Can your business help Seek Discipline?    [other banners]

	SD! : Web boards : Ritual : "Linguistic gestures?" 1 2 3 4 Linguistic gestures? (35) 20 Nov 06, 8:55 AM Rolling_Wildheart US(AZ), 2 yrs  Ok, I've seen several subs/slaves respond, so I figured I'd give you a Master's point of view as the why I have My slave (giolla) do the things I have her do in this area. As to both the third person speech and the "W/we" and "O/our" way of typing, I feel it is just a way of reminding My slave of her place (not that she really needs reminding). I only require third person speech when W/we are alone and specifically when she is asking permission from Me to do something. In both instances, they are ways of making sure that she always remembers that W/we are not "equals", that she is subservient to Me. It is my personal feeling (and I don't mean to prescribe this to anyone else on here) that the word we, when used with a single "w" (caps or no) denotes equality in the two parties being spoken about. In using "W/we", it differentiates the hierarchy. Same with capitalization of pronouns. In using "He" and "i", it, again, is a remider of the status of the two parties in the relationship. The more those things are used, especially in training (for Me at least), the quicker it gets into the subconscious mind. I might feel differently if I owned a slave who was already experienced in the lifestyle, but with giolla, she was brand new to it when W/we met, so I feel these are things that help her along in her journey to full slavery. Wildheart 20 Nov 06, 10:04 AM 538-020-638 AU, 2 yrs  This girl appreciates the question, and where all the curiosity is coming from. When she first started reading posts on TSR she also wondered why many of the slaves/subs referred to themselves in the third person, and often marveled at how they managed to still sound intelligent and self assured. When this girl was finally allowed to start posting, with permission from Master, she had no desire of her own to post in third person - but Master decided He required it. This girl was reluctant and felt she was giving up a large part of her identity (she thinks this is partly why Master requires it as she is still learning that she is His property). It gives a feeling of submission to this girl, and reminds her constantly why she is doing it (because it is Master's wishes) - which is especially important as the relationship is sort of long distance and a constant reminder of who she belongs to means alot to this girl. She understands the frustration in reading it - one of her housemates is a grammer fanatic (you would probably get along well), but you will most likely find you will get used to it, and hopefully for your sake it will not frustrate you enough that you lose out on the intersting interactions that go on throughout the boards. Masters_pussycat 20 Nov 06, 11:52 AM Tanos UK, 11 yrs  Y! http://www.domsub.info/historical.html has some interesting references to historical uses of lowercase "i" and personal names. lili and popi are both required to use lowercase letters for their names, and lili is allowed to use "i". My own preference is to use standard capitalisation for pronouns ("him" not "Him") and impersonal nouns ("owner" not "Owner"), and lower or uppercase for slaves' names, according to their own usage (presumably the owner's wishes.) This is probably because I view names as the private property of each individual (or the person who owns them), but otherwise like to write in standard English since it's easier to read. I did used to capitalise "Master" and even "Dom" sometimes, and still do occasionally - eg in "Master / slave". I changed course a couple of years ago for readability. Regards, Tanos www.tanos.org.uk "There is a level of cowardice lower than that of the conformist: the fashionable non-conformist" - Ayn Rand Edited 20 Nov 06, 12:00 PM by Tanos 20 Nov 06, 1:33 PM shornIvory US, 3 yrs  shorn is not required to post this way, shorn simply finds it more demeaning. As somebody above said it makes shorn more of an object. shorn may stop slavespeak and use professional language if and when shorn wishes. However it does have some advantages, shorn slipped at work late last summer and addressed department head in slavespeak, shorn got funny look and shorn and Owner got invitation to a really kinky party in SoHo. shorn actually changed shorn's given name (not the one shorn works under however) last spring and middle name is now shorn and the Judge carefully made a typo when filling out the paper work and forgot the capital letter. shorn's Owner however is not Him, but him and we is we or We as proper. Additionally shorn's wife (shorn part of poly) is Ebony and when shorn is working with