RE: female Supremecy

RE: female Supremecy (Full Version)

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

Message

CarrieO -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 10:36:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Underumam quote: ORIGINAL: Lucienne quote: ORIGINAL: Underumam They are the life-givers and as such house the REAL power here in the physical world. (sadly-many females have forgotten this) It's kind of amazing to me that thousands of years after achieving higher order consciousness our species is still so fundamentally enamored by the primitive biological to-do list (reproduce!). Not saying that's entirely a bad things. It's just... kind of weird. lol. Modern thought can change perceptions, but not the laws of creation....... Not to go completely off topic but, I've always wonder about this claim of superority based on the ability to create life and reproduce. Where does that leave the women who, for whatever reason, are unable to create life? Where do these women fit in the big picture of Female Supremacy if one of the criteria is the ability to create new life? edited to add....this is an honest question to no one in particular. I'm actually curious...that's all.

SomethingCatchy -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 11:07:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CarrieO quote: ORIGINAL: Underumam quote: ORIGINAL: Lucienne quote: ORIGINAL: Underumam They are the life-givers and as such house the REAL power here in the physical world. (sadly-many females have forgotten this) It's kind of amazing to me that thousands of years after achieving higher order consciousness our species is still so fundamentally enamored by the primitive biological to-do list (reproduce!). Not saying that's entirely a bad things. It's just... kind of weird. lol. Modern thought can change perceptions, but not the laws of creation....... Not to go completely off topic but, I've always wonder about this claim of superority based on the ability to create life and reproduce. Where does that leave the women who, for whatever reason, are unable to create life? Where do these women fit in the big picture of Female Supremacy if one of the criteria is the ability to create new life? edited to add....this is an honest question to no one in particular. I'm actually curious...that's all. My honest answer is I think it has less to do with creating life, and more to do with where that life comes out of when it's birthed. Can't make a kid? Well that's ok, you've still got a vag. edited because my fingers are talking faster than my brain today.

Underumam -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 11:56:28 AM)
IMO- a woman NATURALLY knows how to take the interests of all her family/people into consideration, and has an extra special bond with those who she birthed. I'm not insinuating a superiority the way most now perceive it, but rather one that is more spiritual in nature. Consider; "Behind every good man, is a good woman." Where did this saying come from? The older tribal cultures always had male chiefs/leaders, but they were put there through the councils of clan-mothers/elders and the like. This worked well for a reason, as no one knows a man better than his own mother and aunties. None could bull-shit their way into a coveted position with lies and fancy words like they all do now. This sublime power I've seen and experienced first-hand has no bearing upon whether a woman has had children or not, but it's innate. The power of the feminine focused in the wrong way, can lure an emperor into betraying his countrymen, but focused correctly, can uplift a whole people...In short, when all the women in this world stop taking abuse, teaching their men, children and others the way of love, respect and compassion, this screwed up world will lift itself up out of the swamp it's now in. Pussy has the power.lol.......Just sayin......

earthycouple -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 4:12:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Underumam IMO- a woman NATURALLY knows how to take the interests of all her family/people into consideration, and has an extra special bond with those who she birthed. I'm not insinuating a superiority the way most now perceive it, but rather one that is more spiritual in nature. Consider; "Behind every good man, is a good woman." Where did this saying come from? The older tribal cultures always had male chiefs/leaders, but they were put there through the councils of clan-mothers/elders and the like. This worked well for a reason, as no one knows a man better than his own mother and aunties. None could bull-shit their way into a coveted position with lies and fancy words like they all do now. This sublime power I've seen and experienced first-hand has no bearing upon whether a woman has had children or not, but it's innate. The power of the feminine focused in the wrong way, can lure an emperor into betraying his countrymen, but focused correctly, can uplift a whole people...In short, when all the women in this world stop taking abuse, teaching their men, children and others the way of love, respect and compassion, this screwed up world will lift itself up out of the swamp it's now in. Pussy has the power.lol.......Just sayin...... good boy S

undergroundsea -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 5:00:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucienne I don't believe in female supremacy, but that's a pretty shitty example. Mary Queen of Scots stands fairly accused of being the tool of men in ways that Elizabeth refused to be. And when it came right down to it, the dispute between them was over control of the male heir. If that's a shitty example, I am curious what word you would use to describe the quality of the case you make against it. Mary's execution was ordered by Elizabeth, who you say refused to be the tool of men. Cheers, Sea

PeonForHer -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 6:56:39 PM)
I can't see how this discussion of Elizabeth 1 and Mary, Queen of Scots, is relevant, to be honest. I thought this thread was descending (as discussions about female supremacy here always seem to do) into a cosy chat about biology. Human biology - and, in particular, biological differences between men and women - aren't particularly relevant in the social sphere. Social forces aren't the same as biological forces. They have to be examined in their own right. What this point boils down to in this example is just this: that Elizabeth as a girl was reportedly a delightful, caring, feeling sort of child. As Queen Elizabeth, on the other hand, she took England into more wars than any other of our national leaders before or since. 'Pop' went that feminine fluffywuffyness - just as it has done with so many other female national leaders.

