Existence without Labels?

Existence without Labels? (Full Version)

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

Message

MadRabbit -> Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 8:07:10 PM)
So...with all the threads as of late focusing on the importance and neccessity of labels, standards and definitions in the kink community, I have a question to present to the group. 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?

IrishMist -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 8:11:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit So...with all the threads as of late focusing on the importance and neccessity of labels, standards and definitions in the kink community, I have a question to present to the group. 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

BadJezebel -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 8:15:41 PM)
pleanty of us! I bet that most of us on CM were doing all of these things w/o really knowing what they were called for a L O N G time.

Archer -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 8:17:27 PM)
It's not the after they get to know each other where labels have their function A freind put it this way Walk into the grocer store looking for chicken noodle soup. Now imagine having to do that without anything being labeled. 50,000 cans of ? (because all the labels have been removed) and you have to find one with Chicken Noodle Soup. Labels serve to reduce the non matches, it's a function of the human mind. (Similarities and Differences) Otherwise how many of those previously sealed and safe for sale cans are you going to have to open and leave behind until you find your chicken noodle soup.

goodgirl85 -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 8:18:47 PM)
It happens all the time in with power exchange I can't say with kink for sure, but who knows what goes on behind bedroom doors. I see it in my grandmother's relationship with her husband. Not 100 percent, but certain things, like dinner on the table when he gets home, she serves him, gets him dessert. Yada yada yada. In most relationships, there is one partner, who becomes the dominant one. Whether just in bed or in life as well. My mother used to make sure she was home every night before my step father woke up so she could make his coffee. Its around us all the time, if we know what to look for, even in those people who would turn there noses up at what we do. girl

crouchingtigress -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 8:25:01 PM)
[image]http://www.collarchat.com/micons/m25.gif[/image]meee.

dawntreader -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 8:33:56 PM)
Greetings Archer, i do see the validity to your analogy but only if we all looked alike. Our personalities and behaviors are great indicators to the "observant". If all the cans had a picture of the contents and the only words were the ingredients, one could deduce what was in the cans without the actual label. If we took our observation skills to a more refined level, we would see in others the characteristics that appeal to us without necessarily having to label them. Unfortunately, while i do agree that labels can be helpful in the large sorting order, our reliance on them has decreased our ability to hone in to the finer mannerisms in others, a reaction, so to speak, to another. Instead, we use a label to define ourselves, try to fit the definition, get our feelings hurt when we are told we don't fit the catagory we have claimed, *and worse of all...we judge another's worth by the ever-changing definition of a label.* i think we could achieve existence without labels and i for one am at that point - particularly after some of the threads i have recently been following. However, i do not see it as a global reality.

MadRabbit -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 8:36:44 PM)
My post wasnt meant to support an actual existance without label or claim they arent necessary for communication. The point was more that with all the endless debating and arguments over the Internet regarding this subject, the neccessity of them for two people to be happy and fulfilled in a relationship is zilch.

Missokyst -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 8:43:40 PM)
Yeppers. I was doing this long before it was fashionable. And I am not a gay male leather type. Labels chaffe. Kyst quote: ORIGINAL: BadJezebel pleanty of us! I bet that most of us on CM were doing all of these things w/o really knowing what they were called for a L O N G time.

RRafe -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 8:56:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit So...with all the threads as of late focusing on the importance and neccessity of labels, standards and definitions in the kink community, I have a question to present to the group. 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? Things get screwed up in this when you do it more with your head-than your passion.

Archer -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 8:59:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dawntreader Greetings Archer, i do see the validity to your analogy but only if we all looked alike. Our personalities and behaviors are great indicators to the "observant". If all the cans had a picture of the contents and the only words were the ingredients, one could deduce what was in the cans without the actual label. If we took our observation skills to a more refined level, we would see in others the characteristics that appeal to us without necessarily having to label them. Unfortunately, while i do agree that labels can be helpful in the large sorting order, our reliance on them has decreased our ability to hone in to the finer mannerisms in others, a reaction, so to speak, to another. Instead, we use a label to define ourselves, try to fit the definition, get our feelings hurt when we are told we don't fit the catagory we have claimed, *and worse of all...we judge another's worth by the ever-changing definition of a label.* i think we could achieve existence without labels and i for one am at that point - particularly after some of the threads i have recently been following. However, i do not see it as a global reality. LOL just cause my contrariness is overflowing tonight "If all the cans had a picture of the contents and the only words were the ingredients, one could deduce what was in the cans without the actual label." Isn't that the very definition of a label? LOL (Short only the shorthand term) Even with such reduced labels it would still take 5 or 6 times longer to go through all the cans. Mad Rabit to exist without a label is nothing new however if you have to discuss an absract idea with someone the definitions have to be reasonably similar for communication to happen. The problem is much more that folks get caught up debating the labels instead of agreeing to a momentary definition for purposes of the discussion at hand. If folks could make their own translations and focus on the abstract idea being discussed rather than the label posts would be much more interesting.

MadRabbit -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 9:00:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Archer If folks could make their own translations and focus on the abstract idea being discussed rather than the label posts would be much more interesting. We are in complete agreement

Cyntilating -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 9:01:41 PM)
Hoping I understand the meaning of your question... He could call me "zinglebots" and I call him "snapsnoodlebooglybabe" ( or visaversa ) and it wouldn't matter. We would still know and feel the dynamics of the defined roles in our relationship. BUT we have already found each other and are involved. That might not have been so clear to me when we were first meeting ( THAT = the dynamic or role) and so names that were recognizable in general ( or labels) helped. I knew his general predisposition to being a dominant person because of his description of himself in that way, and he knew mine because of my using the term submissive. It allowed both of us to "locate" each other more easily. but neither term MADE us what/who we are. That was only realized and apparent after talking and listening and observing and asking questions and giving answers...that is what told me who and what he is, as a man, as a dominant, and a friend. What the heck is that??? When you come upon a red substance in a jar....nothing indicating whats inside> you can guess....catsup? cocktail sauce? cherry jello? "vanilla" pudding dyed red ?(especially proud of that analogy)... a label would help.. after you taste it.....you will most likely know : ) but before the taste..... ??????

SunnyTawse -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 9:09:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit So...with all the threads as of late focusing on the importance and neccessity of labels, standards and definitions in the kink community, I have a question to present to the group. MadRabbit... <gently>... I wouldn't characterize the discussion I've been part of as "focusing on the importance and necessity of labels, standards and definitions in the kink community." I would, rather, characterize them as focusing on the importance and necessity of clarity and common understanding for good communication. 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? But of course! Further, I'd agree with your assertion elsewhere that two people should feel free to call their relationship anything they want. My argument wasn't focusing on the relationship, it was--as I tried to make clear--focusing on communication. Forgive the thread hijack. Back to your regularly scheduled kink. 'Night, all! Sunny Tawse LATE to bed AGAIN! (Damn, but 6 a.m. comes early.)

MadRabbit -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 9:11:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SunnyTawse quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit So...with all the threads as of late focusing on the importance and neccessity of labels, standards and definitions in the kink community, I have a question to present to the group. MadRabbit... <gently>... I wouldn't characterize the discussion I've been part of as "focusing on the importance and necessity of labels, standards and definitions in the kink community." I would, rather, characterize them as focusing on the importance and necessity of clarity and common understanding for good communication. gently...which is why the word thread is plural nor did I specifically mention you.

dawntreader -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 9:31:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Archer LOL just cause my contrariness is overflowing tonight "If all the cans had a picture of the contents and the only words were the ingredients, one could deduce what was in the cans without the actual label." Isn't that the very definition of a label? LOL (Short only the shorthand term) Even with such reduced labels it would still take 5 or 6 times longer to go through all the cans. Greetings Archer, According to Websters...you are correct. i concede my point[:)] And to Charleston...i did take the point in the wrong direction - so in the sense you asked the question...between 2, no labels are needed - atleast in my relationships~

BitaTruble -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 10:14:51 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? Greetings MadOne. [;)] Taking the question literally and at face value, I'd say it's quite possible but would/could make for a much longer and drawn out search. I don't see a whole lot of human characteristics which are exclusively dominant or submissive in nature and I could very well find someone who has all the qualities that I would seek in a partner except for actually being dominant! I won't partner with a submissive, so that's a deal breaker for me. It means that I've wasted their time and my time and one or both of us may have garnered a broken heart in the process where as "I'm submissive" two minutes into a conversation simply avoids the whole issue from the outset. Saying "I'm submissive" or "I'm dominant" isn't the end of the conversation, it's only the beginning. Gaining the details is part of the journey of mutual discovery. The end result might be the same, but at least you've got a fighting chance. If you are a submissive but don't know even the basic outline of submission, you may, in fact, be a dominant. Even an outline of a definition is a starting point, then, you know, choose your crayons and start to color it in and see if you like the picture that emerges. Celeste edited for numerous typos and grammar issues

Owner4SexSlave -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 10:27:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit So...with all the threads as of late focusing on the importance and neccessity of labels, standards and definitions in the kink community, I have a question to present to the group. 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? Gee, what were people doing for some many years, before 400 BC, 800 AD, 1100 AD and throughout history up until today? Don't tell me some of those Ancient Eyptians where not into this shit. Now some of those people had to been some kinky mother fuckers, doing some crazy shit. Regardless if it was with preistest, consentual or non-consentual, forced or of free will. People have been doing this shit without the labels since the dawn of mankind.

BitaTruble -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/8/2007 10:48:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner4SexSlave Gee, what were people doing for some many years, before 400 BC, 800 AD, 1100 AD and throughout history up until today? Don't tell me some of those Ancient Eyptians where not into this shit. Now some of those people had to been some kinky mother fuckers, doing some crazy shit. Regardless if it was with preistest, consentual or non-consentual, forced or of free will. People have been doing this shit without the labels since the dawn of mankind. I'd just like to point out one small detail of the past vs the present. Before electronic media was widely available, the pool wasn't quite so large as it is today, so there weren't as many fish in the sea (or cans on the shelf) to go through then as there is now. In ancient history you might have been in a village of a few hundred people.. today that village has a couple of billion members in it. With that many fish in the pond, you're going to catch a lot of bass when you're looking for shark unless you get very lucky. Using the shark bait instead of the bass bait can help shrink the pool. Celeste edited to ask a quick question for those who don't think labels are important: Why are you on 'collarme' (the label of this website) instead of .. oh.. flowergrowers.com? [8D]

hisannabelle -> RE: Existence without Labels? (10/9/2007 1:03:04 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? greetings madrabbit, 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.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625