RE: Define Slave (Full Version)

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



Message

ElektraUkM -> RE: Define Slave (7/9/2005 10:01:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pleasureforHim



Electra -- my deepest apologies if i offended You by suggesting some disrespect for You or Your relationship. My only point was, because real slevery is illegal in the US, a man and woman who enter into a "Master and slave" relationship are, per force, entering into a role palying fiction; to be fleshed out between the two of them.


Hello again, and no offence taken.

I can quite see your point, and I choose to disagree, simply because I don't have the same emotional reaction to the word that you do. I don't live out a fantasy connected to US slavery, and neither does my partner. We live out a relationship based on how we see slavery within a bdsm setting.

I'm sure we can respect those differences [:)]

~ Elektra




ElektraUkM -> RE: Define Slave (7/9/2005 10:03:40 PM)

oops



lonewolf05 -> RE: Define Slave (7/10/2005 9:31:25 AM)

i am neither going to agree or disagree. what you do for you is cool.

but for me personally? i have no way i can see any dominant being a safety net against the out side world. i live in the outside world. i still have to go to the grocery, i still have to go to the gas station, i still have to go to the V.A.---no Domme can be my net. there are just some things NO ONE can do FOR me and prevent ME from having to deal with it.

if what you have works, bless you.

the wolf



ElektraUkM -> RE: Define Slave (7/10/2005 11:57:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: lonewolf05

i have no way i can see any dominant being a safety net against the out side world. i live in the outside world. i still have to go to the grocery, i still have to go to the gas station, i still have to go to the V.A.---no Domme can be my net. there are just some things NO ONE can do FOR me and prevent ME from having to deal with it.


Is there an assumption here that a master would necessarily 'come between' a slave and the World? Or were you addressing someone in particular on the thread?

Being a slave does not necessarily mean that one serves only in the home. In fact I don't think there is any interaction with the World that would be proscribed simply because one is a slave..?

~ Elektra



BittersweetLila -> RE: Define Slave (7/10/2005 12:33:34 PM)

Imagine being of African descent and a slave in this country 200 years ago and your Master sells your children away from you. This to me would be something I could not live with. Could any of you mothers out there who consider yourself a slave?
I think I use the word slave today when I really should be using the word, submissive. I do choose to enter into a relationship with a Master in which I totally submit myself. Years ago, before I became a mother I was considerably more fully a slave because I did anything, including commit criminal acts and would have willingly given up my life for my Master. But, after I had my first baby something changed for me. My life was no longer my own to give after that. Now, while I still yearn to submitt totally to a Master, I know in my heart that my son and daughter's welfare will always come first in my committments and duties to life. Does that mean I am not qualified to be a good submissive and/or slave?

Lila



ElektraUkM -> RE: Define Slave (7/10/2005 12:42:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BittersweetLila

Years ago, before I became a mother I was considerably more fully a slave because I did anything, including commit criminal acts and would have willingly given up my life for my Master...

Now, while I still yearn to submitt totally to a Master, I know in my heart that my son and daughter's welfare will always come first in my committments and duties to life. Does that mean I am not qualified to be a good submissive and/or slave?



I would have thought that those things would only matter if you were considering submitting yourself fully to a master who thought it was OK to ask you to commit crimes and treat your children with anything less than the care and love they deserve.

Isn't the onus on you to select a partner whose goals and ideals are compatable with your own?

~ Elektra



TallDarkAndWitty -> RE: Define Slave (7/10/2005 12:48:47 PM)

I think one of the problems in trying to define slave is that we are trying to define several types of relationships with just two words: submissive and slave.

In truth, there are those who consensually feel, look, and act like slaves. They would agree to having their children given away. They would admit that they have no rights, not even the right to life.

There are also what I would call "servents". Those who agree to perform various tasks in return for comensurate reward. In the lifestyle, that reward is often affection, attention, money and an expert administration of sensual pain.

Then there are the submissives, those who enjoy submitting to a dominant force.

Trying to convert the word "slave" to mean a part-submissive/part-servant/play-slave, just confuses the issue.

On top of it all, many in the lifestyle only like to submit when they feel like it...further muddying the waters.

The bottom line is that you should know yourself, and be prepared to spend quite a bit of time talking about what you are if you really want someone to understand it.

On my website, there is a checklist form that attempts to break down the sub/servant/slave/maso desires...just an artifact of my paperwork fetish.

Taggard



BittersweetLila -> RE: Define Slave (7/10/2005 1:01:29 PM)

Your are right, Elektra.

I think part of it is that I worry that by submitting myself totally (what I crave and yearn for) to a beloved Master (if He decides to choose me) might clash with my responsiveness to things my son (who is 20 years old) needs from me. I doubt anyone but me could love my son the way I do, and so I worry about what would happen if my Master's idea of what I should give my son differed from what I think my son needs right now. I think I know my son best being that I have raised him from when he was a baby. But, also, my idea of complete submission means that I want to be able to totally obey whatever my Master decides is best for my life. However, I worry about what would happen if my Master wanted me to say "no" to my son (right now I support my son financially because he has had some emotional difficulties and is in difficult circumstances at this point in his life).

So, I think, does my strong committment to my son mean I should hold back for awhile from fully committing myself to a Master? I can stay in the vanilla marriage I am in, to provide financial stability for myself and my son --- or I can take a huge risk and go for what my heart aches for --- total submission to a wise and intelligent and caring Master (and his wife). I want to do this but my mother-instinct is telling me not to for fear of endangering my son't well being.

That's the confused place my head is at right now. Thanks for the advice and listening!
Lila



AAkasha -> RE: Define Slave (7/10/2005 1:47:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElektraUkM


quote:

ORIGINAL: BittersweetLila

Years ago, before I became a mother I was considerably more fully a slave because I did anything, including commit criminal acts and would have willingly given up my life for my Master...

Now, while I still yearn to submitt totally to a Master, I know in my heart that my son and daughter's welfare will always come first in my committments and duties to life. Does that mean I am not qualified to be a good submissive and/or slave?



I would have thought that those things would only matter if you were considering submitting yourself fully to a master who thought it was OK to ask you to commit crimes and treat your children with anything less than the care and love they deserve.

Isn't the onus on you to select a partner whose goals and ideals are compatable with your own?

~ Elektra


If the concept of slavery in a bdsm context is permanent and unyielding, of course people would only choose partners who shares the same ideals, ethics, morals as them. Ask a slave, "well, would you submit to your Master if one day he woke up and told you to do something that was against your entire nature?" and a slave will reply, "I wouldn't have chosen to submit to a Master like that in the first place." This makes sense.

I do have a problem with the concept that with "slavery" comes any more permanent removal of consent/choice than a normal relationship. A slave can always leave. Certainly a slave may submit fully, with the intent to serve in that manner without any way out of it, and plenty love the ideas of contracts that (while not legal) make this removal of choice seem even more real.

How is this different from a vanilla couple getting married and exchanging vows with the full intense (honestly) of remaining forever faithful? Of course that's the intent. But it doesn't work that way all the time. People evolve and change. People don't divorce only because they decided they were not interested in a commitment any longer; they divorce often because one or both people changed.

There are no statistics in Master/slave relationships to use as a reference. How do we know how many committed, "contracted", forever Master-slave relationships ended completely at some point because the slave said "screw this. I am a slave but not to you."?

Akasha



SteelBondager -> RE: Define Slave (7/11/2005 12:41:01 PM)

Aside: ElektraUkM, that is a striking (and distracting) photo you have there.

(and apparently I hit the wrong reply button. it wasn't supposed to be a reply to TallDarkAndWitty)



sub4hire -> RE: Define Slave (7/14/2005 3:57:30 PM)

Ok, after reading everyone's responses. Only counting each person once.

Out of 25 we have 56% believing a slave is property.

40% believing a slave is in a consentual relationship

4% undecided, they answered on both sides of the coin.

Very Interesting.



SteelBondager -> RE: Define Slave (7/14/2005 5:04:45 PM)

And 4% who pointed out that Elektra has a distracting photo for an avatar. :)



ElektraUkM -> RE: Define Slave (7/15/2005 3:25:34 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sub4hire

Ok, after reading everyone's responses. Only counting each person once.

