RE: So, you are a "slave"

RE: So, you are a "slave" (Full Version)

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

Message

MontrealPhoenix -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 11:51:27 AM)
What! You don't give out report cards? How are they supposed to know what skills they have to work on? [:D]

ShiftedJewel -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 11:54:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo This is just my pet peeve here talking, but unless one is owned I don't think one can be a slave. Same why that I cannot be an owner without someone I own. Slave and owner (or it's various titles) are relationship titles. No relationship = no title in my opinion. quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 What does it matter? Unless and until she is owned, she is not a slave. *That's the side of the road I stand on.* And yes, there is the tired old arguement about whether a person is a dominant if they have no submissive... Ok, I have my fire retardent suit ready... slave is a position, just like owner is, or as Tammy said, a relationship title and submissive is a personality, just like I have a dominant personality. I always have that personality but I'm not a mistress until I own a slave. *Jewel* *PS... I feel ya Leatherist, I really do.*

Prinsexx -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 12:01:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 scratches head thoughtfully Hrrrm, ok. So what, exactly, "skills" is it that you think a slave ought to have? For me, at least, the sub/slave terms refer to a mindset, not an activity. I call mine a "slave" because she fits my definition of that. When I give her her progress reports, they don't contain things like "can do activity x". Instead, they say things like, "Focuses on her Master's needs and wants". So what is it exactly that you think a slave ought to be "skilled" at? I would have to argue that "slavery" is not a mindset. "Slavery" is an imposed state, and says nothing about the individual's capacity or willingness to yield or serve. There are many, many 'submissives' who are also focused on their keepers' needs and wants" and they aren't designated as 'slaves'... so what, besides personal preference for mis-using the terminology, distinguishes a 'slave' from a 'submissive'? Calla Firestorm This is a good point. Then with respect i would have to argue that slavery is indeed a mindset.heart intelligence AND/OR an ascribed status, Ascribed status being the social status a person is given from birth or assumes involuntarily later in life. But without the mindset/heart/assumption of role no amount of beating is going to keep the slave enslaved. Therein lies the essential difference between slavery of colonial times and the world of bdsm. Even those who give up rights to release themselves do so voluntarily and copnsensually.

LadyPact -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 12:11:20 PM)
Dang it, Jewel. You stole My thunder. I can't help but agree with all of the people on the thread that said that being a slave is not a self declaration. Then again, I say that about a lot of things. Call yourself a pilot all you want, but unless you've invested yourself to learn how to fly some type of aircraft, sorry, but you're not. It could very well be the case that you haven't had the opportunity yet, and that's fine. Still, I don't think United is going to hire you if you haven't spent any time in the air.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 12:17:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Prinsexx quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW I would have to argue that "slavery" is not a mindset. "Slavery" is an imposed state, and says nothing about the individual's capacity or willingness to yield or serve. There are many, many 'submissives' who are also focused on their keepers' needs and wants" and they aren't designated as 'slaves'... so what, besides personal preference for mis-using the terminology, distinguishes a 'slave' from a 'submissive'? Calla Firestorm This is a good point. Then with respect i would have to argue that slavery is indeed a mindset.heart intelligence AND/OR an ascribed status, Ascribed status being the social status a person is given from birth or assumes involuntarily later in life. But without the mindset/heart/assumption of role no amount of beating is going to keep the slave enslaved. Therein lies the essential difference between slavery of colonial times and the world of bdsm. Even those who give up rights to release themselves do so voluntarily and copnsensually. This is my issue with the whole terminology of 'slavery'. You are right that no amount of beating is going to keep a BDSM 'slave' 'enslaved'. However, in true slavery, beating, starvation, threatening of family members, hobbling, chaining, mutilation, etc., were used effectively to keep slaves (who did not have the slightest interest in remaining slaves) contained and force them to continue to labor, despite their complete unwillingness to comply. I see slavery as an externally forced, non-consentual process. The mindset that you describe, Prin (which I completely recognize, and truly value) is not the mindset of a slave, however -- it is the mindset of a conscious individual who lives in service by -choice-... that doesn't describe a slave. Historically, slaves have been unhappy, unwilling participants in their own servitude. They have been compelled through race or social/religious background to work against their will for another human being. They were typically either broken, and completely devoid of spirit or will, or they were looking for a way to escape their slavery and live as free men. I don't see the mindset of slavery (in particular slavery that one did not struggle to be free of) as conducive to healthy mind or spirit -- a slave with spirit was a slave who -fought- hir slavery. In yielding completely, if one wishes to be compared to a slave, one would either be compared to a broken, will-less, spirit-less being OR to a slave who had been a hereditary slave through so many generations that xhe had no idea that there was any such thing possible as a life outside of slavery.... again, not a healthy spirit, but broken through multiple generations. The closest mindset to that of the kind of submission I have always attributed to yielding from the core seems to be found most often in those with a "calling" -- priests, shamanic healers, medicine men/women, mediums -- where they voluntarily yield their mind/and spirit to their diety, and will their body and its work to their community. Calla Firestorm

