| |
JK wrote:
There are a number of premises within the rules document that is [sic] common to
all Master/slave relationships.
moonlight wrote:
There are? Gosh. Could you elaborate on those, please? Of all the M/s
relationships that I've seen over the past decade, there are just as many
different *types* of M/s as there are participants. What might these common
premises be? Hmmmm?
JK Wrote:
That a slave obeys, serves and pleases her Master.
LadyGold wrote:
Sure - no problem there. Tho that fits many D/s relationships as
well.
No kidding. I would think that the general idea of obeying would fit *any*
D/s relationship, whether it be of limited or permanent duration. As such,
it can't be claimed to *just* belong to M/s. It can be one factor common to
*all* D/s, though.
Then again, a slave/submissive/pet/title of choice isn't always pleasing,
either. So maybe this idea just should be thrown out entirely or stated:
"A slave will attempt to obey, serve, and please their Master to the best of
their ability. Some failure will happen, and punishment for failure will be
meted out according to the Master's decision."
JK Wrote: That her focus is to please her Master.
LadyGold wrote: Right again. Tho I know lots of subs and even vanillas who would
fit this as well.
And, I believe it was already stated in the "idea" above. So, we're back to
being repetative in the extreme.
JK Wrote: That she is found pleasing to Him in all that she does.
LadyGold wrote: Well now, here we get into trouble due to jkays use (misuse?) of
the English language. If she "is found to be pleasing", by whom
is she found? If the answer is her Master, then that means she
never screws up which I don't think is what jkay meant. Perhaps
that she "should be found pleasing", eh? This, of course, could
apply to any relationship.
Hallmark JK. Not to mention, again, that the focus is on her being pleasing
and pleasing her Master. Which, as stated before, was focused on in "idea"
number one. So. We have three "ideas" that are actually just one.
JK Wrote: That a slave is owned property of her Master.
LadyGold wrote: Probably ok here. Though, for instance I am owned and neither
Serion nor I refer to me as a slave. Spyral refers to LordRichard
as her Owner as well but I don't believe either of them consider
her a slave.
But, see, JK thinks that you and Serion are delusional and are *really*
involved in M/s and just won't admit it. I mean....sheesh. Just *who* are
you trying to fool, here, anyway? Huh? :)
Additionally, I know plenty of slaves that are not owned by their partners,
being in some state of testing or negotiation as to just what their
relationship will be. Yet, those same people *still* are taking the M/s
lifestyle and living it just fine. Service oriented slaves may or may not
be owned by the people that they serve. Yet they, too, are still slaves.
(These are different from service oriented submissives, I believe. But
Trinity could prolly better address this than I could.)
JK Wrote: That a slave must earn her pleasures.
LadyGold wrote: I don't necessarily see this as a Universal Truth. IME, it _can_
be built into the relationship but isn't always. It could also be
part of a D/s relationship.
Or, as mentioned above, it may not be a part of it at all. Some slaves are
not sexually oriented slaves. They are "service" slaves. They may not
*want* sexual interaction with the person that owns them. They also may be
masochistic slaves that only want to have the S/m and D/s part in their
relationships and no sex. Or, perhaps they are married to a different
person and sex is not allowed outside of the marriage. Who knows what all
different types of M/s relationships can evolve. Certainly more than JK
thinks, by any means.
JK Wrote: That a slave trusts her Master.
LadyGold wrote: Let's hope so, but it certainly isn't always the case as we have
seen here on ssb-b. This also isn't something unique to M/s.
And, truthfully, it isn't always necessary. For some things it *is*
required. Usually, a slave trusts their owner. It comes with giving up
your rights. But it doesn't always have to.
JK Wrote: That a slave is an instrument, an object from which her Master draws His pleasures out of.
LadyGold wrote: And that a preposition is something you do not end a sentence
with. *g* If that means that the only way to do M/s is to
objectify the slave, then I think there are lots of folks who
would disagree with that.
Yes, well, JK thinks that all slaves must be humiliated, too, and we've
already beaten that one to death. Objectification and humiliation often
walk hand in hand. Certainly, they aren't required for a M/s relationship.
Tiger has no interest in humiliation at all. So it's not a part of our
relationship, as an example. I know of a *lot* of slaves that are not
humiliated, specifically because it is either not part of their kink or is
not a part of their Master's kink.
JK Wrote: That a slave must ask for permission for such things as using the bathroom
for instance.
LadyGold wrote: Always? Then who is really the slave? The person asking for
permission or the person who must always be available to give
permission. For that matter, I have to ask permission at some
times and I imagine many other submissives do too.
This, too, I think depends more on the relationship itself. It's not a part
of mine, as I've said elsewhere. I don't know of a whole lot of people that
*do* include it, truth to tell. Other than as perhaps as a part of a scene.
Much more than that, and the Dom goes berzerk because they have to approve
*everything* that the slave does.
JK Wrote: That a slave be thankful for all that her Master gives her
and allows her.
LadyGold wrote: I can imagine many situations other than a M/s relationship where
this would be true. Certainly, I am thankful for what Serion
gives me and allows me to do.
I dunno. It seems that in JK's world, people are thankful for nothing and
have to be specifically instructed to *be* thankful for what people do for
them. It makes you kind of wonder....Is JK thankful for the services that
he is rendered by his "slaves"?
Is it a requirement that a Dom be thankful for the services that a
submissive renders to them? (OOOOOH!!! New thread topic!!) I certainly
think it is. Of course, Tiger has the right to *expect* me to obey him. I
have no doubt, though, that he his thankful that I am his and there to *do*
those things.
JK Wrote: That a slave not be hesitant in her obedience to her
Master's Will.
LadyGold wrote: OK. That fits M/s, but it's certainly not exclusively M/s.
I disagree. I don't believe that it *has* to be a part of M/s at all. If a
slave has knowledge of something that the Master does not, then they *had*
better damn well open their mouth and hesitate in their obedience.
Particularly if it's something dangerous.
Contrary to what JK believes, Doms are not infalable creatures that are
never wrong. To promote this kind of behavior, unthinking obedience, does a
dis-service to slaves and submissives. It creates an air of unsafe play
that *can* have an impact on our lifestyle, not to mention that particular
slave's life.
JK Wrote: I'll let you figure out the rest.
LadyGold wrote: Hrrrrm... I think you're gonna have to help me since what you've
mentioned so far really aren't premises common to all M/s
relationships. I can't even say that they are exclusively common
to only BDSM relationships.
Well, to be honest, I didn't ask him to come up with a list specific to
*only* M/s and not the rest of BDSM. Though, perhaps that would have been
the better question.
To be considered a separate kink, M/s would need to have some sort of
different rules or attitudes from the rest of D/s or BDSM in general. And,
really, nothing that I've seen him spout yet is M/s specific. With the
exception, possibly, of the Master owning the slave.
That *is* one specific that does not necessarily have to happen within D/s.
LadyGold wrote: Back to the drawing board, if you please. And come up with a
better list next time, eh? *winking at moonlight*
Now, now....are you flirting? *giggle*
I highly doubt that a better list will be forthcoming. Though it would be
nice to see. I don't think I'll hold my breath, though....
Unless, of course, Tiger tells me too.....or he manages to wrap his hand
around my neck in just the right way....
|