quote:

Once a relationship is going, there's the BDSM cliche, "the maledom wants to know how well she gives a blowjob, the femdom how well he cleans house." I don't say this is "accurate," but it provides interesting food for thought. Luckyalbatross said this to me when we had dinner some years ago, before she moved to TX.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SocratesNot
Even the question - which is stricter - can be answered qualitatively, instead of quantitatively.

quote:

I was expecting the discussion about basic qualitative differences between maledom and femdom relationships.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SocratesNot

Thanks God, this thread is finally going in right direction. I enjoyed reading last responses of both LadyNTrainer and LadyAngelika.
I agree with most of what you said, maybe not with all, but, even if I disagree on some minor things, I am impressed with the style and thoughtfulness of your posts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SocratesNot

Maybe you said the same things in a little different way.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SocratesNot

In her last post maybe she expressed similar opinion as in the first one, but in quite different tone.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SocratesNot

OK, I'm wrong. She actually didn't state the very same thing.
Only parrots state very same thing several times.
She said somewhat similar thing. And she was a lot more constructive and a lot less rude in her last post than in her first.
Her first post was deliberate making fun of the thread.
In her last post maybe she expressed similar opinion as in the first one, but in quite different tone.

quote:

OK, I'm wrong. She actually didn't state the very same thing.
Only parrots state very same thing several times.
She said somewhat similar thing. And she was a lot more constructive and a lot less rude in her last post than in her first.
Her first post was deliberate making fun of the thread.
In her last post maybe she expressed similar opinion as in the first one, but in quite different tone.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika

quote:

- What are the main differences between the two?

One has men in charge, the other has women.

quote:

- What are the similarities?

They are D/s relationships.

quote:

- In which of the two is the domination usually more strict?

This depends entirely on the dominant and has nothing to do with gender.

quote:

- Which is more risky?

This depends entirely on the dominant and has nothing to do with gender.

quote:

- Are there differences in style of domination and submission in them?

This depends entirely on the dominant and submissives and has nothing to do with gender.

quote:

- What about the subs? What are the differences between male subs and female subs?

This depends entirely on the submissives and has nothing to do with gender.

quote:

- Who of them are usually more obedient, male subs or female subs? Who have more limits?

This depends entirely on the submissives and has nothing to do with gender.

quote:

- And what about the Dominants? What are the differences between male dominants and female dominants?

Other than the difference in their gender, this depends entirely on the dominant and has nothing to do with gender.

quote:

- Which is easier to implement, maledom relationship or femdom relationship?

This depends entirely on the dominant and has nothing to do with gender.

- LA

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrpheusAgonistes

quote:

OK, I'm wrong. She actually didn't state the very same thing.
Only parrots state very same thing several times.
She said somewhat similar thing. And she was a lot more constructive and a lot less rude in her last post than in her first.
Her first post was deliberate making fun of the thread.
In her last post maybe she expressed similar opinion as in the first one, but in quite different tone.

In the best Socratic dialogues, Socrates begins by posing a question about how to define a particular virtue to a pompous and puffed up Athenian and proceeds, through the process of a gentle but deeply cutting interrogation, to demolish every commonsense view proposed by his interlocutor.  Having finally elevated his new friend to a state of aporia, a state of blissful and vertiginous confusion, Socrates happily wanders off in search of booze and free food.  Thus was philosophy born.

In the best SocratesNot post, a series of questions are posed to which the OP presumes he already knows the answer.  He won't admit this, under any circumstances, and goes through the sad charade of trying to "find out what people think" with all the intellectual honesty of an election in a Soviet satellite state during the early 80s.  When questioned, he flies into histrionics, pouts, and then suddenly tries to save the day by claiming he has suddenly had an epiphany and now, in a blinding flash of insight, has come to understand it all.  Even an awfully clever person has a limited number of true Eureka! moments in a lifetime.  The OP has used all his up in the course of a few threads on Collar Me.  That makes me sad.

SN--LA and VC have indeed been saying the same thing for some time.  I'm honestly not sure why you have such difficulty parsing nuance.  At first, I thought this was some kind of gimmick.  But if it is, you're admirably committed to the ruse.

