CuriousLord
Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jaunty1
I read through this entire thread and decided to start at the very beginning with my comments.
You said that you believe ‘a Master is one who owns a slave(s); “ I will agree with you here
“who is solely responsible for the actions of his property as long as the slave(s) acts within his own guidelines and orders; “ I disagree with you here in the respect that if my slave goes against my orders; or does something that I did not authorize, her actions are still my responsibility. I failed to properly guide her; whether her disobedience is due to just a bad mood; or something more important; I failed her in this respect.
As her owner, I must take responsibility for her obedience AND her disobedience; I must accept responsibility over ANY actions that ensue at any time. It’s a reflection on my ability to Master her.
“and that everything a slave does is due to the responsibility and credit of the owner” Again, I agree with you here. However, this statement alone contradicts what you stated above, that a Master is solely responsible for the actions of his property AS LONG AS the slave(s) acts within his own guidelines and orders.
I don't see the contradiction just yet. The Master is responsible for his slave so long as she follows his guidelines- this is to say, he's responsible for her, so long as she remains responsible to him. Still, if there is a contradiction, I'd appreciate it being pointed out.
quote:
ORIGINAL: jaunty1
Moving on to your next posting: #3
You responded to LA with
“is the slave, then responsible for her being able to cook an awesome apple pie? If she is property, then this falls to the Master”
I agree yet disagree. As her owner, I did not teach her how to bake that apple pie. Yet, when she makes it for ME, it is cooked properly simply because she desires to please me. I can not take credit for her cooking skills; I can only take credit for her CONTINUED cooking skills.
This is one of those subjects that I just have to default to saying "this is a mechanism of the dynamic". For instance, in your life, and in your relationships, you may not take credit for it. Which is really just fine- I just do it differently.
My reason for doing it this way is that, when I collar a slave, I assume liability for her assets and flaws. Sort of a catch-all.
quote:
ORIGINAL: jaunty1
You also stated here that “if a Master causes his slave to go to jail, that it is his fault. Society is just jailing the slave despite the fault being the Master” My question here would be as her Master, and as one who believes that ALL responsibility should fall to you; why have YOU NOT stepped forward and in the eyes of the law and society taken the blame and responsibility for he actions?
This isn't saying I wouldn't step forward. (Hell, I'm not planning on getting any slave into jail in the first place.)
This quote was basically in response to others arguing, "if her actions are your fault, then why is she the one going to jail?" I was answering with, "Because society doesn't reconize the dynamic and would hold her accountable for her actions, regardless of how fault is assigned within the dynamic".
quote:
ORIGINAL: jaunty1
Example; my girl robs a bank because I tell her to. She gets arrested. As her Master, it is my duty to step forward and say ‘she did not do this; I forced her to. I should be the one behind bars, and she should be absolved of all blame.
While it's a noble sentiment, I'm afraid she'd still get stuck with the charges, though perhaps reduced if you can claim coercion, and you'd get stuck with the crime and/or conspiracy to commit it.
Still, it's sort of a moot question. If a Master orders his slave to rob a bank, he's probably not the honorable type to be concerned for her well being and wouldn't stick his neck out for her. The type that would be concerned for her well being wouldn't order her to rob a bank in the first place.
quote:
ORIGINAL: jaunty1
Yet, from what you have said in this post; this is not how you would do things; even though you state quite firmly that YOU are responsible. And yes, this was a question.
You mean I said that, if I got my slave thrown in jail, I wouldn't do anything to try to help her? I can't recall, honestly- it's a subject I try to avoid. Frankly, it makes me sad to consider what I would see as a betrayal of her trust so horribly. If I did say I wouldn't, if you could show me where, I'd like to take another look at it.
quote:
ORIGINAL: jaunty1
Post # 28
You responded to LA with “they are the Master’s responsibility to see to their care. Now of course, he can say you are to care for them or something like this and this is a guideline and her responsibility to him. But she would care for them as a responsibility to him, not as a responsibility to the children or state” So basically, what you are inferring here is that a slave cares for her own children not out of love, or a sense of right and wrong; but simply because she has been ordered to? I am assuming that you do not have children of your own? If you did, you would recognize the fallacy of what you have said here.
Yup, the idea of children came up later. The dynamic I'm illistrating in this post would call for that. However, this same dynamic is only a portion of my current one, as I've posted in response to my new-found words to express it. As it's an incomplete version of mine, and mine doesn't even have children involved in it, I'm not going to begin to claim it would work on the emotional level.
My point behind this part is that, in this dynamic, as illistrated, this is how that would work. It would, too, provided people agree to it. If a mother would agree to care for her own children out of submission to the father or not, though, is an entirely other story.
quote:
ORIGINAL: jaunty1
Post # 42
You said ‘the Master just about always takes responsibility as the slave is living under his rule. He is not responsible when the slave deviates from her rule” I disagree with this here again. As an owner, if a slave goes against what I have ordered; I have FAILED her. It is my responsibility because I failed to recognize the issues that caused this.
This is another place I'd say your disagreement appears to be based more on the fact we subscribe to different dynamics- even if similar.
In my view and way of working with it, she's obligated to only one thing: to serve me. Now, I've made provisions for if a slave fails in her duty due to inability or misunderstanding, which would fault to me.
It is an interesting point, though, that you would feel as you have failed your slave. My view is based off the idea that the slave, at the time of collaring, was dishonset about her nature- that she would not always do as instructed, thus invalidating the basis of the dynamic. However, your argument seems to be supported by the fact that disobidience may spawn during a relationship.. something which, while it doens't quite make sense to me, is a good point to consider.
