Dom/Sub, Position and misuse of those terms

[ThatLewdCat]

Ok, first... A disclaimer: Everything written below is my opinion, my understanding of this topic and my view on things that surround it. You are free to disagree with it. And have/offer your own opinion about it.

Now, with that out of the way... THE WALL OF TEXT. Please, if you do intend on replying "on topic"... Read until the end first before doing so.

 

I'll start with a small story that is quite "on point". I've came to ED from F-list. Another similarly themed site - adult roleplay. It's more profile + chat based instead of a forum, like ED. But it's pretty much the same when it comes to why people go there. Lewd roleplay, plain and simple. Unlike ED, the profiles on that site are more Character-based. So on your one OOC account you can have up to 255 "profiles" - pages with info about various characters, separate galleries, separate lists of preferences and kinks/fetishes. The editor itself, on top of the "main page" for all your crazy walls of text about the character, has a lot of various settings with drop-down menus. For example, the basic stuff - gender, orientation, body type (human, anthro, etc), relationship (single, in relationship, etc), body build (slim, muscular, curvy, etc)... And some more. And, naturally, some of them are more specific things that are aimed towards sex - cock shape (if any), cumshot size, pubic hair and more.

Now here's the main part and topic of this thread. Among those sexual settings... There are two drop-down settings that people often misuse or misunderstand. They are named "Position" and "Dom/Sub Role".

• The Position has a 5-choice ratio: Always Top - Usually Top - Switch - Usually Bottom - Always bottom.
• The Dom/Sub Role also has a 5-choice ratio: Always Dominant - Usually Dominant - Switch - Usually Submissive - Always Submissive.

And that's where the problems start. You see... First off, those are not exactly explained anywhere in the profile editor. Like, at all. Obviously assuming that people who come there actually understand what those two things mean. Which is logical for an adult-focused site, am I right? But the second problem is... The fact that these two options, with fully established drop-down menus exist along with the most basic stuff like gender and orientation - that makes people think that it's pretty much mandatory to make a choice here. And while for "Position" it's understandable (read further), for the second setting... It's actually not. It is and should be optional. In fact, I think it should be moved from the basic settings and to the "kink-list". Read further to learn why...

Back there, I've met a lot of people who didn't understand what "Top"/"Bottom" means. To them, the "Position" means literal poses in sex. Like, say... Cowgirl/Reverse cowgirl - when the girl is riding a guy, who's laying on his back, yeah? In such a position, the guy is a bottom and the girl is on top. If we're talking literally, yeah? But here's the catch and misunderstanding. Top/Bottom setting of the profile there actually means... Giver/Taker. The one who fucks and the other who gets fucked. No matter the position - cowgirl, doggy style or whatever else... If the Man is fucking a Woman (let's just take the traditional stuff as example), he is a "Top". He is giving her the D. While the Woman is a "Bottom". She is the one on the receiving side of that D. People misunderstand that and it actually works against them very often.

Greatest example I have seen is when one Male profile freaked out in chat (and got muted for it) when he got bombarded with approaches by multiple Males. Gay males. Who offered to fuck him in da butt. Why? Because his profile was marked as "Usually bottom". And one of his fetishes was specifically the Cowgirl position. Because he loves seeing his partner riding his dick while he's just chilling there. If taken literally, of course his character is a "bottom". Because he's on his back while the partner is "on top" - riding his cock. But as I already said.. It's not literal in case of "Top/Bottom" setting. Why did they message him though? His profile was labeled not only just "Usually bottom", but also "Bi-curious" in his sexuality. Surely, they should have read his note about that "bi-curiosity", of course, but they didn't. Why they didn't do it? That's another story. But the point is - that guy was curious about fucking a Trap/Femboy. While also explaining that he's absolutely against his character getting fucked in the butt. Yet the profile was wrongly labeled, thus leading to such confusion, conflict and him getting muted for freaking out about it.

But the worst part is the Dom/Sub Role setting. Oh boi...

You see... With that setting being among the basic stuff on a profile, people assume that... It is "mandatory". That it is "required". Especially the inexperienced people who come to such a site and see it there... They think that all of the relationships and sex are built on Dom/Sub dynamics. In reality however...

Domination/Submission dynamics are a Fetish, a Kink. One among many various other Fetishes/Kinks. 

