|
robertolapiedra -> RE: Are you really owned if you are not treated like property? (7/20/2007 9:52:49 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TallDarkAndWitty
Are you really a slave if all you are ever forced to do is stuff you enjoy? Are you a "Master" if you never ask a slave to do stuff he/she does not enjoy?
As evidenced by the replies to the "sharing" question, many people believe that slavery or ownership is simply a state of mind. Mindset, attitude, belief, principles....
I like to share my slaves because it makes tangible the fact that they are property. Not sharing makes slave "property" untangible? or less tangible?
However, there is no question about the concept of ownership when a Master gives his slave away for a few hours. When the slave enjoys it? Would not interdiction be proof of ownership?
For me, again, I like tangible evidence that the relationship I have with my property is Master/slave. This means that only forcing them to do things they want to do just won't cut it. I have to re-enforce the idea that they are slaves by throwing in some unpleasantness...otherwise, it is purely a subjective and theoretic Master/slave relationship.
Of course this is just my way. ... I am not saying everyone must form their relationship I need evidence. I need proof.
Thoughts?
Taggard
Hello TallDarkAndWitty. Are you a (real?) slave when? Are you a (real?) master when? To me the M/s relationship with the focus being on the "owner/property" aspect is just a romantic notion.
What is your "pleasure"? having the slave prove her "mindset" to you, by doing stuff she doe's not like? or you like to prove to the beneficiaries of your "loan to others" that you are an owner? Or you would go the distance, and have her do stuff that the both of you would not enjoy, in order to bring in the "tangibles", thus proving purely an non-subjective ("real"?) and non-theoretic ("real?") Master/slave relationship.
The only way I can see what you are doing, is romantic M/s. A dominant constantly testing his sub in the "property" aspect is actually expressing doubt of property, thus ownership. If you doubt ownership, it is not exactly M/s isn't it? How can you be a master if you doubt about the "mindsets"?
If it is a pleasure issue? You enjoy having your sub doing stuff she does not like? In that case you can have M/s, and sadistic coercive stuff goes on all over the place. Nothing there, to prove anything subjective, objective, theoretical or "real. Are you a "real" master? Is she a "real" slave? Yes, because "knowing" that she doe's not like it, she does what you ask, and "no" because by doing this, you express your doubt in "your" ownership.
In my humble opinion, if it is doubt motivated, it is reversed leadership as "you" don't have to prove anything except doubt. If it is pleasure motivated, you are just being "romantic".
In the 21th century, there are no owners of "people", and people are not property. In a D/s relationship, when you use those "symbols", "mindsets", you have a M/s relationship that is "conditional" to a constant consensual dynamic. Your sub is consenting to "displeasure" (who knows really?) for your pleasure, not because "of" your ownership but "for" your ownership, "for" her submission level (property) in the dynamic.
One must make a distinction between "owning a real slave" and consented TPE.
As for myself, I like to "own" an happy slave. In my dynamic (TPE), I have a great part of responsibility. I will admit that I try minimize the "displeasure" side of things for someone submitting to me for the last 7 years. When submitting is a pleasure, you tend to get more, not less. I have my proof (coherence through time) and I cast no doubts.
My slave is my property as long as I keep making the "payments" by leading her, protecting her and yes, respecting her (mind, body and soul). I find that only a romantic would think that a TPE M/s type slave is automatically "paid" for in full, and must "act" like "historical human property". But that's me, your thoughts?
"Just my thoughts". RL.
|
|
|
|
