quote:

ORIGINAL: IronBear

quote:

ORIGINAL: realwhiteknight



Let's keep in mind he only meant in U.S. society were things set up that way, and it was simply an example of a highly unethical, institutionalized structure within a society, that was not a reflection of the natural order of things. He wasn't summarizing a historical, global study of slavery.

You speak for crazyml now do you? Perhaps you are psychic or could it be you are his mother? I rather think the the lad is quite capable of speakling for himself especially as I fail to find any reference to show he, crazyml this is, was indeed referring to U.S. Society. Perhaps too you fail to recognise that part of a summary of a historical global study of slavery will show far more about the history and development of the slave trade in the U.S.

Just my views and take on this matter. I shall await for crazyml to reply when he is able and illuminate us.

quote:

ORIGINAL: realwhiteknight
His point was obvious as anything; I mentioned this in order to try and avoid a flame war over slavery though. He was using an example to illustrate a point.

quote:

ORIGINAL: porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: jujubeeMB
I actually totally buy that for individuals. I think, in some ways, that's the essence of a really deep, 24/7 submission: the discovery that your rightful place is under the hand of whomever has brought you willingly to that place. But the problem with being anti-feminist is that they are not just speaking about themselves, they're dragging me and every other woman on earth into it too. I didn't consent to be considered inferior by anyone, and any woman who believes me to be because of her own personal wants and desires is doing so against my will.

I've witnessed an anti-feminine variant as well. Where the softer elements of womanhood are derided. And once again it is coming from women and directed to other women. All submissive. How you can possibly be both is baffling but I suppose that doesn't matter. I would have to do more in depth study to determine if the backlash has actually created women that have a hidden dislike of their own gender.

quote:


It all seems really basic to me: no one can make a massive statement about a group based on gender, race, sexual orientation or any other category. You just can't, because we're all individuals, with as many variations as can possibly be imagined.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Malkinius


I think you ought to study history more. Africans enslaving Africans may be the original slaves and owners if, as is expected, some form of slavery goes back into Paleolithic and earlier times. It could pre-date Homo Sapiens but I have no proof of that. It certainly predates written history by millennia. Oh....by the way...the last legal slave owning country in the world was in Africa (Ethiopia if I remember correctly) and it was black Africans enslaving black Africans. It wasn't even an Arab or North African country. Snide attempts at white and North American bashing just won't work on this subject. You have your facts skewed by the lies which have been told about slavery for the last couple of centuries and especially the last 50-75 years.

Be well....

Malkinius

quote:

It could pre-date Homo Sapiens but I have no proof of that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: IronBear

G'day Malkinius mate,

Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't the slave trade into the Caribbean Islands and South America well established by the Spanish, French and later the British at about the same time it was established in the US.. Don't have time to research it at the moment but it sticks in my mind that it was.. I think what we see so often is that the focus is on US thingies where as there is a whole world out here....

quote:

ORIGINAL: realwhiteknight


His point was obvious as anything; I mentioned this in order to try and avoid a flame war over slavery though. He was using an example to illustrate a point.

Also, I was being a bit sarcastic.

Your point was exactly I was trying to get away from: there was no talk of the history of slavery, he simply mentioned slavery being set up in our society to explain that something can EXIST within society and yet not be ethical nor the 'natural order of things'. You seem to be missing his point.

quote:

ORIGINAL: IronBear

quote:

ORIGINAL: realwhiteknight


His point was obvious as anything; I mentioned this in order to try and avoid a flame war over slavery though. He was using an example to illustrate a point.

Also, I was being a bit sarcastic.

Your point was exactly I was trying to get away from: there was no talk of the history of slavery, he simply mentioned slavery being set up in our society to explain that something can EXIST within society and yet not be ethical nor the 'natural order of things'. You seem to be missing his point.

It matters not if his point was as obvious as anything, I do find it offensive when someone takes it into their head to respond for another explaining what someone meant. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: IronBear

G'day Malkinius mate,

Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't the slave trade into the Caribbean Islands and South America well established by the Spanish, French and later the British at about the same time it was established in the US.. Don't have time to research it at the moment but it sticks in my mind that it was.. I think what we see so often is that the focus is on US thingies where as there is a whole world out here....

quote:

ORIGINAL: Malkinius

This makes a few of the responses so far both amusing and pathetic in their, for the so called dominants who are uttering them, slavish devotion to lies and their submission to the will of the liars that makes it so for me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: porcelaine

Greetings,

I would like to have a constructive discussion on the current wave of anti-feminism within the BDSM community. While I'm not advocating either side, I've noticed a peculiar bias among its female proponents. Ironically their derision is directed towards the submissive woman that embraces feminism on some level. To the degree where her supposed behavior towards dominant men - which renders him trod upon or victimized - is heavily denounced. Strangely enough, the identical acts when performed by the dominant male towards a submissive woman are lauded.

I'm left to wonder if the root behind their disgust is truly indicative of their beliefs regarding feminism and its affect on men as a whole, or relates to attributes perceived in other submissive persons that they deem unacceptable and inappropriate.

Q: Have you noticed a similar bias in the behavioral differences between the roles and sexes? And if so, what is your opinion?

As always, I look forward to your feedback.

~porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

Slavery was institutionalized in the United States in 1776. Prior to that it was done by the Spanish, French, English, etc.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

IronBear,

You're right, I evidently didn't make my point clearly. I do hope my explanation has clarified things.

I think you're overreacting just a tad though. I don't think it's rude to post an opinion or a comment to the effect that someone has been misunderstood.

You're a perfectly robust and able contributor to these boards, but if I thought someone had misunderstood you (even if it was in the unlikely event that you'd not made yourself clear) I'd have no problem at all pointing that out. And I wouldn't regard it as rudeness at all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeffff
That is a rather narrow definition of Feminism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: realwhiteknight
True, Domi. I have to say, the concept of slavery pre-dating H. sapiens is almost laughable. (Julia should weigh in on this, as we were all discussing primate behavior and her experiences digging in a cramped pit in 95% heat for grad school on another thread).

I certainly imagine the occasional kidnapping of an odd member of another group, or even battles between small tribes of pre- H Sapiens (H erectus, H habilis and even Neanderthals under some categorizations) but all individuals living in the early environment would be much more invested in pure survival than trying to capture/enslave others especially when it carried such a great risk to themselves. Even if some were added to the group for breeding or social purposed, to add to a dying population for example, those captured would have assimilated for survival and could have not properly been referred to as 'slaves'. I mean, can anyone really imagine a neanderthal trying to enslave other neanderthals to do what, built railroad tracks for their lazy masters? Hunt bison en masse? Be raped and how would they not try to escape? Did they have chains or guns to keep them? omg I can't believe I have to argue this.

Slavery was based in economics and greed. Higher forms of technology and complex, stationary, large scale societies were necessary for it to occur than were present in the early hominid environment.

To ever view slavery as some kind of nature-based phenomena, that began at the pure, beautiful, 'dawn of time' is the most disgusting sort of ignorance and justification of pure evil.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Malkinius
Actually, I was mostly talking about political correctness, not feminism there.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml
Apologies for the delay in responding - occasioned by my going to bed.

quote:

Oh, you can never study enough history! I agree completely.

I'm really sorry, but you misunderstood my point. I see where the misunderstanding lies and it's entirely my fault (although it does seem as if several other readers got it straight away, but please don't regard this as a reflection on your comprehension or intelligence but more my lack of clarity). When I say "Not so long ago, society was 'set up' so that Africans could be taken from their countries and made into slaves", I don't mean to say that people decided it was ok to take slaves not long ago - I mean that "Society is set up that way..." was one of the excuses people used for its continued acceptance. I mean - what sort of stupid fucking idiot would believe that slavery was only invented in the 1700's! Sheesh!

quote:

Thanks for adding the historical extras, as they go to support my point I'm particularly grateful.

Common excuses for slavery, treating females as chattels, and stoning gays to death are "Society was set up that way", "That's what we've been doing for millennia". An apologist for slavery might even take your excellent historical points and say "Well slavery wasn't our idea! They've been doing it for 1000's of years".

quote:

So I'm sure you can see that I wasn't making any attempt to make a snide comment about America. I'm glad I was able to clear this up for you.

quote:

But again, I'm bound to say that "Well slavery was started by the Africans" would be a pretty fucking poor justification for slavery - But I know you're not the kind of stupid ass who would use that argument.

quote:

I'd like to, respond to one of your comments in particular -

quote:

It could pre-date Homo Sapiens but I have no proof of that.

This is pretty "out-there" as a theory, since most anthropoligists believe that hunter gatherer societies weren't capable of supporting organised slave taking, to to argue that it predates Homo Sapiens is either brave or foolish. I'd really like to know what you base this theory of yours on - If you could make a strong case, it would earn you a PHD (or another one) in a flash. I presume you've a background in Anthropology?

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
It's fascinating to investigate that term 'political correctness'.  I remember it once being applied in a narrow way to describe uptight language and the assumption that changing one's language automatically changed one's attitude.  My first published letter to a national newspaper slammed that attitude.  A decade later and by the time of Howard's 2005 Tory electoral campaign here in the UK, though, its meaning had broadened considerably. 'We're here to sweep away political correctness', was Howard's mantra.  'Political correctness' had now come to be applied to almost anything that the right wing didn't like about the left wing. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Malkinius

Greetings realwhiteknight....

quote:

ORIGINAL: realwhiteknight
True, Domi. I have to say, the concept of slavery pre-dating H. sapiens is almost laughable. (Julia should weigh in on this, as we were all discussing primate behavior and her experiences digging in a cramped pit in 95% heat for grad school on another thread).

I certainly imagine the occasional kidnapping of an odd member of another group, or even battles between small tribes of pre- H Sapiens (H erectus, H habilis and even Neanderthals under some categorizations) but all individuals living in the early environment would be much more invested in pure survival than trying to capture/enslave others especially when it carried such a great risk to themselves. Even if some were added to the group for breeding or social purposed, to add to a dying population for example, those captured would have assimilated for survival and could have not properly been referred to as 'slaves'. I mean, can anyone really imagine a neanderthal trying to enslave other neanderthals to do what, built railroad tracks for their lazy masters? Hunt bison en masse? Be raped and how would they not try to escape? Did they have chains or guns to keep them? omg I can't believe I have to argue this.

Slavery was based in economics and greed. Higher forms of technology and complex, stationary, large scale societies were necessary for it to occur than were present in the early hominid environment.

To ever view slavery as some kind of nature-based phenomena, that began at the pure, beautiful, 'dawn of time' is the most disgusting sort of ignorance and justification of pure evil.

If you assume that all slavery is based on economics then you would probably be right. The kidnapping of females, at least, from other tribes and integrating them into your group seems to be in the nature of some primates other than humans.

quote:

My argument for my supposition is that if we see similar activities in both the higher primates and humans, the possibility of similar or even the same thing happening in pre-humans is possible and could easily be argued as probable. Personal opinion time. I think the formation of historical slavery back to its earliest roots has its origin in bride capture which probably does predate humans and was settled into something we might recognize with the beginnings of agriculture.

quote:

It would make for an interesting thread or discussion but I don't know if there is enough data to prove it one way or another.