Dominant, Submissive...

On the Arizona BDSM list, Bill just did a stunning rant about the fact that when he got into the scene, Slaves served, and submissives were, well, submissive. That there is a loss and sadness in him over this, seeing it go away, replaced by submissives who "need" to be whipped, "need" to have love reciprocated, etc. I replied :)What a delightful rant Bill, thank you for sharing it.I myself feel mixed about it all. When I came into my first M/s relationship in '93, I had no access to information, no access to clubs, and as a Slave, my Master's will was honor and law. It was powerful and amazing. And I was raped during the relationship, and abused in other ways.It was an amazing relationship, I learned huge amounts about myself during it. It was, for the most part, a very good M/s relationship.But joining the public scene in late '95 and finding out ideas and concepts like Slaves could ever say no, and serving did not have to equal the destruction of identity unless you so chose... literally saved my life.So really, I'm sad and blessed in the same breath with this stuff. I am saddened at our loss of cohesive scene protocol, and yet I see some groups like the Protocols dinner folks in British Columbia and Connecticut starting to bring it back. I have felt loss at not having earning of leathers and colors be a major part of our world any more, and yet in groups across the world the idea of earning respect and items through hard work and journey is coming back.I personally would love to see new language invented.That there are people who do pain not because they are Sadists and Masochists, but because they like having fun, and thus are Happyists.That there are those who are not Slaves or Submissive partners or individuals in service, but are Bottoms, or Sensation Junkies, or Perverts!Perhaps a lot of this is a linguistics issue? Individuals saying they are submissive when they are only interested in submitting during a scene? And in turn, individuals who say they are dominant, but in fact just like the role play hot porn of it all? I think those things can be fun, and hell, I like them both from time to time... but neither a submissive or dominant individual make.I personally use a system. If someone tells me they are seeking to submit, or that they feel deeply submissive, or long for surrender... they likely are. If someone says "I'm a submissive" or "I'm sub"- neither are proper uses of the original english words, they are titles of the ego that wrap up a concept of activities they have in their fantasy world... and thus they likely are expressing that.Sometimes folks surprise me, but I find it to be a useful tool.Just something to consider? That submission and surrender are actions, and submissive is a descriptor... and none are nouns? Thus, folks who use them as nouns are expressing an egoic concept of projected desire? Take the flip for dominance, control, and dominant? Being "a Dominant" personally informs me of someone to a degree, as compared to individuals who use fully descriptive terms, or state that they are the dominant partner in their relationship.Kisses, and thanks again for the rant!Lee Harringtonhttp://www.PassionAndSoul.com