RE: fake female doms (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity



Message


DommeKeliDallas -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 1:23:42 PM)

"DOM" is male.
DOMME is FEMALE.




Jeffff -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 1:41:33 PM)

I find your post offensive!



MistressJeff




LadyNTrainer -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 2:00:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DommeKeliDallas

"DOM" is male.
DOMME is FEMALE.


Eh, bullshit.  A dominant is a dominant.  It's not a gendered adjective.  If you feel the need to femme it up to emphasize your gender, go right ahead, but know that '"domme" is essentially a made-up word that hit the scene in the 1990's on the Internet.  It's not French, and it's not real in any sense except that we choose to make it so.  You can make that choice for yourself, but there's no objective reality behind it at all.




Missokyst -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 3:27:03 PM)

Not all female dominants CHOOSE to use the "me" qualifier to their name. Dominant, is dominant, it has no sex.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DommeKeliDallas

"DOM" is male.
DOMME is FEMALE.





Focus50 -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 3:39:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyNTrainer

quote:

ORIGINAL: DommeKeliDallas

"DOM" is male.
DOMME is FEMALE.


Eh, bullshit.  A dominant is a dominant.  It's not a gendered adjective.  If you feel the need to femme it up to emphasize your gender, go right ahead, but know that '"domme" is essentially a made-up word that hit the scene in the 1990's on the Internet.  It's not French, and it's not real in any sense except that we choose to make it so.  You can make that choice for yourself, but there's no objective reality behind it at all.


Profundly disagree! Of course there's an objective reality to differentiating between the two. We call it *communicating* - so that one stranger knows what another stranger is talking about.... Which very much makes "domme" a gendered adjective. (or noun)

The thing is, are we really here to get all anal about what is or isn't in the dictionary or are we here to discuss and communicate in a manner where other strangers know just what tha hell we're each trying to say? I'd think mature adults would go with the latter....

Focus.




blueeyedbbwsub -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 3:43:38 PM)

Search feature is your friend. I'm a fake person, just haven't let anyone in on it yet. Oopsie, til now. [8|]

It's the internet, there's fake everythings and everybodies. You can't tell me that in this day and age most people don't realize this? I don't know what you put in your pipe, but hell gimme a hit. Maybe it'll get rid of the general headache I get when I read "another fake" thread. They're not even a dime a dozen anymore, more like a penny a hundred. And now I know why the penny is falling by the wayside, it ain't even worth a penny anymore.

'Nuff said..............




dreamerdreaming -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 3:58:29 PM)

Thank you, Captain Obvious. [8|]


Block and delete. Report them, if warranted.


And: dom is a unisex term. Nyah!  [8D]




DesFIP -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 4:24:31 PM)

Fake for you could be soul mate for someone else. And op, btw, usually when a guy complains about all the wimmins being fake, we read it as they turned him down.




LadyNTrainer -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 5:34:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50
Profundly disagree! Of course there's an objective reality to differentiating between the two. We call it *communicating* - so that one stranger knows what another stranger is talking about.... Which very much makes "domme" a gendered adjective. (or noun)

The thing is, are we really here to get all anal about what is or isn't in the dictionary or are we here to discuss and communicate in a manner where other strangers know just what tha hell we're each trying to say? I'd think mature adults would go with the latter....



Yes.  And one of the things *I* am trying to communicate is that I don't believe that dominance is intrinsically gendered.  I respect people who want to emphasize their own gender; they may certainly do that if they choose.  But they don't get to make everybody else do it too.

I am a dominant.  If you want a short form of that, dom will do fine.  There is no reason in the world that it shouldn't be used to describe me, unless of course you think that a female dominant is not actually a dominant.  I care less about what's in the dictionary and more about the silliness of trying to make the word "dominant" or "dom" exclude women. It does not exclude women, and there is no need for a femmed-up version of the word for that reason. 

It can be convenient shorthand if you do want to reference someone's gender and you don't want to spell it out otherwise, but it's not necessary or mandatory.  Use it if you like it and it works in context, but don't assume it's the only correct way to refer to a dominant who is female.




SocratesNot -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 6:18:43 PM)

I think the term domme just help explain in one word that the dominant is female.If you used just the term "dom" it could be ambigous since it could refer both to male dominant and to female dominant. I don't see that using the word "domme" is implying that female dominants aren't actually dominants.




reckless64 -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 8:03:34 PM)

Well sorry about calling dommes doms.




Focus50 -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 8:16:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyNTrainer

Yes.  And one of the things *I* am trying to communicate is that I don't believe that dominance is intrinsically gendered.  I respect people who want to emphasize their own gender; they may certainly do that if they choose.  But they don't get to make everybody else do it too.

