Indeed. And the thing that defines BDSM as it's currently practiced is a convention of deliberate consent. Not everyone achives this perfectly, or even very well. But nearly everyone who comes here for advice-- that's one of the first things they get told. We all try to spread that news.
Mmm... those things are not BDSM. By definition, by practice, by goals, they aren't.
Pictures?Thank you. Please know that it is not my intent to label the people as much as I want to maybe label the concepts if you will... I too hate labels, and wiggle my way out of them as often as I can. I also cringe at the thought of someone belittling another persons experience in judgment or comparison of their own. I love the thought "we should always be kinder than necessary as everyone is waging their own kind of war." For me, the kind of war is irrelevant...the fact that we all war within is the resonance that breeds compassion and allows tolerance and hopefully celebration of our differences.
Hunger is a delicious word indeed, and I often use it with poetic license to describe my own sexual cravings. I considered the word hunger and did I consider the word craving...but then I chose "seeks" to allow the definition to be more moderate, less confining, and more generic..to reach a broader spectrum. Does that make sense?
Plus, for the more literal thinkers out there, hunger would be equivalent to the life sustaining need to eat...which none of us can deny as a required 24/7 lifestyle choice.Admittedly, the longings for kink can be life consuming but at the end of the day, some can, like you and I, choose to indulge in it at your whim and contentedly thrive.
Of course I did. Some I agreed with and some I didn't. You're all talking about labels and I think that's being too simplistic. It causes people to assume they must fit within those labels, if they are to be dom, sub, slave...whatever. Of course, I'm wrong and your right.
Hunger is a delicious word indeed, and I often use it with poetic license to describe my own sexual cravings. I considered the word hunger and did I consider the word craving...but then I chose "seeks" to allow the definition to be more moderate, less confining, and more generic..to reach a broader spectrum. Does that make sense?
Plus, for the more literal thinkers out there, hunger would be equivalent to the life sustaining need to eat...which none of us can deny as a required 24/7 lifestyle choice.
Nice article! it reiterates everything that I've said.Of course I did. Some I agreed with and some I didn't. You're all talking about labels and I think that's being too simplistic. It causes people to assume they must fit within those labels, if they are to be dom, sub, slave...whatever. Of course, I'm wrong and your right.
Here, make it easy on yourself.
Yes, we are talking about the labels that people use-- and misuse. You notice that last line-- "It can be helpful to ask?" That "popularisation" has become so pervasive that people don't even know to ask.
First of all, I apologise for completely hijacking your thread, s-m!social_morality said:
Really? So what were people experiencing before they called it "D/s"?
I think people may not be experiencing exactly what we do, but then do they ever? We all differ, after all. But on the other hand, there are aspects of commonality, and I don't think it's false to look for those.
No, I'm not wearing D/s coloured glasses.
)
Nothing like being a complete outrider to make you a better expert than the insiders, huh?
Don't I know it! But that's not really the definition's fault. Thge problem is that there aren't enough words, with enough subtle modulations. Language has its limitations. We are lucky actually that the English language is so incredibly flexible. There are always modifiers.
Yeah... that is interesting!Lately I noticed, that the lack of dominant force in my life made me hunger the physical acts of bottoming, pain and bondage, which I normally don't care for too much one way or another. It was weird and confusing, but also very interesting an eye-opening for me.
(And OSG, I've missed your posts
the bold text...yes and no. It's not an article. It's a whole web site of sexual orientations. The reason you found something that you agree with is because it lists, investigates and deciphers all sides of the topic of sex and it's many, MANY avenues, as well as the English language can. And what is the English language? Just another damn label. All of these fucking labels...Nice article! it reiterates everything that I've said.
For example, Lauren says;
Yes, we are talking about the labels that people use-- and misuse. You notice that last line-- "It can be helpful to ask?" That "popularisation" has become so pervasive that people don't even know to ask.
I completely agree that people make wrong assumptions about how they must fit themselves into those labels. That's why we are talking about this stuff. If they don't know that there are other labels, people will forever try to stuff themselves into the labels they have. If they think the labels mean one thing when everyone else thinks they mean something different-- well. Trouble and unhappiness ensue.
And not because we are talking about them in this thread.
First of all, I apologise for completely hijacking your thread, s-m!
And-- yes, I think lots of people do that. It's like being "on" onstage, or getting your game on if you play sports... I know I do prefer to focus the set of qualities that I need for the scene, and jettison the other parts of my personality...
Sweetie, you linked directly to an article. And the article you linked to , which is pretty old in internet years BTW, made very similar distinctions to the ones I use, which was my point-- that there are distinctions and people would be better served by understanding them-- since they will use labels anyway.the bold text...yes and no. It's not an article. It's a whole web site of sexual orientations. The reason you found something that you agree with is because it lists, investigates and deciphers all sides of the topic of sex and it's many, MANY avenues, as well as the English language can. And what is the English language? Just another damn label. All of these fucking labels...
Why do we try to understand something that's so deep and so individual and then hash it out on a web site where nothing but words are seen? Oh, I guess it isn't hurting anything, as long as you don't condemn someone for mentioning he hates labels.
Don't take this the wrong way, but you are no different than anybody else here, you just define your feelings in a different way. I might say cravings or hunger, but it means the same thing as when you say it's just who you are. I couldn't be who I am without my cravings or my hungers. In fact, I'd be just a shell of a person, without any desires or goals or purpose. So, while I might call them cravings or a hunger, without them I have no identity.
I don't care what you call anything. Just don't force me to understand you when you use a label. I don't fit into any labels. I "sort of" fit into a dom label, and I "sort of" fit into a top label, but "sort of" doesn't do it for me. That's all I'm saying. I couldn't care less how someone else defines their life, if they want to use labels. Yes, we need labels as a starting point but no more than that.
Same here. Also, I "sort of" fit into a bottom label, and I sort of fit into a sub label. I "sort of" fit into the female label, "sort of" fit into the dyke label, but not quite. I "sort of" fit into way too many things, and "sort of" sort of sucks. You're talking to the motherfucking champion of "sort of."
). Mull over the word "Proactive," and see if it fits better. 
Young much? Privileged? Got choices?I don't think of it that way. I prefer to think that those labels sometimes fit parts of me. Ego-centric much?
Now, this-- this is so very important. And so very yes.
