Questioning Orientation Terms

Questioning Orientation Terms (Full Version)

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

Message

joy2u -> Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 4:03:00 PM)
There are two parts to this post. They both relate to the terms used to identify orientation and a few questions that have been on my mind about them. Part I The list of orientation choices offered on CM have raised some questions. Orientation Choices Listed on CM:DominantSubmissiveSlaveSwitch First, do you consider submissive and slave to be separate and distinct orientations, as they are listed on CM, rather than simply being variations of a single orientation? Is the separate listing for slave and submissive part of the reason for the numerous threads that question the difference between a slave and a sub? And, should Dominant and Master also be considered separate and distinct orientations and listed as such, rather than being combined into a single orientation? Is this single orientation listing part of the reason why there doesn't seem to be the same number of threads questioning the difference between a Master and a Dom? Should the list be expanded to include these choices, as well, or others? MasterOwnerPropertyServant----------------------------- Part II Gender-specific orientation terms have me wondering. Terms for Dominant Males Only:Master DaddySirLord Terms for Dominant Females Only:Domme Domina Dominatrix Mistress MommyMa'amLady Terms for either Dominant Males or Females:Dominant Owner This list is probably incomplete but, there does seem to be more terms that specify female Dominants than there are to specify male Dominants. Anyone know why this is? Also, the word "Submissive" (sub for short) is used for either male or female submissives and, "Slave" is used for either male or female slaves. Why are there no gender-specific terms to specify male submissives or male slaves or female? The terms "property", "baby", "pet", etc. can all be used for either males or females. But, there doesn't seem to be any simple terms to specify "male slave" or "female slave" or the same for submissive, other than using these two word phrases. Does anyone know why this is? Just wondering.........Just curious, is all. joyOwned servant of Master David

chamberqueen -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 4:09:12 PM)
Actually, I request people to call me Miss. I was wishing that there was a designation so that I could specifically look for "Daddy" Doms but there isn't anything like that. The difference between sub and slave seems to be mostly in the "couples" mind. I normally see my Daddy once a month in person yet He considers me His slave. I don't dare list myself as a switch, even though that is what I truly am, because I already have a Daddy and don't want any others giving me a hassle. In between slave periods I am a Mistress. Think they can come up with a box for mainly Mistress (fill in preferred title), slave about to be collared, and plays only nonsexually with others? LOL

joy2u -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 4:14:54 PM)
Is the list of choices given on CM too restrictive or too vague? Should it be expanded? Are people being asked to squeeze themself into a label that doesn't necessarily fit them? joy Owned servant of Master David

TracyTaken -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 4:22:40 PM)
quote: Are people being asked to squeeze themself into a label that doesn't necessarily fit them? Increasing the number of labels (and necessarily making them more restrictive) won't solve anything.

joy2u -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 4:49:40 PM)
Then, maybe reducing the choices to the general categories of Dominant, Submissive, and Switch would be better. Why should slave be listed as a separate orientation from submissive? joy Owned servant of Master David

thetammyjo -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 4:54:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joy2u Is the list of choices given on CM too restrictive or too vague? Should it be expanded? Are people being asked to squeeze themself into a label that doesn't necessarily fit them? joy Owned servant of Master David Yes, definitely because there is no room in the current choices for someone who just likes SM, on either side, or who isn't only interested in the physical fun such as a top or bottom. But I think this website in general is geared toward Ds over BD or SM and the categories represent that. I think your immediate above suggestion of just dom, switch and sub is a very good idea. That requires people to actually communicate more about what they can offer and what they want. Let's face it, everyone uses the terms submissive and slave differently, there are constant threads about just those two words to demonstrate it. The more words added to categories the more differences of interpretations. Instead of labels to carry all the meaning, very general broad words might hopefully encourage more communication.

