RE: So you think you are really a slave....

RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (Full Version)

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

Message

mbes -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 11:20:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy Added at a request via off thread e-mail. "Master/Mistress would never sell me" is a bit of a cop out to the discussion Why is that a cop-out? From all I've seen reading, it seems to be agreed that by and large, people choose their relationships. Even the most basic slavery (ie, can and could be sold, to use your standard) is chosen initially. If someone only agrees to submit at that level to one after determining that their one would not sell them, I wouldn't see that making their slavery to that one less valid.

agirl -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 11:33:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: daddysprop247 my Master has every right to sell or give me to another. it would be devastating to me, but i would have to accept it as when i became a slave, it was with the understanding that i was truly becoming this Man's property, for him to do with WHATEVER he wills. no limits, no buts. this is not a game to me or the living out of some elaborate fantasy. the thought of being a slave doesn't get me all hot and bothered. but it's the only way of life that can possibily give me the purpose and meaning that i need. i also came into this with a full understanding of what it truly means to be property, with no more power, freedom or free will. so i understood that i could be bought and sold if that is what he wished. my Master gave his former slave to another Master, who still owns her to this day. she was very unhappy at first, but in time grew to love this Master. there are those who would say, well, if it wasn't what she truly wanted, why not just walk/run away? go to the police if need be. the law of the land says you have the right to this, that and the other. such people simply have no idea what it means to be owned. I think it's likely quite rare for many people to be owned in such a manner. If this way of life is the only one that can give you the purpose and meaning that you need, it's understandable that you live it to this extent. agirl

DominicsJoy -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 11:35:06 AM)
I have been told that I am extremely submissive. I know in my heart I must serve someone. If Master were to decide to sell me, it would mean that I had displeased him, and that would break my heart. I cannot say what would happen afterwards, or as to whether or not I could survive that, physically or emotionally. If I were mentally sound I would be serving... but honestly, I am not sure I would be able to survive the devastation. I know in my heart that at some time we will part company, life being breif. The odds are with him older than I that he may be taken first. At that time I will have to face the struggle within, daring to seek another to please. It would make it much easier if somehow I went first. Master is a survivor, a strong and capable man. I do not fare well alone. I pray I never face that time. Master's girl- joy

starshineowned -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 11:40:01 AM)
quote: However, people who try to apply legal historical definitions of "slavery" to a consensual personal relationship choice will always end up on the wrong path. They are two completely different dynamics and the same definition cannot be applied. Absolutely and totally 100% disagree. Consentual slavery or for a more rounded term being seen WIITWD didn't just appear out of thin air. It got it's start based on what was already known to most via historic slavery. While it has to be modified in order to fit current society..stating that basing it off of historic slavery is a wrong path is in my eyes very naive at best. Trying to re-define it so far away from it's base is where leading to wrong paths begins. The further you draw away from a base the less identity it has, and there isn't but 1 initial base or model and that is from history. quick reply thing smilezz..not posted to your post. While I am at it..The M/s dynamic itself is and can be 100% completely independent of "WIITWD" or BDSM. It requires none of it. While I'm still at it. I think a big problem when it comes to this is that people for some reason tend to stop the buck of "slavery" at America's most recent account of it. Slavery has been a part of human existence since the earliest known writings for communication. There is a overwhelming dicotomy of slavery as a accepted legitimate institution and class or status of humans. Actually it's pretty mind blowing to read from a complete human history stance, and not just black history in the US. Well Wishes starshine Happy slave of Master Delvin

agirl -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 12:15:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: starshineowned quote: However, people who try to apply legal historical definitions of "slavery" to a consensual personal relationship choice will always end up on the wrong path. They are two completely different dynamics and the same definition cannot be applied. Absolutely and totally 100% disagree. Consentual slavery or for a more rounded term being seen WIITWD didn't just appear out of thin air. It got it's start based on what was already known to most via historic slavery. While it has to be modified in order to fit current society..stating that basing it off of historic slavery is a wrong path is in my eyes very naive at best. Trying to re-define it so far away from it's base is where leading to wrong paths begins. The further you draw away from a base the less identity it has, and there isn't but 1 initial base or model and that is from history. quick reply thing smilezz..not posted to your post. While I am at it..The M/s dynamic itself is and can be 100% completely independent of "WIITWD" or BDSM. It requires none of it. Well Wishes starshine Happy slave of Master Delvin The quote that you pulled didn't actually say...based on ......it said applying legal historical definitions.... and as you said yourself * it has to be modified to fit current society. Where it got it's base* doesn't mean where it's at. agirl

valeca -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 12:28:09 PM)
(fast reply usage here) The flaw I'm seeing in many posts is that slavery is based purely on one form of historical slavery...the one perhaps most commonly known to people being the American slave trade pre-civil war. In fact, there have been great societies that have fostered consensual slavery, wherein an individual would agree to become the slave of another, often for a set period of time, and would negotiate compensation for their servitude prior to becoming a slave. Look into the Aztec form of slavery for more of that way of life. -It was rarely hereditary (meaning the children of slaves were born free) -A slave could own their own slaves -Owners could (and frequently did) marry their slaves -Slaves could own extensive properties of their own -Mistreatment of slaves was heavily frowned upon, and a slave could gain their freedom if they could show they'd been mistreated. And yes, they could run away (gasp!), in public even, and no one was allowed to interfere and/or try to stop them. If they did, they ran the risk of being punished with slavery themselves. It was a means to gain their freedom, not unlike someone walking away from a relationship now. It didn't make them less of a slave for having gained their freedom. You can't argue 'real' historical slavery while only using a single model of it, or expect that everyone else follows the historical model you do.

