RE: Financial domination (Full Version)

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



Message


Smutmonger -> RE: Financial domination (3/10/2010 6:55:43 PM)

This is one reason I think this upsets male subs. These are supposed to be females of power-and yet-they act like dependent submissives by asking for money and support.

It is pretty confusing.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Honsoku

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse
For me personally, it will always depends upon the individual dynamic. If a woman comes into my life, becomes trusted and important enough to be a part of my household and the relationship is a M/s TPE, then yes I will consider her finances mine to control. Does that mean I am going to take every penny and spend it on frivolous purchases.....NO! No more than I would my own paycheck. It would be used the same way I use mine......living expenses, medical insurance, retirement planning, etc... If indeed this woman is a professional money manager, it would be very likely I would utilize her talents in managing her money and my own.

I never understand why this topic is such an emotional one. People willingly put their physical well being, often that of those they love, at risk with a person but to consider handing over money and they freak out.

To me, Total Power Exchange means TOTAL.


Women: cook, clean, and screw they'll all do, but a dime is out of line.

It's weird, isn't it? The way some people react to it, it's almost as if you asked them to turn over their UMs. When I first stumbled across this, I was surprised. For all the talk about power exchange and norm breaking, money was taboo? Money is power made transferable! We should be neck deep in financial dominants of both genders. Yet, it wasn't just something to do with money itself, as it is a lot more accepted in F/m dynamics than M/f. Then I realized it; by and large, people in bdsm don't really go against the cultural norms, we reinterpret them. "The male pays" is one of those hard coded cultural norms. It's part of our gender identity. It's would be like having a male dominant who cross-dressed. I bet having a dominant that did that would squick out about 90-95% of straight female submissives (of course, they'll be a few responses that go "It's doesn't bother me", which is missing the point). Why? Because it violates gender expectations. In both dominant and submissive roles, we tend to adhere to the same gender archetypes, we just express them differently. For example; the male pays, the male works, the male courts, the male protects, the female handles socializing, the female is supported by the male, the female is courted, the female is protected. We are fine with changing the context of the act, but tend to be grossly uncomfortable with changing the acts themselves.




slo18 -> RE: Financial domination (3/11/2010 4:26:28 PM)

alot of people need someone to control there money, i am one of them, but i balk at the idea giveing someone control of my money in any kind of relationship even my marriage. alot of people including myself were raised with deep biases against it even if it is someone that you trust. my own mother always ought me to keep a stash of cash in case i needed to make a quick getaway and she has been happily married to my father for over 30 years. giving up total control of your money for someone like me is imposable. the idea makes me physically ill. but there are those that it doesn't and thats good for them. if someone wants to give someone else there money for what ever reason be it tribute or just for management purposes more power to them.




vixenmoon -> RE: Financial domination (3/13/2010 2:25:06 PM)

I'm just really not good with money.  Eventually, with the right Master, I want TPE, including him controlling the finances.  That's part of the whole deal to me.  {and all the more reason to be careful in selecting the right Master}  If said Master chooses that I am to manage the bank account and take care of the finances, then so be it.  {He might have his hands full on that particular matter though LOL} 

Others are correct in many people being "fraudsters".  However, buyer beware applies in all relationships.  If someone wants one of the spoiled brats to demand money out of him, I don't care really.  I don't understand it, but it's not my life.




MsHValentine -> RE: Financial domination (3/13/2010 4:25:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Smutmonger

These are supposed to be females of power-and yet-they act like dependent submissives by asking for money and support.



A female asking for money makes her dependent?

So by your argument, a male asking for pussy makes him dependent.

Pussy and money are just two different ways of taking control. The demand for her pussy doesn't automatically mean the dom is dependent on her pussy, neither does the demand for his money automatically mean the domme is dependent on his money.


Men and women dominant the opposite sex differently. Men get served sexually first and foremost. Women get served financially or through labor first and foremost. It's just the nature of the sexes.




Ph0enixF1re -> RE: Financial domination (3/13/2010 4:36:39 PM)

For me and mine, financial domination has been a part of the relationship from the start....not as in tribute, but just as a natural part of taking ownership. Even before I collared her (as a slave, in the traditional definition) I managed her finances, put her on a budget, and started fixing her finances. Now, she owns nothing, nor is anything that she might earn hers.

That was an important part of the whole package for us. In fact, we were just joking about how I was surprised she didn't ask for my credit report to make sure I was actually capable of financially dominating her in a responsible manner before submitting to the collar.




MsHValentine -> RE: Financial domination (3/13/2010 8:24:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ph0enixF1re
For me and mine, financial domination has been a part of the relationship from the start....not as in tribute, but just as a natural part of taking ownership. Even before I collared her (as a slave, in the traditional definition) I managed her finances, put her on a budget, and started fixing her finances. Now, she owns nothing, nor is anything that she might earn hers.



