RE: New/Old Styles (Full Version)

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



Message

Elorin -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/4/2007 4:02:28 PM)

The historical context is interesting, and one I would enjoy discussing in person. On a message board it tends to get a bit sticky trying to apply it.

Considering that BDSM is one of those "each one, defiine one" kind of situations, it is hard to find any definition of any term that applies to all situations, but these quotes certainly give some different perspectives to look at the term slave.

~E



yenlui -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/4/2007 4:05:19 PM)

This touches one of the most important things in D/s: the fact that a person never can be legally owned by someone else.



MasterFireMaam -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/4/2007 6:16:02 PM)

It depends on if you consider slaves as property or not...and to what level.

Master Fire



MultiFacetedDom -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/4/2007 7:32:47 PM)

Re: This touches one of the most important things in D/s: the fact that a person never can be legally owned by someone else.

There is a bit more to this.  It goes to the meaning of "ownership."  Can you really own a piece of land?  Ownership is a legal concept.  If you have a deed, or rent from someone that has a deed, you can defend your property or call the police.  If the group feels you own something or someone and they're willing to enforce that, they you do own them.



Devilslilsister -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/4/2007 7:36:58 PM)

Mmmmmmmmmmm........... definetely interesting if you ask me.  IMO - it seems to me to be the closest definition of M/s to actual real world slavery.  i would compound on this further but i am tired and full of banana pudding.

If you look at the link, there are tons of other interesting tid bits. 

i think the honor thing has to do with the being unallowed to protect ones self as the Roman citizens felt that to be high up on their  list of important attributes.

quote:

The inviolability of the citizen's body was a very important concept in the complex of ideas that constituted Roman identity.


this is where i think the whole honor thing comes in. 

quote:

The mere experience of a state in which an individual could not protect his own body from abuse was inherently and permanently degrading. Thus, even if your owner treated you quite well, Romans believed that you were degraded simply by being subject to another man's ability to treat you poorly if he chose.


I dunno.  It seems pretty close to the WIITWD because Roman slavery, and being enslaved - solely depended on who owned you.  Everyone had their own definition and meaning and way of doing things with their slaves.



Devilslilsister -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/4/2007 7:43:45 PM)

::smiles:: not to be a brat or anything...........

but ownership doesnt soley have to be a legal concept.  There's a few concepts in the dictionary.......... three of em.........


quote:

The state or fact of being an owner
the relation of an owner to the thing possessed; possession with the right to transfer possession to others
the act of having and controlling property


Not to be a brat or anything = ) 



MultiFacetedDom -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/4/2007 7:54:16 PM)

From m-w.com:
Main Entry: 2own
Function: verb
transitive verb
1 a : to have or hold as property : POSSESS b : to have power or mastery over <wanted to own his own life>

My point is that essentially the group grants that power.

I print up a piece of paper that says I own the Brooklyn Bridge.  I call up the police department to get all the cars off of it.  They're just going to laugh.  Bill Gates calls up the police to have a burglar kicked off his property, the police will come running.

In Roman Times, take the example of a slave who is physically much more powerful than their Master/Mistress.  The only way the slave is kept in line is if the group supports the owner.  This does lead to an interesting point which is that you need to give slaves respect even if the Law doesn't call for it.  When the slaves were too disrespected, it made death more attractive than slavery.  Periodically there were revolts.  Can you say "Spartacus"?

That does bring up an intersting point in that in one sense, even in Roman times slavery was consenual at some level.  The slave could always choose to die rather than submit.....





Devilslilsister -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/4/2007 8:03:59 PM)

Very true on the consensual part.  I read about the ways a slave can "refuse" 

quote:

In all slave societies we know of, slaves individually and in small groups routinely resisted their owners by dramatic (suicide, an act slave owners found particularly wicked, murder, running away) and subtle means (work slowdowns, petty sabotage).


LOL - Owners found suicide "particularly wicked"   ha ha ha.  So, i agree in an odd sense - it was still consenual.  Are we back to the old theory (from another thread) that there is no such thing as force?  Everything is always consenual, one just not like the choices placed in from of him? 



MultiFacetedDom -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/4/2007 8:09:35 PM)

I would say it depends on the length of time you're talking about.  You can take away the ability of a person to control their person, but only for a short time.  You can bind or incarate someone.  However, that makes them a prisoner, not a slave.  In order for a slave to be a slave, they have to be performing useful work.  At some level, that work is always consenual.



yenlui -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/5/2007 5:50:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MultiFacetedDom

Re: This touches one of the most important things in D/s: the fact that a person never can be legally owned by someone else.

