M/s vs. D/s

[Sp****]

The world of BDSM is filled to the brim with terms, acronyms and general nomenclature. Nowhere is this game of semantics more prevalent than surrounding the terms “Master” and “slave”.

In My experience, there are many MANY people who use these terms as interchangeable for “Dominant” and “submissive” respectively. I can’t count how many submissives I have talked with who in their first conversations with a prospective Dom, have been called “slave” and instructed to call said Dom “Master”.

Although I’m pretty sure this is bad form, as well as a dead giveaway to one’s experience level, is it “wrong”?? Or does nomenclature conform to some level of structure?

As I was educated in all things kink, I was told that obviously when a Dominant and a submissive enter a relationship there are limits and safewords to govern the boundaries of said relationship. This is a D/s relationship. Once the relationship progresses to a degree that there is implicit trust between the Dominant and submissive, then the submissive will “surrender” their limits and safewords to the Dominant (knowing that the Dominant knows them well enough not to cavalierly push boundaries that would entail use of a limit or safeword). Once this has occurred, the submissive becomes a “slave” and the Dominant their “Master “.

Is this something that is generally recognized? I’d be interested to know what other people’s take on this is.

[ey****]

the "difference between a sub and a slave" discourse is one that's done to death - and the short answer is : whatever works for you and your relationship

if someone feels they are at point x and that makes them a submissive and consensually wishes to move to point y which would make them a slave, that works for them

for others mind, that same "Point x" might be "under consideration" and "point y" might be "collared submissive"

There's a very good blog on this subject that I would cite as being a "Must Read" - I can't link to it but I can tell you it's called " WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SUBMISSIVE AND A SLAVE? " and is by Kate Kinsey.

[Deleted Member]

I'm new to this world, aside from reading about it. But your post is enlightening. I believe that would out clearly defined terms, not only do the words themselves loose meaning, but the concepts that the words stand as representatives of also loose their distinct forms and fade to occlusive fog. The better a theme or concept can be defined, the better the that theme or concept can be understood. This is invaluable. I've not heard the difference between the terms master/slave and dominant/submissive discussed before. Thank you for the conversation starter.

[DeviantInside]

As said above this is a topic that gets repeatedly broached. However by the same token each time it will be new for someone. So my two cents. Everyone will have their own personal semantics for those terms and what it means for them. Based on experience, social conditioning, background, what media has influenced them and a million other things. What is sun for one may be slave for another. What is Dom for one may be Master for another. There is no hats and fast definition. I have had slaves that swore they never would be a slave fully embrace the role when I explained my perspective on it. So it took on a different connotation and meaning for our specific relationship. That doesn’t mean my definition was correct. Just that it was what worked for us.

[DeviantInside]

6 minutes ago, DeviantInside said:

As said above this is a topic that gets repeatedly broached. However by the same token each time it will be new for someone. So my two cents. Everyone will have their own personal semantics for those terms and what it means for them. Based on experience, social conditioning, background, what media has influenced them and a million other things. What is sun for one may be slave for another. What is Dom for one may be Master for another. There is no hats and fast definition. I have had slaves that swore they never would be a slave fully embrace the role when I explained my perspective on it. So it took on a different connotation and meaning for our specific relationship. That doesn’t mean my definition was correct. Just that it was what worked for us.

Lots of typos and autocorrect. Apologies. But anyway for whatever it is worth my personal take on the terms (which isn’t the “true” or “correct” meaning, just my own) is that sub and Dom is less of a committed term, more something that you could do for play sessions. Master and slave is a more devoted and relationship based term. Now I heavily caveat that by saying that there are sub Dom relationships that are fully committed and monotonous, and also Master/Mistress and slave relationships that are purely play/session based. But that’s just what works for me.

[Deleted Member]

Talk about a rabbit hole! But I'm just going to pick at just this -> so M/s imo (and I'm sure in others) is more related to and a spin off of Gorean M/s. I know Norman has some fans and some not, but I'm just saying, I would liken behaviors in M/s to be more akin to and inspired by Gorean ideologies. That being said, I would keep terms like "slave" (even though they're kajira) more in line with M/s and not as interchangeable as mentioned. Personally, I think M/s have more TPE than D/s and that's the main line the divides the two, but again, that's just how I was trained.

[DeviantInside]

22 minutes ago, DeviantInside said:

Lots of typos and autocorrect. Apologies. But anyway for whatever it is worth my personal take on the terms (which isn’t the “true” or “correct” meaning, just my own) is that sub and Dom is less of a committed term, more something that you could do for play sessions. Master and slave is a more devoted and relationship based term. Now I heavily caveat that by saying that there are sub Dom relationships that are fully committed and monotonous, and also Master/Mistress and slave relationships that are purely play/session based. But that’s just what works for me.

Monogamous not monotonous… ffs very different meaning there. I swear it wasn’t Freudian typing.

[DeviantInside]

21 minutes ago, TheCatDaddy said:

Talk about a rabbit hole! But I'm just going to pick at just this -> so M/s imo (and I'm sure in others) is more related to and a spin off of Gorean M/s. I know Norman has some fans and some not, but I'm just saying, I would liken behaviors in M/s to be more akin to and inspired by Gorean ideologies. That being said, I would keep terms like "slave" (even though they're kajira) more in line with M/s and not as interchangeable as mentioned. Personally, I think M/s have more TPE than D/s and that's the main line the divides the two, but again, that's just how I was trained.

I would personally say that Gorean is kinda it’s own subset with very specific rules and understandings. I have read a good number of the books (but have to say I didn’t finish the whole series… probably got maybe 16 in ish). But slave is not a term synonymous with kajira in all of bdsm. You can be a slave without having any of understanding, knowledge or desire for Gor. There are aspects of it that I have take into my own relationships (some of the positions etc from time to time) but I have never considered myself gorean, nor held to the structure it prescribes. In the same way I have taken ideas or concepts from other media and woven it into what I do (l’histoire d’oh etc etc) but I don’t try to measure what I do to fit into that world. Always I try to find what works for me and who I am with, including finding the words/semantics that work… and the ones that might be triggering/off putting.

[Sa****]

My submissive remains a sub. She isn't a slave, (because that isn't what she wants.) She might feel like she is a slave while we are playing a scene, but after it is over she is still a submissive. If you take a 🍀 clover leaf and pluck half of it, it's still a clover leaf.

[Deleted Member]

47 minutes ago, TheCatDaddy said:

Talk about a rabbit hole! But I'm just going to pick at just this -> so M/s imo (and I'm sure in others) is more related to and a spin off of Gorean M/s. I know Norman has some fans and some not, but I'm just saying, I would liken behaviors in M/s to be more akin to and inspired by Gorean ideologies. That being said, I would keep terms like "slave" (even though they're kajira) more in line with M/s and not as interchangeable as mentioned. Personally, I think M/s have more TPE than D/s and that's the main line the divides the two, but again, that's just how I was trained.

You're mentioning names of (I assume) writers I've never heard of. Could I ask for first and last names? I like to read, but where to start finding material for leaning isn't so easily googlable.

[Deleted Member]

Slave and submissive are 2 totally different things. The minute I'm told to call someone "Master" it's a BYE from me. Especially when it's still in the 'get to know you' phase. I personally feel that just shows how little they know of the lifestyle and they aren't going to comprehend that a certain level if respect is needed for both.

A submissive will put up boundaries and expect them to be respected. A slave fully submits to the masters terms and what they want and even then that's on respect and trust.

[Deleted Member]

1 hour ago, cptn_Socrates said:

You're mentioning names of (I assume) writers I've never heard of. Could I ask for first and last names? I like to read, but where to start finding material for leaning isn't so easily googlable.

