Hundreds more articles like this can be found
at the Kink Mentoring Archives… Spread the word!
Master Chuck:
People love labels. Read the reader comments following a news article on most any internet site and people liberally use labels to describe anyone expressing an opposing opinion. I’m not a fan of thosetypes of labels but they’re a good thing when they accurately describe something and help people understand the correct meaning.
Examples of positive uses of labels in the power exchange community:
Conversely, labels can be unintentionally limiting. For example, the label “Master” implies the obvious - the one in authority, the one who has the power. The label “Master” also implies a behavior - i.e. a Master is always the top; a Master never gets fucked.
It’s fine and good if that fits the reality inside the head of the Master but it’s not so good if the Master happens to enjoy being the bottom? Does the Master “lose face” if he orders his slave to fuck him? Or because of protocol, is that path simply not an option?
The stereotype we associate with a label can be a pigeon hole: "a neat category which usually fails to reflect actual complexities". And pigeon holes never expand options, they always limit options.
For an extensive list of BDSM terms, see Wikipedia's Glossary of BDSM
Examples of positive uses of labels in the power exchange community:
- domestic slave - submissive, does chores, follows orders
- sex slave - submissive inside the bedroom only
- chastity slave - has given control of his sexual gratification to a Dom
- 24/7 slave - slave without rights and collared by a Master
- Daddy/boy - relationship based on authority but less structured and more tenderness than a Master/slave relationship
- maso or pain pig - a masochist or someone who enjoys pain and has a very high threshold to it
Conversely, labels can be unintentionally limiting. For example, the label “Master” implies the obvious - the one in authority, the one who has the power. The label “Master” also implies a behavior - i.e. a Master is always the top; a Master never gets fucked.
It’s fine and good if that fits the reality inside the head of the Master but it’s not so good if the Master happens to enjoy being the bottom? Does the Master “lose face” if he orders his slave to fuck him? Or because of protocol, is that path simply not an option?
The stereotype we associate with a label can be a pigeon hole: "a neat category which usually fails to reflect actual complexities". And pigeon holes never expand options, they always limit options.
For an extensive list of BDSM terms, see Wikipedia's Glossary of BDSM
No comments:
Post a Comment