Dominant Types

[shysub21]

Good evening everyone.

I just wanted to start a thread to open a discussion about the different dominant types. I feel as though too many people have a certain image in their head of what a dominant "should be". I find this can be damaging to some new doms and also new subs because it gives the impression that if things aren't done in a certain way, it means they arent dominant or that if a Dom does act in a stereotypical/movie portrayed way, a naive submissive could easily be misused.

I will not claim to be worldly or know a ton about this subject either, I consider myself fairly new. I know that different types of dominants exist, but not the details of those different doms. So please, if you are a Dom, post below and describe your style the best you can. Or if you're a sub and want to brag on your dom and yalls style, go ahead! I want to learn from this post, and hopefully give a platform for others to learn as well.

Also, within this, do you personally believe there is a defined difference between a Master, Sir, and Daddy? I've heard many opinions and would like to hear more as a collective.

Disclaimer: I know one person doesn't fall into any one certain categories. Everybody has their own style and mixture. I just want to hear about everyone's personal experiences and opinions.

Sincerely,

A curious Sub

 

[ToPleaseHim]

I also think this is a great topic and am looking forward to reading responses from Dominants. Also, you may like to read this classic post: Stella’s Essay.

 

[Primalex]

Well, the categories of Dom variations I think in are:

- dominant
- service top
- daddy dom
- rigger
- sadist
- horny net geek

The dominant enjoys getting his way, ideally without breaking a law and is the most likely one to exhibit his tendencies outside the bedroom. Has mastered the technique of looking at you "that way".
Submissive pre-orgasm words:"I can't believe I'm doing this right now for you."


The service top enjoys provoking a desirable reaction and being the reason for it.
Submissive pre-orgasm words:"Please make your little slut cum."


The daddy dom emphasizes the nurturing, careing, teaching nature of the power exchange.
Submissive pre-orgasm words:"Please take care of me daddy."


The rigger dominates by preventing resistance in the first place with tools, particulary rope.
Submissive pre-orgasm words:"Mmmhm MhhMMh mmmHm!"


The sadist just likes to see someone suffering, ideally without breaking a law.
Submissive pre-orgasm words:"Yellow!"


The horny net geek has figured out that there is some pussy to gain when employing certain techniques, without being driven by a particular desire besides the traditional ones of maximized copulation.
Submissive pre-orgasm words:"Since we moved in together, you haven't dominated me at all, I'm getting my vibrator."

 

[ultramarineblue]

This is a great topic and I would imagine that there is overlap between types as well. I can't wait to read more responses.

 

[CuriousDomme008]

Very interested in the responses!

I’m just exploring my domme side. I’m having fun talking with subs that are into different kinks and experimenting with them. Seeing if I like it.

I’m having fun with a more motherly side. Them laying in my lap nursing from my breast as I run my fingers through their hair. But I’m also really enjoying pegging, milking, and edging with some degrading and humiliation.

 

[shysub21]

Well, the categories of Dom variations I think in are:

- dominant
- service top
- daddy dom
- rigger
- sadist
- horny net geek

The dominant enjoys getting his way, ideally without breaking a law and is the most likely one to exhibit his tendencies outside the bedroom. Has mastered the technique of looking at you "that way".
Submissive pre-orgasm words:"I can't believe I'm doing this right now for you."


The service top enjoys provoking a desirable reaction and being the reason for it.
Submissive pre-orgasm words:"Please make your little slut cum."


The daddy dom emphasizes the nurturing, careing, teaching nature of the power exchange.
Submissive pre-orgasm words:"Please take care of me daddy."


The rigger dominates by preventing resistance in the first place with tools, particulary rope.
Submissive pre-orgasm words:"Mmmhm MhhMMh mmmHm!"


The sadist just likes to see someone suffering, ideally without breaking a law.
Submissive pre-orgasm words:"Yellow!"


The horny net geek has figured out that there is some pussy to gain when employing certain techniques, without being driven by a particular desire besides the traditional ones of maximized copulation.
Submissive pre-orgasm words:"Since we moved in together, you haven't dominated me at all, I'm getting my vibrator."

That sounds like a nice combination of things! Do you think you tend to sway in one category or the other? Or is it all evenly mixed?

 

[shysub21]

Very interested in the responses!

I’m just exploring my domme side. I’m having fun talking with subs that are into different kinks and experimenting with them. Seeing if I like it.

