RE: So, you are a "slave"

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

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

Message

softness -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 3:05:35 PM)
This is not an attack .. merely looking to clarify something. RS ... are you saying that in the example of nipple piercing a girl who refuses to have it done, or enters into "slavery" with a limit upon it is a submissive a girl who has no degree of control whatsoever on the situation is a slave I don't require a long answer .. just a little clarity for my own understanding

LaTigresse -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 3:05:44 PM)
Ohhhhhhh, now we are dragging out the "real" and "true" bullshit are we? You know, Treasure and I have agreed on very few things over the course of time I've been coming here. BUT, anyone that waltzes their hiney in here claiming that their way is the only real true way.......I have to call bullshit on. It is arrogant and rediculous. Not to mention screaming of insecurities. The reality is that your views on your idea of TPE are probably very much like my own. However, I refuse to tell anyone else that their way, just because it is my way, is invalid.

LaTigresse -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 3:09:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse Done beating your chest yet? nope... but I will give the kids a break for now. /schools out And yanno, that is really condescending and probably beneath you.

poisonedprogress -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 3:10:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact Which is exactly what I said in the first place. In order for a person to be a slave, there must be an M. There is no self-proclamation. So there is no such thing as an unowned slave? quote: You answered this for yourself, when you said participants (plural) rather than participant (singular). What do you call an unowned slave then?

poisonedprogress -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 3:17:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist She didn't say "no", she said "That said, I wouldn't let you pierce my nipples either." If she said no she could have had a nice whipping and pay recompense. If she wasn’t in control, he could pierce her nipples anyway. But this satatement is made by a mind that is IN CONTROL and that is not a slave mindset. No slave has the ability think these words “wouldn't let you”. Wouldn't let you... what?

IvyMorgan -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 3:30:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist She didn't say "no", she said "That said, I wouldn't let you pierce my nipples either." If she said no she could have had a nice whipping and pay recompense. If she wasn’t in control, he could pierce her nipples anyway. But this satatement is made by a mind that is IN CONTROL and that is not a slave mindset. No slave has the ability think these words “wouldn't let you”. I did, I thought I wouldn't let people do things all the time, and I fought them over it. Doesn't mean I got to stop them doing it. Doesn't mean I didn't get hurt when I said it. Perhaps I still had a little spirit left in me, who knows. quote: Jesus people… are you so blind the mindset of slavery or what TPE means and so deluded and competitive in your ego that you defend this instead of helping her onto the correct path? I understand that different people have different definitions of TPE. I understand, I think, what yours is. I understand that there are other definitions than yours that are equally valid. I have lived TPE, I never, ever want to do it again. I've been a slave, and again, never want to go back there again. The "correct path" is whatever takes her to a place of fulfillment for her and her Owner. It may not be the same as the correct path for you, but as long as she is fulfilled, it's the correct way. quote: There is nothing wrong with being either a slave or a sub missive unless you categorize yourself poorly and try to have the wrong type of relationship with wrong people for the wrong reasons. Erm, no. There is nothing wrong with sticking whatever label you want on yourself as long as you explain clearly what it means and other accept that the definition of the lable is going to subtly alter depending on the person who is wearing it. quote: Do you guys think that there is some competition between slaves or subs? Do you think a slave is a lowly doormat? Or that a slave is somehow more than a sub? It is apples and oranges. Being submissive does not lead to become a slave anymore than being vanilla leads to being a submissive. I certainly wasn't a doormat as a slave, and am definitly not one now when I identify as a sub. But some slaves and subs are doormats and that's what works for them. More power to them for being happy. I don't think anyone is trying to tell you subs are better/worse than slaves, merely that your definition, although it works for you, excludes other peoples' definitions, which work for them, and that all the definitions, clearly defined as they are, are equally valid as long as they work for the people using them.

poisonedprogress -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 3:39:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IvyMorgan ...your definition, although it works for you, excludes other peoples' definitions, which work for them, and that all the definitions, clearly defined as they are, are equally valid as long as they work for the people using them. Well said.

IvyMorgan -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 3:44:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: poisonedprogress quote: ORIGINAL: IvyMorgan ...your definition, although it works for you, excludes other peoples' definitions, which work for them, and that all the definitions, clearly defined as they are, are equally valid as long as they work for the people using them. Well said. smiles Thank you.

ResidentSadist -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 3:45:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse Done beating your chest yet? nope... but I will give the kids a break for now. /schools out And yanno, that is really condescending and probably beneath you. Dear LaTigresse, Thank you for your polite comment and it would normally be below me as I usually take the high road. However, the “kids” replying in this thread are so clueless and so highly opinionated; it truly has been a “schooling” for them. This schooling has come from many of our well respected, highly informed and well grounded fellow forum members. I took the hard nose approach to put an edge on the point and cut through some of the PC BS. Thinking like you have control and “wouldn’t let” your Master do something is not a subordinate mindset. It is not disobeying an order, it is thinking from a position of control and that is D/s negotiated submission not slavery. An enlisted person would never think to “allow” an order… they obey or disobey. It is a very clear distinctly different mindset. A mismatch in relationship roles, styles or motives is disastrous. Imagine the Dom trying to humiliate an exhibitionist by telling her to strip? What a flop that would be. Now try and navigate and communicate your love in a mismatch like that… a disaster waiting to happen I tell you! There is nothing wrong with either exhibitionism or humiliation anymore so than there is with being either a slave or a submissive. There is no right and wrong about it. However, a spade is a spade, to call it otherwise, is to use the wrong tool at the wrong place and time. So, I make this reappearance and these further comments clarifying my quip in honor of your polite and correct statement. Thank you for your attention. Best Wishes, Kalon Eric

