RE: Are you a Slave? (Full Version)

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



Message

orgasmdenial12 -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 2:24:44 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ARIES83
Actual modern slavery as in the types of people that are smuggled/trafficked as a commodity is of course defined by the fact those people are kidnapped or otherwise forced into it. their rights to pursue their own interests are taken from them and they are often kept against their will.


This is not really true across the board. There are lots of different types of slavery, and some are consensual. If you look at the young boys who are sold to fishermen in Ghana, they are often very willing to be sold and excited about the prospect as they see it as a step into adulthood, learning a trade, leaving the parental home, etc. Likewise, the young children who are used as shepherds in many parts of the world see it as a part of their life, a sign of increasing maturity and a step towards adulthood.

Many of the people we consider 'slaves' run away from the authorities - they don't want to be 'rescued'. Of course, there are many reasons for this, including fear of punishment. But nonetheless - the idea that slavery can only be a total and non-consensual state is not true. Slavery is a normal and accepted part of life in many parts of the world. It doesn't all conform to this idea that many people have about slavery in America, with shackles and constant beatings and possible death. Many slaves all around the world see a trade-off between freedom and rights which don't benefit them and being cared for on a rudimentary level and trained in skills that they can use to survive. Slavery is just a way of structuring that trade-off.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ARIES83
If you desire to be kept without rights, is it really slavery in the common sense... you after all aren't being kept against your will, rather your will is that you be kept and to be used etc... you in a sense are pursuing your interests.


Many slaves would see this as exactly what slavery is - not being kept against their will, rather an arrangement for mutual interest.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ARIES83
Is it really just Consensual Non-consent. and what is that in your view?? [:D]


Nothing about my relationship is or ever will be the utter nonsense known as consensual non-consent. Everything I do in BDSM is consensual and always will be. Ymmv.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ARIES83
Do you identify as a Slave?
Why do you see yourself as a slave?
How do you define slavery?


Yes I do identify as a slave.

I see myself that way because I agreed to play with him without invoking the hard limits I insisted on at the start of our play.

In my old-fashioned description, I see a submissive as someone who chooses each time whether to submit or not. A slave decides once to submit always, and that's where I am at the moment.

Of course, there are many appalling acts of slavery around the world, and my relationship in no way mirrors theirs. But in terms of the slavery I described earlier, where people voluntarily enter into an arrangement where their rights are limited, in order to benefit in some other way from the situation, then I think I completely match that definition of slavery.



pg4g -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 3:18:48 AM)

I've noticed a lot of people claiming Consensual Nonconsent as nonsense, but is it really?

Say I'm a woman who decided to consider herself a slave to a master. I consented that, even when I'm not feeling up to it, or even when I'm not wanting it, my Master can have his way with me. Or say He has tasks He wishes me to perform, even though I don't like them. I've stated to Him that I get a thrill out of looking back and the feeling of helplessness and dislike for the activity gives me a buzz.

So some day I feel desperately like I do NOT want to be chained and hurt due to sore, tender skin. My master, however, still wants to hurt me to fulfil his sadistic desires. I'm extremely adamant I do NOT want to be hurt. At this time, I want out of our agreement. I'm so angry and fighting, but he chains me down, and decides that he wants to pour extremely hot-melting wax on my extremely tender skin. I fight him. I demand for everything, the scene, the dynamic, it all to end because I'm so lost in the hatred of the pain and the idea that this will go on for as long as this person deems fit. But he ignores me. I'd given my consent beforehand, and what a stupid woman I am for having done that, right? The pain goes on, no matter how much I honestly struggle. Not in a scene struggle. Real struggle.

A couple of hours after the pain ends, I look back on what my Master did to me. How He ignored me. How helpless I was. And that excites me. And I know He ignored me because He knew that I would feel like this afterwards. I'd given my consent that the feeling of true helplessness to back out at that time was exactly what I wanted. And I got that.

Now is that not the definition of Consensual Nonconsent? Being able to consent to someone ignoring your temporary demands to withdraw power? You informing someone that in a certain circumstance you may try to legitimately back out, and you don't want them to let you?

Let's temporarily ignore the fact that generally according to law (depending on where you are) the consent to ignore withdrawal of consent is not legally binding (you ALWAYS have the right to say no in most places) and the Master should, legally, have stopped. They are running an extremely fine line and trusting the 'slave' to not leave and cry torture to the cops, because technically, it would be quite fair and the Master could be charged.

But the above situation seems completely possible to me, and that being the case, how is consensual nonconsent really nonsense?



DaddySatyr -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 3:23:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pg4g

But the above situation seems completely possible to me, and that being the case, how is consensual nonconsent really nonsense?



Mostly because it doesn't exist because what you describe carries very real ramifications.

You may want to leave the law out of it but, until you can get the cops, lawyers, judges, and law-makers to agree, reality tells us that if we "over-step", we're in deep shit.






pg4g -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 3:38:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

Mostly because it doesn't exist because what you describe carries very real ramifications.

You may want to leave the law out of it but, until you can get the cops, lawyers, judges, and law-makers to agree, reality tells us that if we "over-step", we're in deep shit.




That doesn't make it nonsense or non-existent - it makes it dangerous.

And for the record, I've had this happen many times. My most brilliant experiences I was fighting it every step of the way, hating every bit of it. My deepest needs are often not my wants (the joys of being a switch [&:] ).

I recognise the deep and important trust that my partner must have in me that I won't go to the police and report some of the more... intense experiences.



crazyml -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 3:51:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12
In my old-fashioned description, I see a submissive as someone who chooses each time whether to submit or not. A slave decides once to submit always, and that's where I am at the moment.


Oddly enough that seems to map exactly onto my understanding of the term consensual non-consent.

Now, that isn't to say that I like the term particularly like, but I'm curious as to how your understanding of the definition diverges from the above.

And yanno I'm not being snarky, it is a genuine question!




freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 4:02:19 AM)

Sounds to me like you're describing a scene where you have no agreed safe word and because of your (in)action, you didn't report your master.
Or, where you do have a safe word but decide you're excited enough not to use it.

Either way, it's consensual.
Your master obviously knew when to stop otherwise it would have been a deal-breaker and you'd have left.

Whichever way you cut the cake, it's all consensual.
So yes, it really is nonsense.



pg4g -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 4:13:26 AM)

Consensual nonconsent IS consensual. In fact, that is within the name. So that doesn't make it nonsense. It makes it the very definition of the words. It refers to providing the right to not allow someone to withdraw consent with a safeword. Consensual action in the event of non-consent (backing out) occurring.

Personally, I have a safeword. But mine is just limited in my reasons for use. If I call it, it's for passing by my few hard limits: long term physical damage, non-agreed-upon partners, interferes with work. If I safeword, I know I'll be asked for my reason and if it's not one of those ("It hurts too much", "I'm really not up for this" etc), I'm back to being destroyed.



freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 4:18:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12
quote:

ORIGINAL: ARIES83
Actual modern slavery as in the types of people that are smuggled/trafficked as a commodity is of course defined by the fact those people are kidnapped or otherwise forced into it. their rights to pursue their own interests are taken from them and they are often kept against their will.

This is not really true across the board. There are lots of different types of slavery, and some are consensual. If you look at the young boys who are sold to fishermen in Ghana, they are often very willing to be sold and excited about the prospect as they see it as a step into adulthood, learning a trade, leaving the parental home, etc. Likewise, the young children who are used as shepherds in many parts of the world see it as a part of their life, a sign of increasing maturity and a step towards adulthood.

According to the report by the BBC, those caught into that slavery you depict, when the interviewer finally got to speak with them without being watched, they did not expect to be slaves working for virtually nothing. They were expecting to be gainfully employed.
And those they interviewed on shore that had escaped, it really was non-consensual slavery. Just like the sex trade, they were lured with the prospects of work to end up being a slave.

quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12
In my old-fashioned description, I see a submissive as someone who chooses each time whether to submit or not. A slave decides once to submit always, and that's where I am at the moment.

That's pretty much my idea of the difference.




smileforme50 -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 4:36:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FieryOpal


quote:

ORIGINAL: smileforme50

Honestly....even though my profile says I am a "slave"....I'm still not 100% sure where I sit on the spectrum of all of this.

My profile says that I am a "slave"....
... they think I have the mind, mentality, heart, soul, spirit....whatever....of a slave.....But I've also had a few friends tell me that I would probably be a good Domme too. I just laugh at that one. Go figure.

Have you found, though, that since you changed your designation, you get contacted by more "Kneel bitch"-attitude Doms than before?


Actually.....not really. Maybe I just don't pay much attention to those guys....and never have.

quote:

Perhaps you should reserve this to mark a special occasion with your next Dom, not something to be taken lightly. Also, depending on who you get with, you might find you have more of a switch's temperament. It would be misleading to pre-label yourself


Nah.....in spite of what those friends have said, there is no way in hell I would or could be a switch or Domme. I do know that much. My profile also says that I'm still not sure if I really have it in me to be a slave. I don't think that's misleading at all..... People just need to read.



orgasmdenial12 -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 5:13:54 AM)

If I consent to something then it is consensual. If I agree to always consent to something then it is always consensual. If I give my word, that is final. I am not the type of person to say I will do something and then change my mind a while later. So no matter what he did to me or how much I fought, it cannot ever be described as anything other than consensual, because I consented to it. For me it's a bit like signing a credit agreement. There may be times when paying it back that I really regret signing it and wish I could get out of it, but that doesn't mean it can be described as non consensual because I was the one who agreed to it.



