RE: Slavery is bullshit

RE: Slavery is bullshit (Full Version)

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

Message

slaveluci -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 11:39:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael She is a slave as I use the term, however, she isn't a slave in the historical sense. I just laugh at the people who compare the two as if they are in any way related. Understood. I agree wholeheartedly. quote: (edited to add, those bastards are in Italy right now living it up. Not only that, they used up all the good weather in Los Angeles and left me with rain, I mean this is LA in May for gods sakes.) Good for them, but sorry about the rain.......luci

leadership527 -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 11:46:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael Thanks Jeff! The ownership you have over Carol is the complete opposite of ownership in any of the old sense of the word slave, which was my point. In that form of slavery it works the opposite, the farther from society you go and the closer it got to just the two of you, the less you would have ownership of a slave in the historical context. Which is why using historical contexts to define slavery as we practice it is so laughable to me. I don't see it in the same way. For instance, let's take a trip in the way back machine to primitive hunter/gatherer societies. So tribe a captures a member of tribe B, perhaps some hot young girl that the chief's son wants to bonk. What is true is that earlier times, societies were quite a bit smaller. This tribe that we're talking about may in fact be smaller than 50 individuals. Is that ownership any less "real" than ownership that happens in the US with 200+ million individuals? I would argue that it isn't scale that matters, it's how thorough the agreement is. Just to use an example, I may think I own this computer I'm typing on. You might agree with me. But some thief passing by our place tonight may not agree, break in, and take it. Suddenly, I am no longer the owner of my computer laughs. It gets even muddier if the thief sells it to his buddy who sells it to a pawn shop who sells it to a customer who sells it to their friend. NOW who owns it? Again, my point here is that people talk about "ownership" as if it were some sort of absolute and it very much is not. Here are the factual points of difference between Carol and a typical black slave of the deep south: a) It is easier for Carol to escape into a different society where her status of being owned is not acknowledged. Note I said easier. In both cases it is possible. b) I happen to love Carol and she loves me. But I'm assuming your not naive enough to think that such things never happened in the old south. I would venture to say that the "property rights" agreement between her and I is not dissimilar to what was had in the old south except for my rights to her are non-transferable whereas in the old south they were transferable. Other than that, I can tell her to do stuff. She can obey, get punished, or flee. Now, having said all that, my argument is a bit disingenuous. Saying "it's just like that but with love added" is a lot like saying "The bikini atoll after the testing was just the same as before but with a few atomic bombs added". My point here is that it isn't the concept of ownership or slavery that have changed. It's the addition of love.

eibhlinauvert -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 11:47:15 AM)
Hello Simply Michael, I think the difference between slavery in the historical sense of the word and slavery in bdsm is the initial consent into slavery. In history slaves were owned once they were paid for. A slave in BDSM has free will to decide initally who Masters her. Ownership occurs for me, when a state of mind is reached where your subconscious and conscious are compliant with your Masters will. eibhlín

porcelaine -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 11:48:01 AM)
leadership527, quote: But "mastering a woman"? I tell Carol to do stuff and she does it. So far, she has done it every time so it's factually accurate to say that up until this moment, it's been "total" or "absolute". But I would have no idea whether I mastered her. In your opinion, can you crisply and factually define this or is it more of a poetic concept? I believe obedience is a choice. Every directive you've given to Carol she's chosen to follow. Her reluctance (or inability if you will) to select the other option is hugely influenced by her belief that your choice IS the better choice (and only one as well). The fallacy of other avenues is her knowledge of them but in reality they don't exist. Mastery replaces that. But... It is dependent on interpretation. Some would say yes by right of her acts of obedience, but in my mind that isn't the sum total of what it implies. I can follow the rules and be completely compliant. If I'm calling you a jackass while doing so I don't equate that with obedience. I surrendered my actions but my thoughts and heart are not in alignment with the first. Obedience - to me- includes all of the above. In my opinion, if Carol routinely displays behaviors, mindset, and emotional responses that are indicative of your will she has been mastered. I include my own personal bias that it must be ingrained. Something that person truly has embraced as their own. I process that through IE, but that's just my leaning. I can't speak for Carol but I know myself. When I'm disobedient there is internal discord. I have more angst going against a directive than I ever have following through. I'm tortured because I have a need to obey. And yes, even if I'm calling him an ass in my head I will reprimand myself. He can't hear it but I can. It's an accountability thing that I can't ignore. ~porcelaine

