RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=-

RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (Full Version)

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

Message

T1981 -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 7:39:07 AM)
Resident Sadist - good thread, and as one of those "newbies", I appreciate it. Thank you! While I did know the difference between submissive and slave before I got onto these forums, there is still so much out there that I DON'T know. I think people often get tired of seeing the same questions/posts/pleas/etc etc over and over and over again. Perfectly understandable. There's another message board community that I've been a daily posting member of for 4 years now, and those of us who have been around there for awhile sometimes groan when THAT question (whatever it may be) comes up yet again. But just because we know doesn't mean they do, and that's what we try to remember. Hell, for all we know, that poster's question could be the first time they've ever been on the internet, let alone asking a question about the specific subject. So when someone posts what seems like an inane question here, I'm happy to see that the majority of replies are informative, welcoming, and polite. That does me good, and even more, it helps me learn. That is invaluable.

colouredin -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 7:57:49 AM)
Thats what I do bear, I ask what they want to be called and what it means to them, which I think was my point anyways.

NuevaVida -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 7:59:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist -=Guppies & Sharks=- I once said that guppies shouldn’t swim with sharks. I did not say that guppies weren’t as beautiful or as important but, it got blown out of perspective by the egos of those involved. Sometimes my Zen perspectives do not translate well to those with narrow minds, frail egos or insecurities. How could anyone see one creature as less valuable in their role than another? The same is true for all the many stereotypes (labels) and roles in our BDSM lifestyle. There are generally definable differences between us and we're each colorful, beautiful and valuable in our own ways. Shame on you. Actually you said you would not own a guppy. You were highly critical of guppies. You said sharks should swim with sharks - like being with like - and spoke of the compatibility of such. Later you added the descriptors of "less intelligent," "too stupid" and "frail". Not trying to reopen that argument, but felt a bit of clarity would be appropriate. I won't accept the "shame" of disagreeing with you on this one. As for labels, a good starting point (to have one) but people will apply them differently as they evolve. I'm not a fan of labels at the moment, as I found myself more focused on trying to fit my own definition of one rather than just being myself. Perhaps this will change again over time (likely so) as I continue to figure things out.

Missokyst -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 8:12:06 AM)
I like my label. It is the only one I wear which means anything. Human, monogamous, pathologically straight female. The maso part, the submissive part, the leader part, the anal retentive gets things done part.. doesn't require defining for anyone with whom I am not actively involved.

laura2161 -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 8:35:15 AM)
Good post. I would never tell someone they are or are not slave or submissive. They are what they are within their own relationships. The problem I see is when someone takes their own meaning to a word and tries to shove it down soemone else's throat. I'll give you an example. I identify as submissive. I go into a little more detail in my profile why I see myself as such. Just last week I was contacted by a Man who identifies as a Master and we were rolling along back and forth when he said "Too bad you are just a sub and not a slave; We may have been able to build something together". Now instead of getting mad and all out of sorts, I wrote back and asked him to define his difference between the two. I also explained that 'labels' can be mis-leading and what one person defines as submissive could very easily be a slave to someone else and vice-versa. He went on to tell me that slaves obey while submissives only do what they want to do, when they want to do it, and that a sub only obeys when it suits her needs. I wrote back and asked him to once again read my profile as I state very clearly that I will always defer to 'my' dominant. He wrote back and said he refuses to be with submissives because subs are only in it for themselves... We stopped corresponding after that. My point is this (Sorry for such a long winded post) We can not change other's views on what they think slave and sub mean. It doesnt matter what the dictionary says, people still have their own definitions so when someone comes along and asks what's the difference, I can understand why some tell them not to worry about labels....and round and round it goes.

mistoferin -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 8:51:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: laura2161 He went on to tell me that slaves obey while submissives only do what they want to do, when they want to do it, and that a sub only obeys when it suits her needs. I wrote back and asked him to once again read my profile as I state very clearly that I will always defer to 'my' dominant. He wrote back and said he refuses to be with submissives because subs are only in it for themselves... Dang it, I've been doing this all wrong!!!

ResidentSadist -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 9:05:27 AM)
As I said in the OP, what label you use amongst yourselves is irrelevant to communicating who you are to others. If you have given him complete and fulltime authority, then, by definition to others, you are in a 24/7 TPE. Whether that means you are M/s or not is up to you. I have noticed in my days that some subordinates in a TPE identify as submissives when authority is at the root of the relationship. When I will see a subordinate in the same type of TPE calling it M/s and symbolic ownership plays a stronger role in the relationship dynamics, they identify as a slave. If his authority includes symbolic ownership, then to explain your role as human property to others, you are a slave not a submissive. I hope this sheds light on how others would typically understand your relationship roles and their descriptions. PS. If you have trouble with swallowing the label of a TPE or the slave’s role, you can always just say you are a D/s submissive and negotiated that there are no boundaries and he has complete authority… that’ll fuck with M/s 24/7 TPE crowd’s head for sure! quote: ORIGINAL: oceanwynds I am a thick head. I prefer to not use labels on myself, but I do not prefer everyone to do what I do. If someone would ask if I am a submissive or a Dom, I would say submissive, however they still will not totally grasp who I am nor the extent of my submissiveness. It's my orientation, however it is limiting to my mind. One reason is in regards to Sir, I have given him full control, yet I am not a slave. I tried to figure out if I am this or that, and just stumbled over the labels. It is easier in my head to not attach a label.