undergroundsea -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 7:21:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer I can't see how this discussion of Elizabeth 1 and Mary, Queen of Scots, is relevant, to be honest. XYisInferior attributes war to men whereas I attribute wars to politics and power, which is practiced by men and women. To question his point I asked him why nations with female heads of states have not remained without war. He responded that such conflicts were necessary because of foreign powers led by men, and pressure from a male-led militance to wage war. When he referenced Elizabeth I, I pointed to an example of two women where one was said to have sought assassination attempts against the other, and the other ordered the execution of the first in the manner of politics and power. Cheers, Sea

PeonForHer -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 7:39:58 PM)
Ah - thanks, Sea. I'd lost track of what evidence was being used to prove what splendid quality about women by this point in the thread. Clearly, a woman who brings about destruction and death to thousands and nearly bankrupts the country (not to mention killing off a sizeable chunk of its populace) is not an aggressive, mad old bat but a 'strong woman who will not be controlled by men' - per her superior, more gutsy and individualistic genes. On the other hand, a woman who leads the country into no wars at all is not weak but, in fact, peaceful, warm and loving of humanity - per her superior, gentle and empathetic genes.

MzMia -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 7:44:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Underumam IMO- a woman NATURALLY knows how to take the interests of all her family/people into consideration, and has an extra special bond with those who she birthed. I'm not insinuating a superiority the way most now perceive it, but rather one that is more spiritual in nature. Consider; "Behind every good man, is a good woman." Where did this saying come from? The older tribal cultures always had male chiefs/leaders, but they were put there through the councils of clan-mothers/elders and the like. This worked well for a reason, as no one knows a man better than his own mother and aunties. None could bull-shit their way into a coveted position with lies and fancy words like they all do now. This sublime power I've seen and experienced first-hand has no bearing upon whether a woman has had children or not, but it's innate. The power of the feminine focused in the wrong way, can lure an emperor into betraying his countrymen, but focused correctly, can uplift a whole people...In short, when all the women in this world stop taking abuse, teaching their men, children and others the way of love, respect and compassion, this screwed up world will lift itself up out of the swamp it's now in. Pussy has the power.lol.......Just sayin...... Thank you for a positive post, Bravo! [;)] I believe in female supremacy ONLY in relationship with MY submissive in our relationship. The idea of all females being supreme to all other males is ludicrious. There maybe people that actually believe this, but that does not mean everyone that practices "female supremacy" in his or her serious relationships, believes that it has any relevance in anyone that is not serving her. The only person or persons that I would expect to "buy" into the concept of "Female Supremacy" would be those that are serving ME. In their world I am Supreme, which is just another way of saying "special" "marvelous" "queen" or any other damn adjective we care to use. IF I believe in "female supremacy" and my submissive believes in "female supremacy", that is between us. This is something we can enjoy, share and if we want publically talk about it. I don't give a crap if other people believe it or like it. I get tired of some "kinks" being "accepted but not others. By all the "understanding" people in this lifestyle. [sm=rofl.gif] That would be like me saying, I am a Dominant to all people or a submissive to all people. What a load of crap. Again, it is possible for people to practice Female Supremacy in a serious relationship or relationships. It really can exist for some people in some situations. It may not be your fucking kink, but some of us enjoy it. Now back to your regularly scheduled put-downs regarding the concept of "female supremacy". [;)] Happy New Year!

Lockit -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 7:55:01 PM)
I don't believe... behind every man is a good woman. Nope! Doesn't work for me! Especially when it has been many women with most men/families... and damn it... I want a man that doesn't have to have a woman behind him or pulling him into being all he can be! I don't need the ego trip! I know lots of men that got places in life and other than family... had no woman. I think the guys can live without us and our direction. If they chose to go our direction... sweet... but damn... they aren't friggin loosers are they?

MzMia -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 7:56:33 PM)
Thank you for your opinion. Thanks for also reading the words that I just wrote. Didn't I just say it only applies to ME and my submissive? [sm=banghead.gif] Thanks for understanding that. [&o]

