>>11371721
I think it makes sense that someone who is known for being exceptionally cruel or sadistic would at the very least face social consequences. Most people recognize that slaves are defenseless, and torturing something helpless without good reason is considered pretty distasteful.

If we are being as realistic as possible most stable slavery systems in history actually had certain expectations for Masters to follow, right? I feel like it's sort of necessary for non-slave members of society to feel like slaves are handled with a certain level of justice. Reminds me of a slavery story I read where all the slaves are the property of a corporation who is supposed to enslave those who consent to sign themselves over (they also kidnap and brainwash people) and guarantees a certain level of safety from abuse (they don't give a shit about abuse if owners pay enough). But the public perception is that everything is pretty okay all things considered, so abolitionist movements never get a real foothold.