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.