the point is loving and serving, and owning and mastering, not hurting . . .

one supposes remarkable fulfillments may occur in such an arrangement . . . 

I've got good news and I've got bad news for you, my dear reader.  The bad news is that it seems that I have the blues, I'm feeling them hard, teetering on the brink of a very real and serious depression.  That's the bad news anyway, it's not the end of the world, but I'm not very productive in terms of writing when I feel this way.

The good news is that one way I deal with depression is to immerse myself in studies and reading, so it's not like I'm sitting immobilized and staring at the walls.  By giving my mind something to ponder and work upon, by feeding my head, I'll eventually snap out of my funk, at least that's normally the prescription to resolve my own bouts of depression.

Here is one of the fruits from my reading, an excerpt of an interview with John Norman, creator of Gor.  I'm not sure that Norman understands real world BDSM as it's practiced today, as what he describes as Master/Slave sex is essentially the same as my outlook on BDSM itself.  I guess it's really a matter of semantics . . . 

"I know nothing about "real-life Gorean slavery among some people in the BDSM community." The "BDSM" reference worries me. I dissociate myself from BDSM, at least as I understand it. I may, of course, misunderstand it. I wonder if one would settle merely for "real-life Gorean slavery," because, as I understand it, BDSM is not Gorean. If something is not beautiful, it is not Gorean. In any event, I am assuming that what is involved here, in any case, is consensual. If a woman chooses to submit herself, voluntarily, to a master, it seems to me that is her business, and his business. She would then, of course, be a slave, and would be treated as a slave. One supposes remarkable fulfillments may occur in such an arrangement. It is, of course, important to treat the slave, however uncompromisingly strict you are with her, however much she might fear you, in a humane way, as one would any other animal. Some men, I gather, dislike women, and enjoy hurting them. That makes no sense to me. Women are wonderful, and precious. It is a delight to own one; why would one hurt her? What would be the point of that, mere sadistic pleasure? I think we might distinguish between, say, S/M sex, or sadomasochistic sex, and M/S sex, or Master/Slave Sex. In a sense they seem opposite. Love is important. It is not to be confused with cruelty. Gratuitous cruelty seems to me uncalled for, and ugly, morally and aesthetically. Too, it seems unworthy of a true master. The point is loving and serving, and owning and mastering, not hurting. To be sure, the slave must understand that if she is not pleasing, she is subject to discipline. She is not to be left in doubt that she is a slave. It is easy to avoid discipline; she need only be obedient, submissive, and found pleasing, wholly, and in all ways. Sometimes a slave may desire to be reassured of her bondage. There are many ways in which the master, if he wishes, may see to this. I have written an entire book, the Imaginative Sex book, in which my views on such matters should be reasonably clear."
    ~~ John Norman - io9 profile