RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE".....

RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (Full Version)

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

Message

ShaktiSama -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 10:10:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Andalusite Oh, I have no problem with Texasmaam's relationship, or her bragging on manthing, though I can understand some of the male submissives feeling a bit insulted by the "limp dick" part. I was mostly responding to Shakti saying that men who don't want to give money to women "hate and fear" them, and saying that criticising women for asking for instant tribute is the same mindset as killing prostitutes. Actually, I have never said that men who don't want to give money to women automatically hate and fear them--although judging from one or two of the posts to this very thread, some of them DEFINITELY do hate and fear women, to the point of violence. Or did you miss that charming post about lopping a woman's breast off to make her a "real Amazon"? If you would actually read my posts, instead of just paraphrasing them SO very badly, you would see that I make a very sharp distinction between choosing what to do with your personal finances in PRIVATE, and bashing women for their economic needs, wants and expectations in PUBLIC. Deciding not to open your wallet to a domme, regardless of whether it is on the first meeting or after 20 years of marriage, is your personal decision. Getting shrill in a public community space about what needs and wants women in general and dominant women in particular should be ALLOWED to have or to express, is something else entirely. See, this thread--and all the other ENDLESS threads like it--is taking place in public. And it is a very different thing to make personal decisions about what you want and don't want in your personal life, and to inform any women who happen to ask you for money about your limits, versus lecturing ALL women, IN public, about what they SHOULD want, need, and ask for from ALL men. This goes beyond topping from the bottom and straight into being oppressive, as far as I'm concerned. The line about hate and fear was not mine, although some of the posts I've seen from so-called "submissive" men on these forums, including a couple of this very thread, were absolutely dripping with both. And I'm sorry, but to me, the constant recurrence of Money Threads on these boards really is just part of a much wider-spread phenomenon which manifests itself in various ways. No one is being killed or physically harmed in this thread because we are all safely separated from one another by our keyboards. But the fact remains that some men express their frustration and resentment toward women verbally, while some men do it physically. Both types of aggression are motivated by a sense of wounded entitlement, outrage and desire to put women "in their place" and take back a perceived loss of power or face. I'm not going to get into it any further with you, because further on in your post I saw this line: quote: OneWaste, I identify as a switch in general, but am currently a slave. And then I checked your profile. No offense intended, but a woman who lists Christianity as one of her "Loves" in her profile, lists "Female Supremacy" as one her Dislikes, and lives in abject servitude to a man? Is really not someone I want to discuss feminist issues with. I have no common point of reference with a person who not only lives as a slave herself, but apparently believes that all women should live as slaves to men. I wish you all the best, but this is one wall that I will never willingly beat my head against.

undergroundsea -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 10:42:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: undergroundsea If I were to read a post by someone entering an M/s dynamic and seeking advice about what to do about a demand to transfer all assets to his or her master, I would encourage this person to consider what would happen if the relationship does not last. Would you support some form of agreement that says that the dominant has control over all finances but if the relationship ends (at which time the dominant or submissive dynamic has disolved and now it is just two people who are parting ways in whichever degree of amity or hostility), the submissive has final say on how to determine all financial matters? If not, why not? Would you support some form of agreement that says that the dominant has control over all finances but if the relationship ends (at which time the dominant or submissive dynamic has disolved and now it is just two people who are parting ways in whichever degree of amity or hostility), the submissive has final say on how to determine all financial matters? If not, why not? If the person has considered this point and wishes to proceed with such an arrangement for sake of trust or for sake of the type of dynamic sought, fair enough. The point I wish to convey is that I would consider it reasonable for a slave to worry about or not agree to this aspect of a relationship unless there can be some surety about the well being of this person if the relationship ends, or that the person who has taken such control over the slave's life will act fairly. Cheers, Sea

NoreenSwan -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 11:06:46 AM)
Yeah I just read it and thought wow. I'm like, O.k., uh, her comment makes sense. Andalusite's a slave. Egads, it's no wonder she made that passive aggressive remark against dommes, that's here: "If anything, giving her money on a regular basis is likely to be viewed as "supporting her," and put her in a submissive power position. " Oh gawd, first of all Andalusite do you ever think it's possible that the mistress makes her own money and is able to support her own self irregardless of what financial control she takes from her subby? Could it even be possible his finances augment hers not replace hers?? Heaven forbid, huh? Second of all what a sneaky little way to try to pigeon hole and disrspect female doms. Boy oh boy. OneMoreWaste/Arillis said it best or was it Peeon/Starbucks one of those subbies said it best and that it's right up the alley for whoever it meets the needs. All the best.

