many others in the lifestyle feel that one doesn't necessarily have to be submissive, in order to be "a" submissive. that's a whole other topic however. basically i just wanted to say to you here (and to ADR as well) that i don't judge what is or is not submissive based on what i personally would or would not do. so, the issues i have with the "at your pleasure" example have nothing at all to do with the fact that it's something ownedsubgal would never say...it is just something that a submissive (from my own beliefs as to what that means) imo would never say, any more than a talking pig would say he loves bacon.

The thing is, you are still taking those words as you would interpret them (which is to be expected - we all do that ... I take them as I interpret them). Our boy has a submissive personality/submissive nature, whatever you want to call it ... and while he hasn't used those exact words, he has asked us to do things, begged us to do things ... to me, the "at your pleasure" is simply an addition to let the dominant know that although the sub wants whatever it is that he/she is asking for, they still know that it is the dominant's decision.

I cannot bring myself to believe that the issues you have with the wording that Esclava used are entirely unrelated to the fact that you wouldn't ever use those words ... I know that there are variations of submission and dominance that are practiced everywhere, but in general, I'm seeing that it's how the words are spoken, not the words themselves that anyone would have a problem with. I would have a problem if the sub came in with a smirk on his face or something while using any phrasing for a request, but those words, used in a submissive behavior, as appropriate to a submissive personality, would never strike me as a problem, because no matter what the words are, it's the intent that matters ... a fact that seems to have been missed by you (or maybe I'm missing something).

*edited for clarity*

 

[Netzach]

Do you have to be a submissive to submit to someone?


Personally, I don't really care what the overall makeup of the person's personality is, and whether they kick someone else's ass up and down town by day. If they are ready to put up and shut up where I am concerned, then fine by me.

And I like vulgar responses to pain. They make me know I'm hurting them right.

 

[Caitlynne]

And I like vulgar responses to pain. They make me know I'm hurting them right.

And there we have it! Each Dominant rules their kingdom according to their wishes. And that's as it should be.

Ownedsubgirl said: i definitely have strong beliefs as to what a submissive is NOT. a "warrior" would be among those things.

While I've read with interest your POV on what submission is not, this one phrase prompted me to respond. You seem to dance around it, stating that you don't judge what a submissive should be, but rather judging (from your own personal experience and belief) what a submissive is not.

Submission can be held in the heart of a warrior. In fact warriors are the best examples of submission. A warrior must submit to the orders of superior officers without question. A warrior must put aside his/her personal desires in order to serve the greater good. A warrior must be brave, honest, loyal and capable of great sacrifice and endurance. I'm sorry, I consider all of those things to be the territory of a submissive too.

And I'd like to add there is no submissive personality per se. There is only obedience. We obey our Masters. We obey with the personalities that we were born with. There are no cookie cutter 'submissive personalities'.. There are introverts, extroverts, brats and angels... All of these things come into play, but submission is defined by the act of obedience in my opinion, not by a particular personality trait. And each Dominant defines how, when, what, where and why that obedience will take place.

In other words I don't think *we* get to define it at all, not for ourselves and certainly not for others. Our Dominants define the shape and form of our submission. And that again, is as it should be!

Some submissives struggle with obedience, some have a sense of humor, some are quiet, and some are talkative, but in the end we are what we are supposed to be or we are released...

As for what is a *real* Dominant, (again a much discussed topic)... if a Dom/me is ruling their universe and getting obedience from a sub.. Well, then they have the power now don't they?

~ Cait

 

[Caitlynne]

Oops, the dreaded double post........ move along, nothing to see here...

 

[MissTaken]

MissTaken, i actually took "at your pleasure" to be as demanding as the rest of the statement...meaning well, hey fella, you can spank me now or five minutes from now if you wish, but spank me and do it soon. okay, i ad-libbed the "hey fella" part lol. it's just been my limited experiences, but usually when someone says "at your pleasure", they truly are referring to an immediate desire, and not something that they wouldn't mind not being fulfilled for a few weeks or even months, which is very much the case when i make a request of my Master.

