RE: Why A Slave? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

Aswad -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/7/2013 1:24:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

But I still question why he had to isolate her from family and friends in the first place and how can the intention of that be any good?


There's a bunch of possible reasons to do that, some of them good, some not. There's also a bunch of possible intentions, some good, some bad.

The family and friends may have been a bad influence, or may have considered the relationship abusive and sought to intervene, or may have enabled or facilitated problem behaviors (the sort that can be improved, but which people tend to enable instead of pushing for improvement). She may have had a drug problem. She may have been out to go deeper in her IE, which is easier to do with isolation. And so forth.

No offense, but your guesses don't seem very accurate, so you should try to rely less on those and gather much more info before reaching conclusions.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



littlewonder -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/7/2013 7:32:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75


quote:

ORIGINAL: littlewonder
Ya know, I tried once when I was being emotional over some stuff a few years ago. That thought lasted about ohhh..I dunno....two minutes before he made sure I wasn't going anywhere.

Yea because he knew he could still fix it.




hahahahahaha....that's freakin funny!!

No he didn't. He even came straight out and still says all the time, that he doesn't always know if he can fix something. Instead we talk, communicate and he doesn't let me walk away without at least each of us giving it all we have and talking and communicating and all the stuff that comes along in a relationship, especially one that has lasted over 7 years together. Why would he just want to throw away that many years because I got emotional over something?



littlewonder -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/7/2013 7:37:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75



quote:

Especially considering that if he succeeds in making her happy and she no longer feels bad, he can't possible be abusive.

Well, I agree if he succeeds, his no longer abusive, she happy, everything is fine. But I still question why he had to isolate her from family and friends in the first place and how can the intention of that be any good?


Could it possibly be that her family is toxic to her?

There are people that are toxic to me and I wouldn't be surprised if Master didn't want me around them. It just so happens though that I isolated myself from those family members and friends.




androticus -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/7/2013 11:03:23 PM)

To me, "slavery" might better be described as "servitude". I deeply love and crave the situation of being under the control of another man, and in his service. Mentally, I treat the the situation as absolute, as if I can't not serve. (Of course if something causes concern, I raise that with my Master.)

It is important to mentally understand that consent is still involved--as soon as it is no longer a choice to serve, then we have something other than a situation of fetish servitude -- we have something more akin to exploitation, abuse, or outright criminal enslavement (say if serious blackmail or threats were involved.)

So to me, it is a *moral* commitment one makes to another--to give up control to an agreed degree, with the understanding it is for the mutual satisfaction of two people who have compatible but complementary psychologies.

I think anyone who romanticizes or promotes the idea of "absolute" or "no release" slavery is proposing something that makes for exciting masturbation fantasies or role-play talk, but that in actual reality, if actualized and if the person subjugated no longer is obtaining benefit from the situation -- well, then really that person is in absolutely no different a situation than if they had been kidnapped or coerced etc.



tazzygirl -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/7/2013 11:12:48 PM)

quote:

It is important to mentally understand that consent is still involved--as soon as it is no longer a choice to serve, then we have something other than a situation of fetish servitude -- we have something more akin to exploitation, abuse, or outright criminal enslavement (say if serious blackmail or threats were involved.)


I had lost the "choice" to serve. Choice indicates I could or could not. I lost the ability to see that choice. I still was not abused.

quote:

So to me, it is a *moral* commitment one makes to another--to give up control to an agreed degree, with the understanding it is for the mutual satisfaction of two people who have compatible but complementary psychologies.


There was no "agreed degree". My only choice was in the beginning.. serve or not. After that, I was bound by my word.

quote:

I think anyone who romanticizes or promotes the idea of "absolute" or "no release" slavery is proposing something that makes for exciting masturbation fantasies or role-play talk, but that in actual reality, if actualized and if the person subjugated no longer is obtaining benefit from the situation -- well, then really that person is in absolutely no different a situation than if they had been kidnapped or coerced etc.


Well thank you for your one true way of slavery.

I was not coerced... not kidnapped. I entered with my eyes wide open, all cards on the table. I accepted the situation, and he took over. Eventually, my ability to leave became diminished... I no longer wanted to leave.. no longer had the ability even when I tried.

You are speaking in absolutes of physical slavery. Some of us are speaking in terms of mental slavery.

But, do me a favor, dont pass judgement upon my experience. Then I wont have to do so on yours. [;)]



JeffBC -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/8/2013 12:19:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: androticus
It is important to mentally understand that consent is still involved--as soon as it is no longer a choice to serve, then we have something other than a situation of fetish servitude -- we have something more akin to exploitation, abuse, or outright criminal enslavement (say if serious blackmail or threats were involved.

Oh dear lord... another armchair fetishist. Man, I just love how I get to be all dark & dangerous on these threads. Oh, and for us this was never "Fetish servitude". It isn't kinky or sexy. I got to get me one of these consent voodoo dolls at some point to ward off the evil spirits with. Look, Jim Jones got people to CONSENT to the kool-aid. So that's all fine with you, right? After all, they consented. Dominance (in the social sense) doesn't work the way you think it does. Mr. Jones obviously understood it better.

Mr. Jones is also why I do not use Carol's "consent" as the guideline between what is good and not-good because honestly I could get her to drink the kool-aid (I'm pretty sure)



Kana -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/8/2013 4:58:45 AM)

Jefff-stop being so stuck in the 1970's.The Twue Doms now,they use roofies,not Kool-Aid :-)



tazzygirl -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/8/2013 7:17:12 AM)

I thought those were the lazy doms.... gesh... updating score card again!



Kana -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/8/2013 7:22:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

I thought those were the lazy doms.... gesh... updating score card again!

See-the Roofies, they be working :-)



tazzygirl -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/8/2013 7:23:59 AM)

lmao!



Greta75 -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/12/2013 9:53:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonlightmaddnes
I would think that is completely different. The difference between abuse or not is consent. A child cannot give consent.

I still go by, if the person thinks it's abuse, then it's abuse.
Like, I think my parents beating me, my teachers beating me, and my principals beating me was abuse.
But alot of my peers do not think so, and would carry on that style of disciplinary method with their children.
They grow up, they feel grateful they were hit as a child, it's no longer abuse.
It's like bdsm in a way, where, it's not abuse if they don't feel it's abuse.

I know it's like stockhelm syndrome, but it gets a little muddled here, because...., what is abusive becomes pleasure, what seem to be action of hate, have turn into love.
It's incomprehensible, but the fact that some of us would put ourselves through things vanilla folks would view as abuse, tells me all that matters is what the person going through it thinks.

Which brings to another question...., if all agrees that a child is not of a mental maturity to give consent, but how about a super psychoed sub? One that her brain has supremely been mind-fucked where she's incapable of saying no anymore? Such things can be conditioned.



UllrsIshtar -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/12/2013 10:16:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

But alot of my peers do not think so, and would carry on that style of disciplinary method with their children.


The survey that got you this impression, did it get done in private, or was it a public answering?

In other words, did you have the class fill out a form with their answers kept private from the group until everybody had committed to an answer, or was it a group discussion, where everybody heard everybody else's answer while giving their own?



tazzygirl -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/12/2013 10:21:55 AM)

quote:

I still go by, if the person thinks it's abuse, then it's abuse.
Like, I think my parents beating me, my teachers beating me, and my principals beating me was abuse.
But alot of my peers do not think so, and would carry on that style of disciplinary method with their children.
They grow up, they feel grateful they were hit as a child, it's no longer abuse.
It's like bdsm in a way, where, it's not abuse if they don't feel it's abuse.


Convicts think their sentences are abuse.

A child sent to the corner for time out thinks its abuse.

An employee who has been reprimanded for breaking the dress code, yet again, thinks its abuse.

Abuse isnt JUST up to the person its happening too.

quote:

but how about a super psychoed sub?


You do realize that psychoed is the past tense of psycho... meaning someone who is deranged.



Greta75 -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/12/2013 10:30:44 AM)

quote:

Abuse isnt JUST up to the person its happening too.

If that is the case, then alot of folks are gonna view bdsm, especially the painsluts, and the super masochist as abused.
Just that, if someone is whining about things like being deprived of real sugar candy as abuse, I'm just not gonna take that abuse seriously, as it saves their teeth.

quote:


You do realize that psychoed is the past tense of psycho... meaning someone who is deranged.

Sometimes, I use "Singlish" not realising it's not the same meaning everywhere else in the world. But "psychoed" means "being brain fucked into something" in my country. Like..."He psychoed me into doing this!"
I do know "psycho" means "deranged".
Here's an American video on Singlish language used, yea it's broken English
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owH_LD_JeXk



tazzygirl -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/12/2013 10:42:02 AM)

quote:

If that is the case, then alot of folks are gonna view bdsm, especially the painsluts, and the super masochist as abused.


A lot of people do... or did until 50 shades... possibly the only good thing about that book.

quote:

Sometimes, I use "Singlish" not realising it's not the same meaning everywhere else in the world. But "psychoed" means "being brain fucked into something" in my country. Like..."He psychoed me into doing this!"
I do know "psycho" means "deranged".


She wasnt with him when she emptied her bank account, according to your retelling of events. She went to him with money in hand. Tell me, does she sound like a stable person?

All this is rather silly. You keep tossing out bits and pieces as you go along, expecting us to completely understand the rambling story you are trying to tell us. Im not sure if you arent simply piecing this together as you go along.

This does make an excellent post for other young ladies who are dreaming of the "Master" who will come along, take them in and give them the fantasy they dream about.

Be careful what you ask for.... you just might get it.



JeffBC -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/12/2013 11:40:33 AM)

Oh, COFFEE WARS! It's on now! Time to throw down! :)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NuevaVida
Cold brewed and microwaved? That should be illegal!

Yeah well, some us think boiling the bean dust alive oughta be illegal under some sort of "cruelty to coffee beans" law.

quote:

Grind the beans

... in a conical burr grinder.

quote:

(and it must be Peets),

I rescind my comment about illegal above. I thought we were talking about COFFEE beans. You know... the thing YOU can get at Boulevard Coffee but I have a hard time finding here on Vancouver island. Something that was green two days ago and is brown now.

quote:

nice coffee pot (or better yet, my french press)...hot hot beautiful dark rich caffeinated soothing wonderful beverage.

one where roughly 80% of the flavor is long, long gone but yes. To be fair, when we moved I mail-ordered Pete's. IT's better than the garbage that is on the store shelves. It doesn't compare to artisan roasted.

quote:

If it gets cold I make more (there is NO reheating coffee for me lol).