ShiftedJewel -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 12:24:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact Dang it, Jewel. You stole My thunder. I can't help but agree with all of the people on the thread that said that being a slave is not a self declaration. Then again, I say that about a lot of things. Call yourself a pilot all you want, but unless you've invested yourself to learn how to fly some type of aircraft, sorry, but you're not. It could very well be the case that you haven't had the opportunity yet, and that's fine. Still, I don't think United is going to hire you if you haven't spent any time in the air. *But I wanna be a pilot!!! And I'm sure I could do that as soon as I get over my fear of flying!! Does a remote control plane count? Not that I can fly one of those either...* *The whole time I was typing that I was thinking "wait... this is collarme... words don't mean anything, or they mean what you want them to mean!!"* *That's ok, call me a labeler... I don't care... lol* *Jewel* *Jewel*

sublizzie -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 12:24:16 PM)
Don't pilots need proven "air time" before they are licensed? I am not a slave but I have slave-like tendancies. That means that I could become a slave given the right owner. I tend toward slave-like behaviors whether I am owned or not, which tends to not be healthy for me. It makes it easier if I see myself as a slave and recognize that only my Dominant has a right to use me in that way. It's a protective measure I've learned to take to keep myself safer.

LadyPact -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 12:31:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sublizzie Don't pilots need proven "air time" before they are licensed? I am not a slave but I have slave-like tendancies. That means that I could become a slave given the right owner. I tend toward slave-like behaviors whether I am owned or not, which tends to not be healthy for me. It makes it easier if I see myself as a slave and recognize that only my Dominant has a right to use me in that way. It's a protective measure I've learned to take to keep myself safer. I would hope they require air time. I wouldn't know for certain. I'm not a pilot. Just a Dominant. Still, in effect, the point was made. Whether it's time in the air, or time in service, there's a difference between hoping, wishing, dreaming, and doing.

IvyMorgan -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 1:28:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist The net is a wonderful place to be whatever you want to be-even when you are not. [:D] Yep. I think most of the people who are who they say they are have met someone on the net who isn't what they sau they are. I should imagine the people who aren't what they say they are have also met people who aren't who they say they are. I wanna be the fly on the wall when the two 40 year old male 20something lesbians meet up. As it is, trying to keep track of who I really am is hard enough without having to me a fake someone too. More power to those who can juggle the real them and the fake one enough to keep track of who is who and what is what and so on. Smiles

leadership527 -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 1:36:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW I would have to argue that "slavery" is not a mindset. "Slavery" is an imposed state, and says nothing about the individual's capacity or willingness to yield or serve. There are many, many 'submissives' who are also focused on their keepers' needs and wants" and they aren't designated as 'slaves'... so what, besides personal preference for mis-using the terminology, distinguishes a 'slave' from a 'submissive'? Yeah... except for I'm not going to get into a discussion of the sub/slave divide. Since there is no actual definition (applicable to the BDSM environment), then the term cannot be mis-used. I call mine a slave because she fits my definition of such. That wasn't, I thought, the point of the original question. I thought we were discussing what "skills" a slave ought to have.

