quote:

ORIGINAL: PrinceSitri

It's not only a possibility it's actually happened many times. It's called 'slavery', i.e. the legal owning of another human being who is forced to obey their owner on pain of death. When we discuss slavery in the context of a BDSM life-style we're talking about the consensual adoption of the role of a slave, not the actual reality of slavery. The necessity of consent and the attendant possibility of its withdrawal means that the power of the Master/Mistress is always less than absolute. Thankfully.

quote:

quote:

Tell me, would you kill yourself for your Master? Kill someone else for him?

quote:

I can think of many instances where one or the other of those might be ordered by Himself and it would be imperative for the order to be carried out. If such is the criteria for 'ownership,' then 'never' falls quickly by the wayside.

Well, the fact that there are 'instances' indicates that you're not going to do it out of blind obedience, so clearly your consent is necessary.

quote:


I repeat the statement I made earlier that I am in favour of pushing the Master/Mistress/slave relationship as close to reality as is possible, but without the legal right to actually own another human being it ain't ever going to be really real. In other words, it's a fantasy, albeit a very powerful one, and one which can have many real aspects.

And I still can't sleep!

quote:

ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie

quote:

ORIGINAL: PrinceSitri

It's not only a possibility it's actually happened many times. It's called 'slavery', i.e. the legal owning of another human being who is forced to obey their owner on pain of death. When we discuss slavery in the context of a BDSM life-style we're talking about the consensual adoption of the role of a slave, not the actual reality of slavery. The necessity of consent and the attendant possibility of its withdrawal means that the power of the Master/Mistress is always less than absolute. Thankfully.

Here's Merriam-Webster's definition of "slave", and it does not say anything about being BDSM specific:

Main Entry: 1slave
Pronunciation: 'slAv
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English sclave, from Old French or Medieval Latin; Old French esclave, from Medieval Latin sclavus, from Sclavus Slavic; from the frequent enslavement of Slavs in central Europe
1 : a person held in servitude as the chattel of another
2 : one that is completely subservient to a dominating influence

Here is their definition of "slavery"





Main Entry: slav·ery
Pronunciation: 'slA-v(&-)rE
Function: noun
1 : DRUDGERY, TOIL
2 : submission to a dominating influence
3 a : the state of a person who is a chattel of another b : the practice of slaveholding

quote:

quote:

Tell me, would you kill yourself for your Master? Kill someone else for him?

quote:

I can think of many instances where one or the other of those might be ordered by Himself and it would be imperative for the order to be carried out. If such is the criteria for 'ownership,' then 'never' falls quickly by the wayside.

Well, the fact that there are 'instances' indicates that you're not going to do it out of blind obedience, so clearly your consent is necessary.

Your question wasn't instant-specific or not.  i stick by my earlier answer that i would not be enslaved by a fool  who would have me kill at random.  There is no "blind obedience" in my case.  Here is what i said in an earlier post on the subject of blind obedience:  "In my slavery to my Master, obedience is obeying, at all times, in all things.  i don't use the term blind obedience, because to me that always meant obeying without knowing, understanding and trusting.  i trust Master completely, and while i may not know or understand a command, i know and understand Him, so obeying it is not done "blindly."  i have faith in his orders. "


Here's a former thread about obedience vs. blind obedience which you may enjoy.

quote:


I repeat the statement I made earlier that I am in favour of pushing the Master/Mistress/slave relationship as close to reality as is possible, but without the legal right to actually own another human being it ain't ever going to be really real. In other words, it's a fantasy, albeit a very powerful one, and one which can have many real aspects.

And I still can't sleep!

i contend there is nothing "fantasy" about what we do (and particularly according to the English Dictionary).  You are intent on placing your definitions on the rest of us, by applying one use of the word slave to all slave experiences.

quote:


Well, the fact that there are 'instances' indicates that you're not going to do it out of blind obedience, so clearly your consent is necessary.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


I think you need a few more boxes and squares to make this post more effective.

quote:

but since i've been reading the forums it's brought to the forefront of my mind...the major differences i see in the Male and Female points of view.
I've observed, and please....this is not an attack on anyone, that  most  Female dominants seem to subscribe to the premise of females being a supierior being, and tend  to have a general sense of disdain for the males in general....to the point of cruelty....but...if involved with a woman.....the dynamic is more along the lines of the way a  Male dominant will treat His female........there just seems to more of an underlying nurturing....and concern for ones well being in the Male Dom/female sub relationship.

quote:

ORIGINAL: spankmepink11

I'd like to thank you all for your input....and insights.  If i could just clarify one point.  While i did state that  the Forums  encouraged  me to post on this subject, It is through my experiences on other sites, chatrooms... and in real time settings....be it a munch...or play party, that this question was first raised in my mind..... My foray into the forums is far too recent for me to form a generalized opinion of anyone.  And to the Dommes......i appreciate the fact that instead of taking offense ...You all  offered insights into Your individual personalities.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SoulfulSadism

Based on general impressions - not informed opinions - you are on the money. Have often heard male subs moan in chat how lowly being a male sub is; most dommes seem to be concentrating on offering nothing but 'show me you are worthy'. Of course there are exceptions , but in general - the more-men-than-women gives women the 'advantage'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ExistentialSteel

The brand of slavery that many of us see is different than the historic days of legal slavery, but it is stronger. My point when I write of internal slavery and so on is that I can make my slave do things a former legal slave owner couldn’t. I could order my slave to say silently a phrase every half hour and know that she will. I could order her to fantasize every night about something I want to do to her and I know she will follow my orders. If a slave was only legally owned, did not feel the owner was her Master and knew there was no way she could be caught, she would not obey. Which type slavery is stronger?

quote:

ORIGINAL: truesub4u

I must be reading a different forum again. I read headline of this thread and thought.. WTF. I don't see this going on. Then I read your post, and still don't see it. Now unless you been reading alot of that twits Jessykapower threads, who has since disappeared when being outted. But the Dommes i've seen posting on here, do not stike me as having supremacy problems. A Dom or two I think do, but that varies from post to post with them too. One post they will, the next they don't.