quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

quote:

what did i take out of context, please?

You took the first line of my response and did not read the rest of it apparently...

like where I said this:

quote:

Me:

Now the labeling that occurs around here is really tame in comparison, but since you asked, I thought I would demonstrate ways that it is done. I am not comparing labeling a sub a "brat" and labeling a Jew a "cockroach"... seriously, I am not that dramatic.

Why did you leave that part off, Holly

quote:


it didn't help in painting me as a loon?

quote:


I really thought you wanted to have a civil discussion. I was wrong and I will log this interchange for future reference in dealing with your posts.

quote:


I really find it quite much when someone asks you a question such as "how can labels negate entire countries?" and when you come up with the most obvious example you can think of they cut it out of the entire post to make it sound like you are drawing a direct analogy...

quote:

Again, the part of i did not quote had zero relevance...but hang on to the "I was misquoted" horseshit when challenged, Julia. Works well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

.There are a lot of newbies that take these labels much more seriously than I do

damn right!

something i was yanked around by was 'youre not submissive' - in the earlier years when i was trying to find my way, determined to find my place and damn sure id found *me* this guy came along and that was how he controlled me.

i remember the anger i felt when he said that, it twisted inside me really badly.  each time he said it id be screaming inside because it was like taking away a big chunk of me and telling me i had no right to it.

the thing was, i much later realised, that i wasnt submissive to him.  i was submissive, just not submissive to asshats.  but at the time it really was a very negative and destructive thing and after it ended it took me a good two years to come back to this.

at their most toxic these people can turn a life off track and i really do positively despise them for it - there ive said it - back me up to a wall and shoot me

Maybe one person will read this post and they will learn something incredibly valuable from it... if that happens I am glad I started this thread, and I am doubly thankful you replied to it... thank you for sharing, lally

quote:

Funny, no one but you had trouble understanding my point....

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

i think thats quite normal though, when youre first starting out on something, the novice learner trying to grapple the ropes.

quote:

newbie subs do enter on the bottom rung of power in that respect and are easily washed in and out by the tidal wave of predatory asshats.

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
Yes, it is well documented that this happens.... Joseph Goebbels made it into a science, although people have been doing it since the dawn of time. You want to dehumanize the enemy you attach labels to them such as "cannibal" or "baby killers". You call them things like "cockroaches" and "rats" and you say things like they must be "exterminated".... Derogatory terms I would post here would get me moderated because they are against TOS (rightly so) that negate entire countries of human beings.... Racial terms, for example.

OK, so here's the way I see it. Let's suppose that I decide you're... I dunno... Not a true sub. Carol and I start referring to you as a fake between the two of us. Clearly, at that point, we have negated you IN OUR MINDS. Subsequently, let's assume I post all over CM that Julia is a fake. So now, I'm perhaps negating you in a few other people's minds (highly dubious if you ask me).

But all of the minds that you have been totally or partially negated in are people you don't know and have no reason to respect. I didn't negate YOU. I negated the you that exists in my own brain. YOU still tick along nicely being you.

Turning the shoe around. I don't punish Carol. I readily admit that she is my life partner with or without a collar. I'm not a sadist. I think the description "service dominant" is a pretty decent description of me. I'm not particularly kinky. I'm not into fetishes. I don't wear leather. I don't eroticize any of this. And, perhaps most damningly of all, I have openly said here and elsewhere that I have issues with being sexually assertive/dominant. In short, it's a pretty reasonable statement to say that "I'm not a true [BDSM] master." At various times various people HAVE said that. All of which is fine and dandy because whatever it is that I am is making me and Carol really happy.

NOBODY can negate the reality that exists in Carol's and my living room. All they can do is inform me that I don't match their internal description of what a "master" is. *shrugs* That's handy information for the sake of continuing to converse with this person. I ask "OK, so in your language, what would you call my relationship" then use those terms. But how did any of that negate me or Carol?

quote:

ORIGINAL: porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

i think thats quite normal though, when youre first starting out on something, the novice learner trying to grapple the ropes.

