Content/trigger warning: slavery, rape, torture, death, suicide
The term “slave” or “slave” has been on our minds for a long time in the BDSM context. Due to its problematic historical significance and the triggers that it still triggers for some people today, we no longer support its use in public spaces and on our platform, but from now on prefer the term “serf”, i.e. “servant, serf :r” for the variety that is commonly understood by the term slave.
This text by blogger and Twitter user @Polyamquest, which was shortened and made available in parts for Deviance, explains why. Since some passages in this form could be interpreted as kink-shaming, we recommend the full-length text for an even deeper and more critical discussion, which you can find on the Poly-Guaca-Moly blog.
Dearest People,
Dearest People,
today we have to talk about something that has been on my heart for a long time. We need to talk more about the use of the term “slave” in BDSM contexts. […] We take our experiences and stories with us into every session. They frame our perception and that of those who can observe our activities in public spaces, such as Twitter or parties. […]
I can’t and don’t want to forbid anyone from doing anything. What I want is to encourage people to reflect on their own use of language. Language is never rigid; words always change their meaning over time. […]
The contact with my American family had a lasting impact on me. I spent a lot of time there with my great-grandmother during my first years of life. […] My great-grandmother’s grandparents were born into American slavery and experienced “the strange institution” firsthand until they were about twelve years old. There are only five generations between me and one of humanity’s greatest genocides. The stories about the physical and psychological terror that went hand in hand with this injustice system are known to me from the stories of my great-grandmother, my grandmother and my mother and are present every time I come into contact with the topic. […]
The problem, in my opinion, is the following: The term slave is historically and emotionally connoted regardless of the context and is not suitable for play.
Now there is a dilemma for me in BDSM circles. Here the term is used primarily to describe (sexual) power dynamics. The discussion about how submissives differ from so-called “slaves” is an old barrel that I don’t want to open at this point. I realize that the terms are not synonymous because they describe “different extents of submissiveness and obedience.” […]
For me, the term is inevitably associated with stories about violent family separations, real rapes (not rape play) and bloody punishments (even killings) for reasons of actual economic exploitation and supposedly Christian proselytizing. Anyone who now thinks: Apart from the family dimension and murder, the term fits BDSM, is ignoring the crucial point: SSC (hear me out, because this works multifold). […]
Historically, slavery is diametrically opposed to SSC. Historically, slavery is and has been anything but consensual. […] No consent, no voluntariness, no possibility of escaping one’s own situation without violence – while the term as used in BDSM and under SSC philosophy absolutely requires that. The unconditional obedience that BDSM slaves show their masters must be mutually agreed upon beforehand and can be broken off at any time for a variety of reasons, including by the submissive part of the dynamic. That’s good and important. But now we slide into the category of “living out kink in public” […].
SSC implies that all participants, including non-participants, who may attend a session or exchange in the relevant context […] must mutually agree. […] BDSM does not take place in a vacuum. I don’t want to censor anyone. Kink shaming is bad. […]
The term “slave” doesn’t bother me per se. It’s not a swear word, I don’t think a comparison with the N-word is useful here […]. The fact is that the experiences of black people in many places around the world, but especially in and from the USA, continue to be shaped by the effects […]. For me and other people like me, the game cannot be separated from the real-world implications of the term. Stumbling across it on Twitter or in sessions takes me out of the moment and takes away from the fun of what we all actually do for fun in some form in this community.
Consent is out of the question
Ideally, when I realize that using a certain label causes other people around me to stumble or feel uncomfortable, I think about my own position and how I can help those around me feel more comfortable feel. Not only, but especially in BDSM. So my request to those of you who refer to yourself as a slave in BDSM contexts, who are yourself master or mistress, or who are asked to refer to someone as a slave in professional BDSM contexts, is to pause and stop reflect on whether SSC is guaranteed for everyone involved and whether choosing an alternative name might avoid the problem entirely. […]
In the first episode of their podcast, Maya (@MayaMitKind) and Ihro (@LiMingRichter) talk about the article by Peter Weissenburger (@weissenpeter), in which he advocates the careful use of language in BDSM contexts. In the middle of the podcast episode, Maya makes a constructive replacement suggestion that is becoming increasingly common in US BDSM contexts: “Servant”. By definition, the term implies exactly what we mean when we think of the role description of slaves, but anonymizes the historical level of meaning that comes with the role. Furthermore, the term includes the very real possibility of being able to remove oneself from the relationship if necessary. In my opinion, Servant is a more appropriate term for the corresponding role.
Other terms that also seem appropriate to me are “serf” (in German: serf:r. Usually found in texts on medieval history) or “menial” (in German: servant or servant). I’m open to further suggestions. I personally find the two mentioned here to be the most suitable. Ultimately, I can only make suggestions for improvement. What you claim for yourself is ultimately entirely your decision. […]
Those of you who have been following me on Twitter for a while know that this topic concerns me: I wonder out loud, i.e. publicly, why the BDSM/kinky bubble is so white. […] I now believe that the insensitive use of this term could be one of many reasons why #kinkytwittergermany is so indiverse. As members of the bubble, we cannot fix all of them. But I think we should make it our mission to start where we can. We should make our exchanges more accessible so that people can find their way into the bubble without being immediately put off by insensitive choice of words.
I am fully aware that there are Black people whose kink it is to call themselves or have themselves called slaves in BDSM contexts. For all I care, that is fine, as long as it’s consensual. […] Other black people may share this opinion, but they don’t have to, and that’s […] okay. Anyone who argues with “I know BIPoC from the scene who think it’s okay” should again be aware that black people are not a monolith either (there is no such thing as THE Black community).
We thank Polyamquest of Polyguacamoly for writing and providing portions of this post. Do you want to read the article in full or are you curious about other articles? Click here for Poly’s blog, here for their Twitter account @Polyamquest, and here for the community’s blog recommendations.
