Quote Originally Posted by MacGuffin View Post
I would disagree that a slave has no rights.
Of course we need to establish in what context we are using the word slave. Sex slaves do exist in the modern world and they certain don't have rights, mind you it is normally not consensual. I still maintain that in theory a slave in the bdsm conmtext has no rights but in reality you are right that is not the case. You definition of simply serving 24/7 could include domestics and house servants. Many in the bdsm world use the term loosely just as an office slave doesn't really mean slave or when a dom says the slave is his "property" he doesn't literally mean that.
Indeed. We need to distance ourselves from the whole illegal sex slave thing as that is immoral, illegal and nothing to do with us...

This is also why I say there are many definitions of 'slave'. I have heard some I would consider to be subs calling themselves a slave. Its their definition and there is no universal one that I am aware of in the lifestyle.

I would say that a BDSM slave is more like a Greek or Roman slave - who actually had a lot of rights and there were rules etc about how they could be treated - as opposed to the more recent meaning of the word in the context of the African slave trade.

No contract which asks you to give up that right (or any legal or constitutional rights) would stand up in a court of law.
You are correct of course but I'm not sure what has law got to do with it. When the criminals draw up the robbers contract to determine how the loot is to be split that would not "stand up in court" but it is a contract valid within the criminal world. Incidentally I read that the drawing up of a slaves contract is in itself illegal in Europe.
It becomes very important if a once slave took their former master to court over an issue to do with the contract. As you say, it is illegal so the Master would have no rights to claim anything from the slave.

A BDSM contract is valid in the lifestyle, though normally only between those who sign it, but it has no weight in law.

Compromise is the basis of a good relationship.
Erm not too sure there. Compromise often results in neither being happy. But I know what you mean and take the point. But are bdsm relationships based on compromise? If so, what then does submitting to somebody's will mean if you have negotiated and amended that will through compromise.
You cannot have any relationship without giving up something and that is where the compromise lies. As I said, the trick is to find someone where what you give up is minimal and what you gain is a lot so that you barely notice the compromise. You are right that neither is 100% happy but then nor should they be 100% unhappy.

In BDSM it is generally the case that someone who wants to be dominated finds someone who wants to dominate. The compromise is still there but it is subsumed under the overall desires to serve or be served.

As for being ordered to do something you didn't like because the Master/Mistress likes it?
My point was not whethere or not you do it, but whether or not you gain pleasure from doing it because it gives your master/mistress pleasure.
That is the essence of the submissive mind there... a submissive should feel pleasure because their Dom/me feels pleasure. But I am not sure this is always the case for all subs and in all cases. Its an ideal not necessarily a reality.

The trick is to find someone who enjoys more of the things you do and less of the things you don't so there is less to put up with.
Yes and this is why many relationships fail. People rush into Vegas style marriages (to take your analagy) before really knowing the person then a week later as they slowly find they don't share the same interests it's a quickie divorce. Makes a mockery out marriage in my view.
A true connection takes time to find and even when you find it things often change with time. Wanting to be collared straight away is a bad thing, you should always look around and make sure you are certain before you make a committment. Yes, I am equally olod fashioned in this respect

And I don't think anyone would disagree with the point about 'I like what you like'.
And as I recall Eddie Murphy in the film tried to be cunning and said "I order you to tell me what you like" but still could not get an answer. He ended up going to New York for his partner and so as it happens did I
Yes, I remember that film...