RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=-

RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (Full Version)

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

Message

IrishMist -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 6:26:25 AM)
quote: Why do we care? Bingo. That's what I keep wondering. Why does someone care what another chooses to call themselves. It boggles my mind sometimes the way people keep insisting that it's important that they 'understand' the reasons of why another chooses to label themselves a certain way. Seriously...who the fuck cares?

RavenMuse -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 6:35:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist quote: Why do we care? Bingo. That's what I keep wondering. Why does someone care what another chooses to call themselves. It boggles my mind sometimes the way people keep insisting that it's important that they 'understand' the reasons of why another chooses to label themselves a certain way. Seriously...who the fuck cares? Yep.... for one thing the terms are rather subjective, for another... Can't speak for other folks here but I know what I am and I don't need validation from anyone else, especialy not a bunch of pixels on the screen, which is effectivly all that many here are to Me. Personaly whatever label someone wants to use, good for them... I'm only really bothered when it either impacts Me (Such as when looking at potentials with someone then I will also be looking for whay they have chosen the labels they have as that tells Me quite a bit about how they think and in turn about who they are) or when I am asked for My opinion.... which maybe at odds with their self-label.... that some random chooses to call themself sub/slave/Dom/power ranger/whatever doesn't matter to Me.... but wether I happen to see them in such a light is quite another and frankly should not be of much importance to them unless they have some stake in what I think of them.

OmegaG -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 6:42:46 AM)
FR I'm reading this discussing on the heels of finishing "The Screwtape Letters" by CS Lewis. One of the arguments that he suggests in his book to cause scisms withing humans which will lead to more of them falling is the notition of Equality and how easy it is to undermine equality when you take into account people's personal perspecives. The prime example he used is narrow definitions of what is better and what is right. The man who doesn't eat a hot dog is too highbrow, the woman who doesn't wear the lates trends is an old-fashioned prude.... By suggesting that if someone doesn't follow your formula for slavery (which I think won't be worth it's weight in salt in a court of law) that they are just playing. To me this strikes of insecurity, a way of bettering one's opionion by discrediting others choices and paths to happiness. Screwtape would be proud.

Padriag -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 6:45:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist quote: Why do we care? Bingo. That's what I keep wondering. Why does someone care what another chooses to call themselves. It boggles my mind sometimes the way people keep insisting that it's important that they 'understand' the reasons of why another chooses to label themselves a certain way. Seriously...who the fuck cares? I don't, you don't, Raven obviously doesn't... but just as obviously, quite a few do care. My question is, why do they care? What makes it so important to them? I cannot help but wonder, have they ever considered their own reasons?

Padriag -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 7:01:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OmegaG One of the arguments that he suggests in his book to cause scisms withing humans which will lead to more of them falling is the notition of Equality and how easy it is to undermine equality when you take into account people's personal perspecives. Not to mention personal achievements, qualities, characteristics, abilities, etc. All that, taken as a whole, pretty much destroys the notion of Equality... we are surely not equal in any way. But that is a statement that makes rather a lot of people very uncomfortable. I wonder too how much a role that plays in the pattern of questioning, challenging and debating who is and isn't a slave or master... is it really questioning who deserves to be "special" or unequal or different? quote: By suggesting that if someone doesn't follow your formula for slavery (which I think won't be worth it's weight in salt in a court of law) that they are just playing. To me this strikes of insecurity, a way of bettering one's opionion by discrediting others choices and paths to happiness. Or perhaps just seeking validation for what they are doing, approval of the group... perhaps not so much that they are better... but are they accepted for who they believe they are?

BRNaughtyAngel -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 7:08:57 AM)
He is many things to me....... lover, partner, friend, playmate, teacher, top....... Master. I am many things to Him..... lover, partner, friend, bottom, chef, driver, secretary, assistant, playmate, fucktoy, bottom........ Slave. We chose to be in a relationship with each other that encompasses many things, but ultimately, He leads, I follow. He is my Master and I am His slave. How anyone else in the world views our relationship or how we label ourselves means nothing to us. Within our own local community there are so many varieties of individuals and relationship dynamics, you need an organizational chart to keep them all sorta kinda relatively straight. But ultimately, who cares how others label themselves? Paint yourself purple and call yourself Barney if it makes ya happy. [sm=waves.gif]

OmegaG -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 7:10:56 AM)
I'm not very good at validation. The point that CS Lewis was making was that this notion of equality is presented to humans as good-- the it is desired and beneficial, but in reality it is evil and does more harm then uplifting the masses to a utopia. The thoughts tumbling in my brain pre-caffiene this morning were putting the Letters and this post together as an illustration that the chest thumpers that try to encourage a status quo aren't really offering clarity or joy, but are stirring the pot of confusion and snobbery. I'll go drink more Coke now.

