Sub or Slave Traits

[Aquila1]

Question #1 - why does the definition/label matter? I mean, what if you were happy, did things in a manner that worked for both of you, trusted him with your whole being, etc and just lived Life? No semantics, no worries. Just Gigi and Lover/Partner-type-person who happened structure things around a power exchange? Would you be any more or less submissive/slave? Would he be any more/less in control?

Thank you. This pretty much sums up my world - I've never felt the need for classification. I'm happy and that's all that really matters to me.

 

[JMohegan]

My main question is what really qualifies one as a slave versus just a sub?

What really qualifies one as a sub versus just a slave?

I wonder why no one ever asks the question that way.

In any case, my answer is similar to BiBunny's. People who feel grounded, aroused, satisfied, and generally pleased by the idea of pretending to be property self-identify as slaves. People who don't, don't.

Of course, there are exceptions! If "owned sub" works for you, rock on.

 

[subwannabe]

Sounds to me like you have found a relationship that makes you happy for the moment. My only advice is don't give up on marriage or a more normal relationship completely. Sometimes you have to think about, "where will I be 20 years from now?". Chances are you won't be doing what you are doing now. I guess what I'm trying to say is have fun and be happy but don't let Mr. Right cross your path and not even notice him because you are happy with what you are doing now.

 

[StrayKat]

Sounds to me like you have found a relationship that makes you happy for the moment. My only advice is don't give up on marriage or a more normal relationship completely. Sometimes you have to think about, "where will I be 20 years from now?". Chances are you won't be doing what you are doing now. I guess what I'm trying to say is have fun and be happy but don't let Mr. Right cross your path and not even notice him because you are happy with what you are doing now.

20 years from now she might be living in exact the same relationship and be fulfilled and happy just as she is now. What if this is the only "normal" relationship for her? What if this man is Mr. Right for her?

Imo marriage as in signing the papers is overrated. As long as there is legal protection on the same level for those living together without making it "official", the said paper is just a nuisance if you want out of the relationship.

 

[HisSexyPet]

Sounds to me like you have found a relationship that makes you happy for the moment. My only advice is don't give up on marriage or a more normal relationship completely. Sometimes you have to think about, "where will I be 20 years from now?". Chances are you won't be doing what you are doing now. I guess what I'm trying to say is have fun and be happy but don't let Mr. Right cross your path and not even notice him because you are happy with what you are doing now.

I have been living in a "more normal" marriage for almost 28 years and am totally miserable. Just because this is your ideal relationship does not mean it is other peoples. Everyone's Mr Right is different and as StrayKat said, this may be gigi's Mr. Right.

 

[BiBunny]

Sounds to me like you have found a relationship that makes you happy for the moment. My only advice is don't give up on marriage or a more normal relationship completely. Sometimes you have to think about, "where will I be 20 years from now?". Chances are you won't be doing what you are doing now. I guess what I'm trying to say is have fun and be happy but don't let Mr. Right cross your path and not even notice him because you are happy with what you are doing now.

I know this probably comes as a huge surprise to you, but not every woman on the face of the planet is secretly dying to get married and have babies. I find the idea quite distasteful myself.

In 20 years, I plan to still be serving my Master and Mistress, provided we're all still living then. Nope, it won't be a "normal" relationship, but I'm used to being abnormal and making choices that wouldn't work for other people.

I don't know if you meant it that way or not, but your post was pretty insulting to people who don't have "mainstream" relationships. I take mine just as seriously as my Owner people take their marriage. Commitment doesn't require a marriage license. The idea that people who aren't in "normal" relationships are somehow just playing at it is really offensive.

Though I would renege on the marriage deal if poly marriage became legal in my lifetime, but that is so not something I ever see happening. Kids are still a no-go!

 

[graceanne]

I know this probably comes as a huge surprise to you, but not every woman on the face of the planet is secretly dying to get married and have babies. I find the idea quite distasteful myself.

In 20 years, I plan to still be serving my Master and Mistress, provided we're all still living then. Nope, it won't be a "normal" relationship, but I'm used to being abnormal and making choices that wouldn't work for other people.

I don't know if you meant it that way or not, but your post was pretty insulting to people who don't have "mainstream" relationships. I take mine just as seriously as my Owner people take their marriage. Commitment doesn't require a marriage license. The idea that people who aren't in "normal" relationships are somehow just playing at it is really offensive.

