RE: Why do we need definitions?

RE: Why do we need definitions? (Full Version)

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

Message

LotusSong -> RE: Why do we need definitions? (10/24/2006 5:59:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fawne Labeling is an extreme form of all-or-nothing thinking. Instead of saying 'I made a mistake.' you attach a negative label to yourself: 'I'm a loser.' You might also label yourself 'a foal' or 'a failure' or 'a jerk.' Labeling is quite irrational because you are not the same as what you do. Human beings exist. but 'fools,' 'losers,' and 'jerks' do not. These labels are useless abstractions that lead to anger, anxiety, frustration, and low self- esteem. You may also label others. When someone does something that rubs you the wrong way, you may tell yourself: 'He's an S.O.B Then you feel that the problem is with that person's 'character' or 'essence' instead of with their thinking or behavior. You see them as totally bad. This makes you feel hostile and hopeless about improving things and leaves little room for constructive communication. Is there something wrong with being certain about something?

adaddysgirl -> RE: Why do we need definitions? (10/24/2006 6:02:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Iskander The problem arises when someone says "I am a true submissive because I am a painslut" and others immediately assume the 'true' word is a exclusion, this is as moronic as thinking '2 is a true number' means there are no other true numbers... It's not (always) the 'author' of those statements that is wrong, sometimes it's the readers own narrow perceptions... Iskander... i tend to think that when you add the word 'true' and 'because', it then becomes an implication. "i am a true artist because i went to art school." Couldn't that imply going to art school is a requirement to being a 'true' artist? But what about those who are true artists who never went to art school? What are they then? "i am a true intellect because i have an IQ of 200." Can you deny there is an implication that anything less than a 200 IQ is not a 'true' intellect? Now when you say '2 is a true number'....there is no attachment to that. 2 is a true number because....? Because why? Because it just is! lol There is no qualifier there....and i think that makes the difference between the two. i could probably use a hundred different examples here....but i think i will just leave it at that. DG

LadyHugs -> RE: Why do we need definitions? (10/24/2006 6:13:28 PM)
Dear Lordandmaster, Ladies and Gentlemen; In my mind's eye as far as definitions go; they identify these meanings in a general sense. They are: Definition Meaning Description Explanation Classification Characterization Designation Clarity Outlining In my mind's eye as far as labels go, they identify these meanings in a general sense. They are: Label Brand Class Trade mark Identify Description Categorization Classification True, it is an individual's effort to proffer to others to which they engage in similar settings and or community, a group, an organization and or tribe as well as clubs, to be more specific as to the 'interests' as well as 'focus' of a selection of elements, much like a recipe. Being individuals and unique much like a home made desert; it helps those unfamiliar to recognize those elements that create the recipe that creates us as individuals in a larger community. Nobody will have an identical recipe that creates each of us as a 'me' and or 'I.' Being unique, I can take definitions and labels, as to create a picture to another, as to what recipe or ingredients I use or have, that makes me part of the group, community, tribe, club and or organization. But, as all things with affixed 'words' they do not always identify fully what makes us unique. Although using a common word, definition and or label; that is the only thing common, defining and or what class I am in. Otherwise, I am because I exist and because I exist-- I am. I am because others know me. Because others know me--I am. Respectfully submitted for consideration, Lady Hugs

marieToo -> RE: Why do we need definitions? (10/24/2006 6:25:30 PM)
Padriag nailed it...in a seriously nailed kinda way. What a beautiful piece of well-articulated insight. Really.

catize -> RE: Why do we need definitions? (10/24/2006 7:01:22 PM)
quote: Words should mean things. If they do not, what you say or write has no meaning, and all you hope to do or convey might as well be written in water. Yes, words should mean things. But many words can have different yet accurate definitions. “Crop” for example means one thing to a farmer and another unrelated thing to an equestrian. A farmer who tills the fields and owns horses will understand the correct use of the word is dependent on setting as well as context. Both the crops from the field and the leather crop for the horses can be stored within the same barn and still retain their individual use and meaning.

raiken -> RE: Why do we need definitions? (10/24/2006 7:16:08 PM)
Many people nailed it for me on here, and the way LadyHugs described us, we, me, you and them...well, that recipe she spelled out encompassed many of my thought and feeling that i lack an expression for. If i gain nothing else from being online i am glad i gained insight from all of the many views put forth even in this thread. Hopefully each one of us gets something whether it be a new label or a more clearly understood and modified version of such, or perhaps a confirmation. As for myself, i came here to learn. i am still a babe when it comes to the online communities. And with that, an exposure to many, many, different and unique perspectives. Thank You to all who shared. *smile