I’m having fun with a more motherly side. Them laying in my lap nursing from my breast as I run my fingers through their hair. But I’m also really enjoying pegging, milking, and edging with some degrading and humiliation.

Thats awesome! I'll admit, I havent seen much from dommes but thats probably my own bad for being tunnel visioned with my own desires but id love to hear more about you and your journey!

 

[Lady2020]

Great thread. No one is the same, basically. And beware of Doms, or anyone, who frequently state they are alphas.

 

[ToPleaseHim]

Great thread. No one is the same, basically. And beware of Doms, or anyone, who frequently state they are alphas.

Yes, this. Another red flag is the whole “true dom” and “true sub” thing.

 

[ultramarineblue]

Great thread. No one is the same, basically. And beware of Doms, or anyone, who frequently state they are alphas.

Is that because if they have to state it, they likely aren't?

 

[shysub21]

Is that because if they have to state it, they likely aren't?

I would say so. I think that feeds into the whole notion that they believe it is done this way, so I am alpha, and anyone who doesn't do it this way is beneath me.

 

[Lady2020]

Is that because if they have to state it, they likely aren't?

Yes..

 

[Lady2020]

I would say so. I think that feeds into the whole notion that they believe it is done this way, so I am alpha, and anyone who doesn't do it this way is beneath me.

It's a way to convince a sub he knows what he's doing.

 

[cookiecat]

Mentor dominants: want to teach a sub up to a certain point. Once you've "graduated" from their limited instruction, it's time to move along. Good for new submissives. Or subs who want to experience specific things.

My first dominant was like this. Neither of us wanted an on-going relationship. I wanted to do stuff. At that time, I wasn't really sure what "stuff" was. I got pretty lucky in that he was safe AND he was really in to service. I had no idea that submission could be more than just rough sex and being told what to do. Yay me!

But after a certain point in time, I grew out of him. He knew it and encouraged me to spread my subby wings (and other body parts) and explore more.

I was with another dominant, in a boyfriend/girlfriend relationship who called himself a Daddy. In hindsight, I see he fell under the Mentor category. Once he played out all his Dommy cards, that was it. I wanted more D/s, he didn't. We still liked each other as boyfriend/girlfriend but as Dom/sub, it wasn't going anywhere.

I think there's a difference between Dominant and Top. When I play with someone - for example, have a flogging scene - I'm not really submitting to a Dominant. I am bottoming to a Top who has a certain skill I want to enjoy. A scene is usually pretty fluid - at times, I feel myself getting melty and spacey and if we've talked about other things than flogging (touching lady parts, smooching, yada yada), I can get in to a submissive mindset. Sometimes that doesn't happen and I'm just enjoying the hurt.

There are straightforward dominants: what's in the toybag is what you get. Paddled, flogged, caned. Then there are mind-fucky dominants: messing with a sub's head, conjuring up lewd situations, finding that balance between feeling safe, loved and off-kilter, needy.

My husband was my Daddy. We had a tough time at first meshing up our bdsm styles. I wanted him to push me down, spit on me and tell me he owned my holes. He wanted me to offer up my submission as some kind of pretty gift.

We met in the middle.

He was super quiet. And pretty funny. I was always about the serious, dark, growling, dungeony kind of Dominant. He was about beating me with a rubber chicken or hulk hands and trying to get me to laugh on my way to the ugly but awesome release cry.

Pre-husband, in my early days, I honestly thought Dominants were cave men mind readers. I thought "take what you want! But do it how I want!"

Now, as I think about bdsm and the style of Dominant I hope to find, I'd say it's just like the type of man I'd like to meet.

 

[AZsurfer40]

Alpha.

In that I'm a provider, competitive, and primal.

I've always been of the thought that if I couldn't make my partner cum in multiples I didn't do my job as man. Maybe that's just my dumb male brain at work, but it's grown into much more. Personally, I need that scoreboard. It feeds my ego, make me feel superior and creates a goal for me to attain. That bleeds over into being a dom because I'm always pushing to pull out more Os from her and sometimes it can get out of hand though complaints are rare.

Competitive in that I'm always trying to get that high score, but I also want to be the fuck she'll never forget. The one she judges all past and future partners by. Cum the hardest. The longest. The wettest. Being the first to push her boundaries or if not, taking the crown from anyone who came before.

And primal because I can be very needy. I have a high drive that is as much a blessing as a curse and its just a part of my biology and I've come to accept over time. I'm a man, no apologies. So when I am feeling full and aching for release, I have no problem taking what I need from my sub and making her submit to my drive in a possessive way. It's almost caveman, but part of the package that comes with me.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I would love other Doms to weigh in on the competition part. The Dom I’m with isn’t really concerned about other men and “beating” them in some kind of Dom Olympics. It’s much more personal. Let me clarify, we are also in a loving relationship.

Yep. As I see it, there's (a) one's role during sex, (b) one's role during a broader relationship, and (c) one's role in society at large.

For me, "alpha" gives the impression of somebody who chains all those things together. (It also gets me grumbling about pseudo-science, because FUN SCIENCE FACT the researcher who originated the idea of the "alpha wolf" now says he was wrong and there's no such thing. But I digress.)

I can lead people. I'm not bad at it, if I put in the effort. But my management style is nothing like my PYL style and I don't feel any association between the two. Even in (b) I have little interest in bossing my partner around - I prefer a collaborative, egalitarian approach to decision-making.

It's only in a sexual context that I want to be domly, and when I'm in bed with somebody, I guarantee you I am not thinking on how this reflects on my social standing vis-a-vis Trevor from HR. I mean, "predatory boss"/"vulnerable employee" might make for a hot fantasy once in a while, but I don't relate that to my RL employment.

 

[Bramblethorn]

This.


And I dunno. I hear Trevor from HR is fucking primal and howls and shit.

Only when too much Jagermeister is involved.

 

[Bramblethorn]

don't they now say that it's only true for kept packs such as in zoos? or did i misunderstand some news line some time ago?

Yes, that's right.

Rudolph Schenkel studied captive packs back in the 1940s and observed a lot of competition for status, leading to the idea of pack alphas. In the 1960s L. David Mech studied wild packs and saw what he thought was a similar arrangement, with each pack having a male and a female alpha. He wrote a book in 1970, and pop-psychology seized on it.

Meanwhile, Mech went on studying wolf packs and found that wild packs are actually families - the "alphas" are just mama and papa wolf, and the rest of the pack are their cubs. Eventually the cubs grow up, split off from the pack, and go find a mate and start a new pack of their own. The younger wolves aren't competing to topple their pack alphas.

But the packs Schenkel would have been observing were made up of unrelated animals, a very artificial situation, and given what zoos were like in the 1940s, probably under a huge amount of stress. It's like if we studied inmates in a badly-run prison and tried to generalise about the rest of human society based on that environment.

 

[ultramarineblue]

I would say so. I think that feeds into the whole notion that they believe it is done this way, so I am alpha, and anyone who doesn't do it this way is beneath me.

Yes..

It's a way to convince a sub he knows what he's doing.

Thanks, y'all. That's what I was leaning towards. I have one play partner that once described himself as alpha but it was probably a couple years after we first met and in the context of a conversation about development. He never once described himself that way earlier or since.

Mentor dominants: want to teach a sub up to a certain point. Once you've "graduated" from their limited instruction, it's time to move along. Good for new submissives. Or subs who want to experience specific things.

My first dominant was like this. Neither of us wanted an on-going relationship. I wanted to do stuff. At that time, I wasn't really sure what "stuff" was. I got pretty lucky in that he was safe AND he was really in to service. I had no idea that submission could be more than just rough sex and being told what to do. Yay me!

But after a certain point in time, I grew out of him. He knew it and encouraged me to spread my subby wings (and other body parts) and explore more.

I was with another dominant, in a boyfriend/girlfriend relationship who called himself a Daddy. In hindsight, I see he fell under the Mentor category. Once he played out all his Dommy cards, that was it. I wanted more D/s, he didn't. We still liked each other as boyfriend/girlfriend but as Dom/sub, it wasn't going anywhere.

I think there's a difference between Dominant and Top. When I play with someone - for example, have a flogging scene - I'm not really submitting to a Dominant. I am bottoming to a Top who has a certain skill I want to enjoy. A scene is usually pretty fluid - at times, I feel myself getting melty and spacey and if we've talked about other things than flogging (touching lady parts, smooching, yada yada), I can get in to a submissive mindset. Sometimes that doesn't happen and I'm just enjoying the hurt.

There are straightforward dominants: what's in the toybag is what you get. Paddled, flogged, caned. Then there are mind-fucky dominants: messing with a sub's head, conjuring up lewd situations, finding that balance between feeling safe, loved and off-kilter, needy.

