RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message


SocratesNot -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:16:35 PM)

WIITWD do include love and respect. But the people that I mentioned (natural dominant men) simply don't need it. They may pursue WIITWD. They may enjoy WIITWD. They may be absolutely fascinating masters. They may WANT it. But they don't NEED it.

If they want it nothing will stop them from pursuing it, but still they don't need it.




Jeffff -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:20:15 PM)

People NEED food and shelter.

Everything else is gravey




laurell3 -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:20:18 PM)

Your intellectual dishonesty and backsliding with every response is absolutely amazing and completely unintelligent and transparent. I gave you too much credit, Jeff is right, you are just an asshole.




wittynamehere -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:23:20 PM)

looool

I love how the entire thread is filled with "I'm not gonna read this, it's too long, you didn't format it the way I wanted it done, don't expect me to pay attention to your stupid thread" and so on. Some go so far as to call the guy names when he gets upset that his thread was destroyed by others for no good reason. Somebody spends several hours making something that you can benefit from or skip, and you choose instead to berate him. What a bunch of useless asshats we have for regulars at this site. It could be so much more, but with these 20 or 30 people, it will only ever be a dead end for original though, or even useful discussion.




Jeffff -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:25:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: laurell3
Jeff is right



I just wanted to highlight that for any latecomers




LadyHibiscus -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:25:42 PM)

Well, wittyone, go on and read the tripe and offer up your own deconstruction. If you think he is right, that will make...TWO of you!





porcelaine -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:25:43 PM)

laurell3,

quote:

*smacks her head against the keyboard* yeah because wiitwd doesn't involve love and respect....just keep digging....


I don't think he meant it in that context. But I'll be honest, that is my reference point when I think of what leadership is or isn't. I've dated men on that level and worked hand and hand with them as well. What I often see presented as alpha from the BDSM perspective is anything but. These men command control because of who they are not how hard they thump their chests professing their superiority.

I'm just like Jerry. Show me the money. The results speak for themselves.

~porcelaine




SocratesNot -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:26:05 PM)

quote:

Your intellectual dishonesty and backsliding with every response is absolutely amazing and completely unintelligent and transparent. I gave you too much credit, Jeff is right, you are just an asshole.


No comment on this. There is no backsliding. This is the same thing I wrote in OP. I'll quote it.
quote:


Natural alpha men probably never had any major psychological issues. They are assertive, secure, they have a lot of
self-esteem and self confidence, they know who they are and what they want. Submissive women are naturally attracted
to such men. However, natural alpha men rarely need to dominate. They are secure enough in any relationship that they
simply don't need to dominate in any way. They have natural authority and commanding presence. Very rarely they
enter formal D/s relationships. As they respect themselves, they equally respect women. Sometimes they become
dominants simply because they know that their submissive partners need it.
Even when they do, their style of dominance is not very strict nor cruel - just firm. Because natural alpha men do not have
internal need to dominate, external or fetishistic reasons which I previously described may be important in formation of
their affinity to kinky activities and domination in strict D/s sense.


That's what I wrote in OP.

and this:

quote:

WIITWD do include love and respect. But the people that I mentioned (natural dominant men) simply don't need it. They may pursue WIITWD. They may enjoy WIITWD. They may be absolutely fascinating masters. They may WANT it. But they don't NEED it.

If they want it nothing will stop them from pursuing it, but still they don't need it.


is what I wrote few seconds ago.





ReginaMirus -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:27:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SocratesNot

WIITWD do include love and respect. But the people that I mentioned (natural dominant men) simply don't need it. They may pursue WIITWD. They may enjoy WIITWD. They may be absolutely fascinating masters. They may WANT it. But they don't NEED it.

If they want it nothing will stop them from pursuing it, but still they don't need it.



Ok, I'll bite on this one (in spite of my better judgement)

Explain how that is exclusive to MALES, only.




LadyHibiscus -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:27:42 PM)

It's true, Laurel, he does stick to his story... it's only the claims of why we should agree with him that change!




Jeffff -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:31:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: wittynamehere

looool

I love how the entire thread is filled with "I'm not gonna read this, it's too long, you didn't format it the way I wanted it done, don't expect me to pay attention to your stupid thread" and so on. Some go so far as to call the guy names when he gets upset that his thread was destroyed by others for no good reason. Somebody spends several hours making something that you can benefit from or skip, and you choose instead to berate him. What a bunch of useless asshats we have for regulars at this site. It could be so much more, but with these 20 or 30 people, it will only ever be a dead end for original though, or even useful discussion.



Look at your sigline. By your own addmission you have no idea what you are talking about in this case.

This particular poster has been posting crap like this for days.

Blow Me




VideoAdminZeta -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:33:23 PM)

This is a quote from the guidelines for this section of the forums:

"Keep the discussions civil and mature, and do not insult the kinks, preferences, lifestyles, etc. of others."

The personal insults on this thread are going to stop, now.  Furthermore, the wholesale denigration of kinks, preferences, and lifestyles of others is going to stop, now.




LadyPact -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:34:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ReginaMirus


quote:

ORIGINAL: SocratesNot

WIITWD do include love and respect. But the people that I mentioned (natural dominant men) simply don't need it. They may pursue WIITWD. They may enjoy WIITWD. They may be absolutely fascinating masters. They may WANT it. But they don't NEED it.

If they want it nothing will stop them from pursuing it, but still they don't need it.



Ok, I'll bite on this one (in spite of my better judgement)

Explain how that is exclusive to MALES, only.

