RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants

RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (Full Version)

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

Message

rulemylife -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 8:32:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OneMoreWaste quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife My impression of what is being said here is I'm supposed to "act normal" and "be a man" until the domme decides she wants me to act submissive. Yup, that's pretty much it. Although optimally, Normal should also be in the "be" category rather than the "act" category. And I'd probably capitalize Man if I were writing it. But that's the gist of it. Unfortunately, you left out my first sentence which I think provided the context for that statement.

rulemylife -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 8:43:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chiaThePet Well, I've got a Red Radio Flyer Wagon that I can push really really fast. You can carry my Red Ryder BB Gun if you promise not to shoot your eye out. I'll even wear my pink bunny suit if you triple dog dare me. Oh crap, I just broke my Dad's leg lamp, gotta go. chia* (the pet) [sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif]

rulemylife -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 9:13:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ShiftedJewel quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: AAkasha If you have a naturally submissive demeanor... not that I could tell you exactly what that is... then "being yourself" would mean being submissive... sort of. I think what she is trying to say is that although you are naturally submissive and she may be naturally dominant, well, ok, she is a dominant... she just isn't YOUR dominant. Most of us don't like being treated like we're automatically "your" domme, or "your" mistress just because that happens to be one of the ways we describe ourselves. It's really no different then attending a party and suddenly you start acting sick because there is a doctor present. *Gosh, I hope that made a little sense.* And the aggressive thing? Well, chances are if you want something or someone to notice you then you are going to have to show some sort of interest in that thing or person... that doesn't make you dominant, it makes you assertive... there is a difference. I look for assertive people, they interest me because they have a mind, opinions and ideas. I don't look for another dominant... well, I already have one of those... but still. Assertive is good. *And Chi.... I'm really thinking Florida this coming Feb is looking better and better.* *Jewel* It made sense. I wouldn't want someone to treat me as "their" submissive on first meeting either. I disagree in your intrepretation of what she is saying though. Aggressive/assertive in my mind walks a fine line. It brings me back though to the question if a woman is truly dominant why does she still desire the man to be the aggressor? Btw, if you're doing Daytona this year, hit me up on the other side and we can hook up for a drink or two. You too Chi.

AAkasha -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 9:41:13 AM)
Assertive: He asks questions rather than just waiting to answer questions. He initiates conversations rather than just waiting for the woman to do so. He maintains appropriate eye contact and does not look down all the time He may use honorifics that are considered mainstream or subtle, but does not use femdom honorifics, like "Mistress." If interested, he asks for follow up - asks her to see him again - or asks if she'd be open to it. He asks questions about status or what's going on rather than keeping quiet and just guessing until she tells him or being passive aggressive. He takes a different position on conversation items and is comfortable having a different opinion than the woman He talks in an even tone with the woman and is polite but not passive. He gives his opinion rather than saying, "Whatever you want" with regards to where to go, what to eat, how to hang out on first dates. Submissive: He does not speak unless spoken to He keeps his eyes lowered as a token of respect He remains politely quiet unless conversation is initiated with him He does not say anything to disagree He waits for her to make the first move always and never even initiates casual flirtacious contact of any kind, ever. His response to her questions is deferential, "Whatever you want..." or "It's up to you." He says very little and only answers questions, does not ask any of his own. If she does not contact him or follow up, he does not reach out at all; or, he gets her attention by being passive aggressive (ie, calls or emails "I guess you aren't interested in anymore, oh well, I tried, I guess I'm not good enough." instead of "Hey - haven't heard from you, would love to get together again if that works for you.") Dominant/Aggressive He is bossy and loud He talks more abuot himself and does not let her talk at all. He brags. He tells her what he want to do/where he wants to go ...etc...you get the picture. Other femdoms may have better examples of inappropriately dominant/aggressive behavior on first dates, during courting. I don't have much experience with dominant "submissives." Akasha

PeonForHer -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 10:42:34 AM)
As a very brief aside to you, Aakasha, as well some of those you're mainly engaged with here: I'm really quite staggered by some of the fine minds on these forums. This discussion in particular I find absolutely fascinating. Hell, I'm learning a lot. That's it, interruption over, please carry on. [:)]

