The difference between a little and a slave

[Guest sunnybaby]

Okay! So a little backstory before I jump into my thoughts!

 

I've recently joined a kink dating app in hope of finding someone near me that I clicked well with. (it's been like 3 days so no luck yet lol)

However, one of my matches approached me and was very lovely. We talked for maybe a day, and then asked if I'd like to be his slave. I promptly typed, and I quote "...um...wat?" (i know right I'm a genius with words)

 

But anyway, we keep talking. I'm entertaining the thought of this because if I'm 100% honest with you I had never thought about it before and my immediate reaction was very negative...and i didn't like that response. Why did my brain cringe at the idea of being a slave? (i've discovered it was because I was uninformed and kinda rude but that's beside the point). He then proceeds to tell me that he'd want to take control over my relationships with my friends and family and that's when I blocked him because he was on red flag like number a billion at that point.

 

Here I am the next day, left very curious as to what a slave/master relationship is actually like! I really want to know and understand it and who knows  I may even decide it's something I like. (heck that's how I got into ddlg and I love it!)

I've spent all day today researching and looking at tons of blogs and articles and dming my BDSM friends trying to figure it out for myself and I've realized that literally, EVERYONE has a different idea of what the heck a slave even does. And that's when I realized it's the same damn thing in ddlg! I mean when is the last time you've met little or a caregiver that has the exact same limits, likes, dislikes, interests, rules, guidelines, expectations, etc? (if you're like me the answer is NEVER)

 

So here's where my thoughts are now! Are slaves and littles and any other kinds of submissives really that different besides the headspace the sub gets into and the personal differences between each sub in general? Because there are little that relinquish total control to their caregivers and there are slaves that only give control in regards to sex. I mean please tell me if I'm being rude or offensive or ignorant or something because I honestly just want to learn.

 

Please tell me you're opinions on this topic I am so curious about how people in the community feel about the importance of titles and the differences between them.

[xBabydollx]

Everyone's dynamics are different, because each individual is unique and have their own needs and wants. With any sort of community, there is the fudementals of it, then there is the core of it. The fundamentals change person to person, but the core concept remains the same. For example, with the little community, we all share unique qualities about what we like to do when we feel 'little' (the fudementals), but the core concept is that we all have child-like qualities in the first place. Another example is, as a sub I may like lots of rules, while another sub may like a few. These are the fundamentals. The core concept of us both is that we have a submissive personality type and enjoy submitting to a Dominant we consent to.

 

When it comes to finding ppl with similar core values in something, I think the community u can be a part of can influence a lot of 'what's popular or to be expected'. I come from another community where everyone shared the same core ideals of what is D/s, Master/slave DD/lg, BDSM overall, and other things. Hundreds of ppl mind u, from all over. It may sound unbelievable, but I could ask a ton of ppl what a sub is or what a slave is, and would always get similar answers. Finding articles and blogs online, I always found the same core ideals being repeated as well. Core ideals I'm speaking of, not the fudementals. It wasn't until last year where I joined another community and this site, where I found ppl who have such a loose interpretation (or simply different interpretation) of what the core ideal of what DD/lg is for example. It's impossible to expect everyone's fudementals of a dynamic to be the same tho (likes, dislikes, needs, limits etc).

 

To me personally, a slave is a type of sub who is in a TPE (total power exchange) with their Master/Mistress Who owns them and might possibly treat them as property. That is the core concept. All the little details are fudementals. It's also possible that a little can also be a slave. There is really no right or wrong answers to any of it. Just depending on what community u are in, sometimes u find some ideals more popular than others. I could say what I think a slave is here and it be an unpopular opinion, and I can say what a slave is somewhere else and everyone would agree. Just how it is. Just find what works for u and run with that.

 

Side note, I cringe at the titles of Master and slave, but that's just because the titles themselves make me uncomfortable XD just like Mommy/Daddy will make others cringe.

[Maids]

I have never once been a slave, nor thought about it. I have slave tendencies as in always making sure my Daddy is 100% satisfied and will do anything to complete that task, I love to work as a housewife too (i.e dishes, vacuuming, dusting, etc.) In my experience with a Master when I was first starting out in BDSM, he was very rough with me. He didn't have any nurturing side to him whatsoever. He demanded things and I had to comply or he would shut me out and make me feel like shit. There was no aftercare, it was just a "Good slut." then went off and left me to do his own thing. Daddies are typically very nurturing, caring, understanding, loving. Masters tend to be very rough, they punish easily, never discipline, typically Masters nowadays do not care for safe words. They control who you talk to, when you talk to them, when you breathe, when you eat, when you sleep, when you potty, they are VERY VERY formal. Masters tend to be posture freaks and love everything to be pin point perfect, there is no room for mistakes as they are strict on protocol. The irony is not many these days like to train, they tend to expect. Masters don't tend to be very "Daddy"-esque when it comes to littlespace. Personally I don't believe in someone being both a Master and a Daddy because one is TPE and the other isn't. 

