slavegirljoy
Posts: 1207
Joined: 11/6/2006
From: North Carolina, USA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BitaTruble
ORIGINAL: slavegirljoy
But, i'm not the one who said that someone can't be a slave because they don't have the same definition of what a slave is that i have.
True, you said that someone is a robot. Semantics and, in my view, very disingenuous. It's still pot, kettle, black.
Actually, my reference to "robot" had nothing to do with my definition of a slave, especially since i have no definition of a slave, except the one that fits me. And, it had nothing to do with someone who willingly turns their back on their children, in order to be a slave. i would never compare such a person to a robot.
The comparison i made to a robot was in response to the assertion that a slave must have no other desire or need than to please her master. To me, that is saying that a slave (a person) must deny their basic human needs, including feelings and emotions, and that sounds like a robot, to me, since robots don't have feelings or emotions.
This was the original post, in which i made any reference to a robot.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bobkgin
In a purist sense, a slave has no other desire or need than to please her master.
Certainly any relationship I engage in in the future will be with someone who is ready for this.
"Sorry but, that sounds to me like the description of a robot, that you can program to meet your needs, without having any feelings and desires and needs of its own. But, then again, i believe even a robot has some needs of its own that must be met to keep functioning correctly."
quote:
Okay, so you qualified it. That's no different than someone else saying 'to me' you are not a slave.
i don't have a problem with anyone saying "to me, you are not a slave." That's not an issue for me. But, that's not what was said. What was said was that, "in order to be a slave, you must be willing to turn your back on all others, your children, your parents, etc.", and that is what i took issue with.
When i said that, "This definition might work for some but, not for this slave", i was told that i am a "sub" and not a "slave" because of my unwillingness to turn my back on my children, in order to serve a Master.
quote:
Whether or not it's a blanket statement is beside the point. You have taken a group of people (those who are willing to give up friends, family, children etc.) and lumped them all together under a single category then labeled that category with various character traits which you don't believe the people within that category possess. In my world that's called being a bigot.
big·ot (n. ): One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
i don't belong to a "group" that is opposed to people who willingly abandon their children, unless 2, as in my Master and i, makes a "group."
i'm not intolerant of people who willingly turn their backs on their children, for no other reason than to have a relationship with a man (or woman). i don't have to tolerate them and i don't have to like them and i don't have to have anything to do with them. But, it's my opinion that a person's willingness to leave their children, for no other reason than to be in a relationship with a man (or woman), doesn't demonstrate loyalty and dependability, two traits i consider to be valuable to long-term, committed, intimate relationships. Willingness to walk out on your children, just for the sake of having a relationship with a man (or woman) is very selfish, to me. And, i don't think that demonstrates positive qualities of a slave.
What do you call people who willingly abandon their obligations to their children for no other reason than to be in a relationship with a man (or woman)? i call them many things but, mostly, irresponsible, undependable, and without loyalty to those who count on them for their care and upbringing.
[quote]But, i also said that "i understand that different Masters have different qualities they look for in a slave and, perhaps these qualities are irrelevant to some."
And again, showing your bigotry by saying that some Masters don't think those qualities are relevant again implying that those character traits can't be found within a certain group of people.
If that's what you call bigotry.......OK.
quote:
i never said that it was wrong to be that way, only that i consider those traits essential in committed, long-term relationships.
And yet again, saying those traits aren't found within a certain group of people. Well, I happen to fall within that certain group of people and I'm in a long-term (over a decade), stable relationship. So, your theory has just gone out the window since I hold all those character traits, in abundance, which you claimed can't be found within the group to which I belong.
i haven't made any statements regarding you. If you put yourself in the category of people who willingly turn their backs on their children, for no other reason than to have a relationship with a man, then, you have put that label on yourself.
i haven't expressed a theory. i expressed my opinion of people who willingly turn their backs on their children, in order to be a slave to another. Opinions are not subject to proof or disproof. i didn't say that anyone had to agree with my opinion but, i have a right state it.
quote:
My Master looked for them as well.. and found them. Surprise, surprise. Is it possible that makes you 'wrong' in your opinion?
There is no such thing as a "wrong" or "right" opinion. It merely is. Everyone has their own opinions and no one's opinion is more "right" or "wrong" than anyone else's. They're just different.
quote:
And, i sure didn't say that someone isn't a slave who turns their back on close family and friends.