softness -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 2:12:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IvyMorgan quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist The net is a wonderful place to be whatever you want to be-even when you are not. [:D] Yep. I think most of the people who are who they say they are have met someone on the net who isn't what they sau they are. I should imagine the people who aren't what they say they are have also met people who aren't who they say they are. I wanna be the fly on the wall when the two 40 year old male 20something lesbians meet up. As it is, trying to keep track of who I really am is hard enough without having to me a fake someone too. More power to those who can juggle the real them and the fake one enough to keep track of who is who and what is what and so on. Smiles knows you are a fake ... i thought that as i sat having lunch yesterday ... this girl who is exactly who she says she is ... is well ... totally fake ... it was the cake that did it ... a twue slave would have baked a black cake ... not a pink one.

CruelDesires -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 2:27:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: opposingtwilight -frowns- Ok, you're right. I and my 20-something friends who also identify as slave are jokes. We're just here to yank your chain. We show off our perky titties and our cute round bottoms and in the end we have no real interest in finding someone who literally compells us to utterly submit to their every whim. Wait, what? Hmmm. Please feel free to send me pictures and videos of above mentioned items so I can judge your "slaveness" myself. [8D] C-D

Prinsexx -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 3:17:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW I see slavery as an externally forced, non-consentual process. The mindset that you describe, Prin (which I completely recognize, and truly value) is not the mindset of a slave, however -- it is the mindset of a conscious individual who lives in service by -choice-... that doesn't describe a slave. Historically, slaves have been unhappy, unwilling participants in their own servitude. Yes but we are talking bdsm here aren't we? or did i miss the point? There's simply no way that: a. i can, even if i wanted to, be retroactive enogh to travel back in time. b. agree with any form of enforced slave labour, whichever historical references justify a modern definition c. wish to leave one of the three tenets of bdsm out of my personal equation ie consensuality d. use and justify a definition of slavery which condones or superimposes any one or all three of the above upom another or myself It seems that the schools of thouhght have conveniently dichotomisd themselves across orientation lines. Whilst those who are in bdsm slavery and/or wish to be/continue to be so are in the majority simply stating from their experience that they have a slave mindset and a slaves heart. My private mail justifies that i can make statements over and above personal opinion on this one. Whilst those of the dominant orientation wish to insist that it is something they are training, shaping and imposing upon their submissives. Interesting that those who appear to and to want to make slavery somehow an aquisition of authrity need have less fears; there are an abundance of willing slaves wishing indeed begging to transfer their authoprity out of consensuality. Edited to add, as an after thought so as to keep this on thread: isn't that what a slave 'ought' to bring to the dynamic? It was never a question, ever, of being told what i 'ought to do' my slavery that is. 'Ought' to do is a modal state of being, a kind of ought to but never does, ought to but doesn't, ought to but won't, ought to but can't and so on....no ought to whatsoever in my eperience.

ResidentSadist -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 4:23:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KMsAngel temporary hijack I just want to tell her how much I charge to “service” someone like that so just for .. uh.. curiosity's sake, how much do you charge? [sm=angel.gif] For you, I would be negotiable. quote: ORIGINAL: camille65 Hahaha ohboy I was about to ask RS the same thing! I have a really big change jar on my dresser.............. Group rates are available… I play well with others. It even says so in the brochure.

ExSteelAgain -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 4:47:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist I have to wonder at times. People who post all about how much a slave they are in a profile. I'd have to study the specific profiles you are talking about and exactly what they said.

