Submissive vs. slave

[BDSM_Tourguide]

What is the difference between a submissive and a slave? Is there one, really? Can the terms be used interchangably?

The simplest answer between the difference between a submissive and a slave is summed up in one word: Negotiation.

Simply put, the submissive has the right to negotiate new rules for herself, or to alter rules within her relationship after she has enetered into the relationship.

In a more general sense of the word, though, a submissive is not typically interested in a TPE type relationship. She will enter into a 24/7 domestic relationship with a dominant and will be more interested in the aspects of serving, both/either domestically and/or sexually. She is not so much interested in having her life micromanaged, nor is she desirous of corporal punishment, heavy scenes of bondage or strict discipline. She is, however, comfortable with some rules, discipline and in knowing she is in a position of perceived subservience to her dominant.

A slave, to flip the coin to the other side, is interested in being micromanaged. She wants her clothes and food chosen for her. She want to be told how to act when in public. She wants to give up her control over things and her right to negotiate. In short, she gives herself totally to her relationship and to her master.

And these terms do not even describe other forms of 'submissives' in other types of BDSM and kink. There are quite a lot of types of people that can be grouped into the broader 'submissive' category. Included in this category are bottoms, painsluts, cumsluts, piss whores, toilet slaves, masochists and a broad variety of other types that I probably don't even know about. Still, in most common terms, the word submissive covers them all.

The biggest difference, though, between what is usually termed a "true" submissive and other types of fetish/kink submissive types is that a submissive gets her first and foremost satisfaction from the act of submitting. A submissive wants to serve and please her dominant before any other consideration is taken, but not to the point of giving up her safety or putting her submission before her children, for instance.

A slave also wants to serve, but a slave's primary motivations are usually a little different from a submissive's. Certainly, she still wants to please and satify her master, but she also wants to be owned completely and have most of her decisions taken from her on a day-to-day type basis.

Now, there are plenty of people that think that submissives are just playing at being slaves and there are plenty of people that think slaves are just people that don't want to take responsibility for themselves and want all their decisions made for them. The fact is that submissives and slaves are equal, both in commitment and in servitude. They just choose to show their service and commitment in different ways.

[Barton]

Very well written. A fine distinction.
Barton.

[Pickety Witch]

Spot on! A good description TG.

[tehya]

Very well done Tourguide! However I would like to add that there are those of us that straddle the proverbial fence.

I think there are many lines that blur for me in this area. Fortunately for me, Canopus can see my needs, as I know of his and has found ways to adapt my slave needs into my submissive self... or is it my submissive needs into my slave self... LOL.

There are still places in my life where I must be in control of things... my children, job, household matters (when Canopus is not available). Yet on the other hand, there are many places that I can give up total control... my attire, attitude, sex, purchases, needs, etc.

The point is we believe in defining our relationship for ourselves. As I have stated in another thread, the titles have no bearing on us. What matters is that the relationship is what we want it to be or need it to be, and it could change daily and often does. We work on it every single day.

Call me or put whatever title on me that you would like, but when I am at home, with him, all I am is his! And that is what makes us happy and healthy.

Master's tehya

[myri_SN]

applaudessssssssssssssssss at Tourguide
i started teh same tpic twice in bondage.com and never got a real reply. this sounds much more like the answer i was lookign for.

:D

[BDSM_Tourguide]

applaudessssssssssssssssss at Tourguide
i started teh same tpic twice in bondage.com and never got a real reply. this sounds much more like the answer i was lookign for.

:D


Amazing what happens when you get some people together that really know what they're talking about. ;)

[Barton]

Professor TourGuide! :D

[allalone46]

From what I have read here I ave been thinking on the same lines, but reading some profiles I see the contradictions, in what some think that thay are, but what thay realy are, and want to be. Always learing.

[pandemonium]

I also saw something of this nature someplace else. I don't think I fall into the sub category and definitely not the slave category. Not that I think there is anything wrong with it, but I couldn't do it.
Is it safe to say that a bottom is different in the amount of time or type of play?

[BDSM_Tourguide]

Is it safe to say that a bottom is different in the amount of time or type of play?


Yes it is. Bottoming is usually just occasional SM play, with very little or no DS elements involved at all.

[Dslave]

The simplest answer between the difference between a submissive and a slave is summed up in one word: Negotiation.

Simply put, the submissive has the right to negotiate new rules for herself, or to alter rules within her relationship after she has enetered into the relationship.

