RE: Existence without Labels?

RE: Existence without Labels? (Full Version)

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

Message

kyraofMists -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 3:59:24 AM)
I know it can; I witness a relationship daily that began 20 years ago and at the time they did not know about master and slave in the context of BDSM. When they finally learned about BDSM many years later, they used the label of master and slave because it fit how their relationship was already structured. They did not restructure their relationship to fit the label. From the very beginning she did what she was told and he had all the authority in the relationship. I also think that labels are useful as a starting point in understanding each other and who we are. Knight's Kyra

Celeste43 -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 4:00:14 AM)
Certainly as long as there is understanding of what it is you seek which is hard to do if you've never heard of it before, and clear communication with your partner about it. But for most of us, before we heard the label we chose partners wrongly seeking something that we didn't know what it was, and didn't know what we were. The labels bring you to a Eureka moment faster and helps you find someone who has also already had their Eureka moment.

phoenixinchains -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 4:05:19 AM)
hmm, well, relationships can start without knowing the lables, but in our time( the age of communication) the terms will be discovered if searched for, imho- phoenix

chellekitty -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 4:47:20 AM)
wonders how to get a download from Archer's brain to find out all the stuff he knows...

gypsygrl -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 4:57:08 AM)
quote: How many people think that two individuals can get together and have a fulfilling and happy relationship based on power exchange and kink without ever once knowing the defintion of Master, Dom, Top, Bottom, Slave, and Submissive? Between me and my Master, we have our labels but hell if I know their definitions. I've asked. He didn't really answer. The closest he's come is to say "a slave has no rights" but thats not a definition and doesn't give the word any determinate content. So long as we know our positions relative to each other, and so long as we continue to pass power and authority between us, it works well enough. Having the labels helps me keep things sorted even if I don't have a real concrete idea of what they mean. If I'm wondering why about something he says or does, the first answer is usually, "He's the Master." Alot of times, thats enough to quiet my questions.

WinsomeDefiance -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 4:59:32 AM)
I'm not a mime, despite the fact that in person I can express myself quite wonderfully without words. Communication sure as hell helps to get the point across, though. Words, or rather specific words and the concepts they expound upon, can be called labels if you like, but for me they are simply tools of expression and communication. The fact that slave, submisive, Master, Dominant, slouch, sluggard, troll, or any other descriptive word means something diffferent to others, doesn't mean the tool of expression has no value. It simply means the expectation is on me to convey what those words mean to ME in a clear and concise manner - or to seek clarification and understanding for myself until I can do so. This is a text based medium. Yes, I know. DUH. Nothing like pointing out the obvious here. Yes, I know as well that people live this life outside of pixels and pretense. Again, yes. Duh. But, considering that we are all communicating here (well most of us are) using words I think that it is sort of counter-productive to devalue the very tools of expression we use. Or, conversely to OVER value them. I could probably argue for hours on the simple concept of "insert concept here", and be pretty confident I wasn't alone in the ability to do so. Considering all the strings currently in existence here and elsewhere doing just that. So far as I can see, what we have is more or less a base direction by which to set our compass, but exploring the depths and promise of those concepts resides within each of us. I don't think it is the "label" that individuals despise so much, as they despise the attempts of others to place a foregin or absolute concept of what that label is upon them. Why are we so surprised that a single word, any single word, does not always nor adequately convey the truth of a complex personal dynamic? Oh man, I am going back to bed. My head hurts. I sure hope I don't get back up and scratch my head when I reread this, wondering what in the world I was thinking. C

chellekitty -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 5:05:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance I could probably argue for hours on the simple concept of "insert concept here", and be pretty confident I wasn't alone in the ability to do so. hehe...i could give you a really hard one like the concept of "being" that one sounds simple...right...wrong....omg....how about we start off with i dunno..."grapes"...giggles evilly

WinsomeDefiance -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 5:06:56 AM)
Brat. (start with that one! hehe)

chellekitty -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 5:13:32 AM)
start with the concept of brat? well...there are people like me who do bratty behavior like post #27 in this thread...and then there are people who use the label brat and ruin it for people like me because they are just trying to excuse their rude, disrespectful behavior because they are "oh so cute.." big fucking eyeroll but i am not totally thread-jacking, so i won't go any further on the topic, right here, right now [:)]

themischievous1 -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 6:01:22 AM)
Labeling and defining to death are my pet peeves on CM and other alternative personal sites. I find the labels to be restrictive, demanding, intrusive, and basically just stupid. The labels don't allow room for growth, first of all. Second of all, they aren't going to fit indefinitely and when they no longer do, it can cause confusion. There is no wiggle room within the labeled, stereotypical box. Within each individual's persona and manner of being are an abundance of dominant and submissive characteristics, traits, and desires. Let those flourish! Instead, we have to box each person up into a neat little package and define what and who they are and they damn well better live up to our expectations of the label or else. We stifle and kill creativity, spontaneity, and the urge to explore with our incessant labeling and defining. Enough already! Just let me be and find out as I go along what all I can encompass. Who can know? Hell, even I don't know yet! Just when I think I do, it changes. Why? Because I change as I grow older and so will you--labeling doesn't take this into account. It's a waste of time and far too simplistic and convenient to be taken seriously. [;)]

AquaticSub -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 6:03:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit How many people think that two individuals can get together and have a fulfilling and happy relationship based on power exchange and kink without ever once knowing the defintion of Master, Dom, Top, Bottom, Slave, and Submissive? Don't see why not. I didn't become a submissive when I learned the term. I'm quite sure that there are plenty of couples out there with an unspeaken and unoffical d/s dynamic because that is simply the way that works for them.

