Tagging

Slave Names and Tagging ~

Within 'primarily' the last 2,000 years, the practice of naming became intricately attached to providing 'lineage' information across generational lives. When a man 'gave' his name to a newborn, he was in fact identifying that this child was legitimate or that he 'believed' that he had contributed the sperm necessary to 'create' or bring this child to life. Within this framework, the 'man' was the only person who could legally own property. His primary property would include any females under his 'house' or control and any and all children under his 'house' or control. Women born into the house were considered property of the house to be used by the 'owner' to forward the wealth of the house or the attainment and furtherance of power. To do this, the owner of the woman would sell the woman, including her attachments to his house, into the property ownership of another man. This would often create alliances within 'houses' or weave families together to provide a larger house, more money, more power, more status. This form of 'status' did not remain stable. When a house bore only daughters, the daughters could wield independent status and retain lineage. If the woman's family was of extreme power and wealth, the woman could ascend to full management of the 'house', her husband becoming 'consort' or identified as of the lesser line within the hierarchy. In such cases, it was most common for the family to 'wait' for the next legitimate heir (male) to depose the reign of the woman. Retention of property within the 'mainline' of a family was often considered to be of more importance than strict adherence to issues of females owning or managing large properties, wealth, or concerns.

This patriarchal structure continues to exist within European, American, and Middle Eastern societies today, although some aspects of the naming process are now fading. An adult woman is 'legitimized' by being taken 'under' the name of her male partner. Her offspring are then considered to be legitimate as well or protected by survivor rights. While it is now politically incorrect to consider marriage/purchase or exchange as the selling of a female's rights into the custody or ownership of her husband, there is still an element of truth or reflections of patriarchal ownership evident. The 'bride' presents herself as 'virgin' unsoiled or untouched by any other man, she does this by dressing in virginal cloth 'white' which in ancient times was the color of choice used so that on the bedding night 'immediately after marriage' the man could penetrate the woman (still wearing her dress) and the blood of her breaking hymen would spill onto the cloth of the dress. This 'evidence' of purity or virginity (her dress being removed) would then be paraded before the still gathered families to PROVE the consummation of the contract {marriage} (money) and prevent refusal of the female in disgrace back to her family. This union was further marked by the wearing of a 'band of ownership' upon the finger of the female. The 'mutual' exchange of rings is a much more modern occurrence. In addition, many cultures provide for 'married attire' that a married woman must wear in public. This can go so far as the style of her hair. This 'representation' of marriage is to identify to other males that she is 'under the name' of a male. It should be noted that men did not have the same requirements of dress or behavior. In fact, in many cultures, the man was seen to be simply the owner, and the females attached to him. He might have numerous official wives and numerous women whose status was so inferior as not requiring marital status (from the man's point of view). These secondary or beta females were called concubines, etc. It should be further noted that children, except those in the main line, were considered property of the house. Those who would be less valuable (distant cousins) were often sold, traded, or used within the house by men of higher rank or status. This applied to both male children and female children. Upon reaching adult age, this 'usage' would then be determined strictly by the rank or status of the adult 'free' individuals (were the child male). The ability to deliver a 'virginal' girl into marriage often reflected the status, wealth, and power of her family to protect her virginity.

Within the BDSM community, there are those who enjoy the practice of 'naming' or 'tagging' the submissive/slave within the relationship. This issuance of a 'name' is to suggest that the submissive/slave existed in a nameless or non-genuine state prior to becoming the 'property' of their new dominant. The removal or 'stripping' of existing family name is sometimes seen as a way to separate the submissive from their past, from their family, ties, associations, and responsibilities, to redirect the individual solely toward service to and responsibility toward the new dominant.

When this name exists 'within' the relationship, it can provide meaning to the individuals involved; it can represent an expressed devotion between them. However, if the process involves stripping away existing names or associations, it is important to clarify if and how the transition will be managed, and to consolidate steps to ensure the submissive's well-being. The increased dependency may appear to represent the desire of the submissive, but in fact may contribute to the actual destruction of the relationship. One of the most recognizable traits of abuse and coercion is actions that 'isolate' the individual (submissive/slave). Additionally, diminishment in front of friends, family, coworkers, by the imposition of 'slave behavior' or name-calling publicly, can be severely injurious to the individual. If you are considering 'naming' your submissive or slave, clearly define the 'arena' in which this name shall be used and develop a clear consolidation plan, such as when and how naming will occur and how family/social ties will be addressed. Names used in privacy or within a scene can be experienced with great pleasure. Names used in public displays (within BDSM community associations, meetings, munches, and events) can provide clear statements of attachment and bonding between dominant and submissive.

Every human should have a full and robust life, which includes family, friends, occupations, hobbies, passions, and desires. This medley within a life radiates the health of the life, the health of the person.

If you are seeking to 'scene name' your submissive/slave, some of the more favored ways of approaching this are to carefully consider the characteristics, traits, and personality of your submissive and match your submissive with a descriptive name that suits or represents those characteristics the best. Always try to ensure that your actions are taken to enhance the quality of your relationship. Care should be exercised to ensure that this 'naming' is not a reflection of insecurity on the part of the dominant or based on a need to 'show off' before other dominants. In conclusion, thoughtful communication and mutual understanding are essential to maintaining respect and well-being for all individuals involved.

long text

Archivist Note: Email links (steeibtrfl@aol.com, steelbfl@sonic.net) are no longer valid and have been omitted from this archive. The bookstore link was for a heritage site that is no longer active and has been omitted from this archive. OP's works were not found on the successor live site. Also, the discussion group on Yahoo Groups is no longer available and was not found on archive.org.

To purchase books by the OP, please search your preferred bookseller by title or by the OP's noms de plume: "Mistress Steel" and "F.R.R. Mallory".

Retrieved May 2026 https://web.archive.org/web/20120127131020/http://www.steel-door.com/tagging.htm.