The difference IS choice and in essence negotiation, most absolutely. Once you are a slave, your choices are made for you. The only choice a slave really has is to leave or stay. A submissive that is not a slave has many choices and because of that many things ARE up for discussion and negotiation. As a slave, you trust that your Master knows what is best for you and he makes the choices.

Though, I still differ on the level of commitment. I believe that a slave's level of commitment is much stronger. Just the fact that she must trust her Master with her life is reason enough for me to believe that. A submissive is someone that will allow someone to make choices, up to a point, but she has the last say. A slave truly has very little say if any. And, simply because of that, knowing that a submissive can redefine the rules and the relationship at any given moment, I believe that the level of commitment to the relationship is not as extreme as a slave's. I am NOT saying that a slave is not commited. I am saying it is a very different level of commitment that a slave has.

[BDSM_Tourguide]

Though, I still differ on the level of commitment. I believe that a slave's level of commitment is much stronger. Just the fact that she must trust her Master with her life is reason enough for me to believe that.


It seems that you and I are just bound to disagree on these things.

I don't see any difference in level of commitment between a submissive and a slave. The two simply choose to serve in different ways.

In fact, an argument could easily be made that a slave is less comitted than a submissive is, because she doesn't actually have to make any decisions or take any responsibility for herself. She just has to obey and follow orders as they are given.

I don't know where the stigma that submissives are not as comitted as slaves are, but I certainly do not believe it to be a true one.

Incidentally, how does a slave trust her master with her life? This isn't the world of Gor. A slave isn't going to be put to death for disobedience or for being displeasing. A slave that is not happy with her master, or a master that is not happy with his slave, can walk out the door. If a slave worried that her life was in danger, why would she have become a slave to the person that caused that worry in her in the first place?

[Dslave]

Incidentally, how does a slave trust her master with her life?

I will tell you how very simply, a slave allows the Master to make all decisions for her (save the one... stay or leave) and therefore in essence she is giving him her life or "devoting her life" to him in a very real way. And, it is one of his responsibilities (again, our level of responsibility seems to differ but by your own definitions you do seem to agree that a Master does make all the decisions and there is little room for negotiation and that in itself is a HUGE responsibility) to protect that life that she has basicly given him. She trusts him with all of the decisions in her life so therefore she trusts him with her life. Also, in extreme BDSM (which is not the norm but still exists), a slave does literally trusts her Master with her life quite literally as she trusts that he is going to keep her safe and unharmed through his knowledge, skill, wisdom and commitment towards her life, her well being and her growth. Again, I don't see Dominants having that level of commitment. Sure, they are going to keep things safe/sane/consentual but are they going to care about the slave's long term growth, well being and life in general? I don't believe the average Dominant is very concerned with these things but a Master will (or should be) concerned about these things.

[BDSM_Tourguide]

Again, I don't see Dominants having that level of commitment. Sure, they are going to keep things safe/sane/consentual but are they going to care about the slave's long term growth, well being and life in general? I don't believe the average Dominant is very concerned with these things but a Master will (or should be) concerned about these things.


Interesting, because I have been in a commited DS relationship now for nearly six years with the same woman. For the first two years I provided her with income, clothing, food, shelter and medical care. I think that means I looked after her long-term growth, well-being and life in general, and I'm still not a master. I'm a dominant.

And while I have been immigrating to Canada, she's been working. She's been the one putting herself second for me. She's the one that's been providing me with my clothing and food and shelter and medical care. And you know what? She's not a master either. She's also not a slave, even though she does have to put herself second for my benefit. She's a submissive, plain and simple.

So, this is why I don't say level of commitment counts when determining dominant or master or submissive and slave, because you can be as commited as a fanatic, but it's how you see yourself that counts.

[myri_SN]

I will tell you how very simply, a slave allows the Master to make all decisions for her (save the one... stay or leave) and therefore in essence she is giving him her life or "devoting her life" to him in a very real way. And, it is one of his responsibilities (again, our level of responsibility seems to differ but by your own definitions you do seem to agree that a Master does make all the decisions and there is little room for negotiation and that in itself is a HUGE responsibility) to protect that life that she has basicly given him. She trusts him with all of the decisions in her life so therefore she trusts him with her life. Also, in extreme BDSM (which is not the norm but still exists), a slave does literally trusts her Master with her life quite literally as she trusts that he is going to keep her safe and unharmed through his knowledge, skill, wisdom and commitment towards her life, her well being and her growth. Again, I don't see Dominants having that level of commitment. Sure, they are going to keep things safe/sane/consentual but are they going to care about the slave's long term growth, well being and life in general? I don't believe the average Dominant is very concerned with these things but a Master will (or should be) concerned about these things.