• Surely, some fetishes are more "literal", more "physical". Let's say, Bestiality - the love for sex with animals. Or Foot-fetish - the love for feet. Or various toilet-play, such as scat and water-sports. Or perhaps choking/asphyxiation. These fetishes and others like them are about physical things or actions - be that body parts, sex-toys, specific activities or other things.
• While there are also fetishes about the non-"physical" things... Specifically, the relationships between people in the context of sex. Some enjoy rape. Others fetishize hatefucking - roughness and aggression during the sexual act. Or Cuckolding/Adultery that is growing more and more popular over the recent couple of years, for some reason. All of these and others like them are based around the "relationships", the emotional connection between people and various dynamics that are brought into it. You get what I'm saying here, yes?

Undoubtedly, Dom/Sub dynamics between people fall into the second category described above. But this does not make it into something different other than... A Fetish. Nope. It is still just a Fetish. And that's it. A thing... That some people are "into". While others either don't know about it or NOT "into" it. Just like with any other Fetish, Dom/Sub dynamics is not for everyone. Some like it. Others don't. It's that simple. Which is why in our society a lot of Fetishes are kept private - for people not to judge. Surely, we all know that humans are all kinky by default, it's just the variety of kinks that differs from person to person - "to each their own", as they say. So to avoid judging each other... Fetishes are usually kept secret. At least in real life. I'm not talking about the Internet and the anonymity that it provides, yes?

So let me underline what exactly do I mean by that. Domination/Submission is a dynamic between two or more people that is part of exploring a Fetish of all participants. A fetish for power dynamics, yeah? A Fetish... That is explored upon mutual consent and based upon mutual trust, mutual respect and knowing each other's limits. Which is why there is often a "safe word". To stop the "game" if something goes wrong, you know? It's a game. It's not for real. It's done to "get off" on one person showing dominance over another, via various means. Some like loss of control through bondage - literally unable to move and at partner's mercy. Others enjoy getting abused physically - choking, slapping, etc. And many other ways of domination/submission, through various other means and fetishes used along the main direction - Dom/Sub. But it all still remains a "game". An exploration of a fetish.

Relationships between people are NOT built on Dom/Sub. They are not. Sure, some people are indeed more confident, assertive, can take charge over situation and groups of people. That's just the strong-willed, leader personality. That's not a sign that this person "is a Dom". Neither is the opposite person - shy, modest, lacking confidence - "is a Sub". Personality and Dom/Sub role is not the same thing. The relationship between people are also based upon their personalities, not their Dom/Sub roles. People are not born/grow up to be Dominant or Submissive. They develop a stronger or weaker personality. And only those who fetishize power dynamics of such kind do take upon the "roles" of a Dominant and Submissive. "Roles" in a "game" of exploration of Dom/Sub fetish. In privacy, with like-minded people who also have that fetish. It is not something that exists 24/7 between people in a relationship. It is not.

But wait, there's more. On roleplay sites  - both F-list and ED it seems... People often blur this line between a "game" (the exploration of a fetish)... And having it as a "mandatory thing". Including... Outside of bedroom, outside of the private situations. Pretty common examples on F-list are the requests for "worship". Just scroll through various chat ads and you'll see plenty of stuff that goes along similar lines: "Dom looking for worthless fuck-pig subs. Worship my perfection, sluts." Or something like that. And most of such profiles that send out similar ads are some kind of characters that are in position of power - politicians, celebrities, rich and influential, etc. And their request is not about playing a "game", not about exploring the roles of Dominant and Submissives... It's not about the Fetish. The line is blurred. It's no longer a "private" thing. They are looking for slice of life stuff, daily situations where their character acts as this Dominant all the time, while their partners are Submissives all the time. And it's not a "game" with a "safe word". It's literally about being a total jerk all the time. With no consequences. Because a lot of people also strongly connect "Dom/Sub" with the fetish for Dom abusing, degrading and humiliating their Subs. In various ways - physical and verbal.

Sure, such dynamics are understandably fitting IF the scenario is literally based around the characters having different social statuses - a fantasy queen and her servants, a slavemaster and his slaves. In worlds where this is a normal thing - fantasy or sci-fi worlds, where such behavior is a normal thing. Hell, it also works with our real world historical settings too. Or those weird, illogical anime/hentai plots that I can't even comprehend most of the time. But yeah, that works just fine and I get it. It just has to be specified that it is exactly all about Master/Servant or Master/Slave. Then it will work normally, since it's already a slightly different direction. And in specifically those worlds, it works logically and realistically... But none of that works in normal, realistic modern day society. But more often than not, on F-list this is requested specifically to be in the realistic type of modern world, 9 out of 10 times even with Photo references for characters to even further boost "realism" and how close they get to "feeling it".

People like I described above literally want to be total jerks "in daily life" of their characters. That is NOT Dom/Sub dynamic. That is just trash-treatment of people, if you ask me. An excuse to be a total jerk to others without having any consequences. Nobody would literally punch you back in the face. It's the internet, right? We're all safe, yeah?

One last fun little fact about this whole thing. Back on F-list, I've actually did not pick Dom/Sub role on my characters that have no interest in that fetish. Because, again... Dom/Sub play is a Fetish, nothing more than that. And guess what? A lot of people who approached me... Often started asking the same question - "Is your character a Dom or a Sub?". And I replied... "Neither". Because if role is not chosen in the profile, it means the character is not interested in that Fetish, you know? Makes sense? To me, it does.

I have a couple of characters who are "into" this Fetish, no doubt. And I'd gladly explore it with someone, some time. BUT!!! Specifically as a Fetish. A "game" between the characters, you know? In bedroom and other private moments. But it's not something that I'm interested to have in a "daily life", 24/7, at all times between my characters and their partners. Blurring that line is bad. Especially if the aim is realism and modern world, not some feudal fantasy with royalty and servants (or whatever else).

 

Now. Why am I saying all of this and even created this thread? Because of four things:

1. I noticed multiple times on ED where people also seem to blur this line between exploring a fetish of Dom/Sub and forcing it as the core of a relationship between characters in a scene/story. I'm not going to point fingers or tell any names, but... Yeah.
2. I also noticed that people sometimes seem to confuse Dom/Sub for Top/Bottom too. It's not the same. At all. And I've explained why.
3. I want to discuss this whole thing with you. I wonder who is "on board" with me on my opinion. And who are those that disagree with me. And wanna know why. I'm open to other opinions, even if they differ from mine. Different perspectives and all, yeah?
4. And last, but most important... To explain my view on this, once again hoping for people to understand what I want or don't want in roleplay.

 

/me drops_mic, leaves the stage, feeling like an idiot after writing this whole wall of text.

[Alexander Bodide]

Sub/dom is a kink just like any other. It's very popular, and I'm one of its biggest fans, but it's clearly not something that every person wants to participate in or place much weight on.

I feel like top/bottom are kind of crappy descriptors because there's a lot of ways they can be interpreted. I do think of it more as whoever is literally on top, which to me means the top is whoever has the most direct physical control of the situation. So for my way of looking at it, it's absolutely possible for a woman to act as a "top" with no strap-on or anything required. But I avoid using these terms altogether, not finding them very useful.

As a switch, I wholeheartedly agree that general personality and sub/dom role in the bedroom don't need to have anything to do with each other. And, maybe this is somewhat selfish of me, but I believe that everyone could learn to be a switch if they wanted to. I think people tend to pigeonhole themselves and think "well, my personality is like this, therefore I must only be a sub forever". I feel like switches have a lot more fun.

I agree that sub/dom dynamics can stay compartmentalized in the bedroom perfectly well and don't need to bleed out into daily life. However, I don't think there's anything wrong with that happening if both parties are into it. It is important to make sure that both parties are into it, though.

Sometimes a new RP partner will act like I'm asking them too many or too detailed questions about their kinks and what makes them tick, but if I don't...well, it can be hard to fix an RP founded on mismatched expectations.

[ThatLewdCat]

10 minutes ago, Alexander Bodide said:

it's absolutely possible for a woman to act as a "top" with no strap-on or anything required. But I avoid using these terms altogether, not finding them very useful.

That also has a name - "Powerbottom". When the person who is a "bottom" by that description I have in the first post is actually in charge of the situation, so to speak. Mainly used as one of multiple ways of doing Dom/Sub, really.  

But you have a point - it's best to just avoid using those. Over-complication leads to such confusion and misuse.

[Rajiu Jak]

The whole dynamic between the dom/sub is an odd one that is the core of most rp’s as a fetish. Even then they have so many different versions of the dom and sub relationship. From Slave/Master, Pet play, daddy/little, and just so many more that us just shades of the very generalized Sub/Dom game. 
 

It a person knows what shade they want to use for the game then good on them, if you know your own kinks and wish to play with them then all the power to you if you can find a fun match to go with it. I feel it shouldn’t be the core of a relationship irl tho. It can be a fun part of the overall experience together but basing the entire thing around the one game doesn’t lead to happiness.. just a chain of satisfactory moments until the game plays itself out. 

[ThatLewdCat]

3 minutes ago, Kerzin Kalamond said:

The whole dynamic between the dom/sub is an odd one that is the core of most rp’s as a fetish. Even then they have so many different versions of the dom and sub relationship. From Slave/Master, Pet play, daddy/little, and just so many more that us just shades of the very generalized Sub/Dom game. 

Well, of course. There are various ways to do Dom/Sub and you even named a few.

The question is however... Can a relationship - be that RP or IRL - exist without any kind of Dom/Sub dynamics..?

My answer to that question is Yes, absolutely. Buuuuuuuut... It seems that a lot of people on roleplaying sites might disagree with me. Judging by the amount of those two words being thrown around so much.

[Rajiu Jak]

It is possible but difficult unless both parties are in the exact same mind set and thought process. People can come together as equals and remain that way but many times one party will simply follow the will of the other. 
 

You could even look at an adventure party of four whoever is designated ‘party leader’ is pretty much the dom as everyone else would in general would defer to them. 
 

The sub/dom dynamic is a part of everyday light from personal to not personal interactions for really ‘leader’ and ‘follower’ is what it all boils down to. 

[ThatLewdCat]

I disagree, @Kerzin Kalamond.

And I even explained why in the original post. Personality is not the same as Dom/Sub role. Those things might seem to go along together very well, but they actually don't. The term "Dom/Sub role" is specific to the sexual context and Dom/Sub Fetish. While personality of every individual exists regardless of context.

Besides... Again, I already said it in the original post. If a person has a "leader" type of personality, it does not mean that the same person would have a Dominant role in Dom/Sub.

In fact, most often, it's the "leader" type of people who prefer to be submissive instead. Because in daily life, in regular non-sexual context, they are in charge, they rule other people, they pull the levers. While being a Submissive in sex with a Dominant partner gives them the opposite from what they are doing most of their life. That is why it's a common cliche in movies(for example) to see some kind of rich and powerful guy - a banker, ceo, whatever else - enjoying some BDSM action with a Mistress. Because in daily life, he's the one who gives orders. So in sex, he desires to be the one who's being ordered around. A change of pace. Exploration of a fantasy. A fetish.

And it only further supports my opinion from the original post... Fetishes should stay private, between people who are interested in participating. It should not spill out to daily life. Which is why that cliche I just told about is often (9/10 times) portrayed in movies as something shameful. Something that the guy is "caught" doing and people judge him for it.

I am obviously talking about the "realistic" type of world, with our human values and traditions. Not some medieval, fantasy, sci-fi or just "alternate" world where such things are a norm and accepted. That is entirely different topic however.

[Cindyluv Banned]

Dreamer has said that in many cases, often the Alpha or dom has a secret yearning to play the submissive role.

I know a few that would fit perfectly into this category, but Im afraid I cant.

I'm a real life sex slave, property owned by a wonderful passionate but very dominate woman, the fabulous Mistress Tina. I have been wanting to serve, to get pleasure from serving others since years before I came out out the proverbial closet at age 16.  A girl I dated was the one that took my virginity and the first to ballgag and tie me up.

I would do anything to please her, to worship the ground she walked on, things that made me the perfect submissive to be molded later into Miss Tina's sex slave.

To me, the difference between a submissive and a sex slave is that, although both submit to the will of a stronger person, or the 'Top' that Dreamer has called it, a submissive practices their submission basically in a sexual setting and most of them do it behind closed doors, some often going back to their so called normal lives after their sex play.

   I gave all of my free will to my owner and in return she takes care of me in whatever ways she feels is needed.  In sex I am always the 'Bottom', literally on the recieving end, usually involving rope, handcuffs, ballgags, nipple clamps....and the list goes on.

[ThatLewdCat]

Well, to each their own.

But I still will stand on my point and opinion. Domination/Submission and everything you just described, @Cindyluv... That should be kept private, restricted to the privacy of your home with you and the person/people who enjoy that as much as you. 

It is not publicly acceptable behavior. It's not something everyone enjoys. And it's not something everyone "should" enjoy either. It's not something everyone even thought about - some are completely oblivious to it. It's a thing that should only affect and/or be offered to those who are interested in it. Simple as that. It's a fetish. A kink. Of sexual kind. It should be kept in a sexual context.