Newness has nothing to do with insecurity and in my opinion that's the crux of most of this.

quote:

newbie subs do enter on the bottom rung of power in that respect and are easily washed in and out by the tidal wave of predatory asshats.

There's a big difference between being ignorant of BDSM and lacking fundamental life skills. Inexperience doesn't make you fragile, sensitive, prone to being manipulated, frenzied, immature, thin skinned, or anything other than the obvious.

~porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
I just wanted to ask, what are the negative labels that dominants get tagged with, besides maybe "wannabe" or "fake"?

You need to read more closely. In the general public dominant in it's darker light is seen as all sorts of synonyms for "asshole". Here, on the boards, there is the general assumption that if somehow, something didn't work then it is pretty much because the Dom was an asshole just wanting to score some quick pussy before he tossed her aside.

quote:

ORIGINAL: hardbodysub
I disagree. The general assumption isn't that problems are the fault of the "Dom". The general assumption is that problems are the fault of the male, whether dominant or submissive.

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

Obviously, we're talking broad generalities here and examples of either side can be brought up. At a bare minimum, I agree that there is a male bias... whether or not it is connected to, the same as, or separate from any sort of dom bias or sub bias is worth thinking about. I actually commented on this once with a female dominant. She had posted something exactly identical to a thing I'd posted a few times previously. In my case, I'd learned it's best just not to talk about this on the internet because it really, really annoyed people. In her case, nobody seemed to think a thing of it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527
I agree that there is a male bias... whether or not it is connected to...any sort of dom bias or sub bias is worth thinking about.

quote:

However, male respondents that provide the feedback the OP is seeking are lauded. The same opinion could have been expressed by a woman but it's ignored or debated. The individual wants male coddling and isn't interested in feedback from other women. Most times it boils down to someone's perspective on a subject rather than gender.

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

rofl pam.

That was me... and I stick by it. I don't see that as a question of judging doms unfairly though. I see it is down-home, steak and potatoes, leadership wisdom. I'm fairly certain though from the way you responded here that you're not understanding the intent of "the buck stops here" properly.... or at least the way I see it.

~Jeff

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

quote:

Julia, I think it depends on the context. I have had relationships in which I was a bottom rather than submissive, and I'm quite adamant and vocal about the difference. So, in those circumstances, someone calling me a bottom is just dandy. There are lots of people looking for bedroom-only (or primarily) dynamics, who don't focus on control outside the bedroom. Again, nothing wrong with using that label to describe yourself or someone else, and it can be done in a positive way. I'm generally not a brat in the slightest, but I enjoy physical wrestling/playfighting, and once jokingly threw legos at someone - I suppose it could be called "bratty" in a playful way. I know a lot of dominants who are actively looking for a submissive or bottom who he has to overpower, or who has that kind of playful side. The tone of your quote is the problem, not the words.

I pointed out myself how I could be all of those labels I mentioned in my OP at different times. I do not see them as an insult intrinsically. What I am talking about is how these terms are used as insults and ways to denigrate people...

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
I think you are missing the picture here...

A submissive person makes an account here. They state their limits, they put forward what they are looking for, etc. Then, being new, they get a slew of emails from (perhaps even well meaning) people telling them that if they have limits, they are not true or real, they are justa bottom. Now, they want a D/s style relationship, and many people are emailing them this stuff, they start to become negated in their minds...

So, that person comes over to the forum side of things, and sees a bunch of terms applied to submissive sorts that hint those who engage in certain actions are not true or real. Perhaps they want to brat role play, or maybe they want to try the sammy thing... and we have a buncha people reducing entire human beings to terms that originally were developed to describe actions, not dynamics. See what I am trying to say how this could be seen as somewhat negating to people?

Now I do not think it is going to change, people being who they are, but it bugs me a little just the same