sting516 -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 1:18:42 PM)
This is a very interesting thread...my take on it is, once i give myself as a slave, or am taken as one, whether i'm sold, traded or disposed of by an owner for whatever reason is totally out of my control. Of course, we have to take the simple legality of it out of the equation...i would say this though, if a slave resorted to that as a way out of their ownership, then they were never a slave to begin with.

FatDomDaddy -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 1:34:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sting516 i would say this though, if a slave resorted to that as a way out of their ownership, then they were never a slave to begin with. Bingo.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 1:39:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: starshineowned Absolutely and totally 100% disagree. Consentual slavery or for a more rounded term being seen WIITWD didn't just appear out of thin air. It got it's start based on what was already known to most via historic slavery. While it has to be modified in order to fit current society..stating that basing it off of historic slavery is a wrong path is in my eyes very naive at best. Trying to re-define it so far away from it's base is where leading to wrong paths begins. The further you draw away from a base the less identity it has, and there isn't but 1 initial base or model and that is from history. As TammyJo has already said and can elaborate, consensual personal slavery is as old as non-consensual legal slavery. I do not think one came from the other- I think they both have existed for a very long time for very different purposes.

Archer -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 1:49:53 PM)
Exodus chapt. 21 V. 5 and 6 say "But if a slave declares, "I love my master, my wife and my children, I do not wish to go free". His master shall take him unto G-d, he shall take him to the door or to the doorpost , and his master shall pierce his ear with an awl: and he shall serve him forever." Deuteronomy chapt. 15 v. 16 and 17 repeat basically the same thing, " ... you will take the awl and put it in his ear into the door, and he will be your slave forever. Also with your female slave you shall do this." Historic Consensual Slavery Documented

FatDomDaddy -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 1:55:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: valeca You can't argue 'real' historical slavery while only using a single model of it, or expect that everyone else follows the historical model you do. I am not sure I used any model in the op. But for arguments sake. Modern slavery as practiced today, right now in places like Brazil, Northern Africa and several Islamic states is not historical, it is of the moment. The slavery is non consensual, the slave has no rights and is chattel property and the slaves are often sold or passed with no consent what so every. They are also lent out for trade for the sole benefit of their owners. And even though it is outlawed by statute, in many states where it thrives, the laws are at best selectively applied. This is real slavery. This is the clear academic and scholarly definitions of slavery. This is slavery. There is nothing remotely romantic about it.

agirl -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 2:10:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy quote: ORIGINAL: valeca You can't argue 'real' historical slavery while only using a single model of it, or expect that everyone else follows the historical model you do. I am not sure I used any model in the op. But for arguments sake. Modern slavery as practiced today, right now in places like Brazil, Northern Africa and several Islamic states is not historical, it is of the moment. The slavery is non consensual, the slave has no rights and is chattel property and the slaves are often sold or passed with no consent what so every. They are also lent out for trade for the sole benefit of their owners. And even though it is outlawed by statute, in many states where it thrives, the laws are at best selectively applied. This is real slavery. This is the clear academic and scholarly definitions of slavery. This is slavery. There is nothing remotely romantic about it. Few would argue that it was romantic.

valeca -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 2:11:02 PM)
The fact remains, you're using a single example of slavery to validate your points about 'real' and expecting others to follow the same model when answering the question. If you're asking, am I a 'real' slave based on the conditions you've set down in your model of modern slavery, then no, I'm not. If you're asking if I'm a 'real' slave based on any model of slavery, then yes, I am. quote: This is the clear academic and scholarly definitions of slavery. This is slavery. Rhetoric. So are the other forms that have been mentioned, e.g, my Aztec example. One is no more 'academic' or 'scholarly' than the others.

catize -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 3:55:32 PM)
quote: Unless of course you are the mute child of Arab parents who sold you to a murderer who is the brother of the Sheriff in a small town in Kentucky. And I wanna know if the whipping post I'm shackled to would be sold with me![:D]

bandit25 -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 4:11:45 PM)
There is real slavery because YOU say there is? Hmmmm. In your reality, there is real slavery. In someone else's reality, there is. In my reality, there isn't. I'm not negating your reality...don't negate mine. As I said, one may choose not to exercise the option thus negating it, however, unless physically or mentally unable, the choice to leave is there. Edited to add: I'm not talking about slavery in third world countries...I'm talking about slavery...meaning one has no choice (not a negotiated limit, but actually NO choice) but to be sold, traded, etc,... within a bdsm context. Again, I want to make it clear that this is my reality only.