ShaktiSama -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 11:15:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: undergroundsea The child support laws apply to men and women. What the government is addressing via these laws is not male behavior but human behavior. You have a wonderfully rosy view of the world, Sea, and the relationships that exist between genders. Too bad it has so little basis in statistical fact, and no relationship to the lived reality that affects the lives of millions of people. The replies you give to many of the simple factual statements in my posts is that you "don't see" these realities in the world around you. But the fact is, you probably don't see them because you don't choose to see them. These statistics and studies that I am referencing are easily available. The truth of what I'm saying can be verified in 30 seconds by use of the same tool that you are using to make your blanket denials. If you're so sure that economic and social inequality between the sexes is over, why don't you actually VERIFY it by checking your facts? Answer: because the lie you're promoting is comfortable for you, and the truth behind these endless threads about money is not. Even this latest viewpoint on the laws effecting the economics of single parenthood is BS. Statistically speaking, for the last 30 years, the total number of children living with single mothers has swung back and forth a few points around 20% of the general population. Meanwhile, the number of children living with a single father has never risen even to 5% of the total, and that figure would be even lower if you cut out all the single fathers who had a cohabiting partner in a new marriage--single fathers are almost TWICE as likely to have a cohabiting partner as single mothers, and also far less likely to be living at or below the poverty line. The practical reality of the laws to force support of children by a non-custodial parent is that they are laws which overwhelmingly exist to make men open their wallets to women. And guess how well they work? Apparently even less well than demands for tribute: the majority of men are statistically more likely to make a payment on their new cars than a payment to support their children, and the majority of single mothers are living in serious economic distress. Given a choice, the majority of men in our society obviously prefer to use their money to empower themselves, rather than empower a woman--even if the woman needs that power to support a child that he fathered. Result: more economic pressure on women. The sociologist in me would love to know how many of these "Tribute Dommes" that everyone is so angry about--the ones who demand Tribute even before first meetings or getting together to schedule pro sessions--are single mothers. Among sex workers, in particular prostitutes, the ratio is 50-70% of the total.

SmartStrongSub -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 11:49:57 AM)
"If anything, giving her money on a regular basis is likely to be viewed as "supporting her," and put her in a submissive power position." Such thinking is certainly counter to genuine Female dominion. An Owner can rely on its property to produce income and require a slave to regularly contribute. The flow of power is to the Owner not vice versa.