 

Masters are very brutal when it comes to punishments, Daddies tend to be more playful and light about punishments as they are more sensitive to a little than a slave - depending on the infraction ofcourse, I know if I really messed up, Daddy would throw some hands at me LOL.

 

My Daddy was a Master for a brief period of time and his experience with it was very boring and mundane, it was protocol constantly, it was expecting the same thing constantly, routine day in and day out, repeating yourself over and over again, a lot of posture and a lot of sitting, a lot of general silence. It wasn't very happy and playful like our DDlg relationship is. He ended up feeling sorry for his slaves at that time. That's what drew him to leave the dynamic, he was expectant to the slaves to be a lot more brutal than he felt comfortable with. It was just very cold and there wasn't much emotional investment involved. He didn't ever 'love' his slaves nor his submissives.

 

I recently had an experience with a Master who took interest in me... he only referred to his slave as "slut", he never called her by her name or anything else. He was very quiet with me and mostly observed me and harshly corrected me when I said something wrong. He didn't want me to call him anything other than "Sir" when he wasn't my "Sir".... he didn't gain my consent when it came to pushing my boundaries and he just did it and it made me cry and he said "That's good" and I quote... fucked me up. I see a lot of Masters being very polyamorous, but that may be just by the crowd I am in. He was in markets with me with other LITTLES not slaves and wanting them to "present" themselves to him by forcing them to stand infront of him. He didn't even know what 'littlespace' was. Before I was even his, he was trying to 'test me' to see how submissive I was and how much of a fight I would put up with him by instructing me to stop talking to my friend (without my consent). 

 

Generally, Masters are very expectant of respect as opposed to Daddies who tend to earn it. Well, good Daddies... but if you are genuinely curious, you should run by  each of the dynamics to see what fits you best. It's the best way to grow and feel happier for yourself, just know when to leave if you decide to go through with trialing a Master. You are never just a 'little' or a 'babygirl' or anything, BDSM is constantly evolving as are we and we should encourage exploration, just be safe when you do.  Personally, as a little, I have experienced a bit in M/s and I hated it and neither would my Daddy or I would recommend trialing a Master as M/s is a COMPLETELY different ballpark than DDlg. 

 

I have met plenty of Daddies who are a little bit of everything, but I have never once believed that a Daddy can be both a Master and a Daddy on equal levels. Master is too strict on protocol to be affiliated with Daddies. 

 

Just my opinion though, don't tear me apart.

Edited June 11, 2018 by ♥Squishy Princess♥

[xBabydollx]

Woah. I just want to say that the 'Masters' u describe sound like abusers and not Masters whatsoever. A Daddy, Master, Owner etc...no matter what title a person claims, doesn't' mean they are what they say they are. Many ppl will hide under a title to gain trust when they are really just abusers.

 

I have met Dom/me of every type, and no matter their type, they love/adore/respect their partner. Masters give discipline, are fair, are nurturing in their own way, always provide aftercare, would never ignore safewords, and only do things their partners consent to and are never cruel or abusive. Masters just typically have a 'firmer hand' approach, while a Daddy has a "soft hand' approach to their dynamic. A Master can have moments of being soft and tender just like a Daddy or anyone else. Not every Master likes high protocol either. Not every Master is into S&M tho ofc some are. Anything a Master does to their slave is something they both consent to and both enjoy.

 

While ur exps are unfortunate and ur own, I would hate for ppl to read what u said and think that's what a Master is/does. It's just abusive behavior, which anyone can do, including those who call themselves "Daddy"

[Maids]

 

What he said is accurate. Yes, I do have rather biased opinions on Masters. But he is correct, Masters do little to nothing for their slaves, they are very expectant. Sure a Master may be a nice guy one day and watch a cartoon or two with her, but he won't share that same connection with her when watching cartoons with her. My Daddy goes into Daddyspace a bit when he watches cartoons with me, a Master would not share that with me. He will just sit there and nod like he cares.

 

Sure they have their own way of caring, but it's not even remotely the same to how a Daddy would care for a little. Masters take-take-take and give little to nothing in return, the slave is ... a slave. Sure, it's consensual... but a slave has little to no say in things.If the Master wants his slave down on her knees, she does it, no matter who is around. If the Master wants his slave to make dinner and clean the house, she does it, no if, ands, or butts. 

 

Sirs have the 'firmer hand' and tend to be less marshmallowy, Masters are very protocol. The little may go to her Daddy for acknowledgement and approval and whatnot if she goes out for an interview or does something she is proud of, he will be equally as excited for her and give her that sense of approval she longs for. I highly, HIGHLY, doubt that a Master will know all the names to his slave's stuffies. Sure, they may know a few of the stuffies but they won't care as much as a Daddy Dom would, as the Daddy Dom legit mirrors the role of a Daddy. 

Masters - are more firmer, are less corrective and more physical kink, and may 'punish' for no real cause. The idea in a scene is that the submissive is submitting to the Master because he is demanding it, may be forceful about it, and likely because the submissive is owned (as in "property of") by the Master...

Edited June 11, 2018 by Foxette

[Siniwit]

Let me just clarify a few things here:

​A Master is not a Daddy - full stop. The two are so vastly different it is like night and day. If a Master is showing caring and nurturing tendencies, then they are not a Master; just like if a Daddy is showing total control tendencies and isn't willing to offer much love and support back, then they are not a Daddy. There is a huge difference and the lines aren't often blurred, if ever.

​These are two very opposing mindsets. I've been a Master. I've "learned the ropes" (so to speak) as a Master and I've been in that mindset. If I ever attempted to go into that mindset with my little girl, I would freak her the fudge out and she would run for the hills because that is not at all what she needs from her Daddy. Likewise, I have actually had experiences where, as a Master, I've found myself naturally becoming more caring and loving and found backlash from my slaves or submissives because I was not harsh or brutal enough and ultimately, that's what led me away from being a Master, once I realised I was more of a Daddy. Once I had tried being a Daddy and only a Daddy, it was like a weight was lifted off my shoulders, as I felt more free to be me and I myself wasn't shackled by the role of a Master.

​I found myself to be incredibly cold and lacking in empathy or emotion as a Master and did not at all feel myself, because that is not naturally who I am. For the vast majority of Masters, that is what they are like; they aren't very empathetic and they aren't very caring nor does their role dictate that they should give a damn about their partner. Their partner is their property and nothing but; their partner is a tool for their own gains and that is it. Their slave is precisely that; there is no middle-ground where their slave can have "little tendencies" and they as a Master cater to that. That's just not what happens very often if at all - certainly not in my over 13 years of experience in the lifestyle.

​As a Master, the only aftercare I ever gave or witnessed was that to any impact play bruises, scratches or other "injuries", but only to a minimal extent. I literally witnessed time and time again Masters simply suggesting "you should put some aloe vera on that" (or something equivalent to that kind of nonchalant response) when their slave was bringing up their pain. Safewords are usually acknowledged but I have indeed seen them ignored or pushed (way too far and for way too long) on more than a handful of occasions.

​Granted, not every Master likes high protocol, but the vast majority do and the issue with all of this is that none of this is very good for a little. DDlg is not TPE; DDlg is not the same as M/s. Littles are at a high risk of being upset or traumatised by any experience they may endure with a Master, as opposed to a Daddy and it is well worth the responses in this topic rightly pointing out the potential devastating psychological impact of such relations.

​In short, consenting to a Master is quite literally accepting and giving yourself unto a consensual form of abuse, be it physical or psychological. This is far from anything even remotely close to the dynamic entered into with a true Daddy - and this is precisely why DDlg is an entirely separate branch of BDSM than M/s. The littles on this forum need to be made aware of the dangers of misconstruing the dynamics and misunderstanding what it is they are entering into - especially if they are new to BDSM and aren't familiar with the different terms and branches where dynamics can vastly differ.

​I'm not at all saying that there can't be a little bit of line-blurring, but 9/10 this isn't actually what happens. The littles on this forum need protecting from that kind of trauma - and their little space needs protecting too, as this can be completely shattered by a cold and harsh Master, as opposed to the Daddy they seek.

​As for slaves, the long and short of it is that they too are vastly different to littles in that there isn't really a "head space" as such, and the role is quite literally whatever the Master wants them to be. Their role is to serve unconditionally and simply to await the next instruction while focusing on the task at hand. Their mind is to be blank the majority of the time, so their Master can be free to fill it however they see fit. They are to wholly submit their entire being to their Master, giving them unfettered access to such things as their social media and friends lists etc. so that their Master can dictate how and when they interact with others. This, as you will likely know, contrasts the kind of experience a little receives from their Daddy - and perhaps quite the opposite.

