|
aromanholiday -> RE: finding a real sub/slave? (5/4/2011 3:56:22 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: OwnedFemaleFlesh
I also find it strange when people refer to themselves as slaves when they're unowned. The whole concept of slavery is ownership, if you aren't owned, how can you be a slave?
The short answer to this is that the condition of "ownership" in this time and place is very difficult to ascertain despite the presence of a second "masterly" body that the alleged "slave" is shacking up with or claims to have a "contract" with. While anybody can claim to technically be a slave due to the presence of that second body, it has been my experience that the majority of such individuals are not describing anything close to what I'd call slavery. A master-slave relationship is largely mental and due to that, invisible to outside eyes. I have a strong suspicion, though, that most actual slaves (based, of course, on the rigid standards by which I define that term) are not out in the bdsm community declaring their slavehood, except perhaps for a brief period of time in order to complete a specific goal of their master's. I suspect most genuinely owned slaves are voiceless and hidden from the world.
Collarme encourages people to refer to themselves as slaves when they are unowned by providing individuals looking for a dominant partner (and thus, one would assume, unowned) with the option to label themselves as a submissive or a slave when creating a personal ad. I understand the purpose for that: it's to advertise that you want to be a slave. Since a great many of the submissive people you encounter online have been through CM's personal-ad grist mill, unfortunately things have gotten conflated: the idea that any person desiring to be a slave actually is a slave has become unconsciously and almost universally accepted, despite its absurdity.
If I knew someone who'd never wanted anything in her life except slavery and identified/agreed/complied completely with what I feel are the most basic and hardcore tenets of slavery, I would personally call that individual a slave, even if he or she chose to call themselves by the more technically correct "potential slave."
What I'm trying to say is that when you are quite experienced with slavery, you can recognize a slave, no matter what it calls itself. A temporarily unowned slave doesn't magically or instantly become a free, self-determining individual if their past slavery was real and particularly if they're making every effort possible since they became unowned to find someone else capable of completely mastering and owning them.
Since I know the condition of slavery in this day and age has to be largely mentally enforced, it makes perfect sense to me that were I to judge whether someone is a slave or not, a great deal would depend on their inner condition, attitude, motivation (not to mention the attitude of the master, if there is one in the picture).
|
|
|
|
