|
DavanKael -> RE: Use of terminology (3/5/2009 8:35:32 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark
I agree with you to a certain point DavanKael because I do believe that the word in itself that you were discussing (Fetish) is an over used term that people confuse with the likes of the word 'kink' etc. However, your response to that other post was not helpful in addressing the issue, it merely came across as mocking and derisive(stricktly my opinion). You never attempted to address the issue nor enlighten people helpfully until pressed. In the case of the OP in question, there was no attempt to quantify what was meant to help clarify the intention of the OP.
The word 'fetish' appears countless times on the forums. So does slave, submissive, pet, switch, punishment, sadist - all these words have distinct definitions outside of BDSM. And yet they are used within this framework as a different identifier. Are people now supposed to refrain from using such markers, because their origins or standard set definition is not in line with BDSM definitions?
End of the day, fetish will be used within BDSM to mean something you do not believe to be true. It only weeds out for you, those who do not follow your ideas. End of the day, the word fetish appears in countless dictionaries with various meanings - from the spiritual - to the mental aspects that you were refering to. None of them are incorrect and all have substance.
It's nothing to do with people using words erroneously. It's about accepting that you might use definition (a) and another uses definition (b).
the.dark.
Hi, thedark----
I appreciate your respectful tone.
I actually kept my first reply in the other thread very brief because I was not trying to de-rail the guy's thread, simply to interject that there was a common but incorrect usage going on. I, later on, explained my thoughts on the matter because an issue was made of it. I replied, rather firmly to the op, because he became abusive in his reply which actually flows well into the overall picture he's painted of himself in my estimation (As do I reside, in his thoughts, as an annoying asshat at best...so be it). Ah, I am editing 'cause that reply got pulled. Apparently, it's okay for him to be verbally abusive but not for me to retort. One wonders at certain even-handedness.
In my opinion, the other terms you cited aren't as skewed in their usage as is 'fetish' in its popularization. For example "submissive" in D/s parlance really need not deviate terribly far from the actual definition, if at all. Same of the others you noted. 'Fetish' has come to be popularized into something that it, by definition, is not. Great example: I have a male friend whose boyfriend, because he has 15 pairs of shoes said that he has a 'shoe fetish'. Said friend likes shoes, enjoys having a good pair to accent whatever outfit he's wearing. He has a preference, in excess of what many males have, for shoes an an integral fashion accessory. He, in no way, is sexually excited by shoes nor does he need them to perform sexually. Thus, shoe preference, not fetish.
Note that I said I am willing to dialogue, in fact enjoy intelligently dialoguing, with people about their usages of words (I disagree all of the time with people who call themselves straight and have, for whatever reason, willingly had sex with people of the same sex) and respectfully disagree all of the time with erroneous usages.
I look at things from not only their intellectual base but from their visceral and emotional base, their developmental base, etc. There's something very unsafe, in my estimation, about people who use definitions in a habitually slippery way; ie: "What, I meant x; just because that word means y doesn't mean that that's what I meant." Communication, as I pointed out, is key.
Davan
|
|
|
|
