RE: Define Slave

RE: Define Slave (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

amayos -> RE: Define Slave (1/10/2006 7:28:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin quote: SLAVE: A person who is property of another and is forced to obey. Period. No exceptions. While I agree that a person can not be a slave...even if they are of that mindset...without being owned, I have to disagree with your force stance. I believe that the vast majority of those who identify as slaves, in the context that we use the term here, do so consentually. Here, in this place, consent is needed at first for a soul to enter through the ponderous gate of servitude; it fuses with desire and need on another level entirely and is in fact part of the very chain binding them (among other more worldly things). In our society slavery is not a "legal" practice, and so those seeking to make a slave must be clever in the ways of catching and plying the soul, heart and mind. But let us not fool ourselves; those who are slaves solely by their own consent and nothing more are merely actors; they are in fact submissive souls who find the term slave more romantic. Perhaps there is a core in them willing to surrender fully, but most do not alllow this.

caitlyn -> RE: Define Slave (1/10/2006 7:45:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: amayos But let us not fool ourselves; those who are slaves solely by their own consent and nothing more are merely actors; they are in fact submissive souls who find the term slave more romantic. Well, I'm not a slave, and perhaps not a sub of any notewortyness ... but you certainly do meet lots of very intelligent and experienced people that consider themselves slaves. I would find it hard to believe that every one of them is looking for a romantic title. I finally determined to not judge what I probably just don't understand. Then again, from reading your posts ... admitting you may not understand, may not fall within your gifts. Of course, I really don't know you at all, so I might be completely wrong. [:D]

amayos -> RE: Define Slave (1/10/2006 8:37:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn ... admitting you may not understand, may not fall within your gifts. Of course, I really don't know you at all, so I might be completely wrong. [:D] * Laughs [sm=lol.gif] Superiority in numbers does not always go hand in hand with truth. Not a matter of much complication. A slave is what a slave is and always has been. Just as I do not call an apple a peach, or a spider a butterfly, so too will I refuse to call a submissive by any other name...

caitlyn -> RE: Define Slave (1/10/2006 8:47:34 PM)
Nope ... clearly not wrong. [;)][8\|]

RiotGirl -> RE: Define Slave (1/10/2006 8:47:54 PM)
all of the above on what Merc and beth said

amayos -> RE: Define Slave (1/10/2006 8:57:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn Nope ... clearly not wrong. [;)][8\|] See it as you wish. You can argue semantics and relativism all day in thesis form...or embrace Webster. [;)]

cloudboy -> RE: Define Slave (1/10/2006 9:29:04 PM)
I think your question presupposes the existence of limitless slaves, but everyone is limited. The recognition of limits is the first step to measuring real possibilities. A DOM could order a slave to lift a six hundred pound stone, but he'd be stupid to do so. The slave's inability to lift the stone has nothing to do with her being a slave and has everything to do with her limits. Logically, then, a slave commicating the maximum weight she can lift is nothing but helpful information about how she can be used. So, a slave knowing her limits is quite slave-like indeed. A DOM can always seek to expand the limits of a slave and a slave can commit herself to strive for limitless submission but that's as far as it goes. Limits will remain. Its important to know where they are and its fun to explore their boundaries.

caitlyn -> RE: Define Slave (1/10/2006 9:44:05 PM)
zzzzzzzzzz ... a new experience for me: the pedantic fruit analogy. [;)] Boredom just set in ... have a nice day![:D]

ponygirlzira -> RE: Define Slave (1/10/2006 9:53:32 PM)
You know what, there are NOT "many" definitions of the word slave. There is just one. Slave: A person who is owned by, and completely subject to another; one bound by slavery. Regardless of how many different people try to stuff themselves into the slavery box, none of us really are, as far as the dictionary definition. We all have the same "rights" as anyone else, and what we choose to do with those rights is not up to some "Master" but rather, only we can decide what we will or will not do. We may choose to do whatever our Masters ask of us, or we may not. If we choose to deny our Masters, then perhaps we will be released, but still...the ball is in our court. So...before I get long winded, I would just like to say this. You choose who you fuck. Plain and simple. If your master asks you to fuck a same sex buddy, and you do it, then thats because you chose to obey. If you don't want to have same sex relations, then its your choice to disobey.

amayos -> RE: Define Slave (1/10/2006 9:56:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn zzzzzzzzzz ... a new experience for me: the pedantic fruit analogy. [;)] Boredom just set in ... have a nice day![:D] Wait, I'm here to entertain you? Now WHY didn't anyone tell me that before? Now I see the error of my ways... [:D]

amayos -> RE: Define Slave (1/10/2006 10:09:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ponygirlzira You know what, there are NOT "many" definitions of the word slave. There is just one. Slave: A person who is owned by, and completely subject to another; one bound by slavery. Regardless of how many different people try to stuff themselves into the slavery box, none of us really are, as far as the dictionary definition. We all have the same "rights" as anyone else, and what we choose to do with those rights is not up to some "Master" but rather, only we can decide what we will or will not do. We may choose to do whatever our Masters ask of us, or we may not. If we choose to deny our Masters, then perhaps we will be released, but still...the ball is in our court. So...before I get long winded, I would just like to say this. You choose who you fuck. Plain and simple. If your master asks you to fuck a same sex buddy, and you do it, then thats because you chose to obey. If you don't want to have same sex relations, then its your choice to disobey. Correct, for the most part—though I can assure you the ball can be removed on rare occassions from the hands of certain, rare individuals. But overall, yes, I believe you make very good, direct points.

fldrkhorse -> RE: Define Slave (1/11/2006 5:13:35 AM)
In my growth I've concluded that sex has nothing to do with servitude. Servitude is a mental, psychological, and emotional mindset. Sex is physical. If one seeks a particular sex it appears they seek the physical dominance rather than the fuller encompassing psychological. I've met powerful Dommes that if "gay" men had allowed themselves to shut thier mouths and open thier minds could have felt a dominance they never thought possible. Dominance is NOT gender exclusive, sexual prefernces are.

phoenixslave -> RE: Define Slave (1/11/2006 5:14:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: amayos quote: ORIGINAL: TragicallyHip I believe that to place such a limit on ownership would be to define oneself as a submissive and not a slave. Or rather, any limits at all. A slave is just that—a SLAVE: A person who is property of another and is forced to obey. Period. No exceptions. No limp facade of servitude or setting down rules or boundaries; they are fully and wholly owned. They do not belong to themselves. They are not owed compensation, love, loyalty, fidelity, respect as a sentient human being or any form of affection or recognition. They only receive what their Master/Mistress may grant them, and that purity is so very ideal. So few have the selflessness and dedication to be that. Wow. Normally i believe in live and let live and a whole range of opinion. But you can't state yours without trying to demean those who disagree. i am dedicated and i am selfless despite falling short of your standards. And i would add that you would fall short of mine for a Master. Not trying to be offensive, just defensive.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Define Slave (1/11/2006 6:06:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ponygirlzira Slave: A person who is owned by, and completely subject to another; one bound by slavery. See I'm not owned but I consider myself a slave. And many slaves do not consider themselves to be in an "ownership" situation. Using a dictionary to define particular jargonistic sub culture terms never ends well.

Jasmyn -> RE: Define Slave (1/11/2006 6:44:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: amayos quote: ORIGINAL: TragicallyHip I believe that to place such a limit on ownership would be to define oneself as a submissive and not a slave. Or rather, any limits at all. A slave is just that—a SLAVE: A person who is property of another and is forced to obey. Period. No exceptions. Yeah but its expected of you to say such. You profess male supremacy, just as I profess fem supremacy. A slave in my Queendom is an inferior being by sheer fact of his gender; and without limitations by sheer status of being 'a slave' in an existence of woman/women who are not slaves. If I wanted him to suck my toe nail clippings from between the buttocks of another slave while being flailed 100 times with a cat-o-nine tails, you bet your bottom dollar he'd be forced to obey, period, no exceptions. Thus anyone seeking to be a slave to me based in my superior female status to their inferior male status would do so knowing full well they can not define their own limits within this dynamic. Thus your words below are a fine fit to describe a gender-supreme slaves and does indeed have a sense of pure slavery about it. They are not owed compensation, love, loyalty, fidelity, respect as a sentient human being or any form of affection or recognition. They only receive what their Master/Mistress may grant them, and that purity is so very ideal. I owe my fem supreme slaves nothing but* gratitude for not spitting in my coffee.* But not all m/s relationships are supremacy based. Even for myself, fem supremacy is just one of the ways for my dominant self to manifest. Thus a slave who does not seek fem supremacy but wishes to be slavish to a dominant fem can certainly find a place at my feet. The difference between them and the fem supreme slaves is that they do not take my fem supreme status for granted, knowing full well, the only reason they are not treated as inferior to my gender is because I grant them that human equality by choice. And with human equality comes the right to define their consensuality. Many m/s relationships are the same. Thus your definition of a slave is a perfect fit for what it is you do. But is not a one size fits all deal unfortunately no matter how many times you may click your red heels together and wish it to be so. One can learn to become more slavish and it is a journey, an egoless journey with many rewards above an beyond the imagined benefits of reaching a slavish state to another. But like all journeys you are limited to what is available to you at the time.