My husband was my Daddy. We had a tough time at first meshing up our bdsm styles. I wanted him to push me down, spit on me and tell me he owned my holes. He wanted me to offer up my submission as some kind of pretty gift.

We met in the middle.

He was super quiet. And pretty funny. I was always about the serious, dark, growling, dungeony kind of Dominant. He was about beating me with a rubber chicken or hulk hands and trying to get me to laugh on my way to the ugly but awesome release cry.

Pre-husband, in my early days, I honestly thought Dominants were cave men mind readers. I thought "take what you want! But do it how I want!"

Now, as I think about bdsm and the style of Dominant I hope to find, I'd say it's just like the type of man I'd like to meet.

I loved reading about your experiences.

 

[Master_Doctor]

Good evening everyone.

I just wanted to start a thread to open a discussion about the different dominant types. I feel as though too many people have a certain image in their head of what a dominant "should be". I find this can be damaging to some new doms and also new subs because it gives the impression that if things aren't done in a certain way, it means they arent dominant or that if a Dom does act in a stereotypical/movie portrayed way, a naive submissive could easily be misused.

I will not claim to be worldly or know a ton about this subject either, I consider myself fairly new. I know that different types of dominants exist, but not the details of those different doms. So please, if you are a Dom, post below and describe your style the best you can. Or if you're a sub and want to brag on your dom and yalls style, go ahead! I want to learn from this post, and hopefully give a platform for others to learn as well.

Also, within this, do you personally believe there is a defined difference between a Master, Sir, and Daddy? I've heard many opinions and would like to hear more as a collective.

Disclaimer: I know one person doesn't fall into any one certain categories. Everybody has their own style and mixture. I just want to hear about everyone's personal experiences and opinions.

Sincerely,

A curious Sub

I have yet to throw in my two cents worth. So here goes...

Its funny... what sort of DOM should someone be... the same question can be asked... what sort of Submission should said person be. There are many different kinds and even different roles in both cases. In the end what sort of Dominant should someone be?

The kind that responsibly meets the needs of his submissive. Everyone in unique. Telling somone how to treat someone else... is laughable.

As long as they are responsible, and consentual and they meet the needs of their submissive and vise versa... then who are the rest of us to judge?

I admit. Ive been doing this a very long time. I, personally, identify (as the terms Im familure and comfortable with) Loving Dominant, Sensual Dominant, Strict Dominant. One thing I can tell you that I DO NOT identify with is a Sadistic Dominant.

Ive lived in BDSM communities for nearly twenty years. What makes me laugh more than anything is when people outside a relationship try to tell the people in it... that what they have doesnt work. Just because you cant imagine it... doesnt automatically make it impossible or bad for someone else.

For example. I had a extremely experienced Master (and friend of mine) Who had a wife/slave who called him Daddy and not Master. People would often times (behind their back) said it wasnt right... He was Master, not a Daddy Dom. lol

I will tell you, I have never seen a more loving, caring, couple who were insanely inlove with each other than those two. He took care of her and looked after her until his passing.

Just because something doesnt make sense or work in your mind... doesnt mean it cant for someone else. The best part is... it doesnt have to. As long as they are happy and healthy together... it doesnt matter what any of the rest of us think or feel.

Master Doctor

 

[Orchidea73]

Alpha.

In that I'm a provider, competitive, and primal.

I've always been of the thought that if I couldn't make my partner cum in multiples I didn't do my job as man. Maybe that's just my dumb male brain at work, but it's grown into much more. Personally, I need that scoreboard. It feeds my ego, make me feel superior and creates a goal for me to attain. That bleeds over into being a dom because I'm always pushing to pull out more Os from her and sometimes it can get out of hand though complaints are rare.

Competitive in that I'm always trying to get that high score, but I also want to be the fuck she'll never forget. The one she judges all past and future partners by. Cum the hardest. The longest. The wettest. Being the first to push her boundaries or if not, taking the crown from anyone who came before.

And primal because I can be very needy. I have a high drive that is as much a blessing as a curse and its just a part of my biology and I've come to accept over time. I'm a man, no apologies. So when I am feeling full and aching for release, I have no problem taking what I need from my sub and making her submit to my drive in a possessive way. It's almost caveman, but part of the package that comes with me.

I find this post refreshing because honest, and also interesting from a different perspective.

