Thoughts inspired by Lea’s post a while back.
I’ve never had much trouble with labels in terms of kink. I’m female and heterosexual, which I realise is on the simple, predictable end of the spectrum. I also identify as a submissive, and feel that word alone pretty much sums up my perspective on that sort of thing. While I’m fascinated reading the accounts of others where a mishmash of words is required to explain how they identify themselves and their place or prospective place in a relationship (and have learned quite a bit from so doing), I’ve never felt the need to do the same thing.
An interest in spanking prompted this long-term self-analysis, and I’ve come to accept that spanking, while a large part of whatever-this-is-that-I-am, it is still only the part. I cannot describe myself simply as a spankee, bottom, etc and convey the same connotations of discipline, service and devotion that come with describing one’s self as a submissive. Nor do slave, little, pet, etc. convey how integral this is to who I am; submission is not something that simply ceases to exist when play is over, and understanding my desired roles even in vanilla contexts has helped me to understand and, when necessary, moderate my behaviour. Nor do any of the more specialised terms truly encompass the largely blank slate of someone with very limited experience.
So I call myself a submissive, and leave it at that. Maybe I’m taking the easy way out and not truly thinking this through (though that might be a first for my typically over-thinking self).