IrishMist -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 7:14:09 AM)
LOL. I can remember back to when this was all new to me. I had very specific ideas and definitions of what submission, submissive, and slavery were; what’s more, I was more than willing to debate and argue them till death. It took me not long to realize that no matter how hard I tried, or how much I wanted it to be so….that things were NOT black and white. It took me a bit longer than that to come to the realization that it did not matter if another agreed with me or not; all that mattered was that it was understood that things were not always black and white…I learned a lot about people and relationships once I accepted that.

hopelesslyInvo -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 7:14:57 AM)
quote: Why do we care? i'll take "more than obvious" for 200 please. budew dudew dudew dudew dud doo doo dewwww~~~ "a general inquiry that doesn't need validation or purpose as a motivator for asking the question in the first place stems from this..." buzz "what is human curiosity?" correct!

Archer -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 7:18:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Maya2001 No lifestyle slave will ever be true property .... they can consent to stay but can also walk away whenever they choose and you have no say or legal rights in that matter should they choose to leave you , that is one area of consentual slavery that you as a master will never have control over, ..therefore true legal consentual slavery is impossible because you cannot force them to stay in bond to you ... so it boils down to roleplay heck even boyfriends/girlfriend will get tatoos to represent a union between them so as a it does not mean ownership or mean they have a TPE relationship and as Celeste pointed out ..you cannot have legal guardianship over a minor or an adult who is mentally incapacitated but not a slave. So neither of your qualifiers can be used as proof of lifestyle slaves After the last time someone used this idea to try to call all consensual slavery just extended role play I came to the basic conclussion that those that want so much to knock down off the imagined pedistal, those who do not consider it as such, are guilty of wanting sameness from other people. They can't deal with the idea that anybody might be different or special because that somhow reduces them in value (certainly a self percieved reduction in value since what anybody else is or is not effects their value almost none). But anyhow on to the real idea I wanted to discuss. The idea that a consensual slave cannot be real in the classic definition of slave. I would contend that the legal right to walk, certainly runs counter to the idea that we can have consensual slavery. However because it does make sense on the surface I have looked for historic references to consensual slavery. There have been consensual slaves for centuries, they are mentioned in the Bible, and they are mentioned in literature. Life Debt slavery being one example, "You saved my life and therefore by the standards of my society I owe you that part of my life that I would not have had unless you had done so." It had at the time the backing of society but still itwas a consensual slavery, nothing other than the person's honor and social preassure held them to the idea. Consensual slavery after a period of enforced slavery, mentioned in Dueteronomy in the Old Testament. Reference that Jews could only hold other Jews as slave for a period of 7 years after which time they must be freed. However if the slave begged to remain your slave they were to be marked as such with a pierced ear and then they would be slave for life. (this kinda falls into that line of thought a few have mentioned here already but crosses the "right to walk" line.) Lastly I contend that the idea of an honor slave a slave bound to you by their honor would met the current legal standard of having the right to walk, but being held in place by their own need to honor their agreement. Much along the same line as the life debt slave. But anyhow the idea that slavery must be held in place by force of law rings hollow to me. Why would law be the only legitimate force to hold someone to their condition. Do we not talk about many other more elevated things than law telling us what is the "right thing to do"? So I contend that there are models of consensual slavery that have existed being called slavery for thousands of years, that were held in place not so much by law as by personal values and honor of the slave. Slaves are in fact special (different), but the things that make them special are not universally valued. Special has developed a connotation that it means better than as if anything different must be more valuable, when we know that different does not always mean better for everyone.

Stephann -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 7:28:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Validation from who? From you? Some guy on the Internet who has come here to set the standards for who is "real" and who isn't "role-playing"? That's kind of arrogant, don't you think? I do I do I do![/bold] quote: ORIGINAL: Archer Slaves are in fact special (different), but the things that make them special are not universally valued. Special has developed a connotation that it means better than as if anything different must be more valuable, when we know that different does not always mean better for everyone. Brilliant! A HMMWV can be purchased for the same money as a Mercedes. The type of person who desires and actually purchases a Mercedes isn't likely to be the same type who actually purchases a genuine M998. It doesn't mean one is more valuable than the other; it says a lot more about the buyer than the vehicle itself. And here I thought this was going to be another boring, pedantic discussion about fantasy verses reality. Boy am I dissappointed [;)] Stephan

apettiger -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 7:48:02 AM)
i was sold as a child by a family member and used as a fighting girl (human trafficking is alive and well in the good ol' U.S.A.) i WAS a REAL slave. i was beaten and starved, forced to fight the only people who showed me any kindness. forced to witness other girls being mistreated and abused, moved from one area to another to avoid detection and had to fake my own death to avoid a real one in the pitt (fighting girls do not usually live to be my age). the difference between a REAL slave and a D/s slave is a D/s slave is loved and cared for and enters into that condition willingly and with open eyes. a REAL slave is used until they can no longer preform the duty they were purchased for, then discarded, either through death or being sold to someone else who could care less about them as a human being. they are abducted and forced to preform for whoever had the money to purchase them. there is NOTHING consentual about what happens to them. for a REAL slave there is no love, no comfort and no care, other than what it takes to keep them in preformance condition. for those of Y/you out there who will say that human trafficking is something that happens in other countries if it happens at all, i would suggest Y/you inquire at Y/your local law enforcement office and ask about any recent cases of human trafficking they may have on file or be aware of.

