The (Human) Pet Thread

[BiBunny]

I can get VERY buried in my own shit - work, illness, more work.

It's actually nice to be needed and whined for sometimes. If H whines it's the sign of an underlying issue for him usually. It's sort of annoying to smooth over the old psychic scars every year or so because he's acting out, but it's just what I know to expect at this point. If it was really frequent, I'd be outta there.

Huh. I never thought of it that way. The penis-wielding Owner told me the other day that he noticed I'm much needier when I'm really stressed out. I guess maybe he thinks it's nice that it's HIM I turn to when I'm tired, stressed, or in need of advice or a sympathetic ear. Even if I probably could pick a much less annoying way to do it.

 

[Netzach]

Huh. I never thought of it that way. The penis-wielding Owner told me the other day that he noticed I'm much needier when I'm really stressed out. I guess maybe he thinks it's nice that it's HIM I turn to when I'm tired, stressed, or in need of advice or a sympathetic ear. Even if I probably could pick a much less annoying way to do it.

I think most people have some version of this problem, if both are struggling for a living or striving real hard, it's even worse. So we've been though the "I've been really REALLY good and denying myself all complaint, see what a good boy am I" phase and you know what? "Pay attention to me, please, sob" once in a blue moon is SO MUCH HEALTHIER.

Of course, I do actually have to pay attention, but I don't mind that. It's nice to do.

If this got to be onerous or a big insecurity fest, then my mind would change about it. But that's a personal preference thing.

I've had these moments with T once in a great while. Usually when he's talking about some T girl he just met - I experience insecurity more than jealousy. A second to acknowledge my position in the world and I'm perfectly happy again. I've learned to ask to hear the things I need to hear in a calm and adult way, looking eye to eye and gauging the honesty for myself - there is no such thing as "he should just know" because there's no such thing, don't I know myself.

I also know that after over a decade no one's really going anywhere voluntarily at this moment. If he's still meeting up with me when I'm this boring, no one's going anywhere.

 

[00Syd]

Me, too. Which makes me think I'm not submissive at all, just an attention whore.

Oh man, ditto. I think that all the time.

I see the main purpose of a pet being companionship. So the most important thing to do is greet your owner enthusiastically when he comes home, be ready to cuddle up with him if he wants to rest, play with him if he wants to play, and distract him into playing if he's working too hard. On the other hand you have to be sensitive enough to leave him alone when he wants alone time or if he's angry, and you have to be able to entertain yourself while he's at work.

That's about all real pets do. They don't do chores, they definitely don't work. A human pet provides sex and conversation in addition to the things an animal pet provides. A human pet can also be reasonably expected to be self-grooming, but on the other hand a human pet requires an allowance of spending money which an animal pet doesn't. Anything beyond this basic relationship is subject to negotiation.

Yep, I'd say Owner/pet is about companionship. But I'm not sure that you can quite extrapolate the animal experience into the human experience here, at least not completely.

Well, I would say that any relationship is about companionship.

And I'm with Bunny on the not being able to completely extrapolate the animal experience onto the human experience. Somethings will naturally overlap, but this is a relationship between two human beings with human needs and worries and responsibilities. To say that the only thing a human pet provides beyond what an animal pet does is sex and conversation, completely overlooks that.

As we frequently like to say on this board, a PYL/pyl relationship is still a relationship. Somebody is going to have to do the dishes and take out the trash.

 

[JMohegan]

So, pet-type people, what do you do when you're not on your fluffy pink pillows?

I once asked a similar question, in the course of a conversation with a guy whose girlfriend ID'd as puppy pet person. His response was that both of them were very into training.

Not roleplay pretending she's a canine, but training using techniques similar to those he would use on an actual dog. Unfortunately, I never got a very clear sense of what exactly she was being trained to do.

 

[sb2009]

um...so where do I get one of those gigs where all I need to do is greet my owner at the door and provide sex and companionship? Becasue that's sounding schweeet right now!!!!

OK seriously though...I know I am needy when I'm stressed. And I'm finally learning that "he should just know" is just not my reality...and asking for some attention has much better consequences than acting like a jerk. For me, at least.

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

Huh. I never thought of it that way. The penis-wielding Owner told me the other day that he noticed I'm much needier when I'm really stressed out. I guess maybe he thinks it's nice that it's HIM I turn to when I'm tired, stressed, or in need of advice or a sympathetic ear. Even if I probably could pick a much less annoying way to do it.

