why bother with titles anymore?

[bambina]

I was having a conversation with some people and we were trying to decipher what classified a person as a Dom, sub, or switch. You know, usually when someone is uber new to the lifestyle, that question arrises in a chat. The new person will ask "Well how do you know whether you're a Dom, sub or switch?" Now you'd think this would be a no brainer. But we were really going at it. The people I talked to said that you can still be a Dom but be dominated every now and then. I said that that wasn't true. A Dom who has submissive tendencies is not a Dom but a switch. That's pretty much the definition of a switch. Someone who has the tendencies of both Dom and sub. Matter of fact, that's how one is supposed to identify their own orientation. They look at their preferences. Are they Dominant or submissive? If they are both then they are switches. But they refused to acknowledge what I thought was fact. So many people disagreed with me and not it's gotten me confused.

Wouldn't you treat it just like sexuality? Even if you like the opposite sex, if you have a sexual interest in your own sex, you're automatically bi-sexual. That's just how it works. If you are a girl and have an inkling to kiss another girl then you are bi-sexual. Because you know what lips feels like. Guys have lips, too. So the fact that you specifically sought out a girl, even though you claim to like guys, makes you bi. I don't believe in (not an advocate of) experimentation but I do acknowledge it when others claim to be exploring their sexuality. But you can't sit there and tell me you are straight after kissing someone who is you own sex. You can say you're curious. You can say you are just testing the waters. but you cannot tell me you are heterosexual when you are messing with those of your own sex. Isn't that what being bi-sexual means? To be interested in both sexes?

Honestly, if people refuse to follow this logic, then what's the point of the titles? If someone comes up to me and says they are a Dom, what does that really mean? I know it means that that person has dominant tendencies but what I don't know is whether they do or don't have submissive tendencies as well. The fact that I would have to ask such a question would defeat the purpose of the labels. I don't want a guy telling me that he's straight after I just saw him dancing with and touching all over another guy. Because then the meaning of straight becomes diluted. Now how much sense does this make?: You don't have to be 'straight' in order to be straight. Someone please help me explain.

[kurious25]

I almost feel like this is a silly post...but yet I felt compelled to add my 2-cents.

Labels, or titles, are a nice and easy way of letting people know where you generally fall, but to force people to stick to those labels and never grow, or explore, is confining and boring. Have you always been exactly what you define yourself as now? Do you really see yourself not adapting or changing how you define yourself later in life? And why do you feel such a need to stick everyone in a neatly labeled box to define them. How dull that seems!

I think that trying to fit all the variables into nice tide Dom or sub category, with everything else being switch, is an oversimplification. In your example of straight,gay,bi for instance you state that if you kiss a member of the same gender you are bi...but I for one have kissed another female and would not consider myself bi at all. Sexually I am attracted to men, but in multiple situations I have kissed a girl. Once just to try it (and lips may be lips, but girls kiss way differently than boys do), and on other occasions because my partner "requested" that I do so.

Sexuality is more of a scale than a one or the other box. In fact in research most people are found to fall somewhere between "totally heterosexual" and "totally homosexual" and yet very few identify as bi-sexual because their preference is for one or the other.

I feel that roles within BDSM world are very much the same. Some may not identify as switch, but would be willing to try a role-reversal with their partner. Or, just be curious to understand the other side of things better. Again, speaking for myself, I am a submissive...but my partner suggested that iit would be good for me to understand the role of Dom, so I have taken a few small forays into being the Dominant with him. But, I realize that it doesn't "fit" for me. In this case experimenting has cemented my role, but since I have experimented would you still call me a switch?

Titles are handy, but I think letting them define you and make your decisions for you is to cut yourself off from experience, and unlike you I am a huge advocate for experimenting and exploring. After all isn't that why most of us are here in the first place?

[FrozenGrapes]

I almost feel like this is a silly post...but yet I felt compelled to add my 2-cents.

Labels, or titles, are a nice and easy way of letting people know where you generally fall, but to force people to stick to those labels and never grow, or explore, is confining and boring. Have you always been exactly what you define yourself as now? Do you really see yourself not adapting or changing how you define yourself later in life? And why do you feel such a need to stick everyone in a neatly labeled box to define them. How dull that seems!
.........
Titles are handy, but I think letting them define you and make your decisions for you is to cut yourself off from experience, and unlike you I am a huge advocate for experimenting and exploring. After all isn't that why most of us are here in the first place?

OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR RESPONSE!! I am so over the back and forth You are Dom/me and you are sub and OMG you just called her Miss!! You MUST be a switch!! why the hell does it matter??
I mean really it is just a RELATIONSHIP.. every person we cross affects us different ways.. one person amy come along and i may feel automatically Dominant and protective over them, but then I have a Miss that make my knees weak! What does it matter?
like it was said.. it is a great way to generalize what or who you feel you are.. but there is so much more to a person than them being Dominant or submissive. It may be mold alot of what they do but it is not all of who they are.. and experimenting is just that.. you experiment to learn, to learn yourself and how others react, and really all these debates constantly in chat about Dom vs sub, sub vs slave, all of them vs switch.. why focus on a simple a title that in reality means NOTHING.. just because you SAY you are Dominant does not make you a good Dominant or good person.. just because you SAY you are sub does not mean you really want to submit, you might just be playing too.. so in reality.. why get hung up on labels?
Get to know the PERSON and then you never know what will happen..
I am a Domme who has subs but My Miss is a submissive who has a rl Dom.. so what do you call that? like i said.. every person we cross affects us a different way and getting caught up on titles is just shallow, get to know the person and go from there.. otherwise you are cutting off alot of options and some great opportunities to grow maybe...
Just MY 2 cents...

[Mizar]

I have submissive tendencies, even being a Dom. The thing about this is that I am not submissive. I don't feel like Im quite saying this right. I am a sadist. And Im a Dominant. I have thought I might be able to switch once...and then I realized the dislike I had to be controlled. This is what makes me a Dominant. I refuse to, and maybe I will give my sub oral. It is because I want to. For whatever reason. I may ask her opinion and treat her as a near equal and such...moderatly submissive in the way I talk to her. But this is because I want to know etc. Trying not to sound pompous, but its all about Me. I choose to act that way and I acknowledge the tendencies I have when I do act in that way. But, because I can act submissive doesn't mean that I am less of a Dominant.

I know women and Im sure that you've heard of them, who are in complete control of their daily life and can't suffer to be anything less than controlled. I know other people who are submissive or Dominant in every walk of life.

I would rather say that every person has submissive and Dominant sides to them, because every person has duality. Now it is simply what you want that takes this into account. Do you want to take control or be controlled? Both? This is, personaly, what makes someone a Dom, a sub, or a switch. Do you want to be one or the other?

You are submissive correct? How do you know you aren't a switch? Because I am quite sure that at some points you act and are Dominant, in some way shape or form. Its how you feel about it that decides what you are, personaly.

[leah06]

Removed comment.

[thepast]

We use titles & labels because at SOME point you have to call yourself something--the problem is, people mistake a label as a description. For instance, if you want to say, "I don't really know what I am. I am exploring. I have some submissive tendencies & some Dominant ones," that's fantastic. It says you don't really know what you want yet, but you're exploring--it's a descriptor. Whereas "I am a sub" is a label, and a semi-useless one at that. Great, ok, we know you aren't strictly a Dominant. But what kind of a sub are you? A bottom? A sexual submissive? A service submissive? A 24/7 submissive? A only-under-certain-circumstances submissive? A play submissive? A submissive with switch tendencies? An alpha submissive? A bottom's submissive? A... you catch the drift, no?

By choosing to limit ourselves to silly labels, we don't have to confront the bigger issues, which is to figure out who we really are & what we want. And even more then that, labels give us something to hide behind & shield ourselves from others. We take comfort in the notion of, "I am a submissive." But what does that mean? It means nothing the same to two different people-- and THAT is the beauty of BDSM.

Grapes mentioned that she's got subs but yet subs to another. Does that make her a switch? Yup. Does that make her a sub? Yup. A dominant? Yup. It makes her GRAPES. It's what works for her. People should just embrace themselves & allow others to embrace who they are.

Personally, I classify myself with a different label depending on the audience. For people in the general forums, I would class myself differently then I would to people in r/l, or then I would to a group of Goreans or Old School folks. Why? Because labels are simply interchangable words that categorize. However, I would use the same description of myself no matter whom I am speaking with. Because it describes who I am.