Ebony (shorn and Ebony met as nude dancers) shorn's name is Ivory, thus shorn here is shornIvory. shorn is supposed to write a signature line of 'Beneath shorn's Owner's feet' or similar after each post and shorn has 'forgot' every post this past week. shorn will be caged for two weeks next summer as punishment. Fundamentalist Christians will often refer to themselves as i to indicate that they are beneath The Lord. Also the military uses 3rd person address as a sign of respect such as 'What would the Captain like' or 'The Captain would like your report now'. shorn 21 Nov 06, 12:31 AM 678-111-340 US, 2 yrs  631-535-398 wrote: <snip> i actually have tried when going to sleep find good ways to explain things to someone who doesn't think a certain way normally (geek! <-- ) And yes i love to dig for reasons. i think it's called overanalyzing or gathering information to help you better yourself, but i call it mental masterbation and i practice it constantly and have for as long as i can remember! <snip> Heh, giolla, you sound so much like me. Every family gathering I am called upon to try to explain concepts like email, mp3s, and other tech-oriented stuff to my grandparents. I'm slowly making headway, but it's quite fun to have to outdo myself each time with a new and slightly different perspective or explanation. Mental masturbation, indeed. The world could use more of it. Rolling_Wildheart wrote: <snip> As to both the third person speech and the "W/we" and "O/our" way of typing, I feel it is just a way of reminding My slave of her place (not that she really needs reminding). I only require third person speech when W/we are alone and specifically when she is asking permission from Me to do something. In both instances, they are ways of making sure that she always remembers that W/we are not "equals", that she is subservient to Me. It is my personal feeling (and I don't mean to prescribe this to anyone else on here) that the word we, when used with a single "w" (caps or no) denotes equality in the two parties being spoken about. In using "W/we", it differentiates the hierarchy. <snip> Thank you for the perspective from the "other side of the line" (as it were). Whether or not I agree, your explanation makes sense to me. I think the phrase "differentiating the hierarchy" is a good one. Again, thank you. Masters_pussycat wrote: <snip>hopefully for your sake it will not frustrate you enough that you lose out on the intersting interactions that go on throughout the boards. Oh, hells no. I can put up with a lot of linguistic discomfort for the sake of all the companionship, advice, and information I've found on these boards. Tanos wrote: <snip> My own preference is to use standard capitalisation for pronouns ("him" not "Him") and impersonal nouns ("owner" not "Owner"), and lower or uppercase for slaves' names, according to their own usage (presumably the owner's wishes.)<snip> That seems a good way of doing things, to me. Also, thank you for the link. shornIvory wrote: <snip> Fundamentalist Christians will often refer to themselves as i to indicate that they are beneath The Lord. Also the military uses 3rd person address as a sign of respect such as 'What would the Captain like' or 'The Captain would like your report now'. shorn That's interesting; a usage I'd never heard of before. Hmm. Thanks for pointing that out to me. (Edited cause I'm a twit with closing brackets, sometimes) - Mynx Edited 21 Nov 06, 12:32 AM by 678-111-340 21 Nov 06, 5:00 PM shornIvory US, 3 yrs  678-111-340 wrote: shornIvory wrote: <snip> Fundamentalist Christians will often refer to themselves as i to indicate that they are beneath The Lord. Also the military uses 3rd person address as a sign of respect such as 'What would the Captain like' or 'The Captain would like your report now'. shorn That's interesting; a usage I'd never heard of before. Hmm. Thanks for pointing that out to me. (Edited cause I'm a twit with closing brackets, sometimes) shorn isn't certain which of the two usages you are speaking of, but ran across the fundamentalist one on another BB last summer, followed her website link and got a long explaination there. Never saw it before then. The military one has been around for a long time, shorn thinks it is mostly Navy and Marine Corp that has this usage. shorn 21 Nov 06, 8:27 PM Dark_Angel1 US(FL), 2 yrs  Y! This girl has never been told to use third person just started doing so, and now it is automatic. She believes it show's respect to her Master to do so. Would you refer to your chair as I, or your bed? Some of us accept our place as property. It's not saying we are less equel then others, but we belong to our Masters. This girl also believes every time she refers to herself