Possessive:
Possession, in the context of linguistics, is an asymmetric relationship between two constituents, the referent of one of which (the possessor) possesses (owns, rules over, has as a part, etc.) the referent of the other.
desirous of owning; genitive: the case expressing ownership; having or showing a desire to control or dominate; "a possessive parent" wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
vs...
Protective:
To guard or keep something safe from harm, attack, or injury.
intended or adapted to afford protection of some kind; "a protective covering"; "the use of protective masks and equipment"; "protective coatings ...
protective(p): (usually followed by `of') solicitously caring or mindful; "protective of his reputation". wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
---
Difficult to draw the distinction when in the actual position of being possessed or possessing.
When demonstrating acts of possessiveness, a person may argue that they are merely being protective.
Like a boyfriend beating up another guy for just checking out his girl.
Could the boyfriend view it as him knowing what the other guy may be thinking and find that the girl may be in danger with this guy and hence thinks he is 'protecting' the girl by beating the other guy up?
Then again, others may view it as possessiveness as he seems to be treating his girlfriend as a possession. Something he owns and has a right over her. Has a RIGHT to PREVENT OTHERS from even getting close to his possession.
In a legal sense, ownership would be 'the right by which a thing belongs to some one in particular, to the exclusion of all other persons'.
Then again, one could argue that any monogamous relationship portrays some sort of human possessive nature.
As you claim that your partner is yours and not another's. Is that not claiming some sort of 'ownership' over the person?
You wouldn't say that he/she is someone else's or does not have a special connection to you and to you alone.
Would you not get hurt if that person were to go with someone else or if he/she decides to leave you? Wouldn't you try to prevent it if you see unfolding in front of you?
Surely a part of you would like to do so. Even if you do let them go in the end, a part of you will always think that that person was one 'yours'.
So, in effect, is everyone in a monogamous relationship technically possessive?
How do we draw the line between the brawling bogen who beats up any guy who even looks at his girl and the mere acknowledgement of the special connection a couple shares in a relationship?
Could we argue the latter is just protectiveness and signs of affection?
Of course we are getting ahead of ourselves since a relationship is not a one way street. Both parties in a relationship would surely share some sort of possessiveness over each other.
Even if you are an independent sort of couple, you wouldn't want your partner to leave because he/she alone does make you feel a special way and makes you feel happy.
Until you have completely fallen out of love with someone, you would definitely be devastated if your partner were to share THAT feeling with someone else that isn't you. That feeling you thought you 'owned' and that he/she only shared with you.
Maybe, being human, we are ALL selfish, possessive and ugly inside.
Maybe that is why they always say, 'If you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all'.
Perhaps it is a saying to remind us to take a closer look at ourselves first before acting upon something that is hypocritical and may hurt someone unnecessarily.
My mum is right. There is nothing wrong with being quiet, sometimes.
5 comments:
Being quiet would be not making a post about this.
LOL.
But in all seriousness, I think there is an obvious distinction between being protective and being possessive. Being protective is looking out for the interest of the subject, while being possessive is looking out for the interest of the owner.
I think in the case of a male getting aggressive over another male showing interest on his female partner is him being possessive, and in no way protective. The female is not harmed in anyway, and the only thing hurt is probably the male's ego. Jealousy is natural, don't get me wrong, however I feel that if the male reacts with aggression, he is at fault. That shows that he's being possessive.
And in the case of being in a relationship = having ownership over the other partner, i think that is not the right way to view it. I think you can see it as an agreement to be obliged to the other person in certain matters, but never as having ownership. Because if you own something, only you can relinquish rights of ownership yourself, and in relationships the partner can end the relationship without consent of the person.
I don't know. Me rambling as usual.
Back to study. Wheeee.....
josh mirrors my view precisely.
But everyone's idea of 'being protective' is where the subjective element comes out, in a sense that everyone's idea of the best interest of the one he's protecting is different.
I did say "sometimes" though. But yeah, after writing everything I realised maybe I should keep my opinions to myself but I thought, I would like ppl's opinions as well.
Definitely agree with defintion, Jo: "Being protective is looking out for the interest of the subject, while being possessive is looking out for the interest of the owner."
But, in a way, certain things you do in a relationship is looking out for you own interest. You do not want the person to leave because they make you feel a certain way and hence you do certain things to keep them with you or even exclude others from your relationship.
And, the way you do that borders along a line at times. So, when would you truly excuse someone for truly being over-possessive?
Of course I do not agree with saying that a person can "own" another but being in a relationship (at least a normal monogamous one), in some ways, does exclude others in a sort of informal way. Though, each party of course has the liberty to leave this sort of 'exclusion' as and when they want to. So, tis just interesting lar... Feel free to zha me... Im just musing over the 'exclusion' point. HAHA!
Which I guess comes down to Jia's point of it being very subjective. As the intention behind actions may merely be 'protective' and thinking this is for the 'best interest' of the other(protective over relationship=possessive?? confused now).
Whoa.. then we come back to the things we learnt in moral in SAM. Deontology vs Consequentialism.
Forgive me for any annoyance evoked.
Ooo, but actually one has no actual 'right' to exclude others except in the little twisted heads of ours.
I think not wanting a person to leave is not possessive. Not allowing a person to leave is possessive. Allowing a person to leave despite knowing that you'll never feel the same feelings is something noble and commendable.
in my opinion, being protective over the relationship is being possessive.
you wrote alot but don't have time to read and analyse. Will do so some when my head clears.
Post a Comment