Well, before it was someone who had the willingness to do so, now it's someone who's actually done so. Um, okay.
i was responding to a definition of "slave", which i disagree with. If someone is willing to abandon their children and turn their back on their family, in order to be a slave, and that willingness is considered necessary, in order to qualify as a slave, which was asserted here, then that would mean that there are some who actually have done so. Otherwise, according to this definition, there would be no slaves at all. What's the point of being willing to do something, if there isn't any intent on following-through on it?
Still, i didn't say that someone, who is willing or who actually has turned their back on their family, including their children, isn't a slave. i said that i believe that anyone who does that isn't a person i consider to be loyal or dependable.
( http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=1233811) "A slave is a person who can, or will, give up any prior committments that they have in order to be in service to the Owner. This is including committments to job/career, children, spouses, family."
quote:
As I recall you didn't deem them slave, you deemed them robot. ::shrugs:: I don't see the difference.
This is what i wrote in reference to robots.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bobkgin
In a purist sense, a slave has no other desire or need than to please her master.
Certainly any relationship I engage in in the future will be with someone who is ready for this.
"Sorry but, that sounds to me like the description of a robot, that you can program to meet your needs, without having any feelings and desires and needs of its own. But, then again, i believe even a robot has some needs of its own that must be met to keep functioning correctly."
quote:
i was the one who was told that i can't be a slave because of my unwillingness to turn my back on my family and friends.
Since it doesn't matter what anyone but your Master calls you, why does it matter?
i already stated that i disagree with the definition that was given of what a slave is and that, for someone who doesn't know me or my Master to say that i am not a slave because i don't fit their definition is simply wrong and insulting to my Master's ability to recognize a slave when He sees one and owns one.
quote:
i didn't place my personal values on anyone else and use my criteria to tell anyone that they weren't a slave.
That's exactly what you did. You made several statements as to a persons character (or lack thereof) then put them into the robot category.
No. As i have stated, i was responding to the statement, "a slave has no other desire or need than to please her master" and comparing a slave who has no desire or need than to please her master to a robot.
quote:
How insulting do you believe it is to tell an entire group of people they don't have certain character traits because they have a willingness to do something which you do not have a willingness to do? How insulting do you think it is to call people who fall into a particular group of slaves, robots who are not capable of being loyal or reliable etc.
Again, as i have said, i didn't call people who are willing to turn their back on their family, robots. It was in reference to the statement that a slave has no desire or need than to please her Master. Saying that needs and desires can't exist within a slave, other than the one to please her Master, is to me saying that they are without feelings, emotions, fears, hopes, etc., and that is what i compared to a robot.
quote:
That is an insult to Him, not to me.
I don't speak for my Master, but I seriously doubt he'd ever be insulted by the words of strangers on the Internet, but then he's got a very thick skin and doesn't give credibility to pixels on a computer screen. Are you quite sure that your Master would be insulted? You are able to speak for him on this issue?
i have spoken to Him, as i do every day about everything that i post on this site and everywhere else that i put my views. He has thick skin, too and He isn't losing any sleep over any of this and neither am i. He and i have the same outlook on the issue of people who willingly turn their backs on their family and children and He is much more blatant about His negative opinions of people who do, than i am.
i didn't say that He was insulted. i said that it was an insult to Him. It was an insult to His character and ability to recognize a slave when He sees one and owns one.
quote:
I don't have permission to make statements on the feelings of my Master or when he would feel insulted or even complimented by the happenings in cyber space but that's just the way things are done in this house. I suppose they are done as you desire in your own house since you set limitations on what can and cannot be where you live.
my Master has given me permission to speak my mind, as long as it isn't contradictory to what He has stated to me, which i haven't. If that were not the case, i wouldn't be here posting anything.
i set no limitations on anything in my relationship with my Master. He did that, at the beginning of Oour discussions about becoming Master and slave, before i became His slave. i agreed to His limits, requirements, needs, rules, etc., and that's what i live by.
i elected to accept my Master's collar and His offer to become His slave, after i learned what His needs/requirements/rules/limits/etc. were for me and after i learned about His character. When i saw that He was a man with values that were compatible with mine and that He was a man of integrity, honesty, reliability, humor, intelligence, and a fine sadistic nature, then, and only then, did i feel any desire to be His slave.
quote:
Call me anything you want but, don't tell me i am not something that my Master has determined that i am.
In my world, you're not a slave. You're a submissive who has put forth limits to what they are willing to do and if your Master does not comply with those limitations you will not serve him as he requires or am I wrong in my understanding of what you've stated?