joy2u -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 4:59:21 PM)
Thank you so much for pointing this out. i completely forgot to list Top and Bottom in the other choices that could be offered in the list. joy Owned servant of Master David quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo quote: ORIGINAL: joy2u Is the list of choices given on CM too restrictive or too vague? Should it be expanded? Are people being asked to squeeze themself into a label that doesn't necessarily fit them? joy Owned servant of Master David Yes, definitely because there is no room in the current choices for someone who just likes SM, on either side, or who isn't only interested in the physical fun such as a top or bottom. But I think this website in general is geared toward Ds over BD or SM and the categories represent that.

joy2u -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 5:04:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo I think your immediate above suggestion of just dom, switch and sub is a very good idea. That requires people to actually communicate more about what they can offer and what they want. Let's face it, everyone uses the terms submissive and slave differently, there are constant threads about just those two words to demonstrate it. The more words added to categories the more differences of interpretations. Instead of labels to carry all the meaning, very general broad words might hopefully encourage more communication. This is what i was thinking, too. Why should slave and submissive be listed separately, as though they are completely different orientations and yet, no distinction is made between Dominant and Master or any of the other terms used for D-types? Thank you for your input. joy Owned servant of Master David

TracyTaken -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 5:06:18 PM)
quote: Then, maybe reducing the choices to the general categories of Dominant, Submissive, and Switch would be better. Why should slave be listed as a separate orientation from submissive? Joy, why do you care? I have an online friend who does not care to define him/herself as one gender and wants fluidity with respect to gender. I'm fine with that. I do not understand why trying to define others is such an obsession on collarme.

SilkLaceNPearls -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 5:20:05 PM)
Even though I yet to experience an actual D/s relationship, I still have some definitive ideas about what certains terms mean to me. In my own mind, a Dominant is less involved than a Master or Owner. Sir, Lord and Daddy are just titles to me. As for the female side, Domina, Domme, Dominatiix would less involved than as Mistress/Owner would be. Mommy, Lady and Ma'am are simply titles. I see a sub as some one who submits but retains certain rights as agreed upon between all parties involved whereas a slave has given up their rights. Tops and bottoms, to me are simple play partners will little or no emotional involvement. As I have already said, this is just how I see and define those terms. In time, my viewpoint may change as I learn and grow in regards to the D/s life but for now this is my opinion. Personally I define myself as a sub with slave tendencies meaning I know for sure I am a submissive but with the right person and within a strong established relationship I think I could easily make the transition to slave.

mnottertail -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 5:27:09 PM)
I see it, I hear you, and it is common to think this way, in my view. But for want of a word, your Master may be lost to you, in all likelihood. But this is abaft the beam of Noah's intent, I fear. Ron

HerLord -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 5:27:26 PM)
This is a great thread. I hope to see alot of input here. While I am not going to personally debate definition of terms here, I will state thate as a dominant personality, it does strike me as very confusing to see such limited options that do NOT allow for individual "interpretation." Moreover, the "titles" appear to be pert near useless, as what seams like the majority are somewhere in between. An example. some one is a "switch", but has "Dom/me" needs that are not being met, might post a "Dom/me" profile, because they already have what they need on the "sub" side of life fulfilled. another example. WOMEN. First of all, I don't get'em. Next, I do understand that we men, are disgusting, perveted, disrespectful, and generally rude. I have seen way too many women complain about the number of lude responses given to a "sub" profile. This in itself is enough to turn some from using this site at all. While I appreciate (LuckyAlbatrosse) that no one is obligated to respect ANY relationship in any way, it is discouraging and disgusting to me and mine. This to itself is a possibility as to why some might post a profile in one manner or other. I think that using the Titles is counterproductive, almost, it would be better served, in my humble opinion, to use generalizations. The three orientation idea, while noble, I think is not inclusive enough. It is my belief, that there should be more debate on what orientation catagories there should be and possibly taken to admin. My suggestions are: top bottom Dom/me sub/slave switch both sex 24/7 the "sex" orientation being that this "lifestyle" is more of a passing bedroom interest than a full on 24/7 "Do what the fuck I tell you, when I tell you, at any given point in time anywhere." I would love to see some input on these orientation titles, as I described, debated on applicability, feasibility, and any other -ity you can think of. I realize that the "titles" I listed may need to broken into different catagories. Maybe to have one as 24/7 with Dom/me, sub/slave, switch, top, bottom. and conversely with a "sex" catagory. While I am new to this site, I am not new to the concepts. To put all the different "lifestyles" here in one place does make this one of the greatest sites for such, it does leave much confusion and room for debate.

