RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla

RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (Full Version)

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

Message

PeonForHer -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 1:23:33 PM)
OK, I think that a submissive male will, to some extent, want to feel that he's a 'prize' to the Domme who is his target. He'll want to feel that he's offering his service, devotion, adulation, whatever, to someone who he thinks will value it. There are some submales who get into the mindset of 'I'm just a worm, I'm worth nothing at all' - but I'd guess that's only a small proportion of them. I think that most of us would at least like to believe, something like, 'You, Ms X, are the woman to whom I'm going to devote myself. I'm your sub, servant, slave (whatever) and yours alone. Please value that, because it's something of a gift, not given lightly, even though there are 3.6 billion submales to every femdom [or whatever the feck the latest ratio is]'.

Venatrix -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 1:28:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer You add notches to your bedpost, but get that bit more depressed each time you 'score'. Not only that, but you wind up with a bed frame that falls apart.

PeonForHer -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 1:41:56 PM)
I'm still not at home to Mistress Cheek, V.

LadyAngelika -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 2:38:58 PM)
quote: Please value that, because it's something of a gift, not given lightly, even though there are 3.6 billion submales to every femdom [or whatever the feck the latest ratio is]'. Correction. There are 3.6 billion sexually submissive bottoms that identify as submales to every femdom. The ratio of boys who truly want to submit to a woman to dominant woman ration is much more even. - LA

SweetDommes -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 2:54:58 PM)
I don't think it's so much the thought of "I'm a prize" that is the problem, but more along the lines of "I have to convince (so and so) that I'm a prize; that they aren't one" that is the problem. I think the true attitude here is that the friend the OP mentions thinks that he's superior to whomever he's trying to hook up with - which is probably another reason that he can't manage to get into any kind of lasting relationship ... he thinks he's too good for all the women he's been with so far, and works to convince them that too.

Venatrix -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 3:04:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer I'm still not at home to Mistress Cheek, V. Yes, I've often said that about you, P: porch light on, but nobody home. [:D] In order not to derail the thread - to the OP: I once had a sub like the friend you describe. He lasted all of two play sessions. The only reason he lasted that long was because I am an infinitely kind, loving and understanding domina. Until I say "Fornicate this excrement, I'm outta here".

KITTYLECTRO -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 4:48:32 PM)
I've seen some form of this question pop up in many discussions. A day prior to being introduced to your friends, I imagine all of these women you speak of would claim they have no interest in the type of person you describe. The next day they would still give your friend their number.

WantingToServe11 -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 5:55:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SweetDommes I don't think it's so much the thought of "I'm a prize" that is the problem, but more along the lines of "I have to convince (so and so) that I'm a prize; that they aren't one" that is the problem. I think the true attitude here is that the friend the OP mentions thinks that he's superior to whomever he's trying to hook up with - which is probably another reason that he can't manage to get into any kind of lasting relationship ... he thinks he's too good for all the women he's been with so far, and works to convince them that too. Maybe, your over analyzing this a little though that point could be true about him thinking he's better than everyone. But, he's just a pervert that likes to have all kinds of sex all the time. And he did have a relationship with a girl for a good year or year in and half. She was a pretty smart girl from what I was able to gather as she just got done with nursing school and is starting a career. However, he wasn't very committed to her. But, you could argue that he's a narcissist. quote: ORIGINAL: KITTYLECTRO I've seen some form of this question pop up in many discussions. A day prior to being introduced to your friends, I imagine all of these women you speak of would claim they have no interest in the type of person you describe. The next day they would still give your friend their number. Sadly, this is probably true for the younger females on these forums.

SweetDommes -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 6:08:28 PM)
The time frame of a relationship isn't the only thing to consider when trying to figure out if it's a "lasting" relationship or not. The fact that "he wasn't very committed to her" is very telling. You asked questions, I answered them - other people brought up points and I responded to them. I'm not sure how that is over analyzing it. I've dealt with guys like this before - I don't need to over analyze it ... I've seen it first hand, and that's where my thoughts and theories about guys like that come from.

LadyAngelika -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 6:09:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WantingToServe11 quote: ORIGINAL: KITTYLECTRO I've seen some form of this question pop up in many discussions. A day prior to being introduced to your friends, I imagine all of these women you speak of would claim they have no interest in the type of person you describe. The next day they would still give your friend their number. Sadly, this is probably true for the younger females on these forums. First of all, Kitty is dead wrong. Most strong women I know, Domme, sub and vanilla, can see right through these types. Second, age has nothing to do with wisdom. Don't make such broad sweeping statement, it smacks of ignorance. - LA

LadyNTrainer -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 6:15:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WantingToServe11 I have one of those friends which is one of those guys that know how to pick up a girl in almost any situation. I asked him how he does this and he says he does this by always being some what cocky, showing a lack of interest in the certain parts of the conversation, being humorous, and being charismatic. Oh, ugh. I've seen that behavior before, and it's extremely annoying juvenile game playing. That type seriously makes my skin crawl. I only date academics and "geek guys" who are intelligent, serious, and submissive, and who don't play poser games. quote: Now my question to you ladies is. Have you ever fallen for this sort of man but with him being a submissive version of this? Would you find this type of "submissive" to be attractive? Have you ever ran in to this type of submissive before? No. They creep me out. The ones I've seen in action I've ignored or disengaged from as quickly as possible, so I have no idea whether any of them might ID as submissive. I have run into a few dominants who behaved as you describe, as well as a number of lying player types who ID'd as submissive, but to my knowledge the subly ones didn't do the specific behaviors you mentioned. quote: The reason why I ask is because all of you claim to be normal women (which I believe to be true) but there must be some differences between what you all want in a man vs. a vanilla women other then the man having interests in fetishes. Being an academic and a gamer geek myself, I prefer to date "my own kind". Straight talk and honest communication minus any social posing is the social norm with geeks, and that's what I'm most comfortable with. Social game playing, deception, cockiness, posing, etc, is ugly to me and I won't be around it. It feels creepy and unhealthy. I definitely won't date or play with someone whose communication style is not healthy, honest and straightforward. They're not hard to spot, fortunately. Speaking from a dominant perspective, I prefer a man to be a little shy, not aggressive, and definitely not a "player" out to "score". A mindset like that is an instant turn-off and a total deal-breaker.

WantingToServe11 -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 6:36:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika Second, age has nothing to do with wisdom. Don't make such broad sweeping statement, it smacks of ignorance. - LA Well, in terms of experience age does matter for the most part. I mean, if you haven't experience this type of individual very often then how would you know who this type of person is? People like my friends targets the woman's emotions when talking to them. He'll make himself appear different and unphased by her physical appearance. In other words, he tries to connect with them emotionally. Someone who's younger is less likely to notice his true colors until its too late (You could argue this is a form manipulation?). But, I do believe that age and wisdom go hand and hand but that's a different discussion.

LadyAngelika -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 6:38:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WantingToServe11 quote: ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika Second, age has nothing to do with wisdom. Don't make such broad sweeping statement, it smacks of ignorance. - LA Well, in terms of experience age does matter for the most part. I mean, if you haven't experience this type of individual very often then how would you know who this type of person is? People like my friends targets the woman's emotions when talking to them. He'll make himself appear different and unphased by her physical appearance. In other words, he tries to connect with them emotionally. Someone who's younger is less likely to notice his true colors until its too late (you could argue that this is manipulation). But, I do believe that age and wisdom go hand and hand but that's a different discussion. I know 18 year old women who would never fall for this type of men and 48 year old women who have fallen for them all their lives. Age has nothing to do with it. - LA

KITTYLECTRO -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 6:39:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WantingToServe11 Sadly, this is probably true for the younger females on these forums. My statement was only in regard to the women who gave your friend their number.