LadyNTrainer -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 12:50:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: undergroundsea When women rant against the inappropriate behavior of such men, there is no defense of such men. When men rant against the inappropriate behavior of such women, this behavior is justified and instead the men are criticized for having the objection they have, with which I have difficulty because it feels like a double standard. So in your opinion, it is always "inappropriate" for women to work in the adult industry. Gotcha. Pros are pros, whether you call them "tribute doms" or "financial doms" or what have you. Some professionals operate ethically and take care to give good value in time, attention and skills for the money they receive. Some pros operate quite unethically, eg, your "stealth pros". The same can be said for all professions. The existence of unethical professionals does not imply anything absolute about the field itself, as the medical profession will be quick to let you know in light of current media events. I ask again: why is it automatically "inappropriate" for women to be professional sex workers or seek income from an adult business? I'm not talking about the people who do it badly or unethically, I'm talking about the whole ball of wax. Are you saying that it's impossible to be female and a pro and be appropriate and ethical? If a professional of any sort only accepts consenting adult clients and fairly delivers what they want for the money, how is this "inappropriate"? quote: For sake of clarity, I define tribute as a material requirements that are critically necessary to begin or sustain an interpersonal relationship. I object to the idea when it is done without regard to how the other feels about it, conveys an unerotic disregard for submissive men in general, or when it is directed at submissive men at large (all submissive men should pay tribute). I do not object to it when it is done within a relationship where two people seek to do it and do not impose their view on others. It's not even possible to engage in this kind of transaction if there isn't consent on both sides. Unless you are claiming that some pro dommes run around putting guns to people's heads to take their money for beatings, your first objection is irrelevant. If you don't feel good about a product or service somebody is offering, don't buy any. If the fact that they're selling such a product at all makes you feel bad, even if you are under no obligation to have anything to do with them, ask yourself why. Different people have different notions of what is erotic. I'm a pro, and I admit that I find the "financial domination" mindset pretty off-putting because I really dislike thinking of my clients as "money pigs" or degrading them. However, that is quite honestly a big fetish for some people who want to be called those names and treated that way. It's the service they request and pay for. I'm not really into providing it myself, but I'm not going to knock others who are. You and I are in the same boat in terms of thinking that degradation and selfish use of a man for his wallet is unerotic, but that doesn't give either of us the right to look down at other people who spring an instant boner at this scenario. It's not my kink, but it sure as heck is somebody's. About the only place we're in partial agreement here is that I don't think it's a good idea for anybody to dictate One True Way scenarios. However it is a very valid observation that a totally selfish "submissive" who is purely a taker and not willing to give anything at all is unlikely to find or keep a partner. So in that sense I agree that a submissive who does not offer "tribute" is not good relationship material. I don't mean just money, I mean a willingness to give what you have in order to meet another person's needs in a relationship. Sometimes that does include real physical resources, depending on the respective economic status of the people in the relationship. How much you should be expected to give depends on the individual relationship, and that can range from "living together and raising kids together" to "occasional online playmates". Obviously much more is expected in the way of committing real physical resources in the first scenario than in the second. quote: When what a person wants and demands is selfish or disrespectful, the person at whom the demand is directed objects, be this selfish and disrespectful demand without regard to the other for sex or for money. Selfish and disrespectful to one person is hot and erotic to another. Again, no one is forcing anyone else to participate in a type of kink they don't like or consent to. There are a great number of "submissive" men who want very much to be disrespected in this manner and to have things selfishly demanded of them. It's not my kink, but when I come across folks who choose to play that way on either side of the fence, I leave them alone to play the way they want to. I don't feel the need to launch nasty diatribes about their very existence. I must strongly question the motives and underlying psychology of the people who do.

FullfigRIMAAM1 -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 1:13:35 PM)
Oooops.... Nevermind. Mistook someone else's words, as SmartStrongSub's. M

undergroundsea -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 3:21:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama You have a wonderfully rosy view of the world, Sea, and the relationships that exist between genders. Too bad it has so little basis in statistical fact, and no relationship to the lived reality that affects the lives of millions of people. I have made no reference to statistics. I have instead given counterexamples to what I perceived to be absolute statements by you that seem incorrect to me. I do not claim women and men are on the same economic plane at the present. I claim that we are not still in the 50s. There are women and relationships that lie outside the description of reality you give. Change has occurred. It is continuing to occur. quote: Even this latest viewpoint on the laws effecting the economics of single parenthood is BS. Statistically speaking, for the last 30 years, the total number of children living with single mothers has swung back and forth a few points around 20% of the general population. I do not direct my statement at statistics and statistics do not have bearing on the point I make: the laws are there not against male behavior but against human behavior--they also apply when the custody is given to the father. That statistically custody is granted to the mother more often and that the laws more frequently apply to men does not mean they exist to control behavior of men. quote: The sociologist in me would love to know how many of these "Tribute Dommes" that everyone is so angry about--the ones who demand Tribute even before first meetings or getting together to schedule pro sessions--are single mothers. To me this statement seems more an appeal to tie tribute to a scenario which has broad sympathy. I don't think one has to be a single parent to find it convenient to receive money. I invite you to browse profiles yourself and see how many of those who demand tribute strike you as single mothers. Cheers, Sea