seems that you think a slave has no limits what so ever which i think is wrong, everyone has limits. also do i think that every dom or master or any partner in a relationship always cares for the other partners well being as there is no relationship possible without that.

the other day someone told me if i am a slave i would let SN do anything to me he wanted and what if he wanted to harm me. so i said, i know that he wouldn't harm me. the reply i got was: if i think that then i am not a slave as if i was i would have to fear all the time that he might. but why should i? i know that he won't as there wouldn't be a relationship if i couldn't trust him or he wouldn't care for me :) . seemed to me that that person spent too much time reading gor. also first thing he said was that he pitied me as i was a victim of a dominant male who uses bdsm as an excuse to overpower women :o :confused:

[Dslave]

seems that you think a slave has no limits what so ever which i think is wrong, everyone has limits

I assume the post was directed towards me so I will answer it because I believe you have missed something. Or, maybe, I have. A slave DEFINATELY has limits. But, she defines most of them BEFORE she enters into the relationship. And, a good Master will always respect those limits. Not only that, even though a slave does not have a choice in what is done, she does have a say. In fact, I believe that communication is the KEY to ALL relationships. For instance, I have a journal that I write in every single day that my Master reads. When I am with him, he also reads my behavior. He knows me pretty much like the back of his hand. If he didn't, he wouldn't be my Master. (That is part of what a Master does, in my eyes.) He reads my journal, he reads me, he talks to me when he desires to (which is often) and THEN he makes his decision as to what he feels is best for me (sexually or otherwise.... and I realize that some don't have the "otherwise"). A Master knows (or should know) your limits going into the relationship. He should be aware enough to see progress and problems and to make the decision which direction to go (putting your growth and well being as part of the big picture). Ultimately he makes the decision but slaves, though they may not have many choices, DO have limits. I never said they didn't.

And, BDSM tourguide, I know, it's just me but it "seems" like you two are simply not making the commitment but all else is there. Much like (and NO not exactly like, before anyone jumps on me again) when a couple lives together yet never takes the marriage vows. A couple is still not married officially, even though they live together after 15 years. Just as a Dominant is not a Master or a sub is not a slave after living like they are for years. HOWEVER, all that I see that is different is in the formalities and what is in the heart. The vows and commitment to those vows seems to be all that is missing in both cases.

Though, I also feel many are living or claiming to live as Master and slave that are simply living as Dom and sub, taking their vows and going through the formalities, yes, but they are nothing more than Dominant and sub as they do not honor those vows or commitment or take on the responsibility of a Master/slave. It's much like I ask people often, does a ring make you married or a collar make you a slave? No, I don't believe so.

So, in a sense, a strange sense, I do believe we ARE agreeing on this point. What it boils down to is what is in one's heart and soul and how that heart and soul is reflected, that is the only thing that matters, really.

[myri_SN]

i don't think anyone outside any relationship can judge what type the relationship is. and M/s or D/s is different for everyone and i think only the two people involved can judge if it is M/s or D/s, not anyone else. we never had any vows or contracts of any kind, still doesn't mean he doesn't call me his slave. he knew my limits before we first met and a lot changed since then hence limits keeps changing to. and if there is something he thinks that i really dont like it i could ask him not to do it anymore but i wouldn't ask, if i don't like the particular thing, there is always some aspect to it that i like. for example i hate needles in my nipples but i know he likes doing that, and i sort of liek that he does it anyways no mather how scared i am, as long as i don't clearly ask him to not do it anymore he wont stop and if he wants to stick one in he will (cause i let him sort of, by not asking to see it as a hard limit, and that asking would only work as he said i could on that particular thing).

[leo9]

Just discovered this thread after I'd started an almost identical one over in the next room, so I'll be doing a bit of catching up.




In a more general sense of the word, though, a submissive is not typically interested in a TPE type relationship. She will enter into a 24/7 domestic relationship with a dominant and will be more interested in the aspects of serving, both/either domestically and/or sexually. She is not so much interested in having her life micromanaged, nor is she desirous of corporal punishment, heavy scenes of bondage or strict discipline.


