quote:

ORIGINAL: MagiksSlave

quote:

ORIGINAL: amayos

quote:

ORIGINAL: MagiksSlave
So what I want to know is what you all think.. I personaly think its a copout and a testament [of] immaturity to think being a slave means you dont have to be responsable for your actions... but maybe thats just me.

A slave's life is all about responsibility, in fact. The burden a slave shoulders is unconditional; perform a task and do it to perfection. There are few examples in our "land of the free" where interpersonal relations carry such dire consequences for shortfall. The cost of failure can be grim, depending upon the preference and disposition a Master or Mistress contains.

Regarding unquestioning obedience, I believe that is the only way of a slave. Any significant concession, amendment or deviation from this calls to mind a different creature, which should thus be differently named. While a slave is to take his or her keeper's word as the greater law, it is crucial to reflect deeply upon entering this form of bondage, for as a slave, one is still subject to the law of the land, and in its eyes one is not removed from answering to it.

Considering this, the importance of personal accountability in the choices one makes cannot be stressed enough. This is entirely different, however, than prostituting the idea of responsibility to legitimize a slave's disobedience.

This is kind of sticky!! Since Slavery is NOT recognised by the law we as slaves have to bend to the law and sociaty first befor our Masters (this is how I see it anyway) We have a bigger greater responsability to the common good and beeing a slave does not give us the right to break laws just because Master said so!! Laws are in place to protect people from eachother (for the most part anyway)and sometimes even just from themselvs. it isnt right for a Master to demand his slave to do something wrong and if he does well I think in that case useing the word Master would be shameing that title. I dont know in my own eyes we are humans first bound by morality citisens (Sp)secent bound by the law of the land and slaves thrid bound by the law and obedience to our Masters (yea I know it sounds bad putting the Master third but this is the real world)
We are seen by the world to have free will wather we like it or not and weather we want Master to take controll of every part of us we need to bend to what the majarity sees... OK I cant word how Im thinking again so none of this makes sence and it isnt really a complete thought so, sorry!!

Magik's slave

quote:

ORIGINAL: MagiksSlave
it isnt right for a Master to demand his slave to do something wrong and if he does well I think in that case useing the word Master would be shameing that title. I dont know in my own eyes we are humans first bound by morality citisens (Sp)secent bound by the law of the land and slaves thrid bound by the law and obedience to our Masters (yea I know it sounds bad putting the Master third but this is the real world)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kyraofMists

quote:

ORIGINAL: MagiksSlave
it isnt right for a Master to demand his slave to do something wrong and if he does well I think in that case useing the word Master would be shameing that title. I dont know in my own eyes we are humans first bound by morality citisens (Sp)secent bound by the law of the land and slaves thrid bound by the law and obedience to our Masters (yea I know it sounds bad putting the Master third but this is the real world)

On the surface this looks like a nice sentiment.  However, which laws do you hold sacrosanct and not violate? 

If you are running a little late for an event and master tells you to drive and to go over the speed limit, has he now just shamed the title of master?

Some of what is done under the header of BDSM also violates laws in the states and much of it goes against the morality for a large majority of people.  If master wants you to help him top another bottom and tells you to take something and beat them with it, has he now just shamed the title of master?

Where do you draw the line of what is shaming the title of master and whose morality do you use as a judge of what is or is not appropriate?



Knight's kyra

quote:

ORIGINAL: MagiksSlave
Sorry I may have gotten a little emotional over you choise of examples

quote:

ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross

quote:

ORIGINAL: MagiksSlave
Sorry I may have gotten a little emotional over you choise of examples

You seem to be getting emotional and having to apologize for a lot of your posts lately. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: MagiksSlave

Ok this stems from another thread...

Ok a rather green sub used the defence "I just did what Master told me"
and then got upset when one of our beloved posters (well I think she is pretty great) told her that excuse didnt fly!!

So i came in and explained that just because you are a slave doesnt mean you arent responsable for your actions

this sub then said "a good slave does as her Master says"

My reply was "this is true but that doesnt make you any less responsable for your actions"

She didnt seem to like that!!

So what I want to know is what you all think.. I personaly think its a copout and a testament to immeturity to think beeing a slave means you dont have to be responsable for your actions... but maybe thats just me.

Magik's slave

quote:

ORIGINAL: imtempting

Read the boards and most dominants expect slaves to obey every commend no matter what...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lady Alaria

I love daddysprop's answer to this. She recognizes that she is legally responsible for her actions. She knows(I think) that in many cases she will be held socially accountable. But she feels no moral responsibility for an action that was in response to her daddy's commands. Because, _in her morality_ she is only responsible for one thing. And that is obeying her daddy. And that is _her_ morality. And it may offend some, but most of wiitwd is going to offend someone.

The idea of total slavery to a loving master is a pretty fantasy. It creates the potential in the mind for the ultimate in simplicity, normally only available to babies, winos, heroine junkies, and buddhist ascetics. The simplicity of only really having to care about one thing. No conflicts. No moral struggles. Just obedience, devotion and love.

In reality it is hard. It's hard to find the right Master, hard to learn to trust, hard to continue to please, hard to deal with the fact that your Master isn't perfect, hard to handle that your Master's love is not everpresent and continuous. It's hard dealing with the social ramifications, hard to escape the bonds of modern morality(whatever flavor you've been conditioned with), hard to face the questions: "Is this right? Is this right for me? Is this what i really want? Is this all I want?".

It's not simple. For many it's horrifying when you really look at the implications(would you really rob a bank if Master asked?). Most people are looking for something a little tamer. That's great, most Dom/me's aren't really looking for that level of responsibility(I know I'm not). It does have it's own sweet rewards though, for those who can get there.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MagiksSlave

And I also see it as the Master NOT beeing a very good Master for putting his slave in a position that one of his orders could cause harm to his slave or others...

quote:

ORIGINAL: LordODiscipline

A couple of things:

1. Babies and Buddhist ascetics are not "normally" ammoral.
2. The dominant in the scenario is not capable of accepting that "level of responsibility" for the submissive, as (as has been stated) it is the submissive's responsiblity - the submissive is unable to shed that simply on the whim of "he told me to..."
3. Idealities posted are not realities achieved. Fewer people are "there" than one might read on CM

~J

quote:

ORIGINAL: agirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: MagiksSlave

Ok this stems from another thread...

Ok a rather green sub used the defence "I just did what Master told me"
and then got upset when one of our beloved posters (well I think she is pretty great) told her that excuse didnt fly!!

So i came in and explained that just because you are a slave doesnt mean you arent responsable for your actions

this sub then said "a good slave does as her Master says"

My reply was "this is true but that doesnt make you any less responsable for your actions"

She didnt seem to like that!!

So what I want to know is what you all think.. I personaly think its a copout and a testament to immeturity to think beeing a slave means you dont have to be responsable for your actions... but maybe thats just me.

Magik's slave

You say she was a *rather green sub*  and possibly that's the case.....but her responses weren't THAT ridiculous.

It might be a rather dubious thing to carry that thinking over to some atrocious, far fetched act........or some issue of morality that goes against your own .......... But as you ARE discussing HER (even though she is *nameless*, pah).......it might be useful to also state the context. She certainly wasn't referring to anything earth-shatteringly awful, difficult, morally challenging or law-breaking.

Being a slave, in my opinion , doesn't absolve you from *personal responsibility*, no.....but in the context of the girl's posting, I really don't see what was so outrageous about stating that she was doing as she'd been told to.

agirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: kyraofMists

quote:

ORIGINAL: MagiksSlave

And I also see it as the Master NOT beeing a very good Master for putting his slave in a position that one of his orders could cause harm to his slave or others...

Breaking laws and causing harm are not really the same...  How do you define harm?  Whose evaluation of harm do you use?  Which laws are the "laws of safety"?

There are many people who would look at my bloody, bruised body after an S/m scene with my Lord and think "she is harmed".  Do you use their perception of harm or my Lord's?  There are people I know who would think it is harm and want him arrested and then others who would look at me and wish he would do it to them too.  Who is right?

Kyra