Like i said, i don't put limits on my relationship with my Master. i don't have any reason to, because i knew what was required of me, prior to accepting my Master's collar, and i agreed with and accepted those limits and requirements.
If He had stated requirements that violate my principles, such as if He had stated that He required me to engage in pedo sex, i would have turned down His offer to become His slave, because i won't do that for anyone. Or, if He had stated that He required me to start smoking or using illicit drugs or drinking vodka for breakfast or rob banks, i would have turned down His offer to become His slave. And, if He had stated that He required me to turn my back on my family, my children, my close, long-term friends, i would have turned down His offer to become His slave.
i don't serve just anyone. i won't submit to a liar or a drunk or a drug abuser or a smoker or a pedophile or a worthless bum or anyone i can't trust or respect. i looked for a Master who i would respect and trust and that is the Master i serve.
quote:
As far as i'm concerned, i am only a slave because my Master chooses to use me as a slave.
I'm a slave because that's what I am whether I'm used that way or not. I don't need to be defined by someone else.
You are who you are and i am who i am.
i have always been submissive and have served Doms who didn't want a slave and didn't use me as a slave. That was their choice, not mine. i actively searched for a Master because i desired that level of control over me and to live 24/7 as a full-service slave and that's what i am, now.
If my relationship with my Master were to end, i would not be a slave any more because i would be without an Owner and without a Master to serve. i would be a former slave, who might or might not seek another Master to serve. i doubt i could find another Master, as wonderful as He is, ever again. i believe He is the One i was meant to be enslaved to. If i never served another Master, it would be, i believe, incorrect for me to continue to refer to myself as a slave.
i would still have a deep, internal slave identity within me but, i would not be a slave. i also have a very strong internal identity within me as a soldier, because i was a soldier for 12 years and i would have remained a soldier if the "higher calling" of motherhood hadn't changed my priorities. i still feel a very strong internal identification as a soldier but, i'm not anymore and, i believe, it would be incorrect of me to identify myself as a soldier, even though i have that deep,internal identification as a soldier.
i was also a wife for a number of years but, when my marriage ended, even though inside, i still felt like a wife and still had an internal wife identity, i stopped referring to myself as a wife because that was no longer the case.
quote:
If He were to choose to use me as something else, that's His prerogative.
Quite so, because you are only a slave by his demand rather than it being part and parcel of your own inherent nature. I have no problem with that I just don't call it that in my world. I call that being a submissive.
That's your prerogative. i don't have a conflict with that, because that is your opinion, based on "your world." i hope that you would recognize that in mine and my Master's world, i am His slave, because He chooses to use me as His slave, and that's all that matters to me.
quote:
i am His property and He decides what purpose i fulfill in His life, be it slave or anything else. i am the same person today as i was when i was serving Doms who didn't use me as a slave. That decision is up to the particular man i belong to, not up to me.
The one thing that Himself doesn't have the power to do is to change my inherent nature. He can tweak my actions, command my actions and put forth consequences for my reactions but he can't change what's there, what's inside of me or who I am. He just not that powerful a being nor am I so easily molded that I am capable of slipping into a fascade that doesn't hold true to me and be something I'm not because the person I'm with may change faces and names or treat me differently from someone else.
Of course. And, what is inherently my nature is a submissive woman who will gladly be molded into the slave that my Master desires me to be. It isn't a facade for me. i am His slave, because that is what He wants. If He should change His mind and decide that,instead of a slave, He wanted me as His housekeeper or friend or companion, then that is what i would be. He owns me and, as my Owner, He decides what purpose i fulfill for Him.
i might not ever be any other man's slave, because it is only a very special man that i feel a desire to be enslaved to and submit to as a 24/7, full-service slave. i haven't met any other man, who i have felt that deep desire to be enslaved to.
quote:
You are a slave because you are used as a slave by your current Master. If your current Master did not use you as a slave, you would not be a slave and your service would not change so why you would ever get upset by someone not calling you a slave when, by your own words you are only what you are used as, is beyond my comprehension.
Because, as it stands now, i am a slave to my Master and, for someone, who doesn't know me or Him, to say that i am not who i am, just because i don't fit their definition, is, to me, just wrong. Why shouldn't i say something about that? Why should i let, what i feel, is a false statement about me go unchallenged?
slave joy
Owned property of Master David
"Commitment transforms a promise into a reality."
|
RE: SLAVES VS SUBS - 
Profile
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