Collarchat.com

Create a
Free Account
As the Collar Turns:
Collarchat.com - BDSM Forum

Home  Login  Search 
Espanol  Deutsch  Francais  Italiano  Portugues 

ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Gorean Lifestyles >> ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/12/2008 11:31:26 AM   
Quantumm


Posts: 53
Joined: 1/28/2008
Status: offline
Greetings... I didn't want to hijack the thread titled "Mercy" so I reposted the original under this new subject:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Leonidas, in the "Mercy" thread at http://www.collarchat.com/m_1852362/tm.htm

The quality of mercy is not strain'd,
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath: it is twice blest;
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes:
'Tis mightiest in the mightiest: it becomes
The throned monarch better than his crown

Could it be that I had, as the Codes of my Caste recommended, not even considered her, but merely regarded her as a rightless animal, no more than a subject beast, an abject instrument to my interests and pleasures, a slave?

The Bard suggests that mercy is among those things most noble in us, and especially so in those who hold real power over others.  Among the rude codes of Gor is the suggestion that the will and desires of a slave not be considered at all.  If they are in a collar, they belong in a collar, and as it says above, are to be treated as a subject beast to further the interests and pleasures of their master.

The books contain many cautionary tales along these lines of the girl upon whom her master took pity, and showed mercy, considering her own desires and feelings along with, and sometimes even ahead of his own, and who then spat that pity and mercy back into his face as contempt.  Mercy pitifully begged for and later taken for, and recounted as weakness is an amazing sight indeed.  In the last couple of decades I have seen it a time or two outside the books as well.  I'm sure that anyone else who has kept and been around slaves that long has too.

My advice to those who are disposed to hear it is that a woman who kneels and begs for a collar belongs in a collar.  Do not pity her the weight of it, or the abject submission that it implies and requires.  Where her interests and pleasures diverge from your own, choose yours, and by all means do not consider her at all.  It can be difficult advice to follow sometimes, especially if the girl in your collar is particularly adept at playing for pity.  If you fail to heed it though, you may one day find, perhaps years from now, that she will recount to you what an easy mark you are.  It is not an experience I would recommend.


I have just started reading the books (specifically, just finished the chapter on Nar the Spider) so I haven't a lot of book-knowledge for reference.

Regarding what is written, above, I have bolded and underlined 2 things that jumped out at me:

If a woman kneels and begs a collar, doesn't that consitute an act of her will and desire?  If, then, we are to ignore her will and desire, wouldn't it be appropriate to deny her begging the collar?  After all, if we wanted to collar that slave, we would do so on our own initiative rather than in response to her begging.

I realize, though, that the post was specifically posted in the context of ignoring her will and desire for 'mercy.'  On that note, "mercy" is a term that may mean quite different things to different people so I can't help but wonder if there's more in mind about 'mercy' than what was implied by the original post?

Finally, I noticed a contrast between a 'rightless beast' and a woman begging a collar.  I cannot think of a time when a truly wild beast begged for capture/captivity, whereas in the Earthly realm, human slaves seem quite disposed to do so.

This has me wondering something a bit more complex and subtle:

   * If a beast were more intellectually sophisticated (at the level of human intellectual potential), would it likely beg a collar?
   * If human slaves were less intellectually sophisticated, would they be less likely to beg a collar?


Pick any or all points for exposition.  I'm here to learn.

I wish you well,
Quantumm 
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/12/2008 1:23:31 PM   
xBullx


Posts: 3962
Joined: 10/8/2005
Status: offline
Hello Quantum,

I think it's always import to consider the nature of the beast. In other words the natural inclanatons an individual is inspired too.

To understand why perhaps first one must discover what............

_____________________________

Live well,

Bull



I'm not an asshole; I'm simply resolute...

"A Republic, If You Can Keep It."

Caution: My humor is a bit skewed.

(in reply to Quantumm)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/12/2008 2:36:42 PM   
amelliagrace


Posts: 1792
Joined: 8/4/2007
Status: offline
Hi, Quantumm -
 
Just some thoughts, for consideration:
 
Firstly, there is a great deal of variety among people, be they male or female, slave or free, nilla or kinky, eastern or western.  Those individual variations, and the desires, personalities, etc of the individuals involved will obviously play a role in how a Free and potential slave interact.
 
