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

mnottertail -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 8:50:33 PM)
I cannot wait till the day some girl explains to me that she was trained.... I would take a vacation to lay at her breast and envelop her every word... I would be amazed, and in time---- Raphael

starshineowned -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 8:53:16 PM)
quote: Better examples of people agreeing to be slaves might be those occasions where someone would sell themselves into slavery for the chance of earning citizenship -- this did happen in Rome but very, very, very rarely. Once bought there were few ways to enforce the agreement other than doing excellent work and proving you would be more valuable as a freedman. This time period is where I know Master and myself draw from especially the domestic slaves, which are more liken to what occurs for Us. What is removed is the social acceptance of it and legality by law of it. The Owner then could beat, sell, kill the slave but most did not because slaves were a commodity. They cost bucks to own, and upkeep. To maim them, kill them or just sell them off for no particular reason defeated the reason for buying in the first place. Also during this era it even came to pass that it was illegal for a Owner to severely maim or kill their slaves less they be made slaves themselves or killed. I do love that quoting part of the bible. I liken it to what was mentioned much earlier about a slave coming to that end of a path where there just isn't anything else safe or understood but slavery. In present time..I guess this might be seen by a criminal who's been incarcerated for so long that once freed..they immediately become repeat offenders of something simply to get back into the institution of what and all they now understand. They still however go back in under the same rules that were present before, and without option to go back to it under new rules made by them. They were free. They made the choice to go back to incarceration or slavery as the bible example but they went back with the understanding of what that meant. Well Wishes starshine Happy slave of Master Delvin

mbes -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 8:54:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittensmailbox not a slave.... i am much to strong willed... i am a spirited submissive.... "Not a slave, much too strong-willed" does indicate that it requires weaker will to be a slave. While your premise is indeed up for debate, you put it out there to be debated. Oh, and the signature following the temper tantrum was great for a laugh, thanks! [:D]

mbes -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 8:57:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittensmailbox oh jesus christ.. i just said i wasnt a slave..... i'm not... like it or not.... i'm not, good for those who are... me, just a sub.... i was trained that slaves are not free thinkers..... that is how i was trained... dont like it? too bad, doesnt make me wrong or right, just how i was trained..... hate me, dont care.... i do not have to answer to any of you.... so kiss my ...... I would also say that your training might be lacking, given the number of slaves I've noticed who seem to have perfectly good working minds.

obey1 -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 9:03:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy To MFM and others who have a similar response. This post is intend to provoke a discussion is slavery. There is "real" slavery. If, as many with in "the scene" profess, that "the scene" is not a scene but reality in every sense of the word i.e. 24/7, than we must define accurately the word slave. slave • noun 1 historical a person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them. I we are to give credible scholarly dictionaries their due credit, slavery is not a negotiable. A slave is property. If one has the ability to decide for themselves, they are by definition not a slave. There is no consent unless a Slave Master is willing to give it. Clearly by some of the answers here several self described slaves said they are for sale but hope that would never happen. The "scene" is not a scene but reality? Then the entire dynamic becomes illegal as of the end of the civil war. If I can walk into your homeland, steal your children and force them to become my slaves because I have money, then I should be hunted down and prosecuted. That is what "real, true, historical, institutional" slavery is. It is always by force AND WITHOUT CONSENT of the slave. Otherwise it is known as an indentured servant. "decide for themselves"? Another wrong assumption. Even in the famous story 'Roots' by Alex Haley, Kunta Kinte had ALOT of deciding for himself, to the point of getting repeated beatings, running away, and having his foot chopped off. But as a slave, he was still able to "choose" to have a family, even though he knew that his children would be BORN INTO slavery, all of which prove that this 'consensual' argument is rubbish. If it is not consensual then it is illegal, tell me where this is happening and I will call the authorities to liberate the human being trapped within your repressive RT Megalomania.

Archer -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 9:15:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo quote: ORIGINAL: Archer 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 giggle This is the quotation Fox and I used when we pierced his ears for our 7th anniversary. I would ask though, as a historian, what defines consensual. If someone knows no other life or if someone knows that if they leave they are less likely to be able to have food on the table, clothes on their backs, or a roof over their head, are they giving consent to be a slave or simply choosing that which makes the most sense to them? In other words, if slavery is the least harmful option is it truly consensual or simply surviving? The Historic context of slavery as practiced by the Jewish people according to "The Law" was that slavery of another Jew was for a period of 7 years, after which you were obliged to free them. UNLESS they beged to remain your slave as mentioned in the quoted texts. So 7 years not exactly the amount of time for someone to not know any other way. In fact the indenture period practiced by european society also 7 years in most cases is often conjected to come from that aspect of Levitical Law.