There is a bit more to this.  It goes to the meaning of "ownership."  Can you really own a piece of land?  Ownership is a legal concept.  If you have a deed, or rent from someone that has a deed, you can defend your property or call the police.  If the group feels you own something or someone and they're willing to enforce that, they you do own them.


If I understand you correct: the difference is that within the D/s-lifestyle, I'm sure the rest of the group would agree to my Master owning me, but legally, he never will. When we are outside of the "lifestyle community" He can claim to own me as much as He want, but in all civilized nations there's no way of legally owning another human.

The way I see it: what defines me as someones property (I don't use the word slave about myself) has to come from myself. If I don't allow Him to own me, there's no way He can. And, even within the "lifestyle community", if I wanted to leave and He tried to keep me against my will, few people would help Him and the rest would exclude Him from the community.

quote:

In order for a slave to be a slave, they have to be performing useful work. At some level, that work is always consenual.

I agree to this.



onestandingstill -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/5/2007 8:13:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: marieToo

A statement from the quoted text......
 
"A slave by definition had no honor or dignity"
 




Though few will probably agree with me here I feel at least 50% of the Doms I've met agree with the above statement in how they treat their slaves today in their actions toward their slaves.
I think most that treat their slave like this claim this isn't how they operate when it's exactly how they operate.
I think one of my pet peeves in the BDSM life I've led in the past two years is that many a so called Dom feels he can take take take & break their word, lie and leave subs emotionally hurt claiming they don't have to be a decent human toward you because you chose to submit to them.
LOL I should just stop here as I'm sure this is enough of my negativity and reality in this thread.
suzanne



onestandingstill -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/5/2007 8:23:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: yenlui


quote:

ORIGINAL: MultiFacetedDom

in all civilized nations there's no way of legally owning another human.



Ummm adopting an unmentionable means they belong to you and you're legally responsible to make choices for them they have no control to stop you from choosing for them.
In vanilla situations power of attourney often gives people the right to make choices for you and your life you can't control or have the right to make for yourself.
If you're deemed unable to make rational choices for yourself another adult or the state takes custody and responsibility of you & your choices for you.
Maybe in D/s there's no ownership of an adult, but there are ways the State can appoint you guardian which translates into a form of ownership over someone IMO. 
suzanne



SirDominic -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/5/2007 9:33:28 AM)



quote:


Though few will probably agree with me here I feel at least 50% of the Doms I've met agree with the above statement in how they treat their slaves today in their actions toward their slaves.
I think most that treat their slave like this claim this isn't how they operate when it's exactly how they operate.
I think one of my pet peeves in the BDSM life I've led in the past two years is that many a so called Dom feels he can take take take & break their word, lie and leave subs emotionally hurt claiming they don't have to be a decent human toward you because you chose to submit to them.

suzanne



suzanne, you are definitely meeting the wrong people! It has been my experience that most Doms I have met in life (NOT online) have been decent folk who care a lot about their sub's happiness and wellbeing.

Namaste, Sir Dominic



SirDominic -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/5/2007 9:44:46 AM)

quote:

That does bring up an intersting point in that in one sense, even in Roman times slavery was consenual at some level. The slave could always choose to die rather than submit.....


Well, yes and no. You have to consider the social conditioning of the time. If you were brought up in a world where slavery was acceptable part of life; you would be more likely to accept that as just part of your reality. Can someone really consent if they have never known another way?

Brings to mind the much quoted fact that the third class passengers on the Titanic died in much higher numbers whan any other class. At that time, the social structure was that, if you were a "third class" citizen, you accepted that as your place in life.

It's not so much that the third class was ignored. They knew their place and mistakenly believed that their turn for the boats would come, so they did nothing until it was too late. During the Senate hearings, Senator Smith asked very leading questions of one of the third class survivors, trying to get him to say he was discriminated against. The man refused to say that and went on to say he didn't think he was treated in any way unfairly. His social conditioning was such that he believed that the upper classes did had more privileges.

Namaste Sir Dominic



SirDominic -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/5/2007 9:50:08 AM)

quote:

He can claim to own me as much as He want, but in all civilized nations there's no way of legally owning another human.


Not true. In most Muslim countries, ownership of women is a reality.

Namaste, Sir Dominic



Devilslilsister -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/5/2007 10:10:28 AM)

quote:

If you were brought up in a world where slavery was acceptable part of life; you would be more likely to accept that as just part of your reality. Can someone really consent if they have never known another way?


