To all those "masters" out there

[Spun sugar]

To all those wannabe Masters out there here is a quick little piece of advice, if you want to be taken seriously do NOT go around asking if a slave wants a Master "on the side". There have been multiple times when I have told someone that I am currently owned and am no longer looking for a Master, I thank them for their interest and give them well wishes for their search for a slave, typically the response is "I wish you well" "Good luck" ect. I don't even mind when people ask me to message them if things don't work out, there are some cases (not mine) where things don't pan out and it's just a sign that the door will still be open. What I do not understand is when a "master" remarks "oh your one of those slaves that go for only one master...you wont ever consider another one? not even on the side?" My thoughts are "one of those slaves?" shouldn't that be how a slave should act, serving one Master and one Master only? How can you serve more then one, what if what Their wishes conflict? I think one should be a loyal slave and faithfully serve his/her Master and feel that any slave whoever agrees to have a Master "on the side" is not a true slave just some wannabe and is not worth the time or the effort on the Master's part. I had one tell me that well you know your Master has more then one slave and I think that it is Master's decision, it is not my right to question Him that it is within Their right to do so if they can provide the time and dedication that it requires to have more then one slave as long as they do not neglect them They have the right to have as many as they please. If they do start to neglect them then the slave has the right to find someone who won't. The Master/slave bond is very deep bond and both parties should be dedicated fully, it is unfair to the other party if one is not.

This is just my opinion, I'd be interested to see others thoughts on this both slaves and Masters/Mistresses

[MercilessDomme]

A slave should only have one master. But to make sure, the master should explicitly forbid the slave from having more. Then the slave has no excuse.
There is no reason why a master should not keep many slaves. I have sometimes had more than one, but since each is hard work, I find it's best to keep it to one.
That the rules are different for masters and slaves is simply an aspect of the power imbalance.

[Odiefrom]

Your claim is supported throughout all of history. Biblically, it says that though a man can serve two masters, he is loyal to only one of them. Back when slavery was popular in America, it was against the law for a slave to serve two masters, in fact, it was considered unseemly to even think of something like that! And even today you will find people who will agree with you, I being among them.

A slave is to be at the beck and call of the master. How can the slave do that if they are off with another master? Just my two cents on this.

[daredaredare]

Its one of those things that is different for everyone. Your view is valid for you, and for someone who wants the true experience of being a traditional slave with full control given up to someone. But you have to remember you are on the internet. People looking for relationships here don't all want a serious one. If they truly wanted it to be serious they would probably look for a real life one, many people just want something that doesn't take up their life.

[Collared_Slave]

I think one of those slaves is probally reftering to dare slaves, people that just want to be dared and use this as a simple way to do it.

[EnigmaNZ]

I agree with the comment above. That slaves here are largely dare slaves. They are slaves to the dares, not to the creator of those dares. Those creating the dares are refered to as dare Masters but have little control over those calling themselves slaves. Either party can just, it seems, walk away from the other party without any real commitment. I'm not sure why its even part of a truth or dare community.

[Leopard]

Picking someone up in casual chat is completely different to someone found via an ad.

If the ad specifically states serious replies only etc. and stipulates / or the master stipulates to the slave that it is to be full time, or whatever, then I would think that the slave is expected to follow that (assuming they have agreed to.) At that point the whole 'chat slave' thing goes out the window.

In theory.

The reality appears to be that since the site is such a blend of both people looking for casual fun (more the dare slave side of things, sort of inbetween dares and bdsm) with a sprinkling of the more serious types, that you're simply going to run into both, which may be annoying for those after one specific type, but then you're unlikely to find exactly what you want the first time anywhere.

Personally, even though I generally fall into the 'after something more serious' side, I quite like the relaxed atmosphere here compared to the more serious sites.

[kinkster707]

Hello all,

I am Spun´s Master and thought I should throw my opinion in. Firstly thank you all for your responses thus far. My slave is still very new and giving her some outside perspective will be very beneficial to her.

So far she has shown great promise during her training. She really strives to please me, However I´ve asked her not to speak to any dominants any further than respectfully explaining that she is owned and isn´t allowed to speak to any other dominants. (I do not consider talking on the Forums inappropriate obviously.) I fully agree that a slave should only have one Master. The bible quote by Odie was taken out of context but could still be considered applicable here. How can you be loyal to two unique individuals with different wants and desires.

