Labels and titles and terms, oh my!

[Kajira Callista]

dunno how I feel about being "n/a"...

A switch is either wired D or s IMHO. They do what they do for reasons i don't really understand so I just stuck in n/a so it wasnt blank.

 

[alice_underneath]

I think of sexuality as sliding scales.

I do, too. I picture it more like a double helix (with additional strands), but the frequency distribution chart makes sense to me as well.

As to sexuality, empirically, I have nowhere near enough information, so I'm forced to fall back on offering my own self-analysis as a piece of anecdotal evidence - near worthless scientifically, but illustrative none the less.

Illustrative and very helpful in understanding what you meant when you wrote: "if you need pigeonholes to squeeze me into, Bi Switch kind of fit."

Thank you very much for taking the time to explain.

 

[Hester]

As a Canadian novice/beginner I agree with the pigeon hole theory, but sometimes us newbies need that to understand how to categorize things that we learn... I would define these words TO ME as such :

Dominant one who takes charge in a monagamous relationship, but listens to opinions of the Submissive

submissive one that is led by the leader of the relationship, but can voice proper opinions to the Dominant without fear

Top to me personally this is the same as a Dom/me, maybe a term used for people just starting, but not quite reached the full potential mindset of a dom/me?

bottomto me personally this is the same as a Sub,maybe a term used for people just starting, but not yet reached the true sub mindset?

Switchone that can/will/has "played" both roles

Master one that controls a person's life to the extent agreed upon by both parties, that eventually will always change as the relationship between both parties evolves

slaveone that gives thier life to a Master or Domme/dom... to have no say in your life and relinquishing all responsibilities to the mind of the Master or Dom/me

I know alot of you will SCREAM at me for the definition of a Slave.. I am sorry, but was PUT IN MY PLACE when someone "thought" I was calling his sub a slave (which I wasn't.. he didn't catch the whole conversation)

i really hate when people assume that tops and bottoms are "incomplete" or novice dommes/doms and subs.

that may be how it works for you but it really comes across as quite condescending and judgmental.

and i'd like to put forth the concept that a bottom is not necessarily the same a sub. bottoms may submit, but they don't always do so. there are some dommes/doms on here who have bottomed but i'm pretty sure they wouldn't all agree that they submitted.

 

[alice_underneath]

I was asked to write an essay on this topic once a few years ago and I did. In re-reading it, I'm wondering why I never posted the edited version on my website...I was having a love affair with commas that night. Excuse the mistakes if you actually read the damn thing.

*ahem* anyhow, my opinion on some of the labels has changed a bit but for the most part, this sums up (in a very long winded manner) how I define each role. I wrote it to include the spanko lifestyle moreso though because it was for a spanko publication and I have since discovered that my view from a spanko lifestyle and from that of a BDSM lifestyle is a bit different, which is kind of interesting.

What's in a Label?

Thank you very much for posting a link to your essay, Serijules. It was very informative and quite a nice read. Lots of common sense, sprinkled with humor along the way.

For those who are interested in the usage of various labels, I highly recommend Serijules's essay. It discusses the terms listed in the first post of this thread, as well as: sadist, masochist, brat, smart assed masochist, and parent & child roles.

 

[Pure]

i do get a kick out of those who say they don't label, or as jadefirefly says, assert 'a rose by any other name would smell as sweet'. (OK 'the rose' is 'la rosa' in Spanish, and not all translations are exact, but so what!).

(not to pick on you, but you're handy!)

jade said,
The Grudge was the biggest piece of crap excuse for a horror movie I've ever seen.

If jade had no idea of what the label 'horror movie' meant, or never used that label, jade would not be able to label The Grudge a 'crap excuse' for one.

And there can be a 'crap excuse' for a dom/me.

As to the proposal (maybe not serious) dom=top=master, etc.

I think we want many dimensions of a person ("multiaxial" approach). Wouldn't it be a drag if the only thing one could say about people was 'tall or short.'

So if someone said, "what is 'fat'?" some helpful explainer would say, "well, it's more or less like 'short', don't worry about it." Few, all embracing labels make it hard to discuss anything.

And by the way, none of this has to do with the tolerance issue--that each person should be free to live their life. Consider the people who favor 'gay and lesbian rights'--as i do. They accept the rough-and-ready labels, 'gay' or 'lesbian'. That allows them to call for 'gay and lesbian' rights even though the boundaries are fuzzy, and some people are 'bi' and blah blah. And they want tolerance--the label *enables* them to call for 'tolerance' and 'rights' for gays.

In the 1950s, the main word for 'gay' was 'pervert.' It should be quite obvious why 'gays' decided the 'gay' label better suited them. "Pervert" is one of those all embracing labels that applies to pedophiles as well.

