RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker?

RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress

Message

AAkasha -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (1/31/2006 8:42:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: veronicaofML desperate, poor, unhygeinic, lacking social skills, ================================= for the most part...i give ya credit where its due... yeah okay. i know. ya hate my guts. ah well. life sucks...i dont care. i give ya credit anyway. but social skills? in what? some fancy black tie affair? piss on that shit. i'm blue collar and proud of it. and i guess i aint the only one here. desperate? in the fact some of us damned well fight n scratch to find a good domme that is human and not afraid to show it...vs..one that thinks she is god's gift? poor? like i said...blue collar. so what? ya aint takin your money to the grave with ya! as to the last........i take my showers...i dont shave as often as She likes...but then..i have a skin condition that stops me from shaving my beard everyday..... so if YOU wanna attack me yet AGAIN here.........have at it sister......i just dont give a damn. but i did like your post anyway. at least THIS one cut through to the chase. i still give even YOU credit for being human...though i doubt ya have a heart, sometimes. ya DO worry me. take care of yourself, huh? Desperate meaning a man that will hit on/approach, ask "Can I be your slave?" of any woman that walks past him. Lacking social skills meaning inability to have a conversation about anything other than kink. Not knowing how to ask questions and listen politely. Inappropriate social behaviour like burping, talking with mouth full, scratching in public. "Black Tie Affair"? Sure, I prefer a man I can take out to an important, formal work function. More importantly though I want a man that would not embarrass me in front of my other mother. "Poor" == I am not going to define financial status. Most people know that the man I married had zero money to his name (well, I think $300 total) and no possessions. But he was rich to me, rich in generosity of spirit and time, and financially SOUND -- meaning he knew how to manage money and had financially responsibility. Hygeine -- nowhere in the walks of life have I met so many men that do not shower, have very few clean clothes (one regular to events here wore the same stained t-shirt to every event), do not have a haircut, do not know how to use cologne and do not take care of their teeth/gums. Bad breath, body odor, or a total lack of regard for one's health is a huge turn off for me. You may take everything I say and turn it around to you, but it's not all about you. In fact, it's rarely about you. It was a post addressing an issue in general. Akasha

McWhips -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (1/31/2006 8:55:22 AM)
Real one, I cant get your profile up it says 'profile not found' I would like to contact you (Sorry Im not a Domme though). You can contact me via my profile if you like.

MichMasochist -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (1/31/2006 4:32:13 PM)
If you have the time I would like some information on these yahoo, msn servises. TIA (Thanks In Advance)

Real0ne -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (1/31/2006 6:26:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MichMasochist If you have the time I would like some information on these yahoo, msn servises. TIA (Thanks In Advance) youve got mail!

lokisgodhi -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (1/31/2006 9:07:54 PM)
MysticalPhoenix wrote: "Although you didn't copy the salient part of my post (clever, aren't you) I clearly stated that exploitation is something I object to-for either person-neither the sub nor the domme should be exploited." Okay, since you feel slighted, I'll address it then. You wrote: "The last thing I want is to (s)exploit someone, particularly for money. Money seems a tawdry form of motivation to me. I guess I'll never be rich thinking that way, but I'd rather be true to myself and my own ideals, than to exploit someone's sexuality for cash. I wouldn't let anyone exploit me for money, either, just because they think it's the (cue trumpet fanfare) one, true, real, way of Domme-ing." I happen to think that cash, services and gifts are interchangable. Trying to extract any of them from someone because they want to interact with you in an activity that you both profess to wish to undertake is immoral. Yet I see and hear about dommes who do this all the time. They start relationship with a submissive man and then they start trying to winnow, cash, gifts and services out of them. The especially stupid ones go further than that. I know of one domme who used a sub's credit card without his back and run up a rather large bill. The guy's a cop and was not amused. I belong to a debating society. I belong because I enjoy it. When enter in debates with other members of the society neither I not they expect their co-participants to ask them to pay them, provide services for them or buy them gifts as renumeration to engage in an activity we agreed to undertake. Anyone who tried to do so would be considered an utter scumbag. I see not reason why this should not apply to a bdsm relationship. "However, if a professional of any type is providing a service, or billing a client for their time, they should be compensated. Provided that is something that is made clear well in advance, and the person is indeed a professional and not a con artist. " But it's rarely made clear in advance. What they do is like having a doctor agreeing to provide services pro bono and then presenting you with a bill when you're on the operating table. "It would be interesting to see how such a scenario would play out with people practicing without a license-people who are not self-identified as Pro Dommes but who expect 'tribute' in exchange for services (i.e. scening) or for their time. Would they vanish entirely, changing to being Pro Dommes who work for cash, or stop playing with the do me boys, or hang on stubbornly? Who can say." Charging them with extortion and sending them to big girl prison sounds like a great way to handle it.