undergroundsea -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 4:14:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyNTrainer So in your opinion, it is always "inappropriate" for women to work in the adult industry. Gotcha. I have said that I do not direct my comments against professional domination. quote: For sake of clarity, I define tribute as a material requirements that are critically necessary to begin or sustain an interpersonal relationship. I object to the idea when it is done without regard to how the other feels about it, conveys an unerotic disregard for submissive men in general, or when it is directed at submissive men at large (all submissive men should pay tribute). I do not object to it when it is done within a relationship where two people seek to do it and do not impose their view on others. The italics are intended to give an emphasis on interpersonal relationships. Perhaps the text below will deliver even more emphasis: I define tribute as material requirements that are critically necessary to begin or sustain an interpersonal relationship (versus a business relationship). I have no issues with professional domination. It is upfront and fair for a dynamic where services are being sought. I agree with your comment about genuine professionals and unethical professionals. I direct my comments not when services are being sought but when an interpersonal relationship is sought. quote: Pros are pros, whether you call them "tribute doms" or "financial doms" or what have you. Because of broad use of terminology I can see how one might confuse tribute dommes to be professional dommes. I distinguish between the two. As I define it, tribute is not sought on basis of providing a service but on basis of simply demanding it. And I consider financial domme yet a third category. quote: It's not even possible to engage in this kind of transaction if there isn't consent on both sides. <snip> Different people have different notions of what is erotic. There are scenarios where tribute or financial domination is sought (whether the attempt is successful or not is another matter) without regard to consent in interpersonal relationships. I agree that different people have different notions on what is erotic. The concept of tribute is erotic to some men and it is not to others. When the idea of tribute is directed at men who find it unerotic, it is then I object. However, instead of recognizing that some subs find it unerotic, the rhetoric by the some of the dommes here is that these subs are wrong for finding it unerotic or not wishing to participate in tribute. quote: You and I are in the same boat in terms of thinking that degradation and selfish use of a man for his wallet is unerotic, but that doesn't give either of us the right to look down at other people who spring an instant boner at this scenario. Degradation and selfish use of a man carries masochistic appeal for me but this appeal is trumped by other considerations. I do not look down at those who find masochistic appeal to do this activity. I do not look down upon those who find sadistic appeal in this activity. I would even be fine with a scenario where the motives are selfish (versus for sake of kink), which I do look down upon, but it is done within consent--I would be fine with the scenario but not the person. To elaborate, I would not object to the scenario if a white supremacist sought race play with a black submissive for harsh SM as long as the black submissive consented. However, it would not change how I would feel about the white supremacist for his bigoted views. So if you pair up a selfish person with a submissive who gets off on being exploited by a selfish person, I do not object to the situation because it is consensual. However, it does not change how I feel about a person who is selfish and exploits others. How do you tell whether a financial domme is otherwise a compassionate person who is doing this for sake of her kink, or a selfish person? The distinction can be made but there is not an easy way to know upfront or from a distance. To me the general nature of the person defines the specific activities. I would hold a different view about financial domination and tribute from a domme I knew well and thought to be compassionate, than about a domme I did not know well, or knew to be selfish. Cheers, Sea

undergroundsea -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 4:17:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NoreenSwan Yeah I just read it and thought wow. I'm like, O.k., uh, her comment makes sense. Andalusite's a slave. That Andalusite is a switch woman who is currently in a relationship as a slave does not undermine her statements simply for that reason. Cheers, Sea

MsRose -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 6:15:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Venatrix Whenever I hear the word "tribute", I'm strangely reminded of ancient Roman triumphs, where war captives and plundered booty were displayed in a processional before the populace, guarded by muscular centurions wearing studded leather breastplates, and, erm, I'll just go have a lie-down now. This is the image that played across my mind, also. I was almost tempted to watch the "Rome" series again, but controlled my urges. The original post read to me (at first) like a declaration of some sort. Pride in ownership and an announcement that for the OP, life was good. I also thought that there was some bragging about all the things that had been purchased - which appear to make both dominant and sub happy. But I didn't interpret it as vile, as someone here mentioned. Although, I can certainly see how it could be seen in that light. I am sure there are some subs who don't appreciate being called "limpdicks" simply because they are unable to offer gifts on quite this level.

