xssve
Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bigblackone
The question is simple. In your opinion what is the difference between a sub and a slave
Like several people mentioned, it comes up on a regular basis, but all that means is that after all that time nobody is really sure, which is what you've probably gleaned from the rest of the posts.
After numerous iterations of this topic, including some marathon knockdown drag outs, what I can say is that we are left, objectively, with the standard definitions of the words themselves, and whole continuum of subjective applications of those definitions.
Objectively, a slave is property, whereas a submissive submits.
This would seem to be fairly straightforward, and for many people, it is, and they adhere to these definitions relatively rigidly: i.e., a submissive can say no, a slave cannot, to keep it simple.
All well and good in theory, but technically, this is a pure abstraction in terms of social divisions, presumably, if we are talking about consensual relationships, and not human trafficking, both master and salve are social-political equals: both citizens, with the full rights and responsibilities of citizenship, quite often they are also political-economic equals, with economic responsibilities, making a check, and paying the bills, etc., all of which kind of messes with the definition of "slavery" per se, leading the average person to conclude that "slave" is role you play under certain conditions, and under appropriate circumstances, and this definition is no less true, in spite of a statistically meaningful demographic of individuals, both dominant and submissive who insist it's "real".
I don't want to rehash that argument, so suffice it to say that in a consensual context, there is no such thing as objective slavery, slavery is a variation of submission, in which the submissive plays he role of a slave, for whatever motivations.
Not everybody is going to like that, as I say, but the submission is real enough, as I like to say poker is a game too, doesn't mean you can't lose your ass - one can subjectively immerse themselves into the role to the degree that it's objectively indistinguishable, it is their reality, I call that role immersion.
For both however, and especially the dom, while the slavery can be real enough that the issue of consent never arises, there is no formal recognition of this by the authorities - i.e., I don't care how "real" you think it is, you can't just hang a slave and remain with in the legal boundaries, there remains a very distinct line between what you can and can't do legally without committing a criminal that can no longer be sheltered under the umbrella of consent.
Kind of a no brainer really, I think most people operate under this assumption, and go on blathering about subjective slavery as if it was objective, the fact that it's subjective regardless is too obvious to belabor and interfering with the subjective immersion into the role - for the same reason the safety nannies or whatever are often jeered, although theses things do need to be repeated every so often, people can and do form distorted subjective perceptions of reality, and that necessitates the occasional reality check.
Anyway, there is plenty of room in the middle to mix an match, and considerable overlap withing individual dynamics, many submissives like the idea of being "owned" who would not define themselves as slaves, "slaves" who strain and struggle against their bonds, etc., there is no single model or discrete set of models here, in spite of incessant attempts to define one or more: each dyad is in a sense unique, and is defined by the interplay between the personalities involved.
So, submissive and slave, while "meaningless" as one person suggested, on the objective level, may be very meaningful on a subjective level, but within the the legal limits, how you define and act out those roles is largely a matter of mutual consent and identity.
All dyads are, from an evolutionary perspective, a symbiotic relationship, a breeding pair, technically, whether or not reproduction is explicitly included or excluded, it still operate according to the same patterns, which include division of labor, sometimes simple, sometimes fairly complex, and there may be a "Black Queen" effect where one partner compensates for traits that atrophy in the other, it's actually an evolutionary process that occurs frequently among symbiotic organisms.
i.e, in a "traditional" relationship, the male takes on economic reponsibilities, while the female takes on the domestic responsibilities, and in the evet the dyad is dissolved you get a man can't care of kids, and/or a woman who can't get a job - which is why I mention that divisions of labor tend to be more complex nowadays than they used to be, there is a need for a little bit more redundancy in order to decrease the risks of redundancy dissolution or incapacitation of one of the partners, since there is no extended family (in most cases) to take up the slack.
I'm probably already way past the point I should have stopped, lol.
Personally, I like the idea of a slave, but I conceptualize a slave more like a "Girl Friday", a maid, a personal assistant, a wingman, etc., almost more like a very devoted buddy, than somebody I lock in the basement, feed scraps, abuse her holes, and beat occasionally (although that can be fun too) - i.e., in more of the classical sense of a more cultured arrangement, which is a little more practical - albeit it means cultivating a real relationship - but that's just me.
And sub and slave are not the all of it: in fact one thing that came out of those knock down drag outs was the wisdom of calling anybody a "slave", a word that is only subjectively distinguishable from an actual victim of labor abuse or human trafficking, etc., but nobody seem s to be able to agree on an alternative, and there remain a lot romanticized notion of slavery, " a slave to love" essentially, a eroticization,and fetishization of the role, including, raptio, etc.
But previous civilizations had numerous levels and role designations other than kinky or vanilla, submissive or wife: meretrice, prostibulae matronae, the Greek Pornai and Hetaere, the Japanese Geisha, etc., although for the most part, these roles are demonized and lumped together in formally monogamist Judeo-Christian culture in the Madonna/Whore dichotomy.
It can be quite enlightening however to study the alternative social roles of ancient civilizations however, it's quite a bit less binary, and a lot more roles and concepts to ponder.
And, you can invent your own, too. 
_____________________________
Walking nightmare...
|
RE: Sub v slave - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread