Owned vs submissive to

I totally agree with you. (Owned) meaning your property. Is she your property or is she confused on what that means? But the point is i agree with you

I wasn't referring to anyone specifically. It was just a thought that I wanted others to weigh in on. How the definition of that word differs from dynamic to dynamic, or in others use of it.

Ownership , can be said on different energy of language. Does really have be said but shown in different ways how ever the person and other person feels in there bond. Person can own them self hold the key or have a friend who they trust be key holder til they enter in safe connection. People are each and there own what will be for them list goes on. We both hold the key to a beautiful connection, bound together by mutual respect and trust. We both agree on the importance of consent and safety, even as we navigate the dynamics of submission and dominance. Yet, we remain committed to balancing our relationship with our individual lives, refusing to be bound by societal expectations. Instead, we choose to write our own story together, one that is filled with love, respect, and adventure. I once reserved my heart for someone who could respect and cherish it, and slowly, we grew a bond that blossomed into a beautiful friendship and romance. We traveled together, explored new horizons, and deepened our connection. Submission is not something that can be taken or given; it is earned through trust, respect, and vulnerability. It is a gift that is nurtured over time, with sweet moments and gentle words. They were emotionally invested in me before they fell deeply in love, and I am forever grateful for that.

In my own personal opinion, language and definitions have changed a lot within BDSM to the point that I often find myself having to relearn terms I thought I understood. Not spending much time online through out my journey has complicated things in that respect for me.

Secondly, I beg forgiveness. You asked for Subs to reply and I am a slave but I hope I can provide some perspective. M/s is all I know and what I have practiced in every relationship I have had thus far.

I think the confusion comes in because I feel many D~type persons feel that they own their s~ type person whether or not they are in a M/s relationship or not. Furthermore, there are those who differentiate between M/s and Owner/ property.

Relationships are as individual as the people in them.

On a side note, I have served as a slave for the majority of my life. Power exchange is all I know. And yet, never in my life have I ever been “not really human”. That's a bit insulting really. It is my very human nature that allows me to love and serve the way I do.

Being a slave is hard. It is so much more than objectification and kinky sex. When we are stripped of our humanity, you will get nothing more than a husk of what that slave once was and then what’s the point?

OK, that's very interesting, and thank you for weighing in on the question. First, I meant no offense, and if I have something wrong about the M/s dynamic I'm more than happy to learn more about it. You're right, each dynamic is unique and very personal. I had assumed that an M/s dynamic was at it's core an Owner/property dynamic, and that's why I was curious. Also, to that point, those that prefer an Owner/property dynamic prefer a "dehumanizing" dynamic. Maybe I am phrasing that incorrectly though. Obviously the owned is still very much human and must be cared for, and supported as such, but it was my understanding that it was almost a complete ego removal on the part of the property "I am anything you want if it pleases you Master". Still very much human though as the complete power transfer and perfect service are the ultimate goal of the property. It's all very interesting, and it seems like you have a much better understanding of those dynamics, so I'm very glad you reached out. You have definitely given me more to think about, and if you could expand on your understanding of M/s vs Owner/property, I would greatly appreciate hearing your ideas.

A few thoughts/feelings about the OP.

i see a difference between owning an object and owning a living, breathing, thinking, feeling being.

E.g., one may own a pet rock and reasonably expect a certain kind of obedience, like when one puts it in it's place and commands: "stay and don't pee on the carpet," i think it's reasonable to expect the rock will stay put and not pee on the carpet.

On the other hand, a living being like a pet dog may stay put for awhile, but eventually nature will take it's course and the dog will have to pee... maybe it will stay put and pee on the carpet in and effort to at least half obey and please master, or maybe it will flee through the dog door, disobeying the order to "stay put" while obeying the command to not "pee on the carpet."

Though one may want, dream, desire to objectify or be objectified, a person will never be a pet rock. An owners expectations or desires cannot alter all reality. People are complex and individual and have individual needs and desires that are different.

To me, ownership of a living being comes with the understanding that control is dependent on an intimate understanding and connection to the needs and desires of that living being.

Speaking from my personal journey and identification with the term ‘owned’, as someone who is generally naive to old world understandings of BDSM and ‘the lifestyle’ and someone who has limited capacity to immerse myself into all that I would like to, I can say that it provides a state of mind, a constant reminder, wherever I go out in the world that I belong and am cherished no matter the distance or limitations of the ‘hat’ that I am wearing at that time. It is cerebral, an invisible leash that binds me always. It keeps me safe and elevates me.

My/Our circumstances are restricted to online and I cannot give up control in much of my life - responsibilities and the way things are do not allow for that. It’s understood, respected and worked with. Therefore, what we do is carefully cultivated to be specific for us and the dynamic. The strongest aspects of our connection are in the nuances - the feelings and ways of being that escape clear definition. For me, owned is not a set of rules, there is no contract, it’s a way of being and staying in tune with each other alongside all the other practices that bind me to him.

I see the importance of language and ensuring there is clarity of meaning and expectations. I also see the concern for fractured culture and practices - ever shifting goal posts and the way terms change and lose meaning. Others will disagree with how the term is applied in our dynamic. But it doesn’t matter - it means so much to us. It’s one of our cornerstones; I walk with it, embody it and it sustains me, because the distance is hard and every symbol and signal of us is vital.

I hope I have explained my unique position clearly. I’m a bit of a ‘head in the clouds’ sort of person

Union both hold the key are it’s nothing. There has to be togetherness no matter what your dynamic is someone says they own you take over all you no rights run it’s a pretend D just looking get there kicks and use and abuse and can turn ugly it’s not safe. Without communication there is no relationship. Without respect there is no love. Without trust there's no reason to Continue. If they don’t support your goals and dreams they are not the one. Go by effect not sweet words. And you have right to speak up
You have right to say no as a sub or slave your human. Yea hey should bring you peace not headache. This or ride or die or it’s nothing. Share life the passion the growing this how it goes some get bored to quick when shit happens but real genuine will show you go out there way.

I don't disagree with you at all. It was not my intent to say that the "owned" was like a pet rock, or any other inanimate object. I was referring very specifically to the Master/slave dynamic (probably in the high protocol sense) where the slave is viewed as something less than human. Not a rock, or a pet, but not someone deserving of the usual accommodations or comforts. It is a dynamic that is very dependant upon the Master making sure that the "owned/property" is well managed, well cared for, and is raised to the upmost presentation and character. It is a very specific dynamic and protocol that is very much not for everyone. I'm sorry if I was not clear in my original post, and I hope this makes more sense. Thank you for your thoughts though, and responding to my questions.

I appreciate you weighing in on the topic, and I agree with you. Communication is essential, and paramount to any dynamic or relationship. My question was about terminology. The aspect of "owned" in different dynamics vs the Master/slave dynamic which is very specific. If you use the term without that dynamic, what does it mean to you?