RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (Full Version)

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



Message

AAkasha -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/12/2009 2:46:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

 
I think power exchange comes after mutual affection on some level, or at least *lust*, and is recognized by both parties.
 
That I agree with.  Mutual affection and lust come a long way first.

I strongly believe that once a man is relating to a woman as a dominant partner or potential, he should expect that on some levels his freedom, his rights, his desires, his expectations WILL be comproised for hers on HER terms (not his fantasy terms). 

I believe that his likes and dislikes may get compromised, his expectations likewise, desires . . .  His rights won't be compromised, nor will his freedoms.  Those will be jointly decided.  That's how it'll be for me - or it'll be nothing.  Or vanilla again.

By it's very definition, power exchange indicates the man is submitting to the woman's dominance, not just in the ways he feels are right and fair.
 
No, it doesn't.  Power exchange involves the gifting of submissive's submission in the ways he feels to be right and fair.

You asked earlier: who is in power in the relationship - the man or the woman?  You may as well ask, "who is in power in the USA - the government or the people?"  The answer is: both.  The people of the USA designed a constitution with limitations on the government's power over the people.  Dictatorships tend to be miserable - and prone to revolutions.  Liberal democracies tend to be more realistic about their apportioning of power. 

Or, at least, it does in my view.

Can I ask how many longterm vanilla/BDSM relationships you have had (more than 2 years) with this dynamic?

None.  Yet I wouldn't want a relationship in which these things weren't recognised.  That would be for her good, as well as mine.  Can I ask you - have you had a relationship that's gone wrong because the dynamic has suddenly changed?  If so, I'd suggest it was because certain of these things weren't recognised, and owned, by both parties. 




Most of my bdsm relationships have been longterm, and the romantic ones have been very longterm.  The ones that didn't last long were ones where the submissive was sub on his own terms, and wanted me to dominate him only on his terms and in the ways he wanted, or did not give me enough space and was too needy. I can usually identify that early on though, before too much has transpired. 

The reason I ask is that I think you are looking for too much control for a longterm relationship with an organically dominant woman. A vanilla woman who doesn't mind enjoying dominating you now and then - sure.    I am just talking about the initial part of the relationship stages, I don't know what happens for you after you get settled in the power exchange dynamic, but I would not be inclined to stick around with a sub who insisted I show him I am worth of his 'gift' before he will start submitting on my terms. He can't just do it half way. He can't only submit to the good stuff first, and then agree that 'later' he will give me more unconditional stuff.  He has to trust that I am not a lunatic and will respect his desires but he's willing to be the one to give in the initial stages of courting. Otherwise, I just feel like a performing pony.  Too many sub guys just stick around until it's not hot and sexy - why would I want to invest time and energy with a guy to prove I am worth it so he can use up my energy and move on when the tasks aren't fun any more?

Someone has to take the emotional risk up front.  If a sub isn't willing to do it to show me he's serious about his submission, I wiill not trust his motives.
Way too many sub guys are just bottoms looking for a few thrills and they use the fairness/equality/"I don't want to be mistreated" card as an excuse to package the relationship dynamic in a way they find acceptable.

Akasha



4u2spoil -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/12/2009 4:53:18 PM)

I was going to throw in something about the alfalfa female being the one to discipline Spanky, but thought it might make things a little pervy

quote:

ORIGINAL: subtex

quote:

ORIGINAL: 4u2spoil

A derivative of the alfalfa female, who is often marked by a cowlick.
[;)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

What is an "alfa" female? I have never heard that one before.



You'd think if you saw and "Our Gang" reference in here it would have been about Spanky. [:)]

Bill





LadyHibiscus -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/12/2009 5:01:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Lady Hib, Mistress Kuma has spoken.  You are not a True Domme.


Aw, shucks!  Been doing it wrong all these years! [8D]



MistressDolly -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/12/2009 5:02:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
Mistress Dolly, you're a pro-Domme.  It's very difficult to see how you're entirely able to avoid being '"designed" by the whims, morals or fantasies of submissive males". 


And yet I'm not. That you have a hard time understanding or seeing this is somewhat telling in of itself. Small nit: I'm not a pro. I have a paysite.


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

We are here to be served, not to dominate you on your terms, no matter how pragmatic or "fair" those terms may seem to you!

I don't think that equates to the real world. 


I don't know what to tell you then. I've been living in the real world for some time now, as have my boys. You assume too much and imagine too little, I think.



PeonForHer -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/12/2009 5:36:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MISTRESSKUMA

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

A submissive should be willing to compromise his own needs, wants and expectations for the woman he is pursuing, adoring, or fucking in a power exchange relationship.  True.  Akasha's right there.