I agree with those who made comments about "dare slaves" although I would assume that they would have found the way to contact Spun through her advertisement in the slave/Master section. It seemed to me that the ad was written by some one very serious about the slavery otherwise I would not have replied to it. Surely then as a serious Master can tell by an ad if a slave is serious or just a "dare slave" so can a "dare Master".

Again thanks to all for helping my slave reaffirm her views and also giving her some more perspective, it is always welcomed.

[MasterPain]

you are right, its a relationship, yes there are polys out thre that can handle more than one master/ slave. but its rude to go..... ah he wont mind come with me.
outsiders to the relationship shouldent enforce their will where it doesent beong

[TensionRoom101]

Firstly there is a need to get the difference clear between slaves and submissives. This site is sadly one of the worst for using them interchangeably, and they are far from it. Huge difference.

Anyway, I have different take on it. My submissives (not slaves, not interested in removing my girls' freedoms, only enhancing them) are free to talk to other doms. I don't demand to see their chat logs, I don't have email passwords, and I trust them implicitly. However, it does infuriate her when so called doms try to order her about, call her 'slut' or whatever, or think she should go to a 'proper' master. When she tells them I'm 43, been involved in BDSM for 20 years and running very successful clubs for 10 years and Dungeon Master at others, they usually vanish. Some still persist, but then we tend to make sport of those sad people.

I don't agree that a slave can serve only one master though- there are many couples who have a house slave for instance. I have handed my submissive over to others for training that is outside of my skillset, or I deferred to a higher wisdom. In turn, I have taken over the temporary ownership of another's sub previously, because there were things they needed from my experience. For some it works. It doesn't work in general for me though (except for something specific) and in most cases it is very unfair on the submissive/slave to divide their loyalties in that way.

Mike

[Spun sugar]

Originally Posted by TensionRoom101

I don't agree that a slave can serve only one master though- there are many couples who have a house slave for instance. I have handed my submissive over to others for training that is outside of my skillset, or I deferred to a higher wisdom. In turn, I have taken over the temporary ownership of another's sub previously, because there were things they needed from my experience. For some it works. It doesn't work in general for me though (except for something specific) and in most cases it is very unfair on the submissive/slave to divide their loyalties in that way.

True, there are couples who have house slaves but because it is a couple, there is typically one mindset, one "Master" mindset. Because being a couple has a "we" mentality that is the part that controls the slave, if not and each individual of the couple gave directly opposite orders who would/should the slave listen to? Also, I think, that when a submissive is handed out she/he still only has and is following one Master, you, you have asked her/him to go and follow another and it is out of respect for you that the submissive is doing it, not out of loyalty to another. So that even if the submissive is following the orders of someone else, the heart still belongs to the original Master/Mistress and therefore the sub still only has one true Master/Mistress.

[VooDon't]

I agree completely here. As a slave I find it difficult to even think of serving two masters, what if they give me conflicting orders? and I'd feel like I was betraying my master by serving someone else. If its a serious relationship you should have no need of a second master. if you feel the need for a second master, maybe you need to ask yourself if your current master is really working, and whether you want their happiness enough to stay. you should also consider if you're really suited for the slave life, or whether you just like being ordered around for kicks.

[SubMissChievous]

Originally Posted by Spun Sugar

shouldn't that be how a slave should act, serving one Master and one Master only? How can you serve more then one, what if what Their wishes conflict? I think one should be a loyal slave and faithfully serve his/her Master and feel that any slave whoever agrees to have a Master "on the side" is not a true slave just some wannabe and is not worth the time or the effort on the Master's part. I had one tell me that well you know your Master has more then one slave and I think that it is Master's decision, it is not my right to question Him that it is within Their right to do so if they can provide the time and dedication that it requires to have more then one slave as long as they do not neglect them They have the right to have as many as they please. If they do start to neglect them then the slave has the right to find someone who won't.

Originally Posted by Merciless Domme

A slave should only have one master. But to make sure, the master should explicitly forbid the slave from having more. Then the slave has no excuse.
There is no reason why a master should not keep many slaves. I have sometimes had more than one, but since each is hard work, I find it's best to keep it to one.
That the rules are different for masters and slaves is simply an aspect of the power imbalance.

There's a lot here that I need to comment on... For one, I'll say that the only part I agree 100% with is very much like what MasterPain said: Outsiders should not enforce their will where it doesn't belong if they are not invited or encouraged to do so.

