Myths about Slaves.

[denuseri]

It never ceases to amaze me how many people have assigned some kind of derogatory misnomer or misconstrued additive to sub-define something that used to be one of the highest ideals to uphold in the art (for the initiated).

I am sure there are going to be a lot of the "true" or "real" adjetives thrown around, but sometimes that is unavoidable.

I see a lot of people make assumptions about what a slave is or isnt in bdsm as well as in historical "vanila" subtexts and how one may or may not differ from the more contemporary politically correct term of "submissive" in a bdsm terminology capacity.

So....I figured it would be a good idea to start a thread on what a slave in the context of a safe, sane,,and yes.."consensual" practices of BDSM is and is not all about so people could air what they think the myths are and are not and discuss and learn together perhaps a little bit about ourselves.

Which brings up Myth #1:

"The slave can not consent, or has no choice about anything having "surrendered" all forms of consent or having had all forms of consent taken or removed as such, is incapable of consent."

Something which is completely and utterrly false imho, (in both a bdsm and vanila setting historical or otherwise btw). Plenty of people made the conscious choice to become slaves for a much wider variety of reasons than many will believe.

Everyone, regardless of titular distinction makes choices and or consents or does not consent to this or that as a human being on a case by case, moment by moment basis.

The way I was tuaght, one didn't make the choice to become a slave in a bdsm context until one had dedicated themselves to the path of submission over that of other paths that they may be pursuing (it was kind of like becoming a specialist in the arts of submission and didnt happen until one had been at it for several years,) but also didnt mean you did not top others as and when needed in a bdsm context or vanila one. It was just that your focus was beyound such considerations of "roleplay" where in your relationship to your Owner would be conserned.

The slave was one, who was actually "collared", as opposed to only wearing a collar while submiting. The slave was one who had surrendered in total to his or her self first before offering oneself as well as one's submission to one's Master or Mistress.

Which brings us perhaps prematuraly to Myth #2:

"True" slaves "will not" or "can not" top or dominante another.

Again,, utterrly false, both in bdsm and historically in the vanila world imho.

Again just becuase you take on the titular distinction of a slave, doesnt mean you submit to everyone and everything all the time. Your still human. You still will excersise what dominion you hold other those that you can hold it over, the difference is you are now also willfully and lovingly within the direct dominion of another authority whom you submit to as higher than your own, not becuase you are forced, but becuase you must in your heart submit. Not only for the sake of your Owner...but for yourself as well.

But I shall wait until more people have responded on #1 & #2 before expounding further. I am sure more Myths will come to mind as the debate progresses and or they are brought up by others, and please remember to keep it civil my fellow kinsters, we are not all from the same traditions etc.

[13'sbadkitty]

i am "in process" some where from when this began with Him as a play date kind of thing to daily life and has become, or He say it was always who i was i just didn't know. i don't so much know what i am as far as a title goes, which i do worry about less and less as i have entered into a new place of happyness and acceptance with being owned. i thank you for taking the time to begin this thread, as i myself thought differently of what being a slave is then what it actually is and am happy to know that as i find myself owned on a deeper and deeper level, it is not as i thought. sorry for the random unintelligeableness of this post. i am just happier being owned then i ever was.

[Lisais mine]

Everyone, regardless of titular distinction makes choices and or consents or does not consent to this or that as a human being on a case by case, moment by moment basis.



no truer words can be spoken. i live by those words every day. i dont belive in not acting in a way that you are not willing to die for.

[pervertedpages]

Well often one person's myths are someone else's reality.

For example, I don't feel like I consent each and every time he gives me an order on a case by case basis, whether or not that is someone else's Utter Truth For Everyone. That was true at one point but now I don't think I could thrive in my relationship, as it stands, without knowing that whatever he says is a given in my life, where he shapes my reality, and I can't just say "hey can I have that consent back?" Whether he or anyone else really believes that is pretty iffy lol but it's how he handles me and how I "handle" him. Many people live with super consensual, case by case consensuality in their lives but that doesn't disprove the "myth." Man usually I wouldn't care to enter in this discussion because it's SO personal and individualized that I never glean anything from it besides terminology for my life (like "ohhh, so they call it Consensual Non Consent, hmm ok now I can use that phrase when trying to communicate with someone at another time where the conversation will still be useless" lol). But anyway I just wanted to clarify what I meant by my first sentence.

In terms of discussion and responding to the original post, I'd say I disagree with most things stated under Myth #1 (about consenting on a case by case basis as I said, though I don't disagree with that as a whole just saying that if we're talking in absolutes and general refutations, some slaves live any kind of crazy ways. I also don't agree with slavery being some kind of Guild Master or 'artist specialist' after you have been on the path of Submissive Journeyman for a while. I don't believe someone "evolves" into a slave from submissive in some kind of specialization or self-surrender journey. I'd say someone evolves into a slave to their Master/Owner/Person once they've been with that someone for long enough to trust them with their life and surrender it to them, sure, but not with any kind of "path" talk, just not my personality to talk or think in those terms. But then again I haven't been "initiated" nor have I ever sought training from anyone besides the Man who shapes my reality. For me, training or being taught in "this is how we do it" would be a waste of time, because for us there is nothing important about a "we" as in slavey community with accepted norms/traditions or ye olde guild of slavecraft. There's just a Man and his girl, making googly eyes at one another and absolutely knowing our places, which is what I call "slavery" but I'm sure other people wouldn't lol)

I now apologize for the long parenthetical.

