Ownership and Being Owned

I've been following an intense discussion going on in the last few days. The whole exchange has been lengthy and complex and interesting on a lot of different levels, and I've not been an active participant. I do think that magdala summarizes a lot of the salient points well in this post and the one that follows it. The discussion has been wide ranging, and it is interesting because it is being carried on by a number of people who are involved in living the life.

I've been watching and thinking about it. Wondering what there was for me to say. As usual, I've been struck by the enormous surface differences between my life, and magdala's, and kaya's. Surely, there is very little that makes their paths and mine look the same. Yet each of us self-define as "slave." Perhaps that is important. Perhaps not.

I agree with kaya that words do mean something. It is valuable to define our terms. If we simply say that "slavery" in the sense that we use it within the lifestyle means whatever people say it means "for them," then it very quickly comes to mean nothing at all, and we lose the ability to use it to convey anything by the words. If, when we speak of power exchange, or "power forfeiture," it doesn't denote something that, at least in general terms, we can all point to and say, "that is it," then we have no way to speak to our lives at all.

With that said, I want to take a different approach to this discussion here. Rather than posit the extremes, let me paint the notion that in ownership dynamics -- which is what we are discussing, there is the necessity of focusing on the core member of the dynamic: the Owner. Almost always, when I hear/read discussions of what would or would not be "OK" within these relationships; what would be what magdala refers to as a "deal breaker," things usually devolve to the point of where would it have to go for the "owned" partner to say "no." In my view, the more critical issue, from the outset (and always), is what path or vision does the Owner have in mind. Within ownership driven relationships, the real operative issue is does the Owner have the right/power to envision an outcome, and then move toward bringing forth that creation.

Given that definition, kaya lives within a "real" and valid ownership dynamic where the One who owns her has the right and power to implement His vision in bringing forth the creation of His slave as He sees that reality. So does Magdala. So do I. The fact that kaya may spend most of her time locked in a small basement room while I am sent out to "mold and shape young minds" is a comparison that is perhaps analogous to the differences in techniques used by DaVinci and Picasso -- different Owners with different ultimate creative outcomes in mind. Tomorrow, kaya could find herself trudging off to classes to learn how to teach, and I could find myself locked in the closet. Each of us would likely experience some significant "property" style cognitive-whiplash should that actually happen, but it is within the realm of possibility. Each of us have Owners who could see a different vision with the sunrise.

I will argue that the driving force in "ownership dynamic" relationships must be the Owner. Under that model, all the fussing about which slave is the most slave-like (based on who handles the highest levels of pain, or spends the most time chained to the bedpost, or has the fewest choices with regards to clothing or hair style or employment, etc.) becomes academic, because the real question in each case is, "what does the particular Owner choose or want from the slave?" Just as, in other arenas, some might choose to own Fords, or Hondas, or BMW's, so in the realm of lifestyle slavery, Owners will make decisions about how to model/shape the nature of the dynamic with their individual slaves.

Like magdala, I find kaya's declarations that she has no "deal-breakers" disquieting, and disturbing. I understand the depth of committment and passion and trust that drives that statement. I think I even understand what it means to come to a point in your life where you simply decide to stop equivocating and say something definitive. So, I believe that what is really going on here is an attempt to state that the point of entering into an Ownership dynamic relationship is that the consent to becoming "property" is a one-time thing. Done. Over with. It is not an on-going negotiation. So quit asking, or operating on some other set of assumptions. Fair enough.

Still.

I do not entirely believe that there is no breaking point. No point where there would be "too far." No limit. AND, I do not believe it even has to get as horrific as the sort of life and death, taboo, sort of scenarios that magdala proposes. I believe, in my heart, that those of us who enter into ownership dynamics do so with a certain and sure understanding of those with whom we create those bonds. We trust that the earth will not shift radically under our feet; that the Master will not change the definitions totally so that the world that we find ourselves living in "down the road" is entirely outside the realm of what we anticipated.

But, since we are engaging in hypotheticals, let's play "what if." Owners have the power to create their world's the way they want them to be. This is hot and squishy and intriguing when it is titillating. However this isn't always sexy. What if we take the future, hypothetical shifting of "Ownership" demand out of the sexy realm? What if any or each of us were to get this sort of direction from the One to whom we have pledged our obedience?

I've had a revelation.
I've been on the wrong path.
I understand that SM is "bad, sick, and abusive."
So, the first thing that you must do is pack up and discard all of the paddles, whips, clamps, clips, and other "toys."
Dismantle all of the restraints and bondage gear.
From now on, I want our relationship to contribute to the well-being of mankind and the earth, so each day your "tasks" will be as follows:
Monday -- volunteer at the homeless shelter
Tuesday -- voulnteer for a local agency for people with developmental disabilities
Wednesday -- volunteer for an agency that works for the environment
Thursday -- volunteer for the local Headstart
Friday -- volunteer for a local agency for the aging/elderly
I expect you to journal about each of your daily activities just as you have been doing.
Oh yes, I've also decided that as part of my ongoing spiritual quest, I am adopting the practice of celibacy, so please dispose of the bed and purchase two simple twin beds for the bedroom."

Which of us, slaves, would stand by that "no deal-breakers" stance?

swan