Not true.  Alot of the Roman slaves were not home grown.  They were taken as prisoners of war.  Here, i'll get the text.

quote:

There is an unbreakable link between Rome's experience as militaristic, expansionist empire and its experience as a slave society.

Romans obtained slaves in massive numbers by conquering other political entitites.

The Romans also traded for slaves. We know, for example, that a great portion of the Roman wine sold in Gaul was paid for in human currency (as many as 15,000 a year). One aspect of Gallic and German slavery that the Romans found interesting was the willingness [at least from the Roman point of view] of individuals to sell themselves into slavery to pay off their own debts. European tribes also sold their war captives to Roman slave traders and merchants. Finally, the practice of piracy provided a steady supply of slaves. Pirates would routinely kidnap individuals from seized ships and sell them into slavery. Similarly, they could attack coastal towns and villages and sell the population wholesale into slavery. Finally, they often worked with gangs based on the mainland. The gangs would attack and seize the towns, turn them over to the pirates who would arrange the sale of captives in ports with slave merchants, and split the profits with the gangs.


So - alot of it was consensual. 





Devilslilsister -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/5/2007 10:14:13 AM)

quote:

LOL I should just stop here as I'm sure this is enough of my negativity and reality in this thread.
suzanne


I agree.  Oddly, i rarely have met Dom's online with this attitude.  Well those that i talk to.  i've run into it offline though.  You just have to let them know what time it is and keep moving.  Unfortunetly, all it says about them is that they have no honor, among other things.

Cute joke - Women have got to stop comparing men to Dogss.  Men are NOT dogs.  Dogs have loyalty. (among other things)

heh



SirDominic -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/5/2007 10:17:58 AM)

quote:

Maybe in D/s there's no ownership of an adult, but there are ways the State can appoint you guardian which translates into a form of ownership over someone IMO.
suzanne


This was brought up in another thread or two recently. I don't think it is as simple as this. If one is legally an adult, I don't think anyone can appoint you to a guardian unless you are handicapped in some way. In other words, a "normal", functioning person couldn't have themselves appointed to a guardian for no reason.

I'm no legal expert though. Would love some clarification on this by those on here who do know the law.

Namaste, Sir Dominic



FukinTroll -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/5/2007 10:19:00 AM)

Honor and dignity are subjective here just like everywhere. Many view suicide as dishonorable and undignified, nevertheless one of the most complex and rigid honor systems in our world held suicide as the utmost honorable act one could do.

In the lifestyle we have to weigh what is important to our sense of honor and dignity and apply them within because we have no sense of culture or stringent community. Many of us could agree that a servile and obedient slave would have a phenomenal sense of honor through his/her actions. Not only personal honor but also an honor that he/she would be bringing to his/her owner.  A slave can approach his/her life with or without dignity and observers can view them as undignified and it is simply their own feeling about such. He/she can approach a task or chore whining and dragging his/her feet and have no display of honor nor dignity or he/she can tackle the endeavor with enthusiasm and pride making even the most menial task dignified and honorable.

It is the eye of the beholder. You may feel that Gorean slaves would have no sense of dignity because of the hedonistic chauvinism they must submit to, however when you observe a well trained kijira pouring her heart, elegance and grace into a pose she does, in fact, make her slavery dignified and honors her Master as well as the other observers. She can give her status honor and dignity by being the best kajira she can be. Her sense of honor and dignity can stem from her dedication to her presentation, mannerism, obedience, and submission. She can pay lip service to her skills and only honor her Master with her competence of posing and serving while guests are present or she can maintain a sense of honor and dignity and be the best kajira she can at all times.
Even in this community we judge the slaves of this site by our own senses of honor and dignity. I have witnessed slaves lose all sense of dignity and honor in their manner of posting just as I have seen them elevate their honor and dignity with their manner of posting. In this community when we look to see a fine example of an honorable and dignified slave one half of a duo comes clearly to mind. We all are guilty of being very attentive to that slaves post nevertheless when it comes to the great slave debate she is often farthest from our thoughts because we want to post passionately about how we feel. Then we, eventually, see the pretty pink words written in the most humble, honorable, and dignified post and we simply say, “Damn, beth nailed it!”



yenlui -> RE: New/Old Styles (4/5/2007 10:43:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SirDominic

quote:

He can claim to own me as much as He want, but in all civilized nations there's no way of legally owning another human.


Not true. In most Muslim countries, ownership of women is a reality.

Namaste, Sir Dominic

Yes, that might be true, but those countries does not go under my definition of civilized (and by this, I do NOT mean that all Muslin countries are not civilized - just had to make that clear).



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

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
7.788086E-02