LadyNTrainer -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 6:23:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: undergroundsea I have said that I do not direct my comments against professional domination. Yet if I am reading your words correctly, you object to women who honestly advertise that they seek tribute or offer financial domination? quote: I define tribute as material requirements that are critically necessary to begin or sustain an interpersonal relationship (versus a business relationship). It is not an unusual thing for a female to choose to mate only with a male who can demonstrate the ability to provide material resources in abundance. If you have a problem with this, you may want to consider taking it up with the greatest Domme of all. Her name is Mother Nature. [8\|] There are other successful female courtship and reproductive strategies, but "weed out the losers by requiring gifts" is a fairly consistent one throughout the animal kingdom. Homo sapiens is not an exception. Invertebrates do it, for that matter. Trust me on this; you really don't want to be the male spider or mantid who comes without bearing substantial gifts. quote: I direct my comments not when services are being sought but when an interpersonal relationship is sought. One hopes that it should be fairly easy to distinguish between the two. Even the unethical "stealth pros" who waste your time initially by pretending their interest is personal rather than professional will show their asses in fairly short order and can then be avoided. quote: There are scenarios where tribute or financial domination is sought (whether the attempt is successful or not is another matter) without regard to consent in interpersonal relationships. They're teaching "Just Say No" these days even in grade school. There's not much you can do about people who missed that lesson. I don't think it's a very hard one. quote: I agree that different people have different notions on what is erotic. The concept of tribute is erotic to some men and it is not to others. When the idea of tribute is directed at men who find it unerotic, it is then I object. However, instead of recognizing that some subs find it unerotic, the rhetoric by the some of the dommes here is that these subs are wrong for finding it unerotic or not wishing to participate in tribute. Do keep in mind Mother Nature's caveat. The male animal who truly cannot or will not provide material resources is quite likely to fail at finding a mate, or at keeping one. Whether a given submissive finds it erotic or not, if he is unwilling to demonstrate his willingness to please in a way that is meaningful to the lady he wants to impress, he isn't going to succeed. The trick is finding a lady whose idea of meaningful tribute lines up with his ability and his willingness to give, at any given stage of the relationship. Obviously your alarm bells should be going off if she thinks you need to sign over your house and bank account on the second date. And her alarm bells should be going off if you've expressed great interest in serving and pleasing her and you aren't poor, but you want to go Dutch on the second date (and on every subsequent date) and make her buy all the toys to avoid "being taken advantage of". Caveat emptor. quote: To elaborate, I would not object to the scenario if a white supremacist sought race play with a black submissive for harsh SM as long as the black submissive consented. However, it would not change how I would feel about the white supremacist for his bigoted views. So if you pair up a selfish person with a submissive who gets off on being exploited by a selfish person, I do not object to the situation because it is consensual. However, it does not change how I feel about a person who is selfish and exploits others. Good analogy. I don't get along well with supremacists of any stripe, nor with men or women who really dislike the opposite sex and interact with them in a primarily negative or selfish way. I do however understand financial dommes as a pure reflection of the image that the clients create and enforce. Whether they feel that way about men or not, they are required to behave as if they do in order to make their clients happy. I doubt that most of the ladies in question do actually feel that way; it's part of the game, and one that the clients insist on. quote: How do you tell whether a financial domme is otherwise a compassionate person who is doing this for sake of her kink, or a selfish person? The distinction can be made but there is not an easy way to know upfront or from a distance. To me the general nature of the person defines the specific activities. I would hold a different view about financial domination and tribute from a domme I knew well and thought to be compassionate, than about a domme I did not know well, or knew to be selfish. I don't know. I have been asked to enact this scenario, and once or twice I've tried to cater to that kink for fun and profit. I don't seek out those kinds of clients, but they show up in everybody's inbox, including the non pros. When I had a friends-only profile here I still got them. It was mildly amusing acting the role of a spoiled princess who kept demanding more and more and being quite rude, arrogant and humiliating about it, but I doubt I could keep it up long term. I definitely couldn't keep up that act in a personal relationship. But I don't mind pretending in the short term for a session if it's what really turns someone's crank, with the understanding that I'm still going to insist on some baseline rules regarding my not being willing to do real harm to anyone financially, psychologically or physically. Other than that, I hope I'd do a good enough acting job that you couldn't tell I wasn't actually mean and selfish and spoiled. LOL

