sereneone4u
quod nutrit me destruit
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Posts
- 52,079
I think the most useful things to come out of all this has been Curious_in_Cali's short post in the other thread:
Top/bottom - What you do in action; Top acts upon, bottom is acted upon.
Dom/sub - Who you are by nature; Dominance seeks control, submission seeks surrender.
Is that any better? Would it be enough for someone not knowing anything about the dynamics to at least be a starting point for more "appropriate" terminology that would be more widely accepted within the community at least for use in discussion?
Labels are useful as a starting point, if one wishes to communicate. If one isn't particularly interested in discussing it, or if the person you're hanging out with Gets It without a lot of defining, then that's fine too.
If one orders a "burrito" in a restaurant, one expects that it will bear at least some resemblance to the concept of "burrito" that is widely held in the larger burrito-eating-and-preparing community. It's not gonna be cotton candy, served in a dirty laundry hamper, with chopsticks, unless one has been banished to Bizarro Earth.
That said, if you want to go home with your SO and cook up Fruit Loops on broiled sea bass and beets and enjoy your "burrito" together, then no Word Police will break down your door. Although an angry sea bass widow might.
And if you want to expand the concept of burrito, then cool. But you'll have to do a little more explaining to be understood. For instance, your restaurant might feature an "open face Thai style burrito on a spelt tortilla." Now people know that "THIS burrito differs from the commonly-held head-picture of a burrito in X ways." That requires a little more work to be understood, but so what? It's worth it.
I like PYL/pyl, with the caveat that this is going to be the equivalent of the term "Mexican food": if one wants to communicate with more precision, it will require a little more effort.
God. I didn't realize how hungry I was when I wrote that.
MMmmmm...burritos
