Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Submission and Slavery


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> Submission and Slavery Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 8:06:03 AM   
SenorX


Posts: 142
Joined: 12/23/2004
Status: offline 		I have noticed so many ads (a/k/a profiles) here whereby people clandestinely choose without a clue to call themselves slaves when, in reality, (and sometimes, at best) they would be subs and not slaves. Perhaps there are many who become involved in D/s that do not realize the true significance of slavery.

In so saying, It would be nice to find out from individuals here, Dom/mes, subs, and slaves, what each thinks is the significance of actually being a slave and not simply using nomenclature because it sounds good.

Therefore My question herein is as follows:

What, in detail, is the significance that Yyou personally feel should be placed on the erm, that of being a slave, do you feel that the terms 'slave' and 'sub' are randomly interchangeable, and why?

Best Regards,

X
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 9:09:21 AM   
darkinshadows


Posts: 4145
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: UK
Status: offline
Years ago(showing my age...lol) in my naivety, I would have agreed with you.

But...

Its not up to me or you to decide to call someone not a slave. If someone wants a label to be able to get into a particular headspace - good for them.

If you want to be exact - slave means an owned property - so sure, some people wouldn't be slaves, because they aren't owned.

But that would be the only reason - and as we all know, labels in BDSM rarely conform to outside of wiitwd.

If that was the case, I would be a slave. I am owned property - I am what would be viewed as 'no limits'... But - it is prefered that I am not refered to as slave because of personal choice of Demons.

So if someone calls themself slave - who are we to judge that they are not? If someone calls themself Master - so what? We have the ability to just walk away and not call them what they insist - but we certainly don't have the right to deny them being what they feel.

Peace and Love

_____________________________
.dark.



...i surrender to gravity and the unknown...

(in reply to SenorX)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 3:33:54 PM   
EmeraldSlave2


Posts: 3645
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline 		What she said.

(in reply to darkinshadows)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 3:33:56 PM   
SenorX


Posts: 142
Joined: 12/23/2004
Status: offline 		so if a person simply wishes to call him/her self a slave then that person is considered a slave?

By the same logic, then if a person who is not Dom/me wishes to simply all of a sudden claim to be Dom/me then they are automatically Dom.me because the nomenclature is strictly up to that individual who wants to claim whatever that individual is?

Is that not what many posts here are all about, making statements such as 'fakes' and 'wannabes'?

Best Regards,

X

< Message edited by SenorX -- 5/17/2005 3:34:26 PM >

(in reply to darkinshadows)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 3:34:07 PM   
subcheryl


Posts: 280
Joined: 11/2/2004
Status: offline 		dark-angel I agree with you, as for myself when I first started down the path of bdsm, I classified myself a submissive no way was I going to be owned by another, have no choices in anything that pertained to me that type of thing. But the more I learned and read the more I felt that yes you can start out submissive but become a slave, to what extent you are a slave is dependant on you and your Masters relationship. I know consider myself owned by Master, but still have opinions and input in and about our relationship, but the ultimate decision is Masters, He has been a great Dom/Master since I came to him 3 mths ago and I wouldn't change anything in our relationship, again it is all in the dynamics of the relationship whether sub or slave.

(in reply to darkinshadows)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 3:40:06 PM   
SenorX


Posts: 142
Joined: 12/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: subcheryl

...But the more I learned and read the more I felt that yes you can start out submissive but become a slave,


So, if you can start submissive and then later on become a slave, because of being 'owned', then if you become 'unowned' do you retain the title of 'slave' or would you revert back to being 'sub'?

quote:

again it is all in the dynamics of the relationship whether sub or slave.


What would you consider the 'dynamics of a relationship would be to determine whether a slave or a sub? Please expound on this.

Best Regards,

X

(in reply to subcheryl)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 3:59:46 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

What, in detail, is the significance that Yyou personally feel should be placed on the erm, that of being a slave, do you feel that the terms 'slave' and 'sub' are randomly interchangeable, and why?


Senor X
My definition is for me and mine.

A submissive or a Dominant can be anyone. It is self proclaimed, a form of identity to pursue the lifestyle. It's a label needed if you are planing to meet someone. It signifies what role you expect to take if/when you find a compatible person and establish a relationship.