​Hopefully that clears things up a bit and gives a bit more insight into how diverse the branches of BDSM can be, and how they can also almost be poles apart.

Edited June 11, 2018 by Siniwit

[xBabydollx]

A Master is definitely not a Daddy. M/s and DD/lg is not the same and there is a reason why the Master matches with the slave, and a Daddy matches with a little. I would never expect someone who only identifies as a Master to want any part of 'little me' just like I wouldn't expect someone who is only a Daddy to enjoy me as a pet. However, ppl can be a mix of things. It happens all the time. While it isn't common, the Master/Daddy combo and little/slave combo does exist. The only thing I'm disagreeing with is a Master being portrayed as cruel or an abuser. It is a role where safe, sane, and consensual does apply. When things are no longer consented to or enjoyed by both parties, that is when it is no longer BDSM, but rather simply abuse in my eyes and there is many Masters and Mistress's who isn't cold or abusive/ignoring of safety, aftercare, and consent like earlier described.

[Maids]

We weren't saying that it wasn't consensual, it is 100% consensual if the Master has a 100% slave, matched with a 100% Master, vice versa - but it is not consensual to the little side of you as the little side requires more than a slave... a lot more. That is not a grey area where someone can be a mix.

 

I am a pet, little, omega, with very mild slave tendencies... we never stop evolving in BDSM and gain more branches to our personality. But we are just expressing that a little with a Master is very dangerous and can lead to a lot of trauma for a little. From the perspective of a little, Masters are very cruel to me because I do not approve of how they treat myself, but if their slave is happy, who am I to discriminate? Daddies are very protective of their little girls AND their littlespace because that is the Daddy's whole world right there. Masters won't wholeheartedly protect that like a Daddy would. Yes, I see very happy slaves being treated coldly (in my eyes) and like the way their Master treats them, but a little and a slave is VERY different. Mixes do exist, but mixing a ... lets say... 75% Master with a 65% little, that's a recipe for disaster. There has to be balance for it to be healthy or else grey and fine lines will be crossed and that's how trauma happens.

 

Like I said, I am very biased and I do acknowledge that, but I stand my ground where a little and a Master do not belong together in my eyes for this very reason that you brought to me: a Master will not acknowledge littlespace, that is not fair for the relationship if a portion of you, a rather big portion, is in the closet. That relationship is straight up doomed if that is the case. But if that slave is not a 24/7 little and does not have any issue with the lack of nurturing and guidance a Daddy could offer, then there is nothing wrong with it. 

 

My Daddy loves me as a pet, as a pet and a little share similar characteristics. To be cared for and that tender love and nurturing and the training of a pet. Masters these days typically don't have the patience for training, they expect protocol. Where as a Master will take for his own benefit and not consider the well-being much like an Owner caring for a pet (how can a human being not love a furry little creature with not much knowledge of the world ??) or a Daddy taking his little girls hand while crossing the street. Vastly different. 

 

Also! What I want to add is that a Master typically ONLY punishes, never disciplines. As a little, my Daddy never really punishes me firmly, he mostly disciplines me because I understand more from the hand of discipline rather than being punished. Discipline makes me break down what I did, why I did it, why it upset my Daddy, and I learn more from that rather than him slapping me around and calling me a bad girl. There is really no self reflection when it comes to punishments (but that is going into a WHOLE different topic!) which a Master typically doesn't offer. It's more like "Hey. You've fucked me off. I hit you now." lol.

Edited June 11, 2018 by Foxette

[Siniwit]

Nowhere has it been said that a dynamic with a Master is not consensual, nor safe or sane. SSC applies to all BDSM dynamics, however, if there is any part of a submissive that is a little, then the M/s dynamic can be incredibly harmful to that side - which is the point being raised in the acknowledgement of the vastly different roles. Being treated as a slave is abuse for a little - full stop. Of course, littles can have slave-like tendencies (as mine does), but that does not at all mean she should be entering into a dynamic where she is treated as a slave, as it would destroy what makes her who she is. This needs to be made clear for other littles in the same boat. Chances are, if there are submissives out there who are a mix of little and slave, they will be primarily little; at least this is the case with the majority that I have come across. Therefore it's safer for them to have a firmer Daddy (or a Sir, at a stretch) than to have a Master.

