RE: Kink Identity Labels (Serious thread- please don't panic and move it, mods) (Full Version)

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



Message


LadyHibiscus -> RE: Kink Identity Labels (Serious thread- please don't panic and move it, mods) (9/14/2011 7:04:16 AM)

My profile here:

Sadist. Dominant. Princess. Auntie. Leatherwoman. Grey parrot companion. Mean Girl. A marshmallow with a titanium core.

It's just a description. A true to life description, of course, in no particular order. If any of the above are icky, then push off, is the message I hope to convey.




HeatherMcLeather -> RE: Kink Identity Labels (Serious thread- please don't panic and move it, mods) (9/14/2011 8:39:08 AM)

quote:

Until then, go play with someone who'll give you the time of day.
You replied to me, so you did. [:D]

Booya!!




DesFIP -> RE: Kink Identity Labels (Serious thread- please don't panic and move it, mods) (9/14/2011 9:17:36 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kana


True. But labeling still doesn't begin to describe the taste, feel, texture and sensation of the foods.

In fact, you kinda back up my argument. Labels like that tell you what the item is, maybe some nutritional value (which may or may not be deceptive, I mean have you ever looked at what a "normal" serving size is), a picture that looks nothing like the content and quickly conveys a very narrow limited range of information about whatever the contents are.

But labels, unless you count fluffery and advertising, won't tell you that Johnny Walker Blue is the bomb and Old Crow is rotgut.



No argument. Which is why I said they're a starting point only.
However for someone who is allergic to alcohol, both labels will tell that salient fact.




Hisprettybaby -> RE: Kink Identity Labels (Serious thread- please don't panic and move it, mods) (9/15/2011 9:24:09 AM)

Behaviours? Switch. I submit to One, and Dominate another.
Tendencies? Switching.
Experiences? Moderate experience. Mostly sub experiences so far, but looking toward getting more Domme experience.
Desires? See above. Also, I'm both masochistic and sadistic.
Current status? See above.
Ideals? Ideally, I'd like a polyamorous relationship in which I submit to One and Domme another, which is what I have right now.

I think labels are just an easy shorthand way to let others know who/what we are without having to do a lot of explaining in most cases. Some people use them to box in limit their perceptions of themselves and other people, but I don't. When I hear the label Dominant, I think s/he likes to be the one who holds the reins in their relationship. Submissive, I think they are the one who likes to yield to the other person(the Dom/me). When I hear switch, I think they like to experience both roles and switch back and forth. When I hear the label vanilla, to me it just means they aren't kinky.....not better or worse, just different.

I started out as a submissive and, further down the road, I started wondering if I was a switch because I started wanting to do things to/for the another person to see their reactions, and I wanted to "hold the reins" so to speak sometimes but not always. Then I got the chance to flog two people and that's what "flipped the switch" for me. From there, I discovered I liked doing other things too, and realized I actually am a switch. I don't think I will ever switch totally over to being a Dominant only. I will continue to be a switch because I like both roles....just not both with the same person. But no matter what else I may be called or call myself, I will always be a "kinkster" and "kinky."

~Hisprettybaby~




Djducati -> RE: Kink Identity Labels (Serious thread- please don't panic and move it, mods) (9/16/2011 12:53:43 PM)

Labels dont make me uncomfortable, derogatory or not.
some people run screaming from them and others will come TO them.
Label away, I see it like a nametag




Awareness -> RE: Kink Identity Labels (Serious thread- please don't panic and move it, mods) (9/16/2011 6:13:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: VaguelyCurious
So then the questions 'what parameters are you using to choose your objectively apt label and what baggage do you attach to other people's labels?' are fair ones. Because to someone whose labels according to all the factors she's listed above all cohere, the answer is obvious. To someone whose labels conflict, it isn't.
  Except the notion of what labels are consistent largely depend upon the semantics you've attached to them - which is, again, unique to the individual.

The other problem is that, as human beings, internal consistency is not always guaranteed and our behaviour and ideas of who we are tend to be contradictory.  Having said that, I find resolving those contradictions reveals a deeper truth, but ultimately I can't see this solving the OP's problem of label confusion.

To me the answer is simple.  Labels are simply coarse approximations of either who we believe we are or who we want others to believe we are.  Like many things, they describe subjective rather than objective or literal truth.  A given label may be accurate or it may be chosen for the purpose of artifice.

quote:

Think of it as a queer cultural thing; thinking about labels is what we do. It's compulsory, or they revoke your membership and you have to go back to being mono or bisexual.
  I tend to view the queer community's focus on manipulating labels and semantics as something of a power play made by a (somewhat formerly) disenfranchised group.  To a certain extent it's worked for them and I can't fault those without power for attempting to gain it, but it doesn't change my perception that it's ultimately a political move that's worked so well that some wish to carry it on way past the point of sanity.






Sundowner -> RE: Kink Identity Labels (Serious thread- please don't panic and move it, mods) (11/16/2011 5:21:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreepyStalker

I really don't understand kink labels, they don't make any sense to me.



You are not a stupid person but I really don't understand your question.

Do you mean the "Female slave/Female submissive/Dominant male" labels here or do you mean the "I'm an idiot who is ... I am not, however, a sock puppet" descriptions? Surely not the latter.

If you do not understand the concept of labels as simplified indicators, take care when thinking of using a public lavatory.

There is a risk that you are a stupid person and not the real Creepy's Talker. I'm not sure I could handle the exposure of impostor saga again. If you are the real CS my recollection is that we are slightly deeply in love and I therefore apologise for not talking with you for a long time. Since so many people have become excited by your (to me) foolish post I fear I may be intellectually challenged and you may therefore be comforted to feel you've not missed much.












xssve -> RE: Kink Identity Labels (Serious thread- please don't panic and move it, mods) (11/17/2011 7:14:54 AM)

Identity is part ideal, part propensity - we tend to develop certain needs, requirements, etc., that we pursue regardless of our social identity - at the same time, there is often a need to reconcile these need without social identity, so roles tend to develop that represent particular "need clusters".

Naturally, formal roles tend to form around the most common needs, the need to dominate, and the need to submit are relevant here of course, and there are roles: dominant and submissive, that reflect the dyads that form around this particular, more or less symmetrical need cluster.

If "society" has no preformatted (often stereotypical) role for you, you may have to create your own - roles for dominant women have been formalized on a pretty arbitrary and ad hoc basis for example, literature was dominated by men for many centuries, and thus there is often recourse to historical narratives that were harder to suppress: Lesbos, Amazonia, etc., or individual women: Queen Elizabeth, Joan D'Arc, etc.

And there is something of an obsession over gender identity, to some extent there is a natural division of labor w/regard to gender, women give birth and are properly equipped to do so, not too many ways around that, but biological identity does often extend into social identity in ways that don't always make sense or offer optimal utility, i.e., identity politics which is a whole 'nother animal, and encompasses gender, class, age, morphology, geography, etc., etc., adn so on.

So, to recap, there are basically three classes of identity: self identification, who you think you are, social identity, who you act like, and assigned identity, which is who others tell you you are, or should be. In some cases they overlap, to your greater or lesser satisfaction, in others, they may conflict mightily.





NakedSenses -> RE: Kink Identity Labels (Serious thread- please don't panic and move it, mods) (11/17/2011 1:02:09 PM)

@OP:
Often a social group or sub-culture will create its own vernacular and colloquialisms to facilitate specialized communication, and also to shield sensitive information best not stated openly. Then it can evolve into a cult-like communication paradigm, and finally it degenerates into an adolescent practice of labeling and categorizing whom and what one may like, or admire (cool) or not like/disparage (not cool). After that, it ceases to have much  real use when natural language will easily suffice - assuming that one can speak the language well. (And don't count on that!) ;-)




switchblademoi -> RE: Kink Identity Labels (Serious thread- please don't panic and move it, mods) (11/17/2011 8:12:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreepyStalker

I really don't understand kink labels, they don't make any sense to me. I know what they mean in literal terms, but I've never gotten my head around how to apply them.

What are they actually supposed to denote?

Behaviours?
Tendencies?
Experiences?
Desires?
Current status?
Ideals? 


If by kink labels you mean things like domme, sub, switch, top, bottom, etc., the problem seems to be that you are seeking black-and-white definitions that don't exist. Two women who both call themselves dommes can have extremely different tendencies, experiences, and desires. Kink labels aren't meant to put people in narrow little slots. They are simply very broad categories.




xssve -> RE: Kink Identity Labels (Serious thread- please don't panic and move it, mods) (11/21/2011 5:44:15 AM)

In my experience, kink labels fall more into the ideal category- there are naturally dominant people, but kink specifically has to do with sex, not leadership per se, although leadership can be an aspect of it - powerful people are often kinky people, while at the same time in the opinion of the public, kink is probably more often than not interpreted as a character flaw - more politicians lives and careers are ruined over sex scandals than corruption - you can come back from a corruption scandal, a lot harder to come back from a sex scandal.

Anyway, for this reason possibly, maybe others, kink labels typically describe more interpersonal traits than public traits, it's who you are in private, whichis why you occasionally get people who wish to wear it on their sleeve complaining about it - nothing wrong with that, it is also fashion ins a sense and in the appropriate subculture, it's acceptable, possibly even encouraged, but overall, it remains a subculture.

Statistically in fact, the Janus report indicates that roughly 15% of the population identifies as kinky, which includes the whole gamut - slightly more men than women, but the figures are actually pretty symmetrical.

Given that the Janus report was written before kink came out of the closet with the internet, I would consider that a relatively stable figure, although it might be higher at the moment due to it's being more fashionable.

In any case, regardless of how it's promoted, it seems to remain very firmly in the realm of interpersonal peccadillo, i.e., a private identity, vs a public one, and this seems to apply even to semi-public figures in the lifestyle, as it is termed.

So much for the big picture, on the interpersonal level, it probably compares to other interpersonal quirks, vegetarianism or veganism, what kind of movies you like, whether you read, and what, etc., etc., i.e., it describes a particular aspect of your personality:it has no institutional meaning, because it isn't an institution, although because we are human, and humans are know to to institutionalize things, there is always somebody trying to institutionalize it.

So far though, no, and ceterus parabus, discounting the Calvinist reaction formation that waxes and wanes with the election cycle, it has roughly the same level of social meaning as whether you prefer Italian or Chinese.

If you want to discuss particular identity labels, then we'd have to try to break that down, it's been tried, the problem with that is, the act of breaking it down is in itself, uncomfortably close to institutionalization, i.e., when you're done there are pre-formatted roles, and no room for individuality, as Switchblade suggests above.

And, in this age of conformity to media/ad agency values (Note this list does not mention a dripping, gaping cunt, a beady gaze of psychotic depravity, and a little drool in the corner of your mouth), kink is, in some respects, that last mile, the one area of your personality that isn't subject to public review or approval, although of course, that too is a human obsession, i.e., the "twue" debate.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.589844E-02