Anyway Myth #2 I can back you up on, why shouldn't a slave be able to top and learn the craft of domination really well? It's not for me but definitely a sensible thing. I'd propose "Myth #3: Slaves are doormats who can't speak for themselves" but well, I'm pretty much a doormat in my relationship and I'm sure there's some slave out there who we'll never hear from because he/she cannot in fact speak for him/herself. Which was the point of my first sentence.

[thepast]

While you're at it...

I would sub-divide slaves:

Long distance v. close v. live-in

Bedroom v. 24/7

Slaves who are parents v. slaves who aren't

Slaves who are married to their Masters v. slaves who aren't, but who are in a committed monogamous relationship w/their Masters v. slaves who aren't in a monogamous relationship w/their Masters because they're poly v. slaves who aren't because they are in an "open" relationship

Slaves who work outside of the home in an income-based job v. slaves who work in the home

Slaves who were in the relationship before becoming a slave v. slaves who entered into the relationship either as a slave or as a sub

Slaves who have had previous D/s or M/s relationships v. slaves who are new to BDSM

.........

Enough categories for you yet??

Here's my point...

I agree with denuseri, but I don't think that 2 myths are even SCRATCHING the surface. There is no such thing as a "typical" slave. To each his own. Everyone develops their own relationship with their Dominant over time that works for them. Some people use the term "slave" when speaking with others because they want to denote the level of committment in the relationship; others use the term because they want to denote the level of power exchange; others use it to denote their fantasy of BDSM they would like to enjoy; and yet, still others use the term as an excuse to describe an abusive relationship.

The problem is that there is absolutely no way to know which "definition" of "slave" someone is until you talk to them. For instance, denuseri is married & lives with her Master and is his 24/7--yet both work outside the home, and denuseri is a caregiver for a family member as well. In other words, she has a real life outside of her slavehood. I don't know about 13bk, and I don't know enough about pp, but I assume their situations are very different from denuseri's. I know mine is... And yet, there are still others who are strictly online & would refer to themselves as slaves. Are they? I am not the judge of that, but it's something to keep in mind: everyone has a different situation & a different definition of the word "slave."

Here is my point. Don't judge/believe a book by its cover. If someone says, "I am a slave," I look critically at them, because I don't always believe things people "tell me." So I will ask them... What does "slave" mean to you? Ask someone sometime. You'd be surprised at how much many just babble--useless, incoherent babble. They have no idea what they are talking about or what being a slave is. It's just a term they use for whatever reason--whether it's what their "Dom" has used, or whether it's what they've used that day to be "hip." Don't get me wrong--I'm not jaded--there are definitely people (like denuseri) who know what their slavehood means to them. But don't kid yourself--it is one of the most overbroad, overly-used terms in the BDSM lexicon. I am also not the "Judge & Jury" of the BDSM lexicon--people are free to use whatever term they want to describe themselves... sure... BUT... it's misleading oftentimes, particularly with THIS term, because of it's over-broad use.

...and that is *exactly* why there are so many myths about it. STOP READING THE FICTION, PEOPLE. It's called FICTION for a reason. IT AIN'T REAL. You want to know what it's like to be a real "slave"?? Get out there & ask people who have lived it for 5+ years, who can give you a coherent definition, who have talked w/other people, who don't get defensive when you ask, who are comfortable in their own skin... ask them about what slavehood means to them, what it is... you will get really interesting information--and probably useful information at that. Just don't believe everything you read on the forums or online: remember... people have REALLY loose definitions of "slave"... far beyond what most people would imagine...

As for the "myths" themselves.
Myth 1, re: consent--you consent to breathe. You consent to everything you do, every minute of the day. You consent to not consenting if you choose to do so. So yes, I would agree to this statement, that slaves are like everyone else--they choose to consent & to what degree/level & when. Again, though people may believe that they are "pure slaves" and "obey their Master no matter what" *fakes fainting in love* it's still consenting.

Myth 2, re: dominating in r/l--Slaves can't dominate? Tell that to the people I boss around @ work *laughs*


So... read with care. But read with a critical eye... when it looks too good to be true, it is. And beware, kinky folk: no one lives in the BDSM Castle in BDSMland. People have to have real lives & make decisions & choices within the real world.

[pervertedpages]

Dude I'm TOTALLY planning on living in BDSM Castle in BDSMland. I'm on a journey to be healthier so I can live long, have a beautiful family that gets the hell out and makes something of themselves, and then make my retirement a NonStop BDSM Wet Dream Rock!

Ok so maybe BDSM Bungalow instead of Castle, the Swedish are a very humble people and I'm learning :)

[_ID_]

I sorta agree with delia on this one.