That has not been my experience.

 

[MissTaken]

Yes.


Many fine examples of "my submission is better than your submission" in this thread.

.

It certainly reads that way.


Yep.

 

[catalina_francisco]

I think initially I may not have read the question the same as some, perhaps because of my own perceptions and the expectations I know exist in our relationship, and being on the hop at the time. I thought it was about making a request at a moment out of scene which is what I responded to. I don't think for me it is something I would ask for during a scene unless I was asked specifically to indicate a desire I may have at that point, and that would be a rarity.

Different strokes for different folks which is why variety is the spice of life, but for us he likes to be 100% in control during a scene in particular. Similarly, it does not go well if I request punishment. He expects and is pleased I tell him if I have done wrong, but to then suggest or ask to be punished for whatever reason comes off to him as tftb and insulting his ability or right to make that decision. In that situation, I daresay he would make me go without the suggested punishment as he knows that would hit home more than giving me the release, and serve to remind me who decides if I deserve to be punished or not, when and how.

Catalina

 

[Esclava]

WHEW! My goodness - I had no idea there were such resolute opinions on what I considered a simple request.

To clarify a bit, if I were to utter those words to my Master, it would NEVER be in scene. It would be as I set it up originally - He and I sitting quietly (I would spend many hours at his feet), perhaps engaged in quiet conversation, perhaps just talking about the day's events or some other trivial, mundane things.

From my perspective, the question was not meant to manipulate or provoke - especially not provoke Master to wrath. I would fully expect to pay a very high price for that kind of provocation. No matter what "discipline" Master imposed, it would not come close to the personal, internal punishment I would inflict on myself. (Now that might be truly topping from the bottom!)

Many, many tremendous responses in this thread. Thank you for sharing of yourselves! I particularly like Caitlynne's "warrior" analogy. It is very much how I have always felt. A warrior who is singleminded and determined in carrying out their duties is praised many times over and well rewarded with each new recognition of service achieved according to their King's desires. Sounds like how a cherished slave serves Master to me.

Esclava

 

[shyly curious]

WHEW! My goodness - I had no idea there were such resolute opinions on what I considered a simple request.

To clarify a bit, if I were to utter those words to my Master, it would NEVER be in scene. It would be as I set it up originally - He and I sitting quietly (I would spend many hours at his feet), perhaps engaged in quiet conversation, perhaps just talking about the day's events or some other trivial, mundane things.

From my perspective, the question was not meant to manipulate or provoke - especially not provoke Master to wrath. I would fully expect to pay a very high price for that kind of provocation. No matter what "discipline" Master imposed, it would not come close to the personal, internal punishment I would inflict on myself. (Now that might be truly topping from the bottom!)

Many, many tremendous responses in this thread. Thank you for sharing of yourselves! I particularly like Caitlynne's "warrior" analogy. It is very much how I have always felt. A warrior who is singleminded and determined in carrying out their duties is praised many times over and well rewarded with each new recognition of service achieved according to their King's desires. Sounds like how a cherished slave serves Master to me.

Esclava

now i feel more confused.

was the original question posed a purely hypothetical question??

has Esclava ever really experienced the sublime process of serving a Dom/me?

i am just wondering how i should process this whole exchange of thoughts in the most beneficial and accurate way.

be well all, shy

 

[catalina_francisco]

WHEW! My goodness - I had no idea there were such resolute opinions on what I considered a simple request.

Many, many tremendous responses in this thread. Thank you for sharing of yourselves!
Esclava

Not wanting to hijack the thread Esclava, but I wanted to first thank you for presenting such a great topic and subsequent discussion. Usually I have to search around through threads to update the 'Thought for the Day' thread, but today I felt there was plenty of great material in this thread alone which saved me the effort while I fight off this cold which is trying to creep up on me. Thanks to all who have shared openly and honestly.....maybe the whole thread should be added to the Sub TFTD thread!!

Catalina

 

[ownedsubgal]

And there we have it! Each Dominant rules their kingdom according to their wishes. And that's as it should be.