Emperor1956 -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 5:41:28 PM)
FR, posted after reading about 1/2 of this thread. OK. Lets see if I can boil this down to a few truths. 1. There is no real slavery in the world in which those reading and posting live (my apologies if you happen to be in one of the countries of the world which legalize human trafficing. To the best of my knowledge, that does not include Great Britian, any country in the EU, the United States, or Canada (although I am uncertain about Newfoundland). "Real slavery" being a system (well identified in such varied cultures as Ancient China, Ancient Japan, Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome and whatever you call the universe reflected in the Jewish Bible) in which human beings are property. Therefore a person who says they are a "slave" is -- by definition -- accepting a self-imposed construct. The "slave's" owner ALSO is accepting a self-imposed construct, for He/She has no real title to the "slave" any more than He/She has legal title to a rainbow. If the so-called "slave" chose to "unslave" themselves, all they would have to do is contact a law enforcement authority. The emancipation from the so-called Master would be fast and likely brutal. 2. That was a joke, up there...about Newfoundland. 3. Older people are often jealous of younger people's appearance, exhuberance and freedom. Younger people are often jealous of older people's wisdom, wealth and power. Each group uses their attributes to get an advantage over the other group. Snarkiness, however, is not limited to either age group. (This truth is found in D/s groups and swingers clubs. It is also found -- not exclusively -- in church leadership, military organizations, sororities and fraternities, corporations and plumbers' unions. Big surprise, huh?) 4. Someone pissed in Leatherist's wheaties, and they are soggy and smelly and he is NOT a happy boy. 5. Several regular posters on CM have long-standing grudges, gripes and snits with other regular posters, and when any sort of mildly polarizing discussion takes place, these folk are absolutely unable to NOT INVOKE THE PAST and write as if the perceived wrong -- which may be years old -- was committed THIS MORNING. You can usually rely on them to let the gloves slip a bit after the first or second post by their "target". Oh, and (This truth is found in D/s groups and swingers clubs. It is also found -- not exclusively -- in church leadership, military organizations, sororities and fraternities, corporations and plumbers' unions. Big surprise, huh?) Have a pleasant summer evening, all. E.

Leatherist -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 6:39:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ShiftedJewel quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo This is just my pet peeve here talking, but unless one is owned I don't think one can be a slave. Same why that I cannot be an owner without someone I own. Slave and owner (or it's various titles) are relationship titles. No relationship = no title in my opinion. quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 What does it matter? Unless and until she is owned, she is not a slave. *That's the side of the road I stand on.* And yes, there is the tired old arguement about whether a person is a dominant if they have no submissive... Ok, I have my fire retardent suit ready... slave is a position, just like owner is, or as Tammy said, a relationship title and submissive is a personality, just like I have a dominant personality. I always have that personality but I'm not a mistress until I own a slave. *Jewel* *PS... I feel ya Leatherist, I really do.* When you talk about "service", that does involve some sort of a useful discipline that benefits the one being served in some manner. "Slave" in the context of a consenting relationship is a mislabel. Nothing more than a dramatic conceit. So lets be a little objective here, and stash the pink unicorns and powafool wowiows in the closet for a bit. Forget the flash and drama, let's look at functionality. Let's say somebody goes for a job interview as a gardener for instance. Person walks in and states "I am a GARDENER!!!" The potential boss asks for refferences from a past employer. Sorry, no past employer. Can you take me to a garden you are caring for to show me your work then? Nope, there is no garden. So exactly what are your qualifications for this job? I read about it and had fantasies of being a gardener, stop being so mean to me!!!!! Okk............................................[&:]