​The M/s dynamic is entirely consensual and any slave entering into that is doing so willingly and wholeheartedly - that also needs to be made clear; however, that is a dangerous environment for anyone with a little space in their head. If a submissive who is a mix of both is treated as a slave, then gets hurt or punished physically with little aftercare or thought to her well-being (as is often the case in a M/s dynamic), then happens to go into little space to protect themselves, they are putting themselves at risk of having that little space shattered by whatever their Master's next move is. Their Master could very swiftly snap them out of little space and/or punish them for even going to that place in the first instance. This leads to regret, shame and guilt for doing what comes naturally to them. It leaves them feeling like they cannot regress or truly be themselves and like they are locked in this scary scenario where the bad man hurts them just for wanting to be loved. Is that fair? Is that safe for a little? Is it sane to encourage that? Is that a consensual dynamic at that point? No. That's when it becomes abuse and that's the point being raised in defining the contrast between the roles and dynamics.

​I think that's where you might be misunderstanding what's been said. The points which have been raised are for the protection of those who are littles or are primarily littles. There are, of course, slaves out there who are more than happy with the M/s dynamic and nobody is knocking or judging that, but it is merely being said that this dynamic is unsafe for a little as a Master can be quite abrasive and icy to a little in comparison to the soft, warm and ultimately loving approach of a Daddy.

[xBabydollx]

The reason I had mentioned it is because of her original post where she talked about things being pushed against her consent, along with her mentionioning a lack of aftercare and things of that sort. Lack of consent and care implies abuse which no dynamic supports. little/slave and everything else does mix. There is even ppl on this forum who identify as such and have a Master/Daddy partner. With anybody who have multiple headspaces, it can change and transition quite fluidly. When ppl are compatible, I don't see the harm. A person who is only a little would ofc not be compatible with someone who is only a Master. To be only a little and seek someone who is only a Master is just a setup for failire imo.

[Guest Loki]

I would just like to say thank you for everyone who is discussing these things. I had no idea about Masters.

[xBabydollx]

Yeah the Master/slave dynamic is quite interesting and I think their portal depends a lot on ppl's personal views, exp, and ppl they meet. For example, there is a lot of 'Masters' that are described like earlier mentioned, but I would just consider ppl like that as abusers cuz I have met Master's and Mistress's who wouldn't do a lot of those things at all, like no aftercare? They would never not give that. So I truly believe that the portrayal of the dynamic depends on the ppl u come across or hear about, or even exp ur self.

[WanderingWonderland]

I would just like to say thank you for everyone who is discussing these things. I had no idea about Masters.

 

I wouldn't get too excited. The levels of ignorance and the projections of 'personal' being treated as 'universal' on this thread would be funny, were they not so sobering. I've never read so much rubbish in my life.

 

Sincerely,

 

an ex-slave.

[Guest SUeB]

Yeah, that's not a master, that's an insecure prat that's trying to fit his abusive mental problems into a relationship title.

But to answer the question, some littles are not slaves and will never want to be. Some slaves have no aspect of lg personality and never will have, and some people (like me) are very much both.

You can be one thing and you can be many things.

For me, it's all from the basis of my submissive nature. It all fits together seamlessly.

[Maids]

Exactly. As long as long as there is a balance of diversity within you then there is no harm in it. But, if someone like myself who is more on the little/babygirl side than a slave, were to try out a dynamic within the M/s side, I would not be capable as I do not have that balance. It would not be fair for me to say that you cannot be a little bit of everything as I am a little bit of everything, but I have my preferences. We are all growing continuously throughout our dynamics and we cannot limit ourselves to one title. 

 

As I am a little/babygirl, the M/s dynamic would be damaging for myself. Note: that is the point that was being raised. We don't want our comments to come across as grouping our personal experiences as together and suggesting that is the norm, however, there are many, many resources out there that state the exact same thing that we have been saying. The description of the Master/slave dynamic is a lot more common and just because others have not experiences this themselves should not be a reason for anyone to dismiss what has been said as nonsense. All we have been trying to do is raise awareness and protect the littles on this forum.

[xBabydollx]

The thing is, nobody was ever disagreeing with that notion. I know I have said many times already that I don't think someone who is just a little should be trying to pair up with someone who is just a Master. It just doesn't fit. The only thing ppl was trying to add is that the Daddy/Master mixture can blend and workout wonderfully. Also, that a Master and an abuser are not 1 in the same. Not all 'Masters' act that way, of which was earlier described by ppl. Many Master's are not like that whatsoever, so I just wanted to share that so ppl wouldn't think, "Oh, that's what a Master is? Sounds like an abusive asshole to me". That is all really.

