*giggles* See, this is what I meant by everyone having their own definition of the two terms. This is why I feel it is important to sit down and discuss your potential Dominant's views.
That said, I have to say that my own definitions tend to be near clones to BDSM_Tourguide's. I think that the term "slave" implies ownership. As such, a slave would have very few freedoms beyond genuine concern for their own safety. I feel that when a slave negotiates a contract or other agreement is then bound by it completely. Perhaps they have safewords in their contract, perhaps they don't. If they do have safewords, then those safewords are used ONLY in the event of an emotional or physical safety issue.
I see submissives more as play partners. Maybe they're just in it for a scene or three with a Dominant. Maybe they want more than just a scene or three but don't want to turn their entire will over to someone else.
Though I would like to reinforce that what I've written are my views. These things are not clearly defined in Webster's Dictionary-O-Kink. I encourage you to define "slave" and "submissive" in your own words and through your own experiences InnerTemptress. And please remember that until you're collared and have agreed otherwise, your opinion matters.
--
"Not all that yields is weak." - Jacqueline Carey