Historical D/s

[catalina_francisco]

I know there have been discussions here before about history of D/s, slavery, and things related, and there were even some good links provided, but after doing a search and checking the library (which has no heading for historical content) I didn't find them so thought as much as I hate it I would start a new thread for people to post links to which give some insight into the history. The idea came to me after seeing one link posted elsewhere by Tanos in a bid to get some help with research he is conducting in this area. The link he provided was interesting, especially in terms of collars, boot licking, and slaves with individuality. The link is here .

Catalina

 

[ThorkelGriersen]

History

I know there have been discussions here before about history of D/s, slavery, and things related, and there were even some good links provided, but after doing a search and checking the library (which has no heading for historical content) I didn't find them so thought as much as I hate it I would start a new thread for people to post links to which give some insight into the history. The idea came to me after seeing one link posted elsewhere by Tanos in a bid to get some help with research he is conducting in this area. The link he provided was interesting, especially in terms of collars, boot licking, and slaves with individuality. The link is here .

Catalina

I'm not sure how far back you want to go. I think that one way is to know names and then dig on that basis. Of course, this being the 250 birthday of Mozart, that is a source. Amadeus was a masochist. Those who know this usually refer to "the unjustly maligned Constanza" and those in the dark usually consider her a harridan who hindered Mozart. There is a new book by a woman entitled "Mozart and his Women." I don't know how much it gets into this. A good source is Mozart's letters, most of which have been published. They aren't exactly explicit, but a little reading between the lines tells quite a tale.

Then there is the first masochist recorded: Aristotle. I've read bits and pieces but cannot give a good scource. The story is that Aristotle's pupil Alexander the Great was given many concubines. There was one exterremly attractive one who when Alexander visited her told me: "You cannot have me unless you kill me. If you want a corpse, go ahead." --He told her that he knoew just the match for her -his old teacher in Athens: Aristotle. She accepted and supposedly went to Aristotle. I long ago reaad a story of how a track was constructed and in the moening she would hitch him to a light car and whip him as he drew her around the track. At lot of times, some of these sources are only avaliable in the original Greek or Latin. I once a professor of Classsical History who would start something and then say, "Well if you want to know look it up." Of course, there was an immediate line at the library with everyone trying their Latin skills.

Maybe with hints, different people can do some searches and come up with some real solurces on these and other items.

addition The book is "Mozart"s Women: His Family, His Friends, and His Music" by Jane Glover, Harper Collins ($27.95)--The book may or may not be helpful. The only review I have is quite brief.

 

[babiesmiles]

Thanks Catalina and ThorkelGriersen for the link and informations.
It is something I would like to make some search about, I am really fascinated about history of " things" .

 

[catalina_francisco]

There is also the story about Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings which still seems to be unconfirmed but has lots of evidence which seems too coincidental as a group to amount to nothing.

Catalina

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

This is such an interesting topic Catalina I really look forward to seeing the Thread grow.

It can't be helped;
It must be done.
So down with your breeches
And out with your bum

from A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man by James Joyce

Okay well thats a bit silly I know though James Joyce (1882-1941) and his wife Nora enjoyed quite a strong relationship that one might consider BDSM orientated. Its History but its a baby of History compared to some posts above here yet never the less interesting.

Link to page with letter exerts

I have full copies of some of his letters to Nora stored 'somewhere' I'll post some here if I see any interest . I am uncertain if this was part of the direction the Thread was intended to head for now.

Caligula(12AD - 14AD) and de Sade(1740-1814) come to mind as well. Aristotle(384BC-322BC). I have copies of several letters from de Sade to his wife from a Society I was a member of though they are easily purchased in book form from Amazon.

 

[ThorkelGriersen]

James Joyce

This is such an interesting topic Catalina I really look forward to seeing the Thread grow.

It can't be helped;
It must be done.
So down with your breeches
And out with your bum

from A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man by James Joyce

Okay well thats a bit silly I know though James Joyce (1882-1941) and his wife Nora enjoyed quite a strong relationship that one might consider BDSM orientated. Its History but its a baby of History compared to some posts above here yet never the less interesting.

Link to page with letter exerts

I have full copies of some of his letters to Nora stored 'somewhere' I'll post some here if I see any interest . I am uncertain if this was part of the direction the Thread was intended to head for now.