Leatherist -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 6:43:54 PM)
You don't care? Excellent, I 'm sure another thread will amuse you more then.[;)]

julietsierra -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 6:51:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist quote: ORIGINAL: ShiftedJewel quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo This is just my pet peeve here talking, but unless one is owned I don't think one can be a slave. Same why that I cannot be an owner without someone I own. Slave and owner (or it's various titles) are relationship titles. No relationship = no title in my opinion. quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 What does it matter? Unless and until she is owned, she is not a slave. *That's the side of the road I stand on.* And yes, there is the tired old arguement about whether a person is a dominant if they have no submissive... Ok, I have my fire retardent suit ready... slave is a position, just like owner is, or as Tammy said, a relationship title and submissive is a personality, just like I have a dominant personality. I always have that personality but I'm not a mistress until I own a slave. *Jewel* *PS... I feel ya Leatherist, I really do.* When you talk about "service", that does involve some sort of a useful discipline that benefits the one being served in some manner. "Slave" in the context of a consenting relationship is a mislabel. Nothing more than a dramatic conceit. So lets be a little objective here, and stash the pink unicorns and powafool wowiows in the closet for a bit. Forget the flash and drama, let's look at functionality. Let's say somebody goes for a job interview as a gardener for instance. Person walks in and states "I am a GARDENER!!!" The potential boss asks for refferences from a past employer. Sorry, no past employer. Can you take me to a garden you are caring for to show me your work then? Nope, there is no garden. So exactly what are your qualifications for this job? I read about it and had fantasies of being a gardener, stop being so mean to me!!!!! Okk............................................[&:] Well... ok He wanted someone who would do exactly what he wanted - regardless of the situation he put them in. He wanted someone he could count on to be there when she said she would and not be there when she said she wouldn't. He wanted someone whose proclivities or at least the willingness to try out his proclivities matched his own. He wanted someone who understood where he was coming from, where he was going and why he was doing what he was doing. He wanted someone who would do all these things and more. In short, he wanted someone who matched what he was looking for to take care of what he wanted taken care of when he wanted it taken care of. And he wanted it all with no argument - not because she was unthinking, but because when she thought about it, she was more than willing to give things a try and she really wanted to submit - on his terms, not hers. And well... I guess that would be me. juliet

Leatherist -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/28/2008 6:56:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: julietsierra quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist quote: ORIGINAL: ShiftedJewel quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo This is just my pet peeve here talking, but unless one is owned I don't think one can be a slave. Same why that I cannot be an owner without someone I own. Slave and owner (or it's various titles) are relationship titles. No relationship = no title in my opinion. quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 What does it matter? Unless and until she is owned, she is not a slave. *That's the side of the road I stand on.* And yes, there is the tired old arguement about whether a person is a dominant if they have no submissive... Ok, I have my fire retardent suit ready... slave is a position, just like owner is, or as Tammy said, a relationship title and submissive is a personality, just like I have a dominant personality. I always have that personality but I'm not a mistress until I own a slave. *Jewel* *PS... I feel ya Leatherist, I really do.* When you talk about "service", that does involve some sort of a useful discipline that benefits the one being served in some manner. "Slave" in the context of a consenting relationship is a mislabel. Nothing more than a dramatic conceit. So lets be a little objective here, and stash the pink unicorns and powafool wowiows in the closet for a bit. Forget the flash and drama, let's look at functionality. Let's say somebody goes for a job interview as a gardener for instance. Person walks in and states "I am a GARDENER!!!" The potential boss asks for refferences from a past employer. Sorry, no past employer. Can you take me to a garden you are caring for to show me your work then? Nope, there is no garden. So exactly what are your qualifications for this job? I read about it and had fantasies of being a gardener, stop being so mean to me!!!!! Okk............................................[&:] Well... ok He wanted someone who would do exactly what he wanted - regardless of the situation he put them in. He wanted someone he could count on to be there when she said she would and not be there when she said she wouldn't. He wanted someone whose proclivities or at least the willingness to try out his proclivities matched his own. He wanted someone who understood where he was coming from, where he was going and why he was doing what he was doing. He wanted someone who would do all these things and more. In short, he wanted someone who matched what he was looking for to take care of what he wanted taken care of when he wanted it taken care of. And he wanted it all with no argument - not because she was unthinking, but because when she thought about it, she was more than willing to give things a try and she really wanted to submit - on his terms, not hers. And well... I guess that would be me. juliet And you met the qualifications for the job. Only the details were left to be sorted out. [;)]

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875