hizgeorgiapeach
Posts: 1672
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: WhipTheHip
quote:
ORIGINAL: hizgeorgiapeach
quote:
ORIGINAL: WhipTheHip
I suspect that female subs who are not into D/s
who are just into S&M are at times willing to have anyone
top them so long as the person is competent with their
tools and can be trusted not to violate their hard limits.
Ok, here is one of the problems inherant in what you're saying - those who are not into d/s are Not 'female subs.'
I don't know how you derived this from my words.
See the area above within your own quoted text which I took the liberty to highlight and change the color of for clarification. That is how I derived your mistake from your words.
quote:
"Female sub" is a kind of generic term. But "sub" stands for
"submissive," and females who are not submissive who are just masochistic bottoms are technically speaking
not "subs." Not every female masochistic bottom is a sub.
That is where you are making your initial mistake, Michael. Sub is NOT A GENERIC TERM. It is a short hand form of a Specific. While YOU (specifc, in and of yourself Only) might consider "female sub" to be a generic term - what Julia and I have been trying to explain to you is that it is NOT considered that by the vast majority. You are falling for your own misconception - and arguing that we are wrong does nothing other than point out your unwillingness to actually gather data which conflicts with what you've predetermined the outcome is going to be. Obviously you didn't understand, or you wouldn't have said "huh?" about my posting Power Exchange (either in fact or desire) being a necessity to fit the criteria of "sub" or "submissive." I have only seen one person respond on this thread who remotely agreed with you that some have begun to use it (the term female sub) as an inclusive to mean all females within bdsm who are not specifically female dominants or primarily sadists - and even that one responce did not infer that the useage was somehow Correct.
quote:
original WhipTheHip
quote:
original hizgeorgiapeach
As far as your statistical sampling goes - well - here's an old truism concerning Statistics : Numbers can be manipulated to mean whatever the statistician desires them to mean, thereby proving practically anything - including proving the world is either flat or simply doesn't exist.
Actually, this is not correct. Don't tell this to any professional gambler, to any insurance
company, to any physicist, to any quality control engineer. to any medical researcher,
to any pollster, or to any political strategist.
Funny, its a truism that Pollsters and Political Strategists have used for decades, and the truism was told to me by - *gasp* - A Mathmatician. (Specifically, a college Calculus professor who also taught courses in Geometry, Trig, all levels of Algebra, and Remedial basic mathmatics for those who were deficiant in that area to enroll in college level required courses.) He's going to find it terribly amusing if I go tell him "Nope - sorry - your wrong, numbers cannot be manipulated by statisticians." So will the woman who taught my Statistical Analysis course.
Poker Odds are hard fact as there are no unknown variables - all card decks in use hold the same number of cards which add up to the same total within the deck. Its a simple matter of keeping track of what has and hasn't been put into play yet and basing calculations upon those left. Very limited use.
There is a huge difference between mathematical statistical fact and research statistics. The two are not the same thing, and do not belong in the same catagory even by stretch. Measurement techniques and machines in use in the pure research environment are intrinsically flawed. This is why all scientific studies include error estimates in their statistics. Humans are flawed, the things they create are also flawed.
quote:
original WhipTheHip
All science is based on generalizations and labels. Problems arise when people who are unable to make subtle distinctions misuse generalizations and labels.
Incorrect. Science is based on verifably repeatable sets of conditions used to prove or disprove a hypothesis derived via speculation. Generalizations are considered dangerous, and lables are not applied to those things which do not meet very specific criteria to fit within the lable being used. Some pure research may START with a generalization, but once you start doing the research it is in an effort to get Away from those generalizations and into tighter and tighter ranges of Specifics.
quote:
original WhipTheHip
I have very particular D/s and bdsm interests. Most people into D/s and bdsm are not into what I am into. So, it may not be important for you and others to know what other people in D/s and bdsm are really into, but it is important to me, because what I am looking for is a lot harder to find. It may not even exist. The only way for me to know
is to ask questions and see what others are really interested in. Then I can take find where my interests intersect the interests of others. Capice?
The thing I find strange is half the threads on this website are people asking what other people like. I have never noticed anyone else having a problem with others asking questions like this. You might want to ask yourself why you find my questions so disturbing.
We don't find your questions disturbing, Michael. We find your tendency to discount any answer to those questions - especially those answers which contradict whatever theory you might be currently trying to prove or disprove to yourself - rather disturbing. The fact that you discount the answers given and then you go on to state that since we didn't give you the answer you Wanted, we must not have understood your question/statement or we are simply Wrong, is even More disturbing. You are human, just like the rest of us - and therefore are Not going to always be correct - especially when what you're asking is for other peoples' opinions, perspectives, and preferences.
_____________________________
Rhi
Light travels faster than sound, which is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.
Essential Scentsations
|
RE: Ideal fantasy top? Ideal fantasy bottom? - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread