RE: Master vs. Dom

RE: Master vs. Dom (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master

Message

Sirandlittle1 -> RE: Master vs. Dom (2/15/2006 4:33:44 PM)
This holds for me, yet my Dom has the opinion that master is TPE. quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster That's my definition too. quote: ORIGINAL: Evanesce A Dom is an individual with a dominant personality. A Master is a Dom with property.

MasterDaddy123 -> RE: Master vs. Dom (2/27/2006 2:31:17 PM)
A Dom is the dominent one in any type of relationship. A Master owns his slave. The slave is His property.

classykindasassy -> RE: Master vs. Dom (2/27/2006 9:45:02 PM)
I attended the South Plains Leatherfest/Master/slave Weekend in Dallas, as a sub interested in M/s dynamic and getting a true grip on the differences. I feel I got my questions answered, and new ones inspired as well. I think A difference is that while Doms do do 24/7 power exchange, not all do, and it would seem to be the moniker most adopted, and properly used , by those who do not wish the responsibility of a piece of property, requiring complete care and management, tutelage and direction. However those that are old guard or Leather family Masters DO own their slaves as power exchanged property 24/7. AN INTERESTING DISTINCTION I DISCOVERED: As we all know, Masters and slaves in the non-sexual and strictly functional sense have been around since time immemorial, and sex has not necessarily been a part of slave ownership. I discovered that there are M/s relationships where persons get together who are not even of compatible interest sexually (ex:a gay leather Master served long-term by a femme dyke slave) strictly for the spirit-to-spirit connection. I found this idea terribly interesting and it made me very curious to know more about the dynamic. I also saw how difficult a time many of us have in separating the commonly-held concept of M/s from sex. Given that our fetish world is so sexually charged, sex tends to obscure certain aspects of the M/s and D/s dynamic. And, so does romance for the same reasons. It is truly fascinating to take apart the layers of how we think of relationships and then reconsider what really works for us as individuals, what we really want, and who might best provide that. I'm having a good time taking a new look at the entire world of WIITWD. And I will never so casually use the honorific "Master" again.

sineight -> RE: Master vs. Dom (2/28/2006 4:52:23 PM)
the term Dom just means the dominant of the relationship. a master implies that they have a slave.

Arpig -> RE: Master vs. Dom (2/28/2006 8:13:33 PM)
Guage pretty much has it...a master is a Dom who has found somebody who calls him master.

BearNFirelight -> RE: Master vs. Dom (3/1/2006 5:38:52 PM)
I'm sure this opinion is already stated by others here, but I see it this way... Dom is the name for the nature of the person. I for instance am a Dominant Man. This is my core nature and I thrive in a Dominant submissive dynamic. Master is a title. It can represent a simple title like Sir, or it can represent a role occupied by the Dominant. For instance, I am a Dominant, but I practice a Master/slave level of Dominance and submission. And I am slave 'X''s Master. To all others I would be called a Dominant, to that slave, I am 'her' Master. If I am introduced as Master BigBear, I correct the person introducing me by saying, I am BigBear to all, I am my slave's Master. The fact that I am a Dominant is self explainitory and not something I am insecure about to the point of needing to remind people of my title or role. That I practice M/s versus D/s is my lifestyle. Titles are easily confused and abused. Every Dominant can be called Master, only those that are actively practicing a Master/slave dynamic are a slave's Master....and it is only the one(s) wearing the collar that they Master. Beyond that it is simply a title that is commonly used in this lifestyle.

Zensee -> RE: Master vs. Dom (3/3/2006 7:43:35 PM)
You can be a ship's Master without being its owner and you can be a submissive's Master and not claim possession. But if you are a slave Owner you had better be a Master too.

girlToServeYou -> RE: Master vs. Dom (3/6/2006 1:10:01 PM)
quote: ... you will get alot of different answers... some will be very similiar... but even they will be alittle different. Damn, you're cute. Oh yeah...and what you said made a lot of sense too. No, really....I read it all. heh....Im diggin this message board stuff.

PenelopePitstop -> RE: Master vs. Dom (3/7/2006 5:22:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IronBear 1: One who has Mastered something such as a craft ot trade (Master Builder, Master Baker or perhaps Master Calligrapher). This is ususlly awarded by a Trade/professional Organization or Guild. I hold this to be true, as I see Mastery as a skill but in this context over a submissive. To master someone you need to know them inside out, and whatever challenges come up, a Master will cope with them successfully (and now we have to define what success is but it depends on the person). It implies a length of time and a depth of knowledge, whereas Dominant implies a tendency or trait. That's my take on it anyway.

FLdsCpl4Cpl -> RE: Master vs. Dom (3/7/2006 10:27:49 AM)
It has always been my belief that the term "Master" is an individual with a dominant character that conquers the understanding of something in particular. Yet a Master as per my upbringing within the lifestyle is an individual who not only owns property, yet also knows and masters the manner in which his property is utilized. With Honor, Respect and Care. "Nobody can master themselves or others totally", yet all strive to attain the ultimate goal on our paths. Whether I own property or not, I could never look at myself as being a Master unless I am certain that I am treating and utilizing my/a property in the proper manner and understanding and exercise the meaning of the responsibilities that come with with such property. my/a I have only expressed as I have always been taught that once a dominant accepts the honor of a submissive serving him or her (be it long term or in a session), then he/she has also accepted the responsibility of the well being of such submissive. A Master is not defined through the ownership of his property, but through his property. It is the slave that reflects the Master, therefore is it not the slave that defines whether a dominant is or is not a Master? Maybe not in words, yet in actions. A Master is, in my to my belief, not self proclaimed or through the ownership of property, yet earns his title through others, be them his property(ies) or those who live and walk the same path. OK, I think I am floating away into jabber, or at least I sense that I am. But I can hope that what I have expressed has maybe helped in ways and not offended anyone present.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Collarchat.com is a member of the Free Speech Coalition

Terms of Service

0.03125