Secondly, the person begging the collar may well not be enslaved.  What do I mean be that?  A person can have a slaves heart, mindset, or inclinations - even experience as a slave - and not be enslaved to the person they are begging a collar from.
 
Enslavement isn't a once and done, open mix, add water, and stir proposition.  Depending on the individuals, and what has preceded the begging or bestowing of a collar, those events may well only serve to mark the willingness of an individual to inter into a relationship and process with another, which will (eventually, and if all goes well) result in enslavement..at some point in the future.
 
When Charlemagne was conquering territory right and left, he technically became ruler of those territories.  Possessing them, controling them, however, was a bit more involved.  Little pockets of resistance had to be put down.  All the little villiages and isolated farms and hamlets had to be advised that they were now "under new ownership/management" so to speak.  It isn't so very different with individuals in a M/s relationship.  The process of truly owning, possessing, controling...enslaving...takes time, effort, and skill.  Simply putting a collar around a neck does not not enslave them, or mold them to your will in all areas.
 
IOW, the begging of the collar may well be the last choice made by the individual, and be the transition point from un-owned to owned.  What it isn't, in most cases I've ever seen or heard of, is a single moment at which point all resistance is conqured, and all the work of possessing the land..errr, slave...is done.  It is usually the beginning of the journey, rather than the destination.  When it comes right down to it, the person begging the collar, prior to that act, is usually seen as free, and likely thinks of themself as free.  If that is the case, then the begging or acceptance of it are not something done free to slave, but rather, free to free.   
 
A formal setting aside of freedom in order to seek enslavement, can serve good purpose.  Some might call it "covering your ass" legally, others "a right of passage", and others still, "an outward symbol of an internal dynamic".
 
I hope I've managed to convey my thoughts on this in a comprehensible fashion.
 
Grace

(in reply to xBullx)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/12/2008 3:59:52 PM   
Quantumm


Posts: 53
Joined: 1/28/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: xBullx

Hello Quantum,

I think it's always import to consider the nature of the beast. In other words the natural inclanatons an individual is inspired too.

To understand why perhaps first one must discover what............


Hello, Bull.

I suppose at this early stage of my journey/learning, I'm as challenged by terminology as anything.

For example, the term "beast" -- when applied to slaves -- just doesn't sit well with me.  I don't mean to buck natural order when I say this, it's just that there's a bit of a hop (in my mind) from male dominance to enslavement of a human being, then another hop from human enslavement to referring to a slave as a [mere] beast.

When I think 'beast,' I think zebra, wolf, cow, etc.  The gulf between beast and human, to me, is vast.  In what sense does one understand the term 'beast' when it's applied to a human slave?

Regards,
Quantumm

(in reply to xBullx)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/12/2008 4:08:59 PM   
Camerius


Posts: 742
Joined: 9/5/2006
Status: offline

The term "beast" is a legal one from Gor, since they had as much rights as such, beasts. Too they could be done with in any way like that as the owner saw fit, just like it can be done with other types of beasts.


Slaves are property, no more, no less, and yet, a lot of other things behind that, which might dawn on you further down the road, from more extensive reading, and mainly deeper thinking of what is written in the books.


I wish you well,

  Camerius




_____________________________

"To Gorean morality many Earth moralities might ask, "Why so hard?" To these Earth moralities, the Gorean ethos might ask, "Why so soft?" Marauders of Gor, pg.8

(in reply to Quantumm)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/12/2008 4:27:41 PM   
Quantumm


Posts: 53
Joined: 1/28/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: amelliagrace

Hi, Quantumm -



Hi, Grace.

quote:

ORIGINAL: amelliagrace

Just some thoughts, for consideration:
 
Firstly, there is a great deal of variety among people ...[that] will obviously play a role in how a Free and potential slave interact.
 
Secondly, the person begging the collar may well not be enslaved ... to the person they are begging a collar from.
 