As for the rest: There is simply nothing anywhere that says that a submissive should act a certain way and that a Dominant have to act the way they please at all time. The «power imbalance» has nothing to do with it because everyone, subs and Doms have their responsibilities and one of them is to be true to themselves. There is no «Universal Code of Conducts for Kinksters» that I know of yet. And there can't be because whether you are submissive or dominant this isn't all that defines a person once they enter a D/s relationship. People, regardless of their lifestyles, are still humans made of emotions, values, priorities and preferences. All of these are important and should be discussed between individuals who are considering a relationship. There are no double standards that hold true until both parties have discussed and agreed on.

I know some subs and slaves who do serve more than one. And, while it is true that some do out of respect for the Dom or because it is a direct order, many others do because they WANT to. They are not any less serious than you and me and certainly not «wannabes». People have different needs and desires and whatever they are they have to be respected.

I also happen to know quite a few Dominants who are strictly monogamous. Not because having many subs is «too much work». Simply because they prefer sharing their intimacy and fantasies with one special person.

For some, subs and Doms alike, commiting to more than one or simply playing with others is a deal breaker. Often people talk about limits but rarely about deal breakers as it seems. Or they don't take them as seriously. They wait until something goes wrong... Interestingly enough (and the main reason why I am replying) is that I was confronted to a situation that illustrates pretty well how important it is to be up front and honest about your needs & preferences:

Last week a Dom friend of mine came to me for advice. A few weeks before his sub had to leave town for a couple of weeks due to a family emergency. Poor little Dom felt all alone while being «subless» so he decided to find some «play things» on the side during his sub's absence. Long story short: the sub comes back, finds out through a third person to make things worse. The result was far from being pretty... Apparently, even though they had discussed the subject in the past, either the agreement wasn't clear enough or the Dom decided that he was entitled to act the way he wanted (I think it was a bit of both). Was that Dom right in the way he acted: no surely not. Why? Because he disrespected a previous agreement and didn't communicate clearly his needs. And in the process not only was he deceitful towards his sub but towards those other girls he played with during the sub's absence as well because he deliberately didn't tell any of them that his sub was unaware of the situation, that he had an agreement with her on the matter and that playing with others was a deal breaker for the sub. Obviously, now both of them have to live with the consequences because trust was broken and as a friend I found myself «sandwiched» between a sub friend with a broken heart in need of a shoulder to cry on and a Dom friend who had just realized how badly he had screwed up and was afraid he had lost her for good.

So all of this really shows that no matter one's orientation or role there is simply no «one true way» other than communication and honesty. It is imperative that when people enter a relationship that they clearly state those priorities and needs. One way or another is not better or worse but it needs to be crystal clear. And once an agreement is made, if for some reason, one person in the relationship cannot respect their end of the deal (or are not happy with it) then it may be time to re-evaluate whatever the priorities are. Some will find a way or a compromise. Some others will realize that their needs & wants are conflicting and that they are not meant to be together. Sure, it may not sound as fun as «play» but it will most likely avoid a lot of misunderstandings, heartaches and conflicts.

And as far as outsiders go my personal take is that I don't bother with them much. If someone isn't able to respect my choices and my relationship then they are no friend of mine and I simply have no time or energy to spend on them and I am most likely just to ignore or cease any communication with them.

[SUBstantial]

I know some subs and slaves who do serve more than one. And, while it is true that some do out of respect for the Dom or because it is a direct order, many others do because they WANT to. They are not any less serious than you and me and certainly not «wannabes». People have different needs and desires and whatever they are they have to be respected.

Thank you Chloe for this. I am actually one of these subs who does serve two masters. One Master is more fantasy, the other is more real time task oriented. The one who is more fantasy based has become too busy for me. He has granted me permission to seek a second Master but has requested I not leave Him. And I wouldn't leave Him unless He asked me too.....we've been together for a while. So me finding a second Master had all to do with me essentially having no acting Master at the moment and still wishing to be dominated. However, if my first Master had the time for me, the thought never would have crossed my mind for a second.



Anyway, to Spun Sugar, I have to say I understand your frutration with the persistent PMers that refuse to respect that you are taken. I've had a few of them myself.

[Star Shadows]

I have, in the past had people trying to push me out of the control of one master into their own hands, or push me into having multiple masters and yes it can be frustrating... but just because they want a different type of relationship to that which you do. People were made to be individual, they have the right to have varying attitudes and wants...

Just as a more task oreientated master would not be seen as "more serious" than a one who leans more to nurturing and self gratification in a submissive and vice verca the same can be said here.

In such a broard field as this is there will always be differing attitudes and opinions, each as entitled as the one before them. Its just s case of telling them in plain and simple english that it isn't what you are looking for, and if they persist simply add them to your ignore list.