Tattos/brands,how does a Master/Dom(me)?slave/sub cope with anothers mark?

[shy_lovegirl[Quest10]]

Hello all,

i recently saw a topic refering to collars,old collars and what we do with them,give them back,keep them,burn them.My question is,if a collar you can give back,burn,sell, and so in a way put it behinde you, a tatto or a brand stating the ownership of an ex Master/Dominat is harder .How do Masters/Dom's cope with seeing anothers mark on their property,or even slaves,to see the mark of the ex on you,or why not of an ex slave on your Master(many now do similar tattos).

Thank you
shy

[VeniVidi]

For tattoos specific to a particular Dom[me], laser tattoo removal is non-invasive and quite widely available, and as far as I understand it another tattoo could be put in the same or maybe similar place. Many tattoos are more generic, just "slave" for example. I read somewhere (probably in more than one place) that if requesting that a mark of ownership is tattooed, due consideration must be made to the ease/cost etc. of its removal. We all know, however, that at a particular moment in time when a sub is entralled to the point of wanting a mark of ownership, the mere thought of that ownership ending is out of scope.

VV

[shy_lovegirl[Quest10]]

But at the same time,me as a sub/slave when i took that decision of accepting the brand/tatto i did it out of a nr of reasons,to simply erase it or cover it up would hurt me...it is like trying to deny a whole history with another(he might have passed away or the relationhip ended in amical terms).
the point is i think we cannot erase our pasts..and we should not.i would keep all the marks and be proud i was loved and loved in my life,my service and love and atentiion to the actuall Master/Dom would not be less because of it.So i would want him to accept me with all i bring as i would.
My 2 cents

shy

[VeniVidi]

When I got married I was "persuaded" to chuck away all the photographs and other mementoes of my previous relationships. Now I really regret having done so - there are loads and loads of nice memories now lost. That is more or less the same thing you are talking about - the question you asked "How do Masters/Dom's cope with seeing anothers mark on their property" must depend on one person to another - if for any reason you had a new master, it would be up to you to negotiate to keep your tattoo if that's the way you feel about it - I wish I'd negotiated and saved those mementoes - I was a fool.

Lovely to have a discussion with you shy one.

VV

[ksst]

I was thinking about getting a tattoo, but my Master doesn't like them that much. I think I'm going to get an ink stamp made instead that says "Property of..." . It won't be permanent which is a downside (or an upside, considering the fun he will have refreshing it), but it will make him happier, my main purpose.

[Ozme52]

I dislike permanent marks per se, so I don't mark any of my property, animate or not.

If I obtained property with another's mark, then I might decide to remarque it, add my own mark, or ignore it. If my sub or slave was so marked my decision would be based on what kind of mark, location, and whether it afforeded an opportunity to use it in play. For example I could just try to beat it off her... or use it to remind her she's mere chattel (an interesting kink)... or in humiliation play.

[denuseri]

Ive been branded (back when I earned my stripes) and then years later tattooed, both times with the same exact design (the brand faded after a year or so). Ive never been marked by any one with some special "personal" mark or other non-generic mark or their name. I think its rather foolish to use a mark that is identifiable as someone being the property of so and so when one can do that so much more easily with a collar.

[shy_lovegirl[Quest10]]

@denu yes i agree,but the point is a tatto that was placed apon you by an owner(does not matter id it is a cat or a table) it stil is a signe of ownership of another.how would he react or you if the new owner would want it covered up or deleted?

[denuseri]

Well what I'm trying to get across is that a "brand" traditionally is a signifier of one who is a slave.

IE the brand tells people someone is a slave, but not who owns one (symbolic or not); where as the collar traditionally does that job.

All of which is beside the point.

Personally for me if its a symbol...shrugs...big deal. One can always deal with it or get a new mark of some kind or remove the other one at their leisure.