amayos -> RE: Why do we need definitions? Take 3 (10/24/2006 7:17:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster So you care what two married people call each other when they're members of the same sex? In private? No. In society? Yes. I take issue with the overall premise that we may frivolously pick and chose and subvert what things mean, despite literary evidence to the contrary, which (again) is where it seems the underpinning slant of your original post was basically heading. One may settle on any meaning he or she invents or revises in a word, and may even help to foster a society of it. I certainly do not need to join in and give kudos over the idea, however. Husband and wife or master and slave are words which yield distinct and literal meaning, if one cares to look into them. The gamut of sub cultural nomenclature, as found in the "BDSM community," may be more difficult to pin down, but I think most would generally agree on their established definitions as well. Your frustration over the constant questions brought up over definitions is understandable, but the very fact these issues are brought up time and time again in BDSM is the result of a sensed and exploratory need to be clear on the matter, and no one should be faulted for that when trying to understand where they belong in the tapestry of things. In my mind, the irony of it all is that it is the lackadaisical and inventive throwing around of the terms which fuels constant confusion and misinformation—and incidentally, rants on message boards. ;)

Lordandmaster -> RE: Why do we need definitions? Take 3 (10/24/2006 7:22:03 PM)
Well, we're not going to agree about this, but since you mention literature, you have to be aware that the meanings and nuances of words have changed dramatically over time. Should everyone be pilloried when they use a word in an inventive sense? You'd be pillorying all our greatest writers. And what about cases where the usual array of words just doesn't serve the purpose? As our society and culture change, so, naturally, does our language. quote: ORIGINAL: amayos In private? No. In society? Yes. I take issue with the overall premise that we may frivolously pick and chose and subvert what things mean, despite literary evidence to the contrary, which (again) is where it seems the underpinning slant of your original post was basically heading.

SadistCpl4fslv -> RE: Why do we need definitions? Take 3 (10/24/2006 7:44:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: amayos quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster So you care what two married people call each other when they're members of the same sex? In private? No. In society? Yes. I take issue with the overall premise that we may frivolously pick and chose and subvert what things mean, despite literary evidence to the contrary, which (again) is where it seems the underpinning slant of your original post was basically heading. One may settle on any meaning he or she invents or revises in a word, and may even help to foster a society of it. I certainly do not need to join in and give kudos over the idea, however. Husband and wife or master and slave are words which yield distinct and literal meaning, if one cares to look into them. The gamut of sub cultural nomenclature, as found in the "BDSM community," may be more difficult to pin down, but I think most would generally agree on their established definitions as well. Your frustration over the constant questions brought up over definitions is understandable, but the very fact these issues are brought up time and time again in BDSM is the result of a sensed and exploratory need to be clear on the matter, and no one should be faulted for that when trying to understand where they belong in the tapestry of things. In my mind, the irony of it all is that it is the lackadaisical and inventive throwing around of the terms which fuels constant confusion and misinformation—and incidentally, rants on message boards. ;) amayos, As usual you bring high intellectual common sense to a world of utter confusion, even if some are in denial over it. My hats off to you Bro. Lordandmaster, I would be glad to offer my pillory for such use as long as the writer/writers in question are female masochists <WEG> RSC

Lordandmaster -> RE: Why do we need definitions? Take 3 (10/24/2006 7:52:01 PM)
On this idea that the meanings of words should never change, a link to a relevant comment in an old thread: http://www.collarchat.com/m_106416/mpage_1/tm.htm#106460 But Amayos has turned this into a conversation about something different from what I was originally talking about. I was not asking why words have definitions, because that would be a stupid question; I was asking what people get out of thread after thread posing questions that turn entirely on different people's definitions of contested concepts.

texancutie -> RE: Why do we need definitions? Take 3 (10/24/2006 7:52:02 PM)
Since I saw a post to this old thread....I followed it way back. Way to go Padraig! I agree wholeheartedly. You usually always have something insightful to say and you don't bicker. Hope you have been well. Better yet....I will message you. Has been a while.

ExSteelAgain -> RE: Why do we need definitions? Take 3 (10/24/2006 8:02:56 PM)
There were three muggings, two stabbings, one murder and one hostage situation involving the SWAT team during the making of this thread. Luckily, no animals were hurt during its production.

Lordandmaster -> RE: Why do we need definitions? Take 3 (10/24/2006 8:04:20 PM)
It was a perfectly fine thread until someone accused me of starting it just to stir up shit. We squabbled, and now that's over. I think we can go back to where we were beforehand.

