RE: A question of semantics (Full Version)

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



Message


MasterFireMaam -> RE: A question of semantics (3/7/2007 11:58:36 AM)

Words are just words. It's the intent behind them and our analysis of that intent that cause or solve difficulties.

Master Fire




mixielicous -> RE: A question of semantics (3/7/2007 12:06:23 PM)

fast reply, when i first began to *learn* Master and i would refer as Top/bottom [i think those are the words on my contract] which eventually evolved to Dom/sub then to Master/slave. i find the titles to be a lot of time in frivolity, but i adopted them so that people could recognize my status, as i see that important. kinda an oxy moron i know, but the point i am trying to make is, IMO, the less experience the "lesser" ranking





StellaByStarlite -> RE: A question of semantics (3/7/2007 12:18:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

When I say "value" in relation to words I don't mean whether or not you think they are important. I love words and writing.  What I mean is  you rank them by importance, some are better or bigger than others.

I know people who consider themselves Tops who would put most self appointed masters to shame.  God knows we all know slaves who we believe really wear the pants in the relationship.

Labels are in many ways the trees in the BDSM forest.  Focus on them and you lose sight of the big picture.

Take an act of dominance and rank it for me as an example.  Which is more extreme, cutting a design into someones back with a knife or getting a woman to drop her eyes?  Truth is you have no way of knowing.  If the bloodplay/marking is done on someone with 10 other marks from 5 other owners, it isn't a big deal to do another one.  Making a well known female domme to do ANY sort of submissive act in public in front of her peers is a HUGE thing.

In general two groups of people worry about labels.  People who are new to the scene or who are in small groups and people who need to feel better about what they do and use labels to build themselves up and put others down.



Somebody please give this man a cookie =)


Stella




AquaticSub -> RE: A question of semantics (3/7/2007 12:21:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: StellaByStarlite

Somebody please give this man a cookie =)


Stella


Chocolate chip or oatmeal rasin?




StellaByStarlite -> RE: A question of semantics (3/7/2007 12:24:02 PM)

Oh, hell, both. =) Or let him decide, lol

Stella




elderrook -> RE: A question of semantics (11/9/2007 3:33:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Actually, it is you who are ONLY a slave, or perhaps JUST a slave, or maybe you can't be MORE than a slave? 

Doesn't feel as nice does it?  Think about that before you go putting someone down as "ONLY" a top or bottom.  I am sure this isn't something you mean to do but you are ranking which label is better rather than simply saying each is different.


Hmm. Interesting point of view. I can't help but notice a certain style in your reply to my post. I notice how you twisted what I said into something other than what I meant. I don't recall "puuting someone down as ONLY a top or bottom". Those are your words, not mine.

So let me take a look at some other things you've said in this thread....

"Top and bottom are not as cool sounding as slave and master...
Think about what you are doing."


Think about what YOU'RE doing. You're taking someone's words out of context, and making it sound like they say something other than what they mean. Just the way you did to me. The person who spoke of the "coolness factor" didn't say she felt that way. She didn't say Top and bottom are not as cool sounding as slave and master. In fact, the only person who did say that was YOU.
 
 
"Your community has an agreed upon range of definitions which is great.  However, now you are comming here and wanting to place value on words."

Placing value on words? Yeah, some folks place too much value on words, and get VERY EASILY offended. Such as when you were offended when I used the words "only a top or bottom". It was my way of differentialing the two titles, no implication that one was better than the other. I should apologize now for the perceived offense. I hadn't realized there would be someone so thin-skinned as to take offense to it.

"In general two groups of people worry about labels.  People who are new to the scene or who are in small groups and people who need to feel better about what they do and use labels to build themselves up and put others down. "

So which one are you? My guess is you need to feel better about what you do by putting others down, the way you did my post.

My advice to you: LIGHTEN UP.

Sometimes people use labels not  to definitively define people, but to clear up what they're talking about. You call a person a top, and someone else may simply say master or domme. It's a way of clearing up what you're talking about and staying on the same page.

However, my guess is this will come to you as yet another assault on your character. If so, sorry about that. I agree with Stella. Would you like a cookie?

Susan, do you think he'd like some of your fudge? I hear you make great fudge.  [;)]

-rook






daddyncherry -> RE: A question of semantics (11/9/2007 4:06:03 PM)

Wow this must be the day for this question.LOL my gf was asking me earlier if she should post something similar to this thread, or if everyone would be mean to her.

What i told her was that none of it made a difference. She could ask 100 people and she'd probably get about 60 different answers to the questions.

She got a bit annoyed i think and was going to ask someone else that we know...i laughed and told her to go ahead, that i wasn't being obstinate, and that he and i may or may not agree on the definitions....

Basically, when push comes to shove and you meet who you will be with you will have to have the discussion between the two of you. You may have an idea that you want a Daddy Dom and seek one who says that is what they are. Then, after you begin to talk you find he is nothing like what you thought that meant. Does that mean he isn't a Daddy? No. What is means is that is who he feels he is, and maybe your idea doesn't mesh with it, but that doesn't change who he is to himself.

my Daddy is a Dominant man, he is my Daddy and he is also my Master....i am a submissive woman, who is Daddy's little slave girl. (but i wouldn't imagine that another in a dynamic with the same wording as ours would be the same type as we are. Sure, they may be, but it's just as likely that they wouldn't.

What matters is between the two people. Understandably you want to understand when you see that this one identifies as X. Y. or Z but if they are that important, then ask them what they mean by it or else  just accept if you see the term Dominant/Master/Mistress then they are generally the ones wearing the pants...that the sub or slave is the not the one wearing the pants and that a switch tends to decide if they want to run around naked or not.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125