chrissyslave -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 5:02:16 PM)
I hardly dare put my toe in the waters of this discussion, other than to perhaps make more "daily living" type observations regarding relevance to me in this lifestyle in the United States. To me distinctions are significant when they impact me or someone I might be interacting with, such as a master or several masters in any due considerations, as a process, and growth of relationship. And to view and interact with other slaves (or subs to expand this same perspective). Starting with the most broad observation is what is done and allowed currently is quite opposite in style from even black slavery history, whereas as they were originally taken by force from their country so whereas they became by our laws at the time bound by slaves (and away from their homeland) it was not normal for them to enjoy that slavery, although over time and being born in that situation they might be more resigned to that status, given the lack of good other options. On our current society we are free legally but choose mentally to be slaves, or subs. If the basic "slaveship" is what someone wants then they should fly over to the Middle East or whatever and sell themselves there (or allow their masters to do that for them) then know what true slavery is about. And frankly I doubt that those not at least already in a deep slavery position (just talk at this point) would find that level of slavery all that appealing once it became reality...and then it's too late. As for how I would interact with someone calling themselves a slave, I would think no less of them, nor inquire of them their position of "would allow to be sold or not" status, because that is not critical to my mind what it takes to perform as a slave. Show me the factors that affect one's life, and one's service on a daily basis and that will be what I want to hear. Whereas I do believe that we as people are on a continuum of sub/slavery, and Dom/Master and is not right or wrong to it if on the same page of expectations, but I do see labels as having critical cutoffs points that should be reasonably well agreed upon, and do giving significant meaning in communication and interactions. Now removing my little toe of inexperience out of the discussion. Chrissyslave (at least to be)

starshineowned -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 5:56:30 PM)
Still stands as I wrote. You have to apply legal historical definitions of historical slavery to begin with to even understand what it was all about in order to modify it to fit current society as best as possible but stay as close to that legal historical base. It is only with doing this that decisions of what Has to be modified, and what can stay standing as was can be done at all. If a historical slave legally had no rights, and a present slave gives up those rights in order to be that slave..the end result is they both have no rights to use while they are slave. The same result is yielded yet modified. Well Wishes starshine Happy slave of Master Delvin

kyraofMists -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 6:01:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy From Merriam-Webster: Main Entry: 1slave Function: noun Pronunciation: 'slAv Etymology: Middle English sclave, from Old French or Medieval Latin; Old French esclave, from Medieval Latin sclavus, from Sclavus Slavic; from the frequent enslavement of Slavs in central Europe 1 : a person held in servitude as the chattel of another 2 : one that is completely subservient to a dominating influence From Oxford English Dictionary of Current English: slave • noun 1 historical a person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them. Oxford English Dictionary of Current English. I like how you ignore the other definition of slave from Merriam-Webster and only focus on the definition that fits your argument. One that is completely subservient to a dominating influence fits me with my Lord. Guess that makes me real. Webster says so. Knight's kyra

amiciaN -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 6:02:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy From Merriam-Webster: Main Entry: 1slave Function: noun Pronunciation: 'slAv Etymology: Middle English sclave, from Old French or Medieval Latin; Old French esclave, from Medieval Latin sclavus, from Sclavus Slavic; from the frequent enslavement of Slavs in central Europe 1 : a person held in servitude as the chattel of another 2 : one that is completely subservient to a dominating influence From Oxford English Dictionary of Current English: slave • noun 1 historical a person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them. It seems to me that most people have overlooked the definition I underlined in the OP's follow up post. By that definition, I would have to conclude that any person who self-identifies as a slave is a "true and real" slave. A great many submissives would be too. Bdsm encompasses so many different elements that it is unlikely there will ever be a universally accepted definition of the difference between a submissive and a slave. And in my own opinion, whether there is a universally accepted definition of what consistutes slavery doesn't actually matter. What matters is that the people involved in each individual relationship define it the same. As always, this is only my opinion based on my personal beliefs and experiences. Different people/relationships work differently. ymmv

kyraofMists -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 6:04:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: amiciaN It seems to me that most people have overlooked the definition I underlined in the OP's follow up post. By that definition, I would have to conclude that any person who self-identifies as a slave is a "true and real" slave. A great many submissives would be too. Bdsm encompasses so many different elements that it is unlikely there will ever be a universally accepted definition of the difference between a submissive and a slave. And in my own opinion, whether there is a universally accepted definition of what consistutes slavery doesn't actually matter. What matters is that the people involved in each individual relationship define it the same. As always, this is only my opinion based on my personal beliefs and experiences. Different people/relationships work differently. ymmv amicia, Seems you noticed that at the same time I did. s Welcome to the boards. Knight's kyra

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875