MissSCD -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 6:10:27 AM)
Of course. As a matter of fact, I think it is a wonderful idea because when you get down to it in my opinion, our lifestyle is about concent. When you put titles and demands on everything, it adds uneeded stress to a relationship and takes away from the fun part of it. I consider this to be fun. I have been engaged to my slave for three years, and we have had our challenges. The way we are working this now is better for both of us I think. Regards, MissSCD

Dnomyar -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 10:15:34 AM)
Your name is a label. Your born with labels so live with it.

murmur -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 1:22:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hisannabelle i do not believe it is possible to exist in general without labels; labels in the form of basic stereotyping are a fundamental cognitive process (primarily for organization), and labels for the purpose of communicating certain concepts to one another are a fundamental function of language. i do believe it is possible to have a relationship that fits within the area of bdsm without ever knowing the definition of any of the words you listed, however. there are plenty of people in this world, i imagine, who live kinky, "power-exchange" relationships without ever labeling themselves as such or thinking of themselves in that way. heck, one of the amusing things for me about people who get caught up on master vs. dominant and submissive vs. slave is the fact that we have a very fulfilled relationship without needing to define them as one specific thing and stick to that. very rarely (like one time) have we ever even had a discussion about how we self-identify in that area and what that means for us, and even then, it was more related to his expectations of me and other areas of the relationship than simply an intellectual discussion on labeling. the fact is, i don't think most people in relationships actually feel the need to talk to death this kind of crap with their significant others...whether or not they DO actually know the definitions. it is more than possible to have a fulfilled relationship without bringing any of those concepts into the mix :) respectfully, annabelle. what she said :) What is sad though, is people who feel lost until they can put labels on themselves. Could we call them insecure people or is that an too much of a label put on them?

MadRabbit -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 3:25:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hisannabelle the fact is, i don't think most people in relationships actually feel the need to talk to death this kind of crap with their significant others...whether or not they DO actually know the definitions. it is more than possible to have a fulfilled relationship without bringing any of those concepts into the mix :) respectfully, annabelle. And this was the real point behind the question. You get a cookie! [:D]

Aneirin -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 6:34:34 PM)
Yep,I will go with that, and have said as much in my profile.Labels to me are irrelevant,it is what happens within a relationship.

slavegirljoy -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 7:35:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit How many people think that two individuals can get together and have a fulfilling and happy relationship based on power exchange and kink without ever once knowing the defintion of Master, Dom, Top, Bottom, Slave, and Submissive? i do. i was a very happy submissive to my Dominant husband for many years, without ever hearing or using those labels, although i did know what the dictionary definitions of those two words are. But, when i became single and wanted to find another Dominant man to enter into a relationship with, it sure did help being able to read the personal ads in the newspaper and know that Dom was the keyword i was looking for. It was just as important as knowing what the label "SWM" meant, especially when i was wearing the label of "SWF" and i was ISO one. Labels are helpful in making a search for another person easier but, actually finding someone to have a relationship with doesn't end with the label. It's just a handy tool to help thin out the potential prospects. If a man labeled himself as a MWM, i would pass him by, just as i would if he labeled himself a submissive. Those aren't the types of men i was interested in meeting so, they helped me to not waste their time or mine. i can love and be loved, without knowing a definition for love. But, i know it when i feel it. i also know the feeling of being Dominated and Owned and i don't need to know the definition of those words. i know what they mean to me and my meaning is going to be very different from what they mean to most other people. slave joy Owned property of Master David (and, i know just what that means, to me)

Prinsexx -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/10/2007 4:20:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit How many people think that two individuals can get together and have a fulfilling and happy relationship based on power exchange and kink without ever once knowing the defintion of Master, Dom, Top, Bottom, Slave, and Submissive? Labels and definitions are both a curse and a blessing. for me they are a curse when they are applied to me or I am expected to aplly them to someone else and then systematically adhere to a code orset of undefineable qualities to that label. It just becomes a limt in itself outside of which, if we allow ourselves to internlise the label, we then become afraid to move. A person is never solely a submissive: they are also lets say male or female, a parent or not, or they a a certain height or weight or then again they have an Iq or an emotional intelligence or not, they are a slave type or not and so on and so on....but what anothe rperson is surely is an individual? Anyone reading this from within a Groean lifestyle might want to argue nad I once wandered into that discussion forum and was asked did I really know where I was? But labels make us feel safe and labels help to identify us, and, just as with any journey...labels keeps us and outr baggage together...that can be a good thing or a bad thing especially when we out grow our label. I dislike the label bisexual....as there is asexual or transexual just for statrters and I sincerely wish collarme had the term pansexual as a choice...there is asexual btw also so I do know ok?.....just think its a balance... also reflecting that I also was submissive and on my knees long before I knew what label I had....just like I WAS HALF STARVING BEFORE i KNEW i WAS ANOREXIC.......

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.125