HerLord -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 5:30:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TracyTaken quote: Then, maybe reducing the choices to the general categories of Dominant, Submissive, and Switch would be better. Why should slave be listed as a separate orientation from submissive? Joy, why do you care? I have an online friend who does not care to define him/herself as one gender and wants fluidity with respect to gender. I'm fine with that. I do not understand why trying to define others is such an obsession on collarme. I think it is not so much to define others as much as to find a place for ourselves, and find terms for conversing with that are more universal to apply to what those who use collarme to find play partners/freinds/wtf ever else one may be searching for.

Noah -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 5:35:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joy2u Is the list of choices given on CM too restrictive or too vague? Should it be expanded? Are people being asked to squeeze themself into a label that doesn't necessarily fit them? joy Owned servant of Master David I've stumbled over the same thing you're talking about. Since these terms are presented in the search tool just to help get a search started productively, and not as any attempt to define who or what anyone is, I think it is a very good use of labels to put them there. They will never be perfect but you have to start somewhere. I have a friend who demands fluidity in the meanings of "and" and "the" and "it" and "antidisestablishmentarianism" but I don't think he's a gonna be a great team leader for the Search Tool programmers. I expect that some people see slave as a subset or submissive while others don't. I don't know whether the tool is programmed to see things one way or the other. If there were general agreement about what these terms mean I'd be glad to see them both there. I don't think there is general agreement so I'd rather see those two terms collapsed into one. Elsewhere, in the what you're looking for list, I'd like to see the "Just Friends" entry changed to "Friends" since--evidenced by a recurring theme in the message boards--some people don't see the Just Friends choice as allowing for things like: I"m seeking a dominant AND people who can be just friends to me. These people seem to hold that is "Just Friends" is selected then it is short for "Just Friends And Nothing Else Thankyou Very Much". My guess is that if people were listing "Dominants" and also listing "Friends" then the breadth of interest would be more clearly represented.

Lumus -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 5:36:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TracyTaken I do not understand why trying to define others is such an obsession on collarme. switches 'define' with "understand"; scratches beard; switches 'on collarme' with "for human beings" Tis our nature. Your avatar looks like a brown puppy to me. There. There's two labels for your avatar. What? Are they not labelling words? Labels riddle nearly every language on this planet as we attempt to establish lines of communication between one another. We need common terminology and points of reference to share our experiences. This is how we learn. If you can find a way to learn without referencing labels and diagrams of those who passed before you, kudos. You are truly brilliant, certainly more than I. So fret not that a label is used. Fret more about how, or perhaps, why, it is used.

joy2u -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 5:40:24 PM)
Tracy, i don't really care what someone calls themself. i would like to call myself a PIKSY (Personal Intimate Kinky Servant-y type) but, that isn't offered as an Orientation choice on CM. i'm not trying to define anyone. CM is. They require everyone who sets up a profile on here to select an orientation and there are 4 choices given. Everyone has to pick one of those 4. And, 2 of them (submissive and slave) are constantly being compared and contrasted on here, which makes me question whether those two should be even be listed separately. Just wondering, like i said, if there should be a change made to the list of choices for orientation that CM offers, that's all. joy Owned servant of Master David quote: ORIGINAL: TracyTaken quote: Then, maybe reducing the choices to the general categories of Dominant, Submissive, and Switch would be better. Why should slave be listed as a separate orientation from submissive? Joy, why do you care? I have an online friend who does not care to define him/herself as one gender and wants fluidity with respect to gender. I'm fine with that. I do not understand why trying to define others is such an obsession on collarme.

