quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth

quote:

ORIGINAL: Goddess2002

If you view your sub or slave as property....how do you define it? Meaning, is that individual merely an object in your eyes, do you view them as one would a pet, or do you actually have an emotional connection that could be described as loving, caring, etc?

I define "property" as anything I have a sovereign, recognized right to do with as I wish. If something is my "property", then no one but myself has any say-so in what I do with it, so long as I don't impinge on anyone else's property.

That being said, it is legally impossible for someone to be "property", since the moment they revoke their consent, my "right" to them goes poof, and there's nothing I can do about it. In first-world countries, possessing another person as "property" is a game of mutual make-believe, unless you are extremely powerful or are already somewhat "off-radar".

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drakontos

The only things that zaphira was promised when she begged Master's collar was food in her belly, a roof over her head, and medical/health insurance. Nothing more; everything and anythng else, zaphira had to earn through her service to Master.

No promises ever have been made; not in the beginning, and not since being collared; that included emotional entanglements of any kind. zaphira does not need, or want, Master's love. All this slave needs and wants is his continued ownership.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AislynLass

I know the dynamic for everyone's relationship is different and indvidual to them. I just felt a twinge of concern at your signing over and selling your property, stocks, car, etc. in such an irrevocable manner. I admire your ability to trust in him to such an extent that he will always see to your needs being met. Unfortunately, I had an experience where my trust was betrayed by a man who believed I could trust, deciding to break that trust and not respect something that had been agreed to prior as a hard limit. Needless to say, this ended our relationship. As I read your post, I admit I shuddered a little at the thought of what-if had I done as you have done in terms of turning over my financial means to him. I definitely wish you the best and sincerely hope that you never find your trust to have been misplaced.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drakontos

The only things that zaphira was promised when she begged Master's collar was food in her belly, a roof over her head, and medical/health insurance. Nothing more; everything and anythng else, zaphira had to earn through her service to Master.

No promises ever have been made; not in the beginning, and not since being collared; that included emotional entanglements of any kind. zaphira does not need, or want, Master's love. All this slave needs and wants is his continued ownership.



Greetings zaphira,

I'm not trying to attack you, but you are confusing me a little here and I'm just trying to understand.
Did or didn't he make promises to you?

Seeing that you said that he promised to provide you with food, shelter and medical care, I'm assuming that he did do that and that later on you meant that he made you not other promises besides those.

quote:

I think we are both kept in a very similar type of slavery, so I'm kinda surprised that your Master even made these promises to you to begin with. Is there even a need for him to make them? I'm assuming those are things he would have taken care of on his own, without the need to tie his word to it, or would he sometimes use them as a punishment (say withhold you food or shelter for a while to teach you a lesson) if he had not made those promises?
Was it a matter of you feeling save why he made them, or did he do it from his own inclination?

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

A lot of the time nowadays, I view Carol primarily as my slave (as opposed to my wife who happens to obey me). A slave, by definition, is a human that is owned. So yes, there is an ownership dynamic within our relationship. That has nothing whatsoever to do with objectification. What I own is a slave which is a sub category of human not object. The fact that she is my slave (and even more importantly, continues to seek to be moreso daily) doesn't cause me to stop loving her. That's kind of an incredible thought in my mind. To me it goes the other way around and I love her more.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drakontos

I understand your thoughts here; however, unless I am very mistaken, you are speaking these words form an emotional pov?
Emotions, such as those that would normally cause a person to pick a partner, have no place and no say in how our relationship is worked out; they also had no say in how we worked out her contract for service. If it had been a 'love' match, chances are that yes, some of those things discussed would never have come up. However, at the time, it was thought important to make sure that any concerns, questions, doubts, expectations, assumptions, desires, wants,needs, etc were firmly and totally discussed and agreed upon.

It is better to be safe, and have everything in the clear; then to find out later that something important had NOT been discussed. Do you not agree?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drakontos

Hmm, perhaps zaphira can better explain her role as property, and why she thinks of herself in this way.

Master views ownership of property in a very extreme way; it's as close to real slavery as you can get, and still remain legal. ( Please, zaphira is not interested in hearing all the debates about 'legalities'; this is Master's way of doing things, and it is a way that zaphira finds most comfortable. )

Master spent over a year talking with zaphira about what he wanted, needed, expected, demanded, and yes, deserved, when it came to property that he owned. In this year, zaphira was told exactly what she would have to give up, to become his property. This slave gave up her career, sold her car, and transferred the title to her house and the ownership of stocks over to Master on the exact day that she begged for his collar. These were things that Master had demanded be done if zaphira was serious about becoming his. Any and all money that zaphira had was given to Master. This slave literally went to him with nothing. When she got to Master's home in Colorado, Master burned all zaphira's clothing. zaphira was left with nothing; in the literal sense.

The only things that zaphira was promised when she begged Master's collar was food in her belly, a roof over her head, and medical/health insurance. Nothing more; everything and anythng else, zaphira had to earn through her service to Master.

No promises ever have been made; not in the beginning, and not since being collared; that included emotional entanglements of any kind. zaphira does not need, or want, Master's love. All this slave needs and wants is his continued ownership.

zaphira is not treated as a pet, she is not treated as special, she is not treated as a princess, she is not treated as a significant other, she is not treated as a girl friend. zaphira is property. This slave is treated as a possession of Master's; something he owns, and takes care to 'keep in good running order'. We do not celebrate zaphira's birthday, Master does not see Valentine's day as a day for zaphira to be pampered; and he does not introduce his property to others as anything other than what zaphira is. zaphira has only one right in this relationship; that is the right to make the decision to stay or leave. This slave gave up all other's when she begged this collar.

This slave is property; she is owned by another; and it was done and is maintained without any emotional baggage/feelings/expectations. zaphira stays because being property gives her the feelings of security and safety that this slave enjoys.

zaphira rambled a bit; she is sorry about that.

quote:

Fascinating. It seems that having the right to make the decision to stay or leave hasn't negated the feeling of being property for you. Do you know how that works? It seems like a contradiction.

quote:

ORIGINAL: justme1980

Value is linked directly to the emotion, the greater the emotion, the greater the value

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: justme1980

Value is linked directly to the emotion, the greater the emotion, the greater the value

Not necessarily.  There are many art collectors who know the value of a certain piece of sculpture or of a certain painting but have no emotional tie to that work...they've just done their work and have determined that it is worth an amount which seems to only stabilize or go up and so the piece of artwork becomes a very valuable investment.  The only emotion they would experience upon its loss through damage or theft would be anger or sadness over the loss of profit.
Some people view other people in the same manner.  Their value is only in what they give to the "owner" in terms of service, aesthetics, whatever...NOT in the emotional interplay they bring to the table.