SimplyMichael -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 11:53:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael Thanks Jeff! The ownership you have over Carol is the complete opposite of ownership in any of the old sense of the word slave, which was my point. In that form of slavery it works the opposite, the farther from society you go and the closer it got to just the two of you, the less you would have ownership of a slave in the historical context. Which is why using historical contexts to define slavery as we practice it is so laughable to me. I don't see it in the same way. For instance, let's take a trip in the way back machine to primitive hunter/gatherer societies. So tribe a captures a member of tribe B, perhaps some hot young girl that the chief's son wants to bonk. What is true is that earlier times, societies were quite a bit smaller. This tribe that we're talking about may in fact be smaller than 50 individuals. Is that ownership any less "real" than ownership that happens in the US with 200+ million individuals? I would argue that it isn't scale that matters, it's how thorough the agreement is. He owns her because the tribe says he does, you own Carol because she says you do. THAT to me is the difference. If you were out alone hunting with Carol and you turned your back to her, she isn't as likely as your hot cave chick is, to bonk you over the head with a rock and leave.

LadyPact -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 11:56:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael Oh god is that so true on so many levels. There is a line from a sci fi show about how you have to torture a man to really know him, LA can probably quote it from memory. Lady Pact and I have met but neither of us have seen the other with a partner and till you SEE that, in person, your knowledge of them is partial, even then it isn't complete. Anyone who has done this for any serious length of time has had the experience of meeting someone you thought was either fluffy or extreme, and then upon seeing them with their partner realizing how very wrong you were, or at least how little the words captured the reality of who they are. Talking about m/s or D/s with people who you have not seen their interactions in person is like trying to describe colors to each other. A thousand words won't do it but pointing and saying "that is the blue I mean" is instantly understood. What? You didn't meet My husband? How did you miss him? LOL. OK, I really am just kidding there and I do know what you meant. Actually, clip would have enjoyed Folsom to no end. It's one of the events that he was very sorry that he had to miss during his tour. I think you might be a little tougher than I am in this particular area. While I can see your point of the exact shade of blue, I have enough allowance in Me to also think some areas you can go on the preponderance of the evidence. For example, I'd be really shocked if, when I have the opportunity to meet Jeff and Carol, that they were different than what he has presented here. The reason for this is based on My observation that he is amazingly consistent. It didn't start out that way, and there were even a few times that I was hard on him in his early days around here because I wasn't sure if he was full of it or not. Today, I don't feel that way at all about their relationship. Take the S/m away and such things and I've noticed how similarly we think about certain concepts. In a way, I could say the same thing in your case. On another thread, someone suggested that no one should watch you play. In spite of My first reaction, I didn't add My comment about My opinion of, due to the things that I've read you write about over the years, I'd probably be one of the people who would enjoy the hell out of it. Sure, there have been times over the years that this method has proven false, but in a lot of cases, it's been bang on.

SocratesNot -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 11:59:33 AM)
I have a question: Why there was NO consensual slavery in the past, in modern M/s sense? Yes, some people became slaves willingly in the past, but they did it only to survive or to gain some material or other advantage. But, in history (before 20th century), there were NO cases of consensual slavery for the sake of slavery, and this NEVER had any sexual connotations. If the ideas of internal enslavement, and all the other modern ideas of M/s are so natural for some people, why were they developed so late?

