RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel"

RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

FlamingRedhead -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 12:07:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark quote: ORIGINAL: softness quote: ORIGINAL: missturbation quote: He has no intention of amusing himself for a while and then trading me in for a newer model. Being chattel does not necessarily equate to being traded in for a newer model. It is just a different mind set. I want to echo this. I have been chattel in several relationships, and my place in the relationship was never at risk from being replaced by a newer model. This must be an awfully big room for such an echo...[:)] Chattel does not mean replacable. the.dark. I never said it did. I believe it was the OP who said.... quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin I have seen many who view themselves as property here describe it in a way that places them on the same level as their Master's car....or favorite chair. As though they are little more than an object or thing. A thing that can easily be replaced or rejected. However, if you're going to enter a relationship with the same status as cattle, surely you must recognize that your "owner" can do with you as he wishes, so as Beyonce says, "Don't you ever for a second get to thinkin' you're irreplaceable." chattel c.1225, chatel "property, goods," from O.Fr. chatel (see cattle, which is the Norman-Picard form of the same word). Application to slaves (1649) is a rhetorical figure of abolitionists, etc.

softness -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 12:14:48 PM)
We were in fact replying to your supposition that people in relationships with the status of chattel were mere amusements that would inevitably be traded in for younger models. The OP indicated it as a possibility, which we would all agree with, your statement seemed to posit it was not just a possibility, but a logical conclusion. If that was not what you intended to say then I feel I can speak for all of us and apologise. It was however very difficult to read something else into the phrase.

mistoferin -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 12:16:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FlamingRedhead I believe it was the OP who said.... quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin I have seen many who view themselves as property here describe it in a way that places them on the same level as their Master's car....or favorite chair. As though they are little more than an object or thing. A thing that can easily be replaced or rejected. Just to clarify, I didn't mean to imply that is how I feel. I am referring to how some people have represented their dynamics here...and yes, some of them feel as though they have no more value than any other "thing" that their Master owns. It's a completely foreign concept to me.

Wildfleurs -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 12:18:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin I know that my views on this are different than many here but I thought that I would present my perspective on it and find out if others feel that one can be property...and not be chattel. Sure, people can call themselves the High Priestess of McDonalds, I mean people can be whatever they want to be. Linguistically and literally however, chattel is literally someone's personal property. quote: I am not Master's slave. I am his submissive. I have been a slave to my ex Master but in my way of thinking slavery is not something one just "is"...it's a condition that one becomes over time within the confines of their relationship. I am sure that there will be a point in my current relationship where I will certainly be Master's slave...but we are not there yet as we've only been together now for about a year. I am however, "owned" by Master. I am his "property". Now again, I know this is in contradiction to the beliefs of many. Maybe I view it a bit differently because I have spent most of my life as the "Property of" in the motorcycle world. There are many cross-overs between the biker lifestyle and this one. "Property" is common in both, but I have noticed one very significant distinction. Here it would seem that many believe that "property" is identical to "chattel". Like there is an emotional disconnect between owner and property here. I have seen many who view themselves as property here describe it in a way that places them on the same level as their Master's car...or favorite chair. As though they are little more than an object or thing. A thing that can easily be replaced or rejected. Now I understand that for some people, being viewed that way is the kink in and of itself. That's cool. I personally do not view myself in the same light, even though I do believe myself to be his property. I am not an object that could easily be replaced. "Property" in our world is a position of great honor. It means that I MEAN more to him than anything else in this world. It means that I am NOT disposable or replacable in his eyes. "Property" in our world is a testament to commitment. I understand your perspective, but I would have to say linguistically its a little confusing. Property inherently doesn't mean anything related to value - so to me it is equally confusing when people say that inherently being property means they have NO value, just as its confusing when you say that inherently it means that you have great value. Similarly, chattel quite literally means someone's personal property (as opposed to real estate property), so while you may not want to recognize the linguistic connection between the two words... it is pretty much identical. And again similarly for the definition slave, chattel is used as a descriptor and "a slave" is one of the definitions of the term chattel. I think people can and should literally have the freedom to use whatever terms they want to - however, I think its important to perhaps see where it can be a little confusing if you are talking to someone who is a bit more literal when you say you aren't his slave but you are his property but you aren't his chattel and by being his property it means that you have a commitment, but you aren't an object. To me it sounds like a lot of word twisting and weird and confusing definitions.... but I'm only saying all of this because you put it out for everyone to respond and also because I'm procrastinating from work! Ultimately, none of what I said really matters so long as you are happy in your relationship, which it sounds like you are. C~ Edited to add: After reading the thread, I also wanted to add that I do think that being loved, not being sold, and being owned are completely compatible and certainly are the way things are in my relationship. I think for my owner, loving what you own makes complete sense - I mean he loved his childhood dog (and still talks about her from time to time). And while he technically could sell me, I can't see (nor do I think he can after all these years), why you'd sell something you love and have customized and changed to fit you completely and that is really just a beneficial (on a practical and emotional level) piece of human property. Its like that Chris Rock joke, "Shit, you could drive a car with your feet if you want to. That don't make it a good fucking idea."