Wise choice sans microwaves. The uneven heating pattern of a coffee pot is hopeless. That's why you don't let it get cold, you put it in a carafe.

quote:

Peets is rich and one of the few coffees

Unless they can tell you when, exactly, that bean was roasted it's not coffee. That's like saying instant coffee is coffee.

All kidding aside, the conical burr grinder isn't optional nor are the real coffee beans. Brewing method IS optional. I like cold brew because it gives me so much more control. The oils leach out of the coffee grinds at a predictable rate and different oils take longer and shorter. So by taking a 2-3 second hot brew process and stretching it out over 12-14 hours I get to precisely control exactly what I'm getting. Other than that, at the chemistry level, hot & cold brew are identical. A really expensive (high-end restaurant grade) expresso machine has enough control over the pressure and temperature that similar results can be achieved. I just get that without spending $15k for a coffee pot :)

edited to add in the interests of fairness
Most people I offer my cold-brew to prefer the hot brew specifically because of those bitter oils (which are some of the last to leech out) and burnt sugars. For me, I prefer to delve into the more subtle flavors like the earthy tastes, chocolates, nutmegs and the like. They get occluded easily by the much stronger bitter/burnt flavors. I could just let it steep longer to get the bitter oils but I couldn't replicate the burnt sugars without actually heating the cold brew on a burner or something to burn it.



LadyPact -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/12/2013 11:53:27 AM)

Deleting. Can't do it.



UllrsIshtar -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/12/2013 12:21:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

Unless they can tell you when, exactly, that bean was roasted it's not coffee. That's like saying instant coffee is coffee.



That ties into the whole "definition of slavery" discussion very well actually.

What is coffee? And what definition do you use to define what coffee is? Going off the dictionary definition will yield different results than going off a "group name of flavor" definition, which will yield different results than going off a "optimal beverage made using coffee beans" definition, while you get yet another definition if you go of a "any beverage using coffee beans" definition.

It's silly to argue about what coffee is, unless you're going to specify which definition range you're using.

Similarly it's silly to argue about what slavery is, without being willing to define what definition range you use.

The problem most commonly ran into in these discussions of whether or not voluntary slavery is slavery or not, is that the people who argue that it is, are very forthcoming at defining the parameters of the definition they're using, and therefore reliably substantiate their claim that voluntary slavery can be actual slavery and not a mere fantasy according to that definition ranger, while on the other hand the people who claim that voluntary slavery must necessarily always be a fantasy consistently refuse to define what precisely slavery then is...

Interesting...



nephandi -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/12/2013 1:31:50 PM)

Greetings

This is a reply to the original post as I have not read the entire thread.

For me when I considered myself a slave it was to put a word to it. I am into TPE where one give up all of one's personal power to another, meaning that withing the confines of that relationship one is actually a slave. This is my opinion on this, a slave is someone who is not free, now you can be unfree int he eyes of society and therefore not have the right to leave, you can be a legal slave, however I do not think that society is the only entity that have the right to define someone and their position and within the confines of the TPE relationship the submissive is not free but are a slave and so the term do apply.

Now I do understand why many would react badly to using the term slave to something that is entered into freely and which is generally a positive experience for everyone involved, it is a very negatively loaded word and with good reason for slavery have a horrid past and I am not trying to make light of that. However I still think that in it's essence slave means someone who is owned by another, and I do not think it matter if the state also acknowledges that ownership or if only the parties involved do, as long as the Master/slave relationship is there, the slave is owned and therefore using the word slave is appropriate.

I wish you well



SwitchNSpanky -> RE: Why A Slave? (6/12/2013 3:21:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: nephandi

Greetings

This is a reply to the original post as I have not read the entire thread.

For me when I considered myself a slave it was to put a word to it. I am into TPE where one give up all of one's personal power to another, meaning that withing the confines of that relationship one is actually a slave. This is my opinion on this, a slave is someone who is not free, now you can be unfree int he eyes of society and therefore not have the right to leave, you can be a legal slave, however I do not think that society is the only entity that have the right to define someone and their position and within the confines of the TPE relationship the submissive is not free but are a slave and so the term do apply.

Now I do understand why many would react badly to using the term slave to something that is entered into freely and which is generally a positive experience for everyone involved, it is a very negatively loaded word and with good reason for slavery have a horrid past and I am not trying to make light of that. However I still think that in it's essence slave means someone who is owned by another, and I do not think it matter if the state also acknowledges that ownership or if only the parties involved do, as long as the Master/slave relationship is there, the slave is owned and therefore using the word slave is appropriate.

I wish you well


If there was a "like" button here I'd have pushed it like crazy. Also. I'd have pushed the "hell yeah" button a bunch.



Page: <<   < prev  21 22 [23] 24 25   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625