RE: Dominance and submission?

RE: Dominance and submission? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

Faramir -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 12:01:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CitizenCane As for the meta-sense of consent- that is real as well. I would suggest, however, that a D/s dynamic may exist in a variety of 'scopes', and that it CAN include the metascope you refer to as well. I would further suggest that an effective D/s dynamic has a tendency to expand in scope over time when it serves mutual needs- and to collapse when it doesn't. That has been my observation as well.

CitizenCane -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 12:06:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile Don't get me wrong! I agree that D/s is a real relationship dynamic at work. It's however consentual and not completely authoratative. Meaning the submissive has the legal right to end the relationship any time they see fit. The submissive still has human right according to the law. It's up to the submissive to excercise these rights for not. Hence it's consentual and not a true D/s relationship. True D/s relationship being forced or arranged marriages. The type of crap that still happens in places such as India, the middle east, asia and other fun parts of the world. These are true D/r relationship where the submissive had no choice in submission. Eh, your examples merely show how legalities can vary from place to place and time to time. You seem to be avoiding the issue of the internal state of the submissive and how that constrains choice. I don't see any conflict between consent and a real D/s dynamic, my point is merely that the D/s dynamic can bring about that consent in ways that have more to do with cause and effect than they do with conscious choice making. What most people are doing in BDSM are living out consentual Roles and Fantasies. The shit that is being lived out is real because it's happening. However, it done in a manner to mimic the REAL DEAL of forced D/s or slavery, torture and abuse. If you think it's really real, go snag a vanilla off the streets and try doing this shit without consent, because that is what it would take to MAKE this REAL and not Consenting Fantasy come to life. It's one thing to play Rapist in the bedroom with a consenting partner and another to play rapist on the streets with unconsenting people. Many people do act out fantasies, that's true. This doesn't invalidate the reality of other dynamics in which what is happening is just what is happening. Some people pretend to be Roman patricians and Greek slaves, or rapists and victims, but this irrelevant to the issue at hand. It's appearent that some people don't grasp what some have expressed lately on the message board. If all this crap was really we would not care about issues like safety, relationship problems, finding the right partner, getting tips or advice, playing safe and sane, and dealing with issues regarding limits. IF this was real, there would be no debates. A Master would do as they see fit with a sub/slave including killing them and eating thier flesh for lunch if they so saw fit. No regards for permanant damage or death. This simply doesn't follow. I am concerned with safety and the well being of people in general, and more particularly take on a great deal of responsibility for this with people under my care and control- which go together in my dynamic. Caring is not antithetical to dominance. BDSM is a watered down copy cat of the REAL DEAL. Copy cat of real torture, slavery, abuse, forced D/s relationships and everything else. BDSM Master/slave relationships are consenting copy cat models of REAL Slavery. It's a Lived out Fantasy of the REAL DEAL. Pffffffffffttt.... is it just me or are people having a hard time friggen getting this through thier heads at times... It appears from this that your idea of dominance is having the power to injure others. REAL power can be used in other ways as well.

WhiplashSmile -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 12:12:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CitizenCane This seems to me to be what 'dominance and submission' describes, not 'May I please bend you to my will?'. Anyone else see things this way, or has has SSC concquered the world? Anything short of SSC is breaking the law. Consentual the C part of SSC.. If the relationship is not consentual then it's forced slavery. Against the law and a crime. Human Trafficing is against the law. I actually know somebody who became a Victim of this Bullshit.. If anybody honestly believes this is OK and acceptable. I'm the last person on this site you want to share this with! Because I will be your worst enemy. I have Zero Tolerenece towards this illegal activitity! If you are a sub/slave that wants to become a real slave.. simply respond to some of the overseas jobs listed in classified Ads. You'll find out what the meaning of real slavery is all about. Safe... Now if you don't give a fuck about causing fatal damage that can kill somebody to cripple them for life. You are breaking the law. Hell, people that attempt to kill themselves or cause themselves permanant damage are breaking the law. Dugh! If you kill somebody it's against the law. If you beat somebody to the point of Kidney Failure, you are responsible for your own actions. It makes me sick when I see and read stories about women or people found dead from playing or engaging in BDSM activities. Most of the time it's the result of NonConsentual Play. Another reason for Having the C in SSC... Sane.. this is keeping a focus upon maintaining control. To make certain you don't harm, kill somebody, that it's consentual and that you are aware of the legal aspects and ramifications. That one maintains a consious in WTF they are doing... Things such as SSC and other motto's are reminders to check ourselves in check. To keep BDSM from turning into Forced non-consentual slavery. To keep people from gettting killed, to keep people from getting fucked up for life. It also reminds of the law and the human rights the people we are playing with have under the Law. SSC and things like it is what Sperates us BDSMers from the Criminals. Has SSC concquered the world? Hell no.. there is a lot of illegal crap going on in the world today. It makes the rest of us BDSMers look bad and misunderstood. If you don't like the concepts of SSC or anything similar.. go move to some BumFuck Egypt country or Hell... I'll just wait to see your picture flash on the 5 o'clock news. If you don't understand the purpose of SSC or other similar things. It's to keep things in check and a balance maintained in the BDSM community. It's Concepts such as this, that seperate us consentual people from the Criminals that pray on innocent people. YES... I'm on a RANT... I despise the promotion of illegal crap that causes Damage to innocent unconsenting people. Call me sadistic, but I firmly believe people doing this crap to unconsenting people should be put to death slowly and painfully. I think this clearly expresses how opposed I am towards Real Human Trafficing, torture and other crimes. Again, I stress the deep impact I've seen this shit has had on somebody I know. Completely not the same warm lovable person she was before.. all for what? Over an overseas travel agency job! I don't the Difference Between FANTASY SLAVEY and REAL SLAVERY! I'm sick to death of people making something out to be so REAL when it's not as HARSH and REAL as the REAL DEAL... Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr..... Whew...............

Lordandmaster -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 12:16:13 PM)
Whiplash for President!

WhiplashSmile -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 12:20:40 PM)
My rant... BDSM slavery is a role played out copy cat of Real Slavery. True D/s is about power exchanged however it's consentual. The power exchanged is really real. Yes the Dom assumes control, the submissive really submits. However, the submissive is not forced into submission against their will. In terms of Caring for a sub/slave.. one should damn well care if they are beating the fuck out another human beings kidneys or not. If not then it's not safe nor sane.

Lordandmaster -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 12:22:21 PM)
P.S. It's "consensual," not "consentual." I mean, I know it's declasse to point out spelling errors in the forums, but you use the word so often, you may as well write it correctly.

Faramir -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 12:26:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile BDSM is a watered down copy cat of the REAL DEAL. Copy cat of real torture, slavery, abuse, forced D/s relationships and everything else. BDSM Master/slave relationships are consenting copy cat models of REAL Slavery. It's a Lived out Fantasy of the REAL DEAL. Pffffffffffttt.... is it just me or are people having a hard time friggen getting this through thier heads at times... No, BDSM is not a watered down copy, and that's why people aren't "getting this through their heads"--you're wrong. BDSM relationships are not mimetic--while they may share tropes and motifs of other relationships, they are not copies. A watered down version of non-consensual torture would be a one-time assault--instead of doing kidnapping, torturing, raping and then killing women, you would brutally rape and terrify a woman--the later is dreadful, but a pale shadow of the former. Instead, because they are consensual, BDSM relationship are in opposition the the non-consesual relationships you describe. They may even be more intense than a coercive relationship, involve more pain, suffering and be more brutal--does that mean that the coercive relationship is the shadow or copy? Like, don't be confused by tropes and figures. I take the cold, finely honed, razor sharp impliment and slowly cut her skin open, peeling the flesh back to reveal the meat and organs below. Blood wells up in a rush... Am I a murderer or a surgeon?