I am a dominant.  If you want a short form of that, dom will do fine.  There is no reason in the world that it shouldn't be used to describe me, unless of course you think that a female dominant is not actually a dominant.  I care less about what's in the dictionary and more about the silliness of trying to make the word "dominant" or "dom" exclude women. It does not exclude women, and there is no need for a femmed-up version of the word for that reason. 

It can be convenient shorthand if you do want to reference someone's gender and you don't want to spell it out otherwise, but it's not necessary or mandatory.  Use it if you like it and it works in context, but don't assume it's the only correct way to refer to a dominant who is female.


Crikey, this just gets sillier by the second...!

The thing is, you walk into a munch full of strangers and say you're a dominant, chances are *everyone* knows whether you're male or female - it's a no-brainer.

And another no-brainer is that this is a Forum of the WRITTEN WORD. But I'm sure you're not the type to get pissed one day when someone inadvertantly mistakes your dominant self for being a male, based on something you wrote. If that's so, we're all good and if not - the difference amounts to two lousy extra key strokes.

Get real - it (dom or domme) happens to be a language everyone here *understands*.... Does that not serve a purpose, as opposed to splitting hairs at the atomic level?

Focus.




kiwisub12 -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 8:18:19 PM)

Actually, everyone is reading the OP as fake dommes that are female.

The way it is written, it could also refer to fake women claiming to be doms................................ just saying.




Focus50 -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 8:22:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SocratesNot

I think the term domme just help explain in one word that the dominant is female.If you used just the term "dom" it could be ambigous since it could refer both to male dominant and to female dominant. I don't see that using the word "domme" is implying that female dominants aren't actually dominants.


Precisely! But it only works to distinguish the ladies. Lol, I seem to recall someone asked you if you were m or f in your "humiliation" thread....? So the question of gender does arise in other people's minds.

Focus.




LadyNTrainer -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 8:37:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50
The thing is, you walk into a munch full of strangers and say you're a dominant, chances are *everyone* knows whether you're male or female - it's a no-brainer.

And another no-brainer is that this is a Forum of the WRITTEN WORD. But I'm sure you're not the type to get pissed one day when someone inadvertantly mistakes your dominant self for being a male, based on something you wrote. If that's so, we're all good and if not - the difference amounts to two lousy extra key strokes.


You're assuming two things.  One, that strangers have the right to know anything about another stranger - including their gender and sexual or D/s orientation - that someone may not feel like wearing on their sleeve in a forum discussion.  Two, that I personally care whether someone knows my gender or not.  The answer is no to both questions.


quote:

Get real - it (dom or domme) happens to be a language everyone here *understands*.... Does that not serve a purpose, as opposed to splitting hairs at the atomic level?


So it serves no purpose to state that dominance is not gendered?  I'm glad that you know what is personally important to you, but you don't get to decide that for everyone else. 

As I said, if you find it convenient to use "domme" as shorthand for "female dominant", go right ahead when that is the most practical way to convey that information.  Just don't assume that it's mandatory or necessary in all cases, because the term "dominant" is inclusive of both genders and is not exclusive to male dominants. 





Focus50 -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 8:56:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyNTrainer

You're assuming two things.  One, that strangers have the right to know anything about another stranger - including their gender and sexual or D/s orientation - that someone may not feel like wearing on their sleeve in a forum discussion.  Two, that I personally care whether someone knows my gender or not.  The answer is no to both questions.

Ok, this is just transparent posturing - you need it, I don't...!

Moving on....



quote:

So it serves no purpose to state that dominance is not gendered?  I'm glad that you know what is personally important to you, but you don't get to decide that for everyone else. 

As I said, if you find it convenient to use "domme" as shorthand for "female dominant", go right ahead when that is the most practical way to convey that information.  Just don't assume that it's mandatory or necessary in all cases, because the term "dominant" is inclusive of both genders and is not exclusive to male dominants. 


Of course dominance isn't gender based. I'm just not wearing your chip about it - that 'domme' signifies female dominant but you're clearly interpretting it as meaning less dominant than dom, hence your indignation.

Sheesh!

Focus.




Hawkwindblues -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 9:17:27 PM)

Concerning Socrates, must he have not have choosen Socratesess, if he were a she, Focus50?



...





Silence8 -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 9:20:56 PM)

Interesting how this post is fairly deja vu, but still a lot of individuals fail to admit that the OP is basically right (even while admitting that the post is a repeat!)