AAkasha -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 11:25:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer As a very brief aside to you, Aakasha, as well some of those you're mainly engaged with here: I'm really quite staggered by some of the fine minds on these forums. This discussion in particular I find absolutely fascinating. Hell, I'm learning a lot. That's it, interruption over, please carry on. [:)] Thanks. I have had a long, long time to think about these things, and also have really struggled with some of the philosophy of my own desires and what works and does not work for me. I've also been posting on newsgroups for a very long time, and welcome anyone who is interested to use deja.com to search for my posts, as early as 1996, in alt.sex.femdom and soc.subculture.bondage-bdsm - just use my name [email protected], or for the older posts, [email protected]. You'll find that I have been asking many of the same questions and have virtually "matured" (from age 29 to 39 now) through these discussions over the years. It's a lot of reading material - but some good threads back then... For example, from July 1, 1999: I am sure men more women will tell you the same thing -- that easily more than half, if not 3/4 of these men can be elimated from the competition you talk of. A big batch you can get rid of right away because they are already married and just looking for extramarital fantasy. I think there is a serious lack of quality men in the S&M arena (on the net especially), so if you are a quality man, you should feel lucky - because you will stand out like a diamond in a pile of mud. What makes a quality man? Of course women have varying requirements, but I would speculate that these types of things are fairly general, yet sorely lacking in many net-SM types: 1. First, are you single, or not going behind a woman's back to fulfill your fantasies? ie, are you cheating? 2. Are you educated? If you aren't booksmart or college educated, are you at least bright and possess good wit? 3. Do you have any experience with women? If you are 21 and the answer is no, that's one thing. If you are 40 and have never had a real relationship with a woman, you may have some challenges ahead of you -- understanding and relating to women is a skill. 4. Are you attractive? Yes, that is a requirement for most women. No, it doesn't mean you need to be a model, but do you have a sense of style? Do you make sure that you look good? Are you staying healthy? Do you work hard on having a nice appearance, good hygeine? 5. Do you have good social skills? Are you a communicator (women tend to like that,and on the the net, especially, you are doomed if you don't possess the skills)? Can you be engaging? 6. Are you interesting? Do you have hobbies, outside interests besides S&M magazines and computers? 7. How are your social circles outside of the PC? If you are a hermit with a PC, you have a bigger challenge. 8. Do you have a job and a future? You don't have to be rich, but women tend to get turned off by men who aren't at least upwardly mobile (unless all their other skills shine so bright that it is easy to overlook), employable, etc. Do you have ambition? 9. Most importantly, can you distinguish fantasy from reality? Do you know how to respect a woman for her kink, but not objectify her? No matter how bad you want it, can you be patient enough to get to know the lady first, and the (sub/domme) second? Or are you rushing right to the payoff, and it shows? If you take these basic criteria, I challenge that 75% of the kinky people in personals or responding to personals can be eliminated immediately. You have your guys looking to cheat, you have your totally uneducated batch, you have your lazy one-liners, you have your "living in a fantasy" guy, you have your older guy who obviously lives alone in a little apartment and has never even kissed a girl on the lips and he's 42 but just reads a lot of kinky magazines. You have your "Masters" who read about S&M and thought, "Hey, what a way to get free blow jobs without having to even romance a chick! COOL!" and you have your socially challenged meek men who flock to S&M because they fear rejection and having to work in a relationship so much that they hope some dominant Goddess will come sweep them onto their knees and then they never have to make another choice in life again. Trust me. The competition isn't that tough out there. The challenge, though, is to 1) make it through the NOISE that is the ton of useless messages ouf there and to 2) compete with vanilla men, who more often possess these skills that women seek and are more readily available for the picking. I believe ANY kinky man who has those traits above and is reasonably successful with vanilla women but wants a kinky partner would be an extremely hot commodity. Akasha