If one had to talk only in terms of 'pervert', the claim for 'pervert rights' would immediately be challenged "I don't want no pervert child molesters teaching my son."

 

[catalina_francisco]

A switch is either wired D or s IMHO. They do what they do for reasons i don't really understand so I just stuck in n/a so it wasnt blank.

But then wouldn"t that mean bisexual means you are wired straight or gay, and so there is no such thing as a switch or bisexual? I cant relate to that.

Catalina

 

[Pure]

for serijules,



very nice little essay. there a minor diffs with my own scheme, but yours is commendably clear.

j.

 

[alice_underneath]

maybe the whole question here is really what such terms or labels mean to the individual, and how it varies person to person. The whole trying to see things from a different perspective.

Yes, exactly.

On a slightly different note, as a newbie i sometimes wonder about some of the shortened forms of terms and their significance. Maybe i just needs to spend more time reading posts ect.

Please feel free to post any questions on this thread. I may not know the answer, but others almost certainly will.

 

[jadefirefly]

Um...

Ok.

What I -said- was, I don't like to label -people-. I'd really enjoy reading your posts more if you would read posts more, so that you didn't make an idiot of yourself.

Oooooh! Lookit. I labeled you. My bad.

Now, if you want to get back on topic... I don't feel it's my place to assign you a BDSM-type label. Why? Because it's not my business.

What you do in your life is your business. If you choose to keep those activities within the scope of the bedroom, that's your call. If you choose to make it a full on 24/7 thing, that's also your call. And it's not my place to say you're either not living up to potential, or you're really just <insert label> even though YOU call yourself <insert other label>.

I decide what I am called. I don't bother trying to decide what everyone else is called, too. Since I'm not involved in that part of their lives, I don't really care.

If you need help removing that foot from your mouth, I'll be around late tonight.

 

[Pure]

hi jade,

you're cool, and don't take it 'personal.'

yes, i realize you spoke of labelling people, but my post addressed that issue, quite clearly.

as to your statement

jade said, Now, if you want to get back on topic... I don't feel it's my place to assign you a BDSM-type label. Why? Because it's not my business.

What you do in your life is your business. If you choose to keep those activities within the scope of the bedroom, that's your call. If you choose to make it a full on 24/7 thing, that's also your call. And it's not my place to say you're either not living up to potential, or you're really just <insert label> even though YOU call yourself <insert other label>.

I decide what I am called.

Pure's response: Sorry, friend, those points are not relevant. "Privacy" "bedroom" "it's your life" do not engage the issue. Likewise, no one ever said anything about 'living up to potential'.

There is such a thing as 'heterosexual', is there not? (And yes the boundaries are blurred, and there's a continuum.). What 'heterosexuals' Mr. X and Ms Y, who live together, do in the bedroom, generally, at some point, is fuck. The man fucks the woman (heterosexual relations or intercourse) and vice versa.

Now, I hear your concern about "really X", in that there MIGHT be a judgment involved, as in "That's not really leather, it's plastic."

BUT, if we find Mr X has hardly ever fucked Ms. Y (hence the label 'just roommates') we have a different situation: Suppose we find Mr X commonaly invites his neighber Mr A over for an encounter.
And even if Mr A brings along Mrs. A, Mr X hasn't much interest in fucking her, as part of the threesome.

AT THIS POINT we say, "Mr X is not really a heterosexual" (so far as his current practice). This is NOT, as you suggest, to say that there is something wrong with Mr. X or that, in your terms, he's not living up to his potential, and so on.

I hope the issues can be discussed without 'personalities' for AFAIK, you're a fine person, with very intelligent views. We just happen to differ. OK?

peace

 

[AngelicAssassin]

Now, if you want to get back on topic... I don't feel it's my place to assign you a BDSM-type label. Why? Because it's not my business.

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-8/363868/applause.gif
If folks spent a little less time wrapped around the axle with what the fuck to call themselves, or others for that matter, they might have a little more time to enjoy whatever the hell they're doing. Pick it, do it, and slide up and down on whatever scale you wish. The time to reexamine a label choice comes when you didn't do it right enough to either fall asleep, or do it again.

 

[RJMasters]

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-8/363868/applause.gif
If folks spent a little less time wrapped around the axle with what the fuck to call themselves, or others for that matter, they might have a little more time to enjoy whatever the hell they're doing. Pick it, do it, and slide up and down on whatever scale you wish. The time to reexamine a label choice comes when you didn't do it right enough to either fall asleep, or do it again.

Definately all-madden material there.

 

[catalina_francisco]

The time to reexamine a label choice comes when you didn't do it right enough to either fall asleep, or do it again.

Or when you're looking to find someone suitable and in synch to do it with.

Catalina

 

[serijules]

very nice little essay. there a minor diffs with my own scheme, but yours is commendably clear.

j.

Heck, there are minor differences with *MY* own scheme now a few years later and I wrote the damn thing, haha.

Thanks for the compliment, to both you and alice_underneath

 

[Pure]

just for the record of this thread, i have proposed definitions of 'top' 'bottom' and 'dom' (sexual), and by implication 'sub', in these two threads:

Theory A or Theory B
https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=434289

Illegals entering Domland: Tops

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=435333

I might mention also, the "Deviant's Dictionary" as a fine resource.

Index:
http://public.diversity.org.uk/deviant/dictindx.htm

 

[RJMasters]

I was asked to write an essay on this topic once a few years ago and I did. In re-reading it, I'm wondering why I never posted the edited version on my website...I was having a love affair with commas that night. Excuse the mistakes if you actually read the damn thing.

*ahem* anyhow, my opinion on some of the labels has changed a bit but for the most part, this sums up (in a very long winded manner) how I define each role. I wrote it to include the spanko lifestyle moreso though because it was for a spanko publication and I have since discovered that my view from a spanko lifestyle and from that of a BDSM lifestyle is a bit different, which is kind of interesting.

What's in a Label?

Great essay serijules.

 

[Kajira Callista]

But then wouldn"t that mean bisexual means you are wired straight or gay, and so there is no such thing as a switch or bisexual? I cant relate to that.

Catalina

what does switch have to do with bisexual?

 

[shy slave]

IMO Labels are important, not just in BDSM but in life.

Of course everyone has a slightly different interpretation of what the label actually means.

Companies spend hundreds of £/$/cash explaining what a product label actually means
(anyone remember the 80's and the emergence of the company mission statement )

In relationships its easy to say I am not labelled in any particular way,' or 'labels are meaningless' because you have found the person who has similiar views on the subjective use of words like 'sub, Dom, slave, single, humour etc'

But if you're looking for a partner, labels help to make early decisions about whether that person may be interesting to meet.

Of course labels are subjective, but they do help to give early signs of another persons direction and thoughts.

Once the conversation starts what the other person means by the words they use is essential if there is going to be a meeting of minds.

Of course if you just want to fuck their brains out who cares what they call themselves

Of course I am still puzzling about Marquis assertion that switch = psychic, if that is true is the reverse equally true?

 

[Emma_Ray_Garrett]

I like SpectreT's pigeonholes are for pigeons, but since this thread appears to be more about definition than assigning 'titles', I don't mind to share my personal definitions.

Dominant: The person in control. This can be applied as broadly or narrowly as seen fit, but in sexual relations the one 'in charge' of the encounter.

Submissive: The person following the domininant. Again as narrowly or broadly as the user chooses to apply, but in sexual relations the one 'following/obeying' the dominant of the encounter.

Top: This is a positional expression and nothing more, IMO. Top literally being the person in the sexual situation in the 'higher' or top position. In other words, if I want my submissive to fuck me in the missionary position he is 'topping' me, though he's only doing it by my command. I think this has gotten somewhat mixed up with dominant, but I don't interpret it that way.

Bottom: Again, positional definition only. The person receiving the action in a sexual encounter.

Switch: This term is tricky, for me. I generally apply it to my 'top' and 'bottom' definitions. Although I accept its use when referring to a D/s relationship in which one or the other desires to 'trade places' with the other. I don't think this has anything to do with the "nature" of the people and see it as an encounter that can be shared and enjoyed without 'outside' influences having any sway. That said, I don't think one can 'switch' by being told to do so. They have to want to 'switch' otherwise its just rp, IMO.

Master: In a dedicated D/s relationship that extends to all aspects of daily life, this is the dominant, IMO.

Slave: Similar definition as above, though this denotes the submissive.

 

[alice_underneath]

and i'd like to put forth the concept that a bottom is not necessarily the same a sub. bottoms may submit, but they don't always do so.

I've seen many people on this Board draw clear distinctions between Top & Dominant, and between bottom and sub.

After reading your post, I followed Pure's link to the Deviant's Dictionary (thank you, Pure). Here's what I found.

...................

bottom = Submissive or recipient of stimulation in an SM scene

submissive = One who submits. ( )

submission = The act of or interest in submitting to someone else's will, within limits, for sexual purposes. See domination.

domination = The practise of taking the dominant role in a scene, running the scene, controlling the bottom's behaviour, perhaps simply as role play or humiliation or perhaps reinforced by the threat or the actual use of intense or painful physical activities directed at the bottom, and/or by restriction, bondage and physical control. A person who takes on this sexually dominant role, either habitually or for a specific scene, is known as a dominant or dom.

