RE: lower then a slave

RE: lower then a slave (Full Version)

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

Message

ownedgirlie -> RE: lower then a slave (7/29/2008 12:05:39 AM)
No problema. I swear I reread my post about 3 times, a little confuzzled. Whew!

Allondra -> RE: lower then a slave (7/29/2008 3:37:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DiurnalVampire If you own a slave, that means you are dominant to that slave... or else you wouldnt own them. If you are dominant to that slave, and submissive to someone else, that makes you the standard definition of a switch. I dunno. If I told my boy to get himself a slave, that wouldn't make him a switch. I think it matters a lot where the urge to have a slave comes from. But, this is not the topic of this thread.... -- Allondra (who believes that no one is "low" if they are being true to themselves, and doesn't really understand why it matters to figure out if it's possible to become lower than a slave)

mistoferin -> RE: lower then a slave (7/29/2008 4:43:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie For some, the slave of a slave has a lower ranking. Wouldn't they be sub-slaves? LOL And to think that we were confused over sub vs. slave.....

ResidentSadist -> RE: lower then a slave (7/29/2008 5:11:24 AM)
*is it possible to become lower then a slave?* Yes, you can be an object or an animal. Some people are very fond of their objects and their pets so this may not be true for everyone. However it in general, in today’s BDSM society humans serving as objects and animals are considered to be less than or lower than human slaves even if real slaves were considered to be no more than livestock. Serving as a human toilet for strangers at a party or an ashtray might get that “lower” perspective going for those of you reading this thread and you don’t get it. *is a slave that is owned by a sub lower then a normal slave?* Yes, if you’re talking about a ranked household. My alpha had the service of maids and chauffeurs (long ago when I used to have money). Not all of the maids were hired and some were the occasional indentured servants. They were lower than the “normal slaves” that slept in my bed at night. They were “service slaves” and they were so low and meant so little I don’t think I could remember one of their names of my life depended on it. They reported to the girls not me. *i do have some concept of the difference between a sub and slave just so you know, before i get someone calling me silly names or other things its just a question or two.* I think your readers often felt you were talking about a democratic household and you left them confused which explains so many strange replies despite your request otherwise. Personally I think your O. P. could’ve used a little more set up for your readers. You might have wanted to explain to them you’re talking about the Victorian households, female supremacy or ranked old guard households. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ You might want to do a little research on Victorian households and guard households, the vest, the cap and other symbols of rank. what I do not understand about your OPis how you can be even familiar enough to know these things exist but not have been exposedthe enough to understand what they were . Please share with us your exposure that makes you ask these things.

ownedgirlie -> RE: lower then a slave (7/29/2008 5:43:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie For some, the slave of a slave has a lower ranking. Wouldn't they be sub-slaves? LOL And to think that we were confused over sub vs. slave..... I was joking with one girl about being a sub-sub. We thought it had a nice ring to it, lol. Nah, they'd just be a slave whose owner was also a slave. When I had a human pet, my Master ultimately owned us both, but I managed the pet....just like I manage my kitty pet. [:)]

masterdstar -> RE: lower then a slave (7/29/2008 12:50:00 PM)
Of course; first an animal and then an object. Enjoy your wonder-filled day :- )

DesFIP -> RE: lower then a slave (7/29/2008 3:27:27 PM)
In my opinion we are all of equal value. But some give up their power to others. Now if you are asking if someone could be a sub to someone else yet be your mistress or master, sure. They would be a switch, bottoming in one relationship and topping in another. Could they be an alpha sub with you answering to them as well as the master or mistress? Yes again. Anything you can think of, someone else already is doing.

thetammyjo -> RE: lower then a slave (7/29/2008 7:15:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: beaten2service is it possible to become lower then a slave? is a slave that is owned by a sub lower then a normal slave? i do have some concept of the difference between a sub and slave just so you know, before i get someone calling me silly names or other things its just a question or two. Personally I reject the notion that being a consensual slave in BDSM is "low" in any way. Someone who is my slave has earned that though hard work and devotion and he stands head and shoulders above almost any other man or woman I know in my eyes even if he's on his belly at my feet.

chamberqueen -> RE: lower then a slave (7/30/2008 8:35:35 PM)
As a slave I don't consider myself lower than anyone else. It takes incredible strength and will to submit so fully, and my Master thinks of me as His diamond and His special pet. In a poly sense I am to have a sub of my own. She is lower in our personal hierarchy than me, and only gets to see my Master when I am present. When I attend munches no one looks at my slave status as making me "lower" than others there; if anything I've seen their mouths drop and have them tell me that they have always dreamed of having a slave like me.

ResidentSadist -> RE: lower then a slave (8/14/2008 1:11:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chamberqueen As a slave I don't consider myself lower than anyone else. It takes incredible strength and will to submit so fully, and my Master thinks of me as His diamond and His special pet. In a poly sense I am to have a sub of my own. She is lower in our personal hierarchy than me, and only gets to see my Master when I am present. When I attend munches no one looks at my slave status as making me "lower" than others there; if anything I've seen their mouths drop and have them tell me that they have always dreamed of having a slave like me. You are saying yes to the OP and that you are higher rank and your subordinate “is lower in hierarchy” right?