Saw this one on the scroll.  Actually, I think using that quoting technique would have worked to make your original easier to read, OP.

I'm curious about Regina's question as well.  Speaking specifically as someone in the minority opinion on these boards who has repeatedly stated that I believe that the only things we "need" are those things that support life and everything else are "wants" to some degree, perhaps you can address that for Me.




SocratesNot -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:35:23 PM)


quote:

Ok, I'll bite on this one (in spite of my better judgement)

Explain how that is exclusive to MALES, only.


It's not. I wrote exactly the same thing about natural alpha women.

I will quote my OP again, also I will underline relevant parts.

quote:

In my opinion of all the groups mentioned, female dominants which are natural alpha women, along with natural
alpha men
are least insecure. It is possible that they were quite successful in their youth and very beautiful as well. Such
personality simply caused most men to be somewhat afraid of them, because they feared they are not good enough or
dominant enough for such a woman.
It is possible that only the most dominant males dared to approach them and they formed power couples with such
dominant women. Such relationships sometimes work, but they quite often fail, because the struggle for power and
control is often present in them.
After dissatisfaction with several such power relationships, the dominant woman decided to take the things in her own
hands. So she used her assertiveness and sexuality to seduce more submissive types of men, and of course she was
successful. So they probably formed very successful, female led, but still vanilla relationship in which she was treated
like a goddess, and he also enjoyed the relationship with such a powerful woman very much. Many naturally dominant
women never actually proceed to real D/s or BDSM.
In most cases this happens completely accidentally if some of their
lovers happens to be kinky and introduces them to femdom. As an open minded and assertive women, more often than
not, they happen to like it, so they become dommes. Or, in an alternative case, as a open minded and curious women,
they happen to discover the kink on their own, and to like it.
The core reason for the assertiveness and pronounced sexuality of such women is probably somewhat higher level of
testosterone than women usually have.
That's why they are quite often lesbians and also they have genuine attraction to submissive and even effeminate
men.
In my opinion such female dominance is usually the most natural form of dominance because it is caused by their
natural affinity and the situation they encountered in life, and not on feelings of insecurity.
Also their style of domination
is not cruel, but nurturing, and since they don't have much internal need to dominate, their kinky elements may also be
based on external, fetishistic factors, just like among natural alpha men. However, in my opinion, genuine female dominants
are quite rare, and it is even possible that they are more present in the world of vanilla then in BDSM.





Jeffff -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:36:14 PM)

Ok, I"ll cop to "Blow Me", if the OP cops to denigration.





laurell3 -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:37:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyHibiscus

It's true, Laurel, he does stick to his story... it's only the claims of why we should agree with him that change!



No, there are so many times when he changes based on responses, I'm not referring to right now. This was just the final moment when I lost faith that there was hope for him actually being here and being able to have intelligent discussions without being judgemental and making no attempt to understand other people.

I'm out. He's welcome to espouse his experienceless views all day and only adopt responses that agree with him, however as far as I'm concerned, there's no value to having an conversation with him period. LnT is right, there is something really wrong with this picture that we aren't seeing and it isn't just being new and naive and it isn't worth the effort at all, nor are the constant apologies actually sincere or any attempt to change.





LadyHibiscus -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:38:59 PM)

I applaud the mental masochism that inspired that response, LP~

If there were no BDSM, no willing masos out there for me to stomp, I would still be a dominant woman. I would be the go to person, the problem solver, the one with the responsibility. Because dominant is who I AM, without really thinking about it. I respond to all situations as a person who is in charge, whether I am actually in charge or not. (that pesky chain of command!)

I do not NEED kink in my life, because I am of the camp that says you need air, nourishment, and shelter and the rest is gravy.




laurell3 -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:39:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeffff


quote:

ORIGINAL: laurell3
Jeff is right



I just wanted to highlight that for any latecomers


HAHA! I say that all the time, just not here! [;)] For the record, I adore you and you are (almost) always right (when you are serious). There!




mnottertail -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:40:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: wittynamehere

looool

I love how the entire thread is filled with "I'm not gonna read this, it's too long, you didn't format it the way I wanted it done, don't expect me to pay attention to your stupid thread" and so on. Some go so far as to call the guy names when he gets upset that his thread was destroyed by others for no good reason. Somebody spends several hours making something that you can benefit from or skip, and you choose instead to berate him. What a bunch of useless asshats we have for regulars at this site. It could be so much more, but with these 20 or 30 people, it will only ever be a dead end for original though, or even useful discussion.


And just how much honest contemplation is owed to every infant weltanschuuang, or every untutored navel gaze?

If you cant write it in a sentence or two first, it is junk.

Tell em what you're gonna tell em.
Tell em.
Tell em what you told em.

people are not going to wade thru cracker dry puerile pontifications of the intentions of gashbrainers as seen thru a man's eyes in the hope that one candle may be lit in their lifetime by some as yet undiscovered savant.  It ain't human nature.

That's where I'm at.

Ron




laurell3 -> RE: An interesting theory of D/s (my own) (5/26/2010 2:40:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: VideoAdminZeta

This is a quote from the guidelines for this section of the forums:

"Keep the discussions civil and mature, and do not insult the kinks, preferences, lifestyles, etc. of others."

The personal insults on this thread are going to stop, now.  Furthermore, the wholesale denigration of kinks, preferences, and lifestyles of others is going to stop, now.



didn't see it, sorry I'm out.




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

Valid CSS!




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