This page sponsored by Mr. S Leather, San Francisco    [other banners]

	TSR : Web boards : M/s D/s O&P : "Calling Other Masters/Dominants "Sir" & vice versa" 1 2 Calling Other Masters/Dominants "Sir" & vice versa (13) This post is on the M/s D/s O&P web board. Wed 7 Apr 10, 11:51 PM curious_bina US(TN), 2 yrs This is mostly an opinion question, there's probably no "right" answer. This slave was wondering for Masters/Dominants/Mistresses who own slaves, do you suggest they call other D/O/M's by Sir/Ma'am? And for unowned slaves as well, do you naturally call other D/O/M's by Sir/Ma'am? If so, why? Just common courtesy; etiquette? Just curious, -s Always the curious one ~ s 8 Apr 10, 1:18 AM masterfiremaam US(WV), 5 yrs We require Our slave(s) to use titles, whatever the person prefers, including "silly" ones like "Lord Grand Poohba". In our circle, this is simply how we show one another respect... and respect is, in some ways, given right from the start. Master Fire **The power of who we are can be intoxicating.** **The power of who we could be is humbling.** **Yet, we are assured we are exactly as we should be.** Edited 8 Apr 10, 1:21 AM by masterfiremaam 8 Apr 10, 2:09 AM Bella_Ragazza US(RI), 6 yrs Curious_s wrote: Calling Other Masters/Dominants "Sir" & vice versa This is mostly an opinion question, there's probably no "right" answer. This slave was wondering for Masters/Dominants/Mistresses who own slaves, do you suggest they call other D/O/M's by Sir/Ma'am? And for unowned slaves as well, do you naturally call other D/O/M's by Sir/Ma'am? If so, why? Just common courtesy; etiquette? Just curious, -s Master has me call everyone by their name with no titles attached, I think this is because there is no point in being formal with the people we know within the community, since we are friends. So, the only one I call Sir is or Master is my Master. Bella 8 Apr 10, 4:08 AM slave_of_The_Tesh US(FL), 2 yrs We don't really know anyone in the community in person, so I call people by their given names. When addressing someone here I will use the screen name; the only person I call Master is my Master. His Beloved Owned and loved by The_Tesh This post has probably been edited for spelling/grammar because I'm weird like that. 8 Apr 10, 5:34 AM pet_ka_MJ CA, 2 yrs First Master, required that I call him Sir during training. Then when I passed a certain point in training is was My Lord. We did not associate within BDSM circles, so not requirement to used titles with anyone else. My current Master, is Master in private and his given name in public. I am pet regardless of where we are. I am not permitted to speak with other Dominant types without prior permission of Master, and then I am required to address them by their title. In all other situations, I am to be courteous. We do not associate as a couple within BDSM circles. Master has his own circle of BDSM friends he associates with. With courage you will dare to take risks, have the strength to be compassionate, and the wisdom to be humble. Courage is the foundation of integrity. - Keshavan Nair 8 Apr 10, 8:06 AM 562-470-768 2 yrs /me smiles and greets you, this girl has a knack of making up respectful 'nicknames' for the ones around her that she gets to know. because the formality of 'Sir' or 'Ma'am' is often uncomfortable in a social and general setting for the ones she address, she would make sure that they get their respect by the 'name' she gives them. a online friend Dom of Master is "Captain Rick". a close friend of Master is "Mister Lastname" "Monsieur" a lady friend and Mistress of Master is "Lady" an online co-Owner "Lead" when this girl is not sure she would look to Master to ask the person on how and IF they want to be addressed by this girl. in the office environments (when girl visits Master - and when she DID work) this girl offers respect in tone and body language. she will anser with a clear "Yes Sir, or Ma'am" when given instructions, and *chuckles* does not GIVE commands or instructions at the office, but requests or suggest and more often than not formulated in a questions (which usually is complied with based on rank in the office rather than brutality) "Do you think it would be a problem to get this back in two hours, please?" or "it may be a thought to change these things to improve the outcome". (easy peasy no?!) at the end of the day, it is a matter of your intentions. even with a 'sir' or 'mam' one can be very disrespectful in tone, body language etc, so by simply using a title does not make it better or worst - is this girl's thoughts. however - there are ones and situations that Master WILL correct and/or reprimand subs/slaves should they overlooked the agreed protocol. (NEVER, of course, would Master insist on anything unless agreed with Owner of those Owned, or the slave/sub itself who is unowned) We are all vanilla to some degree - for society will keep a foothold in our lives. We are all Dom/mes or slave/sub on some level, as there is ALWAYS someone weaker or stronger than you... 8 Apr 10, 12:04 PM thineown UK, 5 yrs I don't differentiate. At least I hope I don't. 8 Apr 10, 1:28 PM SeanT70 9 yrs This subject grates with me..a lot. It's