Though I would renege on the marriage deal if poly marriage became legal in my lifetime, but that is so not something I ever see happening. Kids are still a no-go!

On the other hand, what was good about his post is thinking about what you want long term. It could stand some broadening, though, for people who don't want 'the American dream'. As in 'decide whether you want this kind of relationship long term before you get in a long term relationship'. More people in this world could stand to look before they leap, not count their chickens before they hatch, and look in the gift horses mouth. Too many people just go along in life without even a vague idea of where they're heading.

 

[BiBunny]

On the other hand, what was good about his post is thinking about what you want long term. It could stand some broadening, though, for people who don't want 'the American dream'. As in 'decide whether you want this kind of relationship long term before you get in a long term relationship'. More people in this world could stand to look before they leap, not count their chickens before they hatch, and look in the gift horses mouth. Too many people just go along in life without even a vague idea of where they're heading.

Oh, definitely. But I would guess that most people err on the other side of the equation. Like, getting married for no better reason than everyone else was doing it! (Don't laugh; I know people who've done it.)

But, yeah, an Abnormal Relationship means you should put a lot of thought into it beforehand. You'll have to sacrifice things that society tells you that you should have. You may even have to, like me, spend holidays alone with your nutty family.

But if it makes you happy, don't let somebody telling you that you should do this, this, and that deter you from it.

 

[StrayKat]

Like, getting married for no better reason than everyone else was doing it! (Don't laugh; I know people who've done it.)

Now I dont find that funny, I find it sad.
I never wanted to get married either, yet I did.... twice. I was kinda tricked into it, first time by my manipulative ex and second time country where my husband lives and works and I only had tourist visa.
But seriously, the only thing I got from being legally married was having to visit social services and courts like 15 times in row and explain to bunch of strangers why exactly I want to get divorce. Its annoying and humiliating.

I have potential 3rd husband now and if anything will make me rethink that relationship it would be his determination to marry me. I heard stories about guys that run away at hint of wedding bells but I never met one, on the contrary, all the guys I was with for longer than 2 weeks started to talk about marriage at some point. Its damn annoying.

 

[BiBunny]

Now I dont find that funny, I find it sad.
I never wanted to get married either, yet I did.... twice. I was kinda tricked into it, first time by my manipulative ex and second time country where my husband lives and works and I only had tourist visa.
But seriously, the only thing I got from being legally married was having to visit social services and courts like 15 times in row and explain to bunch of strangers why exactly I want to get divorce. Its annoying and humiliating.

I have potential 3rd husband now and if anything will make me rethink that relationship it would be his determination to marry me. I heard stories about guys that run away at hint of wedding bells but I never met one, on the contrary, all the guys I was with for longer than 2 weeks started to talk about marriage at some point. Its damn annoying.

OMG, yes, it is.

 

[sb2009]

I have a friend who is dieing to get married - I try to get her to see how nice her life is. She travels, she goes out wtih friends, she has a million casual hook-ups avial if she wants to have sex. When I ask her *why* she wants to get married, her answer is usually "because I'm 40 and only losers make it to 40 and aren't married." wtf??????

I've had her at my house at the height of family chaos and she still won't see the light, er, appreciate the single life.

 

[graceanne]

Like, getting married for no better reason than everyone else was doing it! (Don't laugh; I know people who've done it.)

Doesn't surprise me or make me laugh. I've known people who had kids cause everyone else was doing it, why not get married? People have done stupider, and less reversable things, just because 'everyone else is doing it' (drug use comes to mind).

I heard stories about guys that run away at hint of wedding bells but I never met one, on the contrary, all the guys I was with for longer than 2 weeks started to talk about marriage at some point. Its damn annoying.

I was thinking that the other day. My best friend has been engaged three times. (Never married.) Her current guy is 'open to the possibility of marriage' (they've only been together a few months). I've never seen a guy she's dated be marriage shy.

I've had her at my house at the height of family chaos and she still won't see the light, er, appreciate the single life.

LOL Been there, done that. My sisters best friend was like that. She was 19, had a REALLY good job, good benefits, was building her credit well, so she was well on the way to buying a house, etc. She wanted to get married, wanted to get married, etc. Married the first guy to show any interest in her (she didn't really start to get pretty until after high school - orange-red hair, kinda plump - high school guys were not interested). The guy she married is an ASS, and she's seriously considering divorce. But now she's got two kids, although she looks at it as 'getting rid of her third child'. She routinely wishes she'd taken my advice.

 

[00Syd]

What really qualifies one as a sub versus just a slave?

I wonder why no one ever asks the question that way.

I've wondered that, too.

The ways it's worded, with the "just," (no matter which term [slave or sub] comes first) suggests a hierarchy of submission.

 

[Homburg]

What really qualifies one as a sub versus just a slave?

I wonder why no one ever asks the question that way.

I would guess that the simplest/grammatical answer is because "sub" is a broad classification that encompasses "slave" as part of the "submissive" spectrum. I have no problem with it in that sense.

Where I dislike this question is situated firmly in the "just a" part. The negative connotation is unnecessary.

 

[subish2009]

What really qualifies one as a sub versus just a slave?

I wonder why no one ever asks the question that way.
<snip>

I've wondered that, too.

The ways it's worded, with the "just," (no matter which term [slave or sub] comes first) suggests a hierarchy of submission.

On the other hand, maybe it was just meant in terms of, along the continuum of submissiveness, a slave is more hard-core than a sub? In other words, if you accept the idea that the term slave denotes someone who is more service-oriented, someone who is owned, someone who can't/doesn't say no, and that a sub is less inherently service-oriented, unowned, and has a safeword, then a slave would be further out on that continuum, further from vanilla, than a sub would be.

However, that's a lot of ideas to accept that plenty of people probably don't buy into. For me, that continuum makes sense, but I think, as has been previously stated, that the label you put upon yourself is going to have as many different meanings to the individual as there are people applying it. Brat thread, case in point. And it sounds like this topic has been well-covered by you regulars in the past.

 

[Homburg]

On the other hand, maybe it was just meant in terms of, along the continuum of submissiveness, a slave is more hard-core than a sub? In other words, if you accept the idea that the term slave denotes someone who is more service-oriented, someone who is owned, someone who can't/doesn't say no, and that a sub is less inherently service-oriented, unowned, and has a safeword, then a slave would be further out on that continuum, further from vanilla, than a sub would be.

However, that's a lot of ideas to accept that plenty of people probably don't buy into. For me, that continuum makes sense, but I think, as has been previously stated, that the label you put upon yourself is going to have as many different meanings to the individual as there are people applying it. Brat thread, case in point. And it sounds like this topic has been well-covered by you regulars in the past.

I tend to agree on the idea of a continuum, and referred to that in my previous post. But I did feel like the language chosen was negative.

No matter what though, there will be people whose knickers get in a twist. For whatever reason, any time any thread comes up that compares, in pretty much anyway, submissives to slaves, people decide that it is some sort of adequacy test and feel challenged.

 

[ataxia.girl]

i disagree with the concept that slave and property are interchangeable terms. Daddy thinks of me as his property and sometimes even calls me his slave. i do not self identify as much of a sub or slave but i do often feel like owned property.

You don't necessarily have to be submissive or cede much of anything in order to be owned property. i'm present. i show up for the party and that implies consent to whatever happens. i make no promises to obey or submit to anything. Why would i need to? Afterall... i'm "just" a little girl *bats lashes*

 

[BiBunny]

i disagree with the concept that slave and property are interchangeable terms. Daddy thinks of me as his property and sometimes even calls me his slave. i do not self identify as much of a sub or slave but i do often feel like owned property.

You don't necessarily have to be submissive or cede much of anything in order to be owned property. i'm present. i show up for the party and that implies consent to whatever happens. i make no promises to obey or submit to anything. Why would i need to?

I don't think you have to be a slave to be property, but I do think you have to be property to be a slave. (No semantics arguments about the word "property," please. Y'all know what I mean.)

Personally, I go back and forth on whether I identify as a slave or not. I DO identify as a pet, and pets are property, chattel, whatever. So I'm definitely property and possibly a slave, LOL. Did that make sense?

 

[gigi1968]

I don't think you have to be a slave to be property, but I do think you have to be property to be a slave. (No semantics arguments about the word "property," please. Y'all know what I mean.)

Personally, I go back and forth on whether I identify as a slave or not. I DO identify as a pet, and pets are property, chattel, whatever. So I'm definitely property and possibly a slave, LOL. Did that make sense?

Yes, it does make sense to me, as that is about how I feel.

 

[ataxia.girl]

I don't think you have to be a slave to be property, but I do think you have to be property to be a slave. (No semantics arguments about the word "property," please. Y'all know what I mean.)

Personally, I go back and forth on whether I identify as a slave or not. I DO identify as a pet, and pets are property, chattel, whatever. So I'm definitely property and possibly a slave, LOL. Did that make sense?

Yeah i agree with that and i get what you mean about the pet thing. To Daddy i am whatever he decides i am in HIS eyes. i don't always agree. He doesn't give a fuck whether i agree or not. i enjoy the fact my resistance really has very little impact on him.

We tend to be more in the take-down, capture, keep camp. He "keeps" me. i can think whatever i want. Its irrelevant to him.

 

[JMohegan]

I've wondered that, too.

The ways it's worded, with the "just," (no matter which term [slave or sub] comes first) suggests a hierarchy of submission.

Yes. And the word "qualifies" implies some sort of job promotion.

On the other hand, maybe it was just meant in terms of, along the continuum of submissiveness, a slave is more hard-core than a sub? In other words, if you accept the idea that the term slave denotes someone who is more service-oriented, someone who is owned, someone who can't/doesn't say no, and that a sub is less inherently service-oriented, unowned, and has a safeword, then a slave would be further out on that continuum, further from vanilla, than a sub would be.

However, that's a lot of ideas to accept that plenty of people probably don't buy into. For me, that continuum makes sense, but I think, as has been previously stated, that the label you put upon yourself is going to have as many different meanings to the individual as there are people applying it. Brat thread, case in point. And it sounds like this topic has been well-covered by you regulars in the past.

I agree that there is a continuum, but I would describe it in tangible, practical terms - i.e., how much authority is actually being exerted, how much tangible control is ceded, how much deferring of preferences is really taking place.

The people who ID as slaves are not necessarily at the "more" end of that spectrum. Plenty are in relationships in which they "feel owned" - but for all practical purposes, in most aspects of their lives, are not subject to active control.

 

[VelvetDarkness]

I know this probably comes as a huge surprise to you, but not every woman on the face of the planet is secretly dying to get married and have babies. I find the idea quite distasteful myself.

In 20 years, I plan to still be serving my Master and Mistress, provided we're all still living then. Nope, it won't be a "normal" relationship, but I'm used to being abnormal and making choices that wouldn't work for other people.

I don't know if you meant it that way or not, but your post was pretty insulting to people who don't have "mainstream" relationships. I take mine just as seriously as my Owner people take their marriage. Commitment doesn't require a marriage license. The idea that people who aren't in "normal" relationships are somehow just playing at it is really offensive.

Though I would renege on the marriage deal if poly marriage became legal in my lifetime, but that is so not something I ever see happening. Kids are still a no-go!

QFT.

I can't stand kids. I love my friends' kids, those are very specific named exceptions and I can interact with them because I've known them since birth. Strangers' kids are unknown quantities and I'm hopeless with them. My friends just don't get this however. My best friend's youngest is about 18wks and she keeps pointing out how good I am with her, what a maternal instinct I must have and can't I hear my body clock ticking my fertility away. I love my friend. I love her to tiny squidgy pieces but I really wish she'd get off my case. She thinks I'll regret not having kids. I think at 30 I'm big and bad enough to know my own mind and make my own choices about what I could live with regretting in years to come.

Even my doctor doesn't understand me. He wouldn't let me get sterilised at 25 because I was childless and said I wouldn't get a surgeon to do it until I was 30, unless I had kids in the meantime. Now I'm 30 and they still won't do it in case I change my mind. It makes me borderline homicidal that these quacks think they know my own mind better than I do, just because they're wrinklier than I am. So now I'm touting for second opinions in the hope that someone will let me make this choice before I hit the bloody menopause. When I think of the hassle, medication, PMT, pain and inconvenience I could have been spared if they'd just taken me at my word 5 years ago, I want to scream.

Sorry for the hijack gigi

Anyway, to drag this post into the vague direction of the original topic, it's really hard sometimes to convince people that you're genuinely happy with unconventional lifestyle choices. Even friends I've known all my life don't really understand and are waiting to do the 'I told you so dance' when I hit 50 and adopt 5 Malawian orphans and 8 cats in a fit of menopausal insanity. If you want this relationship with your married guy to be long term, you're going to have to be prepared for some incredulous criticism and the pros have to be worth the cons. Don't expect people to understand you. You should expect your friends/family to be accepting, supportive and keep their doubts to themselves but you can't make them understand just what it is that makes your relationship right for you.

