I am just going to skip through all the drama - personally I can see certain individuals slinging mud and behaving incredibly stupidly. Your all doing the exact same thing your moaning and trying to degrade the OP for doing - so really, what is the whole point?
I think I now understand the whole point of the beautiful platypus earleir thread, and LH asking about cliques.
Because this thread is a marvelous example of one.
As for the OP... the problem with the question as it stands, Michael, is that there are many generalisations in the thought process you are passing over, as well as a slight misunderstanding on some of the terms that exist. You have every right to place your own definition on a word, however it does not make it correct - and moreover - it definately doesn't make it correct for everyone else. Therefore, whatever study or observation you are trying to make, will be null and void as it has no truth to it, only the truth as you see it.
Now I am a terrible word nazi... and whilst I will agree that there are some definitions within the BDSM community that lack a certain cohesion with set dictionary and medical terms (slave, dominant, submissive etc)... there are other definitions that are clearly defined within the community (masochist and sadist being two of these terms).
This is where BDSM can become incredibly confusing to both novice and those who consider themselves 'well versed'. That is why there are so many disagreements that appear on the forum, that is why there are debates that rage continuously like the slave vs. submissive debates... the 'what is a Master ' debates etc,etc...
From the beginning of the OP... you have left out vital componants.
Not all submissives are masochistic. Not all bottoms are masochistic. And most importantly, a submissive is not a bottom. Now you can insist that submissive is a catch all term because you have seen others use it as such. But unfortunately, that is because there are people within BDSM - new and old - who have never strived to learn and move forward. Many times, people take on a position, only to find that they cannot truely find their match - and why is that? Because they are sticking to the label that they placed around their neck and giving over nothing but miscommunication.
Where do I and people like myself, fit into your question? I am not a masochist, but I am a sadist. I am not a submissive, yet I have a submissive personality. I can Top, but because that is a service and submissive act on my part. And I am definately not a switch. I really would enjoy responding to your question, however, I fit none of your criteria.
Not all dominants nor tops are sadistic. I know many who are masochisitc in nature and many more who are neither.
There are tops and bottoms in committed, monogamous relationships.
There are submissive types who wander from partner to partner.
My suggestion is that you try not to become so submerged in the labels. Labels help and allow the chance for open communication - but that is all they are. Listen to what an individual has to say, and see if it agrees with your perception. If it doesn't, then find out why it doesn't. You cannot judge anothers reasons of why they enjoy pain, or why they are dominant purely on your own perception and expect it to be correct.
A judge or jury in a court of law, looks at all the evidence, and ideally, should not be blinded by ones own perception because that does not make a fair trial. It does not happen very often, but when it does, it shows wisdom and care.
Peace and Rapture
*edit because I was being too general...[;)]
