 |
TSR : Profiles : teejayel
| Profile Name: | teejayel |
| Owner/dom of: | 931-333-205 |
| Created on: | 31 Jul 2006 |
| Last visit: | 21 hours ago |
| Location: | Surrey/London |
| Country: | UK |
| Sex/gender: | Male |
| Age: | 56 |
| Hair colour: | Greybrown |
| Eye colour: | Brown |
| Profile type: | Dominant / Owner / Master |
Height: 5ft 10in; Weight: 11st 12lb; BMI: 23.6
VIEWINGS OF PROPERTY SINCE MARCH'09: c.20,619
The principle of absolute equality of treatment of women in employment, education and under the law is sacrosanct. In personal relationships it is another matter: 'equal' (since the relationship is expressed through mental perceptions and their recognition on each side - you need to be able to talk 'as well'- a lesser intelligence on one side lessens the experience) but different (since the measure of a woman's value is how far she can be debased, debauched and degraded, such that the expression of her identity becomes a function of how she is used, including her ceding all notions of privacy, dignity or personal integrity to her owner, to be disposed of, as here, at his whim).
A female's status and treatment in a relatonship may be derived from encouraging her sexuality along its natural, instinctively submissive lines, the greater the contrast with the girl's public achievement and status the better. Intelligent, attractive women are the best specimens to obtain submission from. A desirable, additonal feature, is to make the woman's embracing of her sexuality a permanent and public feature of her identity. Loss of any type of virginity is irreversible: consent for the first time to vaginal, oral or anal sex, collaring, chaining or beating, being photographed naked or "consensual ownership" can only be given once. And whilst real slavery, or in a sexual context trafficking, is abhorrent and quite properly illegal, so that "ownership" requires the continuous seeking of consent from the female, it remains that she should be treated as if her first consent, essentially no longer to be able to say 'no' (with a consequent duty of obedience) is permanent except where consciously reversed and true that certain elements are irreversible by definition. In the same way as loss of vaginal virginity makes a permanent physical change, a consented ("model consented") photograph may not be taken back, and public display of it makes that aspect of the girl public property. I am not given to the habits of the "tattooed classes", but, marking a girl with her SLRN number is permanent, detailing the use made of her on her TSR profile is in the public domain and so effectively permanent (even if subsequently edited) and no man coming into consented possession of a woman and looking up her profile would expect, or should expect, to use her more gently.
(An analogy: When I was first dating the girl who became my first property, 000-195-048, and had seduced her into submitting for a few risque photographs, she was at first very reluctant. Then I discovered that an earlier boyfriend had photographed her - in the bath etc. From that moment I accepted no nonsense and went swiftly beyond anything cuddly to fully, explicitly naked and collared in the same training session. The acceptable treatment of a woman is thus on a one-way ratchet, driven by the consented use that she has been put to. Any man coming into legitimate possession of such a woman, of 931-333-205 if I approve, should have full access to such a record as a guide to what is permitted in her regard. And though consent must always be sought, once given it should be regarded as permanent unless explicitly withdrawn and the woman made aware of and agree to this also).
In those regards, whilst still an equal soul, her status has changed. She has become property-in-common, part (by virtue of the public aspect being internet-driven) of a new class of owned females who have in effect permanently surrendered large chunks of their personal integrity and dignity that it is impossible to restore and which submission she should be encouraged to eroticize. Ultimately, it doesn't matter whether her eroticized submission is hers or created within her by habituation. Only her performance, her unconscious and unselfconcious obedience in and arousal by any humiliation to which she is put - and which should be beyond her original offering or imagining, though not too far beyond - is relevant.
A man being introduced to her, if told her SLRN number, will be able to draw down her naked image to his phone even as they say their first hellos. Who, man or woman, would fail to act differently in those circumstances - or should? Anybody meeting any vanilla couple politely skirts over their sexual life: what is understood about them is not alluded to. A woman who has consented to be registered property has lost the privacy and dignity of that status, the right to politesse, permanently. Her sexual attributes can and will be discussed as if she is not present and with none of the delicacy accorded a women with unadjusted status even in her absence. After all, her submission means that use and display of her body is no longer her business. Though she inhabits her body, it is no longer hers for practical purposes. If I tell my property to undress, she may not refuse and must rely solely on my sense of propriety. This is a very good thing: airs and graces, trivia and irritations are brushed aside in the same way as they are when a woman decides to go topless or naked on a beach, the more so, because such decision is no longer hers. While a girl who exposes herself on a beach, or as in a recent TV programme about nudism, in the street, might affect who is permitted to talk to or photograph her, she has no control over who looks at her, regardless of how "empowering" she feels it. And there the cartoon character Lisa Simpson is accurate with her quip that anything a feminist does empowers her. It would be more accurate to say that making active choices about life are acts of maturity. Though there are obvious aspects of play, a woman's embracing of her sexuality and deliberately stepping down in, arguably placing herself entirely beneath, the dominance heirarchy in this way (irrespective of her public achievement or perceived public status) is an act of maturity, empowerment or surrendering of power being of equal worth. It is an abnegation of self comparable to becoming a nun, part of a sectarian group whose fundamental identity is use and display for male pleasure. This pleasure might be as casual as being viewed here, the woman's loving sacrifice of the whole of her integrity and being measured in no more than a smile at her humiliation, of which exploitation she should be proud.
===================================================
NB: As a part of the permanance of 931-333-205's status as registered property, whilst she may be allowed in the future to post under her profile on TSR, she will never be permitted to know her password, her inability to alter how she is displayed marking her permanent reduction in status - a right and proper thing. This aspect of her freedom disappeared with her consent to ownership. Thus, at my pleasure, she will be on permanent display naked and used and, in the very unlikely event that she passes to a new owner, he alone will be supplied with the password, to use as he pleases. She may, however, be permitted more control over her equivalent profile on IC.
===================================================
I am gratified at the number of viewings of my property since I first posted pictures of it here in March 09. It belongs to me but its status is registered property-in-common and I exhibit it on the same basis as I might livestock of mine at a horse show or Crufts. It is kept in in full submission with no right of decision, but in comfort and is generally contented. In essence 931-333-205 has consented to an expansion of the Marriage Act of 1736, which states that a man's wife is thereafter his physical property to use when and however he wishes. It states that "the wife has given herself up in this kind to her husband" and that this is a form of consent "which she cannot retract". She in a literal sense hands over her body for her husband's sexual disposal. She might withdraw her consent to sexual relations by ending the marriage with a divorce, but is otherwise in a permanent de jure state of consent. By this definition there is no rape in marriage. I differ only in adjective: there is no rape because I do not practise aggravated rape, however, she has consented to ownership, that she may never say no and is never and will never be asked. Like Heisenberg's uncertainly principle applied to electrons, which act sometimes like mass, sometimes energy, a woman is both personality and object. But a woman's fullest value to a man is yielded by her use as an object whilst conscious of the subjugation of her personality to this aspect of her being. This notion of physical property is then a livestock chattel, an animal, an intelligent animal (quite possibly more intelligent than her owner - there are more intellectual differences within the sexes than between them) held in wedlock. I have read of one man who as part of his wife's (enthusiastically consented) transition to property actually divorced her as a final degradation (Only in America! Listed here as 000-101-957) but find this unnecessary, as I have made very clear to my property that wedlock engenders reduced, not enhanced status for her and that her consent has ended all rights: over her body or sexual disposal, of decision, of privacy, of any dignity whatsoever except at my whim since that one, irreversible-except-by-separation, act.
Her property file on TSR (unadvertised, but now linked to this profile) contains a fuller record. However, it seems reasonable to display my property here too and as it should be shown: no messing about with corsets, shoes or coyness. It is as it should be: naked, opened and ready for consumption, like an oyster. This is what D/s or M/s is when the niceties are removed and it is viewed as not a game but sober reality. This is property; this is my livestock. It has no dignity, privacy or rights. It is a consumable commodity.
DESCRIPTION OF CHATTEL Initially vanilla woman (anal and BDSM virgin) met, aged 43, 16th June 07 (at a wedding!). 5'7", slim, (36" hips, 26" waist, 32", undersized breasts) prominent labia minora, small vulva, tight anus, very tender nipples; lubricates swiftly, slow to orgasm. A registered property (which she acknowledeges) and sex slave (how and when she is used by me is not under her control; she is not permitted pantyhose, does not need but in any case is not permitted a bra, is not permitted clothes in bed, or, at my discretion, clothes when we are alone; etc.). She has a tag engraved with her name and property number (931-333-205) drawn from here, knows of but has not seen the associated profile, which is placed here as a "private" (well, at least unadvertised) record of her possession. The tag can be used for a labial piercing but is currently used to lock her chain collar when used, including, after securing her by wedlock in Dec07, in public (particularly during the honeymoon and immediately afterwards as part of the process of acclimatizing her to her new status). The principle of her being marked as my possession is accepted. She wears a wedding ring, I do not. (This is a family tradition, however it is convenient to associate the ring with her being property and my having no ring as emphasizing that I may do as I please, regardless of whether I do. That other women notice and remark on it is the extent of revealing the property's status publicly, except here, anonymously). The property has ceased principal employment and moved into my house in a physically, emotionally and financially subordinate and dependent position. The financial aspect is entirely incidental, as women should be encouraged to develop their full potential. The higher their quality and achievement, the more meaningful their submission and possession. However, that she brought almost nothing into a household registered, like her, solely under my name adds to her humiliation and makes for easier identification as just one more thing that I own.
I am a freelance business consultant. Slim, 5'10" and have broken no mirrors that I know about. My friends say that I have a personality. Well educated, reasonably successful in business and otherwise interested in travel, cinema, theate, literature, some music (more classical than popular, but eclectic) the occasional opera, household/garden improvement and general events, eating, drinking etc.
Before now, I have taken the view that the web was less likely to produce a useful contact than walking down the street, but I have encountered a couple of people who very clearly give the lie to the idea that a web forum is the wrong place to be. However, the woman I chose was met conventionally and trained from vanilla, initially very swiftly, along the lines of her natural inclination to love and submit to me (as was her late and very lamented predecessor). She will though be taken beyond that, to submit irrespective of her feelings and so be reduced to a level where she yields the highest value.
Taking an innocent, debauching and debasing her and securing her one-time, irreversible, consent to remove her freedom and reduce her to an owned object is in a way more satisfying than encountering a self-aware submissive from whom less can be taken as it is already offered. I find that I nowadays even approve of the concept of taking a woman, training her, then, once she is reduced to what she should be, SLRN listed property, and accepts that this is right and proper, actually disposing of her to somebody else (ultimately, power comes only in its exercise). Though I rather doubt I'd ever do this, it provides a useful mindset in how to use and view a women and one registered here is clearly property-in-common as well as a personal chattel. Nobody coming in legitimate possession of this specimen and knowing its status would or should hesitate in making full use of it.
Interested in long-term debauching, debasing and possession of a woman in a full and externally absolutely normal, loving relationship, but one in which her ownership is complete and irreversible and she has no identity, self-perception or use other than as property: a chattel. (One 20 year, very successful example to-date: 000-195-048. Widowed, otherwise would not have been seeking).
The property is intelligent, reasonably educated, and has acceptance of what it has become and a growing understanding of its status as chattel; it is attractive, so had alternatives to be sacrificed and has ceded control in all major aspects of its life, although its opinions and background will always be considered in how it is made to submit. The girl's decision to give herself to me was the last important one she will be asked to make without leave. The property is quietly spoken, non-confrontational, at ease with itself and reconciled to the use it is put to. It does not expect orgasm and need not (I am beginning to think should not) be given either orgasm or foreplay and is now trained to be and is used in any orifice at any time convenient to me. Where it is taken and what is done will arise from our interaction: its capacity and my requirements.
I have kept an extensive unadvertised profile of the property on TSR since August 2007, the month it was first collared, first buggered and was proposed to (whilst being buggered). NB: My late first wife was proposed to and photographed as she, naked and collared, knelt, arms behind and fellated me in November 1984. At that time there was no TSR to provide context. I used aspects of the Story of O (collaring, chaining, spanking & whipping, attaching rings to her labia and very free use of all 3 orifices) to degrade her (registering her after discovery of TSR as 000-195-048) this many times & for many years before I showed her the Story of O film. She realized then that the way she was used was not 'romantic us', just a technique to debase women to their proper use & status (which had been very successful). She felt it reduced her to "just another set of holes". Precisely the object. But while this was true and it was right and proper to debase her in this way, she was also a loved personality, the more so because of her complete submission. And it made no difference: I used her as before, enforcing discipline where necessary to obtain her compliance. She submitted as before and loved me as before.
This time, with ownership of 931-333-205 clearly targeted from the outset, the aim was achieved quickly, efficiently and in a manner deliberately to exclude notions of romantic equality. The proto-property was stripped, made to suck me and buggered whilst watching The Story of O, was unmistakably informed that simple ownership of a woman was my object and that her details would be publicly registered on TSR. Unlike for her predecessor (here assisted by the existence of TSR's register) she was permitted no illusion that she would be anything else.
From March 2009 I chose to make some of the photographic record in her profile more public as a mark of the status of the property (by its consent fully compliant, no rights, not consulted, no privacy, no dignity; coil inserted to prevent further pregnancy; numbered livestock in my possession) its prospects for being held in this condition (long term, stable, irreversible) and to increase its degradation. Female nudity is ubiquitous in society and hardly remarked upon. It is my view that a submissive woman's more pointed nakedness should be a minimum expectation and equally routine.
==============================================
"LES GALERIES DES SOUMISES MONTREES" ( www.montrees.fr ) is interesting, VERY organized and no suggestion of coyness is allowed to the women registered (except that their faces are almost always obscured).
To qualify for (female only) registration, men must submit a naked photograph of the girl with "aspirante" written on her body to show that she understands the process. She must then answer a questionnaire in handwriting, to which he adds his comments. They are then allocated a number. This must be written on the pubis (removal of pubic hair is recommended) breast and buttock of the girl for each of a series of 9 poses for photographs, all naked (front, front legs apart, side profile, on all fours legs apart facing away, etc) which forms "the book". Exposure of the genitals (for the avoidance of doubt, cunt and anus) is mandatory. A full frontal pose of the woman between chin and knee is then added to a "carte de soumise" which the girl is told she should carry at all times with her credit cards & etc. At photo (A17 - members only) I show a mock up of the card as it might have looked for my first property (though using her SLRN number). Everything submitted becomes the property of the site and the girl's permanent record: a profile, "the book", a copy of the carte de soumise and a geographical listing. A link generates an email blank addressed to her master (only). The master may submit further photographs at his discretion, the concept being that the degree of a girl's submission should be recorded.
It is apparent from the the shy demeanour of early photographs that the girls/women are encouraged to meet the minimum standard, but perhaps are attracted by the fascination of doing so and co-operate willingly and coyly in equal measure. Thereafter they give the appearance of accepting that the threshold is passed and no nonsense tolerated. The carte de soumise can also be used (the girl must present it) as a discount card in a growing numbers of shops and commercial partners of the site (waxing clinics, sex shops, dress shops clubs etc). The registered soumise is also expected to accept more casual nudity (never shut a changing room door, etc) and there are many guidelines for her development, which can result in her upgrading from S to SR status, although the basic level does the trick.
From what I have seen, Fetlife can be more sexually explicit and TSR/IC is more accessible to the unsure, but the French site sets a standard that the women seem keen to aspire to. For the moment it looks to have hundreds of members rather than thousands, but I could imagine it growing fast. I recommend TSR to become an affiliate.
LES GALERIES DES SOUMISES MONTREES closely matches my own philosophy in regard to property, as detailed above, with the advantage of a format to follow, such that the women are entrained in the process and have the comfort of all being the same (though unique to their owners, of course!) Feb 2011
This profile was last updated on 20 May 12, 7:51 AM
(Please read the cautions on
About Personal Ads before responding to
an advert.)
|
|