The complimentary term for the bottom is submission, and someone bottoming to a dominant is called a submissive or sub. 'Submissive' is also an adjective, but the term subby is sometimes heard. The terms 'dom' and 'sub' to describe individuals have slightly more currency in the heterosexual scene that among gay men and lesbians, where the terms 'top' and 'bottom' are more common. Femdom, meaning a female dominant or a scene with a woman top, and its equivalent maledom, are invariably used to refer to heterosexual interaction. The overarching term for games involving domination is domination and submission (dom-sub, DS, D/S, D/s or D&S).

top = Top and its compliment bottom are two terms coined in the last two decades to designate the 'agent' and 'patient' roles respectively in an SM scene while avoiding the loadedness of the existing terms like master-slave; they can be used just in relation to the scene itself and don't imply anything about the participants' regular practice, though they are also used to describe people who typically take one role or the other.
Also may not imply role-played domination and submission but just who does what to whom. Confusingly some people associate them with anal intercourse, but it should be remembered that some tops like to get fucked too. A person who alternates both roles, either from scene to scene or within a scene, is known as a switch or switch-hitter.

.....................

Frankly, I found these entries to be more than a bit circular and confusing. The essay by Serijules is much easier to read, follow, and understand.

 

[alice_underneath]

In relationships its easy to say I am not labelled in any particular way,' or 'labels are meaningless' because you have found the person who has similiar views on the subjective use of words like 'sub, Dom, slave, single, humour etc'

But if you're looking for a partner, labels help to make early decisions about whether that person may be interesting to meet.

Of course labels are subjective, but they do help to give early signs of another persons direction and thoughts.

Once the conversation starts what the other person means by the words they use is essential if there is going to be a meeting of minds.

I agree with your comments here, Shy, and would add that an understanding of the usage of various terms is essential in trying to follow the discussions on this Board.

I also have noticed some controversies here that remind me of a heated debate I witnessed during my first month at college. Two guys were arguing over the quality of milkshakes at a particular restaurant.

Guy #1 insisted that the milkshakes were delicious. Guy #2 responded with a barrage of nasty epithets about the milkshakes and, by extension, the restaurant itself.

The problem? Guy #2 was from Ohio, and the college was in New England.

In most parts of the US, "milkshake" means: a drink made with milk, flavoring, and ice cream. In some parts of New England, "milkshake" just means: milk and flavored syrup.

In other words - the root of the argument was a simple misunderstanding over word usage. I sometimes wonder if some of the disagreements at Lit are caused by the very same thing.

 

[alice_underneath]

I like SpectreT's pigeonholes are for pigeons, but since this thread appears to be more about definition than assigning 'titles', I don't mind to share my personal definitions.

Yes, this thread is about understanding word usage and definitions. I appreciate very much the time you took to offer yours.

just for the record of this thread, i have proposed definitions of 'top' 'bottom' and 'dom' (sexual), and by implication 'sub', in these two threads

Thank you for the links, Pure.

 

[Emma_Ray_Garrett]

You're welcome

I think you have a good point in regards to misunderstandings. Not just here but in the RW, too. Semantics has as much to do with meaning as body language, IMO.

 

[jadefirefly]

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-8/363868/applause.gif
If folks spent a little less time wrapped around the axle with what the fuck to call themselves, or others for that matter, they might have a little more time to enjoy whatever the hell they're doing. Pick it, do it, and slide up and down on whatever scale you wish. The time to reexamine a label choice comes when you didn't do it right enough to either fall asleep, or do it again.

Thanks.

I know I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed most days, but all I got out of your reply, Pure, was a bunch of convoluted analogies about someone and whether or not he was "really" gay or not.

Since I don't think that has any bearing on the topic of this thread, could you tell me what that has to do with what someone calls themselves, or why you feel a need to assign your -own- labels to someone else?

My whole point is very simple. I call myself what I feel I am, after reading up on the possibilities. You can call me whatever you want; that doesn't mean it's accurate. So what does it matter what you choose to call me?

And use simple words. We all know you're intelligent. Use the brain cells to talk dumb to me for a bit, sound fair?

 

[Etoile]

maybe im just stupid but maybe the whole question here is really what such terms or labels mean to the individual, and how it varies person to person. The whole trying to see things from a different perspective. Did any of that make any sense or am i just rambling?

It makes sense, and I agree with you. If we all try to put our own meanings on these things, then there will always be somebody - in this case probably a lot of somebodies - who won't fit into that mold.