Archer -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 9:21:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: obey1 quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy To MFM and others who have a similar response. This post is intend to provoke a discussion is slavery. There is "real" slavery. If, as many with in "the scene" profess, that "the scene" is not a scene but reality in every sense of the word i.e. 24/7, than we must define accurately the word slave. slave • noun 1 historical a person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them. I we are to give credible scholarly dictionaries their due credit, slavery is not a negotiable. A slave is property. If one has the ability to decide for themselves, they are by definition not a slave. There is no consent unless a Slave Master is willing to give it. Clearly by some of the answers here several self described slaves said they are for sale but hope that would never happen. The "scene" is not a scene but reality? Then the entire dynamic becomes illegal as of the end of the civil war. If I can walk into your homeland, steal your children and force them to become my slaves because I have money, then I should be hunted down and prosecuted. That is what "real, true, historical, institutional" slavery is. It is always by force AND WITHOUT CONSENT of the slave. Otherwise it is known as an indentured servant. "decide for themselves"? Another wrong assumption. Even in the famous story 'Roots' by Alex Haley, Kunta Kinte had ALOT of deciding for himself, to the point of getting repeated beatings, running away, and having his foot chopped off. But as a slave, he was still able to "choose" to have a family, even though he knew that his children would be BORN INTO slavery, all of which prove that this 'consensual' argument is rubbish. If it is not consensual then it is illegal, tell me where this is happening and I will call the authorities to liberate the human being trapped within your repressive RT Megalomania. I have provided documented evidence contrary to your asertations, The practice of 1. Slavery as repayment for saving ones life 2. Slavery willingly returned to after the period of indenture was legally over. So as is almost always the case when one uses X was always Y they are factually in error.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 9:26:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittensmailbox ouch!!!!, just posting my own feelings.... damn!!!!! ... i was trained that slaves have no freedmon You were trained poorly then. Many slaves have many freedoms. In fact, many slaves will say they find ultimate freedom in their slavery.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 9:28:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy Well then perhaps this question (and maybe it deserves its own thread); Can a slave (in context here with BDSM) say no if the owner wants to trade out their services, for a profit, for punishment, on a whim or because they just want too show they have the ability to do so? If she is told she can. As I've always said, a slave can absolutely rebel if they want. They just need permission first.

aSlavesLife -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/30/2007 9:29:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: obey1 quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy To MFM and others who have a similar response. This post is intend to provoke a discussion is slavery. There is "real" slavery. If, as many with in "the scene" profess, that "the scene" is not a scene but reality in every sense of the word i.e. 24/7, than we must define accurately the word slave. slave • noun 1 historical a person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them. I we are to give credible scholarly dictionaries their due credit, slavery is not a negotiable. A slave is property. If one has the ability to decide for themselves, they are by definition not a slave. There is no consent unless a Slave Master is willing to give it. Clearly by some of the answers here several self described slaves said they are for sale but hope that would never happen. "decide for themselves"? Another wrong assumption. Even in the famous story 'Roots' by Alex Haley, Kunta Kinte had ALOT of deciding for himself, to the point of getting repeated beatings, running away, and having his foot chopped off. But as a slave, he was still able to "choose" to have a family, even though he knew that his children would be BORN INTO slavery, all of which prove that this 'consensual' argument is rubbish. You are confusing consent with coercion. If I threaten a person with torture or death in order to enslave them, they are coerced. If they come to me willingly, knowing what I offer, it is consent. We also have historical records of people in ancient Egyptian society willingly selling themselves into slavery. And for the record, my slave's mother has already called the police. The police investigated, and found no wrong doing. In fact, I think that was mentioned in my journal.

agirl -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/31/2007 2:27:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittensmailbox oh jesus christ.. i just said i wasnt a slave..... i'm not... like it or not.... i'm not, good for those who are... me, just a sub.... i was trained that slaves are not free thinkers..... that is how i was trained... dont like it? too bad, doesnt make me wrong or right, just how i was trained..... hate me, dont care.... i do not have to answer to any of you.... so kiss my ...... You weren't trained, you were misinformed and told. You can be told anything but it makes sense to inform yourself. It's one thing to be told something and quite another for it to be a fact. If you blindly believe what you're told without informing yourself also, then are you a free-thinker, as a spirited submissive? agirl

julietsierra -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/31/2007 3:12:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittensmailbox oh jesus christ.. i just said i wasnt a slave..... i'm not... like it or not.... i'm not, good for those who are... me, just a sub.... i was trained that slaves are not free thinkers..... that is how i was trained... dont like it? too bad, doesnt make me wrong or right, just how i was trained..... hate me, dont care.... i do not have to answer to any of you.... so kiss my ...... So... what this "training" like.. a.. Pavlov moment or what? If so... where does that imply free thinking? And if it wasn't (and I'm thinking it wasn't), could you point out to me where in this "training" you were engaged in your "free thinking" or did you simply believe what was told to you? Cause here's the thing... If you'd have said you were told this, then explored it for yourself and decided it wasn't for you, THAT would have implied "free thinking." However, being told something without investigating it yourself (even through personal contemplation) and blindly accepting what was said as gospel really does imply less free thinking than you'd like to believe. Oooh, by your definition of us lowly automatons... you'd fit right in. And has anyone ever told you that you're cute when you stomp your foot? juliet

kyraofMists -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/31/2007 4:14:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy Well then perhaps this question (and maybe it deserves its own thread); Can a slave (in context here with BDSM) say no if the owner wants to trade out their services, for a profit, for punishment, on a whim or because they just want too show they have the ability to do so? If my Lord tells me that I am allowed to say no, then yes I can say no with no fear of negative consequences. However, I can also say no and then deal with the consequences. The consequences of saying no to him is an end of the relationship. However, doing so does not negate that I was not a slave for almost the last 2 years. My Lord gives alandra to others to please them on a regular basis. She enjoys it. One day he will also give me to others to please. However, this is only one small aspect of his authority. He does not need to validate his ownership of us by selling us to someone else. It would deprive him of his most favorite toys. As BeingChewsie said owning the body, the property is vastly different than owning the mind. I have three cats. They are mine and I own them. I don't think anyone would dispute their being "real" house pets. I could give them away anytime I so choose. However of the three there is one who will most likely not have another owner besides me. She may live in someone elses house and not see me again, but I will be her owner. She is devoted and loyal to me, so is she not a "real" house pet then? Is she not my property? I could give her away to demonstrate my ownership of her, but at what cost? What cost to her well-being and is it worth the price to lose such a precious part of my life just to prove that I can? What kind of owner would that make me? I think a very poor one. Yes, he could sell my body, but my heart and mind would belong to him. Knight's kyra *Just so someone doesn't get up in arms about slaves not owning anything... I have been granted the priviledge of my cats from my Lord. They are my responsibility.

Mercnbeth -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/31/2007 4:23:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy Can a slave (in context here with BDSM) say no if the owner wants to trade out their services, for a profit, for punishment, on a whim or because they just want too show they have the ability to do so? yes. it "can" happen. some slaves rebel. some get punished. some get released from service. some even run away. similar to, but not exactly like, forms of slavery out of the past.

MaryT -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/31/2007 6:04:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy Can a slave (in context here with BDSM) say no if the owner wants to trade out their services, for a profit, for punishment, on a whim or because they just want too show they have the ability to do so? Never! And any slave attempting such a thing should be executed on the spot! If the Dom then is convicted of murder leaving two ruined lives and two families forever in pain - tough cookies! That is the price that must be paid for being trew! You know what the adage "The power flows from the bottom up"? That's because of the law. If it isn't a matter of choice, it stops being kink and becomes human atrocity. I wouldn't have anything to do with a "kinkster" who was confused about which was which. Such a person's intellect and ethics wouldn't make the cut for even a casual friend, and it wouldn't matter to me if such a person was a sub or dom.

onestandingstill -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/31/2007 6:20:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy Can a slave (in context here with BDSM) say no if the owner wants to trade out their services, for a profit, for punishment, on a whim or because they just want too show they have the ability to do so? yes. it "can" happen. some slaves rebel. some get punished. some get released from service. some even run away. similar to, but not exactly like, forms of slavery out of the past. Slaves like this precious missy even GET MARRIED to their Masters as the life living under his divine rule and orders is the most freeing thing for her. Her will is willingly given to use as He sees fit. She is his slave and would like no life other than one of servicing her Master. Many can learn from the example of love between Master and slave these two set. Freedom and slavery indeed can be synonymous, and harmonious with her still allowed to have free thought. It's not having thoughts that make a slave, it's submitting those thoughts to your Master to use to the betterment of both. suzanne

