hawkwolf7
Posts: 85
Joined: 10/24/2004 Status: offline
|
Actually, chia brought up an example of that differentiation. In the Leather groups I hang out with, "boy" refers to a male submissive, and "boi" refers to a female submissive. But the bois I know are usually not fems, (i.e., not into being feminine), so "boi" wouldn't be appropriate to describe every female submissive. But, in general, I am always amazed at how seriously people take what they are called. I recognize that words can collect both negative and positive connotations, and often without merit. When if first went public, I figured that a "subbie" was the feminine version of the male or gender neutral "sub". Needless to say, I got my head handed to me in a hurry by those who felt that "subbie" was demeaning. That viewpoint appears to be very common for some reason. And, I think it has bled over into Domme. I am surprised at the number of Fem Doms who find that term demeaning. My suspicion is that for some, any differentiation made due to gender is demeaning. As if they are somehow "less real" because they are female??? I certainly don't see that. To me, these are labels of convenience, to denote a gender, not to connote a judgement on their abilities. So, back to the topic. Perhaps it is a good thing that "submissive" or "sub", does not have a gender denotation. At least it prevents me from offending someone inadvertantly. HW
< Message edited by hawkwolf7 -- 5/13/2007 6:55:48 PM >
_____________________________
p.s. Everything I write is simply one person's opinion: mine. Feel free to take what is useful and blow off the rest. All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost.
|