this way it cements in her mind her place. Speaking this way helps keep this girl in slave state all the time, which is where her Master wishes her mind to be. It would be interesting it someone did a bit of research and dug up exactly when this become a BDSM thing, and why. Though this girl believes as stated it's just a status move, and shows the diffrence between Doms/subs and Masters/slaves. Submissivly yours, Kim 21 Nov 06, 9:54 PM 678-111-340 US, 2 yrs  Submissivlygood wrote: <snip>Would you refer to your chair as I, or your bed? <snip> Well, I personally wouldn't, but that's cause I'm not the bed or chair. I imagine if I were a bed or chair I'd refer to myself with the first-person pronoun. But that's just me. Submissivlygood wrote: <snip>Some of us accept our place as property.<snip> Yes, some of us do. And that isn't dependent on which pronouns we refer to ourselves by. Please understand, I'm not saying it's not an effective way to keep one's mind on one's place, and all that. But I think it's kind of silly to insist that in order to "accept our place" as slaves, we *have* to do so. And that's kind of what your post sounded like you were advocating. If I've misunderstood, mes apologies. - Mynx 22 Nov 06, 2:09 AM 139-715-032 US(MA), 3 yrs  678-111-340 wrote: Well, I personally wouldn't, but that's cause I'm not the bed or chair. I imagine if I were a bed or chair I'd refer to myself with the first-person pronoun. But that's just me. So few chairs have much of anything to say. It makes it difficult to determine their linguistic preferences. I know my master is unusual, but he has many "inanimate" possessions that he refers to with proper nouns. For him it only denotes sentience, not status. I know there are a few folks who play with treating their slaves as inanimate objects, but those ones wouldn't be speaking so it is irrelevant. Still, any modification in how one speaks of writes can be a useful tool in mindfulness. My master dislikes the decapitalization convention, so I don't do it. I sometimes think it would be interesting if he made me improve my diction, the way he's made me improve my writing, but I think he prefers to tease me about my accent. ("It is so cute the way you replace your midrange consonants with glottal stops." he once said. That's when I say "mitten" like "mih-en", or "hunter" like "hunner".) -- Joshua Raven's Boy, Joshua, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Raven Kaldera. You may contact Joshua directly with any questions or comments at josh@cauldronfarm.com, or contact Raven at cauldronfarm@hotmail.com. 22 Nov 06, 6:31 AM 678-111-340 US, 2 yrs  139-715-032 wrote: 678-111-340 wrote: Well, I personally wouldn't, but that's cause I'm not the bed or chair. I imagine if I were a bed or chair I'd refer to myself with the first-person pronoun. But that's just me. So few chairs have much of anything to say. It makes it difficult to determine their linguistic preferences. So very true. Perhaps I shall try to elicit some conversation from my computer chair. I predict failure. 139-715-032 wrote: I know my master is unusual, but he has many "inanimate" possessions that he refers to with proper nouns. For him it only denotes sentience, not status. I know there are a few folks who play with treating their slaves as inanimate objects, but those ones wouldn't be speaking so it is irrelevant. Oh, gods, I do the same thing. My car and my computer both have names, and I refer to them as semisentient. My car, in particular. She won't shift into reverse unless I say "please". Hand to Goddess. Once I do, she shifts just fine. 139-715-032 wrote: Still, any modification in how one speaks of writes can be a useful tool in mindfulness. My master dislikes the decapitalization convention, so I don't do it. I sometimes think it would be interesting if he made me improve my diction, the way he's made me improve my writing, but I think he prefers to tease me about my accent. ("It is so cute the way you replace your midrange consonants with glottal stops." he once said. That's when I say "mitten" like "mih-en", or "hunter" like "hunner".) -- Joshua The intervocalic substitution of the alveolar stop is very common. I'd venture to say that the "hunter" -> "hunner" is actually a process by which you substitute a "flap" for the [t] and then the flap all but disappears between the nasal and vowel, since they're both strongly [+cont] and the flap is not. ...I'm sorry. I'm a linguist. I tend to go off on these tangents. The point is, I agree with you. Mindfulness is apparently the goal in most of these modifications; because after all, what else is "reminding ve of ve's slave status" but causing ve to be mindful of it? Well said, Joshua. - Mynx Next page