At some point you need to disabuse yourself of the notion that saying "usually" or "generally" somehow transforms a rigid point of view into something more nuanced and interesting.  Let's suppose we look at a chart for the rainfall in Shallow, North Dakota over the course of a 12 month period.  Let's also suppose that 27  times during the course of that year, it rains or snows on a Thursday.  There are few if any conclusions that can be drawn from this.  Your method is to say "But we can see it usually rains on Thursday!  And rain is associated with sadness but also fertility!  Therefore on Thursday most people are pregnant and sad!"  And someone comes along and explains that you're being really rather awfully daft.  You reply "Excuuuuuuuse me but I CLEARLY SAID 'usually.'  So get off my back, man."  Then, following page after page of reasonable, articulate critiques, you will finally pick out a salient post that grabbed your fancy for some reason and say "Oh now I get it!  It's all so clear now!  How silly of me. You're absolutely right!"

Then, a week later, you will make an identical post in which you point out that you've now discovered it is really Wednesday on which people are (usually) sad and pregnant.

So it goes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


LA's first post was a categorical rejection of gender differences. I'm surprised no one took her to task for that. Additionally, she never reference one difference between maledoms and femdoms, which does point to bias (not wanting to admit there are any differences.)

quote:

LA's first post was a categorical rejection of gender differences. I'm surprised no one took her to task for that. Additionally, she never referenced one difference between maledoms and femdoms, which does point to bias (not wanting to admit there are any differences.)

quote:

Pointing out gender differences is always an explosive topic, but I still think its an interesting one. To me, this thread was littered with empty and evasive responses -- and I have more issues with them than with the OP.

quote:

In the best Socratic dialogues, Socrates begins by posing a question about how to define a particular virtue to a pompous and puffed up Athenian and proceeds, through the process of a gentle but deeply cutting interrogation, to demolish every commonsense view proposed by his interlocutor.  Having finally elevated his new friend to a state of aporia, a state of blissful and vertiginous confusion, Socrates happily wanders off in search of booze and free food.  Thus was philosophy born.

In the best SocratesNot post, a series of questions are posed to which the OP presumes he already knows the answer.  He won't admit this, under any circumstances, and goes through the sad charade of trying to "find out what people think" with all the intellectual honesty of an election in a Soviet satellite state during the early 80s.  When questioned, he flies into histrionics, pouts, and then suddenly tries to save the day by claiming he has suddenly had an epiphany and now, in a blinding flash of insight, has come to understand it all.  Even an awfully clever person has a limited number of true Eureka! moments in a lifetime.  The OP has used all his up in the course of a few threads on Collar Me.  That makes me sad.

SN--LA and VC have indeed been saying the same thing for some time.  I'm honestly not sure why you have such difficulty parsing nuance.  At first, I thought this was some kind of gimmick.  But if it is, you're admirably committed to the ruse.

At some point you need to disabuse yourself of the notion that saying "usually" or "generally" somehow transforms a rigid point of view into something more nuanced and interesting.  Let's suppose we look at a chart for the rainfall in Shallow, North Dakota over the course of a 12 month period.  Let's also suppose that 27  times during the course of that year, it rains or snows on a Thursday.  There are few if any conclusions that can be drawn from this.  Your method is to say "But we can see it usually rains on Thursday!  And rain is associated with sadness but also fertility!  Therefore on Thursday most people are pregnant and sad!"  And someone comes along and explains that you're being really rather awfully daft.  You reply "Excuuuuuuuse me but I CLEARLY SAID 'usually.'  So get off my back, man."  Then, following page after page of reasonable, articulate critiques, you will finally pick out a salient post that grabbed your fancy for some reason and say "Oh now I get it!  It's all so clear now!  How silly of me. You're absolutely right!"

Then, a week later, you will make an identical post in which you point out that you've now discovered it is really Wednesday on which people are (usually) sad and pregnant.

So it goes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

The idea that absent absolute truths you must keep your mouth shut is ludicrous. I see big differences between maledoms and femdoms, just like I see big differences between men and women. The trick is, can you point out the differences effectively instead of copping out or engaging in bigotry or stupid, caricature-like stereotypes.