Aswad
Posts: 6618
Joined: 4/4/2007 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MAWarGod So this thread goes back to is a slave truly a slave without a Master?? A slave is a human being that is owned by another human being. And in the Gorean sense, something that is owned is something that someone has laid a claim to, a claim they are ready and willing to back with force if necessary. That is pretty simple and clear-cut. A master has no particular place in that equation. We can extend it to include what a law states to be owned, of course, but that still doesn't bring any master into the equation. A so-called masterless kajira is, by definition, not claimed by anyone. Scratch the primary sense of ownership. Also, modern nations in the West do not acknowledge legal ownership of non-incarcerated citizens. Scratch the secondary sense of ownership. A slave being a human that is owned by another, the absence of ownership, whether as a legality or a de facto reality, denies the possibility of being a slave, and thus invalidates the term entirely. There is no such thing as a masterless kajira. QED. The thread goes back to "we'd really like to talk about something that doesn't exist, in order to define what it would be, if it did exist, disregarding that its nonexistence is part of its very definition." Or, from a less cynical point of view, it goes back to answering the OP, as I and others have, that the term she is referencing is a misunderstanding and doesn't have anything to do with what the person whose use of the term she was curious about thought it did. Any other questions? 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.
|