MzMia -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 8:00:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: XYisInferior quote: ORIGINAL: BoiJen Let me put it this way...Dominance, sexual and otherwise, and submission, sexual and otherwise, are universal principles. No issue there. quote: ORIGINAL: BoiJen Supremacy is based upon fictitious notions of superiority. Supremacy doesn't have to be absolutely based upon superiority in all things. Supremacy is a state of being superior to others in authority and status. That's the way I and my Mistress view supremacy. For a male who believes in Female Supremacy and lives it in service to his Mistress, Her supremacy is real enough. By jove this is the point! You and your Mistress practice this! You have a right to practice whatever the hell you want to. That aside, I have presented facts in previous discussions which extol Female superiority in certain biological and sociological terms. If these facts are important to one in forming one's beliefs in Female Supremacy, how is this an example of a lifestyle based upon pure fiction? quote: ORIGINAL: BoiJen Supremacy does not exist within nature... You honestly do not believe humanity enjoys supremacy over the world's inhabitance and resources? That's interesting, to say the least. quote: ORIGINAL: BoiJen Comparing the fantasy notions of Female or Male Superiority to understanding and sexualizing (I made up a scientific word for "sex it up") the natural occurrence of Dominance and submission is dealing with two totally different beasts. Simply put, you can either embrace who you are as an s-type or D-type, no matter your gender and respect those positions that others hold within their own lives, or you can force your sexuality upon others by any excuse you find....Female Supremacy happens to be a primary tool/excuse that some males use to force their sexuality upon others. Here we go again with the "some males" line. Fair enough. But (again) what about other males? Or dare I even say Females for that matter? Sounds like you're leading the witness, in the least. Who says I don't respect the preferences of others? Last I saw, it was you in fact who came into this forum making some rather biased and antithetical statements to the thread subject. Quote: "Female Supremacy comes down to yet another manner in which some males objectify all females." Does that sound respectful to the personal lifestyle choices of those "S-types" or "D-types" who embrace FS as a lifestyle? You should perhaps practice what you preach, I'm thinking. quote: ORIGINAL: BoiJen If you don't like being grouped up in that mess, then find some way to distinguish yourself. The Leather community had to... Well, thanks for the helpful advice, but I'll reply by saying that I don't don't assume the words of Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson represent all Christians. Similarly, the actions or motives of some do not speak for all in a subset of an alternative lifestyle or belief system. For someone so proud of their leather association, I'd think you'd understand that. Dear Lord you get it. It is between you and your Mistress, that is all that is necessary. Why are there so many bone heads that don't understand that for many, this belief is ONLY between the people involved?? Thanks XY

Lockit -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 8:01:02 PM)
MzMia... I wasn't really commenting on your relationships. Giving my opinion and way of thinking, is all I am doing. On the subject matter.. not what you said.

PeonForHer -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 8:02:24 PM)
You know, MzMia, I'm perfectly happy to go along with some idea of female supremacy on an individual basis, between couples, as their choice. I'd even go for something like that myself. To me, this is rather like my mother's handling of her Christianity - it's something that fits for her, makes sense of her universe . . . . I can see no reason to argue with it, though I don't share it. She has no need to try to turn it into objective truth, thereby forcing it on everyone else. I should say, though, that such forcing on everyone else is inherent in any attempt to turn a belief (desire, hope, whatever) into 'objective fact'. Objective facts are so called precisely because they must be accepted by everyone. It makes no sense at all to say that a given belief is 'objective fact' but also say that the rest of us are welcome to 'take it or leave it'.

seekingOwnertoo -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 8:03:57 PM)
Ms. Lockit ... You are correct, in one of Your posts ... LOL ... the one where You say "I know lots of men that got places in life and other than family... had no woman." i am a submisive and could be a slave ... BUT I DON"T NEED A WOMAN ... ROFL Rather it is the person that the Lady is ... the one who enraptures me ... mentally, emotionally and then physically ... that i will willingly and eagerly serve, worship and adore ... And then ... want to be enslaved too ...

MzMia -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 8:04:21 PM)
Thank you Peon, I try to limit my posting here, but I felt compelled to post tonight. "Female Supremacy" for many of us, is just another kink. Some want to practice it, others don't. It's just a "kink" that some of us enjoy. There is a long list of kinks that I have no interest in, and so what the fuck? To each their own. You don't have to "get it" or like it. I just get tired of seeing "certain kinks" trashed on a regular basis. I have never met anyone that believed that all Females are Supreme or superior, maybe there are people that believe that. But, I don't know anyone that believes that all Females are Supreme or superior. Happy New Year!

MzMia -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 8:13:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lockit MzMia... I wasn't really commenting on your relationships. Giving my opinion and way of thinking, is all I am doing. On the subject matter.. not what you said. Okay Lockit, I get it. I just never have met anyone that felt all women were superior to men or anyone else. Do you know anyone that feels this way? If no one has met anyone that feels that all women are superior why is it such a big deal? Some of us love "Female Supremacy"!!!! It floats our boats, in our relationships, and I am here to say it can be a "marvleous" thing, for those of us who enjoy it. [:D][:D][:D]

PeonForHer -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 8:14:29 PM)
I have never met anyone that believed that all Females are Supreme or superior, maybe there are people that believe that. I must admit, I took it for granted that this was XYisInferior's position - hence his taking the nickname 'XYisInferior' . . . ? No doubt he himself can correct me if I'm wrong on that, though. But, anyway, Happy New Year to you, too - and long live whatever kink you choose!

Lockit -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 8:19:48 PM)
Some of the people on this thread believe it. I have argued with them about it. lol

Lockit -> RE: female Supremecy (12/30/2009 8:22:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seekingOwnertoo Ms. Lockit ... You are 100% correct ... LOL ... i am a submisive and could be a slave ... BUT I DON"T NEED A WOMAN ... ROFL Rather it is the person that the Lady is ... the one who enraptures me ... mentally, emotionally and then physically ... that i will willingly and eagerly serve, worship and adore ... And then ... want to be enslaved to LOL... When I get to my emails... boy oh boy!

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875