ShaktiSama -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 6:34:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: undergroundsea To me this statement seems more an appeal to tie tribute to a scenario which has broad sympathy. You think there's broad sympathy for single mothers? Lol....Wow. You really DO live on another planet, don't you. quote: I don't think one has to be a single parent to find it convenient to receive money. I invite you to browse profiles yourself and see how many of those who demand tribute strike you as single mothers. How many women selling sex on the street and in brothels "strike you" as single mothers, Sea? Do 50-70% of all prostitutes you see on the game look like Soccer Moms while working, in your opinion? And what does a "single mother" look like anyway? Do you think that perhaps a woman who is stupid enough to "strike you" as a single mother is not picking a great strategy to inspire men to feel sexual desire and part with their money, if that is her business plan? Because I think the statistics about how few single mothers live with a conjugal partner make it pretty clear how "hot and sexy" most men find it to be with the parent of another man's child. Seriously, the more you talk, the more your real stripes show. And it's not a pretty sight. The reason you can't make reference or respond to statistical reality is because your views are not based in reality--and are apparently impervious to reality. You want to live in a fantasy world where men and women are socially, economically and politically equals, and all interactions between them start on even ground with no negative preconditions. The real world for the majority of human beings is much uglier. Every possible negative consequence which can result from sex between two human beings falls more heavily upon women than men, by an order of magnitude--from pregnancy and disease to rape and assault and social stigma. Every marker of social and economic well-being is in favor of men over women as well. I am not talking about the "50's" or the 1800's when I say these things: the statistics and lived realities I'm talking about are going on right this minute. Just as I don't have to go all the way back to 1888 to find a man who murders prostitutes, I don't have to go back to the 1950's to find inequality in the workforce, in politics, and heavy gender bias in social discourse. In this particular thread, you've only said one thing which is perfectly true: everyone finds it convenient to have money. In our society, one gender has it in far greater abundance than the other, and this results in tense relations. The economic needs that women have are not going to go away just because you silence them or stigmatize them, any more than a man's submissive needs go away when he is silenced or stigmatized. I honestly don't know why guys like you bother trying to tell people that it's wrong to be honest and direct about what they want. There are plenty of needs that various submissive men have that I cannot fulfill. Does that mean that they should hide or lie about what they're really looking for in their profile pages, in the hopes that maybe 20 years down the road I might be interested in turning them into adult babies or baking them a poop cake?

cloudboy -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 7:43:51 PM)
ShaktiSama's detours off the road are so abrupt, I'm surprised you don't get whiplash just trying to keep up. What's next, the rape of women in The Congo and how your posting hasn't recognized their plight? You're like a Democratic Congressman at a Town Hall meeting trying to talk about "the public option," while impassioned audience members voice objections to Soviet style communism. As I read ShaktiSama's posts, its as if she regards the proper starting point of male - female relationships to be reparations.

OneMoreWaste -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 7:53:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama See, this thread--and all the other ENDLESS threads like it--is taking place in public. And it is a very different thing to make personal decisions about what you want and don't want in your personal life, and to inform any women who happen to ask you for money about your limits, versus lecturing ALL women, IN public, about what they SHOULD want, need, and ask for from ALL men. Did you happen to notice that this thread was begun by a woman? And that she used no less than 9 (8 unique) adjectives to insult ALL men who are unwilling/unable to bestow tens of thousands of dollars on a Domme? Or is she entitled to that as reparations? Sea, will you stop oppressing these poor women? [>:]

Andalusite -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 8:09:10 PM)
ShaktiSama, I misremembered who the following post was from, I'm sorry that I misrepresented it as being your words: quote: ORIGINAL: SaharahEve Indeed, seen it here too. That motto: one hates what they fear seems applicable. [8D] Yes, I'm a Christian, but I feel that Paul's directives to women to submit to their husbands, and against women preachers, were cultural. I have no problem whatsoever with women who are pastors or dominants. Besides, since you are not a Christian, you are under no obligation whatsoever to live by the Bible. I was a Domme for 5 years in my first relationship that involved BDSM, and most of the ones since then have been egalitarian kinky, leaning slightly dominant. I have a "brand spanking new" female submissive playpartner - I've posted about her a couple of times, but haven't updated my profile yet. She's rather service-oriented, and we may develop a D/s dynamic, but for now, it's more top/bottom. Collarme lumps in Tops with the Dominants and Masters/Mistresses, so I don't feel there's any reason why I shouldn't be able to post in "Ask A Mistress." When I was looking/dating a few months ago, I was open to any BDSM orientation. I was only willing to date someone who was into D/s (whether as a Dominant, a submissive, or a Master) if I actually clicked with them that way. Most people just don't spark the kind of chemistry I need for a formal D/s dynamic from either side of the kneel. No, I didn't see the post about women being mutilated like that - that is horrible! Most men don't view women that way. I dislike both Female Supremacy and the Gorean "Natural Order" or other equivalent "all women are submissive" lines of thinking. In my opinion, I am not submissive or dominant toward someone because I am a woman. Obviously, neither all men nor all women are dominant toward all members of the opposite gender, and vice versa for submission. There are many articulate, powerful women who post here who I admire a great deal, including you, LadyPact, Venatrix, LadyHibiscus, and others. I certainly wouldn't want any of you to become submissive, or for the wonderful submissive ladies here to become dominant. I hope that all of you find or keep relationships with dynamics you are happiest in! Noreen and SmartStrongSub, that is not my perspective, I'm just saying that as far as I can tell, a man supporting a woman by paying for her housing and food when they don't live together, and buying her expensive gifts, when they are involved sexually, tends to be seen by American society as a "kept woman" who is dependent on him, even if she has her own source of income. I think it's perfectly fine for people to buy gifts for their loved ones, and contribute to household expenses and such. A lot of women were talking about money being a form of power, and it can be, but that particular scenario tends to be inverted, from what I've heard/read/etc. I don't necessarily think that it does affect the power dynamic necessarily, but that it's fairly likely that some people will feel that way about it.