Of course, when it comes to Joyce his "Ulysses" is S&M all the way. From the opening when Bloom arises from sleeping under Molly's feet at the foot of the bed, cleans house, and serves her breakfast in bed. Early in the morning, he stops by a street book stall to pick up a couple of S&M novels for her. And, of course, the visit with a Pro-Dominatrix in the infamous "night town" sequence. There are many other little jewels in the book, but I shouldn't spoil it for those inclined to read.

And then the "other pillar"---Marcel Proust's "Remembrance of Things past." Starting with vol I "Swann's Way" where Swann marries a courtasan who has slept with everyone in his social circle. Not only does that lead to social rejection, since she cannot be "received" in society; but to the psycholoical pain of meeting knowing he is the subject of derision in his former social circle.
Vol V is "La Prisonniere"--The Captive in which a young man keeps a young lady as a prisoner, and dominates her to the point of requiring her to report all of her private thoughts.

And, who can forget the ever present and caustic Baron Charlus with his predliction for floggings by "rough trade" in male brothels.

____

Actually, this thread has-- of some necessity-- an overlap with the thread that chelsechained started: Reading the Classics. Highly recommended.

 

[PatPowers]

I'm a little unclear on what you're looking for here. Are you looking for stories about relationships between individuals which strongly indicate that one or both of them are into d/s or b/d or both, or are you looking for historical practices which have strong d/s elements, such as, well, slavery itself? There's a lot of stuff out there about slavery? Are you looking for particular aspects of slavery that are particularly d/s, like the practice in merrie olde England of making kitchen slaves wear branks?

 

[ThorkelGriersen]

Not Sure Myself

I'm a little unclear on what you're looking for here. Are you looking for stories about relationships between individuals which strongly indicate that one or both of them are into d/s or b/d or both, or are you looking for historical practices which have strong d/s elements, such as, well, slavery itself? There's a lot of stuff out there about slavery? Are you looking for particular aspects of slavery that are particularly d/s, like the practice in merrie olde England of making kitchen slaves wear branks?

I'm not really sure. I think that slavery (as "involuntary servitute" as it was once called in the USA) might be too broad of a topic. The Sally Hemmings story is, of course the legalized verson. Totally impersonal. That Jefferson took her as a mistress is now accepted fact. The decendents of Jefferson have welcomed the decendents of Hemmings as cousins. But, of course, their relationship had nothing to do with BDSM as far as I know.

I think from catalina's post that the idea is to examine the history of sub/slave in a BDSM frame of reference. Maybe she can clarify. I assumed that the idea of the thread was slavery/sevitude as a kink.----Could be wrong, of course.

 

[PatPowers]

I'm not really sure. I think that slavery (as "involuntary servitute" as it was once called in the USA) might be too broad of a topic. The Sally Hemmings story is, of course the legalized verson. Totally impersonal. That Jefferson took her as a mistress is now accepted fact. The decendents of Jefferson have welcomed the decendents of Hemmings as cousins. But, of course, their relationship had nothing to do with BDSM as far as I know.

I think from catalina's post that the idea is to examine the history of sub/slave in a BDSM frame of reference. Maybe she can clarify. I assumed that the idea of the thread was slavery/sevitude as a kink.----Could be wrong, of course.

Well, so far as we know there was no conscious BDSM element, and no historical evidence of it. But as a practical matter, the power imbalance between the slave Hemmings and her owner Jefferson was so great that it seems reasonable to speculate that some elements of power imbalance must have been present in their relationship. He could have legally sold her at any time, to anyone, and she would have had no more to say about it than a bale of hay or a chicken. That's a fairly vast imbalance of power, however loving their relationship may have been.

 

[ThorkelGriersen]

Contrast

Well, so far as we know there was no conscious BDSM element, and no historical evidence of it. But as a practical matter, the power imbalance between the slave Hemmings and her owner Jefferson was so great that it seems reasonable to speculate that some elements of power imbalance must have been present in their relationship. He could have legally sold her at any time, to anyone, and she would have had no more to say about it than a bale of hay or a chicken. That's a fairly vast imbalance of power, however loving their relationship may have been.

Yes, decidedly involuntary servitude. Not a relationship she in any way choose.
Loving: probably, maybe(?), no one will ever know all the dynamics of this one.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Though not D/s here are some reference points in history that are BDSM related. I stopped at 1954 because from there it just mushroomed into far too much information.

