S2
Posts: 54
Joined: 11/26/2009 Status: offline
|
Perhaps it can be added that the discussion could benefit from a bit of... dissection... Whats in a name? it is perfectly valid to say that "sub" and "slave" are mere labels, and it really doesn't matter which one is used. I can call myself katrina, or anirtak, it doesn't change who or what I am. However, it should be noted that there do exist people who call themselves as either sub or slave, and would be annoyed, if not offended, to be addressed as the other. There are those who would refuse to be called a slave, and there are those who would insist on being called slaves. This might suggest there is more to the label than logic suggests. Personally, I would prefer not to have to call myself, "anirtak". I think the reasons are obvious. On the other hand, consider this: when shopping, how much do we depend on labels? if we wish to buy an american grown orange, or an imported orange, what is there to tell us which is which? What if an imported orange was labelled as american grown, or if an american orange was labelled as imported? Here is where the label becomes important, especially considering here at Collarme.com there is an option to advertise as a sub, or a slave. Here, one would probably want to take into account the expectations of the "shoppers". What do they expect to see from one who advertises as a slave? and what would they expect to see from one who advertise as a sub? It is thus unfortunate that there seems to be no uniformly agreed on definitions for what subs and slaves are. Are slaves better than sub? Maybe, or maybe not. Maybe slaves are seen as being easier to manipulate, thus are considered more desirable by those who are of that inclination. Maybe subs are seen as being less clingy and needy, thus are considered more desirable for those who find that to be important. Perhaps, in the end, the differences between slaves and subs lie not in logic and reason, but in prejudices and stereotypes. And, as irrational as it is to succumb to prejudices and stereotypes, I would still say that it is close-minded to simply state that no differences exist between slaves and subs. For, clearly, a difference exists in many minds, however subjective those differences may be. I believe I have typed a lot of words but said very little... So, to conclude: I would call myself a slave for I believe in being owned, as a car is owned, and as a computer is owned. A piece of property, which is within the right of the owner to do with as he pleases, to keep, or to give away, to hoard or to lend out. Does that make me better than a sub? Does that really make me a slave? I do not know. I wait for Masters to decide whether or not I have correctly labelled myself.
< Message edited by S2 -- 11/27/2009 2:02:53 PM >
|