pyroaquatic -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 8:29:13 PM)
quote: In our society, one gender has it in far greater abundance than the other, and this results in tense relations. I don't know about y'all but I am broke as a joke. No stress though. I am abundant in craftiness.

ShaktiSama -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 9:20:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OneMoreWaste Did you happen to notice that this thread was begun by a woman? Did you happen to notice that this thread is over 30 pages long and has many male participants, who often range from petulant to psychotic? The only topic more likely to break the bank on this forum is making a heterosexual man suck a cock. Do you think maybe there is some kind of underlying hot button for that subject too? quote: And that she used no less than 9 (8 unique) adjectives to insult ALL men who are unwilling/unable to bestow tens of thousands of dollars on a Domme? Boo freakin' hoo. Been to the Gorean forum lately? They have all sorts of choice adjectives to describe ALL women who are unwilling/unable to fall to their knees and service them properly. Many dominant men define "real" women in terms that are dictated by their own needs, and getting those needs met. Is it really such a surprise that a dominant woman would do the same? Grow up and get the hell over it. You're not her man, you wouldn't want to be, and you're not looking to be the provider in any relationship: groovy. Tell it to someone who cares enough about you to ask about your limits. Here's a hint: that someone is not me, nor is it any of the women who post to this forum.

ShaktiSama -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/27/2009 9:44:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy ShaktiSama's detours off the road are so abrupt, I'm surprised you don't get whiplash just trying to keep up. Just because I hit you like a Mack truck doesn't mean I've detoured off the road. We're discussing the economics of gender right now, and why these money threads are so frequently recurring and so acrimonious. I happen to know a good deal about the subject of gender economics and the demographicc of female sex workers and women living in poverty, so I'm discussing those issues. If you don't know or even care what you're talking about, maybe you should stop embarrassing yourself by bawling out your ignorance like the "impassioned audience members" that yell "Heil Hitler" at our Town Hall meetings these days. Bringing up the homicidal rape of women and female children in the Congo as if it were a funny joke is not a class move, and it doesn't win you any points, demonstrate your cleverness, or prove your lack of misogyny. As for "reparations"? They have their place in the modern world. Unless you want to hand over control of 95% of the planet and all its power bases to the female gender for the next 10,000 years or so, however, there is absolutely no way to balance the scales between men and women along that path. Personally, I think it's better to have a clear view of the past and an equally clear view of continuing problems in the present. The fact that things have improved from a previous nadir of absolute abject subjugation of women does not mean that Everything Is All Better Now and We've Had Enough Equality.

OneMoreWaste -> RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OLD TOPIC, "TRIBUTE"..... (8/28/2009 5:53:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama quote: ORIGINAL: OneMoreWaste And that she used no less than 9 (8 unique) adjectives to insult ALL men who are unwilling/unable to bestow tens of thousands of dollars on a Domme? Boo freakin' hoo. Been to the Gorean forum lately? They have all sorts of choice adjectives to describe ALL women who are unwilling/unable to fall to their knees and service them properly. I have not. If the Goreans do it, that makes it acceptable social behavior? Are those the official Mistress Forum rules, or just your personal credo? quote: As for "reparations"? They have their place in the modern world. Pff. Inherited entitlement is SO seventeenth century. [:'(] Let us remember history, not live it. Edit- Actually, I guess it's not inherited entitlement so much as entitlement by genetic chance. Which certainly has a colorful history, but not a lot of moral high ground.

Page: << < prev 34 35 [36] 37 38 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625