Hickory
Posts: 49
Joined: 2/9/2005 Status: offline
|
TDW - I knew you'd weigh in on this one! Before the "War of Northern Aggression", slaves were not "married". They were property and, although permitted to be consensually joined, did not have any rights or authority over that union, nor over any offspring. Couples could be split up at Master's will, and children could be sold off, separated from their parents, or even killed, if it suited the "owner". Likewise, slaves could be "bred" with one another (regardless of the individuals' wishes)to produce favorable traits (large size, docile temperament, etc), just like any other "livestock". "Uppity" slaves were routinely emasculated, not only as a warning to others, but to insure that their flaws would not contaminate the "stock". My perspective on this matter is that the person really calling the shots, when push comes to shove, determines whether a person can be considered a self-slave or a submissive. If it comes from the top, it a slave, from the bottom, a submissive. Thanks, Hickory
< Message edited by Hickory -- 3/1/2005 12:22:03 PM >
_____________________________
Nullum magnum ingenium sine mixtura dementia. There is no great genius without a mixture of madness. -Aristotle
|