 

Once again,  A disclaimer: Everything written above and below is my opinion. You are free to disagree with it. But if you say you're willingly "gave all your free will to someone" in 2020, in a civilized age, in a civilized country and it affects your whole life, not just "sex-life" in bed as a kinky fetish... Then I think you need help. 

And I don't give a crap if this sounds rude. Because it's not normal. Simple as that. But then again, it's just my opinion, yeah?

[JennyDK]

I have some of the same experiences as @ThatLewdCat since I also hail from F-List. Sadly I have also had many, many shitty moments with the general user base there and more often than not, they are trapped in very black/white perspectives  - like in this case with submissive and dominant.

I fully agree with what TLC has been saying so far and I have no idea how the fetish of sub/dom has worked its way into peoples mind as a thing beyond sexual context. I mean, sure, you can let someone dominate any part of your life, but normalizing this sort of behaviour is simply not allright in my head. That would be the same as I think I can tie someone up in public whenever I feel like it, because it is just part of my partnership dynamic. Stuff like BDSM is a fetish, not a full lifestyle, so let's stop treating sub/dom as if it fits within normal life dynamics.

If you literally have the need to have someone else control every aspect of your life, I would say: Get some help please. I am not trying to shame you, but it kind of shows that there is something that is not really working as it should mentally and/or socially. Whatever the case may be, I can only those people reach a point in their lives where they take them back.

Luckily, the sub/dom thing has not been a thing I have been asked about with most partners at this site and I am glad we do not have to list ourselves as anything on that spectrum at all. Most of my stories fully steer clear away from that fetish. Yes, sometimes it can be fun, but most often I just like to have fun with my partners characters without it having to come down to this.

[krakendaddy Deactivated]

I agree with your original sentiment, that you want a space where you're not forced into one of two boxes. In the real world Dom/sub is a fetish (a very big umbrella, but a fetish nonetheless), and definitely not one that everyone is into. There's a bigger discussion to be had about power dynamics are inescapably woven into society; but that's not what this thread is about (not least because it's the not-sexy kind of power dynamics). Long story short, I agree with you in principle.

That said, I think you've missed the point that nuance quite easily goes out of the window for the sake of plot convenience when roleplaying; and it feels like you're now just casting aspersions on people who enjoy that type of roleplay because it's not something your into, with the idea that the reason that they're acting that way is because they secretly want to be the person they're roleplaying.

I can't speak for the community at large, but personally I tend to roleplay the very shitty people in control as a means of cutting directly to the meat of the roleplay. Every story would be more realistic, more complete, within a relationship context; but it would also be more complete with regular toilet breaks, untimely bouts of sickness, needing to stop in the middle of sex because your leg is cramping up, etc. When we roleplay, we cut these things because they don't add anything to the plot; and if you've communicated correctly before roleplaying (a drastically important part of the process if you're gonna start smacking someone with a paddle for fun, whether it's IRL or RP) then the same goes for the context of an equal relationship when playing with power dynamics.

[JennyDK]

11 minutes ago, krakendaddy said:

I can't speak for the community at large, but personally I tend to roleplay the very shitty people in control as a means of cutting directly to the meat of the roleplay. Every story would be more realistic, more complete, within a relationship context; but it would also be more complete with regular toilet breaks, untimely bouts of sickness, needing to stop in the middle of sex because your leg is cramping up, etc. When we roleplay, we cut these things because they don't add anything to the plot; and if you've communicated correctly before roleplaying (a drastically important part of the process if you're gonna start smacking someone with a paddle for fun, whether it's IRL or RP) then the same goes for the context of an equal relationship when playing with power dynamics.

I don't really get what you mean here. Are you saying that because we don't RP every minute detail of every day life, people have a tendency to simply use sub/dom to get to "the meat" of an RP? Let me know if I am wrong - but the meat of a roleplay doesn't at all have to be the smut.

I get that playing asshole characters turn some people on, that is their thing, but are you suggesting that build-up and foreplay is now less important, at least to you?

I am honestly very unsure what message you are trying to convey. Could you perhaps rephrase? Because I am really confused.

[ThatLewdCat]

24 minutes ago, krakendaddy said:

I agree with your original sentiment, that you want a space where you're not forced into one of two boxes. In the real world Dom/sub is a fetish (a very big umbrella, but a fetish nonetheless), and definitely not one that everyone is into. There's a bigger discussion to be had about power dynamics are inescapably woven into society; but that's not what this thread is about (not least because it's the not-sexy kind of power dynamics). Long story short, I agree with you in principle.