LATEXBABY64 -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 3:46:16 PM)
i think anyone can be anything but are charector the core of what we are can never change only behavior how we approch things how we learn how we see things in simple way like red is red blue is blue some things are constant values morals and ehtics which do you hold ear to (Opeople aways have a choice to do what is right or what is easy) Harry potter

CruelDesires -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 3:52:58 PM)
I want to be a head of lettuce named Ralph. "Re-Run" C-D

IvyMorgan -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 4:06:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist Dear LaTigresse, Thank you for your polite comment and it would normally be below me as I usually take the high road. However, the “kids” replying in this thread are so clueless and so highly opinionated; it truly has been a “schooling” for them. This schooling has come from many of our well respected, highly informed and well grounded fellow forum members. I took the hard nose approach to put an edge on the point and cut through some of the PC BS. Am I one of the "kids". I don't mind being opinionated, but clueless implies a lack of experience/world awareness, and I would question that adjective when applied to myself. So would most people who know my past. Yes, this thread has "schooled" me, in the fact that I appreciated openminded-ness highly in a discussion, otherwise it is simply butting heads with no opportunity for personal development or growth. I would be interested to know if the "well respected...forum members" are those who agree with you, and the "kids" are those who don't, or if the distinction runs along other lines. quote: Thinking like you have control and “wouldn’t let” your Master do something is not a subordinate mindset. It is not disobeying an order, it is thinking from a position of control and that is D/s negotiated submission not slavery. An enlisted person would never think to “allow” an order… they obey or disobey. It is a very clear distinctly different mindset. I always have control, whatever situation I am in, I have control of myself, my actions, my mind, my thoughts. I can choose how I respond to a stimuli, I can choose to take something lying down, or I can fight it, I can perform an action with reluctance, or with grace and flair. I can give an awful, dull, boring speach, or I can be stimulating, lively and engaging. Maybe I just wasn't a very good slave, but, the Ones who owned and trained me never complained much. And I certainly was never frequently disciplined. There are still things I will not "let" people do to me. This does not mean that I will not accept the fact that they can force me to do them. I am subordinate, they decide what I do and what happens to me, ultimately. But, I always, always have control and a choice. Such is the nature of consent, and being human.

Lockit -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 4:14:13 PM)
Wow... I have missed this thread... just catching the last couple of pages. I don't know who is who or what is what... but when one steps into a room and finds insults and name calling, rather than intelligent debate... one does wonder who the teacher is and who hired them. Wow...

ResidentSadist -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 4:14:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CruelDesires I want to be a head of lettuce named Ralph. "Re-Run" C-D With the power of vested in me by caged slaves and bleeding masochist everywhere I hereby dub thee: Resident Re Run [:)]

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 4:18:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CruelDesires I want to be a head of lettuce named Ralph. "Re-Run" C-D =I= want to be a pair of twisted knickers made out of fabric covered with pictures of Twisted Sister! CFB

LadyPact -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 5:11:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: poisonedprogress quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact Which is exactly what I said in the first place. In order for a person to be a slave, there must be an M. There is no self-proclamation. So there is no such thing as an unowned slave? quote: You answered this for yourself, when you said participants (plural) rather than participant (singular). What do you call an unowned slave then? I am beginning to think that you are trying so hard to pigeonhole My definition to match that of yours that you will try to come off with every exception possible. For your benefit, however, I call an unowned slave a slave who has, in some way, lost their prior owner. When I say "lost" that covers all reasons that a slave might no longer be with an owner, be that by intent, design, or death. I do hate to disappoint you, but we are not going to agree on the issue. By My definition, a person is not a slave who has not had an owner. If it makes you feel any better, I have strict definitions for the other side of the kneel as well. Not everybody agrees with Me, which is fine. I do not live their life and they do not live Mine. One thing that always does amaze Me when these kind of threads come up. Some are so willing to say 'everyone's definition should be acceptable' until someone comes around who says their definition might be a little more rigid.

