The question of pigeonholes.

The question of pigeonholes. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Switch

Message

riadre -> The question of pigeonholes. (8/10/2007 7:10:44 PM)
This is a rant. It seems to me that there are currently a number of 'who, what, where, why' threads...and 'are we/is this wrong?'. Why are we trying to explain and quantify and typify ourselves? It's annoying to sound like a broken record, needing to constantly reiterate seemingly obvious things , such as: 1. Some people switch. Some people don't. 2. Some people understand and accept it. Some people don't. 3. Some people will want to try it. Some people won't. 4. Some of us have proclivities towards one side or the other. Some don't. Overall: Everyone is different. It's like having a chorus of people watching you on the sidelines yelling 'categorise it!! Categorise it!!Give it assumptions and trends and qualities that will allow us to make generalisations about it and all its kind~!" It seems like the response is so incredibly obvious as to be completely annoying when people insist on trying to put you into some category or another. And when we ourselves try to put ourselves in a category. And there are probably a dozen hypocrisies in this rant which I've missed, or even noted, but there it is.

Elea -> RE: The question of pigeonholes. (8/10/2007 7:33:37 PM)
See, in my mind, this is an interesting topic to bring up. Just the other day I was protesting to someone about how I abhor labels, including the 'switch' tag. Their response is 'Labels are just shortcuts to help us recognize things and keep our minds better organized.' However, personally, I strongly disagree. I do think that people like to 'categorize'; its part of human nature to want to compartmentalize things; heck its even encouraged in psychology and sometimes other areas of 'personal therapy'. However, that does not mean its alright to devote time to grouping individual beings into narrow categories and then ascribe 'common factors' to all of them and consider them universally applicable to anyone we mentally stuff into that box - whether they fit or not. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this, Riadre; its nice to meet someone I can actually agree with, heh.

aparootsa -> RE: The question of pigeonholes. (8/10/2007 9:04:37 PM)
I, for one, don't mind when something new or particular to a certain situation is brought up. What I don't like is the constant wailing and gnashing of teeth that has been repeated ad nauseum. When posting questions of the above sorts (very general ones), it'd be great to do a quick search, read through the umpteen threads per month that ask the same ones, and THEN if you have something new to bring up, start a new one. Same goes with categories, I suppose. If you've got a pertinent comment on a better system of classification, have at it. Otherwise, please do hold your peace. Categories are useful as a starting point, but far less as a real guide to people - but this is the case for most things. Linguistic classification of dialects, development timelines for babies, and most all other analyses of human behaviors completely break down under close analysis; this is why people spend their entire lives in academia trying to figure us out :)

KMsAngel -> RE: The question of pigeonholes. (8/10/2007 9:07:49 PM)
[sm=rage.gif] <----gnashing example they shouldn't waste their time. us females especially can NEVER be figured out.

arayofsunshine55 -> RE: The question of pigeonholes. (8/11/2007 8:44:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elea See, in my mind, this is an interesting topic to bring up. Just the other day I was protesting to someone about how I abhor labels, including the 'switch' tag. Their response is 'Labels are just shortcuts to help us recognize things and keep our minds better organized.' However, personally, I strongly disagree. I strongly disagree as well. Well that and I don't want someone who is looking for the short-cut, reader's digest version of me. I have the time to devote to saying much about who I am and what makes me tick. And I'd much prefer to be really specific about me. My own idiosyncrasies. Someone looking for the short-cut is not at all my cup of tea. Someone needing to bunch me in with the rest, not my cup of tea. someone who thinks he has a sense of me cause of the box he's tried to shove me into, not my cup of tea. Especially since I find that most of the "usual" generalizations do not fit me.

