|
IC : Groups : O_and_P : "Ownership in O&P"
Ownership in O&P (0)
O_and_P's profile . O_and_P's homepage . O_and_P group posts
Posted by Tanos on Fri 4 Dec 09, 11:48 PM
This is the last of these weekly threads about the ten
keywords in the
O&P
Manifesto, and we've finally reached Ownership. If
Possession is there in the name "O&P" to include the D/s
relationships, then Ownership is there for the M/s ones.
Possession may be limited in time or scope, but Ownership is
the enduring and veto-less form of possession, in which
possession has been maintained long enough and deep enough
that it has become ingrained, resulting in the enslavement of
the submissive, as a slave.
One useful analogy is with land: in many jurisdictions, if
you possess land for long enough without objections from the
owner or being evicted by your neighbours, then you become
the new legal owner, as the land has clearly become yours in
practice by then. In a similar way, everyone that matters -
ie the two people themselves - can become convinced that the
master owns the slave, and this conviction removes the option
of denying the masters authority. That isn't to say that
these slaves always obey perfectly, but that they do always
acknowledge the right the master has to expect obedience.
(If you're familiar with Internal Enslavement, this is a
restatement of IE in terms of possession and ownership.)
However, Ownership is not in any way meant as the right way
to do O&P, and O&P as a name is meant to be a "Big Tent" that
can accomodate the whole range of D/s and M/s relationships
that have the basic qualities of asymmetry and inequality
that are set out in the manifesto under Possession itself.
"O&P" doesn't mean the "ownership of possessions" or
"Owner/possession". If Ownership wasn't one type of
Possession, the name could have been "Ownership OR
Possession".
Regards,
Tanos
|
