Property

Property (Full Version)

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

Message

Devilslilsister -> Property (1/23/2007 9:38:03 AM)
You know the word - Propery. There are alot of things i find important to think about and figure out and alot of things i dont. I seem to have never found it important to nail down a definition. But it seems like it might be important to realise what it means at this point. At least what it SHOULD mean. (Not what you want it to mean, but what it should). i have an idea... it means you are owned..... but then i sort of get lost there. Because i know i'm not a car, or a table, or a couch, or a bed or a door. So as retarded as this sounds......... what should the word property mean? (and i've read the dictionary) And i'm also talking about it in context of "you are property" i suppose that the common definition of "propery" in a vanilla sense does not concide with a D/s one for me.

lighthearted -> RE: Property (1/23/2007 9:48:28 AM)
that, in some fashion, your decisions are no longer your own? or, in a more basic way, that the thinking and reasoning part of yourself is no longer solely your own? I will confess my own inexperience at this point, I'm still sorting this out for myself. (when is a door not a door? when it's ajar...ok, but does that make it less submissive? [:D])

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Property (1/23/2007 9:52:49 AM)
Reposted: The main reason I use Owned/property is because it's gender non-specific. When I type "dom" I mean both male and female dominants, I have no idea why people feel the need to create and use and mis-pronounce the word "domme" but I understand that the fact that I use it for both can confuse some poor people so I just stick with non-genderized terms. And because I do essentially consider myself owned property, existing to be used and useful to the Owner. This is a slightly different perspective than being "a slave" or "a submissive" and I agree that both can be owned. http://www.collarchat.com/m_134860/mpage_1/key_property/tm.htm#136884 Owner/property http://www.collarchat.com/m_233800/mpage_1/key_property/tm.htm#233908 what is ownership?

Devilslilsister -> RE: Property (1/23/2007 10:06:40 AM)
Ah - so the property should mean "a Dominant can do as they please with said property"? thats about what i got from those two posts. I tried to make sense with what KOM posted, but he had too many definitions, its lunch time and i havent gotten lunch yet.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Property (1/23/2007 10:14:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Devilslilsister Ah - so the property should mean "a Dominant can do as they please with said property"? thats about what i got from those two posts. I tried to make sense with what KOM posted, but he had too many definitions, its lunch time and i havent gotten lunch yet. More that property carries with it a more prevalent connotation of objectification being a principle basis of the relationship.

littlesarbonn -> RE: Property (1/23/2007 12:03:55 PM)
For me, and this is just me, property constitutes a state of mind that indicates that final decisions are left to the one who has claimed me. In the real world, a submissive often has the ability and the permission to make a great deal of decisions for himself/herself. It is those critical decisions that a dominant refuses to relinquish choice to me that reveal to me the state of ownership and how I am property. We can make all sorts of determinations and claims of a Locke-ish property system, stating that once someone has physical or proximity control, that is property, but it usually constitutes a state of being and decision-making is what I consider the higher end of this. An example: I own a car. I bought the car, and I can drive it wherever I desire. If I am property, my dominant would be wasting energy to desire to "own" my car, but she would own me and then could decide that I must drive my car to a certain place at a certain time, or relinquish control of it through selling it or whatever process she deems appropriate, because I am Her property, as opposed to my car being Her property. It may sound like nitpicking, but I really don't think it is. If a woman owned me as property and decided she wanted to mark me permanently, that brings up the state of property between us again. It is not my flesh that is really of issue but her ability to push forth her desire to mark my flesh that would constitute the state of property. If I refuse, then the problem is that her control over me is not absolute, and there was a misconception of what and how her property was defined. Through a long, convoluted proof, I would point out that her marking someone's flesh only indicates a momentary ownership, even though it still bares her mark. However, her ability to mark, and her power over me to do so, would constitute a higher level of property ownership that does not limit itself to a physical mark but a higher state of being between two individuals.

thetammyjo -> RE: Property (1/23/2007 2:58:50 PM)
For me, the connotation of "property" seems to be a bit more positive and implies more responsibility than "slave" does for many people I talk to. However I can use the words interchangeably and I probably do. I'll try to write out something below in an attempt to explain how I view the words -- my meanings are not meant to be anyone's else's definitions. So Fox is my slave because his purpose is to make my life easier. (many will disagree with my definition but this is how I define my Ds dynamics) I base my understanding of slave on both my historical models and on the realities of the world I live in now. Fox is my property because he has great value to me and I must take care of him or I will lose him. Like a car or a piece of china or a leather coat, if I mess him up and do not take care of him, I may find myself without anything at all. Perhaps this means more to me because I grew up in a lower working-class home and I knew that if I didn't care for my property I just wouldn't have it period.

LadyHugs -> RE: Property (1/23/2007 3:18:18 PM)
Dear Devilslilsister, Ladies and Gentlemen; In the context of a Master/Mistress-slave relationship (M/s) and or a Dominant/submissive relationship (D/s); in my mind's eyes I see the use of "Property" in regard to a slave/submissive is a 'status.' Since slaves and submissives may be independent and unowned; when they are connected by a status of "owned" it is a status that they are no longer available. Property claimed or unclaimed is a more general "status" in my mind's eyes and yet, when in conversation to claim as property of another, it is a one word status, which describes the Owner of said property, all the rights and responsibilities as an Owner of Property. The authority and tangible aspects of Ownership of Property, is possession. That said, I must further say--that Ownership of Property does not mean that they are "Masters" of their property; in the context of BDSM, D/s and or M/s. Although many well maintained relationships do manifest ownership and mastery over their slave(s) and or submissive(s); there are some who lack the ability to 'master' over another yet, find themselves 'owners.' Just as there are those who may be gifted in mastery over others and own no slave/submissive. Just some thoughts. Respectfully submitted for consideration, Lady Hugs

MaryT -> RE: Property (1/23/2007 3:28:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Devilslilsister i suppose that the common definition of "propery" in a vanilla sense does not concide with a D/s one for me. Using the vanilla definition, ownership would be illegal. And you cannot legally do anything you want with any given property in the vanilla word either. For example, pets, currency and land.

sting516 -> RE: Property (1/26/2007 5:17:06 AM)
Why would we worry about the literal definition...for me, yes, if property, then you have no control over what your owner decides for you...it's slavery pure and simple...what the law states is not as important as the mindset between the people involved. quote: ORIGINAL: MaryT quote: ORIGINAL: Devilslilsister i suppose that the common definition of "propery" in a vanilla sense does not concide with a D/s one for me. Using the vanilla definition, ownership would be illegal. And you cannot legally do anything you want with any given property in the vanilla word either. For example, pets, currency and land.

asassylilslave -> RE: Property (1/26/2007 5:36:27 AM)
For myself, when the word property is used in conjunction with me, it simply means that I am a piece of property; no rights except those that are given to me by the owner, used as the owner wishes, loaned out as the owner wishes. I will point out though that only once have I been referred to in such a way and I am not sure that I could go back to such an 'uncontrolled' way of life.

AquaticSub -> RE: Property (1/26/2007 5:45:39 AM)
I regard myself as his and regard myself as owned by him. However, I don't tend regard myself as property in the class of tables, chairs or even cars. Yes you take care of them, but you take care of them when it's convienent for you most of the time (let's be honest - we've all waited too long to change our oil once or twice or ignored that clinky noise). I regard myself as property in the sense of a beloved painting, a priceless antique or even better - the throughbred mare or delightful kitten. Yes I am his, and fully his, but I have needs. I need to eat, need a comfortable place to sleep and I'd really like some time to play. He tends to my needs as happily as I tend to those of my cats. Sometimes they are a pain in the ass but the moments when they are purring in my lap make everything worthwhile and I hope I do the same for him. I guess what I'm trying to say is that is depends on what kind of property you are, but that for me... if I'm not valued and treasured, I'm not interested in being owned.

hot1 -> RE: Property (1/26/2007 5:54:44 AM)
Hi, This is something that not everyone is going to agree on....is like some people use submissive and slave interchanably....and Dom and Master. To some they mean the same, to others there is a big difference. But in the general bdsm population, I think that property simply means collared....tis not what it means to me...but to most I talk to that is all it means. hot1

ownedgirlie -> RE: Property (1/26/2007 7:11:55 AM)
A parcel of land can not dictate what will be built or grown on it. There may be laws and county codes and principles which guide the owners use of it, but the property itself does not protest or dictate its use. In my case, the property owner cultivates the soil and adds value to his investment. This makes his property flourish, and produce a yield which he very much enjoys. He spends a lot of time tinkering in the soil, making it rich and perfect for almost any crop (ha - I had to throw that pun in, sorry). There are owners who abandon their property, and owners who simply do not know how to get the most out of that which they own. There are also owners who can take a fixer-upper and turn it into a development to behold. But the property itself, in its owners care, is subject to its owner's choices for it.

thetammyjo -> RE: Property (1/26/2007 7:40:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie A parcel of land can not dictate what will be built or grown on it. There may be laws and county codes and principles which guide the owners use of it, but the property itself does not protest or dictate its use. In my case, the property owner cultivates the soil and adds value to his investment. This makes his property flourish, and produce a yield which he very much enjoys. He spends a lot of time tinkering in the soil, making it rich and perfect for almost any crop (ha - I had to throw that pun in, sorry). There are owners who abandon their property, and owners who simply do not know how to get the most out of that which they own. There are also owners who can take a fixer-upper and turn it into a development to behold. But the property itself, in its owners care, is subject to its owner's choices for it. Well, actually coming from farming country I can say this isn't quite true. You can try to plant whatever you want but the soil and nurtrients may not be suitable and your crops will fail. A piece of land overused will stop producing entirely in time. Like a slave in some ways. I can tell my slave to do this and that but if he lacks the ability or the body parts to do this and that, he will not be able to do what I command and then I fail as an owner. A good owner, be she owning living or non-living property, must know what is possible unless they wish to throw away time, money, and even the property itself by misuse.

mymasterssub69 -> RE: Property (1/26/2007 7:59:50 AM)
when i was vanilla, i had such negativity about being someone's "property" because of the way i raised. i felt it was a medieval idea and no one had the right to be "owned" like chattel. yet when Daddy collared and explained to me what being someone's "property" truly meant, my view immediately change. being owned and someone's property means that i'm loved and cared for ...my welfare is in the hands of another ...decisions are no longer mine to make

ownedgirlie -> RE: Property (1/26/2007 8:06:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie A parcel of land can not dictate what will be built or grown on it. There may be laws and county codes and principles which guide the owners use of it, but the property itself does not protest or dictate its use. In my case, the property owner cultivates the soil and adds value to his investment. This makes his property flourish, and produce a yield which he very much enjoys. He spends a lot of time tinkering in the soil, making it rich and perfect for almost any crop (ha - I had to throw that pun in, sorry). There are owners who abandon their property, and owners who simply do not know how to get the most out of that which they own. There are also owners who can take a fixer-upper and turn it into a development to behold. But the property itself, in its owners care, is subject to its owner's choices for it. Well, actually coming from farming country I can say this isn't quite true. You can try to plant whatever you want but the soil and nurtrients may not be suitable and your crops will fail. A piece of land overused will stop producing entirely in time. Like a slave in some ways. I can tell my slave to do this and that but if he lacks the ability or the body parts to do this and that, he will not be able to do what I command and then I fail as an owner. A good owner, be she owning living or non-living property, must know what is possible unless they wish to throw away time, money, and even the property itself by misuse. Yes, technically speaking my analogy was not 100% accurate as there are climate zones, etc, which dictate what certain soils can produce. A good owner knows what he can derive from his/her property and makes the most out of it. In my case, there were a lot of "can'ts" which really turned into "can once the mind was reshaped and taught." Then again, there are still laws of nature that preclude me from the ability to do anything. My analogy was a little flawed but I hope the bigger point was made. I do not tell him "No." I may say "I don't think I am able...can we work on it?" I do not tell him what he can not do. He may find, in his work with me, that we are up against an incapability. But that's different then telling him how he will cultivate. My analogy was going off the assumption that he is already a good owner and knows how to bring the best value out, which is why I said the part that I bolded above. My assumption was that a good owner would know what his/her property is capable of. Hope that clears it up?

losttreasure -> RE: Property (1/26/2007 8:24:24 AM)
I'm not sure any definition would be adequate... like trying to describe an emotion with mere words, everyone will have their own nuances and variations. I don't typically think of myself as his "property"... probably because of the connotations that that word has for me... but I do belong to him.

orfunboi -> RE: Property (1/26/2007 9:09:47 AM)
According to the dictionary - prop·er·ty [image]http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/premium.gif[/image] [image]http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png[/image][image]http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/speaker.gif[/image] /ˈprɒp[image]http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png[/image]ər[image]http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png[/image]ti/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[prop-er-tee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun, plural -ties. 1.that which a person owns; the possession or possessions of a particular owner: They lost all their property in the fire. 2.goods, land, etc., considered as possessions: The corporation is a means for the common ownership of property. 3.a piece of land or real estate: property on Main Street. 4.ownership; right of possession, enjoyment, or disposal of anything, esp. of something tangible: to have property in land. 5.something at the disposal of a person, a group of persons, or the community or public: The secret of the invention became common property. 6.an essential or distinctive attribute or quality of a thing: the chemical and physical properties of an element. 7. Logic. a. any attribute or characteristic. b. (in Aristotelian logic) an attribute not essential to a species but always connected with it and with it alone. 8.Also called prop. a usually movable item, other than costumes or scenery, used on the set of a theater production, motion picture, etc.; any object handled or used by an actor in a performance. 9.a written work, play, movie, etc., bought or optioned for commercial production or distribution. 10.a person, esp. one under contract in entertainment or sports, regarded as having commercial value: an actor who was a hot property at the time. [Origin: 1275–1325; ME proprete possession, attribute, what is one's own, equiv. to propre proper + -te -ty2. See propriety[image]http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png[/image]] Now i am not sure why you feel the need to change the meaning of a word, if you are someones property, they own you. If you don't know the meaning of a word, look it up. If you don't feel comfortable with the definition of property, then come up with a new word.

AquaticSub -> RE: Property (1/26/2007 9:21:17 AM)
She already said she had looked up it. Words are trival when compared to the meaning behind them and the only use words serve is to convey a general meaning to other people. It seems to me that she was asking us what "property" means to people in the BDSM context. The textbook defination of slave will not match the defination of slave most people in BDSM use. After all, while a slave might consent to letting her owner sell her off, I doubt she would consent to letting her owner sell off (or do whatever his perverted mind could come up with) her unmentionables. That is allowed by the classic defination of slavery after all.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0703125