Chi -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 11:45:19 AM)
Submissive or not, the codes of honor a man lives by do not, alter or change at the whim of a female dominator. The content of a man s character has absolutely nothing at all to do with what the female dominant wants; indeed we submissive males are assertive, aggressive and even violent if and when the honor codes we live by are violated. We’ll climb a mountain because its there, do a halo because others won’t and accept challenges others find un winnable based upon self confidence and self love, or we may just do it to gloat later and that too has nothing at all to do with a female dominant. What has to do with the female dominant is can she measure up. I just read what very well may be the most self-serving manipulative disturbed minds description of Assertive/ Submissive and dominant/Aggressive behavior ever written outside those logs tracking schizophrenic hallucinations and I for one have had more then enough of her nonsense.

PeonForHer -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 11:59:22 AM)
By gum. One thing of which I know I shall never accuse you, Aakasha, is not having put some thought into things. I have some reading material to get through, obviously! Two points spring immediately to mind. The first is that even amongst vanillas, the problems of communication between the two sexes are huge because each sex makes false assumptions about the other. Contradictory desires abound. Yet along comes BDSM and adds a whole new morass of contradictions on top of all that. People in the BDSM world have formidable problems even understanding themselves, never mind the people with whom they want to get together. Secondly, I must say, on a personal note, I've already noticed a tendency for people to let their cynicism take over. One result's been pigeonholing. I keep reading comments that people have made, then responses by others, and thinking "No, that person's not saying that and isn't like that. You're criticising something about him/her that might have been depressingly true of many people you've come across in the past, but isn't true of that person".

ShiftedJewel -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 2:57:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chi Submissive or not, the codes of honor a man lives by do not, alter or change at the whim of a female dominator. The content of a man s character has absolutely nothing at all to do with what the female dominant wants; indeed we submissive males are assertive, aggressive and even violent if and when the honor codes we live by are violated. We’ll climb a mountain because its there, do a halo because others won’t and accept challenges others find un winnable based upon self confidence and self love, or we may just do it to gloat later and that too has nothing at all to do with a female dominant. What has to do with the female dominant is can she measure up. I just read what very well may be the most self-serving manipulative disturbed minds description of Assertive/ Submissive and dominant/Aggressive behavior ever written outside those logs tracking schizophrenic hallucinations and I for one have had more then enough of her nonsense. I'm hoping that includes protecting you domme (gosh, I hate that word) in moments when she is unable to defend/protect herself? quote: It made sense. I wouldn't want someone to treat me as "their" submissive on first meeting either. I disagree in your intrepretation of what she is saying though. Aggressive/assertive in my mind walks a fine line. It brings me back though to the question if a woman is truly dominant why does she still desire the man to be the aggressor? Btw, if you're doing Daytona this year, hit me up on the other side and we can hook up for a drink or two. You too Chi. This is something that I've been really contemplating myself. I agree that aggressive and assertive are two different things and it really didn't dawn on me until another thread smacked me in the face that that's precisely what so many females do. It's the upbringing I guess, but I'm not defending it. After all, I wasn't brought up to be a female dominant and I over came that little bit of societal training. It's just something that I never really thought of before. It's good to know this old dog can still learn though. Admittedly I'm not very good at being the aggressor, never have been. Well, there was those few years when I had that really bad attitude... Anyway, to me, I think assertive is important. I don't like the hem-hawing around, and I can't stand the "Whatever you like" attitude either. There is such a fine line there. I'm going to take from this thread exactly what I believe it was meant to be. A learning tool. And on this day I learned that although I don't want "aggressive" in my life, I do want assertive. Meaning I don't want someone that's going to chase me down, but I do want someone that knows what it is that they want and aren't afraid to own up to it. *Jewel*