There must be some willingness by the sub to accept the fact that power exchange means the power will flow more in favor of the woman. It's not 'equal rights' dressed up as power exchange, as some subs want to believe.  
 
But that's wrong.  BDSM is precisely about power exchange, not giving up of rights.  That's why it's called mutual consent.

Ah go on, Mistress K.  Call me "peeboy" again!  [;)]


It is about power exchange, I'm not denying that. Giving up power is giving up your rights because you want to.

No, it isn't, Mistress Klaxxon.  You cannot give up your rights.  You can only give up your power.  If a right still exists as something I can draw upon if I want to, then I still have it as a right.

No one wants to force a subby to submit or take away his consent. Is that what you're saying? That we think we can take it?
 
Of course no-one can force a sub to take away his consent. I thought I'd made that clear.

 . . . . No no. We don't. They offer it to us. Get up off the floor, peeboy. [8D][8D][8D][8D] [;)]
 
The problem is I'm not on the floor enough for you, I think, Mistress Kermit.   I'm not the one who's so in need of validating his kink that he'll draw on some quack pseudo-science about males' genetic inferiority to females.

Does it hurt you to know some men do? It sounds like you don't want women to have any credit, like you want to make dominant women out as thinking everyone wants to submit to them. We don't care about anyone but the men who we like and want. It is ok by us that men don't like service and worship. But dominant women do like those types of submissives who want to compromise thier needs and wants and expectations. We like to be served. And men like to serve us. [;)][;)][;)]

What is this "we"?  You're the only one I can see talking about the natural inferiority of men to women.  You're the only dominant whose profile I've ever seen who gibbers about genetics.  You're not a good advert for femdom, MistressKumquat.  

That is what separates subs from bottoms. Bottoms (you, peeboy[;)] ) want to be dominated. Other men who are subbies, like to serve and sacrifice. Different stuff.
 
He wants to give up power, his rights, his authority to her and HE CONSENTS to it. Bottoms don't consent to an exchange of power or giving up of rights except when they are being dominated. Sub men want that power exchange and want to serve her needs over his.

Really? 

Your profile starts "Hello slave . . . and then moves on to your genetic theory.  And you say you get balanced men who are honest-to-goodness, self-aware, self-actualised subs - and not bottoms?  I doubt it.  The thing is, I've looked at your profile a few times now, MistressKlingon, but I've never seen you mention on it actually having a sub.  You're still looking.  Frankly, I don't think you really know any difference between a sub and bottom. 

And even if you did, why would I care about your labelling of me? 



PeonForHer -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/12/2009 5:55:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MistressDolly


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
Mistress Dolly, you're a pro-Domme.  It's very difficult to see how you're entirely able to avoid being '"designed" by the whims, morals or fantasies of submissive males". 


And yet I'm not. That you have a hard time understanding or seeing this is somewhat telling in of itself. Small nit: I'm not a pro. I have a paysite.


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

We are here to be served, not to dominate you on your terms, no matter how pragmatic or "fair" those terms may seem to you!

I don't think that equates to the real world. 


I don't know what to tell you then. I've been living in the real world for some time now, as have my boys. You assume too much and imagine too little, I think.


I'm sorry to have got you wrong, then, Mistress Dolly.  I did assume that since you had a paysite, you were a proDomme.  

You talk about your boys - plural.  Are these all permanent, full-time partners? 

You see, this is what it boils down to for me.  I want a long-term, full-time, one-to-partnership - it'll remain my ideal and I will give up D/s if need be to get it. 

I've been on this site for some six months, I think.  I've seen so few long-term partnerships mentioned that are actually working.  Of those tiny few, a good many involve a woman, who's very established in her career and life in general, with a man who's much younger and just starting out.  The relationships that work, with D/s in that very black/white character that have been described to me on this thread , aren't one-to-one, or aren't full time. 

So I figure that there's something badly wrong with the dynamics of D/s relationships, in general and as I've seen them represented here.  I don't think they apply well to one-to-one and long term relationships.  That's why I'm working it out for myself. 



PeonForHer -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/12/2009 6:22:50 PM)

The reason I ask is that I think you are looking for too much control for a longterm relationship with an organically dominant woman.
 
I'd just say: for me, it's a contradiction that I don't think is resolvable.  For me "there's no freedom without laws" .  Yet with those laws, there's quite a lot of freedom, and fun, and day-to-day ordinary, good, times.  Or so a couple of close dominant friends have given me the impression to believe. 

