Here's a food for thought topic: imagine how much better the forums would be if there were lots of threads like this, instead of them being blogs that quickly disappear off the tiny blog list.

Very heavy issue! There are masters/Dom's , who feel to reshape there slave to suite them. Training as such, should be broken down into areas. 1. You have the area of improving that skill in the slave. So, they can become stronger as a person. 2. It is that area of challenging the mentally goal within themselves. 3. That mentally stage, of being able to accepted the limits and then being pushed.

Now, there are the evil sides. Which I feel does fall right into what you are saying. 1. Is mind over matter, from how some masters/doms, play with the slave head to adjust them to the standard they want them to be. Is it right? " hell no", it is from the breaking down in which they keep that strong power control over the slave. Due in part, from they don't know what the hell they are doing. 2. " Fakes", in which use the wrong kind of training because, they don't understand the true meaning of what is required.
Everyone has there views on this word of " training", but be honest in some masters/doms, are not truly in that degree if knowledge. So, really they should not call themselves that. They are just using it to get back at those who hurt them. Which is not right and being totally disrespectful to the innocence slaves.

...It's a mushroom? o.o


It seems to me that the real problem here is the example, rather than the word training.

"I would never think of you as bratty, but in need of a lot of retraining" doesn't even really make sense, but let's go with it anyway.

person 1: I am a brat
person 2: I don't think you are a brat; you just need improving

Right off the bat you have a relationship mismatch and so it doesn't need to go any further. It doesn't say anything about the word training itself.

This is an unrelated comment: but do you realise just how much the mushroom, just to the right of where it says comments beneath the blog-post proper, looks like someone receiving anal? That's by-the-by.

Training, to me, is what someone asks for when they lack experience in something. Its a way of admitting it without actually saying 'I'm new and I don't know if I'll like/think I'll be that good at whatever this is'. This could also therefore make it quite difficult to hear for someone who considers themselves quite active in the scene.

I agree with your power dynamic thinking. It's the case of student vs master. Telling someone they need to be trained is essentially asking for a form of submission, but not necessarily directly to them. Students have an image of being 'not quite ready' for the real world, and so by default anyone not in training is seen as above them in whatever twisted hierarchy I'm alluding to.

However, doms always need as much training as subs do. On a broader level they need to know how to conduct themselves when another person allows them to take control. On a more personal level they need to know how best to act around whoever is submissive to them, learn their signals, and, if they fuck up, learn how to be humble in apologising. In this sense, then, training isn't submissive, but necessary. However, the amount it's tossed around towards subs as though all doms just know inherently how to be all domly means it has been twisted into being a submissive word.

That's just my view anyway.

I thought I'd best give a fuller answer after my totally not helpful mushroom-anal comment to begin with. :P (Why does anal on a toadstool hurt more than normal anal? Because there's not mushroom in there).

Training to me, in a completely generic sense, signifies improvement. If you take that word into a BDSM context you can immediately see what's trying to unfold.

You take a submissive, who is either inexperienced, or who has some undesirable traits, and train them through some sort of process with the end goal of them being better than they were before they started. You'd train a dog in this fashion. Humans train themselves like this in universities. No problem, right?

It gets complex in human relationship because, because it's no longer one sided. You now have two people, giving and taking from each other. A husband can't train his wife, or vice-versa. Simply the act of knowing somebody, talking to somebody, developing with somebody; all of these are elements of training.

You're training yourself to be a better match for the other person, while also trying to train them to move closer to your ideals. In an ideal world you'd meet in the middle.

In BDSM you won't meet in the middle. You might draw closer, but the scale is weighted towards the dominant generally. But never all the way towards them.

So while you may be able to train a sub closer to you, you'll never be able to train everything. The sub is a human being, not a Barbie doll.

Trying to "train" out a fundamental part of another person's personality just because it doesn't suit you is an exercise in futility, and only highlights a sense of incompatibility which may or may not be surmountable.

On the other hand, getting away from what it should mean, I always enjoyed the sound of the word in a D/s context, especially as a sub. It gets me all tingly knowing training is coming, more-so because of what's associated with the word (fun stuff right?), rather than the word itself.

