quote:

ORIGINAL: masterforRT

Fine, 'own' your consentual slave all you want. BUT by the literal def . of a slave, they are NOT a slave-they are a submissive. AGAIN I ask, were there any conditions attached to 1800s slavery? The fact that it's illegal in the USA today is irrelevant-it does not change the dictionary def. of what a slave is. Not to mentiuon that BDSM is illegal in much of the world-and slavery is still legal in parts of the world too!


Where did I say they were not people? Of course they are people..BUT AGAIN I SAY, by the actual def. of what a slave is they are ALSO property! They have no rights.  The fact that no one owns them only means that they are available for ANYONE to own them. Back to the 1800s again. Were those cotton pickers not people? yet, they HAD no rights or privliges! What about prisoners? Do they not have their rights taken away? Yes, most of them have committed crimes, but it seems that practically every day we hear about someone innocent in prison that was put there wrongly.  Are those innocent prisoners not legal slaves?

Again, let's go back to 1800s America. Slaves there had no input/choice on who owned them. They even had ownership papers, much like the title of a car.  How does you (and other's) nasty, insulting comments to me change what Webster's definition of a slave is?

quote:

ORIGINAL: feydeplume

<-- doesn't want to get warned again about hijacking but is having a great time with "free range" slaves! *snort* all i can say is talk about humiliation games and the definition of kinky... *snort*

quote:

a freed slave (one with their papers) can choose to stay free or can offer themselves back on the market.

quote:

My animals are MY FAMILY but legally, they are just belongings.

quote:

ORIGINAL: surelyujest71

Perhaps if we look into the more distant past, we can find a definition of "slave" which fits better?

In ancient Rome and Greece, slavery wasn't racially biased.  It simply meant that a person was owned by another person.  The slave's actions were considered to reflect upon the Master.  And, while some slaves were kept more or less as concubines, others were kept to keep house, or help with the household's income.  Many were some sort of combination of these.  "BDSM" as we know it usually didn't apply... we can be fairly sure that if a slave in those times were abused, he or she would either roll over and die, or get up and run.  (unless they liked it.... fetishes existed back then, too, right? ;) ) 

In current times, involuntary slavery is limited to a few areas of the world; usually in 3rd world nations.  In Brazil, once you get away from "civilization," there are some who manage their wealth by enslaving the natives, and anyone else who happens to be convenient.  I'm sure similar things happen elsewhere.  These sorts of slaves only exist to help build the Owner's wealth.  Although, a few might be picked out of the herd to act as a household maid, or concubine.  To my understanding, this category of slaves are often roughly treated, no matter their preferences in the matter.

To me, I prefer the first category - the ancients' concept.  Brought forward to today, and adding in free consent on the part of the slave... it's often more erotic, but also a very stable situation.  And hey!  Slaves have always come with a price tag, right?  In our subculture, the price tag includes consent.

Hopefully I haven't re-written someone else's point... I've only read page 4 of this thread.  :p

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

It is apparent it isn't working too well.

What is that saying about.....something about making the same mistake over and over again......? Doing the same thing and getting the same result? Expecting a different result...

It escapes me. The decongestant is wearing off.

quote:

ORIGINAL: surelyujest71

quote:

My animals are MY FAMILY but legally, they are just belongings.

Very true.  You can't seem to claim a pet cat or dog as being a "dependant."  :p 

quote:

ORIGINAL: littlewonder

Ya know reading these kinds of threads is a great way to pull out the weeds

quote:

ORIGINAL: beargonewild



And what the hell is wrong if a person desires to call themselves a slave or submissive or even a piece of fuckmeat?  I have every right to call myself a sub or even  a white assed honky manlover in just the same way that Sari has the right to call herself a masochistic pain loving wench.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Amaros

You're probably looking for Gor, that's a couple of solar systems over.

quote:

ORIGINAL: masterforRT

More and more, I see people who call themselves slaves claiming that they only want women...or men...or couples. I have always believed that slaves are property, just like a house or a car. I don't see my car refusing to start for only one sex-so how can a slave make any decision as to who owns them?

The definition of slave from Answers.com is as follows:  
"One bound in servitude as the property of a person or household."

Property....right?

I'm interested in what the rest of you think.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Uh no, that would be role playing Gorean.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Amaros

You're probably looking for Gor, that's a couple of solar systems over.