|
DrMaster4U2 -> RE: How to recognize a true Dom (10/14/2013 3:02:07 AM)
|
"So you're saying that a tiger who lost his fangs in a tragic hunting accident is no longer a tiger? Quit preaching your One True Way."
This is what I've been trying to say. Labels are required and dictionary definitions make the rules for many a board game. But no one wants a list of requirements, a list that defines (but with many exceptions - including the tiger who lost its fangs) who and what we are - and what we should inspire towards. It's so much easier to criticize those that make (sometimes, futile) attempts at defining our culture.
The very first order God gave Adam was to name things (no - I'm an atheist). When we name things or people or add adjectives, titles or degrees - we differentiate them from "the others" or their surroundings. As we go deeper and deeper into definitions we get so infuriated with some (that differ from ours!) that many people and their definitions often end up in the courts - sometimes all the way to the SUPREME court. Thus definitions are a necessity and when we talk about the differences between a top, dominant or a master (and their female equivalents) we talk about our own experiences, reading material, other lifestylers, common sense, logic and even our legal status as defined by the courts. So we can make lists, definitions and even add our own spins - but they mean nothing except to the people who practice it - or not.
So I agree with your definition of a tiger. Even if the original classification does not include fully functioning, exactly 3" fangs! A tiger is who you want a tiger to be. The name of the game is the name...... lol
DrMaster
|
|
|
|
