Submissive vs Slave

[CharleyH]

Of course, this is a writer question. Writing a BDSM story at the moment, and this question has come up for me. I think we might all have different ideas as to the different words : submissive vs. slave, but what do you all feel, as writers?

I think a submissive is one who volunteers their services when they want and takes the same services away when they want (tops from the bottom, anyone?) ... a slave is someone who doesn't volunteer so much as give up their own selves - they have no services to offer other than ... (Simplified I know, and for the purpose of the thread) Thoughts?

 

[lucky-E-leven]

I've always had the odd method of distinguishing the two as such:

a) submissive - a descriptive term to illustrate a mannerism or personality trait

b) slave - a position held by someone that is mainly submissive

 

[rgraham666]

To me a submissive is someone who takes the submissive role in sexual situations.

A slave is someone who takes the submissive role in all situations.

 

[lil_elvis]

not much to add here, lucky & rg summed up my feelings on the subject.

you may both kiss my feet

 

[Alessia Brio]

submissive = voluntary

slave = involuntary


(But that's just me bringing my biases to the table)

 

[CharleyH]

I've always had the odd method of distinguishing the two as such:

a) submissive - a descriptive term to illustrate a mannerism or personality trait

b) slave - a position held by someone that is mainly submissive

Well, I must not agree LOL as I have never known a dominant to do anything BUT what their subs allow. LOL - Slave? Hm. Who is the real "slave" in SM?

 

[CharleyH]

submissive = voluntary

slave = involuntary


(But that's just me bringing my biases to the table)

A slave volunteers - much more whole heartedly.

 

[CharleyH]

not much to add here, lucky & rg summed up my feelings on the subject.

you may both kiss my feet

LOL

 

[rgraham666]

not much to add here, lucky & rg summed up my feelings on the subject.

you may both kiss my feet

OK.

Which foot don't you need?

 

[Liar]

Submissive is real, a personality trait, actual relationship dynamics.

Slave is make believe, a persona, a roleplaying character based on submission.

 

[Alessia Brio]

A slave volunteers - much more whole heartedly.

You're right -- in terms of sex play.

I just can't separate the "involunatry captive" meaning of slave from the sex play meaning.

 

[CharleyH]

You're right -- in terms of sex play.

I just can't separate the "involunatry captive" meaning of slave from the sex play meaning.

Nods - so lets discuss . Its an intriguing concept, no? Involuntary is easy. A slave has no rights - but ... problems arise I think.

 

[Pure]

and 'actual slave' is someone who has lost her freedom and has no say in her labor, life choices, etc. Sojourner Truth in her early days.
the ownershipd of this slave is legally sanctioned.

the erotic slave is a volunteer for complete service sexually and otherwise. this slave is outside the legal system, and no law holds her there. there is simply the contract, implicit or explicit between the parties. the figure of "O" in the Story of O is an erotic slave.
"Ownership" in this case is the private decision of the persons involved, IOW "I own you" "Yes, I agree I'm owned by you."

the 'actual sex slave' is a victim, say, of a kidnapping who's forced into her master's beck and call, sexual service, whatever, like Natascha Kampusch in Austria. there is total control as with an 'owner' of a dog, but no legal sanction and no agreement [up the road, any apparent agreement is called 'stockholm syndrome.']

http://www.guardian.co.uk/austria/article/0,,1867511,00.html

---
thanks dr. strab!

 

[Dr_Strabismus]

ownership is a crucial distinction between the two. Master/slave is all about owning/being owned. It's a sort of distorted parent/child relationship.

submissiveness/dominance is about who's the boss.

 

[Alessia Brio]

Nods - so lets discuss . Its an intriguing concept, no? Involuntary is easy. A slave has no rights - but ... problems arise I think.

*shrug* I have a ton of biases in terms of complete surrender of control. (Submissives, I believe, surrender only to themselves. Therein lies their power.)

To hand someone the reigns is one thing. Giddy up!

To have the reigns taken from your hands -- against your will -- is quite another.

 

[Pure]

To have the reins taken from your hands -- against your will -- is quite another.

unless it makes you cum like crazy!

 

[CharleyH]

*shrug* I have a ton of biases in terms of complete surrender of control. (Submissives, I believe, surrender only to themselves. Therein lies their power.)

To hand someone the reigns is one thing. Giddy up!

To have the reigns taken from your hands -- against your will -- is quite another.

In BDSM , slaves give their will. The only thing they own are their bruises - thats what some want (as I wrote not here) or tats - it is still voluntary I believe - to be a slave today in NA?

 

[CharleyH]

To have the reins taken from your hands -- against your will -- is quite another.

unless it makes you cum like crazy!

LOL so true.

 

[Stella_Omega]

In my writing, I tend to use "submissive" and "slave" as part of the descriptive continuum.

Someone might be submissive somewhere near the beginning of the story, and out near the end in the heat of the moment- she becomes a slave- if only for a moment...

Like the "vulva/cunt" continuum, you know?

 

[Alessia Brio]

Like the "vulva/cunt" continuum, you know?

OMG! *hot chocolate spew*

 

[Stella_Omega]

OMG! *hot chocolate spew*

*innocently* what did I say?

 

[3113]

To me a submissive is someone who takes the submissive role in sexual situations.

A slave is someone who takes the submissive role in all situations.

I think you hit the nail on the head, Rob.

From my reseach (admittedly thin), I've found that often in BDSM, the two terms are interchangable. One person's "sub" is another person's "slave" and vice versa.

But when there is a distinction it usually translates to what Rob said, with Slave refering to "long-term" or "all situations." And by long-term I mean 24/7. It's a lot more like a marriage with participants saying things like, "Even when he does the dishes, he's still Master and I'm still Slave."

I think that BDSM folk would also agree that the more extreme the servitude (24/7 demands, like the slave always being chained up a night, etc.), the more appropriate the slave label.

Likewise, those who consider themselves "slave-types" do seem to have personality traits and needs that make them perfer 24/7 submission. They often speak about the intense desire to do things for people, and how hard it is for them to refuse if someone tells them to do something.

That's a little bit different from subs (again, if we're making the distinction). A sub may like being a boss at work, but prefer to be dominated in the bedroom. A Slave, however, would rather not be the boss under any circumstances. They can make decisions, even be in charge if they have to be, but it's not something they enjoy or want to do.

The Leather Scene, by the way, does not use the terms Dom/sub. They use Top/bottom and Master (or Sir)/slave.

 

[Liar]

Question for those in the know:

I imagine that slavery, in this voluntary context, is an outspoken agreement. ("Wanna be my slave?" "OK!" "Goody! Here are the rules...")

Whereas submission/dominance (or top/bottom), sexual or emotional, is something that more or less just happens spontaneously when the right personalities hook up.

So:
Slavery - explicit.
Submission - implicit.

Am I close? Trying to base a little writing on this, so I'd like to know if I have distinctions that are at least plausible.

 

[Guest]

Of course, this is a writer question. Writing a BDSM story at the moment, and this question has come up for me. I think we might all have different ideas as to the different words : submissive vs. slave, but what do you all feel, as writers?

I think a submissive is one who volunteers their services when they want and takes the same services away when they want (tops from the bottom, anyone?) ... a slave is someone who doesn't volunteer so much as give up their own selves - they have no services to offer other than ... (Simplified I know, and for the purpose of the thread) Thoughts?

Submissive....
A bottom, someone that through their words and actions wishes to be controlled and dominanted "to a point" by a Top or Dominant, this may be a 24/7 happenstance but more likely it is something that is planned or worked out

Slave....
a step below a submissive, they have given over their life to the person/persons that are in control. there are varying levels of slaves, some are very close to a submissive, others are completely the other way and have their entire lives mapped out by the one in control or ones in control

 

[3113]

So:
Slavery - explicit.
Submission - implicit.

Am I close? Trying to base a little writing on this, so I'd like to know if I have distinctions that are at least plausible.

I think you are close--but it isn't like anyone has written this stuff down into law. I think it's closer to say that the sub *CAN* be implicit or explict, while slave is almost always explicit.

Because depending on how far a sub wants to go--and what kind of Dom they go to, the rules might indeed be spelled out ("This is the safe word...you can't touch yourself...etc."). For example, most men going to a Dominatrix for an afternoon's fun probably would be subs rather than slaves EVEN if they're called slaves for that hour and play that role. Yet the rules are laid out.

The thing is, in a Master/slave relationship (the way I, personally, would define and distinguish it) the slave isn't just not touching themselves for an hour or a day. They're never touching themselves until and unless Master says. They're also mopping the floors, and making dinner, letting the Master pick out their clothes, sitting at the master's feet while they watch television--Master's choice of show, always. The Slave is (and enjoys being) the Master's toy, pet, servant and sub. The Master is the be-all and end-all, the focus of their live, and pleasing him/her always comes first.

As I said, one person's sub is another's slave and vice versa, but if we're trying to distinguish, the slave has to really see themselves as owned by the Master, not for an hour, but all day every day.