3rd century AD
Sebastian, a handsome young Roman Centurion is beloved by the emperor Diocletian, who turned against him when he embraces Christianity. He was stripped and tied to a tree and shot full of arrows by his fellow centurions. But he survives only to die many years later in a second martyrdom when he is stoned to death.
Note: St. Sebastian has been called the patron saint of gays, and the patron saint of SM.

ca. 1480
Pico of Mirandola in "Against the Astrologists", describes a male acquaintance who is sexually excited by being whipped before sex. This is the first known case history of a masochist.

1585
In one of the earliest recorded cases of masochism, Sister Mary Magdalene de Pazzi begs other nuns to tie her up and hurl hot wax at her. She also made a novice at the convent thrash her.

1639
The German doctor Johann Heinrich Meibom describes the sexual excitement of some men when whipped in De usu Flagrorum. He reasons that this is because the sperm fluid in the kidneys is heated by whipping and then descends to the testicles. Variations on this theory will dominate the thinking on SM until the 19th century.

1740, June 2
The Birth of the Marquis deSade.

1749, Jan. 29
Birth of King Christian VII of Denmark, whose physician assigned him a sadistic male lover who beat him regularly.

1788
The French doctor Francois Amedee Doppet confirmes Meibom and Paullini's theory. He expands it by pointing out that women always have warm vaginas after whipping. At the end of his article Das Beisseln und sein Auswirkunauf den Geschlechtstrieb he gives safety tips for flagellants. This is the first known SM safety text.

1809, Dec. 29
Birth of William Gladsone (death May 19, 1898) The four time Prime Minister of England was dedicated to self flagellation both to punish himself for impure thoughts and to achieve a pleasure from the act, which he then repented.

1836
Death of Threse Berkeley who supervised a flagellant brothel at 28 Charlotte St, London. Ms Berkeley is the inventor of the Berkley bench/horse, a specialized piece of furniture for flogging and bondage.

1836, Jan 27
Birth of Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, author of Venus in Furs. The man who put the "M" in SM.

1844, Oct. 15
The birth of Friedrich Nietzche. (death Aug. 25 1900). The philosopher was not an ardent of SM, but listed among the four women in his life one married woman whom he flogged during sex and who, dressed as a man, beat him senseless before another sexual encounter. Also, a photo of Nietzche shows him as one of two gentlemen horses pulling a cart on which Lou Andreas-Salome (not the married woman) crouches with a knotted whip raised.

1869, Dec. 8
In Austria Leopold von Sacher-Masoch begins correspondence with Fanny Pistor, aka Baroness Bogdonoff, aka Mistress Wanda, his Venus in Furs.

1879, July
The first erotic magazine, "The Pearl, a Journal of Facetiae and Voluptuous Reading", consisting of stories with flagellation themes and attributed to Algernon Charles Swinburne, is distributed among high society. It last for 18 issues until Dec. 1880.

1882, Feb. 2
Birth of James Joyce, avant -garde novelist who made his lover, Nora Barnacle, into a dominant of whom he begged beatings and floggings.

1886, Feb. 22
The Birth of William Seaabrook (death Sept 20, 1945). This top-rated writer about exotic places (from personal experience) was equally famous among the literat for his elaborate, long-term bondage of beautiful, young women.

1886
The Austrian police physician Richard von Krafft-Ebing publishes the first edition of his Psychopathia Sexualis with 110 pages and 45 case histories. He creates the diagnosis of "paedophilia" and adopts "sadism" from earlier French usage. "Masochism" is not introduced until the sixth edition.

1888, Aug 15
The birth of Thomas Edward Lawrence, Lawrence of Arabia, who was captured, caned and raped by Turkish soldiers, and who loved it so madly he hired Robert Bruce to flog him regularly after he returned to England.

1895, May 6
Birth of Rudolfo Alfonzo Raffaelo Pierre Filbert Guglielmi di Balentina d'Antonguolla in Castellaneta, Italy. Better known as Rudolph Valentino, there is little argument that he enjoyed male to male sex, was dominated by his lesbian wife.

1899
The Torture Garden, a novel by Octave Mirbeau is published in France.

1905
The Austrian physician Sigmund Freud publishes his "Drei Abhandlungen zur Sexualtheorie". Sadism and masochism are described as illnesses resulting from incomplete or faulty development of a child's personality. Psychoanalysis, a form of speculative philosophy with no empirical basis, becomes the dominating theory in psychiatry for the next 60 years.