daddysprop247 -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 12:40:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile It's one thing to have a consentual Master/slave relationship.. and another to have bought a slave off the Underground illegal white slave market. Hello! Knock Knock! No wonder why so many vanilla think we are not Role Playing shit out... Because some people in the BDSM community insist upon exerting the REALITY of how REAL this is. Dugh! It's appearent that some people don't grasp what some have expressed lately on the message board. If all this crap was really we would not care about issues like safety, relationship problems, finding the right partner, getting tips or advice, playing safe and sane, and dealing with issues regarding limits. IF this was real, there would be no debates. A Master would do as they see fit with a sub/slave including killing them and eating thier flesh for lunch if they so saw fit. No regards for permanant damage or death. BDSM is a watered down copy cat of the REAL DEAL. Copy cat of real torture, slavery, abuse, forced D/s relationships and everything else. BDSM Master/slave relationships are consenting copy cat models of REAL Slavery. It's a Lived out Fantasy of the REAL DEAL. Pffffffffffttt.... is it just me or are people having a hard time friggen getting this through thier heads at times... whoa. first, perhaps you should realize that simply because something is your (or anyone's) personal opinion, however firm that opinion it is, it does not make it a universal law or fact. for many of us D/s, M/s, are far from the elaborate enacting of fun fantasies, it is just a way of life, as old as mankind itself, that feels right and natural to us. yes, for the most part (there are always exceptions) those of us who come into this life do so consensually, however the presence or lack of consent is not what defines something as "real" or not real. Dominance is not defined by force, and slavery is not defined by consent. yes, for most in the world when they think of "slave" they think of one forced and held in bondage against their will, however that is the connotation of the term, not the reality of it. slave simply means one is owned property, subject to the will of another. most fall into such a condition nonconsensually, by force. however a few of us walk into or accept such a condition by our free will and choice. this makes it very different from a nonconsensual situation, but no less real. the sentence i highlighted above...some (probably more than you think) of us believe exactly that, that a Master has the right to do whatever they please to their own property. we don't believe in SSC or RACK or anything of the like, don't deal with safewords, don't believe that a slave has the right to limits or to terminate the relationship, and don't believe that everything (or anything necessarily) in a D/s dynamic must be mutually pleasureable and fun. this is not a fantasy roleplay, again just a reality and dynamic that feels right and natural to those who believe in it and live it.

WhiplashSmile -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 12:42:58 PM)
Faramir, I beg to strongly disagree with you. Most BDSM M/s relationships do not cause great amounts or Post Truamatic Stress and other things. It's way more intense to being a sex slave on the real human slave market. Where one gets beat to a pulp recieved little next to no medical care.. lives in extreme conditions, not getting food on a daily basis.. To be used by countless number of people... Look Faramir.. you have no idea in hell what a REAL SLAVE goes through in bullshit overseas and how much it fucks somebody up! It's really extreme.. it's a 100 times worse then consentual BDSM master/slave relationships. This involves more pain and is way more intense...and it way more coercive because they literally threaten you by taking lives. OH yes! People get killed in Human Slavely for not complying. It's obvious that you have no idea in HELL what the Fuck you are talking about.. but saying BDSM relationship are more intense and coercive. Faramir this crap would mentally break you to peices if you were on the Human Slave Market. I think if they made you into a bitch slave for Men to enjoy.. used starvation for coercive tactics, sleep deprivation, turned you in a drug addict and used drugs for coercive tactics, along with threating your life. Also you seeing other get killed for not complying... I think you'd be pissing yourself to death at how fucking real it it.. Even more so, when you were literally beaten and had little to virtually proper medcial care.. WTF? How can you begin to share great insight to how BDSM lifestyle relationships are more intense? WTF? I don't understand your mindset here one bit...

