RE: The Term 'Owned'

RE: The Term 'Owned' (Full Version)

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

Message

NuevaVida -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/23/2009 7:13:06 PM)
~ Fast Reply ~ I belong to him. It's that simple - I am a human who belongs to him. He has authority over me. He makes my rules. He decides what I do. While a degree of objectification may apply in our relationship, I am a human, and he takes that into account. But I am his human possession. He possesses me, and he possesses my heart. Therefore, he owns me. It's not about sexy terminology for me. It's about "what is" for us. And I agree with Leadership - "what is" can transcend beyond what the law determines is appropriate or legal.

slaveluci -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/23/2009 7:28:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NuevaVida "what is" can transcend beyond what the law determines is appropriate or legal. And hallelujah for that![:)] luci

eyesopened -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/24/2009 5:34:49 AM)
Even when speaking of objects, what is ownership? If I don't "own" my dog, for example but I take it to a dog-restricted beach, I'm the one who pays the fine, not the dog. If I buy a house but fail to pay the property taxes, the house it taken away from me. If I buy a car and fail to pay for registration and tags, I am prevented from using the car, and if I insist on using it, it will be taken from me. So what then is ownership in modern society? My guess is that ownership is having direct control over something. In the above examples I am expected to have direct control over the dog, the home, the car. In that regard, my Master truely owns me.

IronBear -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/24/2009 10:54:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: eyesopened Even when speaking of objects, what is ownership? If I don't "own" my dog, for example but I take it to a dog-restricted beach, I'm the one who pays the fine, not the dog. If I buy a house but fail to pay the property taxes, the house it taken away from me. If I buy a car and fail to pay for registration and tags, I am prevented from using the car, and if I insist on using it, it will be taken from me. So what then is ownership in modern society? My guess is that ownership is having direct control over something. In the above examples I am expected to have direct control over the dog, the home, the car. In that regard, my Master truely owns me. I have to agree with this. It is said in some societies, lifestyles and historically that the boundary of a man's property id limited only by his sword. Meaning of course the limits or boundary is only as good as you can reasonably defend. here in the West we as individuals tend not to use armes to define our boundaries of property but use the laws of the land to do so and may even employ an army of ledal warriors to fight our battles for us When however, it comes to personal property, we are only, generally speaking, limited by our ability to hold or control our property. At times we may sell or swap an animal which is not behaving as we require or sell/trade a motor vehicle if it is no longer doing what we either want or need. To some degree this applies with slaves but the reality is that we own the slave as long as firstly she wants to be owned by us or secondly as long as he/she is fulfilling her end of the deal. If the dynamic isn't working then something has to change. It may need rethinking, the slave may need retraining or he/she may need to be released and another collard (when a suitable one is found)

Scotty306134 -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/24/2009 1:10:44 PM)
I say I am 'owned' by Ms Debby. That means She has the final word in decisions and activites that affect me. She values my opinion and takes it into account, but She has the final say. Scotty

Andalusite -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/24/2009 6:12:17 PM)
For a long time, I had a negative association with both the term "ownership" and the practice of it. With my Master, there is a definite control, possessiveness, and a slight bit of objectification (not in a negative way, though) that I feel comfortable calling "ownership." I feel driven to ask him for permission to do things that even as a submissive, I pretty much took for granted. I am accountable to him in ways that I haven't been before.