Each person and couple will define their relationship differently. One person may consider themselves slave, while another who's relationship is very similar in scope would define themselves as only submissive, while another still might only define themselves as bottom. To try and say there are typical situations that make a person a slave sub or bottom is utterly preposterous.

That isn't to say there are generally accepted situations that when we say a term in conversation we all understand it to have a certain connotation. For instance when referring to slave we generally understand it to mean that a person has devoted themselves to a particular partner in such a way that they feel the need for limits and safe words has waned to the point of not being needed. Likewise when we say the word submissive we understand it to mean a personality trait, and sometimes a level of submission to a partner that doesn't equate to what we understand for slave. This also applies for bottom. Which we generally understand to mean a person who only submits to a partner for a given scene or given time frame.

What I think is bigger than the myths to be concerned about than what slave means, is what does slave mean to you. When you carry yourself with self confidence it radiates an air of happiness and satisfaction that people pick up on. They will ask you about it, they will observe you closely to try and figure out why it is you are so self assured. They will want to emulate you, and your situation since the way you hold yourself exudes a satisfaction they don't posses.

When they do find out you have made the conscious choice to be slave, or have a slave, and see how happy you are. It being a negative thing will only enter their mind if they have a preconceived notion of the lifestyle, and have already disapproved. Turning that around takes much more than simply trying to dispel myths.

[fetishdj]

I have often bemoaned the fact that there are no clear definitions on 'a slave' in a BDSM context and this is the cause of the myths because everyone sees the word in a different context. I like Den's post because a) it brings this debate to the fore and b) it gives a clear definition which can be used as a starting point for a consensus. Delia carries on that debate by sub defining and showing that there is a broad scope to the topic - can someone who serves someone 24/7 in an online capacity be considered a slave, for example?

[denuseri]

I would think that one may call one's self whatever they wish...

... however, as with titular distinctions in day to day vanila life...

...and taking in to account how much gravitas is given to the words "trust" and "respect" within the real life bdsm community (especially amongst the ranks of the pre-internet practicioners)...

... one should also expect to find that one is not taken very seriously if one "pretends" to be something which one is really not and then lays claim to certian titular distinctions which one has not really earned etc.

That goes not only for titles like Slave btw.

In other words dont tell people your something your not just becuase you wish you were or like to roleplay it. You tarnish everything about yourself when you do such a thing.

The problem would be pretty much mute Fetish if people would only be more specific when they lay claim to certian titular distinctions imho.

Like if your serving someone only online (ie following online commands etc) and have no real life contact with whoever it is; then don't be afriad to say your an "Online Only Submissive" etc (or whatever other title you wish to use), no one is going to bite your head off for being honest about not practicing the arts of submission (or dominance for that matter) in real life...if your upfront and honest about it from the begining.

Same goes for Online RolePlayers etc.

There is a hudge difference (often ignored by many more casual crowds in the club scene and online) between undergoing a long term real life apprentiship and or devoting years of real life effort in self study to make the journey from vanila, to bdsm curious bottom, to submissive, to becoming an actual slave in real life, and just calling one's self a slave becuase one day one decided it sounded nice and was applicable becuase one was serving someone via a long distance venue like the internet or roleplaying a part and doesnt care about "definitions" but wants others to see them as if they were doing something just as wieghty as the real life crowd.

News flash people... In Monopoly no one actually becomes the shoe or gets rich.

Not that there is anything wrong with roleplaying or serving in an online only capacity in and of themselves mind you. Both are valid ways of exploring, learning and having fun etc and have their place...

...just dont try to tell me it makes you so and so's "slave" in real life.

[eager1]

it is very difficult when Master is your spouse...i find it hard to understand the difference and when to change roles...or should i wait for the signal and what is the signal...etc...etc...

[denuseri]

Have you asked him about it?

[Archeon]

News flash people... In Monopoly no one actually becomes the shoe or gets rich.


Quoted for truth.

The problem, in my opinion actually stretches further than the definition and myths revolving round a slave, but to a problem with any BDSM roles being well defined these days.

With the internet came a whole new world, it opened up BDSM to the masses, especially in recent years, and with that you loose structure and clarity. All the roles get merged and greyed out, where slave submissive dominant and master all roll into one. While opening up BDSM to the wider world is a good thing, many people now fear the nature of the definition, because everyone feels they can be what they want to be, and to hell with everyone else.

While it is true I can call myself french, it simply doesn't make it true, no matter how hard I protest. I feel the same applies to dominants/Masters and subs/slaves, however as people have already said there is no single definition of what a slave is, so how do you know if you are one?

Well in my opinion, and the way I look at it, being a slave is about having a certain mindset. A mindset that you wish to give yourself over to someone permanently, to devote your life to their happiness to that of their Master. At that point live in, online, working etc all fade into the same thing, and there does not need to be that distinction. Evidently by my definition of "permanent" this does not count for role play, and I feel that role play could never yield a slave mindset due to the fact, as denuseri so elegantly put above, playing monopoly doesn't turn you into the shoe.