WhiplashSmile -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 12:55:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: daddysprop247 quote: ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile A Master would do as they see fit with a sub/slave including killing them and eating thier flesh for lunch if they so saw fit. whoa. first, perhaps you should realize that simply because something is your (or anyone's) personal opinion, however firm that opinion it is, it does not make it a universal law or fact. for many of us D/s, M/s, are far from the elaborate enacting of fun fantasies, it is just a way of life, as old as mankind itself, that feels right and natural to us. yes, for the most part (there are always exceptions) those of us who come into this life do so consensually, however the presence or lack of consent is not what defines something as "real" or not real. Dominance is not defined by force, and slavery is not defined by consent. yes, for most in the world when they think of "slave" they think of one forced and held in bondage against their will, however that is the connotation of the term, not the reality of it. slave simply means one is owned property, subject to the will of another. most fall into such a condition nonconsensually, by force. however a few of us walk into or accept such a condition by our free will and choice. this makes it very different from a nonconsensual situation, but no less real. the sentence i highlighted above...some (probably more than you think) of us believe exactly that, that a Master has the right to do whatever they please to their own property. we don't believe in SSC or RACK or anything of the like, don't deal with safewords, don't believe that a slave has the right to limits or to terminate the relationship, and don't believe that everything (or anything necessarily) in a D/s dynamic must be mutually pleasureable and fun. this is not a fantasy roleplay, again just a reality and dynamic that feels right and natural to those who believe in it and live it. I was speaking about those that are into Dolcett, an aspect of BDSM fantasy play. Basically human canabalism. Yes, Dolcett really is a subculture of BDSM. http://www.dolcett.estates.co.uk/de-intro.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolcett Some people act out or scene play this to a safe and sane manner! If you remove SSC from it, then people would be fucking eating other people. However in terms of being a Dolcett slave, you are property and view yourself as property. Even to be used as a tasty meal. This is the mindset of a Dolcett slave girl. Now, is this real or just fantasy! Yes, I'm exposing some extreme BDSM things. It's because of extremes and extreme people is why SSC exists. Do you feel your MASTER has the right to COOK you up for DINNER? or is this a HARD LIMIT in your book? Tell me again? You have NO LIMITS?? REALLY??? If you don't defend a slave having rights to say no! Somebody might turn out Dead or Even turning into a Meal. If you don't defend the human rights of a slave being able to terminate a relationship... Come on here. What if your DADDY was a MEAN and CRUEL DADDY.. and there was nothing pleasurable about it. What if he was mean and abusive all the time towards you. Would you be wanting to terminate the relationship then. Sure, just because everything is working out good for you. You can say! You have no rights to temrinate the relationship! However if it turned into a living HELL.. I bet you'd be changing your story! What if DADDY wanted to Turn you into STEW.. say he got so wrapped up into Dolcett, that he wanted to actually eat you? Would you be terminating the relationship and running for your life or not?

MasterBRD -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 1:07:51 PM)
Amen, amen, amen...I couldnt agree more. Sure, I could be a bully and take what I want but as I have told both of my girls...I do not want what isn't freely given. The consent, the surrender of control, the willing transfer of that power...THAT is submission. Anyone can overpower; not many can INSPIRE

CitizenCane -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 1:08:45 PM)
Whiplash, you are obviously quite worked up about this subject, but in your passion you're failing to comprehend what others are saying. Farimir and I, among others, are agreeing that D/s and BDSM relationships are consensual as opposed to the human trafficking you're talking about. We disagree that that makes them imitations or fantasies of that human trafficking. Further, what I'm saying is that 'consent' is a term that doesn't necessarily mean what many people in this lifestyle wish it to mean. YOUR fantasies about mean masters don't have any relevance to the reality of D/s dynamics. Whether or not a particular individual would wish to be eaten doesn't mean that their submission to someone with no desire to eat them is play acting. Even if a person 'consents', in writing in front of a notary public, to engaging in a D/s relationship does not mean they will not suffer PTSD and other trauma from that relationship. You're conflating many separate elements and making rash generalizations from them that don't actually support your contention that D/s relationships are role-playing imitations of real horrible nasty non-consensual things.

WhiplashSmile -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 1:13:37 PM)
Pick and Choose SSC... this is almost laughable... There are times when a sub/slave starts a thread about how abusive or mean or neglectful their Master is being. Everybody seems to spill forth advice to the submissive/slave to get the fuck out of the relationship. Yet, on a thread such as this. A submissive or slave should have no power to terminate a relationship. That a slave should submit fully regardless to anything SSC like or not. That D/s should be to the Max. Come on here people, this almost makes me want to laugh! I can't wait to see the next Slave or Submissive posting a thread about a troubled relationship to see how many people Tell her to terminate it, cut bait, run from it, Bail out and etc... All becauase it not SSC. Amazing how people pick and choose when SSC applies or not applies in thread postings. Makes me wonder what some people really believe in or not. MMmmmmm.....

thetammyjo -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 1:14:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile My rant... BDSM slavery is a role played out copy cat of Real Slavery. For some people this is a conscious reality. I know people who look at historical information about slavery or most often about servant dynamics and then use bits and pieces of it in their household rules. Victorian models are popular. I don't use the rules but I have purposely thought about the logical arguments used in Roman slavery and have chosen some of these to use in my training. I didn't base these choices though so much on the Roman discuss and reported dynamics as I saw in them something I believed all ready. It just appealed to me to say that I use some Roman dynamics.

Faramir -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 1:16:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile Faramir this crap would mentally break you to peices if you were on the Human Slave Market. I think if they made you into a bitch slave for Men to enjoy.. used starvation for coercive tactics, sleep deprivation, turned you in a drug addict and used drugs for coercive tactics, along with threating your life. Also you seeing other get killed for not complying... I think you'd be pissing yourself to death at how fucking real it it.. Even more so, when you were literally beaten and had little to virtually proper medcial care.. WTF? How can you begin to share great insight to how BDSM lifestyle relationships are more intense? WTF? I don't understand your mindset here one bit... Oh, I doubt they would even have to go that far--if someone just spoke harshly to me, no doubt I'd urinate in terror. But that would still be the exact opposite of a consensual relationship. It's not the degree--it is the type or kind. But to answer your many WTF's, no doubt you've done serious, scholarly research on contemporary slavery--stuff like the Lifetime Channel's 2-part special: Human Trafficking. No doubt that is very nasty, but that isn't what I had in mind--I was thinking of slavery for example in Attica in the 4th and 5th centuries, heavily prescribed by custom and law, particularly in the case of domestic or trades slaves, usually subject to manumission, often incorporated into family life in the case of domestics, etc. The point is that non-consesual, coercive relationships can range from the uttemrost pits of barbarism to the relatively collegial, but the degree isn't the issue here--it's the type or kind. If you can't differntiate clearly between consensual and coercive relationships, you couldn't tell a rape from a marraige bed, could you? WTF? I don't understand, WTF? WTF are you trying to say WTF???

CitizenCane -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 1:19:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile Pick and Choose SSC... this is almost laughable... There are times when a sub/slave starts a thread about how abusive or mean or neglectful their Master is being. Everybody seems to spill forth advice to the submissive/slave to get the fuck out of the relationship. Yet, on a thread such as this. A submissive or slave should have no power to terminate a relationship. That a slave should submit fully regardless to anything SSC like or not. That D/s should be to the Max. Come on here people, this almost makes me want to laugh! I can't wait to see the next Slave or Submissive posting a thread about a troubled relationship to see how many people Tell her to terminate it, cut bait, run from it, Bail out and etc... All becauase it not SSC. Amazing how people pick and choose when SSC applies or not applies in thread postings. Makes me wonder what some people really believe in or not. MMmmmmm..... I don't recall anyone saying that a sub or slave should have no power to terminate a relationship. I do recognize, however, that as a matter of practical fact, many are unable, for varous reasons, to do so. This is equally true of people in vanilla relationships.