DavanKael -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/24/2009 9:20:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero (referring back to the OP) I do agree that it makes sense to parallel the use of the term with a certain degree of objectification, yet I don't think objectification necessarily must imply emotional impartiality (how many people have nicknames for their cars?). Also, I think the certain abrasiveness of the term is useful to exemplify a very heavy power exchange dynamic in terms of how much control is surrendered to the dominant party. My pedantic brain, however, does kind of side with the itchiness you seem to be mentioning (even though I think it was I who mentioned the word during a conversation)...yet the clinical objectification that the word can imply doesn't seem to be my initial reaction so much as how it expresses how complete the power exchange is and how thorough my control either is or will be based on the goals set. Hi, NZ < hugs >! :> Must make plans soon! No, wasn't you that squicked me with the term or I'd have gone on with our conversation and made a mental note to query the point with you later and would have welcomed dialogue on the point. Quite simply, the thoughts of the person who was doing the speaking when the term was mentioned didn't interest me enough to revisit it with them as, based on the rest of the conversation, that person's answer would have been rather 'canned'. While I don't inherently cringe at the thought of a heavy power dynamic in a loving, trusting relationship, the interjection of ownership casts a negative shadow for me. I don't see an inherent issue with being loved and valued in a depthful way in a TPE or heavy power exchange relationship while I do question such a thing when a person is objectified: by virtue of objectification, do we glean depth or only surface? And, now this has me going in a different direction: when I draw, I objectify, though sometimes through that, I pull out aspects of humanity not noted previously. Hmmmmm. Davan

DavanKael -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/24/2009 9:28:25 PM)
Leadership527 said: Yes, but let's remember, Davan is not currently in a position to be bonded/owned/whatever you want to call it. Therefor, any urge towards such things would have to be totally internally driven in order for it to exist right now. She and I have spoken a fair amount offline and I would venture to guess that her feelings about being "owned" would change in the presence of the right partner. It is often my speculation that contemplating the more dramatic parts of power exchange is creepier in theory than in fact. Afterall, in theory, one must needs theorize about all the generic possibilities.... what if some master makes me do x? Carol only needs to ponder what I would do. My reply: You know me well and while I might snuggle up around the idea given the right person(s), I have to admit, this one's harder for me to grok than your getting me to 'see the light' on the fact that, in the right circumstances TPE would be just dandy. :> Your thoughts on my reply to NZ would be much appreciated when you have the opportunity. And, yes, you're absolutely right: vagaries do squick me more than do actualities and things that are tangible. < hugs > to you and Carol. :> Davan

DavanKael -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/24/2009 9:29:40 PM)
Thank you to everyone for the replies thus far! :> There are others that have stood out to me that I intend to contemplate further. I am enjoying and appreciating reading your thoughts! :> Davan (Who really is going to call it a night soon as 4 hours of sleep last night just didn't cut it)

ranja -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/25/2009 1:09:10 AM)
we're married; legally i own Him as much as he owns me... if either of us wants out it's gonna cost... mentally i am way more at ease with the idea of being owned while He much prefers to think of Himself as the owner... it is just a game and this is how we like to play it

NormalOutside -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/25/2009 1:50:46 AM)
It's just another word, and has as many meaning as there are people who say it. Same with words like "use". My girls ask me to "use" them. Many would see that as a degrading and abusive act, but we don't. They consider themselves owned by me though neither really identify with the "slave" label.

Acer49 -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/25/2009 6:54:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DavanKael No big dilemma, just introducing the following as a point of conversation. :> During a conversation the other day, the person to whom I was speaking referenced something about when they own a person. The statement was innocuous, just a person using their preferred terminology. I mentally squicked at the utilization, though didn't note it aloud (It wasn't relevant to the discussion and I wished to ruminate on it further). When I had occasion to indulge said thought process, I went to the idea that I don't even say that I own my pets; I consider myself their keeper or even in a parental role toward them; theirs are lives over which I have accepted stewardship. When I think of a person who is Mine, I don't ever go to the idea of ownership, rather responsibility for them/to them (Regardless of the side of the kneel) and certainly a possessiveness without the idea that they are a possession. To me, owned seems to connote to objectification which, in general, isn't something that 'does it' for me and I think that's a big chunk of why I don't like it, along with the fundamental idea (From my years of animal welfare involvemet) of the belief that no living thing can be a possession/owned. My thoughts on the matter are not meant to demean those who use, dig, or otherwise feel warm and fuzzy about the term: in fact, I'm starting the thread to open a dialogue about peoples' perceptions of the term. :> Happy Saturday, folks! :> Davan The term owned can imply differerent things to different people, to some it is something very deep to others is may just be something that sounds cool to be able to say rather than say the one is simply in a relationship with another

whikfu4321 -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/25/2009 7:52:51 AM)
Everything is relative.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/25/2009 8:15:23 AM)
I guess I sort of prefer the term "kept" when it comes to conscious beings. I mean, you can keep a dog chained up or a cat caged, or keep a person tied to you by external circumstance (taking away their outside contact, money, clothing, etc.), but the thing is, unless their desire is to be with you, whether you hold the body or not, they're already gone. I guess that I don't want to label my own relationships in such a way that does not accurately represent what is possible in those relationships, and I don't think one can "own" any animate, conscious thing, including human beings. We can keep them, tend them, lead them... but in my mind, even if we -pay- for them, we -can't- truly "own" them. Dame Calla

Andalusite -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/25/2009 8:29:00 AM)
For me, objectification isn't humiliating, or being treated badly. Being a model for photography or a canvas for body art can feel very objectifying, in a yummy way. [:D] Anyway, it's obvious that the term "ownership" from this specific person doesn't push your buttons in a way you like. You might find that someone else saying the same thing does resonate with you, and I suspect that even if this guy hadn't used the term, you probably wouldn't be compatible with him. I think it's another "focus on how you feel, not what label you use" thread.

Eivarden -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/25/2009 9:12:14 AM)
To DavanKael, When I say the word owned, I as well don't think of it to that extreme. Not that it doesn't make sense what you are saying, but then again, I fantasize about being (In the way you describe owned.) owned. Though, when it comes to fantasizing about being an object, it's just a short fleeting interest, as I would rather being in a relationship, with actual feeling and stuff etc. But because of that occasional fantasy, I don't think so negatively of the idea of being used as an object.

DavanKael -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/25/2009 9:18:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW I guess I sort of prefer the term "kept" when it comes to conscious beings. I mean, you can keep a dog chained up or a cat caged, or keep a person tied to you by external circumstance (taking away their outside contact, money, clothing, etc.), but the thing is, unless their desire is to be with you, whether you hold the body or not, they're already gone. I guess that I don't want to label my own relationships in such a way that does not accurately represent what is possible in those relationships, and I don't think one can "own" any animate, conscious thing, including human beings. We can keep them, tend them, lead them... but in my mind, even if we -pay- for them, we -can't- truly "own" them. Dame Calla I share your affinity for the term 'kept' Dame Calla. And, it's very clear to me what is Mine or to what/whom I belong. :> Your thought-processes as expressed seem very familiar to me. Davan

gracesky -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/25/2009 11:04:48 AM)
i think it all depends on the perspective of the person using it. Personally, i have no problem with the term being owned...and i do get that warm fuzzy; however, i can see how it can be view as a complete objectification, which i'm not sure i like so much

NearlyAcquiesced -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/25/2009 1:56:28 PM)
I get the warm fuzzies, too, but I know it's not all gonna be fun and rainbows. There's going to be plenty of thorns, inside and out. I'm ok with this.

Falkenstein -> RE: The Term 'Owned' (8/26/2009 2:39:53 AM)
Goethe once said that "you can only own what you understand". I suppose it rules out for me the possession of cats, women and other high tech gadgets [:D] I think Calla and Davan have found a beautiful expression with "kept". It has a caring component as in "keeping healthy". It is dynamic while ownership is static. When you keep something you are doing, acting, using your will to apply a force. If you stop actively keeping, whatever you kept is gone. Is this not the essence of a M/s relation? Of course, anybody who read a line from my hand knows that I am not a native speaker of English, nor do I have any formal education on it. But I nevertheless find that Calla and Davan have struck gold. Kinky Kudos to the ladies Henry

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875