John Norman wrote the Gor books

[Deleted Member]

I think people take it all too seriously and there is a middle ground where we don't need to quantify every experience with a role or label. The sub is the decision maker so, outside of the fetish, it is the sub who is the master and the whole metaphor is broken. Nothing makes sense unless you apply it to your individual experience and any education should flavour that experience and not be in lieu of it.

Probably it is a perfectly fine way to start because it is very vague and gives people a clear idea of dos/don'ts that they can question together.

I sort of agree but also think it's just pedantry and probably isn't considered if you're having as much fun as you should be.

[Ba****]

I don't see it as a progressive thing. It doesn't go from D/s to M/s. You don't have to be a slave to be a sub and vice versa. Slave is a different thing than a sub. You can be both, but it isn't a "you HAVE to be a slave to be a sub." It's a if you're a sub, you're a sub. If you're a slave, you're a slave. You don't have to transition from sub to slave.

[De****]

Every relationship is different. There is no one size fits all. I use the term master in regards to a Owner/pet relationship. The only rule is SSC.

[Mr****]

Love that exactly

[Je****]

I agree that these are different things. Slave and sub or Master and Dom are not interchangeable. They have different meanings. But I don’t agree that D/s relationships are expected to turn into M/s relationships. Most people prefer one or the other. I am a sub. Regardless of how close I get to a Dom or how much I trust him I will never have any interest in being a slave

[Deleted Member]

These are not interchangeable terms. Nor does a D/s always turn into a M/s relationship. Differences are the level of control given/employed as well as the frequency. A D/s relationship is typically more limited to sessions, whereas a M/s is typically 24/7 and involves TPE as well.

[na****]

2 hours ago, ADTFEUTA said:

These are not interchangeable terms. Nor does a D/s always turn into a M/s relationship. Differences are the level of control given/employed as well as the frequency. A D/s relationship is typically more limited to sessions, whereas a M/s is typically 24/7 and involves TPE as well.

I think that’s somewhat incorrect I would say. It’s very much a consensual agreement of what is obtainable and sought after from those who engage. I don’t believe there is a set definition or box as such. They can very much be somewhat interchangeable by all means.

[Chloebear]

23 hours ago, ADTFEUTA said:

These are not interchangeable terms. Nor does a D/s always turn into a M/s relationship. Differences are the level of control given/employed as well as the frequency. A D/s relationship is typically more limited to sessions, whereas a M/s is typically 24/7 and involves TPE as well.

D/s is the umbrella term. M/s is the specific, just as DD/lg or whichever variant might be. So all M/s are D/s, just a specific type of dynamic. Yes this might be linked to tpe, frequency etc. It tends to indicate total compliance from the sub and more formal rule structures. But as Nat said, all these things are by agreement within the dynamic. I wouldn’t say most D/s turn into M/s, I’d actually say relatively few from what I’ve seen. It’s a high level of energy and investment on both sides so it’s not an easily sustainable option always.

[Chloebear]

In response to the OP - you go from being under consideration in the initial period, to being someone’s sub, rather than from sub to slave. The Dom is always a Dom but might not accept their formal titles until this agreement is reached. Most will tbh.

[Chloebear]

And also, limits etc would be discussed before any play, during initial conversations. Same for safewords.

I agree that demanding use of formal titles immediately is a red flag.

[to****]

When I discovered what I was it wasn't master and slave that I thought or used, my persona is daddy and I ask my sub what term they use for themselves, because even though there a sub and I'm a dom I feel the relationship should be respectful to some degree and knowing how they feel about themselves makes for a better dom sub relationship

[Ni****]

As I am new to the BDSM seen this has been purely informative, and I appreciate your informative and just wanted to say thank you. You're informative sounds correct to me but I know very little just that I like kinks and have dabbled. I figured it was time to step the game up then some.

[Deleted Member]

I agree. Master is not Dom is not top. But sort of. With all interest in communicating as effectively as possible, I also don't want to gatekeep noobs.