FlamingRedhead -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 12:28:46 PM)
Then you were assuming that I was speaking about someone other than myself and my Daddy when those were the only 2 people mentioned.

FlamingRedhead -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 12:34:03 PM)
I'm perfectly capable of comprehending English, but it appears that others are not quite getting it. You pointed out something, and I described my dynamic. The end.

FlamingRedhead -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 1:10:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist I am going focus my answer on what you said here quote: I have seen many who view themselves as property here describe it in a way that places them on the same level as their Master's car...or favorite chair. As though they are little more than an object or thing. A thing that can easily be replaced or rejected. This, I can relate to on a certain level. Though my late husband and I were together for many years, there was never any doubt in my mind that had he wanted to replace me; he would have in a heart beat without a second thought. This was something that I accepted as part of our relationship. There were several times that I crossed that invisble line only to have him pack my clothes, place them outside, and tell me 'there's the door'. Now some may see this as uncaring; but I see it differently. I know he cared for me; he would not have kept me around otherwise. He was not the overly romantic kind who needed to prove his love to me; it just was; I accepted that. This did not change the facts though...I was property to him; something that had he decided to replace, he would and could have. If that makes us seem hard and uncaring to the rest of the world; that's ok, I can live with that. [8D] He was a cold, hard and at times unfeeling man; for me though, it was that coldness that broke my barriers down. It had nothing to do with 'this is my kink' and everything to do with the two of us making up a whole; despite the fact that he could have made a whole with anyone else [:D] Daddy has also made it quite clear that he has no qualms about showing someone the door if they are no longer pleasing. For instance, there was a girl he moved in who took one of his credit cards and charged $2800 in the first month on clothing, shoes, and beauty treatments. She was working, but he was paying all the bills. When he questioned her about it, she said, "But, Daddy, I'm worth it." He rather bluntly informed her that he could go to Las Vegas and spend $500 a week on a prostitute, yet still come out cheaper....so....needless to say her stay was a short one.

MadRabbit -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 1:26:45 PM)
I tend to view my partner as my partner lol, but there is a multitude of facets regarding how I treat them with treating them as an object solely for my use and pleasure being one of them. It has it's time and it's place. I find it hard to beleive that an intimate relationship could be fulfilling off that facet or really any facet alone. Always dominant, but sometimes friend, lover, companion, servant and caretaker (like the time one person I was with got sick with the flu), and my personal favorite, sole receiver of service and pleasure [:D].

mistoferin -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 1:27:54 PM)
When I think of chattel I think of something that I have no real sustaining emotional attachment to. Something temporary that is tangible in that I can accurately or approximately assess the value of for the purpose of transferring ownership of. I think the sentiment of what I was trying to get across was clear to most. I guess I should have realized that folks here seem to really enjoy picking apart the semantics, which is ok too. I was asking if others feel they can still be the owned property of someone when there is deep emotion, even love. When they are cherished and cared for. Or do people only see it as softness so eloquently put it.....as fuckmeat (or housekeeper, or beating post, or womb, or insert your own whatever here) that doesn't need any consideration beyond the purpose of it's usage. Can people see being property while at the same time being the loved and cherished life partner of another?

