quote:

ORIGINAL: drawntothedark
The OP in my thinking did not come out and say "this is the be all and end all of definitions" He simply gave his thoughts on how he viewed Dom/Masters. No more no less. I'm not clear why so much fuss over a opinion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadRabbit

I will, however, dispute the notion that for a successful relationship to be successful, both people in the relationship didnt have to work and fulfill responsibilities and arent both deserving of credit if they both in fact want to claim it.

I hope that provides some clarity.

My friend, I'm unsure if this point has been clearly expressed to you..
In the M/s dynamic, as defined in this thread, the Master adopts the responsibilities of the slave in her collaring and, as her owner, gains any new ones that would have fallen to her as if the dynamic had no occured.  However, she maintains a singular responsibily, one that consumes her attention in its entirety, to her Master.

One thing that I'm still considering, though, is the obligation of relationship.  In this dynamic, both Master and slave accept the premise: slave obeys Master, Master accepts full responsibility and credit.  In my relationship, and those of similar nature which I've observed, slaves have been incredibly loyal, never disobeying (except in minor instances of misunderstanding, which I do not find blameworthy) nor rebelious.  Masters have had no trouble guiding a slave to the degree which they desire.

This is to say, I've found these relationships to be without strain nor drama.  I'm curious if most following this dynamic are so blessed?

quote:

ORIGINAL: daniL
I'm sorry if I offended you-- I don't actually agree with the concept that bdsm slavery can be related to other forms. I was merely using that as a counterpoint as it had been brought up earlier in the thread. I think it's a much more mutually fulfulling relationship than any of the historical references to slavery. The majority of my post was using images/ideas/theories that originated in the posts of others in order to examine the OP and the insuing elaborations.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer

BTW the thought process for transfering a slave's pre existing capabilitis to their owner is simple but has been missed so far.

A slave has talents and abilities and were selected in part based on those capabilities, so the reflected honor on their owner is in selecting a slave with a good skill set. My slave does many things really well which I had little to nothing to do with instilling in her. I take the laurals for her by simply saying,

"Thank you, I still believe choosing Elegant was he single best decission I ever made."

I am not responsible for providing the skill to her, but I am responsible for allowing her the opportunity to practice it.

My favorite joke compliment for her is "It's easy I wind her up I point her in the right direction and turn her loose. It's easy when you start with good materials to begin with."

quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: MagiksSlave

Again LA you speak so very well. Honeslty that quote or whatever seems to be just a fantasy that kind of thing can not exist just because well think of it the venilla world isnt gunna care that she is a slave to a Master if she does something they dont like they are gunna blame her... If he tells her to rob a bank and she does the police arent gunna arrest the Master they are gunna arrest the slave!!!

Oh, of course the vanilla world won't recognize it.  This doesn't mean you can't have it, now does it?  Do you recognize yourself as a slave, despite the fact most people in the world would probably say you can't be owned, that slavery is illegal?

Slavery is illegal. That means that no one really owns anything and your "slave" can pick up the phone and call 911 on your ass if you beat her too hard. If you cheat and piss her off, she can also share what you two did together, possibly costing your job, child custody, friends and family.

That's the reality of what we do. If you want to really own someone and not have to deal with that, then you should consider moving.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadRabbit

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadRabbit

I will, however, dispute the notion that for a successful relationship to be successful, both people in the relationship didnt have to work and fulfill responsibilities and arent both deserving of credit if they both in fact want to claim it.

I hope that provides some clarity.

My friend, I'm unsure if this point has been clearly expressed to you..
In the M/s dynamic, as defined in this thread, the Master adopts the responsibilities of the slave in her collaring and, as her owner, gains any new ones that would have fallen to her as if the dynamic had no occured.  However, she maintains a singular responsibily, one that consumes her attention in its entirety, to her Master.

One thing that I'm still considering, though, is the obligation of relationship.  In this dynamic, both Master and slave accept the premise: slave obeys Master, Master accepts full responsibility and credit.  In my relationship, and those of similar nature which I've observed, slaves have been incredibly loyal, never disobeying (except in minor instances of misunderstanding, which I do not find blameworthy) nor rebelious.  Masters have had no trouble guiding a slave to the degree which they desire.

This is to say, I've found these relationships to be without strain nor drama.  I'm curious if most following this dynamic are so blessed?

