Ishtarr -> RE: total slavery (11/29/2011 12:25:14 PM)
|
Okay, apparently you have some really weird ideas about slavery -both legal and BDSM slavery- so lets take this one step at a time, shall we.... quote:
ORIGINAL: RWOLF A slave by defination is someone who is owned and has no choices. The definition of a slave is: slave (slv) n. 1. One bound in servitude as the property of a person or household. 2. One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence: "I was still the slave of education and prejudice" (Edward Gibbon). 3. One who works extremely hard. 4. A machine or component controlled by another machine or component. An alternative dictionary defines a slave as: slave |slāv| nounchiefly historical a person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them. • a person who works very hard without proper remuneration or appreciation: by the time I was ten, I had become her slave, doing all the housework. • a person who is excessively dependent upon or controlled by something: the poorest people of the world are slaves to the banks | she was no slave to fashion. • a device, or part of one, directly controlled by another: [ as modifier ] : a slave cassette deck. Compare with master1. • an ant captured in its pupal state by an ant of another species, for which it becomes a worker. Now, please note that nowhere in either definition it states that a slave has no choices (remember that, it's important later). Also note that while there are certain definitions in which a slave is defined as an owned human, most of the definitions of a slave do NOT included ownership. Therefor, it's perfectly possible for a person to HAVE choices, to NOT be owned, and to STILL be a slave. quote:
ORIGINAL: RWOLF Yet in profiles I see so many with limits and demands. Perhaps they are really submissives and not slaves. No, you see so many with limits and demands, because you see people looking for a RELATIONSHIP and not abject legal slavery. In BDSM, the difference between a submissive and a slave is a subjective one. Somebody titling themselves a s slave does not mean that they are less entitled to find happiness than a submissive is. In order for people to find happiness, they need a partner that is compatible with them. Ergo, slaves will post their limits and demands so that they can find a partner that is compatible with them, in the hopes that this will enable them to secure happiness. It's the same thing you're doing on here, isn't it? Why would you expect other people not to be looking for the same thing? If compatibility didn't matter for a BDSM slave, the LITERALLY any man would do. They wouldn't even have to bother to make a profile, because it wouldn't matter what kind of man he was, or what kind of woman they are, if compatibility didn't matter. If BDSM slaves where actually looking for legal, abject, involuntary slavery, then it wouldn't matter which man they became slaves to. The fact that they DO care about who they become a slave to will tell you immediately that ALL of them have demands, expectations and limits. Even if they don't post them on their profile, be sure that they DO have them. If they didn't, any man would do and they wouldn't bother looking for the right man. quote:
ORIGINAL: RWOLF Are you as a slave going into a relationship with the mindset that you will leave when it suits you or being a slave and remaining as such no matter what? Why on Earth would they remain in a relationship that doesn't suit them? Why on Earth would they remain no matter what? Are you seriously suggesting that if you turn into an alcoholic wife beater that they should remain no matter what? WHY? Why would they do that? quote:
ORIGINAL: RWOLF Can you accept that you are owned with no choice even that of release? Oh, I see, you think that BDSM slaves are legal slaves and that legal slaves have no choices. Let me ask you: what would a legal slave have done if they had the opportunity to run away? Would they have just stuck around because of some altruistic sense of duty to the idea that they where legally owned, or would they have ran? Considering that legal slaves would run when they had the chance, what exactly do you think it was that kept them from running? Do you think that it may have been the fact that they where under constant security, by either people or chains? Do you think that it was the fact that they had no place to go to? If the security was gone, and they had a place to run to, do you think they would have ran? And if legal slaves would run when they had the chance, then why on Earth do you expect a BDSM slave that you apparently expect to behave as a legal slave to do anything different than run when they get sick of you? quote:
ORIGINAL: RWOLF Can someone in consensual slavery truely be a slave with no choices and not just walk away because they are unhappy at times? Even legal slavery cannot take away a person's choices. So why do you expect pretend slavery to be able to do it? The only thing that you can do to prevent a person from walking away when they are unhappy is either keep them chained up 24/7 OR instill in them the knowledge that, while times may be rough some times, in the end, being with you is all WORTH IT. You can only do that by making sure that YOU make it worth for THEM to WANT to be with you. If you rely on their sense of duty to the concept of legal slavery to stick around, you are not going to keep them through rough times... it's as simple as that. quote:
ORIGINAL: RWOLF An owner would have the right to sell or kill their slave in a real slave situation(not that it is legal)( and no I dont condone killing anyone). I speak here of the mindset of the slave. You're not speaking from the mindset of a (legal) slave. You're speaking from the mindset of a (legal) slave OWNER. Legal slaves did NOT accept their owner's rights to kill and sell them. Legal slaves did not have "the mindset of a slave". Legal slaves where forced into a system that treated them like animals, but that doesn't mean that legal slaves accepted that they where animals. Legal slaves considered themselves to be very much human. They where very much against being killed. They where very much against obeying their masters. They where very much against staying with their masters. And they where very much against being slaves. Is that the mindset YOU want from your slave? quote:
ORIGINAL: RWOLF Can you as a slave set that in your mind as a possibility and accept that. No, human beings want to survive. Nobody will ever accept the mindset that you are entitled to kill them unless they are mentally ill. quote:
ORIGINAL: RWOLF Would that not be setting yourself up as a true slave, giving yourself over fully with no reservations and accepting everything as it comes? BDSM slavery is not about suffering through and accepting everything as it comes. BDSM slavery is about two people finding each other and clicking in such a ways that they BOTH can make it be worth for the other to stay around and go through things together. They're not at all different from vanilla relationships in that aspect. For a Dom/Master type, that will mean that you will have to find a way to make it be WORTH to live through all the discomfort, and bad times that obedience to you may bring them. You will have to make it such that in the end, when she takes a measure of her life, she is gaining more than she is losing from being with you. She's have to do the same thing to keep you interested in her; or would you really stay with a woman who is more trouble than she is worth? If not, then why would she stay with a man who is more trouble than he is worth? I hope that gives you a new perspective on things, because it sounded like you needed one badly...
|
|
|
|