RE: Labels in BDSM: Harm or Enhance? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message


temptation -> RE: Labels in BDSM: Harm or Enhance? (8/17/2004 2:01:43 AM)

from my experiences with talking to different people.. and discussing what the 'alt lifestyle' means to them, i've discovered that very few people actually fit in the generalized standard catagories that we all like to lump people into.

Everyone is different :)




Thanatosian -> RE: Labels in BDSM: Harm or Enhance? (8/17/2004 1:33:25 PM)

quote:

Uhmmm Yea, that FIRST munch I went to I attempted tp place labels on the guests as they arrived. Who is Dom, who is sub? I think everyone does at first.

But those labels were so quickly shattered that I quickly gave it up.

Now if someone interests me, I talk to them. We'll figure out what our relationship will be through our conversation.

(The huge, ruggedly handsome guy I'd pegged as a Dominant that first meeting turned out to be one of the biggest pain sluts in our group. I last saw his wife / Mistress stitch up his cock with a LOT of needles in a display that had every guy in the room walking crosslegged.)


Very similar experience here: My first munch, sized people up and labeled them in my mind - here's a guy, looks EXACTLY like Doogie Howser, so I'm thinking 'this guy has gotta be a sub' - through general conversation throughout the evening, learned he was a Dom with 5 slaves/subs - cured me right quick of the labeling on assumptions thing[:)]




blue^elf -> RE: Labels in BDSM: Harm or Enhance? (8/21/2004 8:52:00 AM)

Labels... I don't necessarily think labels are a bad thing. It's natural that we have them, because they make things easier. But it's not a good thing if we make the labels themselves too important. We should remember that labels are simplifying reality, and that reality is often much more complex than simple labels. I think this has a lot to do with definitions. Many people seem to believe in absolute definitions on everything. They fail to see that there are often exceptions to definitions, and that there may be things that the people who made the definitions haven't thought of. So too often people get stuck on the labels and short definitions, and don't see the broader aspect to things. Does that make sense?

To be a little more concrete, I once had a heated discussion with someone online about whether ageplay is BDSM or not. I won't go into details here now, because that can be a long discussion in itself. But it was obvious that the other person and I had different definitions of BDSM. One BDSM club/group I used to be a (mostly lurking) member of still don't mention fetishists when they list what kind of people they are for, despite that the fetish aspect is probably the most visible one if you go to their parties. I think there must be many such examples. Maybe this isn't directly about labels. But for me it is mostly the same thing.

We use labels and definitions, and forget what they actually stand for. Too often we use a very simple map and believe it to be absolutely right, but forget to look around us at the actual terrain. That doesn't make it wrong to have a map, but we should put some more thought into how we interpret it. And sometimes it may be time to make a new map because there are too many errors on the old one.

I am probably just as guilty as anyone else for using labels. I try to be careful about it, but I don't always remember or manage to. Then the next moment I find myself put into a category that I feel is not me at all. It's not easy sometimes. [:)]

As a side note, being a male submissive, I often like Dommes who don't fit the most typical cliché of how a dominant woman is supposed to be. You know, the leather and rubberclad, high heeled Goddess looking Amazon with a whip in her hand. But that's just me, of course. [:)]

Karl
(blue^elf)




Madame -> RE: Labels in BDSM: Harm or Enhance? (8/23/2004 4:22:43 AM)

No one likes to be put into a catagory ..

But

You have to give something a name .. if you are going to explore it.

I am a mature married Het FemDom.

<g>




Sinergy -> RE: Labels in BDSM: Harm or Enhance? (8/23/2004 5:52:36 AM)

quote:

You have to give something a name .. if you are going to explore it.


"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings
look on my works and despair" Shelley.

Not sure what that quote has to do with the topic, but there ya go.

If you watch a small child discover how to open the tupperware cabinet in the kitchen
and begin to explore, you will see this child filled with wonderment as they pull item
after item out. They will examine each item, hit them together, throw in some duct
tape and attempt to build a fort, etc.

For a very small child, they might not have a name for any of it.

I disagree with this quote, but largely because I think it is a human tendency to
label the unknown as a means of dismissing it, and many I have encountered
seek to take objective reality and hammer it into the label they have for it, rather
than modify their definition of that particular label to fit objective reality.

JM, CBW, BTYG

Sinergy




newflowers -> RE: Labels in BDSM: Harm or Enhance? (8/23/2004 11:56:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy

quote:

You have to give something a name .. if you are going to explore it.

and many I have encountered seek to take objective reality and hammer it into the label they have for it, rather than modify their definition of that particular label to fit objective reality.



JM but YCBR on this one (sorry, I couldn't resist). The objective method of classicification, to label for means of identification, often seems to denigrate into subjective comparative labeling. It does seem that humans frequently have the need to classify using a personal value system of good and best and better or worse based upon where they fit in the category even if a sledge hammer is needed to make it fit.

newflowers




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
1.953125E-02