I think you are a very smart boy, my friend. (I dont mean to condescend to you)

I think you have spent a lot of time with computers and not as much with people.

I am sure as time goes by and you gain the life experience, you will come to understand how things involving people dont operate with the flawless certainity that is present in your "theory" and in your computers and machines.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer

I think the problem comes when folks try to include things outside of or tangental to the relationship when hey speak of responsibility, of a Master to and for their slave.

In the instance of crimeinal orders then the problem is not that the master is not responsible for the slave's actions (within the relationship itself) but that society also imposes responsibilities on every person as an individual and the person slave or Master is responsible to the society for their behaviour meeting some community standards.

Slavery does not, and can not remove a person's responsibility to society in most cases.
Because in a nation of laws even the most Alpha person is individually held to some community standards (Murder, robbery, assault, etc...) The Master may be responsible for the order to break those standards but society does not recognize that chain of command, unless the Master pipes up and admits to being the one giving the order after which society may well simply file charges against both parties. (Conspiricy to commit). But Society will still hold each individual responsible for their choices and every order given or followed is a choice. Give and accept responsibility/ Obey and accept the conseqences or Give and reject responsibility, / Disobey and accept the consequences.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer

As to the definitions given in the OP I'm not of the same mind, I still contend that "ownership" is the definative difference.
If the person genuinely feels OWNED then a condition of consensual slavery exists.
If the person feels controlled but not owned then a condition of consensual submission exists.
Obedience although desireable in a slave is not definative.
Submission although it makes managing the slave possible is not definative
You can own a dog that does not obey or submit and by all legal defintion you still own the dog, and you are in fact held by society responsible for that dog's actions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile

Now logically speaking....

If a slave is not responsible or accountable for their own actions, then all punishment should fall upon thier Master.  So if a slave fucks up, the Master should punish himself under this idealized concept.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile

Look this is completely insane to make a statement that slaves are not accountable nor responsible for their own actions.  This is the very reason why punishment and even rewards come into play.   Hell, this concept is known about even in periods of time and cultures where slavey has been legal.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile

In terms of a slave being able to cook Bitchen Hot Apple pies and if she learned this from somebody other than her master, The Master was not responsible for this skill set.   Master may be in control of this skill, but not responsbible for it either.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile

Now any MASTER or DOM should know that they can't control everything around them...  There is a Limit to the level of control.   Anybody who thinks they have complete control over everything and anything about a slave is just Living life in denial and in an illustion.   This applied to even in cultures and history periods where Slavery was legalized..

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile

OK.. so let's get all romantic here for a moment, how does the path to owning a slaves Heart, Mind and Soul work.. OH Geeessh... Knock Knock Knock...  The slave has not been magically transformed into something other than a human being!  Dugh!  We are talking about a human being still here.  If it looks like a Duck, Sounds like a Duck it's really a duck.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile

Responsible people are accountable people, now why do slave get punished again, is it not because the slave was accountable or responsible for something?

quote:

If a dominant desires to be responsible for the behaviour, good and bad, of his property or submissive or slave or whatever damn label you want to stick on a persons forehead then that is something that is opposite to society today and is commendable.
 
So many parents wipe their hands of 'problem' children claiming ridiculous reasons why they aren't 'responsible' for their childs behaviour.  Thats just bull.
 
Teachers and people in so called authority are too afraid to stand up and be responsible in anyway, in case they are sued or shown as libal.  And thats just incredibly sad. 
 
So many people see a dog attack and immediately say 'its not the dogs fault - its the owners - they should have trained it better, they should have managed it better, they should have kept it on a tighter leash.'  They want these owners prosectued - held accountable.
Yet you have people - Masters, Dominants - wanting to take that responsibility and told that it will never work, that its an overtly romantic notion and completely invalid.
 
And yet, the only difference between that dog and that slave, is that people have the sense and idea of what being sentient is.
The reality is - its just conjecture and no one can really know if that dog is sentient or not.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord
I am not a boy; I am a man.  Such a pretention would be insulting, though I'm going to chauk it up to lack of forethought.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile

Anybody and everybody is a separate living human being from the other.  The OP made the statement that submissives are sperate and that slaves are not.  However so are slaves and anybody else regardless of title or label placed upon them. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile

No matter how hard you'd like to mentally dehumanize a human being they are still a human being.  If it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck it a duck.  Foot stools are simple objects, using a slave as a foot stool is just using a human being as a foot stool, it does not make them literally become a foot stool and not a human being.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord
I am not a boy; I am a man.  Such a pretention would be insulting, though I'm going to chauk it up to lack of forethought.