While I've read with interest your POV on what submission is not, this one phrase prompted me to respond. You seem to dance around it, stating that you don't judge what a submissive should be, but rather judging (from your own personal experience and belief) what a submissive is not.

Submission can be held in the heart of a warrior. In fact warriors are the best examples of submission. A warrior must submit to the orders of superior officers without question. A warrior must put aside his/her personal desires in order to serve the greater good. A warrior must be brave, honest, loyal and capable of great sacrifice and endurance. I'm sorry, I consider all of those things to be the territory of a submissive too.

And I'd like to add there is no submissive personality per se. There is only obedience. We obey our Masters. We obey with the personalities that we were born with. There are no cookie cutter 'submissive personalities'.. There are introverts, extroverts, brats and angels... All of these things come into play, but submission is defined by the act of obedience in my opinion, not by a particular personality trait. And each Dominant defines how, when, what, where and why that obedience will take place.

In other words I don't think *we* get to define it at all, not for ourselves and certainly not for others. Our Dominants define the shape and form of our submission. And that again, is as it should be!

Some submissives struggle with obedience, some have a sense of humor, some are quiet, and some are talkative, but in the end we are what we are supposed to be or we are released...

As for what is a *real* Dominant, (again a much discussed topic)... if a Dom/me is ruling their universe and getting obedience from a sub.. Well, then they have the power now don't they?

~ Cait

first, i don't believe that submission, or being a submissive, revolves around serving a Dominant. secondly, absolutely anyone can obey. my Master can obey a traffic cop when he asks to see his driver's license...does that make him a submissive? ...obedience does not equate to submission, imo. making the conscious choice to be obedient, or even to serve, a particular person, at a particular time (i.e. a Dominant in a relationship) is not what makes one a submissive imo. having a naturally submissive personality in general, is what makes one a submissive imo. but again those are just my own beliefs. in this lifestyle, there are as many different sets of beliefs as there are sects under the umbrella of Christianity.

 

[catalina_francisco]

first, i don't believe that submission, or being a submissive, revolves around serving a Dominant. secondly, absolutely anyone can obey. my Master can obey a traffic cop when he asks to see his driver's license...does that make him a submissive? ...obedience does not equate to submission, imo. making the conscious choice to be obedient, or even to serve, a particular person, at a particular time (i.e. a Dominant in a relationship) is not what makes one a submissive imo. having a naturally submissive personality in general, is what makes one a submissive imo. but again those are just my own beliefs. in this lifestyle, there are as many different sets of beliefs as there are sects under the umbrella of Christianity.

As we have discussed before, IMHO just because someone has a submissive personality, that does not necessarily equate they are 'a submissive'. It doesn't gel to me to compare everyday mainstream life such as law enforcement issues with D/s lifestyle to judge whether someone is submissive or a submissive. The two worlds do not operate on the same level of understanding, though they need to operate in the same physical world we all live in....and submissive personality and a submissive are two different things. Someone who has a submissive personality, as in non-assertive for whatever reason, does not to me say they are obviousy a submissive in D/s understanding or that they would ever want to be, or be able to fulfil that role.

For me it comes down to the person inside, not their outward actions, or whether they are a 'yes' person...it is whether to be truly happy in the deepest corners of their soul they feel submission provides that state, that deep satisfaction which tells them they are where they need to be and nowhere else will do.

It isn't IMO about a submissive having no other choice, feeling ineffective against withstanding the demands of others or the world, or needing protection, though they may be factors of the personality. If someone tells me they are a submissive or slave because they cannot be assertive and decide for themselves, or felt they had no choice in the matter, I begin to question if it is a matter of convenience, fear, abuse, more so than submission. I don't believe, and I may be wrong, that anyone who is not abused or in a state where they are incapable of making choices for themselves, will choose to be a submissive to another for no reason. There is no point to it.