"Manage" is a nice way of putting it. It's still Financial Domination however.




Andalusite -> RE: Financial domination (3/13/2010 8:36:50 PM)

Asking for money makes a woman a pro-Domme, although I wouldn't say it makes her dependent. I'd think it would mean there is no chance of an actual relationship, just adding another client.




Smutmonger -> RE: Financial domination (3/13/2010 9:43:48 PM)

Independence is a form of personal power. When you give that up by making yourself financially dependent on others-you lose some of that.

Men understand this-I wonder why women seem so often to ignore this.




MsHValentine -> RE: Financial domination (3/14/2010 8:10:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andalusite

Asking for money makes a woman a pro-Domme, although I wouldn't say it makes her dependent. I'd think it would mean there is no chance of an actual relationship, just adding another client.


Are you saying any woman who controls her subs money is a professional?




MsHValentine -> RE: Financial domination (3/14/2010 8:16:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Smutmonger

Independence is a form of personal power. When you give that up by making yourself financially dependent on others-you lose some of that.

Men understand this-I wonder why women seem so often to ignore this.


Acquiring control of your sub's money doesn't mean you become dependent on them. You seem to have a thing for putting women in a negative light. You automatically assume they are dependent on their subs. The truth is you don't really know what their personal circumstances are to make that statement, do you? You'd like to think you do - so long as it lowers them to where you're most comfortable.




slaveboy1138 -> RE: Financial domination (3/15/2010 6:25:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Andalusite

Asking for money makes a woman a pro-Domme, although I wouldn't say it makes her dependent. I'd think it would mean there is no chance of an actual relationship, just adding another client.


I have to disagree, pro-dommes are providing a service for a fee.

Moneydommes just take peoples money.





Smutmonger -> RE: Financial domination (3/15/2010 6:30:57 PM)

I see financial Domination as about the same as playing the lottery.

Tip here, I refer to lotto as "the idiot tax."




DomBlade64 -> RE: Financial domination (3/15/2010 7:25:58 PM)

Where do I sign up?

quote:

ORIGINAL: choccywoc

You give me money, i do nothing in return, that's my kinda job. 




slaveboy1138 -> RE: Financial domination (3/16/2010 9:21:08 AM)

Yeah there is an appeal to it, that's why you got this little girls on here who probably were told through the grapevine that they can find suckers on here who will them their moey for absolutely nothing.

I don't know what's saddder.

These girls.

Or the fact that some guys are so desperate they'll go for people who are really of the same ilk as the Ghana scammers rather than finding themselves a real domme.




thishereboi -> RE: Financial domination (3/16/2010 9:28:35 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Smutmonger

Independence is a form of personal power. When you give that up by making yourself financially dependent on others-you lose some of that.

Men understand this-I wonder why women seem so often to ignore this.


That sounds great. I think I will run down to the local Logans Steak House and tell the cook, he needs to stop depending on my money. If he wants personal power, then he needs to give me that steak dinner for free and finally achieve independence.

What a concept.




domiguy -> RE: Financial domination (3/16/2010 10:03:49 AM)

I have little regard for the majority of the dommes that frequent this thang...They all seem so broken. Incapable of rational and clear thought.

The pros are even worse. I have no regard for prostidommes. Any guy that gets involved with one of these dommes and funds any part of their lives is an idiot and deserves everything that he doesn't get.




no1butme -> RE: Financial domination (3/17/2010 7:43:51 AM)

This is hilarious...

I see people bashing FD all the time, however, what about D/s relationships where the women (or men in some cases) are beat with canes, belts, paddles, and the like.. then left with bruises, bleeding and sometimes submitting in fear of being punished. 

You want to be quick to call any Domme who is a Financial Domme a prostitute, however do you see Financial Domme calling Domme/Dom who whip, paddle, cane or use some form of torture on their subject, a vicious and violent abuser?

No. Why? because its consentual.  Just like the more physical aspect of any D/s relationship, or the relationship at all, it is consentual.

If someone is into feet and he buys his Domme a pair of nice heels, does that mean shes a prostitute?

While I do NOT agree on any woman jumping into FD because she has 10 kids, no job and no food on the table, I also do not agree that any Domme (who is actually a Domme), who takes gifts or tributes from their boys, be considered a prostitute or "Pro Domme".  I make my own money to pay my bills, however if boys want to buy me luxury items, then by all means.  Its what they enjoy.

I have been a Domme for many many years, I have plenty of experience, and have in the past owned domestic slaves.  I have a few boys now that have given power of their finances to me.  I control every aspect of their accounts.  One of which has a wife (who cost him their home and car) and kids, and had it not been for me, they would have had NOTHING for Christmas, NOTHING for birthdays, and no car at all.  Matter of fact, when I met him he was almost negative 900 in his account.  Hes not been negative since.