Timoty -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 9:43:12 AM)
If we can assume (dangerous words, I know, for this site and other endeavors in life but . . .) that a word is used as a visual symbol of something, and, one way we use those symbols is to relate our thoughts and ideas to others, then the use of "labels" (which are simply words) should be a starting point for further discussions and more aesoteric relationships. Alan Watts once said that too often we believe the symbol is the essence itself, rather than a man made representation of the essence. I liked your parable, and, the use of color in the following section. I liken it to the color, red. We use that word to define a specific color in the vast spectrum of colors. We all agree on its definition. By doing so we all understand what red is, and, what it is not. Because we agree, we can use it for many things. For example, red means stop in the traffic community. When added to white, it makes pink in the paint community. It means an emergency vehicle in the fire prevention community. So, the uses can mean many different things based on the community but only if they all agree on the most base definition of the specific word/symbol/label, red. It would be insulting one's intelligence if I had to point out what would happen if one of the communities decided that "red" was "blue" and assumed that all other communities understood and agreed with their "new" version. So, I won't do that here. lol If I ask and one tells me you are a submissive. That should symbolize to me a very definate starting point of who you are, and, who you are not. What a great place to start a discussion about the intricacies of life and relationships. I am symbolized by many things some of which I am proud, and, some of which I rankle at. I am a Dominant, part Icelandic, part Scot, slim, a babyboomer, aging, Canadian, fiscally conservative, socially liberal, etc etc etc etc etc. I am all these things and more but they do not define me, they are definitions of words used to foster communication and share our understandings. I know the worth (or. worthlessness) of the symbol and they don't bother me. Instead, I take it as a starting point to tell you who I am.

oceanwynds -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 10:09:25 AM)
quote: PS. If you have trouble with swallowing the label of a TPE or the slave’s role, you can always just say you are a D/s submissive and negotiated that there are no boundaries and he has complete authority… that’ll fuck with M/s 24/7 TPE crowd’s head for sure! I like that. thanks for telling me where i fit in the grand scheme of BDSM, and i mean that seriously.

SylvereApLeanan -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 10:32:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist -=Letter=- Dear anti-label coalition: The recurrent sub/slave definition requests from newcomers always seem to rally your anti-label coalition and you say there are no real definitions instead of helping define the language and terms we do use in our lifestyle. Shame on you. [snip] /<dismount> [sm=soapbox.gif] [sm=agree.gif][sm=goodpost.gif] RS, you have CMail.

Catgirl711 -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 10:33:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: colouredin I agree that labels are a benchmark, the problem when someone comes out in the posts you are reffering to and says what a sub or slave is it almost always gets someones back up. I can write what the words mean to me but not what it means to others, that is where the labelling becomes difficult. There is a difference between the labels slave and sub and the labels gay and straight there just is. Everyone knows what gay means, everyone knows what a man is there are real no arguments facts about those labels. The same cant be said about sub or slave. the labels of sub and slave are as subjective as the labels "beautiful" and "ugly" yet we don't hesitate to use those labels we would be happy to tell a newcomer what we think is beautiful, or perhaps even why we think such a thing is beautiful with that information, and the knowledge that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, a newcomer would be better armed to discover their own idea of beauty while sub/slave/Dom/Master are things that are not definitive, and newcomers need to KNOW that they are not definitive, a variety of opinions on what defines them to different people could help a newcomer find their own definition. I use the same in dance. For a basic cha-cha step, there is only one way in which the feet can move, however there are multiple way in which you can move the body, the head and the arms to make the step look different. There are many differing opinions on what makes the step more beautiful, on what judges would like to see, on what the audience would find appealing.... however, it is up to the individual dancer to find the way that works best for them. The step itself is a guideline. Without that guideline, the student has nothing to grow from. I appreciate that people will say "this applies to me only, and this is my opinion". I don't find it helpful in the least when someone says "it's whatever you want it to be" That makes me think: Fabulous, I can control everything, beat up everyone, and herald myself around the next playparty as a Queen, and yet still call myself a slave. Which is true, but won't help my understanding in the least (and probably won't make me very many friends). Fabulous thread, RS. You've even inspired me to get up on my own soapbox. [sm=evil.gif] look for it

SlaveIndigochild -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 10:36:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Missokyst I like my label. It is the only one I wear which means anything. Human, monogamous, pathologically straight female. The maso part, the submissive part, the leader part, the anal retentive gets things done part.. doesn't require defining for anyone with whom I am not actively involved. i like this response....[:D]

SlaveIndigochild -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 10:38:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Catgirl711 quote: ORIGINAL: colouredin I agree that labels are a benchmark, the problem when someone comes out in the posts you are reffering to and says what a sub or slave is it almost always gets someones back up. I can write what the words mean to me but not what it means to others, that is where the labelling becomes difficult. There is a difference between the labels slave and sub and the labels gay and straight there just is. Everyone knows what gay means, everyone knows what a man is there are real no arguments facts about those labels. The same cant be said about sub or slave. the labels of sub and slave are as subjective as the labels "beautiful" and "ugly" yet we don't hesitate to use those labels The human mind loves binary opposites.....hence gender. PS i'm a lesbian...L.E.S.B.I.A.N....thats scans the song also.....

colouredin -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 10:43:09 AM)
Yeah well im pretty sure we could equally have an argument about whether we should be walking around calling others ugly. I dont believe that you have really countered my argument just added another two words that really we cant define. But as I have kept saying there is going to be the fundemental princaple that applies to terms, sub and slave arent that differant thats where the personal opinion comes in. Ugly and beautiful are opposite sub and slave are both bottoms.

Catgirl711 -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 10:49:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: beargonewild In that case, why not simply ask the person how they want to be identified as? That way you negate the misuse and incorrect labeling and avoid all the petty bitching about being not wanting to be labeled. But if they don't know what is what, how can they know what they would like to be identified as? Again, I go back to dance: If I ask a student if they would prefer to do a Salsa or a Mambo, my student becomes confused. They've seen them both. They very similar. So similar in fact, that without the knowledge of what makes them different, how can my student choose. Both dances use the same type of music. The same type of steps. You can use Mambo in Salsa, you can use Salsa in Mambo (although not in competition [:D]). In social dancing, you can even go back and forth between the 2.... have your own little Malsa. (lol, such a dork). But without the knowledge of the basic structure of the dance, my student will have no idea which they want to learn about. In social dancing (ONLY) their are differing opinions on what makes the dance the dance. My student will eventually learn their own interpretation of the dance, but I want to give them a starting point in which to interpret from.

Catgirl711 -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 10:52:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: colouredin Yeah well im pretty sure we could equally have an argument about whether we should be walking around calling others ugly. I dont believe that you have really countered my argument just added another two words that really we cant define. But as I have kept saying there is going to be the fundemental princaple that applies to terms, sub and slave arent that differant thats where the personal opinion comes in. Ugly and beautiful are opposite sub and slave are both bottoms. I wasn't trying to counter. I was building on what you said about the terms being subjective. Would it have been better if I had used "beautiful" and "cute"?

SlaveIndigochild -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 11:14:04 AM)
It's not labels that are confusing once they are socially attributed.... see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labeling_theory a favourite: Becker, Howard. Outsiders. 1963 (1997). New York, NY: Free Press. http://home.earthlink.net/~hsbecker/ .....it's choice which confuses.

Timoty -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 11:18:18 AM)
I am new enough here not to know how to use the "quote" function so, I will just have my say and hope the people involved know who I am speaking to. Logic dictates that comparitive arguments must be of the same "type" when making those comparisons. In this case, the set of terms "ugly and beauty" cannot be compared to the set "sub and slave". The primary reason is that they are not of the same type. Meaning one set is intangible "concepts" and the other are tangible "things" (as in person, place, or thing). Either argument (for, or, against) falls apart as soon as the incompatiple comparisons are used. A more applicable argument would be to say "sub and slave" are like (cats and dogs" (or, any other set of tangible mammals). And, like most words defining tangible things, they can be used to construct a foundation of understanding regardless of the variety of differences that may be contained in each set. For example, I can say "cow" and you have a fundamental idea of what I am talking about, even though, there are hundreds of different types of cows each different in their own way, and, each with different personalities. Again, the use of symbols/words/labels is to build a foundation for further in depth discussions and definitions. Not the essence of the whole.

IronBear -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 11:31:08 AM)
All words are labels, every blessed one of them. Nouns (the name of something), Verbs (defining "doing") Adverbs (adding to the name) and so on. If we didn't use them we'd all be pointing at some one or something and grunting which wouldn't translate well into cyber. space. When we string many labels together we have created a language and when two or more agree with the labels and the way we use them we have a public or communal language. Over the eons, new labels come into being because we develop new ideas and need to express them - we and the language evolves. Evolution is an ongoing process which in the end will see this planet devoid of humans and other life forms probable will evolve to take out place and the whole fucking language issue will start all over again..... None of us have to agree with any word/label and we certainly have to use it. It just limits passing information in some cases or conversing in other cases. Nothing for ny of us to get our panties in a wad about though....

AngelGeena -> RE: -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=- (1/4/2009 11:33:30 AM)
I don't care if I am labeled. It is what differentiates me from the next person. Heaven knows we aren't all the same. And anyone that takes time to learn about me, or anyone for that matter, will know I am more than just a two or three word definition.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875