SadistCpl4fslv -> RE: Why do we need definitions? Take 3 (10/24/2006 8:08:37 PM)
Does that mean we are still going to use my pillory? RSC

BitaTruble -> RE: Why do we need definitions? (10/24/2006 8:14:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster It comes in waves, and we're in the middle of one right now: The let's-post-yet-another-thread-about-definitions wave. I've never understood it, and now I have to ask what people think we get out of it. Just out of curiosity, some of us did point out a few of the things that we get out of definitions threads, and I wonder if it clarify's things in your mind as to why they seem to continually pop up? Oh, and btw: the other questions you posted to your OP, (the 'real' ones) caused me to engage my brain, reflect and I actually did a journal entry regarding one of them, so thank you for those as well. ;) Celeste

amayos -> RE: Why do we need definitions? Take 4 (10/24/2006 8:19:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster Well, we're not going to agree about this, but since you mention literature, you have to be aware that the meanings and nuances of words have changed dramatically over time. Should everyone be pilloried when they use a word in an inventive sense? You'd be pillorying all our greatest writers. And what about cases where the usual array of words just doesn't serve the purpose? As our society and culture change, so, naturally, does our language. You bring up very good points, but in my opinion, our language has not been evolving so much as it has been dissolving. As a writer, I am indeed aware that creative writing often involves the invention and expansion of words. Depending upon their stickiness, culture either adopts them or passes them by. This is a different process, however, than the banal misuse of an established term. quote: ORIGINAL: SadistCpl4fslv amayos, As usual you bring high intellectual common sense to a world of utter confusion, even if some are in denial over it. My hats off to you Bro. Thank you, friend.

Lordandmaster -> RE: Why do we need definitions? (10/24/2006 8:21:52 PM)
Yes, I saw those comments; I've been so busy explaining what I WASN'T asking that I've had to respond to those kinds of comments more than anything else. I have to say, I have to go with the answer I've heard most often in this thread, which is that people feel safer if they can believe in immutable and authorized definitions; then they figure out how they fit into those categories. Who authorized those authorized definitions? Well, that's when the issue gets murky and people start bringing up all the social chaos that will supposedly ensue the minute foolish humans feel free to use words however they wish. (How language ever changed from God's own perfect tongue at the beginning of time--well, that's another problem no one really wants to tackle.) There are some people, like you, who are observant and thoughtful enough to get something out of hearing other people's definitions, but I really don't think that's why most people keep rehashing the same material. I think they do it just to reassure themselves. quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble Just out of curiosity, some of us did point out a few of the things that we get out of definitions threads, and I wonder if it clarify's things in your mind as to why they seem to continually pop up?

sailorthor -> RE: Why do we need definitions? (10/24/2006 8:27:11 PM)
Just think of the days before words. How wondrous they must have been! Simply do what you desire... ;) Nobody to tell you it's "wrong." Enjoy Life, SailorThor

Lordandmaster -> RE: Why do we need definitions? Take 4 (10/24/2006 8:28:43 PM)
Could you give an example of "the banal misuse of an established term"? Because none of the things I've been talking about involve established terms. Who "established" the term "slave"? If you're a Webster's fan, fine, haul out your Webster's; you won't find a single definition in there that corresponds to what we in the BDSM world call a "slave." And yet lifestylers seem to have militant ideas about what "slave" means and does not mean, and are willing to tear each other to shreds over it. Isn't that ridiculous? We live in a world that language doesn't describe very accurately, and we're forced, by necessity, to use whatever words we can to convey what we're experiencing as usefully as possible. That means making things up as we go along. We don't live in some kind of perfect, timeless society that preceded us; we live in a society that we've created, with all its imperfections reflecting our own imperfections--and along with the society we create, we're required to create words that fit it. quote: ORIGINAL: amayos This is a different process, however, than the banal misuse of an established term.

sailorthor -> RE: Why do we need definitions? (10/24/2006 8:44:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster Well, the purpose wasn't to get people to stop posting things I don't like; the purpose was to ask what we get out of all the definitions threads. If the answer is "nothing," then all right, I'll just avoid those threads. I thought MAYBE there was some value to them that I've been missing. Well, I should say there is at least some value to the definitions and discussions thereof. I have found that the desires and requirements I have of my woman fit better into a common definition of slave than of submissive. So, when I see a profile with a "submissive" listing, I know right away that I might desire things that this person may not want. It is an efficiency thing. Instead of being surprised that that individual isn't interested, I have immediate knowledge of WHY they might not be interested. Having saved me the instant of being surprised, and attendant frustration, or social oopsy, I have lived more efficiently, entirely due to the label. Does that mean that only those with "slave" on their profile are folks who will value me? Most certainly not, because slave and submissive mean different things to different people. This does not negate the value stated above, it merely leaves open a greater range of possibilities. It is about communication. Effective communication is crucial to a social life (and true antisocials would no sooner post here than go visit a bar, or an opera, or engage in any other social interaction). Effective communication is difficult without common understanding attached to the symbols used to the purpose of communication. All of the discusison about definitions is purely the hashing out of this common understanding. Some posting with more experience, some with less, some with more aplomb, some with less, some with more technical (historic) accuracy, some with less. The point, though, is common understanding associated with symbols for the purpose of efficiency. Enjoy Life, SailorThor Edited to reflect that Padriag already said this. Neat. But sorry to repeat.

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0309906