Apparently, I'm much easier to control when I'm stressed to the max.

My brain is so full of thoughts and is so unfocused, a few sharp words just cut through the swirling fog and I snap back into place in a moment. I think my brain just latches onto that one thing and zeros all the attention in. And I back. And I'm happy, and remarkably calm.

 

[Adakgirl]

I have always thought of us human beings as animals, human animals.
In the profound words of TIME magazine in the article "How man began" March 1994

'No single, essential difference separates human beings from other animals'.

Pet
1. An animal (human) kept for amusement or companionship.
2. An object of the affections.
3. A person especially loved or indulged; a favorite
a person particularly cherished.
b. Expressing or showing affection (pet name)
3. Being a favorite:
To be the person that someone in authority likes best and treats better than anyone else

Any animal kept by humans. (or humans kept by humans) my words in bold
For companionship or pleasure rather than for utility. The main distinction between pets and domesticated livestock is the degree of contact between owner and animal. Another distinction is the owner's affection for the animal, which is often returned.

So it seems to me that it would feel perfectly natural for some people to identify as a pet, or identify some aspects of their personalities as pet like.

 

[sunandshadow]

And I'm with Bunny on the not being able to completely extrapolate the animal experience onto the human experience. Somethings will naturally overlap, but this is a relationship between two human beings with human needs and worries and responsibilities. To say that the only thing a human pet provides beyond what an animal pet does is sex and conversation, completely overlooks that.

Well, personally I think that when choosing to envision a relationship in pet/owner terms instead of regular human relationship terms, part of the goal is to not get bogged down in human complexities and strive for the simpler and more unconditional relationship an animal pet and its owner have. True there are are always compromises that need to be made; I was thinking about it from the point of view where the pet is like a housewife and is not working or attending school, but not very many couples are going to be in that situation.

 

[00Syd]

Well, personally I think that when choosing to envision a relationship in pet/owner terms instead of regular human relationship terms, part of the goal is to not get bogged down in human complexities and strive for the simpler and more unconditional relationship an animal pet and its owner have. True there are are always compromises that need to be made; I was thinking about it from the point of view where the pet is like a housewife and is not working or attending school, but not very many couples are going to be in that situation.

Well, I don't really have a goal with my relationship. And my relationship is a human one. I'm not an animal, and just because I identify as a pet within the context of my relationship doesn't mean that I somehow become more of an animal, or act more like one, or try to act more like one. I have absolutely no desire to be an animal or act like one (out of play). My relationship has no goal, and, because we are two humans trying to make a relationship work, there will be human complexities regardless. I think that would be true of a Person/pet relationship whether the pet lives at home, or not.

Like I have already said previously in this thread,

it's not about trying to resemble an animal. Some people identify as a specific animal, and that's cool, but that's not me, which is why I make the distinction between being a pet, and being a human pet.

Being focused on the pet in the relationship as being animal-like is fine, but that just has no relevance to my relationship. My animalistic tendencies have little to do with why I am a pet. The reason I am a pet, has much, much more to do with who I am in a relationship with, than any of my inherent qualities. Again, like I said previously in the thread,

I can't help thinking that Sebs qualities make me a pet almost as much as my own do. With somebody else, my inherent qualities could be translated into a Daddy/girl relationship, or a bedroom-only type relationship, or an M/s relationship. Seb's qualities as a person and as a dominant, for some reason, when put together with my qualities as a person and as a submissive, come out as a Person/pet relationship.

I guess I don't see being a pet in such a literal way. I've translated my idea of a pet, and a pet's relationship with it's person, into something that fits beautifully with my relationship. A more literal translation, honestly, just seems like it would be exhausting - and short lived. For me.

 

[rinka]

I was thinking last night about how we're all discussing qualities that make us pets, but I can't help thinking that Sebs qualities make me a pet almost as much as my own do. With somebody else, my inherent qualities could be translated into a Daddy/girl relationship, or a bedroom-only type relationship, or an M/s relationship. Seb's qualities as a person and as a dominant, for some reason, when put together with my qualities as a person and as a submissive, come out as a Person/pet relationship.

It's not like my inherent qualities are at all specific to that of a pet, but that's the way of interacting that makes sense, not just to me alone, but to us, together.

