LadiesBladewing
Posts: 518
Joined: 8/31/2005 Status: offline
|
I would agree that most people wouldn't think of this situation first when they thought of someone who identified as a slave, but it isn't as unusual as it might sound at first blush, I think. When our household was in full swing, our Chatellaine (first servant) was responsible for all the other servants in the household, but was, herself, an owned servant, fully dedicated to the Owners of the household. She, in turn, was addressed as "mistress" or "Miss" by the other servants, and everything went through her. She was also the last word in bringing in new servants, since if she determined that they were "untrainable", the Owners' general philosophy was that they truly -were- untrainable and not worth their time -- only if she couldn't deal with it was it brought to a "higher authority", much in the same way that a chatellaine or butler manages everyone below-stairs in a large household. Over years and years, I've discovered that it is unlikely that there is -anything- that "doesn't exist" in this very diverse group of lifestyle preferences. The problem is often finding the right person, who understands and can accept the implications. Lady Zephyr quote:
ORIGINAL: ScooterTrash I imagine that most people would have difficult time believing a "slave" could have any subs, little alone many. A submissive might pull this off under the banner of a switch, but a slave...that simply doesn't register? I suspect this may be why you are having difficulties finding volunteers...maybe a bit too wierd on top of the aforementioned fact that there really is a sparce offering of females with the mindset for a poly relationship in the first place.
_____________________________
"Should have", "could have", "would have" and "can't" may be the most dangerous phrases in the English language.
|