I've read with fascination about 'organic dominants' - dominants who say, roughly, that all parts of their psyches are aligned as dominant - but I'm not a submissive equivalent of that.  Only one side of me is submissive.  It's not aligned with the energy I put into my work, my play . . . it's absent every time I write an article or push against a heavy weight in the gym.

The 'relationship formula' that I'm going to work out for myself, if it's going to do its job properly, is going to have to be a tad more complicated than the standard bottom/sub, all-or-no-submission sorts of categorisations will allow. 



ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/12/2009 6:39:38 PM)

Jesus christ, has this turned into a weird thread. Yet I can't stop coming back a couple of times a day to see how much more weird it's gotten since the last time i peeked in...



ModeratorEleven -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/12/2009 6:43:50 PM)

Weird doesn't even begin to cover it.  Ok folks. back to acting like adults please.

XI



Andalusite -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/13/2009 9:05:22 AM)

I had a 5-year-long, monogamous relationship with a submissive. We didn't focus a lot on "service submission," but he did most of the housework and cooking once we moved in together, which didn't happen for quite some time. I haven't usually found it practical on a regular basis when I don't live with someone - usually, we both want our time together to be spent doing other things. He gave me financial control to some extent, not tribute, but had me as a second person on his checking account, asked my opinion before making major purchases, etc. He wanted my opinion on which major to pursue for his degree. I had genuine control of him in many respects.

I've dated several guys who were brand new to BDSM, and none of them were throwing up the "I need you to do a, b, and c in this way. You must feel that way about them. I have lots of limits!" thing at me. I knew they were just starting to explore, so of course I took things slowly, was patient with them, and didn't push for things they were comfortable with. I've seen the above attitude quite a bit here, but very rarely from people I have met in person, even ones who identify as bottom but not submissive. Heck, even the Doms don't expect that degree of control over my emotions! They want me to feel something positive, or to both like and dislike something at the same time, but they don't demand I get turned on by something that just doesn't make me react that way!

A lot of people conflate bottoming with submission, or don't differentiate between topping and domination. I have the impression that most of the people who bill themselves as submissive here actually want to bottom, or don't even want to be with a real person at all, they're only interested in a completely unrealistic blow-up-Domme fantasy caricature who will perform precisely as they wish. Since some (though not all) pro-Dommes actually *will* go along with that, they get unrealistic expectations when it comes to finding a lifestyle partner.



PeonForHer -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/13/2009 9:25:26 AM)

Sheesh.  All I know is that "bottoming" is irrelevant to me.  If she's not enjoying it, it's a sham.  Yep, slow and patient - I think I'd need that.



Andalusite -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/13/2009 9:31:10 AM)

Huh? I can enjoy someone bottoming to me very much, and I don't consider it a sham, as long as they are straightforward about where they are at emotionally/headspace/etc. I could be perfectly happy topping someone without any D/s involvement. I just don't want to claim that they are submitting when they are the ones demanding that I do specific things or feel in specific ways. Also, just because I enjoy something doesn't necessarily imply it turns me on.

For example, I've helped a couple of gay friends with cross-dressing frequently, and have done a little bit of mild play with it with a couple of my previous boyfriends (while we were still dating). It's fun! I like picking out clothes for them, either loaning them, or going shopping together, just as I do with my female friends. It doesn't turn me on, and I don't feel at all inclined to call them "pantyboys" or otherwise humiliate them. That would be fake/boring/annoying. A LOT of men here have said they don't want to crossdress with someone who just likes it in that respect, that they need her arousal, or the humiliation. I can't give them that kind of control over my emotions, my headspace.



PeonForHer -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/13/2009 9:34:28 AM)

I just don't want to claim that they are submitting when they are the ones demanding that I do specific things or feel in specific ways - it's that bit.  I can't enjoy it unless she's enjoying it and it comes from her.  That's what I mean.



Andalusite -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/13/2009 9:38:23 AM)

Umm, if it's from her, if it's her idea, then I don't see how that relates to what I am talking about. I am referring to so-called submissives demanding specific types of play and subsequent mindset and emotions from a Domme. I hadn't meant you in particular, and you don't seem to be as extreme about it as some of the other guys here, like Tavane, but I have had that impression from some of your posts. You couldn't be happy to do what she asks, she has to make it an order, that kind of thing.



PeonForHer -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/13/2009 9:48:06 AM)

Umm, if it's from her, if it's her idea, then I don't see how that relates to what I am talking about. I am referring to so-called submissives demanding specific types of play and subsequent mindset and emotions from a Domme.