You called me girl a few days ago and I'm older than you.  What in the past two days changed your mind on that particular thing?

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord
I suffer from no illusion that police would arrest me instead of my slave should she vandalize a car.  I am well aware society would hold her accountable.  They are not part of the dynamic.

Now, if my slave were rude to a Gorean Master, it would be me he addressed.  If my slave stole something from him, he'd likely speak to me before calling the police and hold me socially liable for the theft.

quote:


A Master owns his slave, ordering her without limits. She's to live by his word and do his bidding. Her actions are his actions- her responsibilities become his. Should he assign her a responsibility, while she's obligated to follow in it, it is, ultimately, still his.

quote:


Please understand that I am at an utter loss as to which part of this concept is not sinking in for other people.  It is entirely accurate.. I can both justify it logically and demonstrate it, as I am living this dynamic.

If you find anything about this still unclear or apparently contradictory, I will be glad to explain it.

It is not sane to deny the possibility of something logical and demonstratable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer

Minds are seldom changed wildly from one viewpoint to another, they change in millimeters not kilometers.
My own mind is always looking for better viewpoints than my own to adopt in part.
Hundreds of posts though all the years have shifted my thoughts a milimeter at a time until this point and I'm sure it will continue to shift little by little. Whn your mind gets set on a single viewpoint to the exlussion of all other possibilities that is when your mind is closed and stops growing. If it's not growing it's dieing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord
I suffer from no illusion that police would arrest me instead of my slave should she vandalize a car.  I am well aware society would hold her accountable.  They are not part of the dynamic.

Now, if my slave were rude to a Gorean Master, it would be me he addressed.  If my slave stole something from him, he'd likely speak to me before calling the police and hold me socially liable for the theft.

You in turn would deal with your slave for her actions, she is still responsible for her actions, that she carried out seperate from your desires.  Case in point where the slave acted seperately, and she will be held accountable by you, and you are responsible and accountable to the Gorean Master.   She still acted seperately from your will at the time, and she is indeed responsible and so are you. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile

In the case of a slave Vandalizing a car, even though she may be held legally responsible for it, if she does not work.. somebody will have to pony up for damages.  Now who would that be?  However, there are something called limits.  You as her Master what is the limit to what she does that you will accept responsibility for?

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile

So if she runs out and burns down the Gorean Masters house worth $250,000, including priceless contents such as family heirlooms and slays all his animals (dogs, cats and birds) will you accept liability for the damages that occured?  What are the limits in accepting responsibility for a slaves actions here?  At what point would you turn your back on a slave and say, "it was all her and I had nothing to do with it and I'm not responsible for a damn thing."

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile

quote:


A Master owns his slave, ordering her without limits. She's to live by his word and do his bidding. Her actions are his actions- her responsibilities become his. Should he assign her a responsibility, while she's obligated to follow in it, it is, ultimately, still his.

looking for any limits to the responsibility you will take for a slaves actions here, as per above example I gave or other extreme cases one could imagine.

Ordering her without limits - does this include being able to order her without limits to burn down a Gorean Masters house and slay his animals.  Perhaps ordering her to steal from him as well instead?

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhiplashSmile

quote:


Please understand that I am at an utter loss as to which part of this concept is not sinking in for other people.  It is entirely accurate.. I can both justify it logically and demonstrate it, as I am living this dynamic.

If you find anything about this still unclear or apparently contradictory, I will be glad to explain it.

It is not sane to deny the possibility of something logical and demonstratable.

I'm tossing the proverbial dynamics of limits here be it a Masters Limits or a Slaves Limits...

quote:

ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross

No worries, I corrected you back in my initial response on page 2.  But you must watch for things like that in the future if you plan on engaging in forums which welcome all orientations and do not abide such double standards so easily and don't want to spend half your discussion time apologizing and restating.  Just think of it as any vanilla forum- our relationship orientations really aren't relevant in HOW you write to someone.