lokisgodhi -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (1/31/2006 11:18:41 PM)
AAkasha wrote: "Just because dominant women aren't courting you and buying you dinner doesn't mean they don't exist; it means YOU aren't attracting them. If all you are attracting are money dommes -- if the only ones that will consider playing with you (despite all your experience you speak of) are the ones that are looking for men to dupe -- what does that say about you?" Ahhhh, the usual de riguer personal attack about how it must be my fault. I don't expect dommes to buy me dinner. I've always thought it would be fun to take one out to dinner order a huge expensive meal, go to the bathroom and then split, leaving her with the check. I don't generally attract money dommes because when they ask me for money I then ask them for money to play with me. I've always thought it would be fun to offer to give her a mink to play with me and then give her one of those mink tails with the 'here's the mink I promised you' tags. Grifting the grifter-ettes sounds appealing and fun because it really frustrates them because they're not programmed to handle it. What part of 'I run submissive men's groups for over a decade and have had the oportunity to talk to hundreds of submissive men'and 'I've been a board member of several BDSM organizations and have had to deal with people trying to scam members at our functions' did you have trouble understanding? "Subs like you believe they are shocking and edgy by coming on here and first complaining that all femdoms are in it for the money, then slapping on some "bad boy sub" attitude, as if your submission should be "earned" by one of us lowly femdoms who are obviously missing out on all you have to offer. Seriously, it's a dance we've seen for years. If you could not find yourself a single, non-money femdom in all your years and years of exposure to the "scene" then maybe you need to look inward." I don't think that all femdoms are in it for money. The authentic dommes get snapped up and are out of circulation. I can't be a bad boy sub because I'm not a sub. Wether you're submissive or dominant depends on the person you're interacting with. Being able to dominate a person is a prerequsite for being a dominant. Like most things in life if you want to be in an position of authority you have to be able you can prove you can do something before you're allowed it. I've been in several relationships and would still be in one if my partner hadn't died. Back in the mid 1990s I was actually stalked by a femdom who would leave messages on my answering machine about what she wanted to do to me. "The "me tough sub, me throw femdom over my shoulder to get a reaction" attitude goes over like a lead balloon." I've never thrown anyone over my shoulder without them daring me to do it. If they don't like it, they shouldn't have negotiated the activity. DUH! And I'm not especially tough, I simply get away with most things because 'dommes' let me get away with murder. "You have to remember that not all femdoms are swarming the lowly "scene" which is filled with hoardes of subpar men who are desperate, poor, unhygeinic, lacking social skills, painfully horny looking for that one needle in a haystack. We don't have the time nor energy." There're will always be dommes swarming. Grifters go where the marks are. Duh! "If you could not clean up your act -- then or now -- to stand out and shine as classy and unique, it's your own fault." I am unique. The subs that drop the "poor me" attitude, the "all femdoms are scam artists," whiners are the ones that do well because they stand out in a huge way." The dommes who drop the 'buy me stuff because I say I'm a domme' attitude do well because they stand out in a huge way. "They wear a smile, they have a "never say die" attitude, they laugh about life and they know they could date succesfully in the vanilla world." They[dommes] that take pride in being able to pay their own way enjoy having the confidence to be able to meet a challenge, are fun to be with because their partners don't constantly have to worry about someone lifting your wallet "They are not isolated and in fantasyland, waiting years for that special femdom to drop out of the sky and pick him out of a crowded room and pursue him like he's the most desirable man on the planet. Trust me, it isn't going to happen -- not with that sullen, sour puss attitude." They [dommes] are not in fantasyland wasting years for the special mark to come along that they can really milk for all he's worth. They can have fun doing bdsm because they actually like dominating their partners and not avoiding doing it so they can string them along and get just a little bit more out of them. "Keep in mind, many femdoms also have a full dating pool of vanilla-but-open-minded men who have nice jobs, know how to court a lady and don't get their panties in the wad at the concept of showing a woman a nice time on his dime." Keep in mind that submissive men have a vast vanilla dating pool who represent a superior cost vs benefit ratio if you ignore the fact they're just not into BDSM. If you aren't into the corporal aspect of the scene you can be in a bdsm relationship without your partner knowing she's in one. "There are actually some subs now that grip their wallet tighter than the ones gripping their cock. Both are seeking an unrealistic fantasy: You won't get something for nothing -- and, you better have something to offer. If it isn't class, conversation, wit, charm and charisma then your options will be limited to those that will accept money in order to tolerate your presence and indulge your fantasies. Women who lack class, conversation, wit, charm and charisma and the ability to actually engage in a vanilla relationship think they can use submissive men as meal tickets. Like the men who think that submissive women are easy fucks if they pretend they're dominant. Akasha [/quote]

