Labelling ? (Full Version)

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



Message

Aneirin -> Labelling ? (10/13/2009 7:52:00 AM)

Is it not about time this website adopted a more easy going approach to labelling oneself ? I mean, dom, sub, switch, oh and slave, a bit limiting isnt it, what about the noobs that come here, just to get some info on that feeling we all felt but oft was not aware there were others like it. What about those of us that refuse to be defined, as rigid labels do not fit. Me for example, I am forced to label as switch on here, but I am not a switch, but it is the nearest to my interest, I suppose, so it will have to do. And what about those who just like an activity or two that is under the umbrella of BDSM, to be on here, they are forced to pick a label, which they are uncomfortable with, which may lead to others wasting their time under false impressions.

There is a thread going on somewhere down there, regarding Fetlife, comparing here and there, although the majority which includes myself prefer this website for various reasons, it has been noted Fetlife has some things better. For me, what is better about Fetlife, is the nomenclature regarding a person's interest, much more choice, and it includes states, where no hard and fast defining label can be affixed.

How about a label of, Just interested, it means a lot, and at the same time a little, many would be comfortable with that.

So what about it, is it time for Collarme.com to relax a little, much in the way it has relaxed with other areas ?




Andalusite -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 7:54:45 AM)

The labels are just a starting point. Sure, there are a lot of folks who are into S/M and bondage without D/s. Since there aren't separate categories for them, they aren't being misleading by choosing the closest option. Figuring that stuff out is part of getting to know one another - they can either clarify right in their profile, or within the first couple of e-mails.



Aneirin -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 8:04:36 AM)

Or, on the other hand, a person who in anothers oppinion has mis labelled themselves, might be in for some abuse, as is common, with some on here. Sure, one can block the person after receiving a torrent of nastiness, but why get the negativety to start with because one had to pick a label that did not really apply.



Andalusite -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 8:18:24 AM)

I haven't seen any personal nastiness over those labels, just furor over the "trans" vs. woman ones. A lot of people seem to think that they have the right to define what a "slave" is or should be, when they aren't involved, though. It's a little irritating, and I've recently been caught up in that a bit myself, but I didn't think it crossed the line into an attack or anything like that.



leadership527 -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 8:19:44 AM)

Personally, I feel that 3 new categories wouldn't be such a bad thing:

"Somewhere on the D side"
"Somewhere on the S side"
"It's complicated"



Andalusite -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 8:24:33 AM)

Jeff, I think the Dominant and submissive labels are fine for those, but there are lots of folks who just don't do D/s at all, or have in some of their relationships but not others. :) I did think the "it's complicated" one is amusing, but I'm not sure what an example of that might be, other than switches.



onlyfreelycaged -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 8:26:00 AM)

I think the "it's compiclated" would work well for new people, who have no idea where they fall.. it would help with people seeing switches being confuised..



LadyPact -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 8:48:33 AM)

I've never been one to see this as a major problem.  For example, OP, you could list switch and then use the body of your profile to give a more accurate description.  A few quick sentences saying pretty much what you did for the thread, including what you really call yourself (bottom, for example) would seem sufficient.



porcelaine -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 9:04:09 AM)

just exploring
unsure
Sadist
masochist
trying to figure it out

there's a cornucopia of labels that still won't encompass everyone. [;)]

porcelaine



ModeratorEleven -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 9:21:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aneirin

Is it not about time this website adopted a more easy going approach to labelling oneself ?

There's no way to please everyone and someone will always complain that they're not accurately represented by the selections available, no matter how many there are.

XI



yellowroses -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 9:59:36 AM)

OP-I do understand what you are saying.  In fact we were just having this discussion last evening how we sometimes don't feel that we "fit in" on collar me.  He is a Dominant and I am submissive and we hover around the edges BDSM.  Occasionally I will read posts and think "Gee should I be more like that person?".  And then I realize that would not be who I am. So I enjoy reading the varing opinions of everyone and every so often I add to the discussion like today.

That being said, I agree with what most everyone has posted so far.  You could add a whole bunch more labels but you would still not please everyone.

Have a WONDERFUL day!

kim



RUaPhdStudent -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 10:22:31 AM)

label yourself as unlabeled on your profile



Mercnbeth -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 11:35:55 AM)

~ Fast Reply ~


I feel the same way about this "problem" as I do about gay marriage. For gay marriage - eliminate the 'State' sanctioning of ALL unions. Marriage is a contractual relationship. Eliminate the State involvement and any person or persons can create a contractual union with anyone they choose. Religions could then sanction any unions they choose. A true separation of Church and State.