I really like this perspective and I think I need to think more like this.

Maybe it is more about him. He is very attentive to my body language, facial expressions and different sounds I make. He reads me really well like that.

I asked my PYL about the pet thing again and what made him see me like one. What I gathered from our talk is that he wants me to develop this side of me. Letting go, be more emotional, more body. I long for that, and it's really one of the things I crave about different kinds of play. To be taken out of my head and into my body. Maybe by letting myself be a pet some of the time I can get there.

I felt threatened by the idea of being a pet I think mostly because I have this constant need to verbalize and analyze every little thing. Want him to motivate and explain pretty much all he says. I have this automatic response of asking a question. How? Why? Apparently it scares me to tone that side of me down, in a "what does that make me ?" kind of way. So that's obviously what I need to do.

He should probably tell me to zip it more often, but he's very patient.

And sometimes when I'm with him I simply let all of that go and just snuggle. It feels good.

 

[sunandshadow]

Well, I don't really have a goal with my relationship. And my relationship is a human one. I'm not an animal, and just because I identify as a pet within the context of my relationship doesn't mean that I somehow become more of an animal, or act more like one, or try to act more like one. I have absolutely no desire to be an animal or act like one (out of play). My relationship has no goal, and, because we are two humans trying to make a relationship work, there will be human complexities regardless. I think that would be true of a Person/pet relationship whether the pet lives at home, or not.

Like I have already said previously in this thread,

Being focused on the pet in the relationship as being animal-like is fine, but that just has no relevance to my relationship. My animalistic tendencies have little to do with why I am a pet. The reason I am a pet, has much, much more to do with who I am in a relationship with, than any of my inherent qualities. Again, like I said previously in the thread,


I guess I don't see being a pet in such a literal way. I've translated my idea of a pet, and a pet's relationship with it's person, into something that fits beautifully with my relationship. A more literal translation, honestly, just seems like it would be exhausting - and short lived. For me.

Doesn't everyone have goals within a relationship? Or strategies for "trying to make the relationship work". that's basically what I meant when I mentioned goals.

I don't think the animality is really important, it would be just as valid to consider a human being as the pet of an alien or something like that. Would make a great story, actually. But I do think the idea that the owner and the pet aren't the same species is important, because the essence of the owner/pet relationship is that it isn't a typical human/human relationship, instead it's simpler and more pure, unequal but not in a D/s way. When the two people in a relationship aren't the same species, both have to recognize that they can't judge the other either by their own standards, or by the standards of the community they grew up in. When the two people aren't the same species they don't see it as a flaw if they aren't the same mentally, instead the important part of their relationship is loyalty with a side of visceral attraction.

Obviously different people are going to have different ideas about what an owner/pet relationship is or should be. But logically it does have to be different in some essential way from a human/human relationship, or it wouldn't deserve a different name. And since the name is inspired by the idea of a human owning an animal, that essential difference ought to be some property commonly observed in a human/animal relationship. I do see the commonality with a daddy/girl relationship though. Parent/child love, like owner/pet love, is supposed to be unconditional, more simple, pure, and loyal than between two adult humans.

 

[sarahmiller]

Wow Sunandshadow, so deep so deep. As for me I like my kitten.

 

[graceanne]

"he should just know" is just not my reality.

I don't think it's anyone reality. That's the sort of thing that only happens on TV and in fairy tales.

 

[the captians wench]

um...so where do I get one of those gigs where all I need to do is greet my owner at the door and provide sex and companionship? Becasue that's sounding schweeet right now!!!!

For the moment, I think this is my relationship...well except that the door isn't really the door to my apt or his place or anything like that, but I do have a certian way I'm suposed to greet him when he's online (turn on my cam and stand in a certian possition, it's equivalent to greeting him at the door naked I think). I'm loved on as I need, but for the most part it's about providing what he needs.

I can't relate to the comments Syd and Bunny made about voicing their distaste for something. I get a strange satisfaction out of doing things that he enjoys, even more so if it's something that I am not fond of or even hate. It really gives me fullfillment to know that I did something I thought impossible for me to do, did it to his satisfaction or beyond, and recieved our equivilant to a pat on the head and a "good girl". It doesn't even cross my mind to voice how much I hate something, unless he asks about it.