[Guest SUeB]

my Master is NONE of the things that @Foxette listed as her experience of what they are. Nothing like. If anything, quite the opposite in fact.

Just like all lg's are not the same, neither are daddies, or subs, or doms or masters. Or any other identification.

[Guest AlisonS23]

I think these titles are unique to each person and relationship. They have sort of a basic outline of what classified as little or slave or daddy or master but it’s soooo hard to fit people in a box like that. I don’t like to be confined to societies standards of a certain title. I say I’m a little and a pup mostly because I love being that and identify with that but I’m flexible in the fact that each relationship I have I can negotiate and open up to other “titles” I hope I’m making sense... sometimes it’s hard to explain what I mean. Just because you like a strict master or deal with power exchange doesn’t make you a slave or just because you have child like manners doesn’t make you a little per say.

[Guest SUeB]

I think these titles are unique to each person and relationship. They have sort of a basic outline of what classified as little or slave or daddy or master but it’s soooo hard to fit people in a box like that. I don’t like to be confined to societies standards of a certain title. I say I’m a little and a pup mostly because I love being that and identify with that but I’m flexible in the fact that each relationship I have I can negotiate and open up to other “titles” I hope I’m making sense... sometimes it’s hard to explain what I mean. Just because you like a strict master or deal with power exchange doesn’t make you a slave or just because you have child like manners doesn’t make you a little per say.

Exactly. i have the characteristics of an lg, a pet, a slave and a sub in the context of my relationship. Along with being a girlfriend, lover, etc, etc, etc. So if i had to choose a title to incorporate all of that, what on earth would i choose, lol?

[Guest AlisonS23]

Haha yes! Same here!

[xBabydollx]

I personally mix titles/identify with various ones. Works for me and some others

[Guest SUeB]

i guess my overriding one would be submissive, as everything else comes from that underlying basis.

[Siniwit]

I think perhaps people are jumping a tad too heavily on the notion that my little and I have been stating categorically that all Masters are like "blah" and all Daddies are like "blah". So, to quell any misunderstandings and prevent any discussion getting too heated, if you read carefully, we've explained our own experiences and encounters and simply described what we have witnessed as "the general norm" in terms of what we've been exposed to. We've also done plenty of research on this subject in our own right, as we've discussed this very topic ourselves and wondered if it really is like this all the time.

​Of course, it's not like we've described "all the time", but there are countless resources out there saying exactly the same thing and defining a Master as we have described. Others will for sure have experienced things differently and that's great for you - but as it appears to us (and this is from our own perspective, which we are entitled to see as valid), the general consensus from the countless resources on the web (also citing personal experiences of their own) as well as our own experiences - of which I have many years - is that this tends to be what Masters are like as opposed to Daddies.

​It is not "wrong" of us to be suggesting this and it is far from wrong of us to want to protect those who are primarily little from the hurt that relations with a Master could POTENTIALLY cause.

​We have not once said that there cannot be a mix of different aspects in BDSM relationships; of course there can. We would be hypocrites to suggest such a thing, however, we have very clearly defined that for a primarily "little" submissive or a wholly "little" submissive, entering into something with a Master without a full understanding of the potential harm it could cause would be quite dangerous.

​We have compared our own experiences and our own definitions of Masters and Daddies, as requested by the OP, and we have outlined the dangers for those who are primarily little or wholly little, which, I feel, is entirely valid and appropriate given this forum is a DDlg-centric forum and it's entirely possible that there's plenty of primarily or wholly little subs on here who would find such information useful.

​I'm not sure what the argument is with anything we've said, as we have not once closed anything off into a neat little defined box. We are well aware that a lot of people are a little bit of a mix. We've simply responded how the OP requested us to and tried to help a proportion of the member-base for this forum. I see no harm or ignorance in that, as we have acknowledged and accepted the diversity in the BDSM community and different branches and mixes several times.

Perhaps it isn't us being ignorant? Perhaps some of these replies are pursuant of their own expression at the expense of others without offering anything but sarcasm and unnecessarily defensive remarks? We did not wish to offend anyone by relaying our own personal experiences...

Edited June 11, 2018 by Siniwit

[Guest AlisonS23]

Who got offended lol just casual open conversation and opinions friends!

[neworder]

Perhaps the Master/slave world has come to the similar aspect in the DD/lg world: relative truth about something (it's what you make of it) vs absolute truth ('here is a list of universally agreed upon concepts:...")