Archer -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 1:25:23 PM)
I think the mix up is we are discussing consensual slavery. as opposed to non consensual slavery. Are you proposing that consensual slavery is not slavery at all or that it has so many differences from non consensual that they have little if anything in common? I am not contending that consensual slavery is anything like non consensual slavery in more than the use of the word to covey the concept of ownership. A historic model for consensual slavery exists in the form of life debt slavery. This form has been practiced by many cultures. (save a man's life and it belongs to you). With the only thing holding them to you being their cultural mindset that since thier life would have ended they owe these "bonus days" to you. The law of the land does not force the continuation of their consensual slavery, in some cases your own will may not release them from their personal honor code. Being stuck on the fact that folks neglected to clarify that they are speaking of consensual slavery has led you to a justified rant against a great moral wrong. But it's not the aim of many folks here to claim they are the same as a non consensual slave, the discussion is rather about can someone feel they have lost the ability to leave. As is evidenced by thousands of spousal murders and abuses the answer is yes a person can believe they cannot get out. Now does this negate consent? (several legal findings say it does) But I am looking beyond the legal to the ethical. Can someone ethicly continue in a relationship where the ability of their counterpart to leave has been compromised in such a manner? If the treatment is such that they are by all standards well treated, is it ethical to continue the relationship. My view is that the condition of not believing they can leave does not in and of itself constitute a moral wrong, rather the treatment they recieve either meeting the moral standard or not meeting the moral standard makes the difference.

daddysprop247 -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 1:44:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile I was speaking about those that are into Dolcett, an aspect of BDSM fantasy play. Basically human canabalism. Yes, Dolcett really is a subculture of BDSM. http://www.dolcett.estates.co.uk/de-intro.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolcett Some people act out or scene play this to a safe and sane manner! If you remove SSC from it, then people would be fucking eating other people. However in terms of being a Dolcett slave, you are property and view yourself as property. Even to be used as a tasty meal. This is the mindset of a Dolcett slave girl. Now, is this real or just fantasy! Yes, I'm exposing some extreme BDSM things. It's because of extremes and extreme people is why SSC exists. Do you feel your MASTER has the right to COOK you up for DINNER? or is this a HARD LIMIT in your book? Tell me again? You have NO LIMITS?? REALLY??? If you don't defend a slave having rights to say no! Somebody might turn out Dead or Even turning into a Meal. If you don't defend the human rights of a slave being able to terminate a relationship... Come on here. What if your DADDY was a MEAN and CRUEL DADDY.. and there was nothing pleasurable about it. What if he was mean and abusive all the time towards you. Would you be wanting to terminate the relationship then. Sure, just because everything is working out good for you. You can say! You have no rights to temrinate the relationship! However if it turned into a living HELL.. I bet you'd be changing your story! What if DADDY wanted to Turn you into STEW.. say he got so wrapped up into Dolcett, that he wanted to actually eat you? Would you be terminating the relationship and running for your life or not? i thought i had made that clear before, but to be more blunt about it...there is NOTHING my Master could subject me to that would give me the right to terminate our relationship, or to leave him. you seem to assume that i live in some sort of Disneyworld, and have a fairy tale relationship with my Master, where all is peaches, cream and bunny rabbits. this is not at all the case. life as a slave is not always rosey, it is rarely easy, and sometimes it is downright cruel, scary and even depressing. sometimes Daddy is cruel, sometimes he is mean. there have been times i've cried myself at sleep at night, wallowing in self-pity at the reality of my life as a slave. there have even been times in the early days of our union, when i saw suicide as a feasible way out of the relationship. after all, i knew he would never release me, and that i could never succeed in physically running away...not to mention the fact that if i could not be his slave, i saw no point in existing at all. it was a tremendous step in my growth as a slave when i reached the point of being utterly incapable of even contemplating the idea of escaping, even via suicide. He has broken me completely, and because of that i can find peace and fulfillment even through the difficult times, and if life became nothing but suffering, nothing but hard times, i would still find peace and fulfillment because i would be pleasing my Master, and in the end that is all that truly matters. so if he lost his mind, woke up one day and decided to make slavestew, with me as the main ingredient, i'd be sad (probably more confused), but accept it as his will, and hope it was what he truly desired as there would be no coming back from that.

