RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel"

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel"

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel"

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" - 8/29/2008 7:36:51 AM

CreativeDominant

Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sambamanslilgirl

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.

I'll tell you what, sambamanslilgirl...I am going to answer your question even though you have yet to answer the ones above.
What do the two of you have? You have a relationship. No one here has denied it, though some may question it. That is their right, just as it is yours to question anyone else about theirs. But, you yourself have stated before that it is NOT a D/s relationship...that it was Daddy/daughter, surrogate father-surrogate daughter relationship. You've stated you have intimate phone conversations with him that take place during times when you could have been with past lovers. There is NO denial of the fact that you two have a relationship.
BUT...that is not what is being said and the fact that you go into a question and pull out the part that irritates you and address that, rather than ever getting around to honestly answering the question you are asked is very telling. Once again I will ask the question I asked above and I will make the print bold. Either answer the question or do not come back asking questions which you have taken out of context in order to deflect the fact that you are not answering.
If you are "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?

quote:

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.

Actually, I am not looking at him as Lord and Master. I look on him as your "Daddy". I reserve the title of Lord and Master for someone who owns a submissive IN A D/s-oriented fashion. Interesting that he/you insist on him owning you even after you give yourself to another. You say it works for you and that this pet does not feel slighted. Perhaps it is because you are now the one in the dominant position. But your previous posts, lamenting the loss of others, over the course of the 2 years I have been here, would seem to indicate that some may have had at least a little bit of a problem over being the one expected to care for you, take care of you, be the one there for you in a physical and emotional and mental sense and yet, not have the "gall" to think they owned you...you were "Daddy's".

(in reply to sambamanslilgirl)

Profile

Post #: 61

RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" - 8/29/2008 9:07:58 AM

CalifChick

Posts: 10717
Joined: 10/28/2007
From: California
Status: offline

How can they be anything BUT confused when there is also an inappropriate, unethical dual professional relationship as well? I would think trust would be an issue, but who knows.

Cali

_____________________________

AKA "The Undisputed Goddess of Sarcasm", "Big Bad Cali" and "Yum Bum". Advisor to the Subbie Mafia, founding member of the W.A.C. and the Judgmental Bitches Brigade, member of the Clan of the Scarlet O'Hair-a's and Team Troll

(in reply to CreativeDominant)

Profile

Post #: 62

RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" - 8/29/2008 9:31:55 AM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
Status: offline

entering into the relationship this slave shares with Master wasn't the first time in her life she was considered property. cherished and beloved and cared for property, but still owned and operated by others. the experience from this slave's past was in no way sexual, either in words or deeds. however, it was a reinforced headspace in every other way.

more along the lines of the Biker Lifestyle, in that property is respected and cherished, it was not then, and is not now a diminishing term, to this slave.

now, however, there is a sexual element to the ownership, in speech and actions, and it is extremely satisfying to be used and objectified sexually, as it is Master's pleasure.

(in reply to mistoferin)

Profile

Post #: 63

RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" - 8/29/2008 9:37:16 AM

mistoferin

Posts: 8284
Joined: 10/27/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
now, however, there is a sexual element to the ownership, in speech and actions, and it is extremely satisfying to be used and objectified sexually, as it is Master's pleasure.

I fully agree!

_____________________________

Peace and light,
~erin~

There are no victims here...only volunteers.

When you make a habit of playing on the tracks, you thereby forfeit the right to bitch when you get hit by a train.

"I did it! I admit it and I'm gonna do it again!"

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Profile

Post #: 64

RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" - 8/29/2008 9:39:19 AM

velvetears

Posts: 2933
Joined: 6/19/2006
Status: offline

As this thread shows the term property or chattel can have different connotations attached to it. The more important thing is that both the D and the s are on the same page about it. When i was with my ex i was his property, to me that meant i had intrinsic value and worth. He told me he loved me, i believed him, but again love meant different things to each of us. On his side of things property has value if it is useful to you in some way. When i got sick and spent some time in a hospital and concurring with that i was going through some very challenging events that were overwhelming me i was no longer useful and hence not his property any longer. i suppose to him it was all very logical in nature how things proceeded but for me it was quite emotionally devestating.

