Ishtarr
Posts: 1041
Joined: 4/30/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MastrVran
I see what you typed as lumping together many different beliefs and levels of desires, motives and actions into one word "mainstream"
Now by doing so you exclude many who do not feel this way but probably consider themselves mainstream. This is a broad brush approach to me.
Whether or not somebody considers themselves to be mainstream is irrelevant.
The definition of mainstream required that something needs to be considered the dominant trend, the most occurring, the median, for it to be mainstream.
Non-consensual relationships are NOT the dominant trend in BDSM circles.
Consensual non-consent isn't even a dominant trend in BDSM circles.
Therefore, neither of these subcultures can be regarded as "mainstream BDSM".
They are certainly a part of BDSM, and I have never claimed other wise.
But the mainstream trend in BDSM it to place a high emphasize on the mutual consent of the parties participating.
This, combined with the fact that people engage in BDSM for erotical gratification, makes that non-consensual legal chattel slavery doesn't fall under the umbrella of mainstream BDSM.
If you want to argue that non-consensual legal chattel slavery falls under the BDSM umbrella, be my guest, I've never claimed that such would be impossible.
But if you're going to argue that the dominant trend in BDSM circles is to deem it moral to non-consensually force people into chattel slavery, then you obviously haven't spend a great deal of time with the average BDSM enthusiast.
quote:
ORIGINAL: MastrVran
You also stated that a BDSM training of a slave would be diffirent in some way to a Gorean training a slave "because the motive for those behaviors come from opposite sides of the spectrum."
I have known many BDSMers who seemed to want to own someone and called them slaves. I personally cannot see any difference in the motivation. Now on Earth, we each have to get our slaves in similar ways or be outside the laws of the land. On Gor you could aquire slaves through many different ways, most of which are illegal on Earth. But the motivation to own a slave and to train one are pretty universal. You want complete power over them. In BDSM this is normally refered to as TPE. Most Gorean slaves accept TPE as a given. Some BDSM slaves do also. Others are slaves with a laundry list of acceptable and non-acceptable activities. Yet all are slaves at least in some way and call themsleves slaves.
The motives for owning slaves are in no way universal.
Colonial slave owners didn't own slaves because they wanted power over them, the owned them because they wanted cheaper labor.
Slaves owned by Mayas for human sacrifices where owned to appease the God, not because their owned wanted power over them.
Roman slaves where owned for different reasons, most of them economically, but they had rarely to do with the owners desire for power over the slave.
BDSMers "own" slaves for several reasons as well; most often because they get erotic gratification from the illusion of power; sometimes for economical reasons, and I'm sure it's possible that some do it for the power trip on it's own.
Goreans own slaves for several reasons as well, often economical reasons, often for political reasons (the humiliation of an enemy), but the kajirae most often featured in the books where owned because their Masters wanted undiluted femininity from them. They wanted to own female slaves, not because of the power it would give them over the female -a Gorean man doesn't need legality for that- but because the female in a collar was free from the social stigma and social expectations that inhibits unbridled passion, femininity, lust, and need in female.
Gorean men most often own women because they want absolute uninhibited femininity.
If Gorean men would want to own slaves for the power it gave them, they'd be more inclined to own male slaves than female, because it take a lot more power to own a male than it does to own a female.
quote:
ORIGINAL: MastrVran
Goreans do indeed practive BD. Even if at the start it is non-consensual for most. But in the books and even in history there are many references to it becoming desired on everyones part.
Now if you bring in Earth history as the only framework, most slaves there were not real happy about the BD aspects. Their owners though were. So another thought is does a BD relationship have to be not only consensual but also enjoyed by all participants including the slave in order to be considered BD? Or can only one person be doing the enjoyment and it be considered BD? To me and as far as I know most psychiatrists, BD is only required to be enjoyed by one of the people involved for it to be described as BD. What I mean by this is the punishment of a 5 year old by some form of spanking is not BD even though it involved Disciplin. There was no enjoyment on eother side.
Simple using shackles, rope, whips and chains does not make a relationship a B&D relationship in the BDSM sense.
For a relationship to fall under the BDSM category, the motivation for using the tools of a B&D relationship needs to be erotic gratification.
If a jailor moves a death row prisoner, he uses shackles, but that doesn't mean he's practicing BDSM. This is because the motive for using the shackles is not erotic gratification.
You may try to argue that the jailor and the prisoner are in a B&D relationship with each other.
But even IF they are, that doesn't mean that their B&D relationship falls under the BDSM umbrella.
In colonial times, I'm sure that the slave's owners where "happy" about the effectiveness of the shackles and whips they used on slaves, but the fact that they where doesn't mean that they where practicing BDSM.
Even if they where "happy", there was presumable in most cases no erotic gratification derived from these actions, and that would thus exclude them from falling under the BDSM umbrella.
Legal chattel slavery is generally not the same as BDSM slavery.
This is because the motivation for most BDSMers to own slaves is a different one than those of legal slave owners.
Legal chattel slavery is most certainly not the same as mainstream BDSM slavery. (Which was the OP question to me that I was answering when you falsely accused me of making too broad of a generalization.)
This is because the mainstream view of BDSMers seems to be that consent if very important, and legal slave owners don't care about consent.
< Message edited by Ishtarr -- 2/18/2011 11:40:46 PM >
_____________________________
Aren't you glad we got smart bombs, it's a damn good thing that our bombs are clever
It's a shame that our kids are dumb, but our bombs are smart, what a lucky thing now
|
BDSM is not practiced by Goreans. Really. No, really. i... - 
Profile
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