ProtagonistLily -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 5:39:03 PM)
quote: I have to wonder at times. People who post all about how much a slave they are in a profile. But nothing about any skills they have? Is it all about playing then? ~Fastreply~ Yawn...ok, cause I like you Leatherist, I'll bite. First off, these are skills I bring to the table of my owner - that is to say, I have these skills but that doesn't mean that I'm going to wash, fold, iron starch and put away your shirts. I can cook a square meal in under an hour, serve it appropriately, with the necessary accoutremants, and clear the dishes and have the entire kitchen and dishes done 30 minutes after the last bite, but that doesn't mean I'll do that for just anyone. I keep our financial and social calendar, make our social engagements, and plan to entertain, but not just for 'anyone'. My special skills are few, but well honed - boot black, which if you are lucky and I like you, I'll offer as a service, and middle eastern dance, which I'm more inclinded to do for strangers at a Hafla and Him in private than for general circle of friends. In addition to the above, I maintain a 40 hour work week, do most of the domestic chores, have yard work that I do, and any other tasks He deems appropriate. But really, I don't see that having much to do with me being His slave. It's kind of easy to follow the routine, do the 'tab A, slot B' kind of stuff. For me, being His slave is about when I'm between a rock and a hard place (yes, I know, I'm supposed to only live for him and have no personal desires of my own.....) because his desires for me come into direct conflict with my desires for me - this is where the rubber hits the road as far as I'm concerned. It's how I deal with those instances which is the deciding factor as to whether I'm really his slave; and not by just rolling over and saying "Ok, Sir, you win." That's not what he wants, he's not interested in a door mat. What he wants is for me to respect our relationship enough to communicate my needs and wants effectively, and if he guides me in a direction that I'd rather not go in, allow him to with grace and good behavior. Anyone can wash the shirts and iron them. Doing it in a way that honors our Dominants, I think, is a key deciding factor in what it means to call yourself a slave. That's my 2 cents, for whatever it's worth. PL

Leatherist -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 6:31:04 PM)
Whenever these threads come out-there is always someone who feels the need to come in with a third grade level argument about "lines". And then proceed to do nothing more than puff up thier egos and generally derail and piss on the topic. I draw the line at what my partner and the law let me do, and my own conscience. I also have my own definitions of what a servant is, and that is the ability to serve. Not to indulge themselves in some bodice ripper fantasy where they control the behavior of the "hero". And certainly not where all they do is consume time and attention.

Leatherist -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 6:33:35 PM)
Exactly, there are slaves and ex-slaves. I don't take "wannabe slaves" very seriously. They are unproven.

TreasureKY -> RE: So, you are a "slave" (7/29/2008 6:46:38 PM)
sighs Honestly... you're a bit sensitive on this subject, aren't you? quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY As far as I know, there aren't any hard and fast rules. Thank you for admitting your lack of knowledge on the topic. There are specific definitions and lifestyles that we all go by. For example, TPE means Total Power Exchange… that would mean “authority transfer” not “endless negotiation” or the Dominant “asking permission to top you in a manner you find acceptable”… come on, quit fucking around and get real. I really won’t waste your time or the readers with anything further. If you don’t know the difference, then like Leatherist said, you just don’t know the difference. No my dear, there isn't a broad and undefined framework open to personal interpretation. It is very specific and has nothing to do with my person perceptions. First, I said "personal preferences" not "person [sic] perceptions"... two entirely different phrases meaning two entirely different things. Second, my comment that you highlighted and responded to wasn't with regard to how consensual "power exchange" relationships are defined, but rather with regard to what activities are required within those relationships. You seemed to have missed the proceeding part... quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist ... Knowing that having a slave ring your nipple makes you more appealing than a woman without pierced nipples is a big thing. I can’t imagine a slave that wouldn’t want to be more appealing to her Master. I can’t imagine a slave that wouldn’t want her nipples constantly in her Master’s mind so that every time he looked at her he knew there was a pair of service rings hanging from the nipples of his property. If your Master asked you to pierce your nipples and you had a sexual mind, you wouldn’t hesitate for heartbeat because you know you would be getting laid twice as often. Also, a property tag on a loop hanging from your hood and bouncing against your clit all day long is another standard method of marking slaves. Imagine your owner’s name on a steel tag that’s banging against your clit every time you walk… That is a big deal. What? Real masters have their slave's nipples pierced... real masters find pierced nipples to be appealing... real masters want their slaves as sexual objects? Since when does it matter what a slave thinks? You seem to be operating under the assumption that a real slave desires nothing more than to please their master... that a real slave wants to get laid and be the sexual object of their master's attention... that a real slave longs to constantly be sexually reminded of their status... Your comments here did not address any generally accepted difference between D/s and M/s... your comments placed your personal preference for a slave to have pierced nipples and clit and your personal preference for a slave who craves sexual objectification as being specific and definitive criteria for being a slave. For what it's worth, regarding the definition of slave, my very next comment was... quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY I understand your underlying assertion that if a person agrees to truly become the property of someone else, that they give up their right to pick and choose when to obey... I don't really disagree. But it seems you were so busy getting on your high horse, you missed that I was essentially agreeing with you. quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist ... the way she said it, the mindset it took to think like that means she is not a slave. She does not surrender, retains control and only allows certain things. shrugs Count me in with the folks here who don't believe you become a slave until you have a master, or a master until you have a slave. Until the M/s relationship is established, there is no surrender of control. You apparently read opposingtwilights comments as if she was already your slave. I read them as if they were a simple statement of incompatibility.

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875