quote:

ORIGINAL: robertolapiedra

I know, I know...but many of them like to bottom.

to think about.

I enjoy being around you strong men, I feel so safe.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kyraofMists
The act of him controlling this thing that I crave enhances my perception of our authority dynamic.  This fulfills me.  To crave it and be denied creates a challenge for me to work through and also creates joy in watching him be so pleased.

quote:

ORIGINAL: angelic

So if property does not view anything she does for Owner as suffering, they are incompatible?  Or are they imcompatible because the Owner wants her to suffer and it is not within her (in their relationship) to do so?

quote:

ORIGINAL: angelic

Perception is a very big part of it.  If the Owner believes that suffering must occur for the slave to grow, but there is nothing the slave perceives as suffering because everything she does, she does for the Owner, gladly, happliy and without question, what then?

i am not trying to be argumentative, i am really trying to understand.

Personally, i do not need to suffer in order to grow.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightofMists

I do believe that Ownership is denoted by Obedience and the internal value is gained by the effort required to Obey.  Keeping mind the effort exerted is actually a subject thing that is not really possible to measure in any objective manner.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TallDarkAndWitty

Are you really a slave if all you are ever forced to do is stuff you enjoy?

quote:

As evidenced by the replies to the "sharing" question, many people believe that slavery or ownership is simply a state of mind.   All it takes to be a slave is the feeling that one is a slave.  All it takes to be owned is the acknowledgment that one is owned.  Is that really all there is to it?

quote:

The question of "suffering" is an interesting one as well.  Whenever I begin negotiations with a slave, I make it very clear the "slavery is not always fun."  For me, again, I like tangible evidence that the relationship I have with my property is Master/slave.  This means that only forcing them to do things they want to do just won't cut it.  I have to re-enforce the idea that they are slaves by throwing in some unpleasantness...otherwise, it is purely a subjective and theoretic Master/slave relationship.

quote:

Of course this is just my way.  I am not saying everyone must form their relationship this way or else it is not real or true.  Nor am I saying there is anything wrong with a purely theoretic and subjective Master/slave relationship.  I am sure, for many people, just knowing that they could and would do the unpleasant things (they just don't want to) is enough for them to feel like Master and slave.  It just isn't enough for me.  I need evidence.  I need proof.

Thoughts?

quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightofMists

quote:

ORIGINAL: angelic

Perception is a very big part of it.  If the Owner believes that suffering must occur for the slave to grow, but there is nothing the slave perceives as suffering because everything she does, she does for the Owner, gladly, happliy and without question, what then?

It's called... Incompatiability.....

Hopefully.... those involved had shared a deeper understanding of what there perspectives of such a relationship is before they jump into it and find such an incompatiability

quote:

ORIGINAL: angelic

Let's say for the sake of argument, that i am 'your' property.  There is absolutely nothing 'you' can do or ask of me that i consider suffering, because i am 'your' property.  Yet, because i know 'you' define 'your' ownership of me by my suffering, am i being dishonest or simply being a good piece of property?

quote:

  Is that really ownership, are you certain that no one can lure that slave away?  If they can, did you really own that slave, even though you could share them when you chose?

quote:

    If I own a slave and their behavior satisfies my expectations, do I really own them or am I just satisfying my own desires?  But then again if we're happy, does it matter?

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadRabbit

Its merely a method one can subjectively use to require validation as to the slave's effort to obey.

I want and expect this contigency to be withheld when it involves acts and orders that the slave might personally dislike or not find any personal pleasure in doing except in knowing that they please me.

I see nothing wrong with anyone seeking validation for that. The notion that "If you have to prove its there, its not really there" is silly.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadRabbit
Obedience is what makes someone a slave. This is what defines them as my slave. Because they obey me. If they dont obey me, then they arent my slave. Preservation of the contigency of "Obey/Serve or Leave" is what defines the Ownership and M/S in my opinion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Padriag

First off, I haven't had time to read the entire thread so I'm just going to share my thoughts and then catch up later as I have time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TallDarkAndWitty

Are you really a slave if all you are ever forced to do is stuff you enjoy?

First thought that comes to mind is that this is a moot question.  Let's say I have a dog, and the only thing I "require" of that dog is just to lay around, play the odd game, go for walks, etc. all things he enjoys.  Do I own him any less?  Same thing with a slave.  But I see where you are coming from.  As you later say, you enjoy tangible proof and for you that means being able to make them do something they don't enjoy, thus the above question.  For me, that proof comes in a different form... so my perspective on the question is not surprisingly different.

quote:

As evidenced by the replies to the "sharing" question, many people believe that slavery or ownership is simply a state of mind.   All it takes to be a slave is the feeling that one is a slave.  All it takes to be owned is the acknowledgment that one is owned.  Is that really all there is to it?

For some it is, for others it isn't.  I can see some frustration occuring trying to answer this as peoples different ideals clash.  Those two words do not have absolute definitions within this lifestyle, instead we have a lot of personal definitions and styles of relationships.

That said, and on a more personal note, for me owning a slave does require a bit more than just feeling or saying... there's some doing involved and while a state of mind is part of it, you might say there's also a state of being involved as well.  Where you look for things you can do with a slave that provide a tangible proof of ownership, I come at it from a different angle.. I look for things they can't do without.  I don't share precisely because I am possessive, it doesn't present any "pay off" or reward for me to do so.  On the other hand, I observe the ways in which the slave does become dependant on me, the ways in which they grow to need me.  Simply put, they're owned by me when they reach a point that it would truly be difficult for them to walk out the door, to leave me or try living without me.

quote:

The question of "suffering" is an interesting one as well.  Whenever I begin negotiations with a slave, I make it very clear the "slavery is not always fun."  For me, again, I like tangible evidence that the relationship I have with my property is Master/slave.  This means that only forcing them to do things they want to do just won't cut it.  I have to re-enforce the idea that they are slaves by throwing in some unpleasantness...otherwise, it is purely a subjective and theoretic Master/slave relationship.

Possibly, but then I've encountered many who are attracted by that very idea of being made to suffer for their master/mistress.  Whether that suffering comes in the form of pain play, or simply being made to do unpleasant tasks.  I've also known many who are attracted by the idea of service, they like doing things for me, they like and need to feel useful.  So while I can order them to do all kinds of things for me, from fixing me a cup of tea to doing my laundry to scrubbing the bathroom with a tooth brush... they enjoy doing it because it makes them feel useful and owned.  In that sense they enjoy it, does that make it any less valid?

quote:

Of course this is just my way.  I am not saying everyone must form their relationship this way or else it is not real or true.  Nor am I saying there is anything wrong with a purely theoretic and subjective Master/slave relationship.  I am sure, for many people, just knowing that they could and would do the unpleasant things (they just don't want to) is enough for them to feel like Master and slave.  It just isn't enough for me.  I need evidence.  I need proof.

Thoughts?

I suspect we all need some form of proof.  We all look for signs that whatever relationship we have with another person is valid, whether that be a romantic one, a friendship, etc.  We feel betrayed when the other person doesn't live up to our expectations of that relationship.  Those are natural feelings to have.  How we go about looking for that "proof", how much we require and what form it takes, or even what we expect, will vary according to who we are as individuals.  Sharing does it for you as proof.  For me its the things I see in their daily behavior.  For someone else it will likely be something else.  Yet all those different expectations are valid... at least for each of us individually.

So when is a slave owned?  When our personal expectations are satisfied.  That's pretty subjective and I think its likely the only "standard" we'll have.  Objectively, there is no such standard, you can't legally own someone so its just not going to happen.  It could be argued when you say you own a slave, what you are describing is really a case of simply being able to control specific forms of behavior of another person, i.e. being able to share them with others when and with whom you choose.  Is that really ownership, are you certain that no one can lure that slave away?  If they can, did you really own that slave, even though you could share them when you chose?  If I own a slave and their behavior satisfies my expectations, do I really own them or am I just satisfying my own desires?  But then again if we're happy, does it matter?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitaTruble

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadRabbit
Obedience is what makes someone a slave. This is what defines them as my slave. Because they obey me. If they dont obey me, then they arent my slave. Preservation of the contigency of "Obey/Serve or Leave" is what defines the Ownership and M/S in my opinion.

MR,

You already know how highly I regard you and how gratified I am that what I love so well is going to be left in the hands of people such as yourself when I'm just floating ashes on a mountain somewhere. That said, I'm going to repost something I wrote which I'd appreciate you to consider but won't be offended at all if you discard as poppycock. You've been very open about wanting to grow, so I'm hoping you'll do the consider thing rather than the poppycock thing.

"I think it's important to understand about choices and options. I know I've heard a hundred times if I've heard it once, ... you always have the choice to leave.

When I examine that in depth, I find that it's not the choice that's even the issue, it's the consequence of the choice that matters. To leave means I am stripped of my own truth, my core, the essence of who I am. To leave is a lie and a betrayal of trust to my word, my being and my soul. To be other than myself is to wear a mask and fake my life. Depending on your perspective life is either too damn long or too damn short to fake it. Can I physically walk out the door, get in a cab and go somewhere else? No, I cannot. The shell of my body can, certainly, but that shell leaves behind everything that's important, everything that really matters, that does make me unique and the body walking out that door is someone else entirely. It's not me."

I urge you to take great care with obey or leave because it can cause someone to do things which may be beyond their ability to handle if they feel compelled to obey because of their inability to do otherwise. Obey or else.. now that works really well.

Celeste

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadRabbit
So, therefore, I dont refer to the "Serve/Obey or Leave" as a threat, but rather as an understanding of the relationship.

My role is to give responsible and good orders and her role is to obey them. We both do our parts and the relationship works smoothly. Simple as that.

If we arent doing our parts, then we dont really have an authority dynamic and therefore we arent really a Master and slave.

Therefore if a slave willfully disobeys me whenever she feals like it, then it is hard for me to call them my slave.

quote:

ORIGINAL: robertolapiedra

Hello MadRabbit. If the only way to figure out (validate?) at what "level" of obedience is your submissive is to confront her with choice of disobedience in some "difficult" situations? It is delusional. Why? subs "normally" have limits and the little obedience tests "normally" fall in her/his own accepted parameters (which include acceptable "displeasures").

quote:


You need to check if those "parameters" are true? Don't you think that something really a "major" displeasure for the sub would be on the limit lists? Or are we talking about the "uber no limit sub" myth again?

quote:


The notion that "If you have to prove its there, when it is there", is sillier.
The notion that "If you have to prove its there, because you do not know if it is there or not?" It just proves that you do not know, you got no "radar", no great discernment.

quote:


While you are "validating" your sub for "uber obedience" you "validate" your own level of discernment. Unless you do this stuff for "your" pleasure, and it has nothing to do with "validation".

quote:


Asking a sub to do unpleasant stuff to "prove" her obedience within her set limits, is silly.
Asking a sub to do unpleasant stuff that she accepts within her set limits, for one's own pleasure? That's a kink, and it is not "silly", it's just a kink.