Regards,

Arch

[_ID_]

Like if your serving someone only online (ie following online commands etc) and have no real life contact with whoever it is; then don't be afriad to say your an "Online Only Submissive" etc (or whatever other title you wish to use), no one is going to bite your head off for being honest about not practicing the arts of submission (or dominance for that matter) in real life...if your upfront and honest about it from the begining.

Same goes for Online RolePlayers etc.


People who are online only will vehemently disagree with you.

BDSM and what we do is more about where the mind is than where the body is. So a long distance relationship can have equally impacting results when what is done is take as seriously in an emotional sense when on line as what another person does when they have the physical connection of being live in, or even just dating.

...

[denuseri]

...

I only wish to be specific and make a “long needed distinction” between long-distance, role-playing, and real life...and I know those differences very very well my self, intimately so and they are very distinctive.

Talking about climbing a mountain and or practicing on a rock wall is no substitute for actually climbing it.

Watching the space shuttle launch doesn’t compare to riding on it.

It’s like the differences between fantasy, theory and reality.

I do not belittle the people who like to watch or fantasize or pretend or practice submission safely from the sidelines in less than a real life capacity by making such distinctions. I simply define their submission in the context in which it actually lays.

Disagreeing about weather or not the sky is blue, makes no difference to the sky.

Just as role-playing in a textual format in a chat room doesn’t compare to long distance submission in an online capacity, so too both of the aforementioned do not begin to hold a candle to actually being there in person.

Additionally...I believe that we are as physical a being as we are mentally an entity, one does not have one with out the other. When you have actual physical reinforcement the experience is greatly intensified by comparison to a purely cerebral encounter.

Just as one cannot really fully understand what exactly goes through the mind of the slave or how they deal with the internal struggles within themselves between trust, fear, and a myriad of other emotional extremes until one really is indeed truly and utterly "helpless" and in the actual physical power and presence of another.

Because safe word or not...once your really bound and alone at the feet of someone else...you are at that moment really in their mercy and no matter how much you wish to candy coat it otherwise…your life is in their hands at that point.

This is something which quite simply cannot be accomplished in an online only capacity. (Fantasy, role-play, online long distance submission or otherwise)

And something imho that one must be able to face and face in real life before one can even begin to comprehend it, so much as think, of calling themselves a real life slave.

Which brings us posthumously to Myth#3

"I am a slave because I role-play being one, or have submitted to the commands of someone over the internet."

Again...it is what it is...and I think I very clearly pointed out why it also isn't what it isn't.

You simply cannot be a "real life" slave...if you are not submitting in real life.

[_ID_]

...

[denuseri]

...

There are just some things you can't do or experience first hand via "long distance" or "online".

...

[Archeon]

And there are those of us who have done long distance and r/l that agree with her.

[GrandMaster]

Thank you denuseri for a very entertaining thread :)

I would like to know where those myths comes from? what kind of people express them? Nr 2 is just ridiculus and I cannot imagine anyone being more than a few weeks familiar with bdsm saying that...
Nr 1 I dont get your point? what are you trying to say?

We all consent to everything on a case by case basis, yes. That should be obvious to everybody. If somebody is holding a gun to my head and tells me to hand over my wallet, do I really have a choice though? You are thinking about it at a very shallow and detatched and "intellectual" level. Of course we all consent to our own actions... But that is simply not useful in the real world, outside of thought expriments.

Do you really think its wrong to say that a slave has given up consent? Of course, she does not become a robot, trapped in her own body performing against her will as she looks on helplessly... Still, she has put a lot of power in her owners hands. She might very well not feel like she is consenting on a case by case basis, but consenting to having choices made for her, to having her power to make choices taken away.

Now, if there is somebody out there, creating myths that say, "slaves are actual puppets without actual thoughts. They cannot think or make choices and are basically machines programmable by their masters" then yeah i guess you debunked that.

But to say that giving up consent, in some way or another, is not the reality of slaves... then I dont know who is creating myths.

[pervertedpages]

It seems like this turned into defining what a slave is and that gets so crazy. The one thing that really confuses me though is the idea that there is an actual, true to life definition of a slave that matches the Hard Fast Reality. I'm sure we all feel like anyone can call themselves anything, but we will still condescend to them :) that's how all these debates go. All I'm saying is, I'm sure all of us know of some kinds of "slaves" that we wish wouldn't call themselves that, perhaps because it makes us feel like we're being tricked, or misguided, or even misrepresented. But anyway I'm sure Harriet Tubman would probably look at us all and think "Can't they just call themselves surrendered lovers?" lol.