It's that that I call topping/bottoming.  I don't require ordering, no.  I do require limits and boundaries, probably quite strict ones, at first.   Sorry - I think I may have got the wrong end of the stick. 



AAkasha -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/13/2009 9:50:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andalusite

Umm, if it's from her, if it's her idea, then I don't see how that relates to what I am talking about. I am referring to so-called submissives demanding specific types of play and subsequent mindset and emotions from a Domme. I hadn't meant you in particular, and you don't seem to be as extreme about it as some of the other guys here, like Tavane, but I have had that impression from some of your posts. You couldn't be happy to do what she asks, she has to make it an order, that kind of thing.


It goes to your point of where and how submissive men get their perceptions of female dominance.  How often do you see subs starting threads here, even, that really, really dig into the psychology and motivation on an EMOTIONAL and mental level of what and why a woman enjoys dominance? Certainly there are endless threads about whether femdoms cum while using a strapon, what is their favorite method to humiliate a man, and the email version of "What would you do to me if you were my slave?"

Subs want an ideal of a femdom that does what he wants her to do, in the manner he desires, in his comfort zone. If it requires risk, unpleasantries (early on) or things that - god forbid - might make him feel he has the potential to be exploited - then he bolts or passes with the excuse that some femdoms are scammers, therefore, he should not have to go down any path until he is good and ready.  And he takes this so far to the extreme that it's just another form of labeling and packaging a femdom in a way that fits his fantasy, but it's more "PC" because he's not saying "I will only be with a femdom that spanks me with a hairbrush nightly when I am a bad boy."

If subs took a moment to think about the fact that with dominance - the kind that is real, not the kind in porn - comes some character traits that he may have to compromise for, suddenly it's not so sexy. Just because most femdoms like, respect and are attracted to men who do not turn into an instant groveling worm (a la porn), does not mean it's ok for a guy to hold his "gift" so tight to the vest that he won't give in to those acts, situations and dynamics unless he feels she is everything he wants or has proven herself to him as worthy of his gift. 

Submissive men (the organic kind) enjoy that dynamic as it unfolds and enjoy the selfless feeling of it, and are pretty much game so long as the demands and expectations are not totally unsafe or outrageous.  Going back to the main point of this thread, many submissive - and vanilla guys, for that matter - accept and acknowledge that in order to pursue a woman he is interested in, he may have to take some small risks - emotionally, financially, whatever.  At least, these are the men that generally get a second look.   By risk I don't mean huge things - I am talking about risk relative to their own stability, and more tokens than huge gestures.

Akasha



Andalusite -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/13/2009 9:55:55 AM)

Peon, I'm confused by your post. I don't see anything wrong with just topping someone who bottoms, it can be really fun, and I've had a couple of longish-term (~ 1 year) relationships in which that's what we did, no D/s involved. I don't have a problem with people having limits, though most of the people *I* have been with haven't focused on that. I also don't have a problem with my partner making a request to try a specific thing, though most scenes are driven by my creativity/etc. I very much want my partner to enjoy it, at least on some level. A lot of people here seem to use "bottom" or "masochist" as an insult. If that's not what they want, fine, but submissives aren't at all superior to bottoms, IMHO. For that matter, someone can be a bottom in one relationship, and a submissive with someone else - it depends on the chemistry with the individual. If someone's main focus is on the "thou shalt nots" and "thou shalts," I'm unlikely to want to pursue a relationship with them, just because it comes across as prickly and defensive. If they have the exact same desires, boundaries, and limits, but express them in a respectful way that doesn't constitute the bulk of our conversation, and don't come across as demanding, I won't have any problem with them at all. It's a matter of approach and attitude.



Andalusite -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/13/2009 10:19:55 AM)

Akasha, exactly - if I feel I have to practically pry his submission out of him with a crowbar, I'm probably not going to feel dominant when I am around him! Most guys don't push my D/s buttons (on either side) at all. I'm egalitarian/neutral with them in our general relationship, with a bit of leaning toward dominance/being in charge. Even if he does what I tell him to, I don't feel it's dominance on my part and submission on his unless we react to each other with that sense of him surrendering his will to me, becoming an extension of my mind and body. I don't need that, it isn't a requirement, but it's *LOVELY* when it happens, and while there is nothing wrong with bottoming, or having a kink for someone pretending to be in control while they do everything you want, it feels like an outright lie to call it submission.

