The Difference Between M/s And D/s.
Note-this is solely my opinion.
I always identified as a submissive. I hated the word slave and was sure that would never be me. I originally viewed a slave who was someone who had no input, no limits and was forbidden from stating their thoughts feelings or concerns.
I am a brat. I have an opinion on everything. If I feel something is unsafe, beyond my capabilities or just stupid then you are going to know about it right away. So I couldn't be a slave...could I?
Before AM, I had limits. I was adamant that this would never change and these limits would never be touched for anyone. The first few times AM called me slave, he got a mouthful of brat and told why he was wrong. I'm pretty sure several times he did it was just to laugh at my reaction.
But the more he did it, the less resentful of the word I became.
I was certainly giving him more of myself than I had ever given anyone else. Was it possible I could identify as a slave after all? But then I thought about how I would never be the type of person to just do as they are told without voicing my concerns or giving my input. And I started to become very confused.
So I asked AM what he thought of the difference between Master/slave and Dominant/submissive and he explained in a way that for the first time, I could fully relate to. He explained that whilst a submissive chooses how and where to submit, a slave feels the need for it at all times. That subbing is something I do, but being a slave is what I am. Many people who identify as a submissive have told me every so often that sometimes they don't 'feel' it, they don't 'need' it at all times or at certain times. I do. I always need it.
Even when I am busy or sick or stressed, I still need that feeling of submitting at all times. Even when I am bratting, that feeling is always there beneath the surface. I still need to feel like I am wanted and needed and that my submission is appreciated even at times I physically can not do it very often.
I questioned AM how I could identify as a slave given my thoughts on the term. And he pointed out that even though I gave everything that I could to him, there was never a point where I wasn't allowed to state my thoughts or feelings or opinions and that there will never be a time I can not do that. It wasn't about how I viewed it, but how we viewed it.
I do not think that the relationships where a slave has no input or will be disciplined for stating their thoughts is a Master/slave relationship. I think that is an abuse of power from the 'dominant' party. As AM once stated "She doesn't have limits. But there ARE limits."
As I began to accept the term more and start to use it in regards to myself, I felt more comfortable with it and with giving more of myself. More of myself then I have ever given to anyone else and more of myself than I will ever give to anyone else.
I used to choose what I would submit to in my life, when I would submit and how I would submit. I had the power to end anything at any given time if it became too much or I wasn't happy. But now, I trust AM enough to guide me and look after me and to give up that control completely. To give up having any say of how or when or what I submit to and instead give all that I can offer even if I don't like what he asks for. But the only reason I m willing to do that is because of the amount I have trust I have in him. Because he is always willing to listen and make decisions after weighing in my input. If he wanted me to have no say whatsoever, we wouldn't be together now. In my opinion this is the difference between M/s and D/s.
*And this blog may have not made any sense at all as I really struggled to turn my thoughts into coherent words.
I always identified as a submissive. I hated the word slave and was sure that would never be me. I originally viewed a slave who was someone who had no input, no limits and was forbidden from stating their thoughts feelings or concerns.
I am a brat. I have an opinion on everything. If I feel something is unsafe, beyond my capabilities or just stupid then you are going to know about it right away. So I couldn't be a slave...could I?
Before AM, I had limits. I was adamant that this would never change and these limits would never be touched for anyone. The first few times AM called me slave, he got a mouthful of brat and told why he was wrong. I'm pretty sure several times he did it was just to laugh at my reaction.
But the more he did it, the less resentful of the word I became.I was certainly giving him more of myself than I had ever given anyone else. Was it possible I could identify as a slave after all? But then I thought about how I would never be the type of person to just do as they are told without voicing my concerns or giving my input. And I started to become very confused.
So I asked AM what he thought of the difference between Master/slave and Dominant/submissive and he explained in a way that for the first time, I could fully relate to. He explained that whilst a submissive chooses how and where to submit, a slave feels the need for it at all times. That subbing is something I do, but being a slave is what I am. Many people who identify as a submissive have told me every so often that sometimes they don't 'feel' it, they don't 'need' it at all times or at certain times. I do. I always need it.
Even when I am busy or sick or stressed, I still need that feeling of submitting at all times. Even when I am bratting, that feeling is always there beneath the surface. I still need to feel like I am wanted and needed and that my submission is appreciated even at times I physically can not do it very often.
I questioned AM how I could identify as a slave given my thoughts on the term. And he pointed out that even though I gave everything that I could to him, there was never a point where I wasn't allowed to state my thoughts or feelings or opinions and that there will never be a time I can not do that. It wasn't about how I viewed it, but how we viewed it.
I do not think that the relationships where a slave has no input or will be disciplined for stating their thoughts is a Master/slave relationship. I think that is an abuse of power from the 'dominant' party. As AM once stated "She doesn't have limits. But there ARE limits."
As I began to accept the term more and start to use it in regards to myself, I felt more comfortable with it and with giving more of myself. More of myself then I have ever given to anyone else and more of myself than I will ever give to anyone else.