Hopefully someone makes sense of this... my point is this: instead of wasting time figuring out what label you are, or what label your partner is, which is not only futile because you won't be just one, but also futile because it changes over time, why not spend the time figuring out your description.

If you look in my profile, it says "taken." Not "I am a sub/slave/switch/Dominant." Why? Because everyone knows what the word "taken" means, but no two people define any of the other words the same.

Just my two cents.

[denuseri]

<<is lamfao

Why does everyone get so bent about this.

A title means far more for some than others.

Big deal!!

Alas there is going to be lots of different opinions as to what exactly one should or shouldnt act like etc if they bear a certian title and its going to vary alot between individuals of the same "titler grouping too".

Welcome to the language of the human race.

Words and definitions are absolute nessesities for comunication, titles are much like any descriptive noun.

It is how we make distinctions between individuals etc.

Its how you tell the difference for example between a health care practicioner and a patient, a doctor for instance and a nurse , an EMT and a scrub-tech etc etc etc.

Or to be more specific in the words we use to describe our selves and others are only as good as the agreed upon deffinitions for them.




........


words like

master and slave for instance.

[bambina]

Rachel, I don't think about being in a Doms shoes...ever. The idea is just not appealing to me. And I didn't think others did either. But you learn something new everyday.

I'm not saying one can't experience what it's like to be on the other side of the fence. I'm saying that one should acknowledge that they are in between roles if they choose to do so. It was once my opinion that you shouldn't call yourself a Dom if you are submitting to another. Keep in mind, I'm talking about submission and dominance in terms of the bdsm lifestyle. Not work or in a social group.

I acknowledge that their is a difference between being bi-sexual and simply experimenting. But that's the part that I don't think others get. Sure, if you kiss someone who is your own sex, that doesn't automatically make you bi-sexual. But I don't think you're straight anymore either. I think you are curious or experimenting. But I can't see how you can stay straight and do that anymore than I can see someone submit but still call themselves a Dom. Maybe a new label is in order. I just get so confused when I talk to Doms. I start talking to them and they say they are Dom. But then they go on about how they have fantasies about submitting occasionally. I find that misleading. When I think 'Dom', I feel there should be no submission in his heart as far as bdsm is concerned. Just like if I see someone who is 'straight', there should be no sexual same-sex interests either. Because then it gets confusing. When someone says 'Dominant' you don't know what they mean anymore if you follow the logic that you can have submissive tendencies but still be dominant. Does this mean I have to ask every single men in detail how dominant they are? Once again, wouldn't that defeat the purpose of the labels?

[bambina]

Alright delia. Now THAT makes sense to me.

[DowntownAmber]

I do think words should be accurate and consistent in their meaning. I don't think we can adjust them to suit our whims as we see fit and still expect to be able to communicate.

However, many words are simply "umbrella" words that require additional information before they can be considered even remotely specific or telling. If I tell you I own a dog, that can mean a thousand different things until I start to add specifics underneath that umbrella term. I own a Labrador. I own a black Labrador. I own a male Black Labrador who enjoys swims at the lake, snack time, and whose major turn offs include getting his nails clipped and Pomeranians. You get the point. Delia also made it rather well will her submissive descriptions.

I could go on, but I think to do so would serve no purpose other than to be redundant myself and to nod in agreement with the other folks that have posted already and, I'm sure, will continue to post throughout the day.

The only other thing I"ll comment on is the statement that kissing or having an inkling to kiss a person of your same gender automatically makes you bi. I think that might be pushing it just a ticky... I find attractive women to be very alluring, I've even kissed and fondled a few here and there. I do not, however, consider myself bi. I'm not looking to sleep with a woman, have a relationship with one, so on and so forth. There is simply a small sensual element about them that I like to indulge myself in now and again.

I also smoke a cigar here and there, and when I'm acting I close my shows by having a clove cigarette. Does that make me a smoker?