Twicehappy2x -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 1:38:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin I know that my views on this are different than many Maybe I view it a bit differently because I have spent most of my life as the "Property of" in the motorcycle world. even though I do believe myself to be his property. I am not an object that could easily be replaced. "Property" in our world is a position of great honor. It means that I MEAN more to him than anything else in this world. It means that I am NOT disposable or replacable in his eyes. "Property" in our world is a testament to commitment. Awwwww....big grins on my face and tears in my eyes. Marriage, yes it is a sacred commitment. Collaring, at least to me a more personal and sacred one than that. (Before i get slammed let me say i've been collared 3 times and 2 of them died , i am in my third but i've never been married) But "Property of", that in my mind is the ultimate in honor, both being offered it and bearing it. I bore the same Property of on my body for 26 years. It speaks of the one who always has your back, the one you would die smiling for. You know, perhaps someday, if i are a really really good girl, Scooter will offer me his as well.

Wildfleurs -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 2:17:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin When I think of chattel I think of something that I have no real sustaining emotional attachment to. Something temporary that is tangible in that I can accurately or approximately assess the value of for the purpose of transferring ownership of. I think the sentiment of what I was trying to get across was clear to most. I guess I should have realized that folks here seem to really enjoy picking apart the semantics, which is ok too. I don't think its semantics, you presented what you feel about chattel, property, and the term slave and how it applies in your life - and I was simply offering a different perspective on the idea of what chattel, property and slave are and in particular why the terms are on a very literal level... intertwined. Of course, I'm assuming that you are talking about my post, since it says at the bottom "in reply to Wildfleurs." It could be that you are calling the skirmish about daddy dominants and such a semantical thing. I honestly am not to sure one way or the other. quote: I was asking if others feel they can still be the owned property of someone when there is deep emotion, even love. When they are cherished and cared for. Or do people only see it as softness so eloquently put it.....as fuckmeat (or housekeeper, or beating post, or womb, or insert your own whatever here) that doesn't need any consideration beyond the purpose of it's usage. Can people see being property while at the same time being the loved and cherished life partner of another? Again, I'm assuming this is in response to my post and you possibly didn't see the additional comments I added on, but on a basic level I can absolutely see being someone's property and loved. There are things I own that I love (like my cat.. inasmuch as you can own a cat, my violin, and my flat screen tv) and similarly as I mentioned before my owner loves his truck (although he loved his old truck even more), loved his pets he owned, etc. So I don't see a real conflict in loving what you own although I think its a different type of love than say the love of a vanilla spouse or girlfriend. My owner loves me deeply, as do I, and at this point I can't imagine it being any different. Either way I can't see being owned by someone who didn't love me, although I'm not quite into the concept of life partners or promises of forever, since generally people have multiple long term relationships in life. I think while sometimes I'm a sucky slave or just barely a decent slave... I'm one that is worth loving and that I would be at this point in my life, severely shortchanging myself if I allowed myself to be owned by someone who at the least didn't have the capacity to eventually love me. C~

CreativeDominant -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 2:43:50 PM)
When I first came into D/s, I saw it as a more twisted version of the so-called "traditional" relationship (twisted because of the BDSM aspect and some of the protocols/rituals/perspectives...similar but different). I was in it to have a romantic partner as well as a submissive. That is what my long-term relationships with two of my submissives were and while the first one did not have the romantic component since she was married and we both knew the relationship was not going to be "forever", there was love and a partnership involved. I've had casual relationships in which the dynamic of being treated as an object with me as the caretaker/user/owner of that object was the focus. While intense, these were short-lived, mainly because I've always sought more than a one-faceted dynamic to be involved in. Even with my patients, I do not want to be the sole "wellness-maker"...it is a partnership between me and them and I have dismissed patients for expecting me to do it all. I can't...nor do I want to. I would enter into any future D/s dynamic with my view intact that I am more than "just" a dominant leader; I have my Sir side, I have my Master side, I have my "Daddy" side, I have my safety-providing and protective side, I have my nurturing side, I have my property-owner side, I have my strict taskmaster side, I have my partner/lover side, I have my sadistic side, I have my human-that-isn't perfect side...I have ME. And that "me" is all those things and a great deal more. If you want just one aspect, look elsewhere.