The designation "slave" signifies ownership. The identity of "Master" indicates responsibility for a possession. A submissive makes decisions, is involved with decisions, and negotiates with a Dom. Negotiations can be as basic as one-time scene limits, safe words, type of play, and duration of play. The transition is identified when the submissive agrees to become a slave. I like to say that the last decision a submissive makes is to become a slave. At that transition the slave makes no independent decisions. There are no safe words. The slave lives under the rules, and in the manner set by the Master. The Master has the responsibility to enforce the rules (a/k/a Contract), care for the slave, make sure they are safe, and confident in the skills of the Master.

A slave must have ultimate trust in the Master to be "free" enough to surrender to slavery. Both parties MUST know themselves well enough to be confident in the decision. A slave and Master's self identity must be clear. There may be vanilla life issues that take place. There may be times and places when the relationship's dynamic is not as obvious as others. But there is always a very powerful undercurrent of the TPE between a Master and his slave. It comes from having no doubt in the attitude and behavior of the partner.

I don't understand how people identify themselves as slave or Master in their profile. How can you be a slave without a Master? How can you be a "Master" without a slave? You can still be dominant or submissive, but without a Master who are you a slave to? Without a slave, who are you a Master? Of course some are "Master's of their domain". Other's posses a "slave heart". Semantics aside I'd entertain a challenge from either perspective.

A released "slave" or a Master who released a slave may post that they are an experienced Master, or experienced slave, but at the moment they serve no one as slave and they are no ones Master.

No need to subscribe or adopt this policy, but this is the way I keep the terms straight in my mind and it is how I explained the differences to beth when we met.

(in reply to SenorX)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 4:03:29 PM   
EmeraldSlave2


Posts: 3645
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline 		FOr me I am a slave whether I am owned or not for the same reason that I am a bisexual whether I am having sex or not.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 4:18:03 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline 		As usual, I agree with Mercnbeth. A sub is who you are, and I believe subs are born subs (although I'm aware that the whole question is controversial).

But I don't believe you can be a slave without a master, any more than I believe you can be a master without a slave. You could be a potential slave, or someone who would make a very good slave, but you're not a slave unless you're owned. Same goes for a master: you might display all the characteristics of a master, but you're not a master until and unless you own a slave.

And all this has to be qualified with the observation that the names don't matter very much when all is said and done. Whatever you think you are is all you have to worry about--especially if you're lucky enough to have found a partner who thinks you are exactly what YOU think you are.

Lam

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

A submissive or a Dominant can be anyone. It is self proclaimed, a form of identity to pursue the lifestyle. It's a label needed if you are planing to meet someone. It signifies what role you expect to take if/when you find a compatible person and establish a relationship.

The designation "slave" signifies ownership.



< Message edited by Lordandmaster -- 5/17/2005 4:19:04 PM >

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 4:23:09 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

I am a bisexual whether I am having sex or not.


And I am a heterosexual whether I have a partner or not. But if I do it alone, I'm still a heterosexual - but its called masturbation.

Unless you are owned by someone, have given up your power to make decisions, and trust someone enough to turn the responsibility of yourself over to him/her; exactly who are you a slave to? Unless you don't agree that as a slave you are a possession, then you don't subscribe to the definition and want to apply another. I can't debate against that position. It becomes a function of personal definition preference.

If it makes you feel comfortable the accepted second textbook definition of "slave" would agree with your position. Under the second definition a slave is also "entirely under the domination or an influence or person". But the question still remains. Who's domination? Who's influence? Slavery requires active interaction under any definition. I don't see how it can be an individual's identity without it.

Remember, I needed a distinction in my mind. These are my definitions and they allow me to have a distinction. I don't think they should matter to anyone but me and beth. We live under the definition. I did try to think the process through and did so long before I ever met beth. It was why my personal ad did not identify me as a Master. On March 1st 2003 I didn't go into a chamber as a Dom and come out as a Master. There was no mystic right of passage. No one signed off on my "Master" or "Grand Master" certificate. There was no dramatic change to my appearance. My interaction with beth didn't change. But on that day I became a Master for one reason. On that day beth became my slave. I think that distinction is the only applicable and functional one between the terms Master / Dom and submissive / slave.