I think you're mistaken in conflating submission and masochism. I know a totally owned slave who is micromanaged and controlled, but who doesn't want or get any punishment stronger than a sharp word; contrariwise, I know any number of submissives who want extreme bondage and pain, but are always in control even when they're saying "Beat me harder!"

IME, there's no correlation between levels of submission and levels of masochism. In terms of pain, the only consistent difference between sub and slave is that a slave may accept pain that is completely "wrong" and unerotic in order to please hir Owner, and even feel fulfilled by doing so, where a sub would be saying "Red, red, this isn't working for me."

[leo9]

I believe that a slave's level of commitment is much stronger. Just the fact that she must trust her Master with her life is reason enough for me to believe that.

If, as you suggested later, you're referring to SM scenes, I've seen plenty of subs get into situations where they were trusting the Dom with their lives. In the final analysis, anyone who lets someone else tie them up and play rough with them does that. Even excluding conscious malice, a careless or inexperienced Dom can hold the sub's life in hir hands without realising it.

In fact, subs are often taking a bigger risk. They may be playing with someone they only meet for occasional scenes, who they don't know well and who has only a casual commitment to their welfare. Whereas a slave knows hir Owner intimately and knows (one hopes) that the Owner feels responsible for the slave's well being.

[leo9]

if there is something he thinks that i really dont like it i could ask him not to do it anymore but i wouldn't ask, if i don't like the particular thing, there is always some aspect to it that i like. for example i hate needles in my nipples but i know he likes doing that, and i sort of liek that he does it anyways no mather how scared i am, as long as i don't clearly ask him to not do it anymore he wont stop and if he wants to stick one in he will (cause i let him sort of, by not asking to see it as a hard limit, and that asking would only work as he said i could on that particular thing).

In my purely personal usage, I'd say that makes you a slave. If it's wrong for you in every way, but you get off on it because he enjoys doing it and because he does it for his own pleasure even though he knows you hate it, and he would stop if you insisted but you don't... That's what I call a slave.

[BDSM_Tourguide]

IME, there's no correlation between levels of submission and levels of masochism.



No, and I didn't say there was. What I said, foremost, was that I was speaking in general terms. But there are many different "types" and "categories" that can fit under the generalized "submissive" banner. I know that a submissive does not have to be a masochist, because mine isn't. She doesn't want or appreciate pain at all, and if pain is used, it is more often than not, a punishment.

However, having said that, if you've seen our pictures, then you know she has a great fondness for candle wax. That's doesn't mean she's any more of a masochist or any less of a submissive. It just means she has a fetish she enjoys.

Submission is categorized, first and foremost, by the desire to submit. The extracurricular activities are just gravy. As I mentioned, though, trying to classify people by their exact likes, dislikes and fetishes could involve a very complicated naming process that no one really wants. Therefore, we stick to the broadly accepted terms most times: Submissive, slave, bottom, etc.

[BDSM_Tourguide]

In fact, subs are often taking a bigger risk. They may be playing with someone they only meet for occasional scenes, who they don't know well and who has only a casual commitment to their welfare. Whereas a slave knows hir Owner intimately and knows (one hopes) that the Owner feels responsible for the slave's well being.


Occasional scene play is more the dynamic of a bottom than a submissive. Submissives generally do find relationships. They just don't have the same kinds of relationships as slaves do.

My wife and I are in a DS relationship right now. We're not 24/7 DS, though, because we can't be. We have a few other commitments, like our daughter, to think about.

[leo9]

My wife and I are in a DS relationship right now. We're not 24/7 DS, though, because we can't be. We have a few other commitments, like our daughter, to think about.

As I see it, 24/7 is in your head, you don't have to have someone kneeling naked every hour of the day to qualify. You have to go to the shops or meet vanilla friends or family: and if you say "Can you get me another drink, please?" and she says "Okay dear", you know you're saying "Now, slave!" and she's saying "Yes Master!" whatever the rest of the world may see. Same goes with children.

I had a 24/7 slave for several months alongside a 6yo child, and he never noticed anything untoward. (He's 10 now, so I can casually ask about what he remembers of that period.) We kept things looking vanilla till he went off to school, then her clothes came off and her collar went on, but we knew who was in charge every minute.

[myri_SN]

In my purely personal usage, I'd say that makes you a slave. If it's wrong for you in every way, but you get off on it because he enjoys doing it and because he does it for his own pleasure even though he knows you hate it, and he would stop if you insisted but you don't... That's what I call a slave.

blushes :o
so you still don't remember meeting me?