As much as there is this fantasy woven by some that submission is altruistic in that it is done 100% for the good of another with no thought to the submissives needs, wants, or desires at point of submission or after, I don't see it. Even if one submits because they feel the need to serve, be treated as sub-human, humiliated, trained, suffer, etc., the bottom line is they seek that submission not because they are so submissive they have no choice, but because it answers a need in them. In that sense, as others have said, they may be sassy, loud, sluttish, passive, or plain boring, the common denominator being they are submissives, not necessarily submissive personalities.

Catalina

 

[shyly curious]

As we have discussed before, IMHO just because someone has a submissive personality, that does not necessarily equate they are 'a submissive'. It doesn't gel to me to compare everyday mainstream life such as law enforcement issues with D/s lifestyle to judge whether someone is submissive or a submissive. The two worlds do not operate on the same level of understanding, though they need to operate in the same physical world we all live in....and submissive personality and a submissive are two different things. Someone who has a submissive personality, as in non-assertive for whatever reason, does not to me say they are obviousy a submissive in D/s understanding or that they would ever want to be, or be able to fulfil that role.

For me it comes down to the person inside, not their outward actions, or whether they are a 'yes' person...it is whether to be truly happy in the deepest corners of their soul they feel submission provides that state, that deep satisfaction which tells them they are where they need to be and nowhere else will do.

It isn't IMO about a submissive having no other choice, feeling ineffective against withstanding the demands of others or the world, or needing protection, though they may be factors of the personality. If someone tells me they are a submissive or slave because they cannot be assertive and decide for themselves, or felt they had no choice in the matter, I begin to question if it is a matter of convenience, fear, abuse, more so than submission. I don't believe, and I may be wrong, that anyone who is not abused or in a state where they are incapable of making choices for themselves, will choose to be a submissive to another for no reason. There is no point to it.

As much as there is this fantasy woven by some that submission is altruistic in that it is done 100% for the good of another with no thought to the submissives needs, wants, or desires at point of submission or after, I don't see it. Even if one submits because they feel the need to serve, be treated as sub-human, humiliated, trained, suffer, etc., the bottom line is they seek that submission not because they are so submissive they have no choice, but because it answers a need in them. In that sense, as others have said, they may be sassy, loud, sluttish, passive, or plain boring, the common denominator being they are submissives, not necessarily submissive personalities.

Catalina

so wonderfully written, this captures so much, so clearly.

Thank you Catalina for finding the words i could not.

 

[Caitlynne]

obedience does not equate to submission

This is one of those statements that always intrigues me.

We all obey the laws of a nation, state or community or we go to jail. We all obey certain social conveniences or we are ostracized. In that sense certainly I *would* say that Dominants are submitting to the law.

Many who have religious beliefs obey the laws of the canon of a church, in a sense submit to religious law. There are countless examples of obedience to the laws of man, family and God.

But none of them are examples of submission in a D/s sense, and as Catalina pointed out so well, we are only talking about submission in a D/s sense. (Or at least I thought we were)

Maybe it would be better to state that not all obedience is submissive in nature, but all submissives are obedient.

first, i don't believe that submission, or being a submissive, revolves around serving a Dominant.

OK, now I'm having trouble wraping my brain around this one.

May I ask, if submission for you does not revolve around serving a Dominant and you do not see obedience in a submissive as necessarily submissive, what is submission to you?

~ Cait

 

[shyly curious]

WHEW! My goodness - I had no idea there were such resolute opinions on what I considered a simple request.

To clarify a bit, if I were to utter those words to my Master, it would NEVER be in scene. It would be as I set it up originally - He and I sitting quietly (I would spend many hours at his feet), perhaps engaged in quiet conversation, perhaps just talking about the day's events or some other trivial, mundane things.

From my perspective, the question was not meant to manipulate ...

Esclava

Esclava,

pardon me for speaking to this but nowhere in the original post did i read what you say was there. and in the quote here you speak of hypothetical things, things you may be doing when you might ask for a spanking.

i do feel manipulated by this revisionist history style of soliciting feedback.

if i missed something please clarify and let me learn how and where i lost track of the basis for this thread.

thank you, shy