- JK wrote:
That a slave obeys, serves and pleases her Master.
moonlight wrote:
And I most *certainly* will tell him off when he's wrong.
JK wrote:
A good Master should punish you if you out-and-out just told Him off.
- JK wrote:
There are presentation methods and protocols a slave should follow to maintain continuity within the relationship.
- JK wrote:
After all, this Man is your Master - one whom you serve as completely as possible, to Whom you have built up trust with. He owns you - an honor for any slave.
After all...slaves are *not* a dime a dozen. To be honored with the love of a slave, the service of a slave, the caring and regard of a slave....to have a person turn over all control to you....that is as large an honor as it is to be accepted by someone.
You forget, JK.....M/s, just as D/s and S/M is a two way street. There are *two* partners deserving of love and respect....not just one.
- JK wrote:
A slave may come to her Master or right there ask 'Master, may this slave speak to you about this matter?" And if the Master grants permission then and only then may the slave present to her Master her concerns and ask that they be considered. There are number of different ways to do this, but there is protocol.
My Master wants a strong, proud woman as his slave. One who can care for herself when it is needed. One who has decided to submit and serve him until he chooses to release her. One who stands shoulder to shoulder with him and walks beside him. One who he can subdue when he wishes to or one who will know when he wishes her to simply submit to his will.
That these behaviors are not something *YOU* look for is fine. It doesn't mean, however, that *NO* Master wants that. Nor does it mean that your particular beliefs are more "valid" than Tigers.
- moonlight wrote:
I don't sit and dote on his every word. I don't scamper around him and hover over him.
JK wrote:
you have to decide what you need to do.
- JK wrote:
There does, however, need to be communication. you certainly are not just a doormat, but you are an owned slave and thereby, at least in some circles, need to listen to what your Master has to say, have to stop in your speaking when Master begins to speak, have to have an open mind to hear what your Master is trying to get across to you.
- JK wrote:
Do you scamper? Maybe. Depends on what is required of you.
Do you hover over Him? Absolutely not unless He wants it.
- moonlight wrote:
Again, this depends on how you define "please". Sexually? Emotionally? Being a vent for his frustration? Challenging him mentally, intellectually, being stimulating to his mind? Occasionally getting him off if he wants? It's not as simple as you're saying.
JK wrote:
Absolutely correct. Hence, the reason you have to work at it to define what that means for your relationship. Generally, it ought to mean in all ways. That He finds you pleasing to Him in all ways. What is picked out must tho be within what He finds acceptable and will approve of. This is where compatibility is key. This is where what you negotiate at the beginning or call for to renegotiate for what you can decide to accept or not. After a Master has decided to take you or to continue to keep you, and only after all this discussion and negotiation, then He owns you and decides from there what to use you for and how to relate to you. you, of course, if you have opt for time periods upon which to renegotiate, can wait till that time period to make changes. Until then, however, you must abide by what He has been decided. So make your decisions on what to accept or not well, because after the Master has chosen to take you, He owns you and will expect you to behave according to what has been agreed upon.
- JK wrote:
As far as gifts of submissions go - remember: they are a gift and once given cannot and should not be used to blackmail, nor control, nor heckle your Master with when you think you are not being treated the way in which you thought you should be. Once a Master, in my opinion, takes a female to be His slave and property, that gift then becomes His and not yours any longer.
- JK wrote:
Perhaps the phrase "gift of submission" is not exactly the right way to state what is behind it's meaning. A slave feels honored to be owned by a Master while at the same time the Master ought to feel honored to own such a female as one or more of His slaves. If the Master treats His slave well, she will stay and continue to serve, obey and please Him. If not, she is likely to leave Him or reduce her allegiance to Him.
- JK wrote:
If a Master recognizes the value of a particular slave then, if He expects to keep her, should nuture that value. There is responsibility that comes with owning any 'gift' and in maintaining honors.
- moonlight wrote:
There are a whole host of different types of M/s relationships in just these two points you've made alone. And both don't necessarily apply to all M/s relationships.
JK wrote:
I would agree. There are certain principles and definitions tho that clearly mark a difference between M/s relationships and those involved in D/s and Top/bottom relationships. This is what I am getting at here. It is important to know the differences.
- moonlight wrote:
Gosh. Heaven forbid she ever do anything *wrong* then.
JK wrote:
Some slaves work very hard at behaving in manners that don't get them punished or disciplined.
- moonlight wrote:
I'm sure that I've not been pleasing to Tiger for about the last 3 months, according to *your* personal rules since I've been ill and haven't been terribly slavelike. You can ask *him*, though, if that impinges on our relationship in the least. I'll lay money on him laughing in your face.
JK wrote:
If a Master recognizes His responsibilities, takes into consideration you are ill and not really in the mood to be as slavelike as He might expect, but takes good care of you during this trying time, and that you continue to be as good as you can in your behavior around Him - then He ought to know that at least you are trying, that you feel badly about your behavior, that you hope to do better for Him later - then He should appreciate you during these hard times. A good Master takes care of His property (or -ties), nurturing towards good health and submission.