TracyTaken -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 5:49:15 PM)
quote: They require everyone who sets up a profile on here to select an orientation and there are 4 choices given. Everyone has to pick one of those 4. And, 2 of them (submissive and slave) are constantly being compared and contrasted on here, which makes me question whether those two should be even be listed separately. Maybe you are right. Maybe we should have just two categories: Top and Bottom.

joy2u -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 5:54:10 PM)
Thank you. You made some very interesting observations. i like your suggestions for the expanded list of orientations, especially the addition of Top and Bottom, as they are definately missing from the current list. Not so sure about "sex" and "24/7" as orientations. To me, those could be included in the narrative portion of a profile to make it more clear what the person is seeking. "Both" is just confusing to me. And, no doubt, the debate shall go on. joy Owned servant of Master David quote: ORIGINAL: HerLord I think that using the Titles is counterproductive, almost, it would be better served, in my humble opinion, to use generalizations. The three orientation idea, while noble, I think is not inclusive enough. It is my belief, that there should be more debate on what orientation catagories there should be and possibly taken to admin. My suggestions are: top bottom Dom/me sub/slave switch both sex 24/7 the "sex" orientation being that this "lifestyle" is more of a passing bedroom interest than a full on 24/7 "Do what the fuck I tell you, when I tell you, at any given point in time anywhere." I would love to see some input on these orientation titles, as I described, debated on applicability, feasibility, and any other -ity you can think of. I realize that the "titles" I listed may need to broken into different catagories. Maybe to have one as 24/7 with Dom/me, sub/slave, switch, top, bottom. and conversely with a "sex" catagory. While I am new to this site, I am not new to the concepts. To put all the different "lifestyles" here in one place does make this one of the greatest sites for such, it does leave much confusion and room for debate.

joy2u -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 6:02:08 PM)
Thank you, Noah, for your input. At least it's not just me that has noticed a "kink" in the system. Maybe, adding a checkbox for "Looking" and "Not Looking" (or something like that) would be a helpful addition, too. i wonder if anyone (upstairs) will pay attention to the great suggestions being made here. joy Owned servant of Master David

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Questioning Orientation Terms (2/22/2008 7:40:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joy2u First, do you consider submissive and slave to be separate and distinct orientations, as they are listed on CM, rather than simply being variations of a single orientation? I do consider them to be separate orientations. quote: Is the separate listing for slave and submissive part of the reason for the numerous threads that question the difference between a slave and a sub? Nope, it hit the top five way topics to discuss way before nicely formatted forums like this ever existed. quote: And, should Dominant and Master also be considered separate and distinct orientations and listed as such, rather than being combined into a single orientation? I'm fine either way. All clarification can be made in the profile itself or through conversation. quote: Is this single orientation listing part of the reason why there doesn't seem to be the same number of threads questioning the difference between a Master and a Dom? Nope, I think it's a cultural values system that places higher value on slave over sub and the s-types wanting to be found pleasing and approving. quote: Should the list be expanded to include these choices, as well, or others? I agree with TammyJo that perhaps at least top/bottom could be added. But I'd prefer a check box- since so many people are MULTIPLE orientations. quote: This list is probably incomplete but, there does seem to be more terms that specify female Dominants than there are to specify male Dominants. Anyone know why this is? I think you aren't being creative enough. There might be a wider variety of terms because female sexuality always tends to be more complicated, especially with historical repression, than males. But trust me, I can think of tons of terms/labels traditionally male associated. quote: Also, the word "Submissive" (sub for short) is used for either male or female submissives and, "Slave" is used for either male or female slaves. Why are there no gender-specific terms to specify male submissives or male slaves or female? There really aren't for doms either, but for some reason people wanted to create them. I am just fine being called a dom- see no reason for anything else.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875