undergroundsea
Posts: 2400
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Austin, TX
Status: offline
|
I see OWK as a fantasy resort. To me it carries relevance as potentially a place to visit with a femdom group and not as a place I would go to seek professional domination, which serves as the context for much of my post.
The OWK presents an atmosphere where women are supreme citizens by virtue of their sex and enjoy tremendous authority over men, which in my opinion is done to create a fantasy scenario for some amongst those who might enjoy F/m. It is a place where men appear to have little rights and are treated as lesser beings as slaves were in times past. Photos of OWK depict women on carriages pulled by men, women served by men in various manners, women engaging in various acts of intense SM with men, men kept in cages overnight, more. These scenarios carry potential for appeal for both women and men into F/m. There are many women who have or are interested to go to OWK and I expect it is because they enjoy the scenarios created there.
Women appear to have greater freedom for how to participate in F/m at OWK--what to wear, what to do. They seem to have comparatively greater freedom about with whom to participate. Unaccompanied men appear to have little say in these matters and about their boundaries, which is why I would not be interested to go to OWK alone and have been given the same advice by dommes who have been there. In this respect OWK favors women.
For those not there as couples, these scenarios fall more in the scope of play for BDSM fun than relationships with significant emotional components. I expect that statistically there are more men than women who will enjoy such play, and there are more men than women who are drawn to OWK. With respect to this statistical difference OWK favors men.
I welcome hearing thoughts of others about what creates this statistical difference and their ideas about why it might be offensive to women.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Wickad
I think this is the crux of the argument. If the idea of a woman who is Dominant in her relationships, politics, work, ... basically her life, is simply food for men's masterbation, then really how seriously is she being taken and how truely effective is she in her dominance?
To me, it does not follow from the existence of OWK that the idea that a woman who is dominant in various spheres of her life is merely food for men's masturbation. Such women do indeed exist and their power has more to do with social, professional, or personal achievement and is independent of what occurs in BDSM. That there are men who fantasize about the type of power women have in OWK does not undermine power of these women.
Do you instead mean to say that because OWK is seen as a fantasy enactment, it suggests a society with women in power can only be a fantasy? Even then I am not connecting with your point:
- While OWK represents an atmosphere where women have power over men, I think it is more the extent of power (similar to historical slavery) that makes it a fantasy scenario. I would see a similar venue that embodies principles of Gor to also be a place that enacts a fantasy atmosphere for those who enjoy that scenario.
- That there are men who would enjoy a society where women have dominance over men in itself does not suggest that the idea is only food for men's masturbation. Amongst the different men who enjoy this idea, some do so for sexual appeal, some for philosophical (they believe that the world would be better if run by women) appeal, some for both.
quote:
The very idea that a woman in control is seen as a means to a male end (ie: male sexual excitment and fullfilment) is terribly patronizing and insulting.
I think the idea of a woman in control or women in control creates sexual excitement and fulfillment for both women and men who enjoy F/m. Thus, I don't think that that men into F/m might be aroused by a scenario that has women in power is in itself patronizing or insulting. How do you feel about the idea that a woman might find sexual excitement and fulfillment in the idea of a man submitting to a woman--is it patronizing and insulting to the man?
But perhaps there is another way to see it which I am not doing. Would you mind elaborating on why you think the very idea that a man might find sexual excitement about a woman in control is offensive? In my opinion, it is not the idea itself that is patronizing and insulting but something else about it, which is what I am trying to understand.
quote:
If you expand this scenario to encompass an entire resort whose 'schtick' is the"...introduction of an Absolute Matriarchy - the only righteous social order." but whose reality is the subjegation of women to the male sexual fantasy, what you end up with is a large, vocal, presence that validates the use of 'all' women to the male libido. This is not a case of a woman chosing to be submissive but rather a show of the greater societies determination to keep all women in their historic role - subservient to men.
I am unable to follow the logic in the statement above. It seems you state:
- OWK represents subjugation of women to men's fantasies.
- This subjugation validates use of all women to the male libido.
- This validation shows the greater society's determination to keep all women subservient to men.
I am connecting with neither the premises nor the flow between the premises.
I feel that participation of women in the scenarios at OWK does not make them subservient to men--women have greater freedom about how to participate in F/m at OWK. They get something from this participation, be it psychosexual gratification, be it a direct (hired by OWK) or indirect (promotion for a professional practice) monetary reward. How specifically in your opinion does OWK represent subjugation of women to men's fantasies?
Let's assume for sake of argument women at OWK are participating in these scenarios without really wishing to do so. How does the occurrence of such a phenomenon in a compound in the Czech Republic equate to greater society's determination to keep all women subservient to men? I am sensing it is not so much that you feel your feelings about OWK independently suggest to you greater society is out to subjugate women, but that you feel in general that greater society seeks to subjugate women and you see this to be one example of it. Yes?
quote:
I agree that this site and the idea of 'female supremecy' as expressed by many is an insult to women and our abilities to make choices independant of men's needs.
I think what you are saying is because women at OWK are creating fantasy scenarios for men, it is an insult to women in general and their ability make choices independent of men's needs. If the women at OWK are choosing to engage in the scenarios there, why is it insulting to women in general? While men's needs might play a role in that they create a social or economic opportunity, is it not the woman's needs that drive her choice? Are you saying that the choice is not really a choice but a necessity? If so, how?
I think we are seeing the matter from different angles. I am willing to see it from your angle for sake of understanding if you will help me find the coordinates from where are you are seeing it ;-)
Cheers,
Sea
< Message edited by undergroundsea -- 1/4/2008 11:21:43 PM >
|
RE: The Other World Kingdom - Femdom State - 
Profile
These posts are written more for the benefit of men who are attracted to female supremacy on a deeper level, and who might actually like to be feminists or female supremacists in reality rather than fantasy. I think this is a philosophical and spiritual path that can go much deeper and be a lot more personally and socially meaningful. But taking it to the deeper level will involve some real thought--the kind that takes place when your dick is NOT in your hand. 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread