Great topic jane. The discussions and exchange of views and perspectives in the forums is something I have really missed since returning to the Library because that was always my favorite part of it when I was here in the past and the forums more active. So of course I would like to offer my thoughts on these terms you have listed here.

Boy/Girl: Firstly, I limit here the definition to “girl” since my experience is exclusively the M/f dynamic but I strongly suspect that the use of “boy” or “boi” in the context of D/s whether it be F/m or M/m has a similar connotation. Girl does not necessarily refer to either age or size but to the psychological positioning within the relationship. My submissive is my girl because she is mine to care for perhaps to love and mine to cherish, correct, guide, teach and discipline. I refer to her as girl even though she is an adult woman in the context of a diminutive of sorts to symbolize the disparity of power expressed by how we relate and behave towards each other within the framework of our power exchange relationship. I control – hold the leash, hold the flogger, make the decisions and she submits. To call her a woman would infer that it is an equalitarian relationship when of course it is not.

Babyboy/Babygirl: See the above for the same disclaimer that also applies here. To me Babygirl is a submissive girl in a D/s relationship rooted in consensual power imbalance where the dominant partner also has a parental role as well as that of Dom and sexual partner. It is then suggestive of a father/daughter relationship although that is not always necessarily the emphasis. I don’t view this type of relationship (Daddy Dom and Babygirl) as necessarily incestuous-like but especially to submissive girls drawn to this type of D/s dynamic, I think there is some attraction and excitement involved for them related to the incest taboo or their submissive feelings associated with it, a definite Oedipal complex dynamic at play.

In service: In service to me has the connation of a temporary power exchange condition like that which applies when a submissive is serving a dominant at a play party or in a one-off play arrangement. It could I think also apply at the very start of a trial period where a dominant has taken a new submissive under consideration. I distinguish here between something temporary or transient as opposed to a more permanent power exchange and consensual servitude agreement.

Pet: Obviously I know that in some D/s relationships the dominant may refer to the submissive as “pet” in a similar way that “girl” or other terms may be used to express concretely the power disparity, but to me there is an important distinction. I think “pet” is more closely associated with M/s relationships, more associated with slave than submissive. Another difference is sex does not necessarily have to be involved and I think in many cases it is not. A pet gives up herself and obeys and derives her pleasure and satisfaction of needs from the control exerted over her not from sexual play. While they may discuss things, here the dominant has final say in all things.

Toy: I think use of this terms infers that the submissive is viewed by the dominant as a simply something to used or played with a heavy emphasis on the sexual by a dominant. The submissive’s physical body is merely a plaything used to satisfy his urges for sexual gratification. This could simply be limited to a scene or scenes or might characterize the relationship as a whole. When the latter is the case then by definition a dominant feels no real affection for the “Toy” beyond what pleasure he derives from using her sexually. Objectification or more accurately depersonalization is definitely at play here I think.

Yes, it is true that people often have different definitions for the same word or term. Part of that of course is merely the imprecise nature of our language. But in regard to this lifestyle I think another part of it is that there is no real standardization. For example there is no authoritative tome to be consulted for exact definitions and how to properly engage in power exchange relationships. Everyone is free to do the lifestyle in large degree in the way that makes it meaningful and most sensible to him or her. I do think a dominant and submissive in a relationship together do have to come to some meeting of the minds with regards to use of terminology but beyond that I don’t really see any need that we all agree.

S