beeble
Posts: 799
Joined: 5/25/2005 From: UK Status: offline
|
quote:
marie2 wrote: The longer I have had ds experiences and the more relationships that I've had, the more I've come to the personal conclusion that masters and slaves and doms and subs and owners and keepers are basically mythical. At the end of the day, we're just people engaging in relationships and relating in a particular way to another human being under a particular dynamic that's mutually fulfilling. And there are just too many infinite variations and variables that can play into that dynamic or cause it to change, evolve, waiver, deepen, or even dissolve sometimes, therefore I don't see how it can be catagorized or defined. But then I don't see slavery (in our context) as being actual anyway, so the term "slave" may as well be fairie princess, or any other fantasy label you want to apply to it. We need words for things so we can talk about them. I said, `I am Kita's fairie princess', you'd have no idea what I was talking about; if I say, `I am Kita's submissive', you at least have some idea. Maybe that's enough information for you already; maybe you still have questions but that's no different from all kinds of non-kinky things: if I said, `I am Fred's business partner', you might still have questions about what sort of business. The problem, in my view, comes when people decide that these words are definitions, rather than just labels. Worrying at great length about which of these words to use is like fretting about whether a sweater is burgundy or maroon: to most people, you may as well just say, `dark red'. beeble. (I am Kita's dark red. No, wait.)
_____________________________
Kita's owned slutpet.
|