M/s versus D/s

[gagged_Louise]

There is an ongoing discussion - though it doesn't often get up clearly in public on a web forum suich as this, it's more run in personal talk and at bdsm parties - that you might call the "old school/new school debate". The whole spectrum of bdsm changed with the internet, and with the new ways of contact and service that the web has brought along. In the old days, it could be maintained a slave was, in general, a live-in, full-time slave who had written a contract, surrrendered all his/her money and property and given up their person to be the Dominant's chattel - a creature out of Justine or the Story of O and the need to have a full-time Master was very pronounced because without that you simply didn't get far inside the culture, the tribe. of course, not all slaves actually lived like that in the old times, but it was sort of a widely-held ideal. The "lifestyle" was like an underground church.

Some of this is applicable in online D/s also, but the idea that slavery has to be physically expressed and shown at all times doesn't seem helpful to the new generations of Dominants and subs/slaves who have found their way in by the web, who are every bit as committed as the "old school" but who can't or won't move to live under the same roof as their Dominant, or give up their old life (it's also much less easy to "live in your pockets" and in a kind of grey zone outside of ordinary society now than it was back in the day, let's say in the 1970s - today you've got to pay your rent and your bills regularly and without marking time even a few days, you get kicked into the street and branded if you don't). So the concept of being a slave isn't always realized as a live-in creature.

The difference between slave and sub was always a dim one, but I feel it's useful to see the difference between self-image (the image and idea of who you are, what you need) and outward life. Everyone defines these things for themselves, but often...well, a sub is the kind who needs to be punished, used and spanked,to feel controlled and to taste being a bottom, but who may not be heavily into serving their Dominant, at least not with non-sexual tasks, while a slave has a need to define some aspect of themselves totally from the Dominant, to give up control firmly (by a contract, a rulebook or some other means?) and to affirm that they're owned and moulded/re-moulded by their Dominant. Slaves, I think, tend to see their BDSM life as an initiation, an irrevocable change in who they are and what they want to be, even if it doesn't happen full-time, and that's something many submissives may feel less strongly.
Again, this doesn't apply to all slaves and submissives in any sense, its a general trend in how the words are used.