Just because something doesnt make sense or work in your mind... doesnt mean it cant for someone else. The best part is... it doesnt have to. As long as they are happy and healthy together... it doesnt matter what any of the rest of us think or feel.

Master Doctor

So much this! And I am the first to admit that so many things doesn't make sense to me. But only the people living it know what's going on in their relationship and dynamics. Some things do intrigue me and I'm curious but I find the whole category thing, like the examples that Primalex listed, cold and detached. There is a mechanic feel to it. At least for me. It's the whole psychological side of it that I find fascinating.

 

[Primalex]

Maybe subs don’t question other people about who we are, because we know who we are.

Well...no.

 

[DeepGreenEyes]

He was super quiet. And pretty funny. I was always about the serious, dark, growling, dungeony kind of Dominant. He was about beating me with a rubber chicken or hulk hands and trying to get me to laugh on my way to the ugly but awesome release cry.

I love the imagery here. Wait, the Hulk hands that make the loud smashing sound when you slam down on something?? I had (have?) those. Well done, Mr. cookie.

 

[DeepGreenEyes]

I’m a Daddy Dom sadist.

Nurture, nurture, nurture, taunt, hurt and make you pay, nurture.

It took me a long time to figure out because it didn’t seem to fit what I saw as the available categories. But there is a lot of fusion cuisine out there, on both sides of the slash.

 

[Acktion]

BDSM can get kind of confusing for neophytes. And I think the reason why is because it contains three aspects of variable distinction

• Bondage and Discipline
• Dominance and Submission
• Sadism and Masochism

Bondage and Discipline is pretty easy. Is someone being restrained in some way? Who is the one getting tied up, the bunny? Who is the one doing the tying, the rigger?

Sadism and Masochism, likewise, is pretty easy. Is there some form of sensation play going on and specifically involving one of the seven hundred and twenty-three (by my count) sensations that could be considered pain?

Dominance and Submission, though, can be confusing as Hell because it's ninety percent the mentality of the people choosing to engage in it.

***shrug*** I'm probably being overly simplistic, but for me my Rigger tendencies and my Sadist tendencies have some limited overlap with my Dominance tendencies because... well, because they are all within the scope of my personal interests. But, being a Rigger or being a Sadist doesn't really have much to do with me being Dominant other than that they all share some of my attention. What I mean is, if I didn't want to restrain her or hurt her just a little bit in all the best ways that she consented to, I would still be Dominant.

Again it's just my opinion, but I've generally felt that my Dominance was in its simplest form wanting to control what is happening and when. To me. To those I care about. To what is mine.

And I think that is just sort of part of the human condition. Isn't it? Wanting to control what is happening to us, to those we care about, to what we consider ours? Somewhere in there?

The question is, how do we go about it?

Well, again, these are just my observations. My opinion.

Thug. It's all about the force. If you don't get what you want, then beat the crap out of anyone necessary until you do. Well, maybe not always literally. But, there is a certain aspect of "might makes right." Of getting what is desired by being more imposing, of the threat. "Because I'm bigger and I said so."

Capo. There is still an element of swinging their weight around, but it's more about swinging the weight of the organization, the rules. "Do it my way, 'cause I'm the boss."

Smartass(hole). It's more about using intelligence as a club. "I've read more, obviously know more than you about everything, so it would be really stupid to do it any way other than what I'm telling you."

Legend (in their own mind at least). Stronger, smarter, richer, more powerful, more successful, and better looking than you. Just ask them. "Follow or find a footprint between your shoulder blades."

Colt. Young and brash, full of cockiness. Ten feet tall and bulletproof. Success is inevitable. Talking the talk before the walk. "The proof of my success is I haven't failed."

Iceheart. Or Steelheart. "Emotion is for chumps. Humor is for chumps. Talking is for chumps. Keep turning little cog."

Old Fart. Been everywhere, seen it all, done it all, got the scars. "Siddown, whippersnapper. Shaddup, pup. You're still young yet with no scars on your face."

Okay, I admit I was trying to be a little humorous. Each "type" has its pros and cons. But, this wasn't really about the seven psychological types of world domination oriented personalities (at least their world). I just think that it's often overlooked on the way to bed.

And in all fairness, as I look back across the sandscape in the hourglass of the days of my life, I've been each of these types. (Albeit not in any certain order.) These days? I'm tired and retired. Or close enough with one interpersonal relationship left in me to try to sustain.