Enslavement isn't a once and done, open mix, add water, and stir proposition.  Depending on the individuals, and what has preceded the begging or bestowing of a collar, those events may well only serve to mark the willingness of an individual to inter into a relationship and process with another, which will (eventually, and if all goes well) result in enslavement..at some point in the future.



Yes, I'm familiar with the idea that the act of collaring is often just the beginning of the process intended to bring about the condition of [internal] enslavement.

quote:

ORIGINAL: amelliagrace

When Charlemagne was conquering territory right and left, he technically became ruler of those territories.  Possessing them, controling them, however, was a bit more involved.  Little pockets of resistance had to be put down.  All the little villiages and isolated farms and hamlets had to be advised that they were now "under new ownership/management" so to speak.  It isn't so very different with individuals in a M/s relationship.  The process of truly owning, possessing, controling...enslaving...takes time, effort, and skill.  Simply putting a collar around a neck does not not enslave them, or mold them to your will in all areas.
 


I'm feeling some mixture of dynamics here, Grace.  In contrast with the original setting of my question, the territories Charlemagne conquered weren't begging to be conquered.  Similarly, I wonder if he referred to the conquered people as 'beasts'?

As to your point in relation to the process of enslavement, I realize the presence of a collar does not a slave make :)
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: amelliagrace

IOW, the begging of the collar may well be the last choice made by the individual, and be the transition point from un-owned to owned.  What it isn't, in most cases I've ever seen or heard of, is a single moment at which point all resistance is conqured, and all the work of possessing the land..errr, slave...is done.  It is usually the beginning of the journey, rather than the destination.  When it comes right down to it, the person begging the collar, prior to that act, is usually seen as free, and likely thinks of themself as free.  If that is the case, then the begging or acceptance of it are not something done free to slave, but rather, free to free.   
 
A formal setting aside of freedom in order to seek enslavement, can serve good purpose.  Some might call it "covering your ass" legally, others "a right of passage", and others still, "an outward symbol of an internal dynamic".
 
I hope I've managed to convey my thoughts on this in a comprehensible fashion.
 
Grace


Comprehension assured.  Thanks for sharing! :)

I wish you well,
Quantumm

(in reply to amelliagrace)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/12/2008 4:37:01 PM   
ZebRarius


Posts: 88
Joined: 3/17/2008
Status: offline
Gorean slave girls are livestock.  They have no more rights than a flock of domesticated verr.

They differ in some ways, of course.  One can fuck a female slave without people going "ewwwwww" (well... some slaves).

Too, they are intelligent, and sometimes, when it pleases us to do so, we can talk with them.  They can perform a variety of useful tasks.

Z

(in reply to Quantumm)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/12/2008 4:48:56 PM   
Quantumm


Posts: 53
Joined: 1/28/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Camerius

The term "beast" is a legal one from Gor, since they had as much rights as such, beasts. Too they could be done with in any way like that as the owner saw fit, just like it can be done with other types of beasts.



Hello, Camerius.  So then, the term 'beasts' is an analog to describe the absence of slaves' rights?  Makes sense to me when understood this way.  I was trying to understand a more literal interpretation of the term and was wondering how any Master might reasonably justify calling another human being a beast.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Camerius

Slaves are property, no more, no less, and yet, a lot of other things behind that, which might dawn on you further down the road, from more extensive reading, and mainly deeper thinking of what is written in the books.

I wish you well,

Camerius


I'm still working out some apparent conflicts between all that seems (to me) to be implied by 'consensual human slavery' and some baseline measure of human rights.  I understand well enough the motivation and choice to surrender one's liberty.  What I've yet to find a comfortable conclusion about is in the realms of safety and dignity.

Any thoughts on how much (liberty, safety, dignity) is consensually surrendered when one submits to being collared?

I wish you well,
Quantumm

(in reply to Camerius)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/12/2008 4:53:09 PM   
Quantumm


Posts: 53
Joined: 1/28/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ZebRarius

Gorean slave girls are livestock.  They have no more rights than a flock of domesticated verr.



