From Bald_Boi said:
Oh dang do I have some thoughts on this. To start, when I was first learning about the kink lifestyle it was exclusively online through a few different websites. Luckily I did not jump into a dynamic until I could delve into everything possible and learn what it truly meant to be a dom and to be in a power dynamic. This writing does not feel like the writing of a true dom/domme. This feels like the writing of someone who still does not understand that in any kink dynamic, both parties have equal power and equal in terms of any kind of "hierarchy" there may be. What sits wrong with me is the entitlement that any submissive should call them by their "title" even when zero negotiation or vetting has happened. So any random person who identifies as a submissive should be calling them by a title that they have not earned from that person. That is ridiculous to me. In any situation where I am interacting with a person who is submissive, I treat them as a normal person just as I expect them to treat me. Until such time that we both discuss and feel comfortable with honorifics being exchanged. Hell I even like to discuss before something as simple as a nickname is used just to make sure both parties are comfortable with it.
I guess the kind of TL/DR of it is this. If you are a dominant of any kind, you do not get called by your honorifics until discussing its use with the individual in question. And this has to consist of, at bare minimum, you asking if they are comfortable using that honorific.
Also as an aside, I fully believe personally that the submissive should decide which honorific they would like to call their dominant. Mainly because some titles might have a lot more meaning than others and I don't believe the dominant should demand a certain title if a submissive is not comfortable with it. But that's just my two cents 👍
I agree i think when it comes to daily averagee lifestyle, honorifics is part of negotiation and consent which touches more on the side of "kink is customisable".
This particular piece was written by a Professional Dominant (sex worker) and I think in a professional/paid service setting what they are saying is probably correct.
But it's not correct for the general population.
I had a great conversation with them actually and they agreed that they needed to make their posts clearer about the different settings - so when you PAY a professional, as part of their service agreement before engaging them you would be signing a contract which would include things like expectatoins around use of honorifics etc. But then you are paying them for that experience and service they are providing.
Which is a completely different circumstance when you are not paying for a service - and are interacting with individuals online or in person.
It then becomes nuanced even further - because in different regions, BDSM is different and has different moral codes and culture. Termonology can be nuanced and have different history and meaning. Taking that even further, there are times where there are rules, for example you may go to an event that has rules which includes rules around addressing other individuals at that event.
Login or register to post your reply