There are times when I think language, and labels, should appear
on a BDSM checklist. A BDSM checklist is accepted to be a series
of unique, personal interests in activities. And while language or
labels may not be activities per se, they certainly fall into the
same category of being uniquely personal.
Ask ten people what "Master" means and you'll get ten different
answers. The same is true about "submissive", "slave", and "Dominant".
The meanings and feelings attached to these words will differ from
person to person because it is personal and unique. Some call every
Dominant "Master". Some feel that "Master" is a Dominant with a
collared submissive. For others "Master" is a Dominant with sufficient
experience to have the title bestowed upon them. Some feel that
"slaves" are a higher form of submission. Some see "slaves" as
doormats. There are those that deny the mere existence of true
"slaves" in this day and age.
For each term, I could go through the same exercise and legitimately
find sizeable portions of the D/s community that define it
differently. What's the point of all this, then? Why have different
terms if they mean different things to different people?
Simple answer. Because they help define OURSELVES for OURSELVES. We
apply the terms to ourselves that we feel best describe us, what is in
our hearts, and what gives us the most pleasure and personal
affirmation. Two people that are exactly the same in every way (if
there were such a thing) could easily affix different labels to
themselves because personally, they derive greater personal pleasure
from one or the other label.
I'm sure we all know of Dominants that label themselves "Masters" what
we think are far from it. Yet, that's what they feel about themselves.
Why is that an acceptable notion when it seems unacceptable to think
that a "slave" is anything but? Just a little D/s double standard, I
suppose. And yet, what does it matter to us what they label
themselves? You might naturally ask what harm can come of it.
The only possibly credible answer to that question is for the benefit
of newcomers to the lifestyle. And yet, with time and experience, they
will develop their own personal definitions of the terms and apply
their own label to themselves anyway. So is it even productive to
question someone's personal definition of themselves and the label
they apply?
Rather than applying our own personal definitions upon others, it is
more telling to learn what that person's definition is. Just like
reading their unique BDSM checklist, their personal label defines what
they enjoy. It's neither right nor wrong, just right for themselves.
Some enjoy being called Master, or slave, or whatever. If they enjoyed
being called Mickey Mouse, would it matter? Wouldn't necessarily make
them Mickey Mouse, but it's something they enjoy being called.
Personal labels teach us about that individual. They tell us how they
see themselves. They tell us something about their ego, their
lifestyle philosophy, their compatibility with us and others. They are
like big signs hanging around our necks. But unlike most labels in
society, they are labels of our own choosing and in most lifestyle
environments, we wear them openly and proudly.
I'm leery of those that affix qualitative terms to their personal
labels. Terms like "better", "deeper", "more". Being a "slave" may be
better by your personal definition. It may be a deeper form of
submission for you. It may be more of a commitment personally. But
when someone begins to proclaim themselves as "more", "better" and
"deeper" than someone else because of a label, well, I begin to wonder
why. Why let words and labels make a difference, rather than
demonstrated actions? Same is true with Dominants that seem to love to
declare their "Mastery" or "179 years RL experience" or "I've been a
Master since I exited the womb".
My usual conclusion as to why submissives and Dominants alike are
prone to such need for public declarations is one of My favorite
terms. "Self-masturbatory adulation". They're not getting their ego
stroked enough by others, so they're doing it themselves.
In conclusion I want to reiterate that we should all apply a label to
ourselves that we find personally fulfilling. Of course, I suggest
that those labels be accurate in their description of you. Because
that's what our personal labels are. They don't "make" us into
something, they describe what we are. If it's simply fantasy, so be
it. Others will recognize it for that. But don't fall into the trap of
applying your definitions for those labels upon others, or developing
a hierarchy of "better" or "best". It's not only wrong, but you'll
look silly for doing so.
Rover«»
Copyright 2001