Arpig -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (2/1/2006 11:24:05 AM)
If the money/cash/gifts/tribute (a rose by any other name, and all that) is a prerequisite to the relationship, then the one requiring the money is either a hooker (short-term) or a gold-digger (long-term). This applies regardless of the gender of the people involved. This is not about paying for dinner, or gifts given voluntarily. This is not about those involved in a TPE where the domme has total control over all the sub's money. It is about some dommes openly offering their (admittedly sexual) services in exchange for money. Some are honest enough about it to set hourly rates, and specific charges for specific acts, and others dress it up as "tribute", but in the final analysis it is a financial transaction in which the sub purchases the dominant's services for his/her sexual gratification. To me, a submissive's submission is all the tribute I need. And as to who pays for dinner...who the hell cares, if we want dinner and I don't have the cash, then she better pay, its either that or open a can of soup and see what's on tv....pretty simple really.

Real0ne -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (2/1/2006 4:51:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig If the money/cash/gifts/tribute (a rose by any other name, and all that) is a prerequisite to the relationship, then the one requiring the money is either a hooker (short-term) or a gold-digger (long-term). This applies regardless of the gender of the people involved. This is not about paying for dinner, or gifts given voluntarily. This is not about those involved in a TPE where the domme has total control over all the sub's money. It is about some dommes openly offering their (admittedly sexual) services in exchange for money. Some are honest enough about it to set hourly rates, and specific charges for specific acts, and others dress it up as "tribute", but in the final analysis it is a financial transaction in which the sub purchases the dominant's services for his/her sexual gratification. To me, a submissive's submission is all the tribute I need. And as to who pays for dinner...who the hell cares, if we want dinner and I don't have the cash, then she better pay, its either that or open a can of soup and see what's on tv....pretty simple really. BLAM! hit the nail right on the head! well said arpig Mmm now i have a hunger for chicken soup, another dish i havent had in ages! think i will cook one up this weekend.

AAkasha -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (2/2/2006 8:39:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig If the money/cash/gifts/tribute (a rose by any other name, and all that) is a prerequisite to the relationship, then the one requiring the money is either a hooker (short-term) or a gold-digger (long-term). This applies regardless of the gender of the people involved. This is not about paying for dinner, or gifts given voluntarily. This is not about those involved in a TPE where the domme has total control over all the sub's money. It is about some dommes openly offering their (admittedly sexual) services in exchange for money. Some are honest enough about it to set hourly rates, and specific charges for specific acts, and others dress it up as "tribute", but in the final analysis it is a financial transaction in which the sub purchases the dominant's services for his/her sexual gratification. To me, a submissive's submission is all the tribute I need. And as to who pays for dinner...who the hell cares, if we want dinner and I don't have the cash, then she better pay, its either that or open a can of soup and see what's on tv....pretty simple really. BLAM! hit the nail right on the head! well said arpig Mmm now i have a hunger for chicken soup, another dish i havent had in ages! think i will cook one up this weekend. I think submissive men are so out of touch with the reality of "dating" and have so little real experience with courting a woman that they have taken this "money dommes" thing to a hysterical level and use it as an excuse to be cheap and lazy. If you peek your head into the "real world" of dating among vanilla gentlemen you see classy courting (granted, it's only a PORTION of men, but it's MUCH higher than the percentage compared to kink where the sub men do almost zero courting, and forget it if it involves spending a dime -- god forbid, she must be a money domme if she expects the man to pay for dinner beyond just fast food). You don't see vanilla guys paranoid that if they take a woman out to a classy restaurant that he's fallen into the trap of paying for sex. Sure, some guys ARE just doing that, and some women ARE just doing the same, but they both know what they are doing. When a guy is courting a nice girl for a relationship he still treats her with class and dignity and if he's a gentleman, he pays, brings flowers, picks up a CD of music he thinks she'd like, sends a handwritten note at the stage when they both have butterflies when talking on the phone. It's called being romantic. Vanilla men discriminate when they choose who to spend money on, but you can believe they do their best to impress when they are courting a woman they know has many options. No, this does not mean he spends $500 instead of $50; it may mean he is generous in time and spirit, or creativity. When they "fall hard" for a lady they show it by courting her with effort. Do they get screwed over sometimes? Sure, it goes with the territory. But unlike the sad "subbie" world, they don't hole themselves up in their computer room and rant, "I am NEVER paying for a date with a woman again, they all only want money! Any woman who expects gifts, flowers, or me to pay for dinner is obviously a SCAM artist!". They get back into it and they practice more discrimination and they keep at it. Why? Because what they want is important to them -- they want a relationship. Do you subs think femdoms don't get courted by vanilla guys? You see why we get tired of your whining and complaining because guys that are interested in us and don't even know about the "BONUS PACKAGE" (did you know your potential GF is really open minded, erotic, and sensual?) are still courting us traditionally and showing us a nice time without being so sour about it. You will never have success in dating/courting women if you are so bitter and cheap that you assume all femdoms are only after your wallet. What is funny is that "money femdoms" pretty much wear their M.O. on their sleeve right out of the gate by asking for cash. I'll clarify this by adding that for those subs that say "why doesn't the femdom do the courting then? why doesn't SHE pay for the dinners and gifts?" I respond -- absolutely! If SHE is the one doing the courting. In my past relationships, I did the courting in about 75% of them. But you can believe the 25% that were the man courting me, I expected (and deserved) an effort and generosity (in spirit, time and not only money) that caught my attention. Men that just told me they were "available and interested" were ignored. Those that courted me but asked me to pay half? Forget it. Those that took me to a crappy restaurant, didn't prepare themselves, had no clue what they were doing? No second date. Instead of looking at courting as a rip-off scam where "lowly subs" get taken to the cleaners, try to figure out how you can court a woman and use your SKILLS to impress her, and wrench your whiteknuckled fingers off the wallet enough to at least take her out to dinner. I can only imagine how much most of these guys pay for PORN in a month or how many hours wasted masturbating to femdom porn when they could be bettering themselves or interacting with women in real life. Akasha

michaelGA -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (2/2/2006 9:01:03 AM)
i have yet to have any date come right out and say something like "regardless what you spend on the evening, you still need to give me cash up front before we go out" that is the major difference between dating and paying for an escort/pro-Domme/hooker (i don't care for the word 'hooker', but am using it in the context everyone else is)

Arpig -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (2/2/2006 9:16:15 AM)
Akasha, if you reread what i wrote, I specifically stated that i was NOT talking about who pays for dinner, or the buying of gifts that is part of courting...I was refering to those Dommes who require payment. If a man were courting you and was in all other ways an entertaining and attractive person, but had severely limited financial means, and honestly couldn't afford anything more elaborate than a Big mac in the way of a meal....would that matter to you?

AAkasha -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (2/2/2006 9:21:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig Akasha, if you reread what i wrote, I specifically stated that i was NOT talking about who pays for dinner, or the buying of gifts that is part of courting...I was refering to those Dommes who require payment. If a man were courting you and was in all other ways an entertaining and attractive person, but had severely limited financial means, and honestly couldn't afford anything more elaborate than a Big mac in the way of a meal....would that matter to you? If his best solution for a meal was a Big Mac, yeah, he wouldn't get a second date. I expect a man to have enough intelligence when faced with a situation like that to not pick a "Big Mac" because that's the best he could do; I'd expect him to be creative and find a way around spending money. Cooking? Taking the date to a sibling's, or parents for a homecooked meal? However, it's a lot easier and takes a lot less work to drive thru a fast food place and say "I hope you don't mind, I'm short on cash and can only afford mine." Akasha

Arpig -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (2/2/2006 9:42:28 AM)
quote: I'd expect him to be creative and find a way around spending money I like that a lot [:)] To my eye, this makes you demanding (perfectly correct in a Domme), but most definately NOT a hooker.

