Acceptable or No?

[Flaming_Redhead]

First, let me preface my remarks by saying;

1. M/s generally denotes a Master/slave relationship which is far different than a D/s (Dominant/submissive) relationship.
2. I do understand the attraction of M/s relationships for those who enjoy that level of power exchange, however it is not an attraction for me and I have no personal experience with it. I am however acquainted with several people who have that kind of relationship.

so in response...



This does seem to indicate that the relationship is in fact a Master/slave relationship. A bit more information would be needed because these relationships are generally contractual and the precise answer to many of these questions would depend on what the terms of said contract were. But in general, a M/s contract would be "no holds barred/no limits" as generally slaves are not permitted limits and therefore "safewords" is a moot point. There are none.

I agree, except that limits and safe words can be negotiated into the contract. Even in a no limits relationship, I think the limits are implied rather than written because both parties either have the same limits or the Master isn't an extreme player. Hell, they might not even be into S&M.

Again, in this instance if she in a M/s relationship, she is a slave and has no opinion so she cannot be "strongly against" doing anything. No limits, no right of refusal.

A slave always has the right to withdraw consent, understanding that it will probably end the relationship.

Superficially, no quarrel here. If she was a slave and contractually has no limits then she was disobedient if she refused a command and corporal punishment would be an appropriate response.

On the surface, all is well. If he told her to bring him her sister or daughter, which she refused....I suppose the "FUCK YOU" and slamming door would negate any punishment.

In general, yes of course safewords are always protected and honored. But given the point where this falls in your scenario, I'd assume she was attempting to use a safe word to stop the punishment and that is a point I think is well worth discussing. Even in a D/s relationship as opposed to a M/s relationship, submissives are not commonly allowed to use safewords during actual punishment. If you think about it that is only logical. Otherwise if the submissive did not like the punishment chosen she could merely escape it by using the veto power of a safeword. Therefore punishment would not be very effective. A submissive must trust her dominant to use good judgement about when punishment is called for and how it is administered.

Uh-huh.

Regardless of the character of the relationship, here I'd have a problem seeing justification for this under any circumstances. Before disciplining, a dominant should have already considered the matter carefully and decided on a punishment that fits the offense. A dominant should never punish capriciously or while angry. This sounds too much like someone who becomes gripped by emotion and then increases the intensity of the punishment beyond what he intially had decided on. That isn't good and would indicate a lack of self-control. He should merely complete the punishment as originally intended.

I hadn't even thought about that, but I guess you're right.

In summary, many people think they want to be a slave but they haven't clearly grasped exactly what that means. It is world away from being a submissive. The moral here I think is to be wise about what kind of relationship you agree to. I think it is always good in any type of BDSM relationship for the parties to have a written contract. Of course such a contact is not a legally enforceable document but it does spell out the expectations and so both parties know how the relationship will be conducted and what the rules are. I personally have no interest in relationships without limits because in my mind they violate the tenants of SSC and RACK. But everyone should be able to make up their own mind about what kind of relationship they find meaningful.

*nods a lot*