By your logic, which I certainly can follow to a degree, I am a bisexual smoker. Yet, if I were to tell any rational thinking and deciphering human being that about myself, they are going to get a wildly different idea in their head about me than what is actually accurate. Along with their definition, words also carry a connotation, which requires us as speakers and listeners to engage the subtleties of the language blended with our surroundings to decipher actual meaning as opposed to basic definition. It's more challenging, of course, than falling back on wrote memorization of terms, but the approach textures our communication and pushes it to evolve.

[clipcrop]

"I find that misleading. When I think 'Dom', I feel there should be no submission in his heart as far as bdsm is concerned."

I think this is too simplistic a view. Over the years I've met a number of ladies who are sub to men, but Domme to other ladies. How would you categorize them?

And if a Domme likes to have her breasts whipped, or if a Dom enjoys being bound, and they have their subs perform accordingly, does that make the individual less dominant. They are using their dominant trait to further their own pleasure - isn't that dominance?

[denuseri]

lets use a different terminology shall we.

This may also explain some of peoples issues with the use of titles and thier issues with the blurring of such titles meanings.

I am going to use your post as an example clipcrop.

I am going to substitute the words Master and slave for dom and sub in some circumstances and adjust the words.



"Over the years I've met a number of slaves who submit to a Master, but dominate other slaves."

How would you categorize them?

I see you have bever heard of the term "First girl".

She doesnt stop being a slave just becuase she is higher up in the hierarchy. She is still a slave to the Master.

Of course with no recognized titlar distinction of commitment then I wouldnt personally use the term Master and slave.

Of course things can get confusing then.

As for your therorehtical situation/question:

"And if a Domme likes to have her breasts whipped, or if a Dom enjoys being bound, and they have their subs perform accordingly, does that make the individual less dominant. They are using their dominant trait to further their own pleasure - isn't that dominance?"

This has been addressed far better in a different thread.

Here is a link to it:

http://www.bdsmlibrary.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=19084

[Flaming_Redhead]

I think this is too simplistic a view. Over the years I've met a number of ladies who are sub to men, but Domme to other ladies. How would you categorize them?

Switch.

And if a Domme likes to have her breasts whipped, or if a Dom enjoys being bound, and they have their subs perform accordingly, does that make the individual less dominant. They are using their dominant trait to further their own pleasure - isn't that dominance?

It kinda does, actually. If MY dom suddenly demanded that I tie him up and beat him, it would totally ruin the dynamic. I'm a switch, but I want my dom to be 100% dominant with no additives, fillers, extra sugar, etc. Have you ever taken a drink from a fast food cup thinking there was soda in the cup but got iced tea? It's *not* good. That's why using the correct label is important. It's a starting point to getting to know someone. I don't want to invest time getting to know someone only to discover that they're not who I thought they were. By the same token, I don't tell potential partners I'm 100% submissive or an alpha submissive or any other hoohaa. If they can't get past the word "switch," it's their loss.

[thir]

I was having a conversation with some people and we were trying to decipher what classified a person as a Dom, sub, or switch.

If you are a girl and have an inkling to kiss another girl then you are bi-sexual.

I don't believe in (not an advocate of) experimentation but I do acknowledge it when others claim to be exploring their sexuality. But you can't sit there and tell me you are straight after kissing someone who is you own sex.

Honestly, if people refuse to follow this logic, then what's the point of the titles? If someone comes up to me and says they are a Dom, what does that really mean? I know it means that that person has dominant tendencies but what I don't know is whether they do or don't have submissive tendencies as well.

I am thinking several things here. One is that I do believe that there is a tendency sometimes to try to simplify the world in order to make it easier to understand and handle. And that there may be anger or confusion when the world (other people) refuse to conform to these ideas or concepts.

But the thing is, people will think for themselves, define themselves, and call themselves what they see fit according to what they think is right. You cannot control them, however neat the world would seem if your could, they keep hopping out of the boxes ;-)

As for the rest, people very often do have to experiment to find themselves, in many ways and with many things. The experiment itself does not define them.

And in the question of titles, I rather see them as rough descriptions. There seems to be an idea on many lists that a dom is a person who has never had a sub thought or vice versa, but in my personal experience during all too many years I have found that this is very rarely so. I do not mean on lists, which tend to conform to unwritten 'rules', but actual people in real life.

I have for example seen women who started as sub change over the years and change to domme completely. They did not define themselves as switches, and did not live it either. They went from a 100% sub to a 100% Domme.

In some cases they started out as subs because they thought that women into bdsm had to be subs, and then found that this is not so. In other cases there were other reasons.

In my younger days, as a sub, I used to have this same feeling, that if a dom showed any kind of inclination to experiment I would loose all respect.
I have learned different now. I can explain it no better than to say that if what is there in that person is what is needed for that particular relationship, then that is what is important. If that domination is there, then it is there whatever else there may be, and that is all that matters.

[SauvagePouline]

Hmmm. I think the Dom/sub issue has been covered. But I want to comment on the straight/bi/gay thing.

Almost no one is TOTALLY straight, TOTALLY gay or TOTALLY bi. There's a famous study by Kinsey, who developed a scale from 0-6, 0 being 100% straight, 6 100% gay and 3 exactly 50% of each. He had all kinds of people take his test. And it is not at all clear and defined. And it is not constant. You could be a 1 today, and have a life changing experience in a year and be a 5 before sliding back down to a 2.

I don't know of any studies on the subject, but I'm fairly certain that a similar scale would work for submissive/switch/dominant.

Finding a PERFECTLY straight, dominant man is going to leave you searching for a long time, because both traits, in the pure sense, are rare. What should matter is, he wants to fulfill the role you want from him. (for you, he is dominant and straight, and is happy that way.) If you find out otherwise in the course of conversation, then you haven't been deceived than you would be by finding out his dearest fetish is your hardest limit, and vice versa.

And I don't want to point fingers but I have to comment on the use of the phrase "waste of time." It should never be a waste of time to talk to someone and get to know them, especially if it is only because they aren't as straight/gay/sub/whatever as you thought they were. Even if they aren't your dream play partner, you still met someone new and probably learned something or enjoyed your time.

If we really need to find a play partner/mate/friend that precisely fits our criteria, without in depth conversation, hand out a survey and problem solved. (although, it would make a hilarious scene, i'm imagining a play party somewhere, toys are out, every one is in kink-wear and as people are beginning to move towards the toys, this burly, manly Dom walks up to this mouse of a girl and hands her a three page survey. Do I meet your standards? ... lol)

But maybe I'm just misinterpreting the use of the phrase "waste of time." If so, just ignore that little mini rant. (although i really would like to see some of the Doms here reduced to the point of "applying" for a position -giggle-)

SP

[leo9]

I'm not saying one can't experience what it's like to be on the other side of the fence. I'm saying that one should acknowledge that they are in between roles if they choose to do so. It was once my opinion that you shouldn't call yourself a Dom if you are submitting to another.

It seems to me that you have a personal and deeply felt need to believe that anyone dominating you is 100% pure Dom without a submissive bone in hir body. I'm familiar with the attitude because my ex-slave was the same (though less dogmatically), she absolutely did not want to hear about my sub experiences, it made her feel her world was being undermined. Nothing wrong with that, we all have our special needs, but I think you're making a mistake when you try to generalise it into a rule for how everyone should define themselves.

If I'm introducing myself at a munch, I'll say I'm Dom, because (a) that's how I generally operate and how I identify myself most of the time, and (b) in a situation like that I'm looking to hook up with a sub, I don't want Doms hitting on me. If the conversation gets around to it, I might mention that I can also sub to the right person, and most people will accept that without concluding that I was lying at first.

I acknowledge that their is a difference between being bi-sexual and simply experimenting. But that's the part that I don't think others get. Sure, if you kiss someone who is your own sex, that doesn't automatically make you bi-sexual. But I don't think you're straight anymore either.

Then you've defined down the heterosexual population to a very small minority. I can see that this might be correct in the strictest technical sense, but it is very impractical for everyday useage, and the only people who normally use such a definition are the most rabid homophobes who call anyone who gives them a hug a faggot.

Maybe a new label is in order. I just get so confused when I talk to Doms. I start talking to them and they say they are Dom. But then they go on about how they have fantasies about submitting occasionally. I find that misleading. When I think 'Dom', I feel there should be no submission in his heart as far as bdsm is concerned. Just like if I see someone who is 'straight', there should be no sexual same-sex interests either. Because then it gets confusing. When someone says 'Dominant' you don't know what they mean anymore if you follow the logic that you can have submissive tendencies but still be dominant. Does this mean I have to ask every single men in detail how dominant they are? Once again, wouldn't that defeat the purpose of the labels?

