|
Elegant -> Labels: S-types and D-Types (9/30/2005 9:05:34 PM)
|
In another post I used the terms D-Type Person and S-Type Person. I've started using these terms and did not think to define them here.
This is from Heather in Atlanta:
S-type = submissive/slave/property/bottom of any gender orientation - anyone on the "right side of the slash" in a d/s-type relationship. It's referring to the relational dynamic, not the SM component - so even "bottom" in this case doesn't mean "masochist", it means "one who submits to someone/something in the context of d/s or SM" rather than "one who receives the action in a play scenario".
D-type = dominant/master/owner/top of any gender orientation - anyone on the "left side of the slash" in a d/s-type relationship. It's referring to the relational dynamic, not the SM component - so even "top" in this case doesn't mean "sadist", it means "one who dominates someone/something in the context of d/s or SM" rather than "one who facilitates the action in a play scenario".
Switch is separate, unless the conversation is referring to their experience on either specific side of the slash - because generally unless their talking about that specific scenario, they're *not* one or the other.
Sadist and masochist (and top and bottom in a play sense) are also separate, because that is generally an action-based, and not a relationally-based, distinction - and sadists and masochists equally can be either d-types or s-types.
I admit, that's a bit of "lumping" there. But it's the same bit of lumping that people employ when they speak of "subs" (as many do) or "bottoms" (mostly seen in the gay communities, but not completely absent in the het communities). And it's *tons* simpler than typing all the slashes (sub/slave/bottom/property/etc), if you're talking about any of these people *as a group*.
That's exactly how these terms are meant - to speak of the people *as a group*. So "lumping" is exactly what is *meant* to happen - because otherwise, we're doing the same lumping by using different terms – saying "subs" or "doms" or "s/s/p/b", etc.
The variety of self-identities in this subculture, and their expressions and terms, is endless. It's rare that three people (who are not in relationship with each other) can ever agree on what each term means, how it should be applied, and who qualifies (as if it's their place to determine who qualifies, outside of a relationship with them! But that's an unrelated rant :) ). So, when I talk about "slaves", you have your idea in your head, and I have mine - but they're likely worlds apart. Ditto on all of the terms listed above.
These terms are *not* taking anything away from self-identities - they are capturing all of the identities anyone might have on either side of the slash. There is plenty of room for the following conversation:
Person 1 - "How do the s-types here perceive blah blah blah..."
S-type - "I identify as a submissive sadist, and I blah blah blah..."
Person 1 - "How do you, as a submissive sadist, perceive blah blah blah..."
The conversation can *start out* general, as most of them do, and narrow from there - as most of them do. That, to me, is the beauty of an all-inclusive umbrella - it brings the broadest meaning to the table, which can *then* be narrowed down. We don't have to continually mire ourselves in inclusive efforts and cumbersome extra language because we started out too narrow in the first place.
I'm not demanding (or even *asking*) that anyone pick up this language - I'm not *that* arrogant :) It's just what I found worked for me, and continue to use it. I'm a bit tickled that it's worked for others, and not at all irritated that I've had to explain it a few times - that's what happens when you use unfamiliar terms.
~~~~~~~~~
Heather has been in the public subculture for about 8 years, in Atlanta for close to 4. She "grew up" fast and furious in this subculture – and while she doesn’t try to claim any expertise, she knows her way around a dungeon, a d/s relationship, and both ends of many SM activities. Heather lives her d/s and s/m face-to-face. Her relationships take place in "meetlife", while many of her *discussions* take place online.
|
|
|
|