1909, April 23
In Woodside, OH, the birth of writer Samuel M. Steward, aka Phil Andros. As sex researcher Dr. Alfred C. Kinsey's major contact with the world of homosexual male SM he arranged and participated in scenes staged for Kinsey's cameras.

1910, Dec. 19
Birth in Paris of Jean Genet, his gay and SM themed works include The Balcony, Querelle du Brest, and Our Lady of the Flowers.

1916, Dec. 30
On this date Grigori Rasputin is murdered. The Russian monk, who was a famous sexual adventurer, spent some years initiating women into the reportedly Christian cult of flagellants before he settled into the court o Nicholas and Alexandria. There is no evidence that his position in the Russian court stopped or impeded his involvement with the female flagellants cult.

1933, May 6
In Berlin Nazis ransack Magnus Hierschfeld's Institute for Sexual Research and, on May 11, burn his library and museum collection which included many SM implements.

1936
The American houseife Dorothy Spencer publisizes a scheme to improve marriage by mutual domestic spanking.

1945: Aug. 7
Birth of Cynthia Ann-Slater, San Francisco Bay area SM activist and founder of The Society of Janus.

1948, March 3
Birth of Albert Andrew Kraus Jr. Later to be a founder of the Windy City Bondage Club, and a co-chair of NLA:I during a critical period of it's redevelopment.

1954
Historie d'O by Pauline Reage (real name, Anne Declos) first published in France. In 1955 it won the Deux-Magots prize, an important French literary award. In 1965 Grove Press publishes the first English language edition as The Story of O.

1954
Birth of Bob Flannigan, SM performance artist and "Supermasochist".

 

[PatPowers]

Ancient bondage babe

I just remembered, I wrote an article about a Discovery Channel program that featured a kneeling, bound female statuette used in spell casting (a "classic domination spell"). Dates back to 300-400 BC according to the program. Beat that for general ancientness if you can!

Here's the link.

 

[PatPowers]

There's a movie about the historical reality of slavery in England, it's called "A Respectable Trade" and is based on a historical novel of the same name.

Here's a vidcap from it:

http://www.bondagerotica.com/slavegag.jpg

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

There's a movie about the historical reality of slavery in England, it's called "A Respectable Trade" and is based on a historical novel of the same name.

Here's a vidcap from it:

http://www.bondagerotica.com/slavegag.jpg

Pat honestly what is it with you and the branks, is this a fetish of yours ? Nothing I would ascribe to consensual Ds. ( as I would define it )

'intreauged'

 

[alice_underneath]

There is also the story about Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings which still seems to be unconfirmed but has lots of evidence which seems too coincidental as a group to amount to nothing.

Catalina

Let's assume for the sake of argument here that Tom and Sally had a loving relationship. So what? The fact that she loved the man does not mean that she loved her status as his slave.

Sally Hemings was not freed until after Jefferson died. Assuming that he did love and respect her, and further assuming that he granted her the right to choose her status, the fact that she was never freed tells us one of two things. Either:

a) She loved, respected, and cherished not just the man, but also her status as a slave.

or

b) She loved the man and cherished their relationship, and realized that (due to social mores in place at the time) marriage to him would be impossible if she were freed.

Frankly, I think it's a stretch to assume that Jefferson ever granted her the right to choose her status. But even if he did, I consider the former possibility to highly unlikely indeed.

I will also say that I consider attempts to romanticize Old South slavery in this way to be very offensive.

There's a movie about the historical reality of slavery in England, it's called "A Respectable Trade" and is based on a historical novel of the same name.

Here's a vidcap from it:

Pat,

Are you trying to use this image to make a dramatic point about how inappropriate a discussion of historical, nonconsensual slavery is on a BDSM Board?

If so, good for you. If not, I would like to take this opportunity to make that point myself.

Safe Sane and CONSENSUAL

There is absolutely nothing safe or sane about forced ownership of human beings. And BY DEFINITION it is not consensual.

Nonconsensual slavery is an abomination and a crime against humanity. Images of the suffering of African slaves have absolutely no place on a porn board and no place in a discussion of "Historical D/s".

What the hell will we all be looking at next? Photos of Hitler's sexual experimentation on Jews?

 

[ThorkelGriersen]

100% Agreement

Let's assume for the sake of argument here that Tom and Sally had a loving relationship. So what? The fact that she loved the man does not mean that she loved her status as his slave.

Sally Hemings was not freed until after Jefferson died. Assuming that he did love and respect her, and further assuming that he granted her the right to choose her status, the fact that she was never freed tells us one of two things. Either:

a) She loved, respected, and cherished not just the man, but also her status as a slave.

or

b) She loved the man and cherished their relationship, and realized that (due to social mores in place at the time) marriage to him would be impossible if she were freed.

Frankly, I think it's a stretch to assume that Jefferson ever granted her the right to choose her status. But even if he did, I consider the former possibility to highly unlikely indeed.

I will also say that I consider attempts to romanticize Old South slavery in this way to be very offensive.

Pat,

Are you trying to use this image to make a dramatic point about how inappropriate a discussion of historical, nonconsensual slavery is on a BDSM Board?

If so, good for you. If not, I would like to take this opportunity to make that point myself.

Safe Sane and CONSENSUAL

There is absolutely nothing safe or sane about forced ownership of human beings. And BY DEFINITION it is not consensual.

Nonconsensual slavery is an abomination and a crime against humanity. Images of the suffering of African slaves have absolutely no place on a porn board and no place in a discussion of "Historical D/s".

What the hell will we all be looking at next? Photos of Hitler's sexual experimentation on Jews?

That is the point I was trying to make with my sttement that the relationship was based on a legal structure; i.e. that it had nothing to do with a personal choice.

I also stated that no one will ever really know what the real (personal) relation between them was. He did present her in Paris as his wife- or so I understand. Nevertheless, none of this could ever justify the legalized practice of owning another human being.

What a person chooses to do with himself is his business. No one has the right to have the life of another person at his disposal.

I concur 100% with your opinions, Alice. I was surprised that we even got into this.

The title of the thread is D/s relations in history. The legalized ownership of other persons is NOT D/s.

 

[PatPowers]

Let's assume for the sake of argument here that Tom and Sally had a loving relationship. So what? The fact that she loved the man does not mean that she loved her status as his slave.

Sally Hemings was not freed until after Jefferson died. Assuming that he did love and respect her, and further assuming that he granted her the right to choose her status, the fact that she was never freed tells us one of two things. Either:

a) She loved, respected, and cherished not just the man, but also her status as a slave.

or

b) She loved the man and cherished their relationship, and realized that (due to social mores in place at the time) marriage to him would be impossible if she were freed.

Frankly, I think it's a stretch to assume that Jefferson ever granted her the right to choose her status. But even if he did, I consider the former possibility to highly unlikely indeed.

I will also say that I consider attempts to romanticize Old South slavery in this way to be very offensive.

What's romantic about it? If you think I am an apologist for actual slavery, you are completely mistaken. I think that the South got what was coming to us when we got our asses kicked in the Civil War, because we were trying to defend the indefensible. But I'm not sure I get how you reached the conclusion I was romanticizing anything. Perhaps you can fill me in there.

Pat,

Are you trying to use this image to make a dramatic point about how inappropriate a discussion of historical, nonconsensual slavery is on a BDSM Board?

If so, good for you. If not, I would like to take this opportunity to make that point myself.

Safe Sane and CONSENSUAL

There is absolutely nothing safe or sane about forced ownership of human beings. And BY DEFINITION it is not consensual.

Nonconsensual slavery is an abomination and a crime against humanity. Images of the suffering of African slaves have absolutely no place on a porn board and no place in a discussion of "Historical D/s".

So, because we like sexual bondage fantasies, study of historical bondage is forbidden to us? A curious notion, to say the least. Is the study of the historical practices of the Romans, Greeks, Egyptians, Jews, etc., with regard to slavery also forbidden? What can we know, and when can we know it?

What the hell will we all be looking at next? Photos of Hitler's sexual experimentation on Jews?

Godwinized!

History is largely a catalog of the awful shit human beings have done to one another over time. Knowing about it doesn't mean you approve of it. I found the image interesting because it was associated with a piece of knowledge that I didn't have before ... that some slaveowners gagged their kitchen staff. I find the practice curiously extreme.

In fact, however, this scene is from a part of the movie where a suicidal slave is being gagged for her own good, because she's been trying to poison herself. The white female slaveowner who does it is appalled -- the purpose of the scene is to show how being involved in slavery draws one into abhorrent practices and behavior.

 

[PatPowers]

Pat honestly what is it with you and the branks, is this a fetish of yours ? Nothing I would ascribe to consensual Ds. ( as I would define it )

'intreauged'

Branks are not a fetish of mine. I do like to see a woman wearing a gag, but it's more something along the lines of a ballgag or an O-ring gag, but I don't feel any need to see women wearing them against their will.

Branks were not typically consensual, most of them were punishments for women identified as scolds, witches, etc. I find them an interesting historical phenomenon -- an instrument now closely associated with sexual bondage play that was once a tool of social policy. As I noted in my previous post, I find a reference that indicates that ordinary kitchen slaves who hadn't offended anyone were sometimes (maybe often?) gagged. Pretty weird imagery there, did they have gags hanging on pegs by the kitchen door or what? I am a little suspicious of this information, but there's a lot I don't know and I imagine a lot that is unknown about the historical practice of slavery in all sorts of places and times.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Let's assume for the sake of argument here that Tom and Sally had a loving relationship. So what? The fact that she loved the man does not mean that she loved her status as his slave.

Sally Hemings was not freed until after Jefferson died. Assuming that he did love and respect her, and further assuming that he granted her the right to choose her status, the fact that she was never freed tells us one of two things. Either:

a) She loved, respected, and cherished not just the man, but also her status as a slave.

or

b) She loved the man and cherished their relationship, and realized that (due to social mores in place at the time) marriage to him would be impossible if she were freed.

Frankly, I think it's a stretch to assume that Jefferson ever granted her the right to choose her status. But even if he did, I consider the former possibility to highly unlikely indeed.

I will also say that I consider attempts to romanticize Old South slavery in this way to be very offensive.

Obviously this whole topic is touching a sore point with you which is strange given this is a BDSM board which does discuss slavery and other related topics regularly and from various viewpoints as a matter of discussion, not judgement. It is a BDSM board after all and those discussions should be free to be discussed here as we all know in most of the mainstream areas of society, as you have demonstrated, they would often not be so openly welcomed, instead expected to be silenced or painted with a brush that mainstream society has chosen the colour for. It is also worth noting that some of us live our slavery as a daily reality, not a game, not a fantasy, not role play, not something to feel naughty about. This is where we and those who support the right to choose this lifestyle should feel comfotable in coming to discuss those topics and ones which relate to our reality without outside judgement and censure.

I don't recall saying Sally Hemmings had a choice in her slavery, or that she loved it, though there is the possibility she loved Thomas Jefferson....two very different things?!!

As to offensive to romanticise Old South slavery...I wasn't the first one in history to come up with the story of the possibility they were in love (not to mention the countless novels and movies which also have such themes in them)...but given that they would not have been alone and the only Master/slave couple who ever were in love, why does it bother you and drive you to want to cover the possibility of love and a relationship outside the brutal, popular image so often portrayed? It is a matter of your history which has been raised publicly and privately for over a hundred years. Sheeesh, do you advocate the sanitisation of the history books and records as well to suit your preferences and choices of what should be acceptable and what should not be. You raised Hitler in a post....an interesting fact is one of his notions was also to prevent knowledge from being shared and enslaving people through disempowering them by destroying evidence of and recording of facts, and preventing the pursuit of knowledge...he was quite keen on book burning I believe..should, we start that here with any area someone finds offensive regardless of its authenticity or possible idea development? Not if I have anything to do with it we won't.

I'm sorry if this whole topic offends you, but I am not one for censorship, and I will continue to support and introduce topics that have relevance to this board and those who live with BDSM and/or D/s in their lives. If those outside that world have a problem with it they need to remember this is a BDSM board and just as you would not go into a Jewish community and begin preaching the correctness of Nazism, I do not believe it good manners to come here and begin dictating what should and should not be discussed. Out of interest, there are many academics both in and out of the lifestyle who are or have looked at this and other topics related to historical connections, related topics and possible relevance without feeling it was in the least offensive or unacceptable material.

Catalina

 

[catalina_francisco]

History is largely a catalog of the awful shit human beings have done to one another over time. Knowing about it doesn't mean you approve of it. I

So true, but there will always be those who prefer to deny it, bury it, or rewrite it in a more acceptable way deleting some of the reality, then wonder why history continues to repeat itself.

So, because we like sexual bondage fantasies, study of historical bondage is forbidden to us? A curious notion, to say the least. Is the study of the historical practices of the Romans, Greeks, Egyptians, Jews, etc., with regard to slavery also forbidden? What can we know, and when can we know it?