Same solution with 'Labels' - get rid of ALL of them. Let the people involved define the dynamic not words.

Let the topic headings define activities and sensations and people can contribute, without arguing if any label fits, how they feel or react to giving and/or receiving sensations as well as the emotional, mental intercourse.



SimplyIsaac -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 11:38:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aneirin

Is it not about time this website adopted a more easy going approach to labelling oneself ? I mean, dom, sub, switch, oh and slave, a bit limiting isnt it, what about the noobs that come here, just to get some info on that feeling we all felt but oft was not aware there were others like it. What about those of us that refuse to be defined, as rigid labels do not fit. Me for example, I am forced to label as switch on here, but I am not a switch, but it is the nearest to my interest, I suppose, so it will have to do. And what about those who just like an activity or two that is under the umbrella of BDSM, to be on here, they are forced to pick a label, which they are uncomfortable with, which may lead to others wasting their time under false impressions.

There is a thread going on somewhere down there, regarding Fetlife, comparing here and there, although the majority which includes myself prefer this website for various reasons, it has been noted Fetlife has some things better. For me, what is better about Fetlife, is the nomenclature regarding a person's interest, much more choice, and it includes states, where no hard and fast defining label can be affixed.

How about a label of, Just interested, it means a lot, and at the same time a little, many would be comfortable with that.

So what about it, is it time for Collarme.com to relax a little, much in the way it has relaxed with other areas ?



While I do find "labels" (if that's what you really want to call them) useful, your suggestion has merit i think. Allowing us to opt out of being defined as this or that in our profiles wouldn't be such a bad idea. That said... Mod 11's comments are something to consider. I'd be in favor just having the option of opting out of the requirement to select this or that, too. I don't find that as too bad an idea.



kccuckoldmist -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 2:26:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Andalusite

The labels are just a starting point. Sure, there are a lot of folks who are into S/M and bondage without D/s. Since there aren't separate categories for them, they aren't being misleading by choosing the closest option. Figuring that stuff out is part of getting to know one another - they can either clarify right in their profile, or within the first couple of e-mails.


I agree with this and what the moderator added. No matter how many labels are put out there will be people taking too much self esteem by how they identify themselves as or other roles and feel they get cheapened when people do not go by what they have defined it.

I agree labels are merely a starting point for ease of communication. One of the great ironies when people talk about this life is that usually the people who wail against labels are the ones who give labels the most weight.




DomImus -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 3:19:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ModeratorEleven
quote:

ORIGINAL: Aneirin
Is it not about time this website adopted a more easy going approach to labelling oneself ?

There's no way to please everyone and someone will always complain that they're not accurately represented by the selections available, no matter how many there are.

XI


Agreed. Over thinking this is not a good thing. I shudder to imagine the number and scope of seemingly serious suggestions that people would offer up if CM solicited ideas for additions to the labeling system.





mnottertail -> RE: Labelling ? (10/13/2009 3:38:04 PM)

couldn't we all just chip in and buy some labeling software?




CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Labelling ? (10/14/2009 9:23:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

~ Fast Reply ~


I feel the same way about this "problem" as I do about gay marriage. For gay marriage - eliminate the 'State' sanctioning of ALL unions. Marriage is a contractual relationship. Eliminate the State involvement and any person or persons can create a contractual union with anyone they choose. Religions could then sanction any unions they choose. A true separation of Church and State.

Same solution with 'Labels' - get rid of ALL of them. Let the people involved define the dynamic not words.

Let the topic headings define activities and sensations and people can contribute, without arguing if any label fits, how they feel or react to giving and/or receiving sensations as well as the emotional, mental intercourse.


Woo HOO!!! I agree wholeheartedly (on all counts!)

DC



ncbabe -> RE: Labelling ? (10/14/2009 9:43:06 AM)

Although I really do not like labels or titles and the idea of describing what you are in your own words appeals to me, I do have to ask how the search process would work if people were not assigned to a specific predetermined category?

I do think that there should be a new label for people who just joined and have not figured out where they stand yet, as it can be a bit daunting to label yourself as something you know very little about and may end up not being after all.



allthatjaz -> RE: Labelling ? (10/14/2009 9:58:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Andalusite

Jeff, I think the Dominant and submissive labels are fine for those, but there are lots of folks who just don't do D/s at all, or have in some of their relationships but not others. :) I did think the "it's complicated" one is amusing, but I'm not sure what an example of that might be, other than switches.


Why are switches complicated? perhaps to you because you don't understand them but then that would mean slaves are complicated to me [;)]



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875