LadyPact -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 3:12:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: undergroundsea I agree with the general idea but not with the specifics. Generally, I agree that in most introductions, especially if the relationship sought is a broader relationship, one must be socially attractive. While there is a balance to be achieved about not overdoing submission, I don't think one must completely turn off the submissive mindset to achieve the same. While you raise some good points, I keep in mind that you represent the perspective of a domme who identifies with SM more than D/s, and that your response to submissive behavior represents how you connect with BDSM. What you find a turn-off (submissive behavior and one who willingly submits versus one who submits with some struggle that appeals to sadism) might be attractive to some dommes. For example, there are dommes who appreciate a submissive who submits enthusiastically versus one who must be made to submit or experiences an emotional struggle. I recognize that the points you raise have some merit but the reality I know lies somewhere in between the two end points you describe. I think the world is not so black and white that one must be either entirely vanilla or be bowing at first sight. Accordingly, I don't think one has to wait until a relationship is in place to act submissive. I think courtship and flirting can take a submissive flavor. Sure, D/s is intimate to most people. However, there are different degrees of intimacy and every day people enter into intimate relationships expressing these different degrees of intimacy which vary with time. In my opinion, to say that submission is intimate and one must wait until an intimate relationship has been established assumes that intimacy is also black and white for everyone. I think it is possible to treat a woman as a domme and a woman together and take interest in multiple characteristics simultaneously. Similarly, I am a man and a submissive together. Let's assume the sum image of a submissive is a painting, and blue represents submission. If only the extremes exist, then one would have either a painting that is all a dark shade of blue, or a painting that has zero blue followed by addition of blue after one has liked the painting. In my opinion, one can have a painting that has multiple colors, including different shades of blue. What affects how the painting appears to a given person is the shades of blue, and how much they are used. Cheers, Sea Have to say, I'm agreeing with this. Telling a submissive not to be submissive while being themselves makes no sense to Me, either. It would be like telling Me not to act Dominant, and just be Myself. Sorry, Dominant isn't some kind of persona that I put on and take off when it pleases Me. It's who I am. If someone wants to know who that person is, sorry, but they are dealing with a Dominant. I think the same holds true on the other side of the kneel. If a submissive doesn't show this part of his personality, in essence, he's hiding himself. Don't a lot of us have to do that around the vanillas? Are we really suggesting that we do it amongst ourselves, too? I'm not sure what kind of submissives that you meet in particular, Aakasha, but I can promise you the ones in My life aren't anything like you describe. That includes clip and the male submissives that I also call friends. They aren't meek little creatures who submit to any and all people and situations just because they are submissive. You might see the kind of demeanor that you have on your list of submissive actions at a high protocol event, but do you really think that's how people introduce themselves in other gatherings? Well, I should probably say that's not how they introduce themselves to Me.

PeonForHer -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 4:29:13 PM)
Oh lord, what's a sub to do, then? There are such formidably strong arguments on all sides here. I've heard of Dommes who utterly expect submissive behaviour right from the start and assume that intelligent subs will realise that, too. Yet, I'm also well aware of those who assume sub-behaviour will stay hidden in intelligent subs until a certain stage of intimacy's been reached. My two-pennyworth: the advice to "act naturally", I've come to believe, is nearly useless in most contexts. My friend's sixteen-year-old son asked me how to approach the girl of his dreams recently. I was about to blurt out that line to him when I suddenly realised it would be meaningless. After all, it would be his "natural" inclination to rip her blouse off before even saying "hello" to her. I told him, in the end, the wisest course was to treat her mostly like he'd treat a male friend, until things begin to feel more intimate. From all that I've read of this topic, the answer for this questioning sub, anyway, is "be as intuitive as you can be, and follow the cues". The trouble is, we men aren't known for being too great at those particular skills!