I think it's hard to make the point of, "it's different from online because when you're bound up at someone's feet you are at their mercy and then definitely their slave" because that's not, at least for me, the defining characteristic of consensual slavery (getting tied up and slapped around). I think there's something to be said, though, for the idea that once you are with someone and their physicality is affecting your physicality and the course of your life events can change without you being able to walk away from the computer/media source... But I'd perhaps characterize the difference between real life and online as "laundry" rather than "he's got you gagged and is fucking you up the ass and you totally physically can't stop him"

[13'sbadkitty]

i do have a question, and i suck at the quotie thing so excuse me for that...

and i am also only living with my Master since september all though we have been together for quite a while, we do have kids and a mentally retarded brother to care for and jobs outside the home, but i have never been with anyone in a bdsm context outside of him in r/l or o/l....and i don't care what i am called by anyone but Him...so i am not posting as a slave/submissive/pet just as me.

i am for one grateful for this posting as i am one of the people who came to the internet seeking answers and others having my experience and ask all the "what am i?" questions and have spent more time then i care to admit reading all of the threads here looking for answers to define myself. i had believed by many of the posts by slaves that there began a point where i no longer had a choice in anything if i became or am a slave. so at the risk of annoying some, it does matter to say all this about consent. i am fortunate to have a kind and loving Master who does care for me deeply and wants me to let him know if something isn't good for me whether it be during play or in the house with all our kids, my brother whatever. but, what if he didn't? what if He flat out didn't care and was causing real harm? if i identified myself a slave does that mean i suck it up? i just was hoping that people would look at a broader picture where abusive people are there as are some of us the type who attract them and feel trapped even in the vanilla never mind within the context of slavery.

i have no idea as i posted in my earlier response to this thread what to call myself, but i stopped caring and being concerned about my specific title and what it means, but its not bad to clarify all this from a 3d stand point because its hard to be in danger from someone you can't be bound infront of to the same degree...i am sorry but unless someone can actually be there to kill you i am not sure how it is the same thing. but as i have said i have no experience with giving my life over to the care of another in that fashion to know what that works out to be like.

i hope i haven't offended anyone at all, i just have read so many posts by abused people here who only realized after they were in an abusive relationship.

[_ID_]

...

Like I said before, what we do is more about where the mind is than about how you kneel, or how a whip feels. Feeling a whip doesn't make you any more of a slave or submissive than does feeling the control of your Dominant or Master.

If you believe that you must feel the constraint of rope to be a real life slave then you have much more to learn.

[darkfae]

It's hard to define a slave vs. a submissive when there are so many variances to the human thought. Submission is defined so different to everyone as is dominance. And because of that there are many myths because it's easy to generalize.

I was explaining to a girl I work with how I submit to my Owner in the bedroom and in our home, but not in front of our son or in public. And part of that is being clearly verbal about anything. I don't communicate often. It's easier for me to just not say anything and bottle up what I am thinking and feeling. Being forced to speak about my concerns or problems, or even my day, is a submissive thing for me to do b/c I don't like doing it. If given a choice I'd rather not tell him anything and just be quiet.

She actually thought this was odd b/c she always though that slaves/submissives were treated like children "you don't speak unless spoken too," and a Dominant doesn't want to hear your problems or complaints, it's a just "do as you're told" situation. I explained he genuinely cares about what I think and feel and wants to hear it, and he values that the communication will keep our relationship functioning. And so one major way I submit to him is to verbalize my feelings. While to other people, that isn't submissive at all, it may even be the opposite for them. To me, that's submitting to his will and needs.

[denuseri]

Thank you denuseri for a very entertaining thread :)

Your quite welcome!

I would like to know where those myths comes from? what kind of people express them? Nr 2 is just ridiculus and I cannot imagine anyone being more than a few weeks familiar with bdsm saying that...
Nr 1 I dont get your point? what are you trying to say?

Most of the people I see expressing these things are eaither new, as you sugest or opperating under misconceptions and missing the forest for the trees or have never practiced bdsm with any seriousness in real life.

What I am trying to say about consesuality is that everyone has the right to say "no" at anytime if need be. One does not stop being a human being once they are collared. One may take off their collar if they wish and stop as well. (though in reality I am getting into a few more myths here with this clairification lol)

We all consent to everything on a case by case basis, yes. That should be obvious to everybody.

One would think so yes.

If somebody is holding a gun to my head and tells me to hand over my wallet, do I really have a choice though?

Yes you do still have a choice to make.

You are thinking about it at a very shallow and detatched and "intellectual" level. Of course we all consent to our own actions... But that is simply not useful in the real world, outside of thought expriments.

Now now no fair skipping ahead Sir lol.

Do you really think its wrong to say that a slave has given up consent?

No what I am saying is that even a slave (a real life slave in a bdsm context) can revoke her consent once given and a slave can still resist the will of one's Owner and still be thier slave, alltough one who will perhaps be punnished, but a slave non-the-less.

Of course, she does not become a robot, trapped in her own body performing against her will as she looks on helplessly... Still, she has put a lot of power in her owners hands. She might very well not feel like she is consenting on a case by case basis, but consenting to having choices made for her, to having her power to make choices taken away.

It is all too easy for us to forget the consensual aspect, and thats where trust comes in.

[denuseri]

It seems like this turned into defining what a slave is and that gets so crazy.

I agree wholeheartedly...it can get crazy, or at least some of the people who wish to can make it seem crazy...though I have found the dificulty in defining what constitutes a real life slave and what constitutes some other kind of slave are not at all hard to define.