[Dslave]

In fact, subs are often taking a bigger risk. They may be playing with someone they only meet for occasional scenes, who they don't know well and who has only a casual commitment to their welfare.

First off, if you are being intimate with someone that you don't know very well, you are taking unneccesary risks that (I believe) you shouldn't be taking, to begin with. If you don't know a D/s or a M/s well enough to know if they are in control enough to do their very best to avoid most risks then really I am not sure they should be putting yourself in that situation.

In saying that, you actually made my point about commitment. The commitment between D/s and M/s is much different (if not for that very reason... there are several others).

Though, you misunderstood me if you believe that I was simply speaking of a slave trusting a Master with her life exclusively during the sexually intimate experience. Sex IS a part of the M/s relationship but it IS NOT the entire relationship for many and extreme sex is not actually a part of most M/s relationships (it does happen to be a part of mine, though, I have spoke to many that are not into nearly the extreme sex that Master and I are). The trust I was speaking of when I spoke of a slave trusting a Master with their life was in reference to ALL of the choices a slave trusts their Master/Mistress with in their life/experience together. It is, for many, a life altering experience. I was refering to the entire experience and a M/s's commitment to it and the trust it embraces.

[leo9]

the other day someone told me if i am a slave i would let SN do anything to me he wanted and what if he wanted to harm me. so i said, i know that he wouldn't harm me. the reply i got was: if i think that then i am not a slave as if i was i would have to fear all the time that he might. but why should i? i know that he won't as there wouldn't be a relationship if i couldn't trust him or he wouldn't care for me :) . seemed to me that that person spent too much time reading gor. also first thing he said was that he pitied me as i was a victim of a dominant male who uses bdsm as an excuse to overpower women :o :confused:

So, let me see if I've got this clear. If you couldn't trust your Master and lived in fear that he might harm you, you would be in a healthy D/s relationship. But because you trust him and know he cares for you, you're the victim of an exploiter.

You think you're confused? What about this guy? Never mind reading too much Gor, I think he's been smoking too much of something.

[myri_SN]

So, let me see if I've got this clear. If you couldn't trust your Master and lived in fear that he might harm you, you would be in a healthy D/s relationship. But because you trust him and know he cares for you, you're the victim of an exploiter.

You think you're confused? What about this guy? Never mind reading too much Gor, I think he's been smoking too much of something.


i'm not confused that guy seems to have a very wrong opinion. :( and have no clue about bdsm at all i think
then yesterday i read on another forum (not bdsmlibrary, they were arguying that the slaves ont he pics they kept posting were poor girls and needed to be pitied for what happens to them :confused: ) that some guy said that the women he plays with, (he didn't say play he said the ones he hurts and tortures) don't want to be hurt but they got no other choice
weird guy:
I am the master myself....but all the girls i torture don't want it at all...but they don't have any choise.... so someone replied if they were going straight to the police afterwards then. he plainly replied:
weird guy:
They don't know shit....i put bags on their faces when i take them to my place and when i release them....so they don't know where they were i told him that that wasn't BDSM but rape and abuse!!!!!

[allalone46]

i'm not confused that guy seems to have a very wrong opinion. :( and have no clue about bdsm at all i think
then yesterday i read on another forum (not bdsmlibrary, they were arguying that the slaves ont he pics they kept posting were poor girls and needed to be pitied for what happens to them :confused: ) that some guy said that the women he plays with, (he didn't say play he said the ones he hurts and tortures) don't want to be hurt but they got no other choice . so someone replied if they were going straight to the police afterwards then. he plainly replied: i told him that that wasn't BDSM but rape and abuse!!!!! :mad: :mad: What this juy is doing is not ply, it is abuse. he isn't a Dom or even a Top, let a lone a Master he is some pervert getting his kiks off beatting up weman and calling it BDSM. This is the type of pervert, and yes I do meen pervert that gives use in the D/s life style a bad name. This is the type of %^^%$$#$$ that everyone thinks we are becouse when he does get cought, and he will pepole say are what we are, and he is going to say in his defence that he is in the D/s life style, and that is what we do. %*^*^$& like him make me sick. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: As for the *&%^%&$% well the words I have to discribe IT, well I have more respect to everyone reading this than to say them. And in here we can say some pretty rounghy things in the forums.

[myri_SN]

hands allalone46 some valerian tablets :o

[allalone46]

hands allalone46 some valerian tablets :o :confused: I'm just a public school educated Dom and I am still learning and probable much of the knolage that works into and though the D/s lifestyle I havent learned. And yes some of it from Victoean times, and the middle adges but you did lose me there sarry. Also for some reason I cant read what is put up when it put in red on my computer screen some times. Some times and plases I can and so I can't. Here I can't. I wasn't able to read wht you said till I went to the responce section. Don.

[myri_SN]

:confused: I'm just a public school educated Dom and I am still learning and probable much of the knolage that works into and though the D/s lifestyle I havent learned. And yes some of it from Victoean times, and the middle adges but you did lose me there sarry. Also for some reason I cant read what is put up when it put in red on my computer screen some times. Some times and plases I can and so I can't. Here I can't. I wasn't able to read wht you said till I went to the responce section. Don.
just some herbal tablets to calm you down again, sowwy :o

[allalone46]

just some herbal tablets to calm you down again, sowwy :o :) Thats a better color, and I don't tak herbal tablets . Just the color on this screen. Sarry for using the web. Back to the reason for it. On the sick person the was describe that got this started. He isn't one of use, and it sound like when he gets cought he is going to use all of use in the D/s lifestyle to justify himself and what he does. that said I do hope he gets cought. he is just abusing woman. If you wander what the difference is between what we do and abuse. Well what is decribed about him is one big difference.

[myri_SN]

:) Thats a better color, and I don't tak herbal tablets . Just the color on this screen. Sarry for using the web. Back to the reason for it. On the sick person the was describe that got this started. He isn't one of use, and it sound like when he gets cought he is going to use all of use in the D/s lifestyle to justify himself and what he does. that said I do hope he gets cought. he is just abusing woman. If you wander what the difference is between what we do and abuse. Well what is decribed about him is one big difference.
i know hence he pissed me off quite a bit :mad:

[allalone46]

i know hence he pissed me off quite a bit :mad: :mad: Want to know what pissis me off. He did! I just would like to get him some place and let him know what he has been doing to others. But than I would lower myself down to his leval. But with people like him I would love to do to him what I would never do to a sub or slave. And yes I do know how to do it, and I would never do that to a sub or slave but to a sub human like him I am tempted. But like I said I am not going to lower myself down to his leval.

[slavelucy]

i think myri agrees with you allalone, i think that was the point in her bringing it up.

Sounds to me like that guy is making up a load of crap anyway, i very much doubt he practices any of the drivel he yaps on about...i certainly hope so anyway.

In terms of the subject, i agree with TG, blanket terms, although, not ideal, are necessary in Ds relationships, because to seperate everyone out, in accordance with a million definitions and preferences, would be ridiculously complicated and would lead to Ds quietism!

sl

[allalone46]

:rolleyes: Probable spelled that wrong but here goes. What that thing is doing doesn't follow the gide lines, even if what we do can be just about any line you can think. Know mater what thouse same three things are always the same. Safe, Sane, and Consentule. And what he is doing isn't and never will be. Even if one of the three is followed the othr two arn't . And I would find that any are.

Well, yes, i agree...in fact, i think everyone agree's, the guy is clearly a complete loser and i don't know why we're wasting any more valauble thread space or time on him, having already established he's completely wrong.

sl

[Curtis]

Okay, it's time for me to step on my dick, here.

It's my belief that Tourguide's purpose in starting this thread, along with the "Dominant or Master" thread and some others, is to help newer or more confused/unsettled Forum denizens to define(?) themselves, so that they can be be more comfortable with themselves (meaning their self-image).

That's why these three or four threads were placed in Knowledge Base, rather than BDSM Life or General Talk. They're teaching pieces for people who haven't yet solidified their thinking, not an attempt to dictate absolute definitions to people who've already defined themselves.

They're also an attempt to place a common ground of understanding under people who might someday find themselves in a social situation and be faced with strangers using these terms. In such a case, it would be good if everyone was working from a common terminology.

I run into this frequently on the Internet in a non-BDSM context. When e-mailing with Aussies, Brits and English-as-a-second-languagers, it's always good to know that they don't mean the same thing by 'boot' or 'bonnet' that us'ns do, and it's polite to use their definitions (when you can remember).

And this brings us neatly 'round to the "Respect" thread that Dslave began, located elsewhere in Knowledge Base.

(If I misinterpreted Tourguide's intent, I'm sure he'll pop by in 'alf a mo' and set me straight.)