LadyNTrainer -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 6:40:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer OK, I think that a submissive male will, to some extent, want to feel that he's a 'prize' to the Domme who is his target. He'll want to feel that he's offering his service, devotion, adulation, whatever, to someone who he thinks will value it. There are some submales who get into the mindset of 'I'm just a worm, I'm worth nothing at all' - but I'd guess that's only a small proportion of them. I think that most of us would at least like to believe, something like, 'You, Ms X, are the woman to whom I'm going to devote myself. I'm your sub, servant, slave (whatever) and yours alone. Please value that, because it's something of a gift, not given lightly, even though there are 3.6 billion submales to every femdom [or whatever the feck the latest ratio is]'. Oh yes. A genuinely submissive man can most definitely be a worthy and valued prize, and a cherished possession. But by definition, a genuinely submissive man is not a player of deceptive games who is out to score what he can at his partners' expense. He becomes a desirable prize by taking responsibility for his own self-improvement rather than playing deceptive games or blaming others for his shortcomings.

LadyDelilahDeb -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 9:04:33 PM)
Fast reply: The game your friend is playing is called "objectification". His attitude (and some of your later exposition on how he behaves later in a relationship) match exactly what the 1960s feminists called turning women into objects—sexual objects. "A prize" is a thing, "arm candy" is a thing, a "trophy wife" is a thing. It does not matter at all what is inside the exterior of those objects. Me? I thank goddess every day that I have rarely attracted that sort of game player! And when I do, I'm so oblivious to their lines that their scripts fall apart and they end up saying something as stupid as, "hey, babe, you wanna _______?" (Depending on how drunk or stoned they are at the time, they may be explicit or they may use a euphemism.) There are better things for me to do with my time than sighing over lost chances at a pretty face. (Or accent. Worked in a cubicle next to a Brit ex-patriate one year and after the first few days, the testosterone poisoning of his overheard conversations (soccer jock, drunken partier, womanizer, socially less than mature, etc.) completely eclipsed the music of the accent. I would rather an adenoidal New Yorker with something in common, a personality, and a sincere interest in me than that studly little twit with the angelic Anglophilic accent. Anyone who would like to apply this sort of approach in a BDSM sense needs to be looking in the direction of Objectification. Which you will find as one of the fetishes/BDSM interests on the flip side. Lady Delilah Deb

dreamerdreaming -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 9:24:32 PM)
He does it by getting girls who can't see through him. The ones who can, are immune to him. They won't give him a second thought, unless they want cheap, no-strings sex. And in that case they're playing him, not the other way around. So, he's always either being played, or getting dumb chicks. And he's proud of this? That just shows how clueless he is. Don't copy him, if you want a real, lasting relationship. Copy him if you want to attract stupid young girls, who are probably spreading disease.

SomethingCatchy -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 9:53:53 PM)
quote: nonsense and game-playing ... I think it's silly Uh hello. A lot of women that go to the places he's picking them up are full of nonsense, game players, and 'silly' (read stupid). quote: advice telling guys who want to "pick up beautiful women" that they need to be douchebags. I have often boggled over this approach, though there may be something to it, where a certain kind of woman is concerned dingdingding we have a winner!

BeMyProperty -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/7/2010 11:50:45 PM)
Semi-quick reply. Of course it works with most women in the real world. Most "vanilla" women are somewhat submissive. They want the male to take the lead. They want to be a good girl to please their strong male provider. An opposite submissive version might work on me. Depending on what you mean. It's silly, but I get very drawn to a guy who acts submissive without being a wimp. I say silly because usually the guy is just acting that way because it's his job, but it still gets me thinking a bit more about him :)

VaguelyCurious -> RE: Mistress vs. Vanilla (3/8/2010 1:47:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BeMyProperty Semi-quick reply. Of course it works with most women in the real world. Most "vanilla" women are somewhat submissive. They want the male to take the lead. They want to be a good girl to please their strong male provider. They are? They do?!? I dislike that sort of unfounded generalisation-all I can say is that I wouldn't talk like that about my circle of friends...

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125