Grlwithboy -> RE: The question of pigeonholes. (8/11/2007 12:17:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: arayofsunshine55 quote: ORIGINAL: Elea See, in my mind, this is an interesting topic to bring up. Just the other day I was protesting to someone about how I abhor labels, including the 'switch' tag. Their response is 'Labels are just shortcuts to help us recognize things and keep our minds better organized.' However, personally, I strongly disagree. I strongly disagree as well. Well that and I don't want someone who is looking for the short-cut, reader's digest version of me. I have the time to devote to saying much about who I am and what makes me tick. And I'd much prefer to be really specific about me. My own idiosyncrasies. Someone looking for the short-cut is not at all my cup of tea. Someone needing to bunch me in with the rest, not my cup of tea. someone who thinks he has a sense of me cause of the box he's tried to shove me into, not my cup of tea. Especially since I find that most of the "usual" generalizations do not fit me. This is why I personally have eschewed the switch label. Not 'cause I would never do bottom/sub things, but because I am not looking to do so outside the specifics of a relationship so particular to the people in it that I don't want to even field the questions - "if it's you, you'll find out" is the attitude I have. And, from the perspective of my prior percentages, lack of active bottom/sub activities fails to make me squirrely or unhappy or fixate on them. They're contextual reactions. That and I'll be cold in the grave before I'm no longer the authority in my primary rel, too.

ToysAndTies -> RE: The question of pigeonholes. (8/11/2007 5:24:07 PM)
I think people like classifications and sorting because of their dying need to fit into something. I personally just like WIITWD as the summary of everything. Only classification / distinction I think has any significance is To Kink, or Not To Kink. The rest of it tends to be academic and semantic banter with no attempt to really reach any kind of objective. Everyone has their own take on things; great, acknowledge that, and let's start a new conversation. We all are square pegs in round holes...just varies how deep we like to get wedged in there ;)

fungasm -> RE: The question of pigeonholes. (8/13/2007 4:49:01 PM)
Ooohhhh... Can I rant too? Can I rant about the sheer number of doms in my mail box who are going to show me the True Meaning of D/S? Can I whine about the Submissives who want to be naked on their knees taking a toothbrush to my toilet with their teeth? I love subs. I have a lot of sub toys in my professional life. I don't want any doing anything with my bathroom. I love doms. I love arguing with them, and some are just beee-yooo-teee-full. But I am not anyones slut, bitch or whore. Especially if they haven't met me yet. When I say switch- I mean it on many levels. Sexually- it's a give and take of power. Spankings and pleasure and sharing. In this universe, one hopes to find someone who loves bondage and sensation and delight. I don't want someone who needs to know they are stronger than I am. Intellectually, it's where there is a give and take. Equality. Emotionally caring about and for one another. I'm still relatively new. I have just reconfigured my profile again... and put on a photo which is much less flattering- (take the same week as my other one, just from a different angle- with less hair present) so hopefully my inbox won't be so wretched. Thank you for letting me add my rant to your rant. Ali

Alumbrado -> RE: The question of pigeonholes. (8/13/2007 5:00:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elea See, in my mind, this is an interesting topic to bring up. Just the other day I was protesting to someone about how I abhor labels, including the 'switch' tag. Their response is 'Labels are just shortcuts to help us recognize things and keep our minds better organized.' However, personally, I strongly disagree. I do think that people like to 'categorize'; its part of human nature to want to compartmentalize things; heck its even encouraged in psychology and sometimes other areas of 'personal therapy'. However, that does not mean its alright to devote time to grouping individual beings into narrow categories and then ascribe 'common factors' to all of them and consider them universally applicable to anyone we mentally stuff into that box - whether they fit or not. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this, Riadre; its nice to meet someone I can actually agree with, heh. Speedreading may be a shortcut. Relying on pigeonholing is a crutch.

Alumbrado -> RE: The question of pigeonholes. (8/13/2007 5:05:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fungasm ...But I am not anyones slut, bitch or whore..... You mean that 'Switch' doesn't stand for SlutWhore and bITCH ? [8D]

Aine -> RE: The question of pigeonholes. (8/13/2007 9:41:18 PM)
Yeah, on a basic level, labels suck. Do I use them? Yep. Helps people to -start- to understand things about me. If they are curious, they ask, and I answer in a much more in-depth way, which for some people throws out most of the labels. Some people just kind of smile and nod as though they have some sort of understanding. Doesn't bother me none anymore. People think we're confused? Wrong? In denial? What the eff ever. Those people can kiss my white irish arse. They don't want to try to understand, or at least make an effort to work it out in their own minds, they are not worth my time or worry.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875