Hi, Hamish.

Yes, to the first. Neither, to the second.

In any enduring relationship, there needs to be respect for boundaries. Those are sometimes expressed as "hard limits" ("No video. No blood. No strangers. Period. Don't ask.") and sometimes as operational understandings ("Your personal safety, your relationships with your family and your ability to function as a professional at work are paramount concerns. I will never give a direction which knowingly imperils any of those three; therefore, if obeying a direction would cause you to imperil any of them, stop. The directive is null. As soon as you realize this, find me and explain. As long as you do that, you're being fully and wonderfully obedient and all will be well."). The dom needs to be wise enough to ask, the sub needs to be brave enough to say, and both need to be committed enough to making it work as part of their relationship.

There's considerable debate about the meaning of "sub" and "slave." I view the former as a trait, and the latter as a state. That is, an individual may find profound fulfillment and release in surrendering control to a trusted other. That person's a sub. Whether or not the person has a "trusted other" at any particular point, s/he's still a sub. "Slave" is one possible designation for a sub who is in a relationship with a trusted other.

The interests of sub, dom/me, slave and Master are all served by having clear, consensual rules of engagement. The prospects for misunderstanding, anguish and dissolution are way too high otherwise.

S.