UniqueRaven -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 12:02:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 if you do not have reality, then all you have is theory. That is why debating theory endlessly is terribly fascinating for so many people here. [:)][:)][:)][:)][:)][:)][:)] This is one of the few times I have wished I had more space in my sig line, so I could carry a post around for a while, for all to see. UniqueRaven, despite all the summer-vacation-static here right now, I do see a lot of people seriously discussing and sharing ideas. In fact, a currently-active thread about the horrors of slave-like relationships led ne woman in those relationships to thank profusely multiple people on the thread for sharing so much about themselves. This thread might never have come about if it hadn't been for an obstreperous OP. The OP probably learned almost nothing, but someone else believed that she had been greatly helped. Have you ever been in the situation where you didn't really know where you stood on some position until you had to say it out loud to someone whose viewpoint was far different from your own? I bet you have, because you think with breadth and depth. That's the process going on right now on the boards. It's more acrimonious than I would like, and I can't imagine the mods are going to allow a slugfest atmosphere to continue forever, but a lot of people have been sharing a lot here lately. It's a bit humbling to watch. Thank you, and yes, i agree, i do see such discussions going on - for me i think it really is just that i'm sensitive to debate in general - i'm a very emotionally empathic person, and i pick up on the feelings of others quite easily, even in written form - to the point where sometimes i feel more than is actually even "there." So in many of these threads - to me - it just feels like i'm being yelled at, something which makes any point made to me just get lost. My issues. Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. [:)]

SimplyMichael -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 12:07:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact In a way, I could say the same thing in your case. On another thread, someone suggested that no one should watch you play. In spite of My first reaction, I didn't add My comment about My opinion of, due to the things that I've read you write about over the years, I'd probably be one of the people who would enjoy the hell out of it. All I know is that MercnBeth's coming home party in June is going to be HUGE, as I think Jeff and Carol are going to make it, I assume you two will be there, I wonder who else? Sadly, I won't be doing any forced bi as my two current partners are really into each other, I sort of feel like Knight of Mists Light at times! I wonder how cheap flights are from Houston?h Funny, Merc has seen me with women but never seen me play full tilt, I have known Jeff for ages but he was too chicken to go to play parties [sm=crop.gif], Lady Pact, you haven't even seen me with a woman, and so this party should be quite revealing. Jeff doesn't know it but we are going to force him to play...LOL!

KnightofMists -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 12:13:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SocratesNot I have a question: Why there was NO consensual slavery in the past, in modern M/s sense? Yes, some people became slaves willingly in the past, but they did it only to survive or to gain some material or other advantage. But, in history (before 20th century), there were NO cases of consensual slavery for the sake of slavery, and this NEVER had any sexual connotations. If the ideas of internal enslavement, and all the other modern ideas of M/s are so natural for some people, why were they developed so late? Was society on a moral and ethical level the same? I think Not. It wasn't so long ago that women couldn't vote in many western countries. Our culture today compared to the past is significantly different. It would seem that the culture of today makes this possible to the degree that it occurs. However, I am not so sure it didn't happen in the past. Nor am I sure it that it did. I wasn't there but clearly if it did... it is not nearly as well document then as it is now.

leadership527 -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 12:31:16 PM)
I think I understand porcelaine and by your definition, Carol is "mastered" insofar as I understand it. The parts that you mentioned which rely on choice are not applicable to us but that's incidental to your main argument. I have, in the past, used the terms "outward obedience" and "inward obedience". The first is the external act of doing whatever I said. The second is the inward act of following my lead through and through. Like you, I don't actually distinguish the two when it comes to being obedient. To use a specific and real life example, recently I took Carol to a restaurant and put her in a top that was too sheer by her measures... transparent would've been a pretty decent description actually. I gave her two commands. The first was to wear the top. The second was to view it as a fun bit of naughtiness rather than a humiliating act of displaying herself. Both were commands and I expected (and got) obedience to both. The only place I'd see it slightly differently than you is that if I never asked her to be OK with it, then the "calling me a jackass" part would've been fine by me. So tying this all together, I think you and I are seeing this similarly, but as is always true with me, I seek to simplify. I have no need to add "mastery" into the mix when the word "obedience" covers the necessary ground just fine. I'm always seeking to strip things down to their basic truths rather than build up elaborate constructs where not required.