- JK wrote:
How much of a slave you are tho depends on how much of the trait is inborn in you. Some are slaves as if there is no other way of behaving. Others just like to 'be a slave' now and then. You have to decide.
- moonlight wrote:
Define property. Does she live at his whim? Not have a house/job/life of her own? Does she sit on the floor by the door when he's not there and just wait for him to come home?
JK wrote:
Property in its essence means that which is owned. Are you a 'that'? In a sense you are. I could say: Property is what or who another owns.
- JK wrote:
Anyway, property between Master and slave is what is defined by them whether they wish to take a definition from another couple or not as long as the term or related term of ownership is that definition. Does a slave live at His whim? she does. Hopefully the whims have been negotiated and agreed upon to some extent at some point ahead of time. In my opinion, the slave owns nothing except what is permitted to her by her Master. That includes jobs, homes, and her life. After all, she has given all that to Him and He has decided what she will or will not keep or have in her name. Call it classic Romanism. Whatever!
- moonlight wrote:
*BZZT* Wrong. A slave receives her pleasure at the whim of her Master or at her own choosing unless she is restricted from them. I, most certainly, have no restrictions on me in this manner. Other than I am to get permission ahead of time if I wish to see another partner. I can masturbate to my hearts content and Tiger just looks at me strangely if I beg to be allowed to have an orgasm. And I quote "If I don't want you to have one, I'll tell you. Otherwise, if I'm toying with you, I'm probably trying to get you to have one. Why would I want to retard your responses by training you to *control* them, when I want you a whimpering pile of goo?"
JK wrote:
You have to do what works for you and for your relationship to your Master. Some slaves tho would rather know that they have earned their pleasure so that it is a kind of reward since they believe nothing is owed them nor that they have any right that they can take for granted that would result in pleasure they can enjoy. they need to feel they earned their pleasure. Think of it like when kids have to wait, or rather earn the time allowed them, to see what gifts they have received for Christmas. When they receive their gifts they are, by far, elated even more because they had to wait.
- moonlight wrote:
In some relationships I know of, namely service type relationships of M/s, trust isn't an issue. Service is. Again, your rules do not fall over *all* M/s.
JK wrote:
But they do carry basic principles for M/s relationships. What you are speaking about is more about a service bottom not a slave. If the service bottom is punishable - there would be a slave essence then in the relationship and thus trust to be had. And trust may indeed be in a relationship that you speak of since it is hope the service person isn't given things to do that would be not agreeable to him or her.
There is no bottoming about it. They are in a M/s relationship without sex, punishment, or gain. They are owned. They are M/s. And yet, they don't need to operate with trust.
- moonlight wrote:
Tiger, again, would laugh in your face at the idea that I was an object. A cat toy, yes. Something he can use if he wants, yes. An object? Hardly.
JK wrote:
And 'cat toy' is not an object? Hmmmmm. Object does not have to apply in the same manner as to that which is inorganic. a slave may be very happy to be an object because the Master that owns her chose her to be one of His objects.
Often done during cuddling or TV watching. Repeated poking...repeated tickling...squeezing....pinching...just because.
- moonlight wrote:
I can ask to play or be flogged or stuck with needles....and whether or not it is done is up to him. If he chooses to do them on his own, then they will be done. I'm expected to keep myself clean and have good hygeine all on my own, thank you very much.
JK wrote:
Well let's hope so. No Master likes a dirty slave.
- moonlight wrote:
I love Tiger and I am thankful for the gifts and love that he returns. But no more so than I am thankful to my family or anyone else that gives me anything.
JK wrote:
I am sorry to hear that. your Master, unlike your family or anyone else, chose to own you. That should have more value to you.
- JK wrote:
That a slave not be hesitant in her obedience to her Master's Will. I'll let you figure out the rest.
moonlight wrote:
I am expected to question Tiger if I believe that he is in the wrong or hasn't thought something through. I am expected to chew him up one side and down the other if he's being pig-headed about something. I am expected to be a challenge to him and keep him on his toes. As *well* as being generally obedient and doing as I'm told.
JK wrote:
Sounds like you found a relationship what works for you and allows you to do what you want to do. Some slaves, however, want more ownership than you, more of their power taken from them. I wonder tho what would happen if your Master took more control. Would you stay?
I cannot leave him unless he does me harm, by his own rules. I wouldn't want to. If there comes a time when he does not wish to keep me, he will let me go. And there will be no choice for me in it. I don't expect that time will come. But it could.
- moonlight wrote:
I, personally, don't care in the least if people like the rules and use them. That's their choice. What I *do* care about is the fact that you tout them as the way that M/s is organized when it obviously is not the way that *all* M/s is organized.
JK wrote:
"All" is subjective for some. I am saying that my rules document contains basic principles that exist in all or rather most M/s relationships. There some commons.
- moonlight wrote:
I care about the fact that what you put out is dangerous to some quantity of people.
JK wrote:
Life is dangerous to some quantity of people. Building a house is dangerous to some quantity of people. Driving a car is dangerous to some quantity of people. You'll have to be way more specific.