The only real problem with Financial Domination, especially online is this.

1. you dont know for a fact that you are serving a woman unless they get on cam, etc.  Even then, Ive seen boys spoof cam feed.

2.  many inexperienced women jump into FD because they have bills to pay.  Far more then we like to see.

3. because sites dont verify to the best of their ability, men have impersonated women and conned Financial sub/slaves out of cash, ruining the experience for them.


The stories you hear where women take the money and the giver was left with nothing, is because if the inexperience of the woman he was talking to. Or the fact that it could very well have been a man they tributed.

It sucks, it gives FD a really bad name.. but you cant sit here and say that FD is that BAD.  You would then have to look at the fact that whipping, paddling, and putting bruises on a woman/man is bad as well.  More so because its and act of violence.

I personally spend a great deal of time with my boys.  No, it does not always end up in tribute.  Does spending my time with my boys daily, then taking the occasional tribute or gift mean I am a prostitute?  Does it mean I am Pro?  Hell no.  What sub/slaves would not give their Domme a gift out of pure adoration?  Made or bought, it is still a gift.  Something some people seem to insist on condeming.

Remember that everyone has a choice in what fetish he or she persues. If its not your thing, then stay away, otherwise, dont bash.. it really is not becoming of a Dom or Domme.  The scene in any aspect, requires you to be open minded.  Not partially open, or partially closed.  Perhaps thats the problem. Like those who do not accept the scene, some Dom/Domm, sub/slave , cannot accept the notion that FD is actually a fetish like their own that they practice.

:)








Wheldrake -> RE: Financial domination (3/17/2010 1:39:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

For me personally, it will always depends upon the individual dynamic. If a woman comes into my life, becomes trusted and important enough to be a part of my household and the relationship is a M/s TPE, then yes I will consider her finances mine to control. Does that mean I am going to take every penny and spend it on frivolous purchases.....NO! No more than I would my own paycheck. It would be used the same way I use mine......living expenses, medical insurance, retirement planning, etc... If indeed this woman is a professional money manager, it would be very likely I would utilize her talents in managing her money and my own.


This is how I would expect things to work if Mistress and I were to move towards TPE. She handles money pretty well, and I would certainly trust her to control my finances responsibly. I think I would find it genuinely exciting to give her that power over me. Having to work and hand over money so that she could save it or spend it on whatever was important to her would feel... very much like slavery. I suppose I would see myself, in economic terms, as an asset owned by her and being hired out to an employer so that she could profit.

However, I wouldn't be a good match for a dominant woman who was more interested in the financial side of domination than in other aspects of the relationship, who needed a lot of expensive luxuries (or worse yet, status symbols) to keep her happy, or who liked spending money for its own sake. Even if I could afford it, that kind of overt materialism would simply rub me the wrong way, which of course is just my own subjective reaction.

Sometimes, of course, people use the term financial domination to mean a more or less disguised payment for services rendered. Personally, I would rather be explicit about the nature of the transaction - but again, that's just me.




opposingtwilight -> RE: Financial domination (3/17/2010 4:20:16 PM)

~Fast Reply ~

Financial Domination shouldn't be about one person demanding money from someone else in return for nothing. Granted there are some people who do just that; most of them *are* female and yeah its kinda lame but lets face it ... If no one was willing to give them that money, they'd probably just give up and go find another vocation. Whats the point in hurling insults towards female "money doms" or "pro doms" anyway? Kinda smacks of jealousy to me.

In my experience, fin dom is just another form of control. It does require the submissive to do a little homework and make sure his/her dominant is good with money and won't screw them over but I don't see how thats any different than most other forms of play. You have to be sure your partner knows what they're doing and isn't going to get all stupid and do something harmful just because they can. For people who aren't good with money, having someone else control the finances can actually be a lifesaver (or at the very least a money saver, hehe) ...

And why do people keep trying to lump pro doms in with prostitutes and gold diggers? Pro doms provide a legal service. They work their butts off. Some of these ladies (and gentlemen) do happen to really enjoy their work but its still work. Again, all this negativity just makes me think there's some really jealous individuals out there who are pissy because they can't figure out how to get in on it.

Prostitutes also provide a service of sorts but of course, in most places here in the US its an illegal service. Due to lack of regulation, it therefore becomes very shady and unless you're a high end escort, its not exactly the lap of luxury or anything. But common sense should illustrate that point. Neither of these types of people really have anything to do with gold diggers, whatsoever.




Kana -> RE: Financial domination (3/17/2010 7:14:46 PM)

I wanna financially dominate Angelina Jolie.
Does that count?




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




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