AAkasha -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 4:38:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact Have to say, I'm agreeing with this. Telling a submissive not to be submissive while being themselves makes no sense to Me, either. It would be like telling Me not to act Dominant, and just be Myself. Sorry, Dominant isn't some kind of persona that I put on and take off when it pleases Me. It's who I am. If someone wants to know who that person is, sorry, but they are dealing with a Dominant. I think the same holds true on the other side of the kneel. If a submissive doesn't show this part of his personality, in essence, he's hiding himself. Don't a lot of us have to do that around the vanillas? Are we really suggesting that we do it amongst ourselves, too? I'm not sure what kind of submissives that you meet in particular, Aakasha, but I can promise you the ones in My life aren't anything like you describe. That includes clip and the male submissives that I also call friends. They aren't meek little creatures who submit to any and all people and situations just because they are submissive. You might see the kind of demeanor that you have on your list of submissive actions at a high protocol event, but do you really think that's how people introduce themselves in other gatherings? Well, I should probably say that's not how they introduce themselves to Me. If you go back, this was my original, main point about men being submissive and women being dominant, and where the fantasy vs. reality comes in. I stated: "I think it's the perception that dominant women dominate indiscriminately, or they get their satisfaction and pleasure purely from the act, not really the connection with the man. As a result, a submissive man just merely must make contact with a dominant woman and state his availability, and she'll surely be interested in having her way with him, because not all men are willing to submit. " Just because I am dominant does not mean I am YOUR dominant, the submissive who I may be meeting for coffee, interacting with via email for the first time, or talking to at a club. That means that we should chat and get to know each other as friends, and he should treat me as he would a woman, not a "domina," and not posture submissive, or expect me to immediately take control and run with it. He does not need to hide his "willingness" to submit. However, he doesn't have to SUBMIT to me, either. After all, I have not expressed any desire to dominate him yet; if that happens, the signals will become clear. I am not shy. I don't mind pursuing. However, I don't have any interest in dominating a man ready/willing/eager/submitting the moment we introduce each other. I find that inappropriate and pretentious. The problem comes in the continued relationship development, as chemistry is determined. If he shows no initiative and waits for the femdom to do it, he may find himself alone more than not. She may pursue him eagerly and readily; or, she might be busy, distracted, or in the case of a forum like this one, slammed with approaches from other subs -- persistence, politely, is key. The false perception, again, is that the woman will eagerly/readily/always take initiative out of the gate - and to not do so is a signal of lack of interest. Moreso, the submissive is not interested or willing to make any moves - his preferred role is to just submit. Again, before any protocol has been established. There are some men that do this as a simple misstep and correct themselves readily. I tell them, "Just treat me like you would any other woman, the dominance comes later, maybe." Some of them refuse to do so. They must be in the submissive mode from the start, regardless. It's the same as the guy at a fetish club that kisses women on the boot without asking if it's ok, or even knowing them. His preferred role and mode is fantasy. In my experience, most dominant women prefer to be treated equally until some chemistry is in place. Akasha

AAkasha -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 4:39:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Oh lord, what's a sub to do, then? There are such formidably strong arguments on all sides here. I've heard of Dommes who utterly expect submissive behaviour right from the start and assume that intelligent subs will realise that, too. Yet, I'm also well aware of those who assume sub-behaviour will stay hidden in intelligent subs until a certain stage of intimacy's been reached. My two-pennyworth: the advice to "act naturally", I've come to believe, is nearly useless in most contexts. My friend's sixteen-year-old son asked me how to approach the girl of his dreams recently. I was about to blurt out that line to him when I suddenly realised it would be meaningless. After all, it would be his "natural" inclination to rip her blouse off before even saying "hello" to her. I told him, in the end, the wisest course was to treat her mostly like he'd treat a male friend, until things begin to feel more intimate. From all that I've read of this topic, the answer for this questioning sub, anyway, is "be as intuitive as you can be, and follow the cues". The trouble is, we men aren't known for being too great at those particular skills! The question is this: Do you want to be with a dominant woman who expects high protocol immediately before you know each other? If so, then that is your approach. I think that's a smaller pool of women, and I think it's often mostly pros, but I might be wrong. All the kinky women I know prefer to be the one to decide when the domination happens. Akasha

PeonForHer -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 5:11:28 PM)
When I've known that the woman in question has been a Domme I've not had any problems with the cues so far. Mostly. I think. But I have to say, they've all acted quite differently and obviously had different expectations. Me, I keep coming back to the same point: in BDSM we're pioneering new territory. I don't expect it to be easy for even the smartest and wisest of us.

Steponme73 -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 5:13:27 PM)
This has truly been a very interesting topic. And as an "old dog", I have learned lots from the different perspectives of people on this site. Thank you all for expanding my knowledge and curiousity.

