|
Whiplashsmile4 -> RE: Doormats (3/1/2010 11:25:32 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Andalusite
Whiplash, I really don't think that the vanilla world in general cares at all what relationship dynamic labels we use. They're far more likely to freak out that I can more easily trust someone to slap me across the face or punch me in the stomach without harming me than to have sex with me, than they are to worry about him calling me slave, pet, or even "doormat" if he so chooses. I do know some people who refer to their masochistic playpartners as "victims" but rather tongue-in-cheek.
I'm not particularly drawn to humilation or degradation, and neither is my Master. I figure that if he did decide to go there, that he'd do so in a way that was positive and didn't damage me. It's entirely possible that he'd use a tone or combine it with a little physical play in a way that gives it pleasurable associations even on its own after a while. I know quite a few people who really love that kind of play, and would be dissatisfied without it. I don't understand why just because *you* don't like the term "doormat" and feel dehumanized or objectified by it, that you feel you should try to stop other people from using it even if they like it and want to.
Sincerely, what you are writting about I have always understood this a given. One of those since the dawn of time concepts. Personal personifications, personal name calling and for play. Seriously, I get it and I don't engage in any debate regarding it being used in this manner because it's simply a None-Issue.
The issue is adopting the Doormat into BDSM terminology. There is much that I sort of summarized in Post 437 and 456. Again, there is very little concern or issue with it regarding personal use. However, when it's used in a manned like it's an offical term, such as in the Opening Post of this thread, this is a whole different playing field. Big Vast difference. Again I will stress, please read Post 437 and 456, and simply mull it over in thought some.
I'm sorry if it appears that I'm somehow ignoring your side to things, it's because 1) I'm Not against it 2) it's not really an issue to worry about.
I will how disagree with your assement of the vanilla world, because our worlds are actually one in the same, given that we are a sub-culture to the culture we live in. We are a sub-culture to the so-called Vanilla world. Perhaps we can debate about at length this sub-topic, on another thread, or within reason on this thread.
As you said you know some people call their partners "victims", that's okay without question. However, the word "victims" is not in a unique situation where it can become elevated outside of Play or for personal pet name calling. "Doormats" has the potential to become on par with "Little Girls", the "Victim" word does not. These two words are not as equal in nature as you think or believe they are. Again, please read Post 437 and notice what I wrote about sub-labels. It's highly unlikely that the word victim will become used as a sub-label for the type casting of a submissive. The same can be said regarding "fuckmeat".
One of the reasons (as I see it) why doormat poses being used as a sub-label for a type of submissive, is because of it's wide spread use in the so called "Vanilla" world (ironic).
|
|
|
|
