Honorifics

[Deleted Member]

2 hours ago, tazzy said:

Show me the ones who actually considered anything about marriage before they entered it. From experience: people fall into marriages, because that's what you do, right? If anyone under the sun actually considered it with all its societal meanings and expectations, they'd run for their life! Literally! 🤣

I have been married twice, both times to girls I shared a D/s relationship with. I cannot say that they would have endured any longer than a nilla marriage, however both had the undercurrent of the Life running through them until fate intervened. With all that a 24/7 arrangement brings, including in my case ***, you have to have the desire there in the first place to keep it alive. They were not planned, they evolved, and each girl saw me in their own way. It didn't matter what honorific they used, it became irrelevant after time, but they were STILL mine, and they wore my collar as well as a ring. To identify yourself with a title, and adhere to it religiously, is, in my humble opinion, limiting yourself to a singular existence. You may start as one thing, one title suits you at that moment, yet you have to be open to change. We are all adults, in a Lifestyle that is supposed to embrace diversity, so allow yourself the opportunity to do so.

[Pe****]

Honorifics are cultural, and therein lies the rub. “Culture” in itself is such a nefarious topic because it can be constrained or expanded by any number of refining words. For example, in East Asian culture it is quite common place to using occupational titles in normal everyday conversation. Eg. Teacher Jane, Atty James, Doc Jones etc. the honorific belongs to these people as much as it belongs to the culture as a whole. Consider those existing in the military culture. The use or Sir/Ma’am there is endemic and prolific in everyday conversation.

Given this backdrop, it is easy to see that our fetish/bdsm community also has its honorifics which are endemic and prolific in this culture subset too.

For another sub to call your dominant Sir/Master is no more disrespectful to you than for a cadet in the military setting calling any General, Sir.

Perhaps I’m wrong, but from What I can gather from the undertone of the sentiment of the topic presented here is moreso a hint of jealousy in not wanting to share your dominant with anyone else (hence the “cringe” factor you feel). This emotional sentiment is normal and understandable in most relationships. If this is the case, perhaps I can suggest to create a new honorific which is specific and intimate only to you and your dominant. Eg. If your dominant is called David then you can call him DadDav instead of Daddy. That way, you can be sure that you won’t be emotionally affected by others in the community which are using the common honorifics used in the fetish/bdsm culture to address your dominant in conversation.

[TheBookCollector]

Where Honourifics are concerned ive been of the opinion that it is upto the submissive to decide when to start using honourifics.

Why? There are a number of reasons, mainly because honourifics are often used by rote especially with those who have been around the scene for a while and their use appears hollow at the start of a relationship, as a result the first time she uses the honourific i know it means something special to her and that we have bonded.

[CopperKnob]

5 hours ago, PerthS said:

Honorifics are cultural, and therein lies the rub. “Culture” in itself is such a nefarious topic because it can be constrained or expanded by any number of refining words. For example, in East Asian culture it is quite common place to using occupational titles in normal everyday conversation. Eg. Teacher Jane, Atty James, Doc Jones etc. the honorific belongs to these people as much as it belongs to the culture as a whole. Consider those existing in the military culture. The use or Sir/Ma’am there is endemic and prolific in everyday conversation.

Given this backdrop, it is easy to see that our fetish/bdsm community also has its honorifics which are endemic and prolific in this culture subset too.

For another sub to call your dominant Sir/Master is no more disrespectful to you than for a cadet in the military setting calling any General, Sir.

Perhaps I’m wrong, but from What I can gather from the undertone of the sentiment of the topic presented here is moreso a hint of jealousy in not wanting to share your dominant with anyone else (hence the “cringe” factor you feel). This emotional sentiment is normal and understandable in most relationships. If this is the case, perhaps I can suggest to create a new honorific which is specific and intimate only to you and your dominant. Eg. If your dominant is called David then you can call him DadDav instead of Daddy. That way, you can be sure that you won’t be emotionally affected by others in the community which are using the common honorifics used in the fetish/bdsm culture to address your dominant in conversation.

Thats what I've done previously, creating a honorific, adds the meaning not just the respect behind it

[CopperKnob]

1 hour ago, TheBookCollector said:

Where Honourifics are concerned ive been of the opinion that it is upto the submissive to decide when to start using honourifics.

Why? There are a number of reasons, mainly because honourifics are often used by rote especially with those who have been around the scene for a while and their use appears hollow at the start of a relationship, as a result the first time she uses the honourific i know it means something special to her and that we have bonded.

Hollow is a good word, there is a hollowness when everyone uses the same, it lacks sentiment

[ey****]

There's a lady who I once met - and - umm, I didn't know who she was and I got on the receiving end a bit - because, well, it was a Femdom event so it was pretty customary to say hello to someone you didn't know as a "Hello Mistress" kinda thing (which is very borg like if everyone is Mistress, but hey ho) and, she hates it.

She was a Pro Domme for a while and had instructions on her website and she would reject anyone addressing her Miss/Mistress/etc (and, by irony, there are those who will reject you if you don't) and she has an explanation that it's simple that there are guys who do-the-rounds a bit and it lacks any really connection if they're in front of her going "Yes Mistress, Yes Mistress" like they may have done with how many ever other women.

Her perspective gave a lot to think about.

And I think this is something that going one way or another way a lot of people will have different perspectives on how things make them feel.

 

[CopperKnob]

23 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

There's a lady who I once met - and - umm, I didn't know who she was and I got on the receiving end a bit - because, well, it was a Femdom event so it was pretty customary to say hello to someone you didn't know as a "Hello Mistress" kinda thing (which is very borg like if everyone is Mistress, but hey ho) and, she hates it.

She was a Pro Domme for a while and had instructions on her website and she would reject anyone addressing her Miss/Mistress/etc (and, by irony, there are those who will reject you if you don't) and she has an explanation that it's simple that there are guys who do-the-rounds a bit and it lacks any really connection if they're in front of her going "Yes Mistress, Yes Mistress" like they may have done with how many ever other women.

Her perspective gave a lot to think about.

And I think this is something that going one way or another way a lot of people will have different perspectives on how things make them feel.

 

Her viewpoint completely resonates because this is it isn't it I think, if it rolls off the tongue so easily, so quickly, and everyone has the same honorific, what meaning/respect does it truly demonstrate?
For me, honorifics can be any name you choose, not simply the typical ones

[Leisa]

Interesting topic. I think for me the use of honorifics is overused and misconstrued. Using them does not solidify the dynamic nor does it matter I. The scheme of things. I agree that instead of a traditional honorific something that’s special just to the individuals involved would show a deeper connection and have a more lasting effect. Traditional honorifics roll off the tongue too easily for many and are used before the dynamic is truly established. If it’s demanded I’m turning the other way.

[Deleted Member]

For me it's definitely a personal preference thing. I can totally see your point and think it's a very good one. It's a very meaningful point that doesn't get talked about enough. I know there are a lot of preferred honorifics out there. I view the honorific from a clean slate approach. It's kind of like keeping an old and new relationship separate. So for me in my mind I don't mind using a previously used honorific because my focus is completely on the dynamic I'm in if that makes sense. Your point is definitely valid and if you need to not reuse honorifics than that should be respected and discussed.