FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

No labels

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

People often seem to get wound up about labels. Without labels how would you meet?

Describe what you're looking for without using labels.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

Is sex a label? What about gender?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Hot sex

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

Sex as in fucking lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Touche

Perhaps it's not the labels that are the issue....after all everything has a name or label...

Maybe it's more when they are used to put people in boxes as a one dimensional shorthand....

Like single people aren't proper swingers... just a random example

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

A unicorn! Ah fuck, you’re right, I can’t do it!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ink Panther.Woman
over a year ago

Preston

My white knight

Epic fail

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Just as a picture speaks a thousand words, a label will certainly speak a few sentences. So yup, I do like a label to help explain myself.

Mrs

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Nonsense... All.this wishy washy stuff...

I'm.a woman.

I'm always gonna be one.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *gnitemybodyWoman
over a year ago

Onestepoutofthedoor

Single man with penis. Hmm is that a label don't know.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Touche

Perhaps it's not the labels that are the issue....after all everything has a name or label...

Maybe it's more when they are used to put people in boxes as a one dimensional shorthand....

Like single people aren't proper swingers... just a random example

"

This isn't aimed at you. You just gave me the idea for the question. I liked it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I was so tempted, when I first read this, to go into some philosophy of language and theorize that all language is a series of labels. But I'm tired and I can't be bothered.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Touche

Perhaps it's not the labels that are the issue....after all everything has a name or label...

Maybe it's more when they are used to put people in boxes as a one dimensional shorthand....

Like single people aren't proper swingers... just a random example

"

I think if people all agreed on a universal definition of swinging then the label ‘swinger’ would not be a problem. But I guess definitions of all labels evolve.

Mrs

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"I was so tempted, when I first read this, to go into some philosophy of language and theorize that all language is a series of labels. But I'm tired and I can't be bothered. "

Do it do it do it do it

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Touche

Perhaps it's not the labels that are the issue....after all everything has a name or label...

Maybe it's more when they are used to put people in boxes as a one dimensional shorthand....

Like single people aren't proper swingers... just a random example

This isn't aimed at you. You just gave me the idea for the question. I liked it."

Thank you. I'm flattered anyone ever reads my random mumblings.

I didn't feel aimed at... I'm to thick skinned... or is that just too thick

It amused me to see you had put it up as a new thread. But then you do post interesting stuff.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I was so tempted, when I first read this, to go into some philosophy of language and theorize that all language is a series of labels. But I'm tired and I can't be bothered.

Do it do it do it do it "

Well, logical positivists often support the theory of referential realism. In this theory, all language is a series of labels, essentially, whose referents are objects in the real world. Some philosophers, such as Wittgenstein, argue against this theory because he argues that use, not referents, describe language. However, more moderate philosophies have been argued for since, such as mediated reference theory (one famous supporter of this theory of language is Britain's very own Bertrand Russell). There is a strong inclination for philosophers who study language to favor some form of mediated reference theory. I've read a bit of Wittgenstein myself and I find him unconvincing. Although, his "use" theory would also, I beleive, fall foul of those individuals who think we should stop labeling everything. Labels are simply a necessary function of language.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"People often seem to get wound up about labels. Without labels how would you meet?

Describe what you're looking for without using labels. "

I like your profile picture, is it a piss take of men who have cock pics over the toilet bowl? XXX

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Touche

Perhaps it's not the labels that are the issue....after all everything has a name or label...

Maybe it's more when they are used to put people in boxes as a one dimensional shorthand....

Like single people aren't proper swingers... just a random example

This isn't aimed at you. You just gave me the idea for the question. I liked it.

Thank you. I'm flattered anyone ever reads my random mumblings.

I didn't feel aimed at... I'm to thick skinned... or is that just too thick

It amused me to see you had put it up as a new thread. But then you do post interesting stuff. "

You just gave yourself a compliment, nice one! - Because you inspired my OP.

I like a lot of posts, I'm not as grumpy as I come across.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"People often seem to get wound up about labels. Without labels how would you meet?

Describe what you're looking for without using labels.

I like your profile picture, is it a piss take of men who have cock pics over the toilet bowl? XXX"

Nah steely would never do that

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"People often seem to get wound up about labels. Without labels how would you meet?

Describe what you're looking for without using labels.

I like your profile picture, is it a piss take of men who have cock pics over the toilet bowl? XXX"

Yes it is.