I know where you got the inspiration for this from! :P

I'll have to agree with Leopard on this one. You could argue that slave is a more extreme form of sub, but they've pretty much become synonyms at this stage within the BDSM community.
I can't imagine a scenario (a legal one at least) where someone is actually a slave; in service to someone, and unable to leave that service.

Then again, that's the beauty of semantics. In some cases words are being used outside their initial definitions (such as slave in a BDSM context), so there's no actual correct answer.

Training is another interesting one, with lots of different takes on it. Looking forward to that one.
You should have quite a thought-provoking series here!

No, they're just words. The people involved in a relationship can define the terms of their relationship and any titles used as they like.

Semantics... so much fun. So let's start with a topic near and dear to our hearts: sub vs slave. Is there a difference? My take? Absolutely! I think so anyway. In GDs ad area though, there's really not an option to choose. It's 'x' master seeks 'y' slave. Period. Should there be an option there?

This makes me so happy Context is unequivocally important if you want genuine communication, so I am all for these blogs

And Lyss, once again I adore your comebacks.

Where to start...I love this post so much I want to hold it and squeeze it and call it George.

First, I think that the only time it is remotely acceptable to tell someone that they aren't really submissive is if they genuinely do not enjoy submission in general and in fact enjoy domination. Simply because they don't fit one particular niche of submission does not mean they aren't submissive. And I have had experiences similar to yours where people (I refuse to call them doms) were shocked when I wouldn't just whip off my clothes and fall on my knees during the first five minutes of messaging. Guess what? I'm still submissive. I just prefer to choose who gets my submission. That would be 'fuck off' button number one with me, I think.

I admire your communication skills. I still think that from time to time I stuff too much down, or I'm so preoccupied with being "nice" and not offending anyone that I sugar coat things to the point that it's really unclear that I think something is dumb, not worth my time, etc. and it doesn't go so well.

As for titles, I hear you. I think that titles should not be throwaways, should not be demanded, but should be given out of respect (which also means there is a proper context for them). When Wardell and I started out, I called him Sir, and I liked that. It was part of my submission in a very good way, but he didn't impose that on me, I asked what I ought to call him. Then a little bit later we tried out "Daddy," and discovered that fit even better, and he's been my Daddy ever since. But that works for us, it has genuine meaning for us, and if it isn't your cup of tea, then why mess with it? I feel extremely uncomfortable calling someone "master" for a number of reasons I won't get into. If someone I'm just chatting with demands I address them as such and such, I'm likely to roll my eyes, snort in a ladylike manner, and then respond with, 'Okay, "Sir whatever," I'm Galactic President McAwesomePants, nice to meet you.' Same goes when people address me as "sub" or "slave". My name is Tink, and until informed otherwise, that's what you get to call me.

As for this sense of entitlement regarding pictures or anything of the like, I'm going to start asking for an explanation, a detailed justification as to why they in fact deserve intimate access to my person. Somehow, logging onto the internet and calling yourself a dom, then spamming my inbox without even attempting decent grammar feels, I don't know...pathetically lacking. And if we are already friends and they demand, guess who's getting the boot? I could not agree more about your comment on trusting your partner - besides the fact that pictures can so easily be faked that I personally don't feel that's the best choice if one is really that concerned.

As to responses about commands, I have learned Wardell doesn't appreciate it when I become monosyllabic And I can easily respect and accommodate that, so it's not an issue. If someone ticks me off in chat, I can shut down pretty quick, and will resort to short and sweet responses because I've suddenly realized the host of better things I have to do. But again, for me calling Wardell "Daddy" particularly when I respond to a command/request heightens the experience of my submission, so it's win/win. What I dislike is when I am required to change my natural method of communication not because I am being disrespectful and need a tune-up but because the domly dom can only function when an extremely formulaic system occurs.

This week's pet peeve is people not reading my likes/limits and just throwing tasks at me hoping to get lucky. I'm sorry, but if you expect me to do your task, handling prep, safety, completing the task well with attention to detail, clean up, and write you a kick-ass report, then I think the least you can do is read through my info.

And I learned pretty quick that more than anything I want to play with someone who will get in my head, figure me out, and use my imagination, etc., to his advantage. Anything else feels deeply unsatisfying. Whether or not that makes me a true submissive or not, I don't care; I know the lack of care and attention regarding certainly doesn't make them a true dom (oh no she didn't! oh yes, yes, she did).

I don't know if I'm exactly stubborn...that might be a question for Wardell I do know I can accomplish a lot out of spite. If someone pushes me to do something, even if I may have considered doing it out of the goodness of my heart, now I'm not going to do it because you've crossed a line. That's a very big 'fuck off' button with me, also because I have learned if I don't defend myself then people will suddenly have power over me they don't deserve and will not use well (and I learned that most clearly after I read your thoughts on this the first time, so thank you).

The rest I agree with, all the way, and I suddenly realized how long this comment is so I should stop now

I love your post kitten lyss! One thing caught my curiosity, I didnt want to know or care before you said it because it was your business... I must know the answer to this line!!

I sleep nude when I'm feeling lazy and wear lingerie to bed when I'm feeling sexy

It will be driving me nuts all day, and maybe that was your plan! Here we were looking inside your mind and now your looking inside ours what a fun twist of advents.

I completely agree with everything you said especially pictures. I told Brooke from the first day we talked I would only ever request 1 picture as proof she was a girl. Since then its all been up to her if she feels like sharing she can if she doesn't there's no pressure because I never ever ask. (okay asked 1 other time but long story and definitely worth seeing and told her she didn't have to unless she truly wanted)

I liked almost every word of this. I especially liked the part where you say you dislike titles like sir or master. I completely agree with this. I've even sent responses to people asking me why I dislike it which were almost word for word what you said in this blog: 'I don't need a title to feel dominant'.

Saying someone's name is much more connecting to the person you're with. Sir could mean anybody. Jon, for example, could only mean me (at that time).

What a good post, oh the trials and tribulations of being a lady on GD thank god I don't have to worry about that, I think I would block about 90% of men on GD and maybe myself a few times.

As you mention there are a lot of manipulative people out there and also a lot of jumped up pricks that call themselves a Dom. As I have said many times before Submission is not taken it is given, when will these boys learn.

Thank you for your post it reminds us boys what it must be like to get so many idiots PMing you, I am amazed that the Ladies stay on GD.

Regards "Domly Dom"

Semantics can drive me crazy, but I recognize that certain words are 'extra' important to some people. I guess I've learned to accept that. I don't have much of anything more to add, but I just wanted to say that you could always cuddle with me!

So glad you commented on this meaning I got to read it. You know I am in agreement.

My main agreement is the post-script though, about how connotations of words have VERY powerful meanings to me. We're fortunate in that our connotations generally match up. Thanks for belonging to me and letting me belong to ye, Wigglyss

Good post. In my opinion the word belongs more to a world of fantasy. I mean, very few of us, even if we wanted to, will ever be really 'owned' with the true meaning of the word. It's almost impossible for one to truly be owned because of the fact that in the real world we have families, friends and things that are important to us. Even the ones that claim to 'live it 24/7' cannot be truly 'owned'. However when I imagine myself with the man of my dreams in a relationship full of passion and love whispering in my ear 'You're just property to me, I own you' my automatic response is 'Oh yeah, definitely!'. Hope I got my point across, I'm not too good at expressing myself.

I fall on the other side of the mine. I want you all to myself, but I would generally have you say im yours a time or 2 before declaring you are all mine! Even though I am a dom I feel the sub believes it much more when she has been saying shes all yours. But with saying that I love to protect her and make sure nothing bad happens at all. Thats part of being mine

I feel the same way, in general I don't like being called 'owned' (and have had at least one pretty funny conversation around it with a trial run Dom) for the same reasons you and NLG said, I am the only one who owns all aspects of myself.

I don't think my current Dominant would ever even want or consider saying he owns me, but I don't think it would bother me if he did because I know he doesn't think of me as an object or his possession. He has said I am his and parts of me and my right to orgasm belong to him. I love it when he says that, it makes me so smooshy, and he could say owned all he wanted with that!

I do think it is a combination of semantics and different relationships. I can't stand it when a Dom tries to say they own me right away, even parts of me - they have to earn that through trust and respect, it's not just given; but I also don't consider myself a slave and could never be one, so that could be part of the difference.

It's funny, though, whenever I see people's signatures that say owned by _____, I think it is so sweet!