I think it's hard to make the point of, "it's different from online because when you're bound up at someone's feet you are at their mercy and then definitely their slave" because that's not, at least for me, the defining characteristic of consensual slavery (getting tied up and slapped around).

Its not being tied up or slapped around that matters...its that one has actually put oneself at the anothers total and complete mercy that matters.

It is that one has bested their own fear and come through one of the many crucibles that a real life slave must endure each and every time he or she finds oneself in that state of utter helplessness that really matters. Also it alone is not the single defining aspects that seperate theory from reality when it comes to real life bdsm and slaves, its just one of many many tests or rights of passage to say the least.


I think there's something to be said, though, for the idea that once you are with someone and their physicality is affecting your physicality and the course of your life events can change without you being able to walk away from the computer/media source... But I'd perhaps characterize the difference between real life and online as "laundry" rather than "he's got you gagged and is fucking you up the ass and you totally physically can't stop him"

Like I said earlier,,,the physical reality and the mental one must be combined to experience the full effect.

[denuseri]

So are you saying to be a real life slave all one has to do is log on to a computer and roleplay being one or to follow commands over the internet without ever being in the presence of anyone but their household cat?

Like I said before, what we do is more about where the mind is than about how you kneel, or how a whip feels. Feeling a whip doesn't make you any more of a slave or submissive than does feeling the control of your Dominant or Master.

Being in a state of true helplessness and at the complete and utter mercy of another person however does. As stated earlier..to focus only on the mental aspects of the art is to ignore half of what it is all about. It is in the union of the two where one gets the full effect both physically and mentally.

If you believe that you must feel the constraint of rope to be a real life slave then you have much more to learn.

Like I said before its not about the rope or the spankings or the kneeling...its that you had the courage to place yourself at someone elses mercy for real in person that makes all the difference where as that is conserned.

Real trust, requires real deeds, in real time to develope.

The real life slave, makes a real leap of faith each time they put themselves into the actual hands of another. They actually surrender themselves in real life in a way that long distance submission doesnt allow for.

[pervertedpages]

Quote denuseri: "Its not being tied up or slapped around that matters...its that one has actually put oneself at the anothers total and complete mercy that matters."

I do not live with my Master (though I'm working on the whole immigration thing, woo!). But let's say I have this friend, let's call her "shmerverted shmages" and she has a Master who lives very far away, let's call that country "Shweden" lol. And anyway this girl has taken videos of herself, just her face, begging to eat his shit and worship him in all sorts of fuckedupass ways because her Master has a blackmail kink regardless of whether she wanted to record that. No, he can't cut my arm off, but I'm pretty at his mercy in the way that waking up to your mother watching your fucked up blackmail amateur porno will totally ruin your day. (and he won't push that button just like your Master won't cut your arm off)

What I mean is, you can be at someone's mercy in all kinds of ways. We don't live together but he does hold my life in his hands. I asked him to change my bank password for me last week because I was at work without a computer and I had just had a scare about my password being compromised, but it was his choice to not have that information, probably because the compulsion to check up on that might get tiresome lol. So I just feel like the statement "the dificulty in defining what constitutes a real life slave and what constitutes some other kind of slave are not at all hard to define" is really simplistic. I don't "serve" him in person every day, but of course I feel like we're "real" -- I'm getting married to him, fer chrissakes :) I know that your whole "online does not equal real life" schtick isn't pointed at me directly, denuseri, but I'm just saying. There's wiggle room in the definitions because there's people like me, who are not physically 24/7, but much more closely resemble 24/7 than o/l. Of course I'm not there every day to clean his house, do his laundry, and still perform all my other duties according to his rule and live my life with him. So if it's housework and other unsexy shit that makes the difference between fantasy and reality, I'd get behind that and admit right away that I'm not at all his slave in that regard (yet, though he's already conditioning me for it and I'm already steeling myself to have to do things that make me indignant lol). Everything else is just subjective opinion stated with confidence, and arguments with huge gaping holes (mmm sexy). And still, I'm sure there's some slave out there who doesn't do housework OR get slapped around (if they have house cleaners, or their Master/Mistress stays at home while they work a tiring job, or something)...

I just mean, if this is a thread that is self-professedly for the purpose of helping newbies and is in the BDSM 101 section and all that.. Then perhaps we should try and represent the intricacies and complexities of the range of experiences possible and not just "that is not how i live my life as a 24/7 slave so don't tell me it's the same" -- well of course it's not.

I guess I wanted to present a viewpoint that is neither "online is the samez as real life" nor "real life slavery is very easily defined"... One is obviously not true so it's the latter that I was concerned with. I think that's one of the more glaring myths, really.

Just as a quick addendum, if anyone here is somehow now considering giving their Master access to their bank account because some crazy bitch on the internet casually mentioned it and not because it's right for you... lol. Don't, plz. Kthx.

[pervertedpages]

Also: it was in fact time and the most hercluean effort possible that made the kind of things that i trust him with possible. i don't want my casual mention of really important and serious issues (blackmail and possible financial bondage and/or identity theft, lol) to make waves or rub people the wrong way. it's all vry srs business over here, with a lot of trust and depth of spirit and love, despite using silly internet abbreviations and saying things casually.

just like with the whole what is a slave thing... we all just need to do what's best for us in our lives, mine happen to be crazy and stupid choices (on the surface) but no one else's should be!

