So is religion, marriage and tradition any help in keeping women submissive or are they anachronistic appendages that should be abandoned for a purer form of submission?
I want to start off by pointing something obvious that these women conveniently forgot. Since we are talking about "consensual slaves" here, once they have become slaves, the decision of whether or not they get married is actually left to the Master. So when they remain unmarried, the decision is not really theirs, it is their Master's decision. A consensual slave once she has given up control, by definition, doesn't get to make that decision. If the Master wants to marry, she would marry ( unless this is a hard no for her, which I kind of doubt).
So the real question is "Why does her Master, to whom she has surrendered to completely, hesitate to marry her?" Why doesn't he propose and tie the knot?
Here in lies the bitter truth that some of these women refuse to accept. Lets look at the different reasons why a Master would choose not to marry his slave
- He is already married and unwilling to leave his wife (assuming they live in a country where polygamy is illegal)
- He has been married before, and is not interested in the institution of marriage with anyone
- He is just not interested in marrying her, but may marry if the right woman comes along
The first option is just a smoke screen. What it really means is that he is unwilling to divorce his wife and/or leave his kids to marry you, but is perfectly fine to have you cater to his every need and grovel at his feet. I don't blame him. If they can get such a deal, most men would take it provided their wife did not object to it.
The second option is a little more tricky. Why does the institution of marriage frighten a man so much. Well because it is a huge commitment and once you tie the knot, the law steps into your life. If anything goes bad, he can't just walk away. The long arm of the law will follow him everywhere. Maybe he doesn't want someone having a say in his life in that way. Maybe he wants to leave his options open. What if he loses interest in his slave. It would be easier to move her aside if there was no binding marriage contract that would override any mutually agreed to slave contract he had with his slave. He just wants the option to play the field
The last option means that you just don't bring enough value to the table even with being a "consensual slave" to entice him to tie the knot. He doesn't like you that much or probably doesn't think highly enough of your "slave qualities" to marry you.
In all three cases, he is "choosing" not to marry you, even though you have decided to give up all control and become his slave. What does that tell you about such a Master? or what does that tell you about how good of a slave you are?
So its not really that the "slave" chooses "being single", it is really imposed on her by her Master and so she has no alternative to either accept it or find another man. She can rationalize this away by saying that "oh well, I don't like marriage either", but in the end, its not her choice it's her Master's choice and that is key here
But is marriage, religion and tradition really necessary for "Consensual Slavery"? Simple answer is No. Clearly you don't have to be religious, or married or follow any tradition to be a slave. Having said that, I feel marriage, religion and tradition provide a framework that could make you a better slave. I say could, because they are not sufficient, but they definitely help in a big way.
Religion is the foundation for the other two ( marriage and tradition) and provides the fabric that allows someone to argue that women should submit to men. Most Religions are really a bunch of rules on how to live one's life. These rules start with belief in God, traditional gender roles and strong focus on the family unit. Its often a package deal. Abandon one and more often than not, you abandon the others as well. Abandoning religious belief has a much more profound affect on women than it does on men. When a woman abandons faith in God, she quickly starts questioning traditional gender roles as well. Then she questions the relevance of marriage and why she should stay married to a man, if she "doesn't feel fulfilled". Once this happens, it is a slippery slope to "radical feminist ideas" and "gender equality". So while there may be a minority of women who have abandoned religion but still cling to "traditional gender roles", a vast majority of women abandon both God, traditional gender roles and submission to men at about the same time. If you want a society of submissive women, you must in general have a society of God fearing women. I am not talking of exceptions here, I am talking of society in general.
When women abandon faith in God and traditional gender roles, the next victim is marriage. It becomes acceptable to divorce your man if "he is not fulfilling my emotional needs". You can see this trend specially in western countries where 70% of the divorces are initiated by women and most are no fault divorces
Single parent families have profound affect on future generations of men and women. Children raised in families where a strong father is missing themselves are at a danger of being infected with ideas of "gender equality", "feminism" and the "evils of patriarchy". Its as if their immune system is weak and such ideas can invade easily. This does not mean that all children raised in single families grow up with these ideas, but research shows that they are more likely to. They also lack strong male role models in their lives and hence will not easily accept that men should lead families. Children raised in single families are also more likely to divorce themselves. All this creates a terrible feedback loop, further reducing the pool of submissive women available in society.
The other big advantage of religion, marriage and tradition is that a man can use these three pillars as boundaries to contain a woman's occasional urge to defy his authority. He can use them and a society that believes in them as his friend to enforce submissiveness in his woman. Without them, he would have to police his woman much more carefully. That would be too much work for him. This means that if a woman starts straying from being submissive, it would be that much harder for a man to bring her back into the fold, if she is not religious, does not hold marriage sacred and scoffs at tradition.
So are religion, marriage and tradition necessary for a woman to be slave? No, but they sure make it easier on the women themselves, the men they marry and society in general. I feel slavery and submission within the context of a religious marriage is more sustainable and longer lasting than slavery and submission outside it, because they feed submissive behavior and nourish and sustain it.