That said, I think you've missed the point that nuance quite easily goes out of the window for the sake of plot convenience when roleplaying; and it feels like you're now just casting aspersions on people who enjoy that type of roleplay because it's not something your into, with the idea that the reason that they're acting that way is because they secretly want to be the person they're roleplaying.

I can't speak for the community at large, but personally I tend to roleplay the very shitty people in control as a means of cutting directly to the meat of the roleplay. Every story would be more realistic, more complete, within a relationship context; but it would also be more complete with regular toilet breaks, untimely bouts of sickness, needing to stop in the middle of sex because your leg is cramping up, etc. When we roleplay, we cut these things because they don't add anything to the plot; and if you've communicated correctly before roleplaying (a drastically important part of the process if you're gonna start smacking someone with a paddle for fun, whether it's IRL or RP) then the same goes for the context of an equal relationship when playing with power dynamics.

Well, I also think that you missed the point here.

Yes, society is built on power dynamics overall. And yes, this is not what this thread is about. It is specifically about Dom/Sub. Which is exclusively a SEXUAL fetish. It is not a personality type. It's not how a person acts overall. It's not a defining trait of an individual outside of domination/submission bedroom play and fetish fun. Dom and Sub are "roles" in a sexual fetish. Simple as that. It's not something that one should state about themselves or their characters "by default", like it's something mandatory. It only should be there if the person is SPECIFICALLY looking to play a scene/story that includes a dom/sub bedroom play and fetish fun.

That's what it it's all about. It's that simple. No need to over-complicate it.

[krakendaddy Deactivated]

9 minutes ago, JennyDK said:

I don't really get what you mean here. Are you saying that because we don't RP every minute detail of every day life, people have a tendency to simply use sub/dom to get to "the meat" of an RP? Let me know if I am wrong - but the meat of a roleplay doesn't at all have to be the smut.

I get that playing asshole characters turn some people on, that is their thing, but are you suggesting that build-up and foreplay is now less important, at least to you?

I am honestly very unsure what message you are trying to convey. Could you perhaps rephrase? Because I am really confused.

It doesn't have to be, but when we're talking about a sexual fetish I'd say the main thrust is the smut. That said, I think the whole point of BDSM in general is the build up and foreplay.

What I'm saying is that you have to start somewhere. Take the example of a master/slave dynamic. You could choose to roleplay two characters talking through how that's their fetish and agreeing to roleplay as you would in real life, or you could short circuit that process and just start from characters who are a master and slave and start the build up from there.

 

@ThatLewdCat I'd just be badly rephrasing exactly what you've already said in that post.

[JennyDK]

2 minutes ago, krakendaddy said:

It doesn't have to be, but when we're talking about a sexual fetish I'd say the main thrust is the smut. That said, I think the whole point of BDSM in general is the build up and foreplay.

Sub/dom does not equal BDSM.

[Arknight]

I completely agree with your point of view @ThatLewdCat, I come from another site dedicated to the rp, there the people's preference sheet did not talk about their kinks or their plots for rp, they talked about the users who were their pets / slaves and those pets and slaves put on their preference sheets who their owners were, making it clear that you had to ask their owners first before talking to them.

In the end the atmosphere of the place felt not only uncomfortable but toxic. That was the first place to do RP that I found and due to that I came to think that this was normal (which I think may be the cause of this problem) so I tried to adapt, but I couldn't. Luckily I ended up here, and I am happy to have read your post because now I feel that I know very well how to communicate with people who cannot understand the difference you have been talking about.

[JennyDK]

9 minutes ago, Arknight said:

I come from another site dedicated to the rp, there the people's preference sheet did not talk about their kinks or their plots for rp, they talked about the users who were their pets / slaves and those pets and slaves put on their preference sheets who their owners were, making it clear that you had to ask their owners first before talking to them.

That sounds absolutely and very much horrible and outright revolting to me. I mean, I can understand it if you have a site specifically for those kinks, but if the site is not aimed DIRECTLY at those, then it just seems...well...toxic, like you said. I am happy to hear you left such a place. We do NOT need to normalize that sort of fetish as if it needs to be a constant theme or thing or, even worse, an actual dynamic between people outside of sex. Yuck!