Having had a chance to digest some of your remarks, I have a few more questions. Everyone seems to agree that objectification is the reduction of a person to a commodity. A commodity being something that is a "marketable item produced to satisfy wants or needs." Marketable indicates that the item has value. Produced indicates that it is the end result of a systematic plan put into action. Value implies that the thing has worth. With this in mind, how do you then reconcile the concept of "are without rights or worth", If, by the very definition, any object that you own, purchase, or create, has value be it perceived or real?

In another vein, I to like the concept of "deconstruction". However, it to raises certain questions for me. Where does the line exist in the objectification that separates reality from fantasy. To Dominants this question. You obviously chose your submissive based on a set of values or criteria that made her or him attractive to you in some fashion. Some portion of this was the personality portion of that persons makeup. If part of your objectification, or deconstruction, the the modification of this personality portion, at what point do you change the very thing that made this person attractive to you.

Submissives. At what point do such fundamental changes go over the line into hard limit areas? How do you judge?