Out of 25 we have 56% believing a slave is property.

40% believing a slave is in a consentual relationship

4% undecided, they answered on both sides of the coin.

Very Interesting.


Hm... and I don't think I've really given my opinion, other than to respond to other people's definitions...

(is my photo REALLY that distracting, SteelBondager..? lol [8D])

~ Elektra



darkinshadows -> RE: Define Slave (7/15/2005 3:29:04 AM)

lol... I am not steelbondager - and it even distracts me!

It's brilliant, and your gorgeous!

Peace and Love



lonewolf05 -> RE: Define Slave (7/15/2005 4:10:08 AM)

small unheard inner chuckle....nor do "I" voice opinion...
i merely stated i deal with an outside world.

wolf



sub4hire -> RE: Define Slave (7/15/2005 8:20:01 AM)

quote:

small unheard inner chuckle....nor do "I" voice opinion...
i merely stated i deal with an outside world.


Well if you all want to count and re-read all of the responses instead of complaining. Those who didn't form an opinion I didn't count.

Guess we got to 5 pages with only a mere 25 people responding?



imtempting -> RE: Define Slave (7/15/2005 8:21:10 AM)

Its good to see people are argreeing with what ive been saying about slaves in Bdsm.



pleasureforHim -> RE: Define Slave (7/15/2005 10:04:55 AM)

i cannot resist throwing off the bell curve and giving my opinion again. LOL.

1st...dark angel is absolutely right. The use "slave" as a sexual enhancer when so many people here in the US and around the world experience unspeakable suffering due to their true slavery is self-indulgent. How anyone can claim they are ignorant of the suffering dark angel describes, or claim that the use of the word "slave" in their sexual life does not further marginalize this suffering is beyond me. If we called women in D/s "refugees" it might be a bit more apparent what i mean.

2nd...i cannot get over the black man who claims to be a Dom or Master and says He seeks a slave. The hair on the back of my neck stands up. It's like watching Him ask to join the local KKK. Yikes!

3rd...the relationship between any two people in BDSM is, per force, defined by them. Whatever they choose to call one another, whatever rules of living they establish, however they establish trust and (one hopes) love..is individual. They could try to explain their relationship to the readers of this thread...but what use would it be? None of us can mimic what they do..what they feel...what they have built. The unique nature of their relationship means they might possibly advise us as to what works for them, but that's all. It may not -- almost certainly does not -- work for anyone else.

4th..i also agree we should stop using the term "slave" and exchange it for some other word. Whatever level of TPE the couple has going on..he/she can end it on a dime by calling a halt to it and leaving. i can remember, when i used to chat in TheLobby, being asked over and over for devices to make the slavery "legal" through guardianship or elsewise. It cannot be done. Even in states which permit adult adopton, she will never lose her civil rights. I tried to explain this, and inevitably some dim bulb would argue with me and send everyone to his web site, full of misinformation on devices to legally capture a woman. *sigh*. Since she can never BE a slave; and since slavery is a CURRENT problem of a revolting nature. why not call her what she REALLY is?

Here are some choices:

servileness

noun

A state of subjugation to an owner or master: bondage, enslavement, helotry, serfdom, servility, servitude, slavery, thrall, thralldom, villeinage, yoke. See over/under.

thralldom also thraldom

noun

A state of subjugation to an owner or master: bondage, enslavement, helotry, serfdom, servileness, servility, servitude, slavery, thrall, villeinage, yoke. See over/under.

bond·age (bŏn'dĭj)
n.
The state of one who is bound as a slave or serf.
A state of subjection to a force, power, or influence.
The practice of being physically restrained, as with cords or handcuffs, as a means of attaining sexual gratification.
Villeinage.
[Middle English, from Anglo-Norman, from Middle English bonde, serf, from Old English bōnda, husbandman, from Old Norse bōndi, present participle of būa, to live.]

(LOL: upper-subby.)

So to ElertraUkM and other "Owners", i ask You; why do You need a 24/7/365 fantasy that You are slaveowners? Would no other imagery satisfy Your need for TPE? i do not question or critise Your relationships....perhaps i would even envy them if we knew one another..but the terminiology is so repugnant...why is it necessary?