Normally, if someone introduces himself to you as a Dom, it means that he's looking for that role in relation to you. If he wanted you to dom him he'd call himself a sub. So for everyday practical purposes, the way people use the terms is a lot more practical than saying "I'm a switch but right now I'm looking for a scene/relationship where I am the Dom."

I accept that the normal usage breaks down with someone like yourself who can only relate to switch-proof Doms who've never even fantasised about subbing. But that doesn't mean that everyone else is doing it wrong, it just means that you have to make your needs clear, because they're uncommon enough to need spelling out.

[Soaul]

First, their are differences between common BDSM activities. I imagine that once a person decides what kind of activity (-ies) they want to be participates in determines what you are. The following is my understanding from my BDSM readings:

a) TOP/bottom: it is about the physical body.....pleasure/pain. The TOP does things to the bottom, spanking, clothe pins, crop, penetration, etc and the bottom reacts. The TOP then reacts......it is a physical dance. Once play is over the two participants are equal.

b) DOM/submissive is about the mental body.....specifically power. The DOM/DOMME is in complete control during the scene and the submissive submits to whatever the DOM wants. Now there can be sexual subs who only submit in sex and nothing else. The is the Daddy DOM/lil girl where the DOM is a daddy like figure (NOT the father) and the lil girl (NOT a daughter) submits to Daddy DOM. This is NOT incest or anything like that. It is just the relationship. The Daddy DOM pampers and disciplines his lil girl.

c) Master/slave is beyond DOM/sub since it is supposed to be 24/7. It is about spiritual body....submitting to subconcious urges. Many slaves can't remember when they weren't submissive and wanted to submit. The relationship is like above and contracts for periods of time are signed by two equal people. Only after the contract is signed does the roles come into play. As a rule, the slave ASKS the Master to be his or her slave.

d) finally there is Owner/slave.....an extreme Master/slave that is without any limits or whatever is negotiated.

[Matin]

ive got two cents *fishes around, antes up *

i think human beings, as was stated before, pretty much defy classification beyond male/female. anything else is a grey area.

but i also think that a lot of us are kinda social chameleons - to coopt a phrase i've been hearing a lot of lately - and will resort to a 'default' label for ourselves when we feel it will make interaction with others a little more streamlined.

my profile says i'm a dom. blech. boring. and yet it seemed like a lot of people here have a label like that, so in order to not deal with questions i might not feel like answering, or might not actually be able to answer beyond *shrug* (lol) thats what i wrote.

and its honest! ...to a degree. i AM currently and for the forseeable future, a dom.

i don't really like classifications but i have a lot of fun with a system a mentor of mine told me; wolfpack mentality. for example; i'm an alpha male, but i border on beta. there's alpha and then there's ALPHA. a true alpha can have me making calf eyes like a twelve year old girl, yet most men make room when i walk through. with most alphas i'm an equal, with betas i'm in a leadership role, and finally with omegas, judging from the looks, i must be twelve feet tall! lmfao

humans being social animals, and mammals, have a lot of tribal/primal instincts built into our social subconscious. so watching true animal interactions, where there's much more solid research, can give us a lot of clues as to what's going on under all of our conscious interactions.

of course it's as imperfect as anything, and that it applies at all is only the opinion of myself and some of my friends.

but it's amusing at the least.

-matin

[shayna{L_D}]

I am so over the back and forth You are Dom/me and you are sub and OMG you just called her Miss!! You MUST be a switch!!
why the hell does it matter??
I mean really it is just a RELATIONSHIP.. every person we cross affects us different ways.. one person amy come along and i may feel automatically Dominant and protective over them, but then I have a Miss that make my knees weak! What does it matter?

you experiment to learn, to learn yourself and how others react

Get to know the PERSON and then you never know what will happen..

Grapes i like how you put this, i realy do..

Im a submissive, but im finding i may be a switch.

my "dom" (we dont like to use titles...heh imagine that) has a Miss, but is dom to me.. and im submissive to him. what do you call that?!

I agree with everything in that little quote box up there Grapes. couldnt have said it better myself.