And the same really goes for submission. You can seek opinions here, read info on how other people define their dynamics and sit and consider what you want to cede and what rights you want to retain. What you decide upon with your partner however, is unique to you two and if it works for you both, it matters not one iota what anyone else on the planet (or in the BDSM lifestyle) thinks. There'll always be blinkered little pathological conformists who will insist you're 'not a true/real' x y or z but they're morons. Some people are so hardwired into needing social acceptance of some kind that even in exploring BDSM they need a set of peers and social groundrules to adhere to, needing that conformity and acceptance even within a niche subculture. If the world was a party, there are kinksters in leather and latex who would still find themselves in the kitchen. The internet has liberated a lot of kinksters but they tend to be the geeky ones for whom everything is binary, so take it all with a large pinch of salt.

 

[Bandit58]

Question # 2 - who says you have to give up the control you've gathered/found? Bandit IDs as slave to Master Gil, yet (for example) she still controls all her own money, makes medical decisions if he's unable to, etc... it's called being a whole, happy, useful, resourceful person - who happens to be a slave.

*smiles* The things you miss when you don't get online for a couple of days

Actually CM I identify as a sub with (some) slave tendencies, which I don't really see but some other people do. I feel I retain too much control over my life to "twuely" be able to call myself slave. However as graceanne pointed out:

It's just a matter of finding someone who's compatible with what you want/need. Master Gil doesn't WANT control of her money, etc.

Sir is quite happy for me to take control of our finances. It's one less thing He has to worry about It's part of my service, along with the dialysis and everything that goes with it like stocktakes and blood tests and keeping track of doctors appointments.

It means that I have to take control sometimes when He is unable to...another form of service Try having to yell and poke and shake your Sir when He's in the middle of a diabetic hypo and you have to get some sugar into Him STAT Sometimes it doesn't work quickly enough - I have to have the gumption to know when an ambulance is needed (which it was about a month or so ago).

I consider myself a sub. After living in vanilla world for so long and had bad nilla relationship, not completely sure if I can give myself up as a slave. But is that possible? I trust my sir with my whole being and understand that we will never be 24/7, but can I still be a slave? Will it ever be possible for me to let go of the control I finally feel I have gathered? Out of all that I have met, he is the first person I have even considered that possibility with.

I lived in the vanilla world for my first 45 years of life. I was also in a 23 year marriage that was emotionally abusive. I have worked hard to get control of my life since I got out. I am very lucky in that Sir and I have very similar outlook on what our lives and limits are - yes I do have hard limits even after almost six years together. I still have my safe word, even though it isn't used often.

Every relationship is different. It's up to you as a couple to work out what works for YOU - never mind what others think you SHOULD be doing/saying/thinking. Sir and I joke a lot that we would be kicked out of the "Real and Twue BDSMers Club" if they knew how we carry on together. But we don't care....

 

[00Syd]

I don't think you have to be a slave to be property, but I do think you have to be property to be a slave. (No semantics arguments about the word "property," please. Y'all know what I mean.)

Personally, I go back and forth on whether I identify as a slave or not. I DO identify as a pet, and pets are property, chattel, whatever. So I'm definitely property and possibly a slave, LOL. Did that make sense?

I think of myself, at least in terms of my current relationship, as a pet. But for us the connotations are less along the lines of property and chattel as they are along the lines of loved, cared-for, play-thing, etc. But when you look at it, those two definitions are really one and the same, but just looked at through a different lens.

It's funny how we can take the same word and look at its definition and take such differently feeling meanings from it (property vs. cherished play thing), even though they essentially mean the same thing.


If that even makes sense.

Yeah.

 

[eastern sun]

Yeah i agree with that and i get what you mean about the pet thing. To Daddy i am whatever he decides i am in HIS eyes. i don't always agree. He doesn't give a fuck whether i agree or not. i enjoy the fact my resistance really has very little impact on him.

We tend to be more in the take-down, capture, keep camp. He "keeps" me. i can think whatever i want. Its irrelevant to him.

Though they all denote ownership, I used to distinguish between "toy," "pet," and "slave" according to the connotations each carries.

"toy" connotes objectification and play
"pet" connotes domestication and/or training
"slave" connotes labor and captivity