RE: The Fallacy of Labels (Full Version)

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



Message

SlyStone -> RE: The Fallacy of Labels (3/20/2007 9:27:11 PM)

I think the smartest thing I heard last year, was when I heard someone say: " The person matters more than the the damn role."



I agree, and sometimes I wonder about the importance people assign to the d/s labels in particular, as if they are somehow magical and that we are transformed through there use within the d/s dynamic.  It may be that some people are, I haven't felt that but in a way I can see how others might.


It's a whole different subject but it is interesting.



SlyStone -> RE: The Fallacy of Labels (3/20/2007 9:35:37 PM)

I see myself as a submissive innately. I will say this though, I may not be someone else's idea of what a submissive is. I am a woman innately, but I may not be someone else's idea of what a woman should be. It starts with a label, and if someone is wise it will turn into a conversation regarding what it is that we do.


Or like tammyjo said you can just be Julia, and the labels be damned. Than the conversation can start anywhere and go anywhere , the possiblities are endless :)

But I do understand what you are saying.




bearincuffs -> RE: The Fallacy of Labels (3/20/2007 10:02:23 PM)

For the most part, labels need to serve a purpose to give a basic identity about another person. The application of labels used to define a person is fluid and only represents one aspect of who that person is and/or a facet of their personality. The only way a label is fully accurate is when a person labels themselves, people who place a label on myself do so based upon how much they know me a s a person.

Using myself as an example, people will label me as male, bear, slave, submissive, slaveheart, cranky, intolerant, fiesty, stubborn, kinky, perverted, out spoken, Pagan, gay, etc. All these labels are not right nor are they incorrect on their own. But each does apply since they are a representation of the different aspects that make up who I am as a person.

I don't believe that labels are limiting by their nature. Labels change and evolve over time from our life's experiences and growth. As we grow in life, the labels we use and are known by change along with us. The only way I can see labels being limited and constricting is when a person restricts themself by not growing as an idividual.

I do agree that it's quite difficult to describe someone using just one label, we as humans are very complex beings and thus using many labels gives a more accurate description. I believe the safest way is to stick with a broad label when applying it to another, it aviods any misconceptions and incorrect assumtions about the person.



SlyStone -> RE: The Fallacy of Labels (3/20/2007 10:51:07 PM)


Sometimes, I think the most apt characterization of myself is that of a barnacle thats hell bent on attaching to the bottom of a big ol' ship.  If I'm securely attached, I'm fine, but every once in a while I come loose, through no fault or will of my own, and then I just kind of float around aimlessly until another ship comes my way.



You know I was brushing my teeth and this posting popped into my head out of nowhere and I had to laugh. A floating barnacle! :)
I cannot imagine another person in the world using that analogy to describe their submissive nature, or any nature for that matter, and how fucking cool is that.




MadRabbit -> RE: The Fallacy of Labels (3/21/2007 4:24:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy

p.s. I personally think that a person contains multitudes, and when a person puts a label on somebody they stop examining that person for who they really are, and rely on the label to maintain their intellectually lazy examination of the person.


I completely agree. People start to think in terms of "What would a dominant do?" and "What would a submissive do?" rather than what the individual person would do. People start to fall into this narrowminded type of thinking of "All real (insert label here) do 1, 2 and 3 and if they dont, they arent really a (insert label here)".

Human beings are so diverse and complex it baffles me how people can make such blanket statements as if people were predictable animals.




Peterlocked -> RE: The Fallacy of Labels (3/21/2007 5:00:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SlyStone


I think all labels are limiting by their very nature and therefore they diminish us as much as they describe us. I say that because we are all more than one dimensional, no one word can describe us, and even more importantly nothing can describe what it is that we can become.



Of course labels are limiting, they say "This thing is this and not that", which in the frozen vegetable section is great.  But people aren't inanimate objects which will never transcend their current state. People grow and change, life is a progression, frozen corn is never going to progress past its current state, unless you add lima beans and then you get succotash, but I digress.

Labels are useful, however, to describe a current state, but must be placed on with removable tape, as they can change fairly easily, with a bit of encouragement from a Dom(me)...  [:D]

peter



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




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