Eager To Get Started? (21)

Whereas it seems obvious that submissive material should be cautious about a prospective partner who seems to think that a chain of command should be established before you have even shaken hands, the other way around may not be so clear cut.

I myself have always viewed with the utmost suspicion people who call me "Sir", capitalise (or lowercase) the personal pronouns, etc. before they even know a damned thing about me. WTF is that about - and how is it any "better" than its opposite, the infamous "kneel-bitch" attitude? As far as I'm concerned; unless other arrangements have been made, we are all "civilians" and nobody owes another any default deference. That just comes across as sycophantic. Or even worse: Deluded.

In general, I believe one should be cautious about any- and everybody who seem a wee bit too eager to "get things started". Call me anal, but planning is half the procedure - so why start walking when you don't even know where you're heading?

Story Of My Life

It all means precisely *NOTHING*!

I'm sure we're all capable of reading between the lines of such trivial matters of personal style as we get to know the person, so why not just simply do that?

I AM THE GOD OF HELL-FIRE!.....but its my lunch break right now

Some people are just trying to be polite and respectful however especially I think in forums etc. So I do try to keep it in proportion and just tell them that I'd like them to know me first.

To be honest I don't need honorifics that aren't earned from anyone. Really I don't need them at all. I don't need anyone to act submissive to me who isn't, well my submissive.

When you meet someone for the first time surely you are just people meeting for the first time. What you decide to do after that is another topic.

I really appreciate it when people are polite though.

http://rope-topia.com | http://wykd.com
Remember that both rope and girls are reusable.
Bondage... the eco friendly kink!

"by addressing anyone else other than their name you are making yourself inferior to them my sub"

and I understand it completely, I am submissive to my Mistress, no one else, yes I will be polite and in a more fetish situation if someone tells me there name I will use that, I won't automtically put a "Mistress" before and if they say there name is "Mistress xxx" I will call them that but I will be using it purely as a name.

(*) The reason I asked was I wear my ownership tag on show, I know people have read it in shops etc but nobody has asked me about it yet but when they do I was wanting to be prepared. I have my tongue pierced and still to have the shorter bar put in and I feel if anyone is going to come out and ask me about the tag is some who for a living sticks needles through people and has a face full of metal herself. The problem I have now is the thought that I will be asked to explain my tag is worring me more than actually getting the piercing done in the first place.

Suzy Smith
"They are not women's clothes, they are mine!"
"Don't let your mind stop you from having a good time."

I agree with WykD_Dave about un-earned honorifics. But I'd go one step further and pose a question:

Clearly those who insist on honorifics are sticklers for protocol to whatever degree. Have they considered that it may come into conflict with other protocols? For example, the respectful use of "sir" in speech to a superior is well-established but capitalizing "Sir" could actually be seen as offensive to (ie, usurping the prerogative of) a knight or a baronet. Do we have any titled folks here? It'd be interesting to see how they feel about D/s honorifics.

_______________
"Cuius testiculos habes, habeas cardia et cerebellum."
Want to know why nobody replies to your memos, or just want to whinge about it? Do it here.

Slightly different, but in a similar vein, I hate it when other submissives call me or refer to me as 'girl'. I dislike being called 'girl' and I find it offensive to be referred to in that way just because I happen to be the submissive one in my relationship. I think some people get a bit carried away with BDSM and think that everyone plays by the same rules that they do. Just because every female sub is 'girl' in some overblown Gorean fantasy of theirs, it doesn't mean I subscribe to it or am happy to be labelled in that way. What is worse is when you gently raise the matter with them, perhaps trying to treat it as a joke to avoid offence, and they bluntly refuse to take the hint. I feel that I am just as deserving of respect and basic courtesy whether I am a submissive, a Domme, a switch or none of the above, but if they disagree, I guess a few months of calling their Dom 'boy' might straighten them out on the subject

subbie xxx

subbietrouble wrote: .... I guess a few months of calling their Dom 'boy' might straighten them out on the subject

I have to admit I agree with your points - and that is partly what put me off the BDSM scene, the automatic assumption by some that you speak to others as if you are all in role. At the one munch I went to where this happened I (somewhat bullishly) carried on conversations with people who did this - be they in uber Dom/me or uber sub mode - until they talked to me as a fellow human being (I am a spoil-sport, I know ).

'A woman, without her man, is nothing.
A woman: without her, man is nothing'

As one of those you pulled up for this:

I think one difference is on here I am simply trying to facilitate conversation, politely, by using local terminology.

"Kneel bitch" is not polite. D/dom/me is not impolite, it is the conversational equivalent to S/submissive. Without using these terms, converstaions on here would be a bit more problematic surely? I think the correct opposite to "kneel bitch" would be Uber Dom. Are you mistaking these terms?

Your assumption that this means anything other, or would be carried over into real life is in error, certainly in my case.

I made a general comment which you took personally. I actually happen to think your response was presumptive and really rather rude.

Truth, Justice and the Nilla_In_The_Woods way.

I see no point in explaining that all over again.

Story Of My Life

I'm not trying to start anything. I'm trying to make a point about those sort of assumptions - that there is no foundation to them.

Truth, Justice and the Nilla_In_The_Woods way.

What, like I just plucked them out of my arse? Apart from the rather obvious fact that you don't have to "make assumptions" in order to immideately dislike certain behaviour patterns there is also the added weight of experience.

I don't know how this works for everybody else but to me a person's choice of words and idioms, and not least the contextualisation of the narrative, tells me a lot about how they think. Which is likely to influence how they will (re)act under conditions of similar narratives.

It's all boringly simple, really. Reading minds that is.

Tied In Bronze Chains