hmm... It seems odd to me that you would associate possession with relationship...
Haven't you come across it more often that we humans treat other humans as our property? What if you tried to disconcert this correlation, or what if I said that it is impossible to own a human being, even if a law empowered me to do so, or even if a religious belief gave me legitimacy? How do you see it when parents have their children like a project or property? Do your parents own you and you own them? How then can you be free and they be free?
To answer your question: I never owned my parents, therefore I don't have to dis-own them :) I lived with them, loved them, hated them, understood them, misunderstood them ... and so on. They did everything they were able to do in bringing me up. I am grateful for that.
I may be stopping in writing to you and maybe wanting to continue. That is nothing I can give you an answer to. Why do you want to know?
If I call something "mine", then I give myself the right to dispose of it as I please, don't I? What pleases me though, can very well be harmful.
What is really mine on this earth? Has the planet inherited something to me personally or is it not rather the case that I am - a temporal - part of the planetary organism and everything around me grew or changed evolutionarily, just like man? How can I take possession of something in which I am embedded and part of? I think rather that strict possessive thinking magnifies problems and wants to manifest them in absolute terminologies, rather than considering being in contact with something as a relative act with a degree of uncertainty.
This implies an openness in a relationship, and the uncertainty that every relationship brings with it is easier to accept if I don't consider the other person as "mine", because then I am less annoying, less stressful and less quarrelsome or punishing. I do not suffer so much, when things change, as they always do.
Can you be in a good relationship with someone without them being yours? Surely this is possible, in my eyes even better than if the other person thinks I would be his or her own and vice versa. How else can I allow the other person to be different from me, to have an alien view, to go his or her own way, to develop in a particular way?
Isn't property the reason why you formulate that there are no alternatives between fighting and being "eaten by cows"? Have you ever heard of a Tetra Lemma? It is quite interesting to leave the habit of having to choose between two things.
Am I afraid of anger? A good question.
I'll answer it by drawing on my experience. Whenever I get angry and give this anger more space and keep feeding it, I do badly with it. Anger can turn to hate if I don't pay enough attention to myself.
From my point of view, this is what makes my anger become powerful in the first place, because I succumb to the delusion that it is another person who is "upsetting me". Usually, however, it is my own inner executioner who just thinks I am a weakling or a coward because I did this or that wrong and then points the finger at the other person who allegedly caused my anger.
Where instead I can learn to say to myself: Oh, I feel anger. I do. There is my anger. And when I do that and take a break, that anger becomes something else, something that soon doesn't feel like anger anymore. I may allow me to judge myself less and to free myself from the notion that another person could "take" my anger or "make it disappear". How is that possible, when the other person is long gone, goes about his own business and perhaps doesn't even think about this episode anymore? It is very painful to make oneself dependent on another human, who might feel a situation completely different, to relieve my anger.
Also, I can think of "anger" as not "mine" but just as "anger arising". Does it make a difference for you in hearing it in this way?
Maybe the above answered this question of yours:
Why would you lead a life you do not own and if you don't own your life then who does and why would you lead a life that somebody or something else owns? That is theft to use something and to lead and guide something that is not yours.
I would like to question back:
Why would anyone need to own me? Isn't leading and living my life already enough? Does the universe have an "owner"? Why would it?
Your conclusion on this is incorrect: If I do not own myself then it doesn't automatically lead to others owning me. Instead, it makes ownership impossible. If there is no ownership, there is not theft. I need not hating anybody who tries to get "hold of me" (owning me) because it's not possible that someone owns me. Does it make sense for you when I formulate it in this way? It's a radical formulation and thought. But I think in this exxagerated form it disturbs enough to contemplate about it. What do you think?
RE: "I AM DONNA - and I'm the hammer"