CitizenCane -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 1:46:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Archer But it's not the aim of many folks here to claim they are the same as a non consensual slave, the discussion is rather about can someone feel they have lost the ability to leave. As is evidenced by thousands of spousal murders and abuses the answer is yes a person can believe they cannot get out. Now does this negate consent? (several legal findings say it does) But I am looking beyond the legal to the ethical. Can someone ethicly continue in a relationship where the ability of their counterpart to leave has been compromised in such a manner? If the treatment is such that they are by all standards well treated, is it ethical to continue the relationship. My view is that the condition of not believing they can leave does not in and of itself constitute a moral wrong, rather the treatment they recieve either meeting the moral standard or not meeting the moral standard makes the difference. Exactly. The issue of consent is something of a red-herring. Consent is either an action or a subjective feeling. In action, obedience is consent, not leaving is consent. In the realm of the subjective, a person who FEELS they have no choice may do the actions of consent, but retain the feeling of non-consent. Whether the feeling of non-consent engenders a sense of contentment or a sense of resentment is one measure of whether the person is being treated ethically (though not the only one).

robertolapiedra -> RE: Dominance and submission? (6/5/2007 1:49:04 PM)
Hello CitizenCane. As for your "acting" theory, try this on for size. In roman times you had a hierachy than roughly ressembled the following : Nobility (descendants of the patriarchs), roman citizen, non-citizen free and "slave" (not all roman emperors came from "nobility", but all came from "power"). You have many historical cases of non-citizens becoming citizens, and "slaves" becoming citizens. You have many examples of "real" slaves married by their owners (change of "legal status"). You have other examples of "slaves" obtaining (with time) "status" and "power" in "leading" positions in the many governments of the empire. Owners had the power of life and death concerning their slaves but only in specific instances (laws). When these slaves obtained a different legal status (free, citizenship, marriage, etc) the former owner did not have the "same" powers (other laws). Was the slave "acting" when his/her owner could just about do everything under what was then the law? If a slave was freed, was he/she "acting" as free, but still a "slave in heart"? Or was he/she "acting" as a slave for self preservation and all the time was hiding "the free person in heart"? When a "slave" with time, hard work and positive contribution (merit) was emancipated, and became an important figure with power over other's, was he/she "acting"? The point is, "slaves" were submissives, dominants, vanillas, kinkies, same as today. "Slaves" formed a "cast" with people that are people. It was not a romantic "acting" social arrangement. It was a "legal" one (nobility, citizen, free outsider, slave). Today we use the term "slave" in another "legal" context as it pertains to "naturally" submissive human beings in a "specific intensity" of subservience. The term "slave" is a "reference" (historical-legal) in a emerging system of power exchange in a relationship (21th century!). It is an "historical reference" to a system of control of labor, and only a "sophist" would use this as if it had the same meaning it had when slavery was "legal" (when every slave, including dominants, were "acting" as submissives!). I can tell you that in a 21th century context, the willfull "free slave" exits (laws govern "this" as before), and it is not "acting". You cannot "act" as a slave for many years without going nuts. Same as real actors, who sometimes need a little "therapy" after "acting" for a long period, the same "role" (very long theater runs). You are implying that we delude ourselves because we have laws protecting the integrity of mind and body. You are also implying that "perception" in what defines "reality" is not a panacea. Well "your" perception is not either if this is the case? Yes? The fact that you see "intense legal SSC willfull submission" as "suspect", says that it is how you "live" this, as an "actor", who doe's not seem to realize that "we" all bend to the "will" of some authority, same as the romans did. Romans had "slave" submissives and "non slave" submissives ("acting" and "non acting"?) This notion of unbridled romantic "domination" never existed to begin with, except in litterature and movies (where you find some very convincing "acting"). All in a good fun, my young sophist friend. RL EDIT: Wrong quote, this is in reply to OP from CitizenCane. Sorry.RL

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625