OneMoreWaste -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 6:25:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AAkasha Submissive: He does not speak unless spoken to He keeps his eyes lowered as a token of respect He remains politely quiet unless conversation is initiated with him He does not say anything to disagree He waits for her to make the first move always and never even initiates casual flirtacious contact of any kind, ever. He says very little and only answers questions, does not ask any of his own. Most of these points don't really sound like someone who is presuming to be your submissive without due process- maybe they're just shy? [&:] I still don't think it's right that you have to be assertive to be a good submissive. I bet the girl subbies don't have to put up with that nonsense [:o]

undergroundsea -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 9:01:06 PM)
quote: For example, from July 1, 1999: (list of socially attractive traits) Sure, that's a good list of socially attractive traits. However, these traits are not mutually exclusive to submission. quote: ORIGINAL: AAkasha Assertive: <snip> Submissive: <snip> Dominant/Aggressive Perhaps semantics are important after all. The description of assertive behavior is fair enough. I disagree with the definition of dominant, especially if you make this statement with BDSM as a context as you do for your definitions of assertive and submissive. That behavior seems to describe one subset of those who have a dominant personality--to me it sounds more like jerk behavior. I disagree most with how you define submissive. I think that set of traits would be more aptly described as passive. If you equate submissive with passive, that might be the root for some of the disagreements in which you find yourself. Cheers, Sea

undergroundsea -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 9:22:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Oh lord, what's a sub to do, then? <snip> the advice to "act naturally", I've come to believe, is nearly useless in most contexts. I think what a sub is to do will vary from sub to sub, and with which domme the sub is interacting. I think a sub should become aware of comfort zones and with which type of responses is he comfortable. For example, I am fine with relaxed protocol or formal protocol and find myself in each depending on the situation and with whom I am interacting. I think the act naturally advice makes sense when act naturally means one does not feign traits or behavior thought to be attractive for the sake of impressing another, and one does not let anxiety overwhelm self. Otherwise, nature of a person is usually not one dimensional where to act naturally means one type of behavior only. More on that in my response to Lady Pact. The act naturally advice is easier said than done; for this advice to work the recipient of the advice has to have the confidence about being able to impress the other person without having to resort to pretense. Cheers, Sea

undergroundsea -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/6/2008 9:46:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact It would be like telling Me not to act Dominant, and just be Myself. I, in turn, understand how you feel. I think a person usually has multiple facets to their personality, and how a person behaves in different environments is part of the sum of what makes the person. My behavior may differ when I am at a fetish party, versus Thanksgiving dinner, versus a business function. There are some behaviors that carry across the events, and there are some that are specific to the events. Each behavior is a part of who I am. At BDSM events, if I am expressing my submissive side, I am expressing one part of me which I might not express in other environments. At a formal BDSM or vanilla event, I might not express parts of me that I express at other events. Therefore, I think to be oneself does not have a singular meaning and is influenced by environment. In BDSM company is where one can be the part of self that expresses one's choice for a BDSM role. I think to say that one should not be submissive or dominant is not as much to say that one should be who they are but more along of the lines of saying not to be oneself for sake of social sensibility. While I agree that considerations about social sensibility should influence one's behavior (which I think occurs with most people at some level at BDSM and vanilla events, and I consider the judgment one exercises here to be part of who that person is), I disagree with the premise that one should completely abandon whatever role they prefer. So. I guess what I am saying is that I agree with you for agreeing with me ;-) Cheers, Sea

Chi -> RE: The most subtle misconception about female dominants (10/7/2008 4:05:09 AM)
Jewel: Throughout all of recorded history, men have championed a woman’s cause, not because she was a female dominant figure or even that they shared belief and value systems, but more by virtue of womanhood did they did they pick up arms and stand opposed. The male submissive has not... been released from those honor codes and the mandates of a self-appointing title cannot rob him of them. "You ask, does that include protecting your domme?" First I reject the word domme, and did during its inception and conception. However, the answer to your question would be yes.

Page: << < prev 4 5 6 [7] 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875