Hm... they ARE livestock, or they are AS VOID OF RIGHTS as livestock?  As slave GIRLS, my thinking currently regards them as human first, slaves second.  And that, of course, relates back to my earlier question to Camerius about whether there be something more than liberty that's surrendered in the consensual begging, or accepting, of an Earth collar.

Not trying to pick nits here, just looking for explicit clarity on some points.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ZebRarius

They differ in some ways, of course.  One can fuck a female slave without people going "ewwwwww" (well... some slaves).

Too, they are intelligent, and sometimes, when it pleases us to do so, we can talk with them.  They can perform a variety of useful tasks.

Z

(in reply to ZebRarius)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/12/2008 5:06:15 PM   
xBullx


Posts: 3962
Joined: 10/8/2005
Status: offline
Give the studies some time.....it took Tarl to till book nine to stop annoying me..............


_____________________________

Live well,

Bull



I'm not an asshole; I'm simply resolute...

"A Republic, If You Can Keep It."

Caution: My humor is a bit skewed.

(in reply to Quantumm)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/12/2008 5:49:29 PM   
MarcusofAr


Posts: 532
Joined: 3/12/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Quantumm

Not trying to pick nits here, just looking for explicit clarity on some points.


Any consensual, self-submitted "slave" cannot abandon her legal rights under the law. So, yes, consensual Gorean slaves have rights.

Gorean philosophy holds that all human beings are "animals." Perhaps a different species of animal-- but an animal in the sense that we function under most of the same parameters as other animals found in nature.

It is a common Gorean belief that the word "beast" refers to an animal who exists outside of the Caste Codes.

Gorean slaves falll into the same category as livestock under Gorean Law (which does not exist outside the books).

A female who begs the collar of a Gorean, here on Earth, and who is accepted by him as his slave, enters into a relationship wherein she will be treated as if she had no rights or choices. Her potential choices are reduced to just one: either to stay within the relationship, or not. If she remains, she should expect to be treated as if she were an owned property.

When a woman begs for a Gorean collar, she is a free woman begging for a collar.

But once she is collared, then within the boundaries of that relationship she ceases to claim any rights apart from those normally granted to a Gorean slave-- i.e, owned, living property-- ergo, livestock.

I wish you well,

_Marcus_

(in reply to Quantumm)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/12/2008 7:31:51 PM   
Leonidas


Posts: 2078
Joined: 2/16/2004
Status: offline
quote:

If a woman kneels and begs a collar, doesn't that consitute an act of her will and desire?  If, then, we are to ignore her will and desire, wouldn't it be appropriate to deny her begging the collar?  After all, if we wanted to collar that slave, we would do so on our own initiative rather than in response to her begging.


Begging the collar is the last act of a free woman.  So, yes, it is an act of her will and desire, and worthy of some consideration.  Not to say you have to agree to what she is begging, of course.

_____________________________

Take care of yourself

Leonidas

(in reply to Quantumm)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/12/2008 9:23:02 PM   
Aswad


Posts: 6908
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
Tal Camerius,

Not just a legal term...

In fact, until some moron mistranslated the root NPÅ , the common conception was- as is reflected in most linguistic evidence- that there are "people" (i.e. "us"), animate stuff (i.e. "others") and inanimate stuff. Those who were not acknowledged members of the tribe were beasts (or, sometimes, "barbar" or some similar nonsensical reduplicate noise).

Which is part of the reason why it's traditionally simple for people to do as they wish unto others.

Health,
al-Aswad.


_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do.
" -- Rorschack, Watchmen.


(in reply to Camerius)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/13/2008 7:17:01 AM   
Quantumm


Posts: 53
Joined: 1/28/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MarcusofAr (excerpted, for focus)

It is a common Gorean belief that the word "beast" refers to an animal who exists outside of the Caste Codes.

Gorean slaves falll into the same category as livestock under Gorean Law (which does not exist outside the books).

A female who begs the collar of a Gorean, here on Earth, and who is accepted by him as his slave, enters into a relationship wherein she will be treated as if she had no rights or choices. Her potential choices are reduced to just one: either to stay within the relationship, or not. If she remains, she should expect to be treated as if she were an owned property.



