Content/trigger warning: slavery, rape, torture, death, suicide
The term “slave” in the BDSM context has been a concern for some time. Due to its problematic historical connotations and the triggers it may still evoke for some people, we no longer support its use in public spaces and on our platform. Instead, we now prefer the term “Serf” for this type of play, which is commonly understood under the term “slave.”
Why, is explained by this text from X-blogger @Polyamquest, which has been shortened and partially provided for Deviance. Since some passages in this form could be interpreted as kink-shaming, we recommend reading the full text for a deeper and more critical engagement, which you can find on the blog Poly-Guaca-Moly.
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 Subs 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 inextricably linked with stories of violent family separations, real rapes (not rape play), and bloody punishments (even killings) due to actual economic exploitation and supposed Christian missionizing. If you’re thinking: “Apart from the family dimension and murder, the term fits BDSM,” you’re missing 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 non-negotiable.
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) discuss an article by Peter Weissenburger, in which he advocates for the mindful use of language in BDSM contexts. Towards the middle of the podcast episode, Maya makes a constructive suggestion that is increasingly gaining popularity in US BDSM contexts: “Servant”. The term implies by definition exactly what we mean when we think of the roles of Slaves, but anonymizes the historical connotations associated with the role. Furthermore, the term includes the very real possibility of being able to remove oneself from the relationship if needed. In my opinion, ‘Servant’ or ‘Diener:in’ is therefore a more suitable term for describing this role.
Other terms that also seem suitable to me are “Serf” or “Menial” (typically found in texts on medieval history). I’m open to further suggestions. Personally, I find these two mentioned terms the most fitting. Ultimately, I can only make suggestions for improvement. What you choose for yourselves 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.