I am a history enthusiast, so history will never be banned as far as I am concerned. I find it strange that it be suggested on a board such as this (BDSM board) that slavery and related topics in terms of history is causing offence if discussed.... especially given there are some who actually incorporate elements of that history into their own present day slavery relationships through fantasy, role play, or adopting the power dynamics.

Another area I thought of this week was slave naming. Where did it begin in history and in D/s terms? I know I have a slave name which also reflects the culture and nationality of F, and that in the Old South and Australian history it was not unheard of to issue a name more related to the owners than the slave's origins. Does anyone have other historical knowledge of it existing?

Catalina

 

[catalina_francisco]

The title of the thread is D/s relations in history. The legalized ownership of other persons is NOT D/s.

Yes, that is the title and the topic, but to pretend there is no connection between historical ownership of other human beings and present day consensual D/s and/or M/s is living in denial IMHO. I for one live as a 24/7 slave and our relationship very much hints at historical slavery in that I am owned, I do not have rights, I do not have choices (though initially I had the choice to submit to this), and I cannot leave...do you then see it as your right to invalidate what I do as not existing based on what you believe to be D/s in the style that suits you? Regardless of personal opinions, the opening article dealt with collaring, and spoke of a person who was inspired to wear one based on the experience she had of seeing a play that dealt with slavery...see how these connections are all related? Just because it did not happen as it does in many relationships today, or she didn't fit the image of what some believe a slave or submissive should in present day terms, does not invalidate the reality of it being an historical event which did happen and which reflects influence and linkage between past and present.

If she had never seen the play and identified with the female lead character, would she ever have worn a locked collar which her husband held the key to unlocking? If historical non-consensual slavery and present day consensual D/s slavery are completely unrelated and seperate entities, how is it there are so many areas of commonality such as claimed ownership, collars, slave names, caging, punishment, symbols of ownership including registration and numbering of slaves as existed in past eras etc.? This thread is not about personal preferences, practices or opinions, but more about (hopefully) objectively tracing historical evidence and linkages of the past and present.

Catalina

 

[alice_underneath]

Yes, that is the title and the topic, but to pretend there is no connection between historical ownership of other human beings and present day consensual D/s and/or M/s is living in denial IMHO. I for one live as a 24/7 slave and our relationship very much hints at historical slavery in that I am owned, I do not have rights, I do not have choices (though initially I had the choice to submit to this), and I cannot leave...do you then see it as your right to invalidate what I do as not existing based on what you believe to be D/s in the style that suits you?

"I had the choice to submit to this."

That is the difference. Right there. And - unless you have taken that last letter out of your SSC creed - this difference invalidates your comparison completely.

You are the one rewriting history here, Catalina. You are romanticizing and eroticizing a heinous practice - the forced ownership of one human being by another. In doing so, you whitewash the atrocity. And that is censorship, of the worst possible kind.

To say that these comments in any way invalidate what you, personally, choose to do is preposterous. The topic of this thread is: Historical D/s. That "s" is a reality for you, Catalina. But it was not a reality for Sally Hemings, or the human being portrayed in the photograph of an English slave put on this thread by Pat Powers. You chose to submit to your slavery, and those human beings did not.

Alice

 

[alice_underneath]

If historical non-consensual slavery and present day consensual D/s slavery are completely unrelated and seperate entities, how is it there are so many areas of commonality such as claimed ownership, collars, slave names, caging, punishment, symbols of ownership including registration and numbering of slaves as existed in past eras etc.? This thread is not about personal preferences, practices or opinions, but more about (hopefully) objectively tracing historical evidence and linkages of the past and present.

Discussing the origin of props and symbols is very different than holding up Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings as an example of a D/s relationship - which is how I interpreted your post #4, above.

Alice

 

[alice_underneath]

In fact, however, this scene is from a part of the movie where a suicidal slave is being gagged for her own good, because she's been trying to poison herself. The white female slaveowner who does it is appalled -- the purpose of the scene is to show how being involved in slavery draws one into abhorrent practices and behavior.

If your intent in posting the image was to demonstrate that nonconsensual slavery is an abhorrent practice, then I'll repeat what I wrote to you yesterday: Good for you.

Alice

 

[Quint]

Bah, we're all adults here. Obviously there is something sexual about slavery to us, otherwise we wouldn't be on this forum. Every picture of a whip doesn't need a disclaimer: "This must only be used in good clean consensual fun!" Sheesh.

Thank you to everyone who has shared historical landmarks, especially Joe Schmoe...this was a fascinating and thought-provoking thread.