This is exactly the kind of detail I was looking for.  The rest of your reply was helpful as well... thanks!

Regards,
Quantumm

(in reply to MarcusofAr)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/13/2008 7:50:53 AM   
Quantumm


Posts: 53
Joined: 1/28/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Leonidas

quote:

If a woman kneels and begs a collar, doesn't that consitute an act of her will and desire?  If, then, we are to ignore her will and desire, wouldn't it be appropriate to deny her begging the collar?  After all, if we wanted to collar that slave, we would do so on our own initiative rather than in response to her begging.


Begging the collar is the last act of a free woman.  So, yes, it is an act of her will and desire, and worthy of some consideration.  Not to say you have to agree to what she is begging, of course.


As I read what you wrote (which is helpful -- thanks!), it occurred to me that someone else had remarked elsewhere that if a slave is released, she is considered a free woman.  Is that correct?

And if it is correct, then is the term "slave" more a term of relationship (i.e., she's a slave when collared/owned, otherwise she's free) than a term of station (i.e., slaves are slaves whether they are owned or not)?  Or is it perhaps a bit of both (which, for me, would only further muddy the waters :) ?

Regards,
Quantumm

(in reply to Leonidas)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/13/2008 8:45:15 AM   
Kimveri


Posts: 781
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Vegas
Status: offline
G'morning, Quantumm,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Quantumm
As I read what you wrote (which is helpful -- thanks!), it occurred to me that someone else had remarked elsewhere that if a slave is released, she is considered a free woman.  Is that correct?


Keeping in mind the difference between a Gorean Free Woman, who is not actively seek enslavement, & a woman who is seeking enslavement, one could conclude that the female who seeks (but has not yet found) enslavement is, for the moment, a free female.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Quantumm
And if it is correct, then is the term "slave" more a term of relationship (i.e., she's a slave when collared/owned, otherwise she's free) than a term of station (i.e., slaves are slaves whether they are owned or not)?


In reading the books, one will find statements that suggest either. If one separates out the factors related to the socio-economic institution illustrated in the fiction as non-viable in our reality, then that simplifies things a bit. However, 'simple' does not always equal 'easy'! ;-D

I've always viewed "ownership" in two ways; one is the legal condition, often delineated for the owner by a deed or title, & the other is the figurative, internal result of being subjected to "excellent mastery". While many can come to experience the sensation of being owned on a very deep level, it is the mastery that caused that condition, not vice versa. Hence, 'ownership' is not definitive, & cannot be considered the means that delineates the slave from the free female yet seeking.

IMO, mastery is the cause, thus indicative of slavery.

There are some passages in the books that might serve to highlight that idea as worth consideration. I'll include two, for your perusal.

quote:

"The condition of slavery does not require the collar, or the brand, or an anklet, bracelet or ring, or any such overt sign of bondage. Such things, as symbolic as they are, as profoundly meaningful as they are, and as useful as they are for marking properties, identifying masters, and such, are not necessary to slavery. They are, in effect, though their affixing can legally effect imbondment, ultimately, in themselves, tokens of bondage, and are not to be confused with the reality itself. The uncollared slave is not then a free woman but only a slave who is not then in a collar."~pg273Renegades

...&...

"It is one thing to own a woman, and it is another to have her within the bonds of an excellent mastery."~pg465Magicians


I'm fairly sure there are those who disagree, so certainly your query will bring about scrutiny & discussion -- always a good thing, imo! :-)

Well wishes,

~Kimveri

_____________________________

"You get what you accept."

"It is always wise to examine the facts from all angles before one renders a summary judgement."~_Marcus_

(in reply to Quantumm)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/13/2008 11:24:41 AM   
MarcusofAr


Posts: 532
Joined: 3/12/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Quantumm

As I read what you wrote (which is helpful -- thanks!), it occurred to me that someone else had remarked elsewhere that if a slave is released, she is considered a free woman.  Is that correct?