If it weren't for the fact that I do need so much attention and care I think I would identify with "slave" more, but the worst way to hurt me is to ignore me, and showing indifference would kill me. I know that it doesn't nessisarrily have to be that way, but in my mind that's just how it works, how I define that lable.

OK seriously though...I know I am needy when I'm stressed. And I'm finally learning that "he should just know" is just not my reality...and asking for some attention has much better consequences than acting like a jerk. For me, at least.

This lesson was beat into me, quite littlerally.

I internalize a lot. I'm just not a complainer. In relationships, in work, with life in general I don't like to complain about anything big or small. When I do complain it's either something too big for me to handle on my own, or I've just internalized too much and it has to come out.

But Jounar has this great ability to use my need to serve and please him to break me of these bad habbits, like keeping everything bottled in me. It amazes me some times what power his command has over me.

When he decided that I was going on a diet to make myself healthier, he wanted to weigh me so that he has something physical to measure my progress by. I told him my issue with scales. Once I see my weight, I become obsessed with it, and more to the point if it changes. I will weigh myself once an hour. Very unhealthy stuff, and the reason I never owned a scale. He stuck with his decition though and I bought a scale. When I told him that I was becoming obsessive with my weight and discribed to him the day I had, his solution was simple: "Okay, you're not allowed to weigh yourself unless I say so". And it worked. I haven't even been tempted to weigh myself. My fear of disapointing him is greater than anything else. Of course this is replacing one obsession with another I realize, but it really has stopped some very harmful behaviours.

I prolly could end up like one of those psyco stalking ex girfriends.

 

[CurlyKat]

If it weren't for the fact that I do need so much attention and care I think I would identify with "slave" more, but the worst way to hurt me is to ignore me, and showing indifference would kill me.

There's a theory that there are five languages of love, and different people need to "hear" they are loved in one particular language over another. I'm most definitely a quality time together type. Many of the other ways don't necessarily matter to me, but I HAVE to have a good amount of time together and just plain attention from him to really believe that everything is all right and that he really does care. While hearing "good girl" is something I love, and it means a lot, it doesn't mean too much of anything at all without the time together. Obviously all five will play into things, but there's definitely a hierarchy of which means the most. (The five languages: quality time, words of affirmation, acts of service, receiving gifts, and physical touch)

I wonder if within the whole scope of submissives, the type of love language you require helps determine what category of submissive you fall under.

 

[BiBunny]

There's a theory that there are five languages of love, and different people need to "hear" they are loved in one particular language over another. I'm most definitely a quality time together type. Many of the other ways don't necessarily matter to me, but I HAVE to have a good amount of time together and just plain attention from him to really believe that everything is all right and that he really does care. While hearing "good girl" is something I love, and it means a lot, it doesn't mean too much of anything at all without the time together. Obviously all five will play into things, but there's definitely a hierarchy of which means the most. (The five languages: quality time, words of affirmation, acts of service, receiving gifts, and physical touch)

I wonder if within the whole scope of submissives, the type of love language you require helps determine what category of submissive you fall under.

LOL, I almost started a thread about the five love languages the other day. I'm a quality time person, too, and my Owners are decidedly not. It can get hairy sometimes.

 

[CurlyKat]

LOL, I almost started a thread about the five love languages the other day. I'm a quality time person, too, and my Owners are decidedly not. It can get hairy sometimes.

I bet! It's so hard sometimes to put aside your impulse feelings to think logically that they might be expressing love, but you just don't get it or feel it because it's now how you best perceive love.

 

[sunandshadow]

That's interesting - of those 5 things, quality time is probably the least important to me. I need a lot of alone time so, while I'd like an SO to pay about 2 hours worth of attention to me a day, more than that can get smothering.

 

[graceanne]

My LoL is words of praise. K's (and the kids) is touch. Touch is pretty low on mine, so it's a daily thing for me to remember to hug and kiss them, cause it does nothing for me. LOL K, on the other hand, struggles to remember that if he doesn't TELL me he's happy with me, he thinks i'm pretty, he loves me, etc., that I get a bitchy.

 

[BiBunny]

Maybe I should've started that thread because I'm *really* interested in people's responses!

There are little tests online that are supposed to tell you which of the love languages are most important to you. I took one a long time ago, and quality time outscored the second place language (physical touch) by more than two times. Physical touch, words of affirmation, and receiving gifts are all about equal for me, and then acts of service is way down at the bottom of the barrel.

There's a line in a 3 Doors Down song that goes, "There's a difference in spending time with me and killing time while I'm there." It's an ongoing struggle for me sometimes to get the Owner people to "get" it. I don't need a whole lot of quality time, like maybe 20 or 30 minutes a day of people turning off the TV, putting down the computer, and just talking to me and hanging out with me without other distractions. Physical touch and words of affirmation can be included in this, too, and then I'm good for awhile.

I'm thinking seriously about demanding that the Owner people take the damn test, too. When the Masterly one got a wild hair up his ass one day and took the MBTI, he asked me what I'd scored on it after he took it. (I've taken all these random psych tests because my undergrad degree was in psychology.) I told him what I was and that I'd known all along what he was without him even having to take the stupid test, LOL.

Anyway, he Googled my personality type, and he's seemed to relate to me much better now that he realizes certain traits of mine are just "me," not some reaction to something the two of them do or don't do.

 

[CurlyKat]

I didn't want to totally hijack the thread, but it seemed relevent.

Even though I've taken it before, I just took it again to see just how different the levels were. Here are mine:

7 Words of Affirmation
11 Quality Time
2 Receiving Gifts
3 Acts of Service
7 Physical Touch

So yeah, quality time way above everything else, with words and touch tied for second. Combine the three into one event and I'm a big pile of well-loved mush.

It might be a good idea to get partners and significant others to take the test just out of curiosity (I know what Master's top is without him taking it, but the secondary ones are iffy), especially if there's a communication issue.

Maybe there should be a poll on here! It'd be really interesting to see what everyone else is, too.

ETA: This is where I took it online. It only took about 5, maybe 10 minutes. Even though the statements are directed towards having a spouse (like the statements are worded "I love it when my husband...."), it still works just the same.

 

[MisterSir]

My first guess is that I'm a physical touch person, so it'll be interesting to see if the test supports that. Answer: Yes and no.

1 - Words of Affirmation
9 - Quality Time
4 - Receiving Gifts
7 - Acts of Service
9 - Physical Touch

Makes sense. Words are cheap and easily twisted, and I always feel self-conscious when being given gifts.

 

[00Syd]

I'm sceptical about how much an online test can tell someone about themselves.

 

[SimonBrooke]

Well, personally I think that when choosing to envision a relationship in pet/owner terms instead of regular human relationship terms, part of the goal is to not get bogged down in human complexities and strive for the simpler and more unconditional relationship an animal pet and its owner have.

You're a dog person, aren't you? The more stand-offish of my two cats is on my lap at present. She doesn't have to be. She shares the house with me; she doesn't have to, she's free to leave, and she eats very little of the food I put down because she feeds herself almost entirely by hunting. The relationship between a person and a dog is simple. Dogs are pack animals and will follow the pack leader - the human - whatever, will submit to the pack leader, will bask in the attention of the pack leader. Domestic cats are solitary predators. They are not programmed to identify with one leader and follow him; they choose, or they don't choose.

Relationships with cats are not simple. Relationships with cats are subtle. As with a woman, you have to woo a cat, and, as with a woman, you have to work to maintain the relationship. But, as with a woman, the rewards can be very well worth it. I would like my woman to be somewhat like a cat.

There are little tests online that are supposed to tell you which of the love languages are most important to you. I took one a long time ago, and quality time outscored the second place language (physical touch) by more than two times. Physical touch, words of affirmation, and receiving gifts are all about equal for me, and then acts of service is way down at the bottom of the barrel.

OKCupid has a number of these, I just took this one here with the result 'Physical touch' (which I would have expected - I'm an intensely tactile person).

 

[JMohegan]

The relationship between a person and a dog is simple. Dogs are pack animals and will follow the pack leader - the human - whatever, will submit to the pack leader, will bask in the attention of the pack leader.

The relationship between a person and a dog is straightforward IF the human has done a competent job training the canine.

Think about this. If dogs were all wired to submit, how could there ever be an alpha in a wild or feral pack?

It is more correct to say that dogs are pack animals, wired for a social structure in which there is a clearly designated leader. In the absence of a figure that is demonstrably in charge, most dogs will try to fill that gap.

So when a human is inconsistent or irresponsible in training, you get a confused, manipulative, or even overtly aggressive dog as a pet. The relationship is anything BUT simple. It's a big unhealthy mess.