T is for Titles

I identify as a submissive for ease of reference in social networks like this one. It gives folks an idea of who I am and frames a good deal of the things I write about with a clearly understandable context. It lets them know that in my dynamic that's the side of the slash I fall on.

DISCLAIMER: This is aimed at nobody in particular though it was triggered by someone's writing. I just used that as a jumping off point to express views that only apply to me and my dynamic.

Beyond that? It's meaningless. The only person I am submissive to is Cookie. He is the ONLY person I have consented to submit to and the only person who has any authority over me. I am a submissive, I am not your submissive, and I will not use any sort of title in reference to you because it implies an authority transfer dynamic I have not consented to.

And I've heard all the arguments, I've been around the block a time or two. I've heard the "respect" argument, and the "your place in the lifestyle" argument. I've heard about the proper (read: "Right") way to do things because well, you're acknowledging your place argument. I've seen the "Domlies like it" school of thought... And I call shenanigans.

The "respect" argument?
To me there is a world of difference between courtesy and respect. I do not "respect" people for the sole reason that they have given themselves a title that is as meaningless to me as mine should be to them. I will be courteous or civil but that's all anybody has the right to expect from me- A display of pretty manners that grease the wheels of pleasant society. "Sir" or "Ma'am" in a vanilla context? I will do that gladly, it's just good manners. "Sir" or "Ma'am" in a BDSM context- Implies consent to some authority exchange and I'm not cool with that.

Respect is something I reserve for people I hold in high esteem, and it's something that is granted because they've shown me that they a person who I can respect. There are a handful of people for whom I would use a title because I hold them in such high regard. They're the sort of folks for whom I think the phrase "Pillar of The Community" applies.

Odds are good that you are not them.

The "Your Place In The Lifestyle" argument?
My place is at Cookie's side and that's it. The thought that because I identify as a submissive means that I should, for some unfathomable reason, grant someone any consideration beyond that which I would give to any other stranger on the street- it boggles my mind.

Honestly, whenever I hear that argument and try to apply any logic to it- I can hear gears grinding; A paradigm shifting without a clutch.

I identify as a wife. That doesn't mean that I should give men who identify as "husband" the same consideration I afford to Cookie. He is my husband, They are not. I live a married lifestyle with him, I do not live a married lifestyle with them.

See the parallel?

The "Domlies like it" school of thought?
It's about as silly as saying all Dominants are Sadists. SOME D-types love being called by a title by anything that crosses their path. SOME D-types get a kick out of that sort of thing... SOME D-types cannot stand it.

My Dominant hates it. He says it feels as pointless as some random girl calling him her boyfriend. Without the relationship dynamic behind the word to give it meaning it's meaningless. Dominant is just a label he uses to relate to other D-types and he really prefers it if other s-types don't use it in reference to him because he has no authority over them and he feels that the word implies there is some sort of authority transfer dynamic happening. He does not like it, it makes him uncomfortable, it squicks him.

But his most compelling argument- HE DOESN'T CONSENT TO IT.

And he's not alone.

Finally, there's the "Right, Correct, Proper, True, Real, etc. Way To Do Things..."
(And this is my favorite)
No.
No, no, no, and no.
There is how you do things, there is how I do things, there is how everybody else does things. Their way is right for them. Your way is right for you. My way is right for me. None of us are any more right than the other, none of us are wrong (unless it's not BDSM but abuse of some type).

I don't give a fig about what you do in your relationship. I do not care how your dynamic works or even IF it works. That's on you. If it gives you fulfillment that's great, more power to you, blah blah blah.

But just because your dynamic works for you, that doesn't mean that it has to work for anybody else or that anybody else has to play by your rules. And even if your dynamic is the most commonly practiced form of D/s, M/s, BDSM/whatever- That still doesn't mean that you've got the monopoly on "right". It just means that your dynamic is common.

The rest of us? We might not (and probably will not) consent to being involved in your dynamic.

If your D-type thinks all D-types should be addressed by a title?
You can do that as it's part of your dynamic- But it's foolish to expect anybody else to do that as nobody else has consented to play by those rules but you. In fact, others may have a rule that they are NOT allowed to use titles on D-types that they're not in a relationship with.

And you might think that it's the right thing to do to use a title for any D-type whose path you cross-
But that doesn't mean the random D-type actually wants or consents to you using his title. It just means that the fact that consent in BDSM is a two-way street that is often over-looked.

THIS is what's right for me. It doesn't have to work for you and I'm not pretentious or foolish enough to think it should work for you. So grant me the same consideration and courtesy when the roles are reversed.