[Archeon]

I think there are two things that need to be separated out here:

1) Role play
2) Long distance M/s relationships.

I think what much of what denu is trying to reference falls under the first category, where role playing a slave does not make you one.

The second category is much more tricky, as people have stated, including myself, slavery is much more about a mindset than anything else. Now while this mindset is achievable through a long distance relationship, coming from the point of view of someone who has done long distance and live in, and alternated the two, they are not comparable in regards to the mental requirements. In short, when long distance you can always hang up/block/not make contact. That element of control stays with each of you if you unhappy with the situation. While this can happen in real life, it is a lot more difficult to avoid someone you share a bed with!

Essentially what I am getting at is the difference between a long distance, and "live in" (im avoiding r/l for the sake of avoiding confusion) vanilla relationships. While the people inside the relationship may build a strong bond through the long distance relationship, most would not consider it a proper relationship till it is taken to the point of meeting and being together in "real life". I feel that slavery falls under the same type of thing.

Regards,

Arch

[Freak_M]

This is the definition I found on several different dictionaries online, I suppose it's what defines the most used meanings of the word "slave": "a human being who is owned as property by, and is absolutely subject to the will of, another; bondservant divested of all freedom and personal rights
a person who is completely dominated by some influence, habit, person, etc. a slave to fashion
a person who slaves; drudge
slave ant
a device actuated or controlled by another, similar device"

You'll have to forgive me if my english is a bit rusty... :)

Personally I think that the term "slave" is beeing used too frequently in the world of BDSM...

[symphony]

Okie dokie, seeing as I have thoroughly enjoyed this thread I will attempt to add my input however I will point out that my opinion may be a tad skewed as firstly, I haven’t done the online thing much, secondly I wouldn’t personally attempt to call myself a slave.

I am in a 24/7 real life relationship however and have been for 5 years. I would class myself as Submissive but truthfully I think that it’s all relative. I mean sometimes perhaps I am more of a bottom when my life gets stressful moving towards being more of a slave when things aren’t.
To give my response context: I have always personally believed the slave term to be the BDSM equivalent of ... being married (If that makes sense to anyone). No days off for good behaviour, doesn’t matter if you are ill or busy, you still have to serve (unless master says otherwise).

I personally think that anyone who thinks that being online slave is as hard or as deep as real life slave is ridiculous. It is not the same when your master has an off button! I’m sorry if that offends but that is what I think.

From my experience, living with someone, dealing with life, work, money, kids, or whatever stresses you have, does not a bed of roses make, but when he says jump – you still say how high regardless of the fact that you might have had the worst day.
But at the same time anyone that thinks a slave would do this for everyone not just her master is mad! What do these people think would happen if the slave boss tried to fire them for unlawful reasons... would they just say yes ok?

As for control, I think that you make a decision to obey your master in the offset and regardless of collar, contract, promises, or anything else – every time you obey your master that is you making the choice to honour that commitment. You still have your own mind therefore you could chose not to, or to end the relationship.
Symphony

[MasterShamrock]

It never ceases to amaze me how many people have assigned some kind of derogatory misnomer or misconstrued additive to sub-define something that used to be one of the highest ideals to uphold in the art (for the initiated).

I am sure there are going to be a lot of the "true" or "real" adjetives thrown around, but sometimes that is unavoidable.

I see a lot of people make assumptions about what a slave is or isnt in bdsm as well as in historical "vanila" subtexts and how one may or may not differ from the more contemporary politically correct term of "submissive" in a bdsm terminology capacity.

So....I figured it would be a good idea to start a thread on what a slave in the context of a safe, sane,,and yes.."consensual" practices of BDSM is and is not all about so people could air what they think the myths are and are not and discuss and learn together perhaps a little bit about ourselves.

Which brings up Myth #1:

"The slave can not consent, or has no choice about anything having "surrendered" all forms of consent or having had all forms of consent taken or removed as such, is incapable of consent."

Something which is completely and utterrly false imho, (in both a bdsm and vanila setting historical or otherwise btw). Plenty of people made the conscious choice to become slaves for a much wider variety of reasons than many will believe.

Everyone, regardless of titular distinction makes choices and or consents or does not consent to this or that as a human being on a case by case, moment by moment basis.

The way I was tuaght, one didn't make the choice to become a slave in a bdsm context until one had dedicated themselves to the path of submission over that of other paths that they may be pursuing (it was kind of like becoming a specialist in the arts of submission and didnt happen until one had been at it for several years,) but also didnt mean you did not top others as and when needed in a bdsm context or vanila one. It was just that your focus was beyound such considerations of "roleplay" where in your relationship to your Owner would be conserned.

The slave was one, who was actually "collared", as opposed to only wearing a collar while submiting. The slave was one who had surrendered in total to his or her self first before offering oneself as well as one's submission to one's Master or Mistress.