< Message edited by Mercnbeth -- 5/17/2005 6:29:57 PM >

(in reply to EmeraldSlave2)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 4:50:11 PM   
GoddessDustyGold


Posts: 2822
Joined: 4/11/2004
From: Arizona
Status: offline 		I agree with Merc's definitions. Many refer to themselves as slaves but they are not really up to the commitment of becoming "owned property". I try to make that clear in My profile. I am a Domina and I seek slaves. "Owned Property". In correspondence I often refer to and explore a boy's "slavehood vocation". I don't quibble with the fact that many define or identfy as "slave" if they feel they have the heart of a slave. But I do often find they don't have that heart.
It is not a term to be used lightly, IMO.
Many feel it is interchangeable, but I say this:
A slave is always submissive, but a submissive is not always a slave.


_____________________________

Dusty
They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety
B Franklin
Don't blame Me ~ I didn't vote for either of them
The Hidden Kingdom


(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 5:04:43 PM   
mistoferin


Posts: 8284
Joined: 10/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Slavery requires active interaction under any definition. I don't see how it can be an individual's identity without it.


Thank you Merc. I totally agree.

I can't believe we are having this debate one more time......well......yes actually I can. The fact is though that we can debate this til the cows come home and we will still be sitting in two completely seperate camps at the end of the day.

The one aspect of this that everyone always seems to agree upon in the end is what works for them, works for them, and what works for you, works for you. Personally, I don't exactly get that either. If the words mean something different to every single person who declares themself either submissive or slave, Dominant or Master, without having any kind of general concensus on what those terms mean......why then do we bother with terminology at all? What do the terms mean if they have no meaning? What are you really declaring yourself to be if no one even knows what it is?

If anyone can simply declare themself to be whatever they choose....then I am putting you all on notice. I have just declared myself Erin....Goddess and Ruler of the world!!!! Does that make it so? Oh hell no!!!!



_____________________________

Peace and light,
~erin~

There are no victims here...only volunteers.

When you make a habit of playing on the tracks, you thereby forfeit the right to bitch when you get hit by a train.

"I did it! I admit it and I'm gonna do it again!"

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 6:16:26 PM   
Lepidoptera


Posts: 161
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: offline 		I labeled myself a submissive because I don't see myself becoming a slave in the near future- maybe when I'm a bit older and NOT living with and depending on my parents : ).

So how do you decide what to list yourself as? What you are looking for right now? What you would like to become in the future? What you believe your real "nature" is?

And really, what's the difference? I was a "slave" for a year, but some people have told me I wasn't a real slave- that I was a "fucktoy." Personally, I think people should dispense with trying to solidify the definitions of labels and let people call themselves what they want. Heck, if I had it my way, collarme would have "queer" as an option for sexual orientation instead of this straight/bi/les nonsense : )

(in reply to mistoferin)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 6:23:32 PM   
mistoferin


Posts: 8284
Joined: 10/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Personally, I think people should dispense with trying to solidify the definitions of labels and let people call themselves what they want.


OK....I will reiterate....

quote:

If the words mean something different to every single person who declares themself either submissive or slave, Dominant or Master, without having any kind of general concensus on what those terms mean......why then do we bother with terminology at all? What do the terms mean if they have no meaning? What are you really declaring yourself to be if no one even knows what it is?



_____________________________

Peace and light,
~erin~

There are no victims here...only volunteers.

When you make a habit of playing on the tracks, you thereby forfeit the right to bitch when you get hit by a train.

"I did it! I admit it and I'm gonna do it again!"

(in reply to Lepidoptera)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 10:36:32 PM   
SenorX


Posts: 142
Joined: 12/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin

quote:

Slavery requires active interaction under any definition. I don't see how it can be an individual's identity without it.


Thank you Merc. I totally agree.

... If the words mean something different to every single person who declares themself either submissive or slave, Dominant or Master, without having any kind of general concensus on what those terms mean......why then do we bother with terminology at all? What do the terms mean if they have no meaning? What are you really declaring yourself to be if no one even knows what it is?

If anyone can simply declare themself to be whatever they choose....then I am putting you all on notice. I have just declared myself Erin....Goddess and Ruler of the world!!!! Does that make it so? Oh hell no!!!!





So to My initial question, Wwe then need to expound further because these questions above do follow naturally in a reductio ad absurdum since I have left the initial question begging.

So what do Yya'll think about mistoferin's questions and the reductio?

Best Regards,

X

(in reply to mistoferin)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 10:43:33 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline 		If you're talking about relatively unambiguous words like "bus," "house," "ball," "chocolate," and so on, then I tend to agree with you. But ALL words have some degree of built-in ambiguity, and when you're dealing with words that people use as a matter of self-identity, you're bound to get profound disagreements about what word means what.