RavenMuse -> RE: lower then a slave (8/14/2008 1:24:09 AM)
Lower? I would say that either your understanding of the concept OR your understanding of the English language is definatly flawed. There are only two ways higher/lower can be used in relation to a dynamic... Level of Dynamic (Amount of authority exchanged)... or a value judgement and your comment obviously isn't the former, given Ownership, M/s, slave is TPE and thus the highest level of authority exchange.

Abaddon2u -> RE: lower then a slave (8/14/2008 2:58:01 AM)
Wow, personally I hold subs and slaves in high esteem. They can do all kinds of delicious things. If ya got both, you are going to be very busy. If they are low, perhaps I am too high above sea level? What is the best altitude to catch them both? Abaddon “Judge not lest ye be judged.” - paraphrase of King James Bible

sillyslaveboy -> RE: lower then a slave (8/14/2008 6:40:19 AM)
At the op Is this actually the question if groups of people might build a hierarchy, in sense "a sub owns a slave, and both are owned by a Mistress"or it is rather of psychological nature "is this slave put lower than another one"? The first is possible. i've seen subs seeking others who would submit both to them and to their Top. The examples of the second are influenced by varying of all the terms, but the general answer is no. The fact a slave is being owned by somebody other's sub doesn't mean s/he is put lower than another slave, serving his Mistress. Depending on their treatment, the result of comparison might vary from yes to no. So it is not a rule: that's why 'no'. If you are referring to a slave being extra humiliated by being owned by a sub, that's individual. As a slave of Someone's sub, i would not pay attention to that bigger picture. The sub would not be less than Mistress to me, unless i am actually shared or unless submission to the sub was on Mistress' command. In that case i would still serve the Mistress who sent me to serve the sub in the first place, but i would not feel any lower than i was.

Surrenderwithin -> RE: lower then a slave (8/14/2008 7:52:24 AM)
I am a slave. I do not consider myself to be " low". I suppose I could think of myself as being lower on the " totem pole" than Master, but low in general no. I am an alpha slave. There are two others in the house who are subordinates to myself. I also do not think of them as being low or lower than myself. They are human beings and have the value that comes with that... Are you asking if they are lower as in ranking or deference within the relationship? Kind of like a private is lower ranked that a sargeant kind of thing.... Then, yeah, I was say so. Although, that could not be a fact for all relationships. Maggi

Surrenderwithin -> RE: lower then a slave (8/14/2008 3:09:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Allondra quote: ORIGINAL: Owner4SexSlave First of all..... A submissive that owns a slave actually is a "Switch". Technically I am a slave that owns 2 slaves ( or co owns anyhow). I do not consider myself a switch at all. In many ways my ownership is a direct service to my Master. In fact, I detest it when I am referred to as a switch because of what I feel that terminolgy implies. Maggi Really? Not at all my definition of "switch". Why can't you be a submissive and own a slave?

windchymes -> RE: lower then a slave (8/14/2008 5:55:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: daddysliloneds quote: ORIGINAL: beaten2service is it possible to become lower then a slave? is a slave that is owned by a sub lower then a normal slave? i do have some concept of the difference between a sub and slave just so you know, before i get someone calling me silly names or other things its just a question or two. you can be a beta slave, which some see as lower than an alpha slave in rank, but both are still slaves all the same. So the lowest rank would be the omega slave. Then again, one of those "lowly worms" that crawl through here every now and then are pretty far down there.....[8\|]

Leatherist -> RE: lower then a slave (8/14/2008 11:00:13 PM)
There has to be a certain level of comfort in knowing you are not expected to be an overachiever in a hierarchal status.

invictus1988 -> RE: lower then a slave (8/15/2008 3:30:38 AM)
quote: is a slave that is owned by a sub lower then a normal slave? i thought the reason people were subs was that they like giving up control. I suppose they could be owned by a switch but I don't think that would be the same as being owned by a full sub.

IrishMist -> RE: lower then a slave (8/15/2008 4:37:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DMFParadox No. We're all slaves and masters in some respect... slave to gravity, master of our own breathing. To a degree. Both statements can be contested; and so can any statement of slavery or mastery. Such is life. Unless you're in a formal, military hierarchy where such distinctions have meaning, then your situation is simply that of a partner to an inexperienced master/mistress, whatever she may be to someone else. (he? gender can't be taken for granted here.) In my estimation, to be a decent slave is to be an effective servant. I was always told, 'whatever you do, whether you're a ditch-digger or a prince of commerce, be two things: in love with your role, and committed to being the best ditch-digger or prince that you can be.' Nowadays that's more true than ever. People are turning to BDSM more and more because the lines of up and down are blurring beyond anything we've known in history; new lines are being drawn in places that are hard for the average person to see... so we draw our own lines. Whatever you choose as your role, be better at it than a lazy slug would be. As a matter of fact, if you're capable, then be a better slave/servant than anyone has ever seen. (Or master, if you ever switch.) Take pride in your capability. People respect and cherish such creatures more than they do mediocre dominants (or submissives.) Be a standard by which others compare themselves to you. Don't worry about the meaning of it too much; just create your own meaning, it's what the rest of us do. Even masters. I don't often agree with what you say; but dayum, this was good [:)] Nicely stated.

ResidentSadist -> RE: lower then a slave (8/15/2008 7:17:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Have you not heard of "meta-slaves"?[:D] I'sn't that some online thing? Halflife, second life or something?

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875