GoddessDustyGold -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (2/2/2006 10:17:12 AM)
quote: Men that just told me they were "available and interested" were ignored. Oh, and we get this so much. Here I am...here is my body. This is what I want, this is what I am into. This is what I am not into. I have made it clear in the past that when I have an active profile it is because I am making Myself available for courting. It is them up to the boy to determine if I am am Dominant he would like to get to know better. That is going to include spending time with Me, and some of that time will involve opening up your wallet. quote: This is not about those involved in a TPE where the domme has total control over all the sub's money. This from a male Dominant. Thank you, Arpig. At least there is one who seems to know that a TPE also includes finances. But I can pretty much guarantee you that this is what some of this is about. For even the suggestion of this in a TPE sends many boys running for the hills. I have had many boys claiming to be experienced slaves, or craving a slavehood lifestyle with Me, but it is not to include their income other than paying their share of the expenses. As I have stated before, that makes a boy My roomate with benefits, not My slave. To what extent financial control is a part of the relationship is up to each individual couple. Most of the boys are willing to do anything, usually in exchange for proposed playtime, but draw the line at their bank account. I find Myself immediately questioned about "the money", these days, even before I have an opportunity to determine how much flexibility might be warranted in an individual situation. Why even discuss this until it is appropriate?. I get this in the first two emails. And we haven't even met yet. Just another instance of how "any Domina will do, just as long as She plays by my rules and comfort level." Makes Me tired. It's precisely why I am not actively seeking at this time.

Arpig -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (2/2/2006 1:07:06 PM)
TOTAL power exchange...to me total means everything. I'd make a good slave in this regard, since I have no money anyway [:D]....how does that old song go...nothing from nothing leaves nothing. Actually I can see how many men would balk at handing over their bank accounts, it is something that has been drilled into them growing up, that the size of the bank account is the measure of the man, the measure of his success as a man, and that will be something very hard to surrender.

BlkTallFullfig -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (2/2/2006 1:38:45 PM)
quote: TOTAL power exchange...to me total means everything. I'd make a good slave in this regard, since I have no money anyway ....how does that old song go...nothing from nothing leaves nothing. Actually I can see how many men would balk at handing over their bank accounts, it is something that has been drilled into them growing up, that the size of the bank account is the measure of the man, the measure of his success as a man, and that will be something very hard to surrender. How unfortunate that the only man on this thread who seems to fully grasp what means to offer self as a slave is a dominant. [8D] I just find it comical that guys write asserting how they aren't submissives, they're slaves, and that simply means they consider selves kinkiest (willing to include scat play for example) on the higherarchy of kinky folks. [8\|] M

Arpig -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (2/2/2006 2:09:43 PM)
I suspect that this is the reason there are far more pro Dommes than pro Doms. the actual surrender of all control is something that goes against every one of the deeply ingrained societal rules/expectations of men. Having it a business arrangement allows the man to retain the ultimate control, since he is "paying for it" he can expect to get what he wants, rather than to simply surrender and give himself over to his domme and trust her, the same way that female subs/slaves are expected to do. As an aside, there is a new thread regarding a prospective contract between a domme and her sub, and the entire thing is about what money he will pay her, there is nothing about any other form of services or play or anything, simply that he will pay X for this or that privelidge/misdeed. This contract was written by the sub, and that strikes me as telling, he seems to equate $ with servitude, he is measuring his worth as a slave in purely monetary terms, and is probably preparing his monthly budget right now. Is this sort of contract common between dommes and their subs/slaves?

cloudboy -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (2/2/2006 2:11:42 PM)
WOW, that was a pretty good back-and-forth of stereotypes.

GoddessDustyGold -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (2/2/2006 2:14:28 PM)
Off the top I would say "No!" My contract includes the financial end of things, but it is only a very small part of things. However, I just noticed this new thread, so I am running over there to read it right now.

Oumae -> RE: Does tribute equal being a hooker? (2/2/2006 2:16:06 PM)
Totally off topic but niceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee corset BlkTallFullfig. You look fab in the pic. Oumae

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875