leakylee -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 8:14:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Maya2001 No lifestyle slave will ever be true property .... they can consent to stay but can also walk away whenever they choose and you have no say or legal rights in that matter should they choose to leave you , that is one area of consentual slavery that you as a master will never have control over, ..therefore true legal consentual slavery is impossible because you cannot force them to stay in bond to you ... so it boils down to roleplay heck even boyfriends/girlfriend will get tatoos to represent a union between them so as a it does not mean ownership or mean they have a TPE relationship and as Celeste pointed out ..you cannot have legal guardianship over a minor or an adult who is mentally incapacitated but not a slave. So neither of your qualifiers can be used as proof of lifestyle slaves Statements of this nature have caused me to doubt myself and my actions for nearly three years. I requested release.It was denied, until he got ready. It wasnt the healthiest situation, but you know what? My word, my pledge, my love kept my ass right where it was. It didnt matter that I was socially free to walk away at anytime. Until that bond was severed as it should be, I was His. That word consentual locks us into our agreements. That is what seperated me from just role playing. Call me old fashioned, but a person's word means a great deal more than any legal right or document. lee

Justme696 -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 8:17:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leakylee quote: ORIGINAL: Maya2001 No lifestyle slave will ever be true property .... they can consent to stay but can also walk away whenever they choose and you have no say or legal rights in that matter should they choose to leave you , that is one area of consentual slavery that you as a master will never have control over, ..therefore true legal consentual slavery is impossible because you cannot force them to stay in bond to you ... so it boils down to roleplay heck even boyfriends/girlfriend will get tatoos to represent a union between them so as a it does not mean ownership or mean they have a TPE relationship and as Celeste pointed out ..you cannot have legal guardianship over a minor or an adult who is mentally incapacitated but not a slave. So neither of your qualifiers can be used as proof of lifestyle slaves Statements of this nature have caused me to doubt myself and my actions for nearly three years. I requested release.It was denied, until he got ready. It wasnt the healthiest situation, but you know what? My word, my pledge, my love kept my ass right where it was. It didnt matter that I was socially free to walk away at anytime. Until that bond was severed as it should be, I was His. That word consentual locks us into our agreements. That is what seperated me from just role playing. Call me old fashioned, but a person's word means a great deal more than any legal right or document. lee I think what the previous poster meant was..you always could have walked away. But your honour made you stay, which is lovely...still...if you wanted...you could have walked out of the door.

Archer -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 8:26:03 AM)
The question though remains should the legal right to walk be the standard we hang slavery on? Is the legal standard the be all end all of the discussion? We both are contending that it is not and should not be the definative, and in my case I provided historic models that it has not always been nessisary to meet the definition.

Leatherist -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 8:32:15 AM)
If a person wants to remain in the role of a slave without a lot of overt cooercion-that's fine. When it comes from manipulation, conditioning, (stockholm syndrome) abuse, etc..it makes me want to tear out the guts of the one doing it-and slowly strangle the bastard with them. And that is my happy little viewpoint on the whole matter-enough said. [:D]

subtee -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 8:34:03 AM)
If discussions/arguments with discordant semantics at their core were banned here for a day we would probably all hear the crickets chirp...

leakylee -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 8:54:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Archer The question though remains should the legal right to walk be the standard we hang slavery on? Is the legal standard the be all end all of the discussion? We both are contending that it is not and should not be the definative, and in my case I provided historic models that it has not always been nessisary to meet the definition. Thank you Archer. I wasnt attempting to argue the fact that I could have simply walked away. That is a foregone conclusion. Leatherist, you have a point with the manipulation and cohersion. I wouldnt go so far as to throw in Stolckholm. I guess my point comes in from another side. There is a vow of sorts. I wouldnt equate my own expeirence to marriage, but at the same time that vow of ownership and property is as valued to me as any legal ceremony. More so in fact. I am pledging everything that I am into a sole body's care, that isnt a light decision. It also isnt one that can be tossed easily. To simply say that any of us can walk away is to easy, to simple. Then what would be the point? i will have to come back to this later. my washer just exploded and i gotta head to miami. have a great weekend lee

Poetryinpain -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 9:10:19 AM)
"Why do we care?" We care because as human beings we are a social animal, and we want to *belong. Since our inclinations toward BDSM make us feel we don't belong in 'general' society, we try to make an ordered society of everyone* whose 'not belonging' matches our general way of not belonging. It's kind of like herding cats. pip, happy to be an individual

gypsygrl -> RE: -=RL Slavery vs Role-play Slavery=- (4/9/2008 9:13:42 AM)
quote: We care because as human beings we are a social animal, and we want to *belong. Since our inclinations toward BDSM make us feel we don't belong in 'general' society, we try to make an ordered society of everyone* whose 'not belonging' matches our general way of not belonging. It's kind of like herding cats. Brilliant. :)

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875