thetammyjo -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/31/2007 7:01:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: starshineowned quote: Better examples of people agreeing to be slaves might be those occasions where someone would sell themselves into slavery for the chance of earning citizenship -- this did happen in Rome but very, very, very rarely. Once bought there were few ways to enforce the agreement other than doing excellent work and proving you would be more valuable as a freedman. This time period is where I know Master and myself draw from especially the domestic slaves, which are more liken to what occurs for Us. What is removed is the social acceptance of it and legality by law of it. The Owner then could beat, sell, kill the slave but most did not because slaves were a commodity. They cost bucks to own, and upkeep. To maim them, kill them or just sell them off for no particular reason defeated the reason for buying in the first place. Also during this era it even came to pass that it was illegal for a Owner to severely maim or kill their slaves less they be made slaves themselves or killed. Era? The laws in Rome to prevent maiming and killing of slaves without a trial is rather late in the Roman world. There are a variety of reasons why it happens but personally I think it reflect economic changes. In the mid Republic through the second century of the Empire slaves were exceedingly cheap -- laws about slavery change as the supply chain for slaves decreases and cost go up. Even in Rome where slaves were chattel (Rome is one of only five slave societies to have existed in the world according to leading slavery scholarly Orlando Patterson) they had certain rights such as the right to burials and the right to run to certain temples for asylum from that particular master; they could also ask a free person to represent them in a legal case. Did most slaves know this? How could we answer this question when most of our sources and evidence come from the more elite members of society? Then again I've read numerous claims on this forum (no where else by the way) that suggests some people are unaware of their legal and social rights today. Perhaps they are aware but they prefer to ignore them? Basically what I'm trying to point out is that the pop notion of slavery is too simplistic to represent any institutional or historical reality. Again I'll ask why it is important to us at all today when we practice consensual slavery or live in societies that do not support slavery. As much as we may set-up our households and our relationships on institutional or historical models we are not part of those societies today. I believe very strongly that people who try to make such universal definitions and apply these to their lives are setting themelves up for failure or for less fulfilling dynamics where they must constantly struggle with defining terms and convincing others to agree with them. I'm not refering to any specific person here just in general to the ideas I see repeatedly popping up and argued. While I will argue about historical examples and legal/social realities I will not argue with someone about how he/she defines her relationship. If you aren't in a relationship with me and if you aren't trying to do something non-consensual to any member of my family or friends, then how you define things only matter in terms of communication. I figure we each of work to do if we try to communicate and my shoving my definitions onto you is not communication but bullying. Why would I want to be or be around such a negative person? (again this is generic not specific to any one person)

thetammyjo -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/31/2007 7:07:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Archer quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo quote: ORIGINAL: Archer 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 giggle This is the quotation Fox and I used when we pierced his ears for our 7th anniversary. I would ask though, as a historian, what defines consensual. If someone knows no other life or if someone knows that if they leave they are less likely to be able to have food on the table, clothes on their backs, or a roof over their head, are they giving consent to be a slave or simply choosing that which makes the most sense to them? In other words, if slavery is the least harmful option is it truly consensual or simply surviving? The Historic context of slavery as practiced by the Jewish people according to "The Law" was that slavery of another Jew was for a period of 7 years, after which you were obliged to free them. UNLESS they beged to remain your slave as mentioned in the quoted texts. So 7 years not exactly the amount of time for someone to not know any other way. In fact the indenture period practiced by european society also 7 years in most cases is often conjected to come from that aspect of Levitical Law. Did you notice that I didn't argue that it was consensual or not? I asked the question and some follow up questions. We could also ask if the origional slavery was consented to or again merely a survival choice. Does survival = consent or something else? If the events in question were not slavery but sex or related to money or age or anything other factor/activity, would the conclusions be the same? If not, why not?

heartfeltsub -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/31/2007 7:14:03 AM)
It is my understanding, though i could be incorrect, that the original 7 years prior choosing to make the slavery permanent was more of an indentured servitude based on debt (typically). Granted this may have not always been the case, it is just my understanding.

thetammyjo -> RE: So you think you are really a slave.... (1/31/2007 7:34:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heartfeltsub It is my understanding, though i could be incorrect, that the original 7 years prior choosing to make the slavery permanent was more of an indentured servitude based on debt (typically). Granted this may have not always been the case, it is just my understanding. ack, run she's slipping into teacher mode If the above is true, how does that affect the issue of consent?

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.785156E-02