Do you know in what ways a Master may unintentionally inspire disobidence in a formerly devout and loyal slave? It's something neat to consider.
quote:
ORIGINAL: jaunty1
In post #55, you said ‘she is my property; I am responsible for her’ In accepting responsibility for her, you must also accept responsibility for when she is disobedient and does wrong. I have failed to see you yet mention this. If she fails as a slave because of disobedience; the fault falls on the owner for failing to address the issues that caused such. The owner must take responsibility in this case.
The argument's noble in sentiment- though I'm afraid even I find it a bit overly romantic.
What if a slave has been an actress? Simply acting the part- well- and then commits a grand crime, blantantly disregarding your rules? Would you be responsible for this?
It may seem like a case that's not worth considering, but a previous slave had done something much like this. Ironically enough, she was a drama major. While she was legitimately submissive, part of her was deviant in loyality- enough to disregard my rules and commit actions I considered to be atrocities.
While I set about trying to right many of her grounds- or, rather, put an end to the continued damage they caused- I could not claim I was responsible for her.
Also, this relationship was not so strongly in the M/s dynamic. While I considered her a slave, I said this because I "owned" her and controlled her, but her responsibilties were still her own. It's only after this relationship did I acknowledge the flaw in this system.
quote:
ORIGINAL: jaunty1
In post # 73 you stated ‘this is a more extreme M/s sort of relationship, though that is not to say it’s better” I disagree. What you have presented here is a plausible, workable relationship that is severely flawed in one area. Your lack of total and complete responsibility when your slave fails.
I would argue that, if she was truly my slave, why would she fail me for the sake of disobidience? (Again, if she's failed due to inability or misunderstanding, that is my fault.)
Just a note part way though.. I'm glad for how many responses you've given. This point, however, your idea of the Master being liable for blantant disobidience- it's an interesting idea and one I'd like to pursue in debate, if you're up for it. I don't know the answer.
quote:
ORIGINAL: jaunty1
In post # 111 you said “a slave does not serve the guests of a dinner party; she has done nothing for them. Her actions were at the command of her Master and she did them for the sole purpose of filling such commands. She does not desire credit for the meal from others outside of the compliment of having served her Master well” I agree with this. Yet, what happens if the meal was not a good one? Is it your slave’s fault? Or yours? In addition to this is the aspect of WHY the meal was bad. What were the reasons for it? Do you take responsibility here? Or do you instead place the blame on your slave?
It would be my fault. The idea of fault versus achomplishment is one I'd like to point out as a view I have in a contineous spectrum.. this is to say, she's done her job, and it turning out well or poorly is a matter of detail. This detail, while it would effect how others might view my ability as a Master or/and simply effect the quality of th meal, does not reflect either well or poorly upon the slave.
The detail that does reflect well on the slave is her obidience to orders and guidelines and her expressed desire in performing as well as she can. Something I'm hesitant to bring up as it maintains loose ends.
quote:
ORIGINAL: jaunty1
In post #168 you said “now if my slave were rude to a Gorean Master, it would be me he addressed” You are very correct here; however, you forgot one important factor. If , as a Gorean, your slave was rude to a Master/Mistress/Free, she would also be punished by the person whom she was rude towards.
Yup, I'm meaning to study up on Gorean idealogy. I would think a Gorean would empathize enough with me to respect that it should be me he would approach about my slave's misconduct, though he would be respectful of my dynamic in understanding that my slave is mine to deal with. This is my hope, in any case.
quote:
ORIGINAL: jaunty1
I admit that your idea of this dynamic can be accomplished, yet I am going to go with the crowd here and state that from what you have said here, it is flawed. I will repeat what I said I earlier.
It is flawed because if your property acts outside of orders; it is still YOUR responsibility. You have failed to Master her in that respect.
This is one of the most ironic and intersting parts of your reply. Most of the others have faulted my dynamic for the levying of both credit and fault to the Master in most cases, yet you would fault it in not levying the entirety of credit and fault to the Master.
I'd happily debate this with you, if you're up for it. It was my sincerest of hopes to receive such contributions in the orignial post. While some posters have made contributions to the content of the thread, and others have made good points, this is the first thing I feel I could benifit from.
To begin, should you be willing, I'll take the standpoint that a Master should not be responsible for instances of blantant disobidience. (As a debate, I'm receptive to your ideas and arguments, this is my stance as I seem to lean more towards it than you do, and I believe you're more comfortable arguing that a Master should take full responsibilty, even in the case of disobidience.)
I would like to argue the basis, to begin with, before the practical effects and consquences.
1.)I feel there are two hypothetical sources of factors contributing to disobidience: those present at the time of collaring and those acquired since.
2.)I would argue that a pure slave, assuming she was without such factors at the time of collaring, would not gain disobidient factors under the thoughtful guidance of a Master.
3.)I would continue that, should one who has been guided by a thoughtful Master, she must have either been deceptive at the time of collaring as to the issue of her stance towards obidience or that the collar was offered prematurely and/or erronously.
4.)I would sum these up in that, should Master have conducted due process in consideration before collaring and acted thoughtfully since, it is most likely disobidient elements of a slave's personality existed at the time of collaring and were misrepresented by the slave.
5.)I would continue that a collaring made under the influence of willful deception is invalid.
6.)I would conclude that, at the time at which a collaring is known to be invalid, the collar itself may be invalidiated.
(I've numbered the points so that they may be more specifically and easily picked up and referred to, such as (1) referring to the first argument.)
(I'm entirely open for any sensible and reasonable person accepting the premises of both the dynamic, general; and logical debate to join in.)
|
RE: Masterhood - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread