CaringandReal -> RE: A little worried.. (10/11/2009 7:43:49 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PolyVinyl Hello everyone, I've got a question that I definitely think you could help with: I'm reading through 'Screw the roses, send me the thorns' by Miller & Devon, and I came across this one part that mentions "bad" versions of SMers, specifically labeled the 'True slave'... The author is saying that the 'true slave' quickly gets boring because they don't seem to have a personality and are too busy trying to lose control at all times. p.s. [sm=violin.gif] <-- lol. I think what's being desribed in that passage is someone who roleplays being a slave and doesn't show other aspects of their personality as they do so? I put a question mark after that statement because it's not clear if those authors knew it was roleplay, but any even slightly realistic assessment... nm, this isn't a bdsm lit-crit thread. :/ There's a wide variety of opinions about what constitutes bdsm slavery. If you're reading the messages, I'm sure you've seen some of the threads. In my personal opinion (but it's shared by others), a genuine slave is requried to be/do whatever their mistress or master orders them to be/do, within human limits. Makes sense, doesn't it? Slaves do what their owners command. And if the commands include having a personality and something to talk about, well, you'd better have or develop those if you want to be that particular person's slave! Having opinions, expressing your personality, and also being rigidly obedient is to me a far more difficult acomplishment than just roleplaying a mindless obeying robot. (I call this roleplay because unless the person has had a lobotomy or some virus that killed their brain cells, they've got a mind between their ears that is busily whirling and thinking, no matter what they are faking with their body, expression, and gestures. On the other hand, mindless roleplay can be very fun sometimes. What's the male equivelenet of a bimbo, anyway? Googled. "Himbo!" LOL! )
|
|
|
|