The Nine Degrees Of Submission

This was posted to collarncuffs.com and is meant as food for thought, as an insight to where you see your own submission. Could also be used to described your submission in Femdom to others

I have added a survey below the article to see which of the 9 degrees of submissive prevails. please take the survey, it is anonymous but will provide excellent insight!

The outright non-submissive masochist or kinky sensualist

Not into servitude, humiliation or giving up of control; just pain and/or spiced-up sensuality, on the masochist's own terms for the masochist's own pleasure (ie: being turned on solely or mainly by one's own bodily sensations, rather than being turned on by being “used” to gratify one's partner's sadism).

Pseudo-submissive non-slave

Not into even playing “slave”, but into other “submissive” role-playing, e.g.: schoolteacher scenes, infantilism, “forced” transvestism. Usually into humiliation, but NOT into servitude, even in play. Dictates the scene to a large degree.

Pseudo-submissive PLAY slave

Likes to play at being slave. Likes to *feel* subservient; may in some cases like to *feel* that one is being “used” to gratify one's partner's sadism; and may even really serve the dominant in some ways, but only on the “slave's” own terms. Dictates the scene to a large degree; often fetishistic (e.g. foot worshippers).

True submissive non-slave

Really gives up control (though only temporarily and within agreed upon limits), but gets his/her main satisfaction from aspects of submission *other than* serving or being used by the dominant. Usually turned on by suspense, vulnerability, and/or giving up of responsibility. Doesn't dictate the scene except in very general terms, but still seeks mainly her/his own *direct* pleasure (rather than getting one's pleasure mainly from pleasing the dominant).

True submissive PLAY slave

Really gives up control (though only temporarily; only during brief “scenes” and within limits) and gets his/her main satisfaction from serving and being used by the dominant - but only for FUN purposes, usually erotic. (May or may not be into pain, but if so, is turned on by pain *indirectly*, ie: enjoys being the objects of one's partner's sadism, on which the submissive places few requirements or restrictions.)

Uncommitted short-term but more-than-play semi-slave

Really gives up control (though usually within limits); wants to serve and be used by the dominant; wants to provide practical/non-erotic as well as fun/ erotic services; but only when the “slave” is in the mood. May even act as a full-time slave for, say, several days at a time, but is free to quit at any time (or at the end of the agreed upon several days). May or may not have a long-term relationship with one's Mistress/Master, but, either way, the “slave” has the final say over when he or she will serve.

Part-time consensual but REAL slave

Has ongoing commitment to an owner/slave relationship, and regards oneself as the Mistress'/Master's “property” at all times. Wants to obey and please her/him in all aspects of life - practical/non-erotic as well as fun/erotic. Devotes most of one's time to other commitments (eg: job) but the Mistress/Master has first pick of the slave's free time.

Full-time live-in consensual slave

Within no more than a few broad limits/requirements, the slave regards herself/ himself as existing solely for the Mistress'/Master's use, pleasure and well- being. The slave in turn expects to be regarded as a prized possession. Not much different from the situation of the traditional housewife, except that within the S/M world the slave's position is more likely to be fully consensual, especially if the slave is male (since men certainly aren't socially pressured into this kind of lifestyle). Within the S/M world, a full-time “slave” arrangement is entered into with an explicit awareness of the magnitude of power that is being given up, and hence is usually entered into much more carefully, with more awareness of the possible dangers, and with much clearer and more specific agreements than usually precede the traditional marriage.

Consensual total slave with no limits

A common fantasy ideal which probably doesn't exist in real life (except in authoritarian religious cults and other situations where the “consent” is induced by brainwashing and/or social or economic pressures, and hence isn't fully consensual). A few S/M purists will insist that you aren't really a slave unless you're willing to do absolutely *anything* for your Mistress/ Master, with no limits at all. There are a few who claim to be no-limits slaves, but in all cases it would be reasonable to doubt the claim.

Article: Missbitch CollarNuffs.com

Which of the Nine Degrees are you?

The outright non-submissive masochist or kinky sensualist

Pseudo-submissive non-slave

Pseudo-submissive PLAY slave

True submissive non-slave

True submissive PLAY slave

Uncommitted short-term but more-than-play semi-slave

Part-time consensual but REAL slave

Full-time live-in consensual slave

Consensual total slave with no limits

None of the above/ don't know

Created with PollMaker

Karl Marx is still relevant today - and we need him more now than ever before.

Is Marx Still Relevant?, by Peter Singer

On the 200th anniversary of Karl Marx's birth on May 5, 1818, it isn't far-fetched to suggest that his predictions have been falsified, his theories discredited, and his ideas rendered obsolete. So why should we care about his legacy in the twenty-first century?

In my opinion... We need Marx more than ever. Capitalism in its current form within the UK causes great inequality and an utter demoralisation of the population. Society has become so accustomed and familiar with the disparity and injustice caused by our current capitalist path, that they no longer acknowledge the reality of the situation. Instead, many have become so indoctrinated by media and political propaganda; they believe poverty is the result of idle, incompetent citizens who did it to themselves.

We have created a civilization of people who absorbed government misinformation that the poor were to blame for their failure to embrace globalisation and capitalism. If one follows the unwritten rules of the social order, all will prosper. As long as Mr Jones works hard, earns an income, pays tax on this income - then more tax when he spends and fritters his earnings to accrue merchandise of fancy to boost the economy, invests in insurance in case of death, unemployment or ill health, buys a house, a car….and he is strict in following the guidelines set out… He will become a perfect citizen, prosperous, free and blinkered to the reality which surrounds him.

THE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF BDSM ACTS

THE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF BDSM ACTS

Gary McLachlan LLB, LLM
Ph.D Student, Exeter University

Abstract

In this paper I use the political theories of Hannah Arendt, as well as critical legal theory which argues against assumptions based in liberal theory^[1] to re-evaluate sexual offences (BDSM)^[2] and touch on the principles which regulate speech, outside of the dialogue on 'freedom of expression' as a human right.

Firstly I set out a series of legal tests which arise from consideration of the cases and theories, and test them against fact, theory and case law to determine the concepts of ethics, motive, consent and capacity within the criminal justice system, as well as examining the existence of consequences. Consequences are included since that allows the determination of answers that would fit within the framework of restorative justice.^[3]

The argument is driven from an Arendtian perspective, but with the inclusion of elements of dignity discourse in equality law so that the focus of the law includes values of self-worth and self-respect both for the victim and the perpetrator. Since the offences are constructed from the actions of those taking part in BDSM sexual encounters, the victim here is normally also taken as a perpetrator. Since it is an Arendtian perspective I have assumed that no legal solution is possible until a political solution is created; that law and politics exist to serve different ends.

I would like to thank Chris Ashford^[4] and Matthew Burton^[5] for their thoughts and comments on an earlier draft of this work; any errors that remain are entirely my own responsibility.