- moonlight wrote:
I care about the fact that without people like myself and DLynn and Spyral Fox there would be some quantity of people out there that would be hurt, possibly permanently, but what you carelessly spout off with little regard for the effects that it can have on people.
JK wrote:
Hardly. I have provided information that they need to research. There will always be some people who are going to work towards hurting themselves and some, with the best of information, who will do the same.
Do you understand *YET*???
- moonlight wrote:
That it works for some people is a given. Everything in the world works for at least one person. What is *wrong* is the idea that one set of ideas works for everyone and that M/s is some monolithic ideal that you have the information on.
JK wrote:
My opinion. No one is telling you that you have to accept it. There are lots of ways to experience M/s and lots of ways to write about it. I wish to express my views and thoughts on the matter. You wish to object to them. Welcome to the world of literature.
- moonlight wrote:
therefore they are what you purport to be M/s. That some quantity of other people also do it your way does not mean that *ALL* people do it your way. They, obviously, do not.
JK wrote:
But they do some of it.
- moonlight wrote:
So. You don't follow your own rules. You follow some subset of your own rules. Yet you say that they are what M/s is all about. Do you, therefore, practice some type of subset of M/s? Wouldn't that mean, therefore, that there is *MORE* *THAN* *ONE* type of M/s? Hmmmmmm?
JK wrote:
Read the document at least on this one point it says:
"4. Consider these rules a part of what will become your crash course about the Master/slave relationship and lifestyle, but realize they are not conclusive, nor the only way to enter and to experience it, for there is more to learn then from the rules that are listed here." If you don't want to read this part, then I leave you to your interpretation wrong as it may be.
Then STOP SAYING THAT THEY ARE WHAT M/s IS ABOUT. They are what it is about *FOR* *YOU*.
- moonlight wrote:
In a nutshell, however, M/s is what the Master and slave in question design their relationship to be. It does not have a master list of rules that are followed. It doesn't have the posturing that you seem to be so fond of, unless that is what their particular brand of M/s desires. Why on earth would a Master, who by your own words rules his own world, deign to suddenly submit to the rules of some amorphous, unknown body of work or ideal set up by someone that they don't know, simply "Because that is how it's done."
JK wrote:
Equally, why not? At this point you are getting silly trying to hold on to your views. A Master works at polishing His skills as does a slave. If that means He goes after what others have written then He does and will incorporate that which will work better for Him. A Master can't know it all without some influence from others. If you want to talk about what is dangerous - this is it - following a Master who doesn't think He has anything more to learn.
- moonlight wrote:
Why on earth would someone who claims to be "dominant" follow the rule set of some other person? Why would someone who claims to be "dominant" submit him or herself to the approval of Joe Blow? Why would a self-professed "dominant" *NOT* set his or her world up to follow his own needs and wants? Eh?
JK wrote:
Depends solely on how much experience the person has. Some are developing to what level of a Master or Dominant they wish to become. This is why deary. And some just want some new ideas. You make it sound like people should work toward hermitism.
- moonlight wrote:
None of the rules apply *IN* *SOME* *CASES*.
JK wrote:
Then in those case you do not have M/s - period!
- moonlight wrote:
About all that can be said about M/s relationships is that they contain a Master and a slave. The slave is owned. The slave does what the Master says. Anything else and you're starting to throw your *own* biases on what M/s is into the fray. Even stating "The slave does what the Master says" can be argued to be too ambiguous. How they do that, how "doing what the Master says" is defined is a *very* broad range of possibility.
JK wrote:
Again you are getting silly!
- moonlight wrote:
No. According to you, the *PROPER* way to deal with them is to discuss them with your Master. Proper indicates that there is one correct way to use them.
JK wrote:
Proper is a number of ways.
- moonlight wrote:
Therefore, if you are *NOT* using them that way, that is an improper use of them.
JK wrote:
That depends on a number of circumstances.
- moonlight wrote:
Let's see. You've said that about DLynn. In the very post that I was responding too. You've told me that. You've told Spyral Fox that. You've told most of the women that are submissives that have disagreed with you that. Does that refresh your memory?
JK wrote:
I do what I do. You don't have to agree on it. You make it sound like I should do things only one way and they when I do you bulk at it.
- JK wrote:
You and I are unlikely to agree on very much. You have your relationship. Live it. Realize that others are searching and if they wish to use what I have written they will regardless of what you have to say about it. You can continue to gripe and bitch all you want. We simply are at an impasse on many points and views. So you do things your way and I'll do mine my way.
- moonlight wrote:
You can challenge it all you want, JK. The fact remains that M/s, as a whole, is not what *you* make of it.
JK wrote:
Your opinion.
- moonlight wrote:
You, JK, are not worth the waste of protoplasm that you call a body.
JK wrote:
Obviously was worth your comments tho.
moonlight wrote:
I was bored at work. It takes very *little* to amuse me or capture my attention when I'm bored.
JK wrote:
Then I'd say you make very poor choices. Sounds like you need some help.
