CelticPrince
Posts: 3613
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
I may be redundant to some degree. Our Gorean board has also been addressing a similar thread. I'm not sure after reading through this thread rather quickly that I might not be echoing the comments of others, but..........
As you used the term property, I am left to surmise that we are discussing slaves rather than a submissive that might maintain certain conditional rights. The slave is the right and responsibility of the owner. She is to obey and do so without reservation. Absolute obedience is the watch words I favor. But even in the Gorean like context (I heard a rumor we are unmerciful and harsh) an owner might want to considered her nature if he is inspired to own her, completely and absolutely.
In the Army we had an old leadership attribute, “know your men and employ t
hem in accordance with their capabilities”. If I had a man that was claustrophobic it would be ridiculous to utilize him on a tunnel recon. Using this analogy to coincide with the slave girl it should tell us that some girls are more suitable than others for certain activities. A man can be insistent and make a girl do something she is not suited for to demonstrate his dominance over her; then again he might knowing this would damage the psyche of the wench choose to withhold her from the buffet line until a time she might be more suited for consumption. Whichever avenue he feels compelled to traverse is his choice to hold, she is after all his property.
The fact is many girls are in reality not all that well suited straight away for a Gorean type morality; a morality where they must obey no matter the command, a morality where they are more aware of their lust as a woman and that this lust is not a negative and is rather natural, where it is ok that they would be fond of the taste of men rather than simply “a” man. One must remember that it is the societal conditioning that has many females afraid of their inner slut like natures. I will say though, that if it is important to the parties involved that with time and proper guidance no societal stigmas are impossible to overcome, no matter how deeply engrained.
That being said I believe that one or perhaps a few specific girls can be and in fact are what Goreans call “love” slaves. This would represent that “perfect” slave suited ideally for a specific man. Now with this slave a man might be inspired to be rather selfish and frankly who could blame him. If this is the girl that flips his ultimate fancy, well more power to him.
In the end there is nothing wrong or right with sharing, it is a personal preference. As seen in the responses to this thread it is the kink of one and the fear of another. Mastery as the art of ownership over another human is at times more complicated than simply shouting fetch, fuck, lick or suck.
Bul,
a much more thoughtful reply this time around,
What you say about Masters rights are complete, but here on CM so many refer to their D as Master, and it is clear that it is a feel good title only as the fem has no true idea what that makes her. So the thread was a homoginized set of questions.
CP
|
RE: Property = sharing?? - 
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