johnxinxscruz
Posts: 53
Joined: 3/25/2006 Status: offline
|
I see some comments here about "Master and slave are not equal", but their means of explaining it are focused more upon power (Master's word is law), which is not at all what I think the OP was talking about. Obviously a Master and slave, in their roles within their relationship, can't be equal in authority ... that would be silly. What I think the OP was talking about is equality in terms of human value. The Master is not a better person, and is not a superior _person_, merely because they are a Master. The Master holds a position, within the relationship, of superior _authority_. They occupy that position not because the slave is an inferior _person_, but because the slave has, in a manner of speaking, loaned* or delegated their personal authority to their Master. They haven't become an inferior person, they have taken on a position of inferior authority. (* I believe loaned is the right term here, because it can be taken back) What Zensee says really focuses it: "Equal doesn't mean 'the same'". It's similar to the legal notion of 'separate but equal'. It also plays into the notion of Yin and Yang (btw: Yin and Yang do not complete each other, they complement each other; important distinction ... and the former is incredibly codependent language to use in a relationship). Yin and Yang are equal, but not the same. It would be entirely reasonable to think of one being "in charge" while the other is "subservient", but they are still equal in quality, quantity, scope, and value. Yin and Yang are equal in value, not necessarily equal in authority or stature. MasterRobsalayna said: "It takes a strong person to be able to give their all to another". I agree. If we think of submission as a gift, then the value of that gift would almost be measured in how much strength the sub/slave is handing over in that gift. If you are weak, then what gift of submission are you giving? It's almost more like hiding behind your Dom instead kneeling in front of them, don't you think? IMO, submission should be given from a strong foundation, not a weak one. Which then plays in to the whole "complete me" vs. "complement me" language. If you're not a complete person on your own, then you're not really a very strong person ... and if you're not a strong person, then what are you putting into that submission? Even in vanilla relationships, I find the whole language of "they complete me" to be such a danger signal ... and even more so when I think about BDSM relationships.
|