NeedingMore220 -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 6:06:19 PM)
[sm=agree.gif] I am a lot of things to my Dom .. woman and friend first, submissive, lover, property, whore ... etc. I'm many people, just as CD points out above all the sides to him that he will share in a relationship. Somehow there is a seamless transfer between our sides within our relationship - with one look from him I'm his slut... when we're cuddling I feel safety and warmth from him... when we're talking I feel friendship. I believe all can exist within one relationship - both sides have to be open to it, though. There was a post I read on here somewhere today where someone said that she entered a relationships believing that she was a slave, and she was going to be a slave, dammit, and it made her somewhat self-destruct her relationships - until she met the man she could be everything with, and was able to release the idea of being 'slave'.

camille65 -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 6:14:41 PM)
He calls me his pet and says that he owns me. I'm not a slave. I am definitely submissive. I know that he loves me and that I belong to him. [:)]

daddysprop247 -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 7:02:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: camille65 He calls me his pet and says that he owns me. I'm not a slave. I am definitely submissive. I know that he loves me and that I belong to him. [:)] camille...hi [:)] just curious...you say that he owns you and that you belong to him. why do you not consider yourself a slave?

scarlethiney -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 8:15:24 PM)
The relationship/marriage I am in is the first for me in being submissive. I will apologize if my lack of knowledge or my take on this offends anyone. I have always "viewed" myself as submissive. Growing up southern it was expected and has always seemed natural. In all honesty I would be/have been offended to be thought of as property that is until reading your posts here. I suppose the only view I had of being someone's property was a negative view. I do feel I belong to my Master which I realize sounds no different than being owned, being property, or chattel for that matter. So is it a matter of semantics? Life experience? I wonder why reading these post and hearing some of you say you are property, chattel or a slave makes me cringe internally. It's almost as if I feel the need to "stand" up for myself. Have any of you ever felt this back and forth attitude or did you in the beginning? I would not offend anyone here for the world and I sincerely mean that.. I know I sound like a huge contradiction. Perhaps I don't really understand true submission. I so appreciate all your opinions and how generous all of you are in sharing them. I so appreciate all your thoughts and your sharing them so openly.

beargonewild -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 8:39:47 PM)
~FR~ I will point out that I equate "property" and "chattel" to have similar yet with subtle differences. Though overall I consider chattel as something which is desired and cherished yet it is an inanimate item, whereas the concept of property in a D/s relationship is more suited to the sub/slave/toy/etc. I find that within my own personal relationship, I have mutated the concept of being another's property as another more intimate term of endearment which my Sir would view me as. Since I found what works for me is to create a balance of equality and of submission with my partner. Thus the D/s factor will not constitute the bulk of my relationship but will co-exist with my partner who is also my equal. So yes, I do see myself as being Sir's "property." I am Sir's tramp, his lover, his submissive, his boy,his pet; then technically I can be defined property since I am his. The only difference I see by not using the term "chattel" is because I see chattel as inanimate and I am far from being inanimate. The most important thing I try to keep in the forefront is we define our self according to how we internally view our place in life. Each person's life is unique and how they view themselves is valid irregardless on how others may see differently. It just boils down to some say tomato and some say tomahto. Neither is wrong and both are right.

mistoferin -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/28/2008 9:08:44 PM)
scarlethiney, I've been active on CollarMe for a good number of years now and active in the lifestyle for a whole lot more. In that time I have seen many discussions on the topic of being property, I've seen fiercely fought debates and seen subs/slaves who have intimately detailed their dynamics in property relationships. If I were brand new some of those things would have sent me running for the hills and I too would have a very negative view. Some of the portrayals have shown relationships that are cold and uncaring. Dark and filled with misery and pain. Emotional turmoil. Relationships where the "s" type has expressed that they have felt like they are undeserving of love or care, that they don't need love, that their status as property has left them with no choice. Their words express that they view themselves as little more than an object to be used and broken at their owner's discretion. I suspect many of them come into these relationships broken. Some of them do not seem to possess the strength or skill to even imagine anything else....and some of them just seem to have lost their drive or hope. I can't begin to understand why such a relationship would be appealing to anyone. There are those that say that is what they sought out, it's what they want and need. As I said before, it's a foreign concept to me. Hearing their stories and reading their words hurts my soul. I am not attempting to tell anyone what they can or can't do. What I would like to do is say that there is another way. There is a way that comes from a place of joy. A way that fills the heart and soul to the brim. A way that feels secure and never leaves you wondering if the bottom is going to drop out, that you're not going to be good enough, that you're going to be abandoned, broken or cast aside. There is a way of being owned that feels like a warm blanket on a cold night....not like prison walls that suck at your spirit. No, not all of the stories have been so void of genuine emotional attachment. Actually, they are far, far fewer than the positive examples that I have also seen. Maybe it's just that they leave such a lasting impression...

sambamanslilgirl -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/29/2008 5:40:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: missturbation pu quote: ORIGINAL: sambamanslilgirl quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin I do believe myself to be his property. I am not an object that could easily be replaced. "Property" in our world is a position of great honor. It means that I MEAN more to him than anything else in this world. It means that I am NOT disposable or replacable in his eyes. "Property" in our world is a testament to commitment. that's how it is between Daddy and i. at first i had a hard time hearing Him say i'm His "property" because i didn't understand what He meant by "property" and viewed the word as a negative description of myself. however after discussing this more with Him, i was finally sold (excuse the pun) on the idea of being His "property" - meaning i'm His beloved and cherished daughter ...i will always come first in His life and He'll always be there for me. i'm Daddy's property for life. Just to clarify and help me understand a little better. If you are his daughter are you still his sub /slave? If not can you be property as a daughter? Especially considering you have said elsewhere you are not in a D/s relationship with your daddy. I'm going to piggyback on top of missturbation's question since you and I have argued a variation of this question before: if you are your "Daddy's property" while not being involved in a D/s relationship with him...and the ones you take on as lovers/pets/Dominants are aware of this...how exactly is this supposed to make them feel? I cannot speak for the lovers or the pets mindset but coming from my own mindset, I know that I would not walk into any situation wherein MY submissive considered herself to be another's property first and foremost...even before she considered herself mine. so let me ask this, if Daddy and i don't have a D/s relationship, then what do we have - in your mindset? simply because we have an LDR doesn't mean we don't have a relationship ...also to add simply because we don't have the typical, twue D/s relationship that involves spankings/physical sexual contact like many here doesn't mean we don't have a relationship. you're looking at Daddy as Lord and Master - in your mindset. i see Him as the Father and mentor i didn't have when growing up ...more like the surrogate, step-Dad. so i'm free to pursue other lovers/pets if i want ..and currently i have a pet in which we're making plans for the future. he understands i see Daddy as His title dictates - Daddy/Father/Friend/etc etc as well as Owner. how does this make my pet feel? he's happy that i have someone i could lean on like a Father. he's neither jealous nor slighted.

Prinsexx -> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" (8/29/2008 5:43:50 AM)
quote: It means that I MEAN more to him than anything else in this world. It means that I am NOT disposable or replacable in his eyes. "Property" in our world is a testament to commitment. Yes i have to agree wholeheartedly with this as a definition of property. Whereas my side of the contract is to agree to do whatsoever my Master wants whenever he wants me to, he has explained that His side of the contracty is to look after me, support me and take care of me for life. It may have taken me a very long time to get here but at last I am cherished.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875