Consensual Enslavement
Objectification
Apprentice, Journeyman
Objectification is not the same as Depersonalization (which is covered elsewhere) but they are very similar as well as being common to consensual enslavement. Objectification can be part of some illegal activities and abuse. Objectification can be used both consciously and unconsciously to control another person. In this case, Objectification is both an engine and a tool of consensual enslavement and the reinforcement of consensual enslavement.
What is it and how can it be properly used? Objectification is changing a person's self-identity from human self to something not human like an inanimate object. The people who do pet play have it easy. They are changing someone into a dog, cat or other domesticated animal. In that case, the slave goes from owned human to owned animal.
The inward/outward directed nature of Objectification is something that must be understood. It is both an inward change and an outward manifestation of that change. This sort of thing is common among many people, especially those at each end of the dominant/submissive spectrum. The more dominant, the more their nature is inwardly directed. For them, it’s all about them and what they want. For the submissive, it is about what others want and how they go about pleasing others. This outwardly directed nature is a characteristic that a Master looks for in a slave or someone who can be enslaved.
Objectification is one of the tools that can be, and that I believe is, an integral part of consensual enslavement. The question that many will ask is why would you want someone to view themselves as not human but as something else? It is because enslavement is about changing how the slave views themselves and how they interact with others. It is the change as much as what the slave is changed in to, which is important to Objectification as a tool. To be a slave is to go from being your own self to someone owned by another as their object or their property. An object is something which can be and usually is owned.
What sort of an object should the slave become? That depends on what is wanted. Do you want a slave, a pet, a sex object, something to give pain to and torment or something else? In the end, it comes down to what the Owner or Master wants and what they can do. When someone identifies themselves first as a slave and only second as a woman, a person, a lover or whatever, their reactions are different than if they identify primarily as an independent person or equal partner. That is the difference that is usually sought by an Owner. As a slave, they are property, they are a possession, not someone who possesses. It is part of the outwardly directed view you want the slave to have. The slave's focus should primarily always be on her Owner. While no one's focus can always be on someone else, the goal is to have their focus away from themselves as much as possible.
The way to get to this state is mostly through classic training. You reward the behavior and viewpoint you desire and either ignore or punish behavior and viewpoint you don't want. There are also other techniques which work as well or better depending on the type of slave you are training. The best of those being the ones which remind the slave of her Status, place and Focus, especially those things that cause her to remind herself of what she is or has become.
There is a second type of Objectification where the person identifies not just as human property but as an object to be manipulated and used, or not used, as the Owner wishes. However, it is not just treating someone as a physical object, such as the traditional footstool or table. That can be a manifestation of the tool usage but it is more than that.
I research a lot of sources that are part of the science side of how things happen, or at least how some people think they happen. Academic and science articles are not directly related to consensual enslavement but they can be very useful. One such article by Martha Nussbaum entitled "Objectification", is rather long so if you wish to read it, please do (http://www.mit.edu/~shaslang/mprg/nussbaumO.pdf). I have summarized the part I wish to discuss. with quotes below. . In the article she talks about the various types of objectification but we will focus on her interpretations of objectification in a sexual context mostly of the male towards the female. It is especially interesting because she does not speak of it in a negative or pejorative way and presents the argument that objectification can be bad or good depending on the situation.
Mt=y original source for the Nussbaum article was in a chapter entitled “Objectification” in Paradigms of Power: Styles of Master/Slave Relationships edited by Raven Kaldera and published by Alfred Press, pgs 206-212. This is an excellent book showcasing many different ways Master/slave relationships can manifest themselves. Each chapter written by a different practitioner of M/s is about how they create their own dynamic. The chapter entitled “Objectification” has an excellent long form discussion about how the writer lives as its Owner’s object.
Here is the list of forms of objectification from: Nussbaum, Martha. “Objectification.” Philosophy and Public Affairs, Fall 1995, pg. 249-291.
Instrumentality: The objectifier treats the object as a tool for his or her purposes.
Denial of Autonomy: The objectifier treats the object as lacking in autonomy and self-determination.
Inertness: The objectifier treats the object as lacking in agency, and perhaps also in activity.
Fungibility: The objectifier treats the object as interchangeable, A) with objects of the same type, and B) with objects of different types.
Violability: The objectifier treats the object as lacking in boundary-integrity; as something it is permissible to break up, smash, break into.
Ownership: The objectifier treats the object as something that is owned by another, can be bought or sold, etc.
Denial of Subjectivity: The objectifier treats the object whose experience and feelings (if any) need not be taken into account.
I think most will find a number of these items and their descriptions familiar from other consensual enslavement sources and tools. The direct application of many of them should also be obvious. There is more here than just individual tools especially where they are the same as or similar to methods referenced by Biderman. There is also the combination of all of them and like Biderman's chart, these items work together as well as in isolation and I believe in any combination.
The engine aspect of Objectification appears to me to be not that someone is treated as a specific physical object, but that their nature is treated as any physical object including as an owned pet at one end of a the objectification spectrum to an inanimate object at the other end.. The point is what the Owner can do with the object, which is just about anything or nothing. Submitting to this behavior is one form of submission that changes the person into a slave. The slave knows that what is done with and to them is in the hands of their Owner. This realization that they are an owned object further moves them to identify and internalize being a slave. That is the consensual enslavement side. What the Owner does to the object is BDSM play as well as the consensual enslavement tool.
The tool aspect is how each of the above list of ways to objectify, and others, can be used singly or together to enhance the enslavement or the reinforcement of their slavery. I will give a short commentary on each of them and a few examples to get you thinking and I encourage your discussion and examples as well.
Instrumentality:
The slave is a tool for the Owner to use as they wish. The slave does what their Owner commands. This normally comes under the heading of Obedience. The Owner commands and the slave obeys. This is a standard, and perhaps the most basic tool and assumption, we have in consensual slavery. This is also where using the slave as a footstool comes in.
Denial of Autonomy:
The slave responds more than they initiate. The slave reacts to their Owner’s desires, wants, needs and whims before their own needs and desires. The slave may have a list of duties to finish before they have time or permission to do what they wish to do. This is not to say the slave never does anything for themselves or that they want to. I don’t know of any cases where that happens, but properly they are responding to someone else rather than initiating things on their own when it comes to the slavery aspect of their relationship even if they have decision making ability how they obey or serve in some situations.
Inertness:
The slave, if they have nothing to do, does nothing or does nothing that is not permitted. At the extreme, if told to stay somewhere they do so until allowed to move. The slave moves and acts only when an outside force, their Owner, moves them. That force may be immediate commands or it may be standing orders or things to do. The slave does not initiate but only responds.
Fungibility:
A slave is a slave. A slave can be replaced with another slave. If there is more than one slave available to complete a task it does not matter which one does it. Any object can be replaced by a similar one or a similar one which can do the same task. True replacement of slaves is not all that easy. We don’t have a local Slaves R Us to pick up a new one or to trade in an old one no matter what some people, both free and slave, may wish. However, the knowledge that a slave can be released and will be if they do not obey can be a powerful tool to inspire obedience.
Violability:
The slave has no personal limits on what may be done to or with them. They may be touched, handled, moved, used, marked or whatever their Owner wishes to do with or to them. They have no personal space, privacy nor boundaries beyond which their Owner may not go.
Ownership:
The slave is property. They are not allowed to forget that and their identity as the property of their Owner is regularly reinforced. They may be done with as their Owner wishes and for any reason up to and including the transfer of ownership to another.
(Before anyone goes on about how this does not happen or they or so and so would never do that to them, it does happen. Slaves have moved between owners. Sometimes with their full consent and knowledge and sometimes it happens without the slave having any say in the matter. Also, if a slave is released and is acquired by a new Owner, that too is a change of ownership.)
Denial of Subjectivity:
Whether or not an Owner cares about the feelings or wishes of their property, it does not matter as the slave is to obey any decision their Owner makes or any command their Owner gives. This is an excellent tool to use at times to remind the slave that they do not need to know why a command is given or something is to be done, they are simply to obey. An Owner may consult their slave before they make some decision but no matter what input a slave is allowed, their Owner has the final say and the slave is to obey.
Some of you may feel that Objectification is too harsh and beyond where you wish to go. Others might say I have been treating the subject softly. The truth of either of those views is in what you make of the information and tools I present. Remember that the goal is to learn, to think and then to do or do not. I make suggestions and give you things to think about and to discuss. I have used pieces of all of these and only considered some of them as objectifying the slave. Other parts I just considered part of what it means if someone is your slave and the basic assumptions of consensual slavery.
Please note that the first part of this tool is almost identical to Depersonalization.
28 September 2018