Posted by Matou on Wed 17 Sep 03, 10:58 PM to Matou's blog.
NotVelvet raised some interesting questions in his weblog and stirred me from other things enough to throw in a few penn'orth of my own.
Actually, I was going to pen a few comments in response to cerrynn's writing on this subject so I will start with that.
As cerrynn said, according to all the “definitions” (I use the word reservedly) of what constitutes BDSM “slavery” she is a slave but she doesn't consider herself one and neither do I. Despite cerrynn's superb eloquence why this should be is still largely a mystery to us. We have spent hours discussing it without any real resolution beyond that we don't like the term; it makes us feel uncomfortable when we apply it to ourselves. (Again, let me stress, we have no problem with how others see this issue – some of our best friends are “slaves”!)
NotVelvet wonders why people have less problem with the term “Master” (and “Mistress”). For my own part I don't particularly care for “Master” (except when cerrynn uses it to me – but more of that later). Perhaps, as NV suggests, these are terms implying strength and are thus to be desired. In addition, “Master” or “Mistress” are multipurpose words. The same is not true of “slave”. (For brevity, please insert “or 'Mistress'” wherever you see “Master”)
The connotations of “slave” are fairly narrow – in fact, it is often used in a way to capitalise on those connotations, e.g. “He is a slave to fashion”. “Master” has a somewhat wider breadth of meaning. It can imply expertise in addition to ownership – a “Master Craftsman”. It can also imply control: a “Master of Hounds” doesn't own the dogs but he is responsible for controlling them. Similarly, a Harbour Master doesn't own the harbour. Finally, it can also infer teaching or instruction, as in “Schoolmaster”. None of these has anything overtly to do with slavery.
I mentioned earlier that I didn't care for the title of Master (applied to me) because I feel that you can only be a Master of *something* or *someone*. To me, to say “I have been a 'Master' for x years” is meaningless – to say “I have been <insert sub's name>'s Master for x years” is not. Even between ourselves, cerrynn and I refer to me as “her Dominant” rather than “her Master”.
When our relationship started to blossom, cerrynn asked me how I wanted to be addressed. I replied, “However you think is appropriate – I'll let you know if I think it isn't” – a statement which was accompanied by a wicked grin. To my surprise, she started calling me “sensei”, which as most people know is Japanese for “teacher”. I actually found this intensely flattering. Sometimes she *does* call me “Master” – usually when she is deep in subspace – and for some reason I find that much more meaningful and emotional. Perhaps because, at such times, it is “natural” and not a conditioned (or even a “trained”) response.
These are our feelings on the subject and constitute some of *our* BDSM. Our style of D/s may be different from others but it is neither better nor worse. The bottom line for all of us in the Scene, whether Dominant or Master, submissive or slave, is what works for us. If it turns you on to be called a slave, or gets the testosterone (or whatever) flowing to be called Master then go for it – and there is no reason whatsoever why all these terms cannot co-exist in perfect harmony.
My six penn'orth.
Matou – Dominant and *very* proud owner of cerrynn{M}
“Love is the only chain that truly binds”
Edited Wed 17 Sep 03, 11:02 PM by Matou
