 |
| sa_fora |
In my humble opinion... i being possibly rather extreem in my outlook in regard to bondage have always ascribed to the idea that bondage isn't worth doing unless it's not possible to get out of it.............My friends have always retorted that i shouldn't be looking to get out of any bondage my Master puts me in anyway and therefore if i was bound by simple cotton then i wouldn't look to break it as my Owner put me there.
i personally feel there are two ways of looking at this and have to agree that in a perfect world one would not try to escape the bondage their Master puts them in......if this is the case however why bind the girl at all? surely one should just order her into the required position and leave her there; alas she would not move as she is controlled mentally by her Master...All i can say is i have to agree and probably one of the reasons i value protocol so highly as it serves to make the girl feel owned with every move she makes.
Alas i think there is a second consideration here too and on reflection possbily a third.... i wonder how many would agree with me that permanent bondage has a marked mental effect upon a slave? i for one feel it does after experiencing much and permanent bondage on a daily basis serves only ever served to mentally keep me in my place.
i think the possible third consideration here although it could possbily still be the second is the fact that permanent bondage serves to make a slave feel loved and owned, i think even if she isn't a bratty slave, which i am not, one needs to be able to test their restraints, alas i feel it natural reactance in a way....
In conclusion; the objective of chaining a girl to a bed or in a dungeon is not to actually restrain her to that place or in that position; Rather the objective of that physical act is to increase her sense of helplessness and submission to his will and whim. and therefore i still ascribe to the idea that one should bind or shackle a slave with permanent shackles that she is unable to remove herself.
Quote of the day:-
Don't give her choices. This is the rudest thing you can do to a slave unless you're deliberately testing them. “Would you like…” is as annoying as “Are you sure?” is to a Dominant.
| 18 Mar 05, 7:30 PM SirCadian_uk UK, 7 yrs |
Thank you for a thought-provoking post. I too have always felt that bondage that is not inescapable is somehow false or incomplete but I have not (until now) tried to rationalise this belief. Consider as an example a sub or slave secured in strong steel handcuffs but where the key is within easy reach. Is this bondage? My assertion is that it is not and I would choose to describe this as simply "restraint". Just as a car seat belt restricts movement, so do the cuffs. But both can be removed by the wearer at any time and the only thing stopping this from happening is their decision not to do so. During the period of restraint, the motorist or submissive must continually elect not to free themselves. Their motivation for this ongoing decision could vary from a desire to assure their own physical safety to a desire to obey their Master's instructions. This is really mental self-control or subservience, not physical bondage. So, in the case of the submissive or slave, what purpose can restraint serve? The following uses come to mind... 1. It may make it easier for the sub to understand and appreciate their given position and also, therefore, to remain in it. It defines their boundaries of movement and may even provide some level of physical support. 2. It may provide some degree of protection from harm to themselves (or to others). 3. It may provide evidence of their continued acquiescence that is visible to all involved (Master, third-party, or sub themselves). Their restraint may even be "tamper-evident" avoiding the need for constant supervision. 4. It may involve a level of discomfort/pain for the purposes of SM. So restraint is not without value but I would maintain that it only truly becomes bondage when the option to escape is also removed. In bondage, the submissive is no longer required to consciously and continually choose not to free themselves. In bondage, their free will is of no consequence and therefore rendered worthless. Bondage creates a sense, in the slave's mind, of total dependency on their Master (which in fact becomes very real if used over extended periods). I believe it is this that can cause bondage to have the profound mental effects that kajira safora refers to...and no doubt seeks. I look forward to reading other posts on this topic. | ||
| 29 Mar 05, 11:37 PM Interesdom UK(IP), 9 yrs  |
While I find myself agreeing / appreciating what you say, I think there is another aspect that is worth considering. One can tie a tame elephant with a thin rope attached to a stake. So long as the elephant can feel a tug when the rope is tensioned, the elephant won't attempt to escape the tether even though it could physically just walk away, snapping the rope or pulling the stake from the ground. This is physically-conditioned mental bondage. The analogy would not require the slave to stay because she knows she should but having her believe in her bondage just because of that 'simple cotton'. I've never conditioned a woman to feel physical bondage with light restraint in this way but if a master's purpose it to own a tamed woman, this surely is the ultimate in bondage. Edited 29 Mar 05, 11:42 PM by Interesdom | ||
| 30 Mar 05, 7:19 PM sa_fora UK(E), 10 yrs |
Well i'm not sure i agree in it being the ultimate bondage. Just a different style of bondage.....in my humble opinion they both have their merits in different ways hence my observations. Personally i think one needs to take into consideration that some slaves feel a pronounced sense of securty when they find themself in permanent bondage..............i understand this can also be acheived mentally but feel a combination of the two has some very interesting effects.
kajira sa~fora x |