Which brings us perhaps prematuraly to Myth #2:

"True" slaves "will not" or "can not" top or dominante another.

Again,, utterrly false, both in bdsm and historically in the vanila world imho.

Again just becuase you take on the titular distinction of a slave, doesnt mean you submit to everyone and everything all the time. Your still human. You still will excersise what dominion you hold other those that you can hold it over, the difference is you are now also willfully and lovingly within the direct dominion of another authority whom you submit to as higher than your own, not becuase you are forced, but becuase you must in your heart submit. Not only for the sake of your Owner...but for yourself as well.

But I shall wait until more people have responded on #1 & #2 before expounding further. I am sure more Myths will come to mind as the debate progresses and or they are brought up by others, and please remember to keep it civil my fellow kinsters, we are not all from the same traditions etc.

I agree to ALL of these. Aslong as they don't try Toppong from the bottom with another Dominant (without permission) than they can be an Alpha or Omega sub or Alpha or Omega Slave.

[didoanna]

Umm, I think the whole issue revolves around the term 'slave'. Everybody brings their own thoughts to it and their own ideas as to what the word really means to them.

Thus, because the BDSM Community is such a broad church, it's inevitable that words like slave and Master develop very different meanings for different people.

For example, I don't consider myself a slave, but yes I fully admit the two people who work ever so hard to keep me on the straight and narrow and are helping me to be a much nicer person have control over key points and situations in my life. That's just the way it is and it works for us.

Sorry, if I've not made myself clear but I've tried to get across the idea, that for me, it's not really the description that matters, it's very much more about how the person acts and interacts with others.

[thir]

Well said! :-))

[denuseri]

I think you have made perfect sence didoanna.

[slaveheart]

Let me preface by saying i'm brand new here and have no wish to offend. :) i have a comment and a question re: this fascinating thread.

my comment: Parts of this discussion remind me of a long-standing debate in the queer community over whether one can "truly" be gay or lesbian if one is not currently in a same-sex relationship. Can a slave self-identify? Put another way: is "slave" something i do, or something i am at my core? Is this a matter of defining the term slave vs submissive? Is "slave" something some subs evolve into, a deeper level perhaps as you seem to suggest, denuseri?

If i knew in my heart, from my life experiences, dreams, desires, the very lens through which i perceive myself and my world, my way of Being in the world, that i loved women, their bodies and minds, romantically and erotically, i wouldn't let anyone tell me i wasn't a "true lesbian" because my current life circumstances only permitted online exploration and relationships.

And my question: "The slave was one, who was actually "collared", as opposed to only wearing a collar while submiting. The slave was one who had surrendered in total to his or her self first before offering oneself as well as one's submission to one's Master or Mistress."

This is so beautiful and intriguing. Would you be willing to expand on it a bit? What does it mean, to "surrender in total to" oneself?

with thanks
sh

[denuseri]

I don't think its all the same as identifying one's self as gay or straight.

There is a big difference between thinking one knows what one's path is, and walking upon the path without any reservation.

And yes, in the way in which I was taught, as previously mentioned, no one is capable of actually being a slave from day one in that manner, though in todays PC world many do indeed make such a claim.

One can think they are, one can hope they are, but one won't know for sure until one has not only put one's self out there for real at the full mercy of another (which can only really be done face to face) and "actually" done it, and not only kept doing it for some time, but also been "tempered" by the challenges such a journey brings and finally leaving all doubt about who and what one really is within one's self behind.

[davina_]

I'm sorry but I have to ask, is there really such a thing as a "slave" by definition? I only ask that because I don't think anyone honestly submits without "agreeing" to submit unless it is in some awful abusive situation. And doesn't that make them more of a "voluntary" slave as opposed to a real slave? I can't imagine actual slavery in any real heathy relationship.

[Xmaster1]

denuseri I think you rock. Your master is very lucky to own you. Cannot wait to read all of this. But please remember your kink is not better than my kink. ;) Online slaves can be just as real.

[ksst]

And my question: "The slave was one, who was actually "collared", as opposed to only wearing a collar while submitting. The slave was one who had surrendered in total to his or her self first before offering oneself as well as one's submission to one's Master or Mistress."


Just wondering, how many submissives out there aspire to be part time slaves (bedroom, or other private place only) and how many want to be in full time slavery as their ideal if they found the right person, and if they could make it work practically? Probably nobody has done a poll, but what are the feelings of those on the forum who want to contribute?

I put myself in the first category, bedroom/ sex scene only.

[davina_]

Just wondering, how many submissives out there aspire to be part time slaves (bedroom, or other private place only) and how many want to be in full time slavery as their ideal if they found the right person, and if they could make it work practically? Probably nobody has done a poll, but what are the feelings of those on the forum who want to contribute?

I put myself in the first category, bedroom/ sex scene only.

That is a really good question IMO. I think the fantasy of total 100% submission is great but I just can't imagine it in reality. I guess if I had stumbled upon the right Mistress when I was younger, I might have been able to consider the full-time submission but what are the odds. I have the perfect wife but she wants me to play both roles so part time is the only thing that is practical.