plantlady64 -> RE: Define Slave (1/11/2006 6:55:19 AM)
Hello There, To me a slave or submissive chooses a Master of similar mind sets, dreams, lifestyles, and goals as themselves. This way when the Master's will covers the slave/sub's will it's a life they both cling to that sustains them. If they were just seeking to be anyone's slave with no regard for their own preferences to me they'd be a broken slave/sub. Regardless of your top or bottom preference we all deserve to seek relationships that fulfill us and make us feel whole. Sincerely, sub suzanne

cloudboy -> RE: Define Slave (1/11/2006 7:18:11 AM)
>In our society slavery is not a "legal" practice, and so those seeking to make a slave must be clever in the ways of catching and plying the soul, heart and mind.< Do you really think it would be any different if consent were not a legal issue? Being defiant, rebellious, murderous and oppositional was all about being a slave in slave cultures. This is why Masters feared their slaves. It goes back to the Smythe theme, frankly, that true dominance is earned. It does not come from dictionaries, powers, titles, ideologies, or legalities. The question I have of you after reading your profile is what do you do when you bump up against another's limits? Do you ridicule and dismiss the woman, or do you engage and work with her? It also seems in your world that everything is "on the slave." Seems to me that if you are a PIG and the slave responds to you as such, this is on you.

amayos -> RE: Define Slave (1/11/2006 7:28:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: phoenixslave Wow. Normally i believe in live and let live and a whole range of opinion. But you can't state yours without trying to demean those who disagree. i am dedicated and i am selfless despite falling short of your standards. And i would add that you would fall short of mine for a Master. Not trying to be offensive, just defensive. My aim wasn't to demean you are cause offense, and I'm sorry if I inadvertently did. My aim was to simply state a fact, not an opinion. That I fall short of your ideals for a Master doesn't shock me; I'm suited for a certain type. quote: ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross Using a dictionary to define particular jargonistic sub culture terms never ends well. Indeed, but one cannot deny that certain words mean certain things. If we were speaking of the words "kajira" or "submissive", I would be more inclined to agree fully with the jargon idea. "Slave" has a very particular meaning. As does "Master" or "Mistress" or "punishment". Still, this does not take away from the fact that these terms are being nibbled away at the edges by the BDSM sub culture, making me essentially wrong by popular opinion.

IrishMist -> RE: Define Slave (1/11/2006 7:39:24 AM)
quote: Still, this does not take away from the fact that these terms are being nibbled away at the edges by the BDSM sub culture, making me essentially wrong by popular opinion Why do you have to be right or wrong? If YOUR definitions work for you and yours, that should be all that matters. Not whether they are right or wrong in the eyes of others.

phoenixslave -> RE: Define Slave (1/11/2006 7:53:57 AM)
amayos, i thank you for the apology. i would like to comment further on the line that most troubled me; quote: They are not owed compensation, love, loyalty, fidelity, respect as a sentient human being or any form of affection or recognition. Slaves are sentient human beings. Strip away our humanity and you have an animal. Animals will by nature shy away or resist the infliction of pain. It is our very humanity that lets us override this to serve someone. And with that enabling humanity comes the need for love, loyalty, respect, affection, recognition. Each individual needs some or all in wildly diverse levels but need them none the less. i don't believe in perfection and an ideal is a goal never reached. Humans of all stripes cannot attain them. And yet your ideal does tug at the very ones human enough to feel failure in not acheiving it. i often wish i were more mindless, and yet much that i do for my Master wouldn't be possible if i were. A balance of realities and goals is the best i can do. Again i thank you for your reply.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125