like the feeding of the five thousand in reverse. Let me explain. If Phay had five thousand masters and mistresses, then she would be expected to address each one accordingly. But she doesn't; she is owned by one - me, the rest are equals to her - just normal people doing the same thing in 'our' opinion. Ergo, they have no reason to be called, and no right to expect to be called anything more than by their given name other than if they actually had a title, 'Sir Sean Connery' for example. M-types, that 'abuse' their position by automatically using 'slave' (because they are all airs but really no graces), when addressing an s-type, need to address where the sun is shining. The only exceptions that might be made in regard to Phay (and so allow others to call her slave and therefore she would address them formally), would be the result of prior discussions in a given situation. Regards, Sean. 8 Apr 10, 2:21 PM petitchat UK, 2 yrs I find this one a little weird. If I email another dom other than my Master I usually would use a term of respect such as Sir but not Master. In person though it is more difficult. I would usually refer to them as their christian name but if his slave referred to mine as Sir etc I would usually follow suit. It is a tricky one though because I don't believe in being submissive I require to be submissive to all men if that makes sense? 8 Apr 10, 2:36 PM 562-470-768 2 yrs SeanT70 wrote: This subject grates with me..a lot. It's like the feeding of the five thousand in reverse. Let me explain. If Phay had five thousand masters and mistresses, then she would be expected to address each one accordingly. But she doesn't; she is owned by one - me, the rest are equals to her - just normal people doing the same thing in 'our' opinion. Ergo, they have no reason to be called, and no right to expect to be called anything more than by their given name other than if they actually had a title, 'Sir Sean Connery' for example. M-types, that 'abuse' their position by automatically using 'slave' (because they are all airs but really no graces), when addressing an s-type, need to address where the sun is shining. The only exceptions that might be made in regard to Phay (and so allow others to call her slave and therefore she would address them formally), would be the result of prior discussions in a given situation. Regards, Sean. /me smiles this girl greets you she wonders, if the big difference here is perhaps not in the way each person define their relationship? it makes sense to this girl on that level. to offer an example: your girl is YOUR slave. outside of that she is not slave. that works for you, and that is perfectly fine. it is not that way for everyone though. inside or outside of the lifestyle, this girl is slave. she is first and foremost MASTER's property, and so how he choose for her to behave etc is at HIS own discretion and thus she is not to submit to anyone but HIM, does not mean that she is not to be subservient to others - in or outside of the lifestyle. however,this does NOT mean she is to be THEIR slave, nor respond to THEIR commands - yet if she hope to show a higher appreciation of her respect to some, she may do so with Master's blessing by addressing them in a way that elevates them above the 'general public'. and should they call her slave *smiles* she'd take it with pride, much like she does being called 'teacher' or 'mother' or even 'bitch' (which to this girl is a rather big compliment no matter which context it is given in!) so perhaps, the very first step then, is to work in accordance to your own boundaries and definition. nobody said there is one way fits all solutions to this. PS: there is a fine line between showing curtesy and respect - often they are confused. We are all vanilla to some degree - for society will keep a foothold in our lives. We are all Dom/mes or slave/sub on some level, as there is ALWAYS someone weaker or stronger than you... 8 Apr 10, 3:17 PM SeanT70 9 yrs There has been many-a-discussion on calling a slave 'slave' (and hence calling an m-type by whatever), because they are unowned or because they belong to someone else, and it often gets very confused with calling 'a' slave 'slave' with calling 'a' slave 'the' slave in context. See? So, given that pretty much every M-type worth their salt has the right to decide what's right for their property (or whatever they are to them), this is what I chose. There is no room for error on either sides then, especially given Phay's outlook too (she will only serve me unless I tell her otherwise..) You get the M-type that can't see past their nose, and use 'slave' regardless (her reply ain't polite, lemme tell ya ), because they think 'all' s-types are under them, which is really not the case. This is why I put the above post the way I did; Phay is 'my' slave (and addresses me properly, according to what we agree), and a slave in context, but because this is an equal forum, for example, she has no reason to use any other than normal, given names, or expect to be addressed by anything less than her name. Quite simple really. Does that make better sense? Sean. Edited 8 Apr 10, 3:20 PM by SeanT70 Next page