Now, i am interested in OPINIONS, but if you're just going to flame me, save your breath. This thread has already had enough childish behavior.

pleasureforHim



EmeraldSlave2 -> RE: Define Slave (7/15/2005 10:16:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pleasureforHim
So to ElertraUkM and other "Owners", i ask You; why do You need a 24/7/365 fantasy that You are slaveowners? Would no other imagery satisfy Your need for TPE? i do not question or critise Your relationships....perhaps i would even envy them if we knew one another..but the terminiology is so repugnant...why is it necessary?

For me it seems to be the jargon term that fits best for my relationship with the Owner.

I do however also use "owner/property" in addition to "master/slave" because it's not only gender nuetral, but it puts a more objectified spin on it which suits us better than Ms alone would.

You find the terminology repugnant, many don't. Think of it like the black dom with a white sub, or someone who has a uniform fetish and wears a nazi uniform. Kinks are kinks, we don't do them because they are necessary, we do them because they fit us, they are part of what we enjoy and what makes our lives more fulfilling.



ElektraUkM -> RE: Define Slave (7/15/2005 11:30:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pleasureforHim

The use "slave" as a sexual enhancer when so many people here in the US and around the world experience unspeakable suffering due to their true slavery is self-indulgent. How anyone can claim they are ignorant of the suffering dark angel describes, or claim that the use of the word "slave" in their sexual life does not further marginalize this suffering is beyond me. If we called women in D/s "refugees" it might be a bit more apparent what i mean.


You are making an assumption that the word 'slave' is being used as a 'sexual enhancer'. I've already responded to that suggestion in an earlier post on this thread.

quote:

We should stop using the term "slave" and exchange it for some other word. Whatever level of TPE the couple has going on..he/she can end it on a dime by calling a halt to it and leaving. i can remember, when i used to chat in TheLobby, being asked over and over for devices to make the slavery "legal" through guardianship or elsewise. It cannot be done...

...Since she can never BE a slave; and since slavery is a CURRENT problem of a revolting nature. why not call her what she REALLY is?


Isn't it another, equally viable option, to accept that the use of the word 'slave' within a bdsm context carries with it the assumption that the arrangement is by mutual consent which can be withdrawn at any time (and so ending the relationship)?

The be all and end all of slavery is/was NOT that it is NON-consensual, but that one human being has total rights over another human being (for want of another, short way of expressing it). I have given an example of slavery in a historical context which was Consensual. So my argument here is that IF the term 'slavery' can be applied historically and outside bdsm to a Consensual arrangement, then the same should be possible within the sphere of bdsm.

quote:



bond·age (bŏn'dĭj)
n.
The state of one who is bound as a slave or serf.
A state of subjection to a force, power, or influence.
The practice of being physically restrained, as with cords or handcuffs, as a means of attaining sexual gratification.


In what ways, historically or present day, do you consider that the state of 'bondage' is any different to the state of 'slavery'? The terms are more or less interchangeable in the sense of the status of the person owned and directed. I've often thought of bringing up the word 'bondage' in these 'slavery isn't legal' debates for this very reason. The term 'bondage' is used in bdsm without (as far as I'm aware) ANY criticism, or reference to any historical or present-day ill-treatment or unacceptable practices.

quote:



So to ElertraUkM and other "Owners", i ask You; why do You need a 24/7/365 fantasy that You are slaveowners? Would no other imagery satisfy Your need for TPE? i do not question or critise Your relationships....perhaps i would even envy them if we knew one another..but the terminiology is so repugnant...why is it necessary?


If you checked out my profile you'll see that I'm in fact the other side of the slash, so to speak [;)]

But to answer from the other side: I don't feel that I'm living a fantasy of slavery. I think, as I've said earlier on the thread, that it is perhaps a projection of those who dislike the terminology of 'master' and 'slave' to suggest that someone using those terms is involved in some kind of elaborate fantasy involving those 'roles'.

I suppose I'd throw the question back and ask... is that how you see those who use those terms..? As involved in a 'master' and 'slave' roleplaying fantasy scenario? Rather than living a particular type of TPE relationship?

~ Elektra



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

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.492188E-02