How would you explain the difference between male subs and slaves?

The subs just need beating hard enough until your sure their a slave.

 

Submissives, submit, willingly to their Mistress. Slaves are mere property and get nothing in return, not even the pleasure of submitting.

 

Subs are there to scene. Slaves are to be owned and controlled.

 

A slave is a passive being that does whatever his/her dominant wants without thought, like a marionette. A submissive brings their own ideas, experiences, and free will to the relationship but ultimately follows the direction of the dominant partner.

 

I think this applies in our case, I don't think either of us could of survived a "normal" marriage (Whatever that is).

 

To me the difference seems to be that the role of "slave" focuses on the dominant, whereas the role of "sub" focuses on the submissive.
A slave serves and does things for the dominant, the slave's sexual needs are disregarded.
Whereas a sub is someone who receives some form of sexual attention, be that pain, denial, being tied up, chastised, ...

 

Just roles; if you really want to label it, I would say slaves are more BD oriented and subs are more DS oriented. However those are all labels and don't live up to reality and how everyone uses them.

 

Agree with you! Madam some times madam calls me a sub, some times a slave, some times both. Some take the labels more serious than others.

 

For me subs submit by will and not via force or enjoy the threat of force etc, As well as Subs have a voice and more a mutual enjoyment.

a slave is more someone who enjoys the forced nature and has less a voice etc.

Or a least that’s how I see it, certainly I identify with the more submissive side.

 

A slave becomes the responsibility of the dominant, whereas a submissive never does

 

The lines are very blurry, but to me the difference is in the level of care the Dominant has for the person who submits.

I'm a submissive and i'll do everything i can to empower you and make your life easier, but there is a connection that i'll need to have with you to do that and the way i get that is by doing scenes and having mutual experiences with you. I don't care what it is we do together in a D/S exchange (i have a very large sandbox for you to play in) but we will have to do scenes if we are to have a thing going on.

I'm not a doormat or an object and there's a mutual respect between me and the Dominant that i need to have and know they care and support me..... even if they tie me up and beat me to satiate their sadistic tendency's.
If we do that there's nothing that gives me more pleasure then worshipping you, giving you footrubs, back massages, cooking and cleaning and stuff like that.

Slaves don't have that mutual respect or level of care afforded to them by the Dominant. They can be completely ignored, they can exist only for doing chores and things like that..... it's just a bit different.
A lifestyle like that for me would make me feel used and taken advantage of, rather then respected and nurtured. It'd drive me to suicide rather then submission.

It's subtle and sometimes you switch back and forth between each for different level's of intensity and for different scenes but my submission isn't a one way street

 

A submissive makes a decision to follow. The mistress and submissive are a partnership where the mistress is the leader. The slave does what he is told where his opinion does not matter.

 

Do you feel like a handbag? Or do you feel like a person.

 

A slave kid a

A slave is a handbag, but a submissive is s person.

I think this type of relationship is unique for each who follows it. Each couple needs to find and determine rules that fit the lifestyle that fits what they are looking for.

It's up to the people the individual couples.

 

The terms have definitely blurred over the years, and I think that's OK. Everyone's relationship is different, and the cultures of FLR and BDSM are constantly evolving.

In the most basic sense, I would say that a slave gives up free will, and gives up their autonomy, as extreme as that sounds. I know a Domme who has had men willingly live in a cage, give up the right to offer opinions/speak, and essentially act as an extension of her. That's slavery, to me.

 

As kinky lifestyles have progressed, i see them more as synonyms than distinctly different.

 

I like synonym roles.

hehehe..see what I did there!

 

I would say there is a relatively big difference between a slave and a sub, but it depends on how those term are used and understood.

Some will use the word "slave" finding it sexy and corresponding to some aspect of their life, and the difference between "sub" and "slave" will blur, transforming them into quasi-synonyms. But it is necessary in my opinion to distinguish their meanings.

A sub gets to decide how much power he gives to his dominant partner and what aspect of his life he will surrender. Even if he is controlled in most aspect of his life, a sub has still the right to say no for some of them. In the case of a slave those decisions are taken by the mistress (owner). In slavery, a notion of property and ownership exists. A slave is owned and can be sold to anyone (his consent is not necessary). A slave is not the most submissive of subs. Moreover a slave may not even be submissive at all. Slavery is not about submission or sub behaviour (worshipping, ...), it is only about obedience.

 

Cinnamon Girls can produce nice and crimson red buns - doesn't matter if a sub or slave- so beware

 

If @L-u-c-y can't define the difference between slave and sub, then I won't pretend to have the answer.

Is "sub" a larger category under which there are many types of subs? (knight, cuckolds, sissies, slaves, etc)

Would a knight consider himself a sub or a slave (or neither?)

 

I would say that part of the problem of the question is that few people want to come to a definitive answer to it. We all have different ideas about what they are and aren’t but if we can’t agree on a definitive terminology and definition of the subject at hand, then how could we then find what we were searching for in it?

Can we agree on a dictionary definition of the subject? Webster’s dictionary defines it as follows:

“
Definition of slave

1: a person held in servitude as the chattel of another
2: one that is completely subservient to a dominating influence”

“
Definition of submissive

: submitting to others”

Are these definitions ones we can agree upon? I would say that many here would argue that this definition or that one isn’t quite right or lacking and that’s part of the problem.

We can’t come to agreement on what each one is or is not and therefore, because the terminology is thrown around so loosely, and one could argue poorly to the point of abusing the terms themselves, that they lose some, if not all, of their meaning. Should we not have an agreed upon definition and thus follow it?

Many here have contracts they sign with their dominant partner and could probably point out subsection blah blah of blah and my question would be to them “do those words mean something?” If the words we use mean something then there should be some agreed upon meaning of the terms. For example, if your contract were to say x action gets y consequence then there should be no mistaking what that clause means. There should be Some way for us to say with certainty that a person who claims to be one or the other is in fact serving in the manner they claim and acting in the role they say they are. That’s just reason and logic and if we can’t come to a reasonable and logical definitive definition that we can all agree upon then we can’t say that this one or the other one is or is not what they claim to be because we have no basis for it.

I think this is where I would get some pushback because there are individuals who would inevitably not fit into one criteria or the other and feel “called out” in some way but I think for the original question to attain a real and true answer you’d have to come to an agreement somewhere where everyone used the same definition. Otherwise, we’re all just “blowing smoke.”

 

Subs make choices. Slaves are not allowed any.

 

My take is that a slave is enslaved and does they're duties reluctantly, whereas a submissive is willing to give up rights. A very grey area

 

I have my thoughts on this subject as I described them above, however, I believe the definition should be whatever the person who is partaking in the activity wants it to be. There is not one rule book that identified hard and fast rules for this kink. It is what people want it to be within their own personal relationship. The only rule should be to enjoy yourself and live a fulfilling life however you and your partner want to.