Unfortunately most men don't get it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"I was so tempted, when I first read this, to go into some philosophy of language and theorize that all language is a series of labels. But I'm tired and I can't be bothered.

Do it do it do it do it

Well, logical positivists often support the theory of referential realism. In this theory, all language is a series of labels, essentially, whose referents are objects in the real world. Some philosophers, such as Wittgenstein, argue against this theory because he argues that use, not referents, describe language. However, more moderate philosophies have been argued for since, such as mediated reference theory (one famous supporter of this theory of language is Britain's very own Bertrand Russell). There is a strong inclination for philosophers who study language to favor some form of mediated reference theory. I've read a bit of Wittgenstein myself and I find him unconvincing. Although, his "use" theory would also, I beleive, fall foul of those individuals who think we should stop labeling everything. Labels are simply a necessary function of language. "

Bloody hell Marc, I'm not ashamed to admit that whooshed right over my head, sorry. Thank you though. x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lmostthereMan
over a year ago

Southampton

Size S

Wash at 30° with other dark colours

Do not tumble dry

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I was so tempted, when I first read this, to go into some philosophy of language and theorize that all language is a series of labels. But I'm tired and I can't be bothered.

Do it do it do it do it

Well, logical positivists often support the theory of referential realism. In this theory, all language is a series of labels, essentially, whose referents are objects in the real world. Some philosophers, such as Wittgenstein, argue against this theory because he argues that use, not referents, describe language. However, more moderate philosophies have been argued for since, such as mediated reference theory (one famous supporter of this theory of language is Britain's very own Bertrand Russell). There is a strong inclination for philosophers who study language to favor some form of mediated reference theory. I've read a bit of Wittgenstein myself and I find him unconvincing. Although, his "use" theory would also, I beleive, fall foul of those individuals who think we should stop labeling everything. Labels are simply a necessary function of language.

Bloody hell Marc, I'm not ashamed to admit that whooshed right over my head, sorry. Thank you though. x "

I'm trying to figure out which theory of language would explain you calling me Marc.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The map is not the territory, the label at best is an approximation to the thing it describes. Our use of language/ labels is an attempt to guide us and what we want. I would have to use many more words to describe my sexuality than one to get even close to the reality. So the problem occurs when my profile says I’m bisexual, all sorts of assumptions based on the reader’s understanding of the word are used to interpret its meaning.

Labels need to be specific to be really helpful, unfortunately some are not helpful enough.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"I was so tempted, when I first read this, to go into some philosophy of language and theorize that all language is a series of labels. But I'm tired and I can't be bothered.

Do it do it do it do it

Well, logical positivists often support the theory of referential realism. In this theory, all language is a series of labels, essentially, whose referents are objects in the real world. Some philosophers, such as Wittgenstein, argue against this theory because he argues that use, not referents, describe language. However, more moderate philosophies have been argued for since, such as mediated reference theory (one famous supporter of this theory of language is Britain's very own Bertrand Russell). There is a strong inclination for philosophers who study language to favor some form of mediated reference theory. I've read a bit of Wittgenstein myself and I find him unconvincing. Although, his "use" theory would also, I beleive, fall foul of those individuals who think we should stop labeling everything. Labels are simply a necessary function of language.

Bloody hell Marc, I'm not ashamed to admit that whooshed right over my head, sorry. Thank you though. x

I'm trying to figure out which theory of language would explain you calling me Marc. "

I know it's you really. I'm just crap with names.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"The map is not the territory, the label at best is an approximation to the thing it describes. Our use of language/ labels is an attempt to guide us and what we want. I would have to use many more words to describe my sexuality than one to get even close to the reality. So the problem occurs when my profile says I’m bisexual, all sorts of assumptions based on the reader’s understanding of the word are used to interpret its meaning.

Labels need to be specific to be really helpful, unfortunately some are not helpful enough."

I agree. One person's understanding of a label will be different to another's. Maybe labels are just shorthand. Communication is key.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The map is not the territory, the label at best is an approximation to the thing it describes. Our use of language/ labels is an attempt to guide us and what we want. I would have to use many more words to describe my sexuality than one to get even close to the reality. So the problem occurs when my profile says I’m bisexual, all sorts of assumptions based on the reader’s understanding of the word are used to interpret its meaning.

Labels need to be specific to be really helpful, unfortunately some are not helpful enough.

I agree. One person's understanding of a label will be different to another's. Maybe labels are just shorthand. Communication is key. "

They are shorthand, communication is key, but is often bypassed in favour of snap judgements

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top