I am going to start filtering some of my more private musings. Since blogger does not have a tool for that, you will need to visit my Live Journal and ask to be friended there. I will continue to post Daily Gratitude and other subjects here. There is also a FAQ for my Journal at the same link.
on flags and definitions
| Monday, August 08, 2005 @ 09:56 added on 9 Aug 2005: I want to clarify that I am discussing the word "voluntary" in relation to "slavery" in this post. In my mind, a D/s relationship is consensual (i.e., the parties involved consent to the use of dominance to obtain submission) and an ownership relationship is voluntary (i.e. the slave chooses to serve without any undue influence). Both are choices and neither is more or less than the other. A submissive individual consents to be influenced; a slave volunteers/agrees to be owned. How can my ownership of boy be voluntary if I have to dominate him into serving me? voluntary adj 1a: proceeding from the will : produced in or by an act of choice b:performed, made, or given of one's own free will c obs:READY, WILLING d: done by design or intention : not accidental : intentional e: acting of oneself: not constrained, impelled, or influenced by another : SPONTANEOUS, FREE... In the section of synonyms for voluntary it argues that "VOLUNTARY implies freedom from any compulsion that could constrain one's choice" Webster's Third New International Dictionary, unabridged -- all definitions in this entry are from this edition I spent a bit of time with my dictionary this morning after being told yesterday on a discussion list that I could not be in an M/s relationship since my dynamic was not "founded" on dominance and submission. How had I exposed mysElf to such judgement in the first place? By asking how the proposed M/s & D/s flag could represent my relationship given that the symbols used are for dominant and submissive which are not the core of my M/s relationship. The poster insisted that "master" and "slave" are defined by "dominance" and "submissiveness" in *any* dictionary and I should go look if up if I didn't believe him -- after all, he'd done "research" and knew that I was wrong in defining my relationship as M/s. My dictionary has 37 main and sub definitions for the word master as a noun (and separate entries for verb and adjective). In none of them does the word "dominant" or "submissive" appear. The closest is the use of "predominance": 2: an indvidual having control, authority, or predominance over another My needs, wishes, goals, etc, are predominant in my relationship because boy chooses to go 2nd, not because I force or dominate him in any way. his service and obedience is voluntary, not enforced. Hell, given that boy is a very dominant person himsElf, I would be exhausted if I had to dominate him into obedience every time I gave an order. I wouldn't last a day. The definitions of master that don't involve teaching, journeymen, graduate degrees, ships, hounds, etc, are the ones that speak to my relationship: 1b often cap: a religious leader whose doctrines one accepts : one who inspires devotion or reverance on the part of his disciples 1d(1) : a person who possess mastery (as of an art or technique) : an artist or performer of consummate skill 1e: a person who is highly skilled, ingenious, or dexterous in some area of activity 2a(1): a man having control over the actions of others: RULER, GOVERNOR 2d(4): the owner of a slave or of an animal I am a master because I inspire devotion in boy. I possess mastery in reading his body, his heart, and his life. I have proved skillful and ingenious in understanding and directing his actions, reactions, and choices. I have control over his actions (because he decided to allow me that control). I own a slave. The definitions of slave that don't involve "submissive" (since boy isn't), mechanical devices, drudgery, etc.: 1a: a person held in in servitude : one that is the chattel of another: BONDMAN, THRALL 2c: one that labors for another: SERVANT boy most definitely is my servant. he came to that position because he recognized my mastery of him (or, at the time, my potential mastery of him) and chose to serve me rather than continue without an owner. Two weeks ago was our third anniversary. I brought out the chains that boy had given to me and returned them to him. I said they were his again for as long as he wanted. It was a very difficult moment as I could see the doubt in his eyes -- had he done something so horrible that I no longer wanted his service?-- but I simply waited. I did not want to "constrain", "impel," or "influence" him in any way. he realized that I was asking him to reaffirm the choice he made three years ago. he returned the chains, and himsElf, to my ownership, just as he had in the beginning -- as a completely voluntary choice.* boy does not obey or serve me because I dominate him. he does not submit to my authority or control. he obeys because he is honor-bound to do so. he made a choice to serve and in his mind and his heart to disobey just because he doesn't feel like vacuuming or is scared of the responsibilities of a new job, would dishonor both him and me. I value the choice he made and the integrity that underlies his service. I would not claim that he made that choice under the influence of my dominating him or him surrendering to the force of my will. To do so would change the foundation of our relationship. It would be a lie. My relationship is that of voluntary ownership and service. It is not based on dominance or submissiveness. There is a reason that M/s and D/s are defined separately, in spite of the overlap in some relationships: They are not the same thing. My brand of M/s is not represented by that of the proposed flag. And if the symbols of said flag can be used by some to judge who is and isn't M/s, then it is not a flag I will support. *for those who aren't familiar with our history: We had been negotiating a part-time D/s relationship with very clear boundaries. I had not asked him to consider becoming my slave nor had I stated that he would have to commit to doing so in the future. The choice to serve initiated in him.
Comments:
Post a Comment
|
|
|||||
page content & design by D M