LadyHugs -> RE: One Master (11/8/2007 1:17:55 AM)
|
Dear trainedobedients, Ladies and Gentlemen, I would have to gently disagree with the premise that a Master without a slave, is no longer a Master. It would be like a 'reduction in rank.' I would have to say, that slaves having been owned and now unowned--would be, in my eyes a slave. My reasoning is, though I owned slaves before, in a house and living the lifestyle over 9 years, other relationship as a Master-slave with other slaves that lasted almost as long. I am of the belief that my slave having titled me as a Master in addition to being seen as a Master by my peers; the title was earned and honorably so. I feel the same is with slaves. Am I to loose my title as a Master if my slave perished? Should a slave of mine loose their title of slave, if I perish? For me, slave and or Master is more than a title; it is a level of living a life's choice in a household and for years. I am not talking about weekend warrior situation. I would think learning my art as a Master is a level to which is not subjected to 'rank/title' reduction. I feel slaves learn their art as well. That said, I do believe the spirit of the post; was for those who are beginning their journey to which they have not past beyond the club and or party scene in a dominant-submissive exchange. However, the times have changed in where titles are not always bestowed by peers, ceremony or rituals not always present, as to bear witness that the individual is judged in their eyes--as the individual is Master or slave. Shared ownership of one slave can be rather fun--double Dominance. Wear out one Master, there is a spare. [Chuckles with humor] On a more serious note, joint Masters would communicate with each other and the slave, as to establish the ranking within a household and or in what area of the household rank is relative. Main thing --it is important as a Master, not to confuse one slave or pull them apart from the middle like two dogs fighting over a treat. It boils down to the relationship that an individual is in. It can only be solved from within. I would also hope if a slave felt like the rope in a tug of war and frustrated; to tell the whole lot (be it 1-100 Masters) that there must be more structure in how and who to obey first and down the line. However, should one Master collar a slave and the slave only begged the collar of 'the one' Master--that Master is the only one to be obedient to. That Master should inform the other Masters, if it becomes an issue; that he is the Alpha Master and all other Masters will just have to be served when he is finished or when he offers his slave to serve other Dominants. Just some thoughts. Respectfully submitted for consideration, Lady Hugs
|
|
|
|