Since we do not recognize the legal state of chattel slavery, in the strictly legal sense the self-professed "slave" is always a free woman (in the sense that she is legally free, and she is a woman).

So, in any translation of Gorean practices from the books into our own melieu, if it says "legal" in regards to "slavery" as it exists on the planet Gor, then you can probably toss it out the window. Because here on Earth, that is never the case.

We use the term "slavery" in two distinct ways-- one, to reference an individual's social status, and two, to indicate her relationship status.

One who declares herself "a Gorean slave" is stating that she surrenders to her inner "slave" nature and is assuming the social status, among other Goreans, of "slave." She will therefore comport herself in relation to other self-professed Goreans as if she were one, and they will be expected to treat her as if she was.

She is then "socially" a Gorean slave, versus a woman who has not declared herself as such.

A woman who has not declared herself to be a slave may instead declare herself a Gorean Free Woman. In this case, she is stating that she is embracing her own inner "free" nature. She will therefore comport herself in relation to other self-professed Goreans as if she were one, and they will be expected to treat her as if she was.

She is then "socially" a Gorean Free Woman, versus a woman who has not declared herself as such.

In the same vein, a man may declare himself a Free Gorean. In this case, he is stating that he is embracing his own inner "free Gorean" nature. He will therefore comport herself in relation to other self-professed Goreans as if he were one, and they will be expected to treat him as if he was.

He is then considered "socially" a Free Gorean, versus a man who has not declared himself to be such.

In all of the above cases, the claimant will be judged by his or her peers (fellow Goreans) regarding the veracity of their claim based upon how they comport themselves.

In all three cases, if one is found lacking or fails to achieve the self-proclaimed status for oneself, that does not mean one is automatically qualified for one of the other two Gorean categories.

Instead, if one doesn't achieve one of the aforementioned categories, one is found "not Gorean" by default, and socially becomes no different than any one of the 30 billion people on this planet who have never claimed Gorean status of any type. You then essentially fall out of the Gorean social loop, into the "Other" category. 

So, a self-proclaimed Free Woman whose behavior and actions fail to qualify her as a Gorean Free Woman does NOT become "a Gorean slave" by default.  Instead she is no longer considered "a Gorean" anything. The same is true for all three categories.

These judgements are collectively made by the greater Gorean community, the same as any other social judgement in any other society. Typically the opinion of one Gorean, or even more than one, hasn't the weight either to damn or sanctify another's claim of status in the Gorean social paradigm... but enough such opinions, taken together, can and will. 

When a self-professed Gorean slave changes her mind and decides she is no longer socially a Gorean slave, usually she immediately drops off the Gorean social radar screen and that is that.

If she decides instead to re-declare her status, this time as a Gorean Free Woman, several things must occur before she can do so. First, it is necessary that she make her case to support that her previous claim was due to an honest error; this new claim must be studied and accepted by her fellow Goreans. Her previous behavior as a self-proclaimed slave will be carefully examined for clues as to her true nature-- be it Gorean slave, Gorean Free Woman, or Earth-neutral. Then her character must be evaluated and it must be determined whether or not she is worthy of the exalted status of Gorean Free Woman-- if not, the Gorean men around her will probably NOT honor her with the respect which is the social due of the Gorean Free Woman. If she is found to be worthy, then she can reintegrate herself socially within the Gorean community. 

The process whereby a former Gorean slave is re-categorized as a Gorean Free Woman is called Manumission. It is largely informal (there are no tribunals or magistrates) and judgement is rendered in the court of public opinion, and then only after a sufficient amount of time has passed.

It is a common belief among Gorean men that true Manumission is impossible if a woman has really experienced surrender at the hands of a Gorean Master; in such a case, they tend not to accept the new status of the Manumitted female as valid.

The argument in such a case is that Gorean slavery is a "process" and not a "status," and that once you are a pickle, you can't go back to being a cucumber.

It is also true that one can call oneself anything one wants. But that doesn't necessarily make it so.

So that is an explanation of the social component of the Gorean Triad-- Free Man, Free Woman, and slave.

The relationship component of "Gorean slavery" is much simpler.