Familiar with Freud's broken kettle?

quote:

.. the dream… reminded one vividly of a defence put forward by the man who was charged by one of his neighbours with having given him back a borrowed kettle in a damaged condition. The defendant asserted, first, that he had given it back undamaged; secondly that the kettle had a hole in it when he borrowed it; and, thirdly, that he never borrowed a kettle from his neighbour at all. So much the better if only a single one of these three lines of defence were to be accepted as valid the man would have to be acquitted. (Vol 4, Pelican Freud Library, p197)






MadameMarque -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 9:42:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: reckless64

Well sorry about calling dommes doms.


It's alright. As LadyN has aptly stated, calling a dominant a 'dom,' for short, whether male or female, is perfectly acceptable.

At some point, some how, someone started adding '-me,' in the hopes of feminizing it, probably thinking that if 'femme' was French for woman, then a female dom would be, 'domme.' But in fact, it's not a French word for a dominant female. The only French meaning of the word, is that it's a place - Domme, France.

To call a female dominant a domme is a scene convention based upon a made-up word, which, in itself, is fine. And in fact, it's a convention of writing only, because in speech, 'dom' and 'domme' are both pronounced the same way, so you couldn't communicate gender by speaking the words.

I believe Focus50 argues that 'everybody knows it means female dominant, so you should opt for the term that communicates most effectively, without picking on its etymology.' I, too, am in favour of efficacy of communication over form, but I don't think Focus50 is taking in what's really being discussed about use of these terms.

I don't think anyone has complained that you *shouldn't* use domme; I use it. But when you get to the point of correcting someone's spelling, as happened above, telling them that they should use the made-up word instead of 'dom,' which is slang, but at least it is short for the real term, that's when some of us have a problem.

First, it is not true that 'everyone knows what you mean,' when you use 'dom' and 'domme.' From a practical viewpoint, this convention is actually rather impractical, as it makes all uses of the term "dom," masculine, whereas 'dom' can also be correctly used without implying any gender, which often causes confusion. where one person believes 'dom' is gender neutral, and another believes it implies a male.

And I agree with LadyN, that whereas it's fine to have some shorthand for which gender you mean, it's not necessary to 'fem it up' (love that, by the way) - a dominant is the dominant. Make no mistake that the politics of language are very real, including gender in language. You can observe discussions all the time, questioning the power of a female dominant, as if there is being "dominant," and then there is being a "female dominant."

So when a female is called dominant, dom, owner, even master, you might ask, is this to imply that in order to indicate power, you must use a masculine term? Or instead, does it mean that those terms of power are not automatically masculine, and do not require description of the gender. The dominant is the dominant, period.




LadyNTrainer -> RE: fake female doms (5/21/2010 9:49:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50
Of course dominance isn't gender based. I'm just not wearing your chip about it - that 'domme' signifies female dominant but you're clearly interpretting it as meaning less dominant than dom, hence your indignation.


Always using a special word for a female dominant, as opposed to referring to her as a "dominant", does give the original word a male gender by default. Do you really not understand why some of us are inclined to point out that this is not necessarily a good thing?  Also, being misinformed about the history of a word or of our community isn't a good thing either.  If you use the term, you should know where it came from.

"Domme" can be convenient shorthand to quickly convey information about your gender and D/s role, and some people enjoy emphasizing their gender in conjunction with their kink.  I don't have a problem with that.  I do have a problem with insisting that "domme" is the proper or correct term for a female dominant.  It's not. It's a bit of Internet slang that got started in the 1990's when BDSM folks started interacting more commonly online than in person.  I think it's intended to sound French.  I laugh a lot when people ask how to pronounce it.  It has no single recognized spoken form, because it didn't originate as a spoken word or from any actual language.  It's useful Internet shorthand, kind of like text-speak where you type "u" instead of "you".  Some people prefer to convey information in shorthand, and that's fine.  Just understand clearly that this is what you're doing.

Back in the 1990's, folks from the Usenet era watched and commented on the massive influx of cyber-newbies essentially inventing their own online BDSM culture with few or no roots in the real life community of the day.  There was significant culture shock, to put it mildly, when AOL exploded onto the scene and drastically changed the nature and the language of the thing.  I'm not saying whether this change was for good or bad,  but that's how it happened.  Folks who know this history are going to think you're silly if you insist that the word is real, or "proper", or that it has a History Of Ancient Leather Tradition.  It doesn't.  It's chat room speak, and its sole reasonable use is to convey information in shorthand without having to type it out. 

Which you can certainly do if you find that useful, but you also have the right not to be deceived about the word's history in our community when you choose to use it.  This is all there is. 




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

Valid CSS!




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