Any road... So, in a BDSM D/s oriented relationship, I've typically identified myself (in retrospect) as one of the following different types at various points over the decades.

Primal. It was almost a battle of supremacy. While I was firmly on the Predator side of the slash, the Hunter, I don't really like the term "prey." You don't mate with prey, you eat it. And the gals who I Hunted... well, like I say, I wasn't interested in weak little tidbits hardly worth the chase. If I didn't have scratches and bite marks, wasn't just as marked as she was, then I figured it just wasn't that good.

Top. I had little thought for them beyond sex, fetish, and kink. Oh, don't get me wrong. I wanted them to have a good time as well as me. But, once we put our clothes on, that was pretty well done for me. They went their way and did whatever they did and I went on and did what I did. Until and unless we got together again for a little more. It was all about the flesh, the hormones, the body. Fuckmeat and wankfodder.

Pet Owner. Less person and more valued pet.

Professor. Or, maybe Mentor. It was all about the mind. Even when the body was also involved, which was rare as Professor or Maestro. This was (typically) a contract with a time limit. Once the class was done, so were we.

Daddy. This was my heart. Love. My vulnerability. Although... arguably, this is "my resting bitch face." I have a tendency to slip into some aspects of that mode with purely platonic friends that I care about. It's how I express love, with protection and nurturance. And I couldn't tell you the number of times I've had pointed out to me by a platonic friend with knowledge on the subject that they aren't my sub.

Master. This was the soul for me, the spirit. Twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week of complete and total power (and responsibility). Everything was mine (or was supposed to be). And I was responsible for everything. Especially the blame when things went wrong.

I realize that my definitions don't match up perfectly with what most think. And that's alright so long as we aren't trying to match up the broken ends of our own individual needs.

For example, as "Daddy" I didn't feel comfortable initiating sexual play whereas "Sir" or "Lord and Master" you'd better have had your safeword ready. Which was confusing for some littles/middles that needed the more forceful aspects that for me went more with Sir or Master.

And I'm not much for punishment. Spanking for funsies? Sure. Discipline? You bet. I'm all for discipline. Preferably self-discipline. Punishment? Not so much. Tasks? Okay. But, if disappointing me by failing at the task wasn't enough of a punishment, then I wasn't the Dom you were looking for. Move along.

And this whole concept of "making."

Not knocking, if everyone involved is into it. Just sayin' I'm not. Too much like my old former career in the detention units, too much like work to be fun for me. I request and remind and if that isn't enough to get someone off the couch, knowing and understanding that their compliance would make me happy, then we probably weren't going to be a good fit long term.

The thing is... I didn't decide "this is what I am" and go off looking for something on the lower-cased side of the slash. Often times, in the heat of the moment, I didn't even have the label for just what we were doing. It just sort of sprung organically from who and what I was at the time in my balls and bone, in concert with who and what they meant to me, the resonance between us. What they called out of me.

You see, each of these for me isn't just all about what I took, but also what I gave. And if I just didn't see them as someone I wanted to give my Mastery, to put in that sort of time and effort, to take that sort of responsibility for, then they might get Sir (Top).

And at the end of all things, I wasn't necessarily going to feel like giving this new one the exact same things I gave to someone else just because she slapped the label "submissive" on her own ass and wiggled it around tauntingly at me. As I told one that sent me a message unsolicited, "Dom you?! Lady, I don't even know you! Why the fuck would I want to go to that much effort for you?"

All I know for certain is that people are people and relationships are all about matching up what each is singularly to find some positive result as a unit for a variable length of time that may be too short or too long in retrospective terms. Compromise is all well and good unless it compromises who and what you are in your soul just so you won't be alone. All these decades later, I'm a firm adherent that it's much better to be alone than lonely with the wrong people underfoot. And if the only reason for being with someone is so you won't be alone, then it ain't ever going to be anything worth having. Trying to live a life based on "what the books say I should want, be, and do" (much less a nameless, faceless entity on the infernal nets) is a sure way to never find your own path to self-actualization.

Figuring out what you are, what you need, is laudable. Throwing out the baby with the bathwater when some aspect doesn't fit and ignoring what does or, indefinitely worse, trying to "live up to" some checklist in order to qualify as a specific label, on the other hand...

Any road, whatever label(s) you might feel applies to you, may the sun be out of your eyes and the wind at your back for a brighter tomorrow than yesterday. And fuck 'em if they can't play you as you lay. Or rather, don't...