If you are in a M/s relationship with a self-professed Gorean Master, then by default you are "a Gorean slave."

If that relationship ends you do not automatically become, socially, a Gorean Free Woman. You remain a self-professed Gorean slave, just one without a current Master.

Even upon Gor, once a Free Woman is branded, collared, and Mastered, most often she completely loses the ability ever to reintegrate herself back into Gorean society among the Free. Once you are a Gorean kajira in the presence of Gorean Men, you tend to remain one in their eyes.

So, that's how it all works.

I wish you well,

_Marcus_


(in reply to Quantumm)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/13/2008 11:39:41 AM   
Stephann


Posts: 4212
Joined: 12/27/2006
From: Los Angeles, CA
Status: offline
Hi Quantumm,

For better or worse, the laws of our land dictate that our slaves, in fact, have legal rights.  We may (and often do) pretend this is not the case, but the reality is that this assumption is neither safe, nor ethical, unless she has positively consented to the relationship.  A slave begging for a collar is not a rightless beast; it is a woman who is expressing her desire to become rightless.

Stephan


< Message edited by Stephann -- 5/13/2008 11:40:11 AM >


_____________________________

Nosce Te Ipsum

"The blade itself incites to violence" - Homer

Men: Find a Woman here

(in reply to Quantumm)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/13/2008 5:09:41 PM   
MontrealPhoenix


Posts: 1526
Joined: 2/27/2008
Status: offline
Greetings Master Stephan,
 
"A slave begging for a collar is not a rightless beast; it is a woman who is expressing her desire to become rightless."
 
I love this sentence. It expresses so perfectly how i see slavery. Thank you for finding the words to express what i have not been able to find.
 
be well,
 
phoenix

_____________________________

"Only in a collar can a woman be truly free"
~Tribesmen of Gor ..pg 75

"He who ties a woman owns her"
~Guardsman Of Gor pg 267



(in reply to Stephann)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar - 5/13/2008 6:51:56 PM   
Quantumm


Posts: 53
Joined: 1/28/2008
Status: offline
Greetings, Kimveri.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kimveri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Quantumm
And if it is correct, then is the term "slave" more a term of relationship (i.e., she's a slave when collared/owned, otherwise she's free) than a term of station (i.e., slaves are slaves whether they are owned or not)?


In reading the books, one will find statements that suggest either. If one separates out the factors related to the socio-economic institution illustrated in the fiction as non-viable in our reality, then that simplifies things a bit. However, 'simple' does not always equal 'easy'! ;-D

I've always viewed "ownership" in two ways; one is the legal condition, often delineated for the owner by a deed or title, & the other is the figurative, internal result of being subjected to "excellent mastery". While many can come to experience the sensation of being owned on a very deep level, it is the mastery that caused that condition, not vice versa. Hence, 'ownership' is not definitive, & cannot be considered the means that delineates the slave from the free female yet seeking.

IMO, mastery is the cause, thus indicative of slavery.

There are some passages in the books that might serve to highlight that idea as worth consideration. I'll include two, for your perusal.

quote:

"The condition of slavery does not require the collar, or the brand, or an anklet, bracelet or ring, or any such overt sign of bondage. Such things, as symbolic as they are, as profoundly meaningful as they are, and as useful as they are for marking properties, identifying masters, and such, are not necessary to slavery. They are, in effect, though their affixing can legally effect imbondment, ultimately, in themselves, tokens of bondage, and are not to be confused with the reality itself. The uncollared slave is not then a free woman but only a slave who is not then in a collar."~pg273Renegades

...&...

"It is one thing to own a woman, and it is another to have her within the bonds of an excellent mastery."~pg465Magicians




That makes complete sense to me.  Regarding slaves who find themselves unowned, they are 'free' in the sense of their ownership even while potentially being 'slave' in nature.

Thanks for sharing!

I wish you well,
Quantumm

(in reply to Kimveri)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Gorean Lifestyles >> ignoring slave's will vs. begging a collar Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2012
Collarchat.com is a member of the Free Speech Coalition
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

4.137