porcelaine -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 12:52:12 PM)
leadership527, quote: I gave her two commands. The first was to wear the top. The second was to view it as a fun bit of naughtiness rather than a humiliating act of displaying herself. Both were commands and I expected (and got) obedience to both. That's hot. But you know my mind goes... :) quote: The only place I'd see it slightly differently than you is that if I never asked her to be OK with it, then the "calling me a jackass" part would've been fine by me. Carol probably doesn't have the verbal issues I do. Which is a nice way of saying I can be quite the smartass. Unlike some I can't harbor those thoughts. I won't ever call him an ass but I would say something else in a moment of self expression that wasn't appropriate. I walk a fine line with this one. Because in all honesty I can't say it aloud either. He doesn't like it so I'm not going there. quote: I think you and I are seeing this similarly, but as is always true with me, I seek to simplify. I have no need to add "mastery" into the mix when the word "obedience" covers the necessary ground just fine. I'm always seeking to strip things down to their basic truths rather than build up elaborate constructs where not required. We are. Articulation of mastery is not a necessity. My obedience says it all. ~porcelaine

LadyPact -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 1:08:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael All I know is that MercnBeth's coming home party in June is going to be HUGE, as I think Jeff and Carol are going to make it, I assume you two will be there, I wonder who else? Sadly, I won't be doing any forced bi as my two current partners are really into each other, I sort of feel like Knight of Mists Light at times! I wonder how cheap flights are from Houston?h Funny, Merc has seen me with women but never seen me play full tilt, I have known Jeff for ages but he was too chicken to go to play parties [sm=crop.gif], Lady Pact, you haven't even seen me with a woman, and so this party should be quite revealing. Jeff doesn't know it but we are going to force him to play...LOL! I've already been forewarned about how many folks should be there and given some practical advice about sleeping bags. [;)] As for playing full tilt, I'm not promising that will be My contribution during the weekend. Oh, I'm sure that there will be some of that, but it's not My real purpose in going. What happens in addition to that is just icing on the cake. I do think some of the potential possibilities could be very interesting. I'll let Jeff speak for himself in what he might want to see or be interested in. At any rate, I'm sure after that weekend, he'll stop calling himself the token vanilla guy.

Jeffff -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 1:17:42 PM)
Don't hurt him TOO badly.......... ~snickers~

jennylandis -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 1:27:23 PM)
slavery is just an easy familiar term used to describe it, but it doesn't describe it accurately because ppl associate slavery with what was going on in the 1800's

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 1:30:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SocratesNot I have a question: {clipped for brevity} If the ideas of internal enslavement, and all the other modern ideas of M/s are so natural for some people, why were they developed so late? My theory on this is that there were many other social contracts that fulfilled similar situations for most people. One could contract as a paid domestic servant (which was nothing like service today); marry under the terms of the times -- for the periods in which you speak, these marital relationships were -extremely- oriented towards H/w dynamics where the female was 'kept in line', denied the right to hold property, vote, or, in some cases, even speak openly in public; one could opt for indentured servitude; enter into an apprenticeship relationship; take a place in a working brothel (some of which were -very- high-class and surprisingly appealing to women who wanted a more... active role in managing their own lives).... Sexuality has not changed, so much as it has become much more -visible-. If you read 'bodice rippers' written during the 17th, 18th, and 19th century, Shakespeare, Byron, etc., you'll find many references to sexual liasons that, today, might easily fit into the dynamic that some choose to call M/s... much more so if you read the blatantly erotic literature of the time. Today, we put things into boxes that other cultures wouldn't even have considered putting them in... so it's not so much that these things didn't exist, it is more that they weren't as public or as available. Even when I came into this lifestyle some quarter of a century ago or so, things were just not as 'visible' -- they existed, but nobody really KNEW anyone who did anything like it... until you managed to find a sponsor who could get you inside... and then, there it was, bright as day. Calla

WyldHrt -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 1:55:11 PM)
quote: All I know is that MercnBeth's coming home party in June is going to be HUGE, as I think Jeff and Carol are going to make it, I assume you two will be there, I wonder who else? Silly question. [:D]

SocratesNot -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 2:03:56 PM)
Would anyone of you obey your Master if he forbid you to use the Internet forever?

slaveluci -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 2:05:37 PM)
Yes, it's simply something I enjoy doing. It's not something I need to have in my day to day life. It does make alot of things more convenient but I could definitely live without it if He desired...........luci

Jeffff -> RE: Slavery is bullshit (5/28/2010 2:06:03 PM)
Yes....... and right now... I wish you had such a Master.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.1210938