JeffBC -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 5:19:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: smileforme50
Nah.....in spite of what those friends have said, there is no way in hell I would or could be a switch or Domme. I do know that much. My profile also says that I'm still not sure if I really have it in me to be a slave. I don't think that's misleading at all..... People just need to read.

Here's a thought about "having it in you to be a slave. In a lot of ways both nobody and everyone "has it in them" to be a slave. We could debate labels forever but generally there is this assessment that somehow "slavery" connotes some broader/deeper/whatever amount of D/s than "submission". That's why I half-jokingly say, "Slavery is what happens when a D/s relationship goes well." What makes for "better D/s" is "more trust" and "more respect" and labels have little to do with that.

IMO, about the only thing a person seeking the submissive role in a relationship needs "to be a slave" is a good partner. If the Dom in question is a credible leader where is the resistance going to come from? Who says "no" to a credible leader they respect who is obviously leading for the good of the team and has a track record of success? Why would someone do that? Why would such a leader even give a command which was going to cause a "no" answer?

There are plenty of relationships on these boards which self-identify as various labels but when you ask "So when's the last time the sub disobeyed?" you get blank looks. Those are the long-term relationships which have clearly "worked" and the label doesn't change the flavor of the dynamic -- sub trusts dom to make decisions... a lot.



thursdays -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 5:22:33 AM)

[ARSE]



pg4g -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 5:32:01 AM)

I agree OrgasmDenial.

So what should they call an agreement to make consent irrevocable during a certain time? Consensual "legal nonconsent"? Because under the law it is nonconsensual - you always legally have the right to claim rape, torture and false imprisonment if you tell him to stop during it. Whether or not we think it's right. I'd love if it were considered legally consensual too. But it's not in most places.

Or maybe we should call it "consent to disregard withdrawal of consent"?




ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 5:45:41 AM)

FR:

I've been back and forth over this particular issue at least a dozen times in the past 30 years.

Naturally since it's me I say in order to have a meaningful discussion, you have to define terms. What definition of the term slave are you using?

Here is a standard definition:

a person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them.

Since this type of slavery is illegal, we have to define our term. I completely disagree with this statement (though it's very nice to see you posting again, CreativeDominant):

quote:

On the one hand...there is the school of thought that someone in D/s and BDSM can call themselves what they wish. Whether or not someone (even the majority of someones) agrees with them, they can do so. I don't go along with this school...words mean what they mean, even when they are defined to fit D/s and BDSM. If you are not a slave in the dictionary sense, then you MIGHT be one in the D/s and BDSM sense...IF you go along with the constructed (granted that the construct is loose in some instances) definition. But if you choose to make up your own definition of what "slavery" is so that you can fit yourself into the word most appealing to you and your definition contains very few elements that others would see as defining of slavery, don't be surprised when someone calls you on it.


The beauty of the English language is it's ability to change over time; this flexibility allows for many definitions of the same term. (For example, we commonly use the term 'cell' here in the US to indicate a mobile phone, this is a new use of that term.)

It allows any given group of people to adapt words for specific usage. For instance, CBT is defined as cognitive behavior therapy if you're a psychologist, computer based training if you're a geek, and cock and ball torture if you're like me!

I've never heard of anyone arguing with these definitions. And I have no problem with those who wish to have their own personal definition of slave. Does it make things confusing at times? Sure, but we're all adults, we can ask for clarification.

I think we argue over the term slavery b/c first it *is* a word with some negative connotations, and there is the inevitable human tendency to need to elevate personal status, making a slave 'better' than a sub.



freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 5:51:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pg4g
So what should they call an agreement to make consent irrevocable <snip>

Quite simply, you can't - not legally.

You are just playing on words to twist things around into something that just isn't.



pg4g -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 6:03:53 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: pg4g
So what should they call an agreement to make consent irrevocable <snip>

Quite simply, you can't - not legally.

You are just playing on words to twist things around into something that just isn't.



Okay, seriously, what the fuck?

I'm not twisting any words. I'm just saying that you are consenting to the dom that they should ignore you - be it legal or not. Consensual nonconsent would be the term commonly used. That's all I was saying. I was twisting nothing.

I asked why someone suggested the situation was nonsense. It clearly isn't - I have such an agreement in place. Someone stated it's not possible because they gave consent. Well congratulations, the title for it doesn't make sense. Who cares? The situation that title is referring to is still a POSSIBLE situation, be it legal or not. The title is the thing she didn't like, but she said the situation itself never exists because she just hated the title and found it misrepresentative.

That. Is. All.



freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 6:10:33 AM)

My comment stills stands.

You either consent or you don't. It's as simple as that.
If your dominant oversteps the line (which makes them an asshat for not knowing it), report them and leave.

There's no such thing as consensual non-consent. Period.
It's an oxymoronic term.



Darkfeather -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 6:18:30 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt

FR:

I've been back and forth over this particular issue at least a dozen times in the past 30 years.

Naturally since it's me I say in order to have a meaningful discussion, you have to define terms. What definition of the term slave are you using?

Here is a standard definition:

a person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them.

Since this type of slavery is illegal, we have to define our term. I completely disagree with this statement (though it's very nice to see you posting again, CreativeDominant):

quote:

On the one hand...there is the school of thought that someone in D/s and BDSM can call themselves what they wish. Whether or not someone (even the majority of someones) agrees with them, they can do so. I don't go along with this school...words mean what they mean, even when they are defined to fit D/s and BDSM. If you are not a slave in the dictionary sense, then you MIGHT be one in the D/s and BDSM sense...IF you go along with the constructed (granted that the construct is loose in some instances) definition. But if you choose to make up your own definition of what "slavery" is so that you can fit yourself into the word most appealing to you and your definition contains very few elements that others would see as defining of slavery, don't be surprised when someone calls you on it.


The beauty of the English language is it's ability to change over time; this flexibility allows for many definitions of the same term. (For example, we commonly use the term 'cell' here in the US to indicate a mobile phone, this is a new use of that term.)

It allows any given group of people to adapt words for specific usage. For instance, CBT is defined as cognitive behavior therapy if you're a psychologist, computer based training if you're a geek, and cock and ball torture if you're like me!

I've never heard of anyone arguing with these definitions. And I have no problem with those who wish to have their own personal definition of slave. Does it make things confusing at times? Sure, but we're all adults, we can ask for clarification.

I think we argue over the term slavery b/c first it *is* a word with some negative connotations, and there is the inevitable human tendency to need to elevate personal status, making a slave 'better' than a sub.


I have to agree with this. The main reason those of us who hate labels argue that fact so, is because once you write that title on a little nametag and start sticking it to people as they enter the front door, people begin to think these "titles" are the end-all-be-all. Meaning if they don't identify with the given definition of said title (and as this thread proves, people rarely agree on what any definition even means) they get confused as to whether or not they even should wear that nametag, another nametag, two nametags, half of one and half of another, etc. Titles are boxes when try to cram people into because we want to define everything, make everything all neat and tidy. But people aren't neat and tidy, they are complicated and sometimes downright messy. So someone wants to be called a slave, so be it. They identify as one, what gives us the right to tell them they are wrong for X or Y reason. They are a slave because they feel they are, period. End of discussion.



chatterbox24 -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 6:21:27 AM)

To me in the bdsm realm an individual is pursuing their own interest, at least at the beginning. The individual desires that role. Historically individuals were forced into roles they did not want.I really can't imagine people wanting the historical role of slavery. I can understand wanting to be a slave to someone you care greatly about. But I could not understand someone wanting to for life lose their own dreams, never do what they want to do, because that can happen if you are under a master who doesn't have your best interest at heart.I don't believe and consensual nonconsent. What happens down the line when somebody changes their mind? If you are truly a slave it doesn't matter if you change your mind or not.



ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Are you a Slave? (2/17/2014 6:24:00 AM)

Okay this is just silly. Of course consensual non-consent exists. It can most easily be defined (here I go again) as consenting to be in a situation where you have no consent.

It can be for a limited period of time (a rape scene or an actual punishment that is administered), or for a prolonged or indefinite period of time where one person agrees to having less rights that another.

My marriage has that dynamic, I have agreed to give him final authority. For instance, I found a pair of boots I really wanted last week, but they cost $130. Not a bad price for good winter boots with great arch support (which I need). I wanted to buy them, he decided not now, maybe next winter.

So I didn't come home with the boots. I've consented to be in a situation where I don't have consent to make certain decisions.

Although I really like the boots, I have no bitterness or animosity for Himself and his decision. This is what I agreed (consented) to.

What is so hard to understand about that?



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875