I used to choose what I would submit to in my life, when I would submit and how I would submit. I had the power to end anything at any given time if it became too much or I wasn't happy. But now, I trust AM enough to guide me and look after me and to give up that control completely. To give up having any say of how or when or what I submit to and instead give all that I can offer even if I don't like what he asks for. But the only reason I m willing to do that is because of the amount I have trust I have in him. Because he is always willing to listen and make decisions after weighing in my input. If he wanted me to have no say whatsoever, we wouldn't be together now. In my opinion this is the difference between M/s and D/s.
*And this blog may have not made any sense at all as I really struggled to turn my thoughts into coherent words.
Total Comments 4
Comments
-
This was an interesting read. I believe indeed it is personal and what exactly is a slave or a sub depends on your relationship.
Terms like these are always tricky in that different people mean different things by it.
I always figured a slave is just a more strict type of sub. Like you said in the beginning: a sub without limits who will do anything that is asked.
Of course, in practice, this would not exactly work and is indeed quite foolish. Unless, as you also rightly mention, you are in a relationship where you trust your master completely. With your life, so to speak.
I'm not sure I personally agree with the statement that a sub is something you do and a slave is something your are. I don't view myself as a slave (yet). I am a sub. But I feel like this is pretty much my identity. Maybe I still need breaks every once in a while now. And maybe it's also different in an online relationship like I have with Miss Butterfly.
Still, I feel like I could grow towards being very much a submissive all the time while still having limits and still being able to use my safe word, and so forth. So then being a sub is very much what I am. And I'd still not be a slave.Posted 01-29-2017 at 03:03 AM by Jaro 
-
Thank you for this really nice blog. Although a lot may have been written about this subject it's especially nice to read the feelings of someone I at least "somewhat" know.
I relate with a lot you say when treating my pet.
It's probably not so much the distinction between the words submissive and slave, but the distinction between the meaning.
My pet I would say is submissive, not a slave. Similarly to your situation it is a 24/7 thing, but still a choice and still she can ALWAYS speakup.
I'm not sure I read you correct but thinking about it I think being a pure "slave" would be abusive.
It's really nice how you describe that "not having limits for your master" still means there ARE limits. I always felt that is what you meant but it's the first time i read it this precise in text. kudo's!
Actually,... as a Dom I had similar ponderings. I am sure to be dominant, sadistic even. But at the same time I donīt feel abusive. Itīs a strange nuance. You may not have understood it like that when/if you did read, but axactly that difference motivate me to write >>my blog about serving my pet<<.Posted 01-29-2017 at 03:20 AM by sir sam
-
This is a really interesting discussion on your progression (I think?) between the state of "submission" (as defined here) and "slavery" (as defined here). I agree with your past self where the common connotation behind the term "slave" didn't agree with my goals: I felt like generally the people who take on that role are more an extension of their Master, as opposed to an obedient companion of their Dom. So, you'd see slaves whose personalities (at least in the public sphere) were quite muted and given to service. I wanted the personality and the service. But, again, as the definition of any relationship is subjective, I can't even rely on that point of view!
Monkey said something funny, "Trying to discern the difference in meaning between 'slave' and 'sub' is like...trying to discern the difference in meaning between 'dirty clothes' and 'laundry.'" It's really indicative of how we run things, though. By and large, I could consider Monkey a slave if I wanted to, but I don't, because I don't want to. In this instance, incidentally, his identity in our dynamic is decided upon by me, which is a concept that might agree with the idea that is often associated with slavery. I can, essentially, do anything I want to him, or demand anything of him within the confines of higher powers (money, health, physical ability, and as he likes to assert, laws of physics). There is no time where he is not subject to my will, and, as he has described it, "Even if I don't wanna do something (cuz I'm lazy), there's not going to be a time where you give me an order and I'm not going to follow it." All of these aspects of our dynamics could be applicable to a M/s dynamic. But he is my sub.
And, as a pondering, could an assertion that a slave has fewer or no limits, or is constantly a slave, invalidate the slave that has limits (for whatever reason) or does not need to be slaved out every day? Does it make subs less "serious" about their role? Or, does it mean that subs who are about as committed to and dependent upon their Dom as this conceptual slave we're building, must progress into slavery?
Of course, as you said, it's your opinion about your relationship. Of course it wouldn't guarantee universal application across all (or even two) relationships. By knowing this we're able to examine and express one way that these states of submission are viewed. I think that's really neat.
What's not neat, unfortunately, is how the community can take to a notion of universalism where others might actually assert their personal understanding of one dynamic or another is applicable across the spectrum. Yet, a definition such as this (your blog) wouldn't, for instance, apply to Monkey and me. Same as how we can't tell you whether you should call the pile of clothes "dirty clothes" or "laundry"
I forget my point because I'm sick and off my meds, but if you're able to draw anything from this rambling, then you're like totally ace!
Posted 01-29-2017 at 07:04 AM by iSpuds
-
You guys all make awesome points and I'm so glad I started a discussion with people who can discuss/debate healthily.
That said, I don't know how to phrase my responses yet in a way that makes sense (A bit like when writing the blog!) So I'm going to ponder over your thoughts a bit longer before I attempt it.
Posted 01-29-2017 at 01:03 PM by IceMaiden