Take the word "Christian." Most people who consider themselves Christian would not tolerate it if someone else decided whether they could be called "Christian" according to some supposedly universal standard. Obviously, there are going to be general areas of agreement--"Christian" doesn't mean anything like "enchilada," for example--but it's the fine details that really count in matters like this. Same goes for "sub" and "slave." They don't mean anything like "fajita," but that doesn't mean everyone is ever going to agree about what they DO mean.

Lam

quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin

If the words mean something different to every single person who declares themself either submissive or slave, Dominant or Master, without having any kind of general concensus on what those terms mean......why then do we bother with terminology at all? What do the terms mean if they have no meaning? What are you really declaring yourself to be if no one even knows what it is?

(in reply to mistoferin)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 11:05:41 PM   
SenorX


Posts: 142
Joined: 12/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

....Take the word "Christian." Most people who consider themselves Christian would not tolerate it if someone else decided whether they could be called "Christian" according to some supposedly universal standard.


So, in this, if a Buddhist decided to call himself a 'Christian', though not be a follower of Christ, but remain a follower of Buddha, would he then be a 'Christian' just because he decided to call himslef a 'Christian', though he was a follower of Buddha rather than Christ?

Best Regards,

X

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 11:13:07 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline 		First of all, you can be a Christian and a Buddhist at the same time--even according to the Vatican. I know this because a friend of mine, a devout Catholic, asked someone pretty high up in the hierachy, and was told that it's acceptable (as long as he does not renounce any article of Catholic dogma, I assume).

Second, if a Buddhist calls himself Christian, who's to correct him? Only God, I imagine. Yours is a deliberately absurd example--it would be like a dom who insists on calling himself sub--but is anyone in a position to tell people that they're not really what they insist they are? Trying to establish universal definitions of Christianity is exactly what people agreed to stop doing after the Thirty Years' War.

Lam

(in reply to SenorX)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 11:26:19 PM   
SenorX


Posts: 142
Joined: 12/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

First of all, you can be a Christian and a Buddhist at the same time--even according to the Vatican. I know this because a friend of mine, a devout Catholic, asked someone pretty high up in the hierachy, and was told that it's acceptable (as long as he does not renounce any article of Catholic dogma, I assume).

Second, if a Buddhist calls himself Christian, who's to correct him? Only God, I imagine. Yours is a deliberately absurd example--it would be like a dom who insists on calling himself sub--but is anyone in a position to tell people that they're not really what they insist they are? Trying to establish universal definitions of Christianity is exactly what people agreed to stop doing after the Thirty Years' War.

Lam



I am not the one making the examples. I am merely asking questions from the answers I have been getting, without the intention of anybody getting upset, but rather for civil discussion without personal attacks in order to see where other people's minds are re this matter.

Should I have deliberately wanted to reduce your comment to the point of absurdity, I would have simply pointed out that your example would then mean that, from your very words, an Atheist could call himself a Christian, and thereby be a Christian, and though maybe in this day in age of 'political correctness' nobody would question how a person who has no belief in any god could really be a follower of Christ, even though the terminology of the word Christian, inherently by its own definition is a follower of Christ.

quote:

As usual, I agree with Mercnbeth. A sub is who you are, and I believe subs are born subs (although I'm aware that the whole question is controversial).

But I don't believe you can be a slave without a master, any more than I believe you can be a master without a slave. You could be a potential slave, or someone who would make a very good slave, but you're not a slave unless you're owned. Same goes for a master: you might display all the characteristics of a master, but you're not a master until and unless you own a slave.


Moreover, there is contradiction showing there from an earlier post, which then may tend to be confusing, or an attempt at political practice?


Again, I reiterate that this line of discussion is merely a discussion and not intended for offense to anyone, nor meant to 'ruffle any feathers'.

And, no, I didn't smoke a joint, in case anyone wonders. (lol)

Best Regards,

X

< Message edited by SenorX -- 5/17/2005 11:31:49 PM >

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Submission and Slavery - 5/17/2005 11:41:06 PM   
SenorX


Posts: 142
Joined: 12/23/2004
Status: offline 		devout Catholics used to pay indulgences to the church to wipe out their sins contra to Christian teaching. Likewise, devout Catholicism is what caused Martin Luther to tack his 95 Theses on the Catholic Church door and quit his job, thereby beginning the Protestant Reformation.

X

(in reply to SenorX)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> Submission and Slavery Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094