Anyone can call themselves anything they want, just make sure it means the same thing to the one it is in reference to.

_____________________________

Religion is for people who are scared of hell, Spirituality is for people who have been there

(in reply to CalifChick)

Profile

Post #: 65

RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" - 8/29/2008 9:54:17 AM

Bstardsbitch

Posts: 154
Joined: 11/19/2005
Status: offline

I balked the first time Sir called me property. After many many discussions lol, (Takes a while for things to sink in) He explained, loved, cherished, but always property.

(in reply to velvetears)

Profile

Post #: 66

RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" - 8/29/2008 5:03:31 PM

scarlethiney

Posts: 492
Joined: 8/22/2008
Status: offline

quote:

. 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...

quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin

erin,

This made me want to cry. It's beautifully written and heartfelt and I appreciate your sharing it with me. It sounds as though you have been in this place and I hope in my heart you are there now or will have the opportunity to be so cherished one day soon if not now.
I also hope I get to this place one day. Thank you for being kind and answering me.

It seems we all have different views based on our life experiences. None of them right or wrong but best for each of us according to what we think we need and or want and deserve. Some things resonate with me and some don't and yet I am grateful that all of you were open enough to share your thoughts. I feel like a huge sponge and am soaking up all I read. I have much to think about and many questions I hope to discover answers for. I promise to read as much as I can before asking!
Thank you again, peace scarlet

_____________________________

"The words 'I am...' are potent words; be careful what you hitch them to. The thing you're claiming has a way of reaching back and claiming you." - A.L. Kitselman.

see my profile masterkspet

(in reply to mistoferin)

Profile

Post #: 67

RE: "Property" vs. "Chattel" - 8/29/2008 6:39:36 PM

IvyMorgan

Posts: 729
Joined: 7/5/2007
From: Midlands, UK
Status: offline

it's late, i'm getting tired, this might not make sense/come out right.

I don't think I am comfortable being considered "property" or, for that matter, "owned". This is no slight against those who do feel comfortable in that kind of relationship, or who do thrive in that relationship. For me it probably is a question purely of semantics. I simply don't like the words and do not want them applied to me.

Having been treated as "property", I'd actually say "as a commodity", something that could be bought, sold, leased and traded for revenue, before, I'm unwilling to go back to that state. I own myself. I am in ultimate control and possession of me, and though I may submit, it goes no further than that.

My experience has been left of the norm, this makes me sensitive to certain ideas, terms, behaviours and so on. I think (hope) I've stopped apologising (and beating myself up) for this. I can not, after all, change my past.

To answer the question of "when you were happy being chattle, why did you stop", yes, there was a time I chose to be nothing more than an object. I owned myself, I profited from my objectification myself, but I was nothing more than an object. I needed that at the time. I needed to "own" the experiences of my past. I needed to prove to myself that I now owned me. And, yes, I do enjoy objectification. Over time (a few months) I stopped feeling that need. I didn't need to prove I owned me, I didn't need to own my past experiences, I'd gotten everything I was going to out of the objectification experience, and moved on. I still love objectification, I like to be considered nothing more than something someone else will use to amuse themselves, but, not with everyone, not with anyone, and therein is the change from before (when either I chose or did not choose to have that set up). I healed, yes, but I healed by doing, and I grew as a person. So, six of one half a dozen of the other.

I don't think I'm making as much sense as I was when I started writing. I should go to sleep now.

edit because I'm making typos that make whole new words that change my sentences into something that means nothing like what i intended.

< Message edited by IvyMorgan -- 8/29/2008 6:41:41 PM >

(in reply to scarlethiney)

Profile

Post #: 68