I've dated a couple of men who were new to BDSM, and we switched a bit in the first few play sessions. They quickly decided they really enjoyed/were aroused by topping me, but they were perfectly willing to continue bottoming *for me*, because I was aroused by or otherwise enjoyed it. Since they strongly preferred topping, we pretty much went in that direction, but if I wanted a stunt bottom to practice a new technique in a class or on our own, I really loved that they were willing to do that for me. I still didn't consider that to be submission per se, since they didn't enjoy my control over them, more that they wanted me to be happy, and enjoyed making me feel good. They figured they were tough enough to handle it, and trusted me not to ask/demand anything of them that would harm them. [;)]

A lot of "submissives" here are only focused on the Domme's arousal, but there are lots of different but positive emotions I can feel, and I want to explore them together if I am with someone! Feeling predatory, feeling playful or silly, feeling secure, feeling very feminine/female (I don't know how to explain that one better), just being, in the moment, and so forth. I'm just not that one-dimensional!



OttersSwim -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/13/2009 11:19:31 AM)

So having read most of what has gone on in these last three or four pages, I see that PforH is taking it in the shorts for his approach to submission. 

I wanted to add a little here from my own perspective, and that of my Lady whom I have discussed this with - she says "Hi" to all of you from her work BTW...  [;)]

So as someone who is still very new to all this D/s stuff, I understand a bit of where PforH is coming from in his approach to submitting to a Dominant Lady.  I also understand a bit of where most of those of you Ladies are coming from as I am now in a relationship where nearly all my inhibitions have been removed and I feel very comfortable with my Lady being in the drivers seat.

As a male, when you are new to this, you have a desire...you also have a socialized imperative to be in control.  So while you have this need inside you, there is also a very real part of you saying "Aw Hell No..." because it means removing control - not an easy thing to do - especially when you are new and don't have the experience of an amazing Lady "inspiring" that submissive place in you and giving you a safe place in which to let go.

So, I think this is worthy of examination and consideration by you Ladies.  Just because a male is new and has not yet seen that release of control is possible, does not make him bad or even unworthy of serious consideration.  It means that he may need a little inspiration from the right Lady to show him that it is okay to let those walls down, surrender control, and realize that deep submission is possible. 

But you cannot expect us to fly before we have even walked.  It is a nuance...and perhaps one that some will say that they have no time for...but I think that this will be the case with a great many males.  They need inspiration for their first flight...

Not trying to put words into anyone's mouth, nor make assumptions about anyone...just an observation and kinship of feeling I felt with PforH when my Lady and I first started exploring our dynamic.  [:)]



AAkasha -> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"? (2/13/2009 11:28:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: OttersSwim

So having read most of what has gone on in these last three or four pages, I see that PforH is taking it in the shorts for his approach to submission. 

I wanted to add a little here from my own perspective, and that of my Lady whom I have discussed this with - she says "Hi" to all of you from her work BTW...  [;)]

So as someone who is still very new to all this D/s stuff, I understand a bit of where PforH is coming from in his approach to submitting to a Dominant Lady.  I also understand a bit of where most of those of you Ladies are coming from as I am now in a relationship where nearly all my inhibitions have been removed and I feel very comfortable with my Lady being in the drivers seat.

As a male, when you are new to this, you have a desire...you also have a socialized imperative to be in control.  So while you have this need inside you, there is also a very real part of you saying "Aw Hell No..." because it means removing control - not an easy thing to do - especially when you are new and don't have the experience of an amazing Lady "inspiring" that submissive place in you and giving you a safe place in which to let go.

So, I think this is worthy of examination and consideration by you Ladies.  Just because a male is new and has not yet seen that release of control is possible, does not make him bad or even unworthy of serious consideration.  It means that he may need a little inspiration from the right Lady to show him that it is okay to let those walls down, surrender control, and realize that deep submission is possible. 

But you cannot expect us to fly before we have even walked.  It is a nuance...and perhaps one that some will say that they have no time for...but I think that this will be the case with a great many males.  They need inspiration for their first flight...

Not trying to put words into anyone's mouth, nor make assumptions about anyone...just an observation and kinship of feeling I felt with PforH when my Lady and I first started exploring our dynamic.  [:)]



There is a word for men who want to keep that kind of control -- vanilla!
Seriously guys.  You can't expect that a woman who is *really dominant* deep down is going to tolerate a guy who just wants to submit when it makes him happy.  Part of the drive of many organically dominant women is that selfless kind of submission that is exactly what these subs seem to be resisting. I swear, I have had less resistance from VANILLA guys when I seduced them or courted them.  If you want a woman to take control, you can't have her just control you in the ways you want.  Find a vanilla girlfriend and give her a list of things that are ok, if that's what you want. 

Akasha



Page: <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875