No Male dominatrices?

No Male dominatrices? (Full Version)

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

Message

submale4u2spank -> No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 7:07:40 PM)
How come there are tons of female dominatrices but no male ones?

ourmsbetty -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 7:19:26 PM)
because the term specifically refers to women who are Dominant. Like waiter/waitress. There are no male waitresses. Actor/actress. Dominant/Dominatrix/Domina/Domme Or did you mean professionally? There are male pro doms, but they are hard to find.

submale4u2spank -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 7:33:44 PM)
Yes I meant pro Doms. I've never heard of them, not that I'm interested, I just think it is an interesting question to be asked.

DarkSteven -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 7:35:23 PM)
Well, I understand that there are several specifically in the gay scene. But hetero ones? Never heard of one.

LadyHibiscus -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 7:35:32 PM)
Full of questions, aren't ya? [:)] You might have fun with the "search" function. One of the cool things about this site is that EVERY post is archived, somewhere. There are some great discussions that we had in years past! Regarding male pro dominants---there are SOME, more often serving the gay community.

ourmsbetty -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 7:37:10 PM)
http://denver.backpage.com/Domination/bdsm-training-for-submissive-men-realize-your-submissive-nature/5111787 Now you have. [:)]

Andalusite -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 7:38:11 PM)
There are some bisexual male pro-Dominants, and straight men who are pro-Dominants who will top men non-sexually. Women are rarely willing to pay for sex or BDSM, so few professionals cater to them.

submale4u2spank -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 7:38:39 PM)
I did do a search, but probably didn't use the proper terms. I'm not really thinking about the gay community, more the idea of a straight male dom that gets female clients.

LadyHibiscus -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 7:40:08 PM)
Honestly? Chicks don't have to pay for it. Not with cash, anyway. [;)]

Andalusite -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 7:52:02 PM)
I know someone has mentioned that she paid a male pro-submissive before, but he had to look good and cater to her specific requirements. I had the impression that he also had male clients, but I could be mistaken.

LadyCimarron -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 7:55:19 PM)
Well just so you know, I have received CM messages from male professional submissives asking me to pay for their services. So maybe it kind of balances out. You may even want to break into prosubbing yourself. The ones I heard from charge a pretty good fee. This really surprised me btw.

LadyHibiscus -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 7:57:00 PM)
I agree with LC, pro SUBBING can be a money maker, but you do have to take extra precautions for safety, IMO. There are SO many dingbats who have no clue what is and isn't a good idea.... I know, I see them in clubs alllll the time!

SimplyMichael -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 7:59:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyHibiscus Honestly? Chicks don't have to pay for it. Not with cash, anyway. [;)] Don't bet on it, while it isn't common, it does happen. There are at least two well known male dominants who pro-domm women in LA. They don't get much business but they do get it. If they want a good looking talented dominant who isn't going to make any demands outside of a scene, there are professional women who make enough to just hire talent, especially if they don't want to spend a bunch of time screening people they don't want to have a long term thing with or they don't want to meet in public. You have to remember that places like Los Angeles are not like the rest of the world, three bedroom apartments in good neighborhoods can be $2,500, different financial world.

AAkasha -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 7:59:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Andalusite I know someone has mentioned that she paid a male pro-submissive before, but he had to look good and cater to her specific requirements. I had the impression that he also had male clients, but I could be mistaken. I did about a year ago, maybe a year and a half. I have no problem getting men to submit to me, but I wanted a very, very HOT guy, in a very STOCKED dungeon, totally on my terms and totally no strings attached. It was amazing and well worth it. I think I posted about it in "positive experiences." The dungeon was Passive Arts. I also paid a switch femme at the same time so she could participate and we could co-top him. It cost a pretty penny but it was really fun. The key for me was that he was very skilled as a bottom, incredible eye candy, open to making the experience everything I wanted it to be, and didn't come with any agenda at all. He had some other clients too. There's a male master that works there also, I believe. Another reason I did it is that I have a clear "paid whore" fantasy; I like to objectify men by paying them to do things for me, and then having total control of the situation. I have roleplayed it in a variety of ways and experimented with it in other fashions, but this was a great extension of it. And seriously, money is merely currency and my time is more valuable. People say "oh you could have guys lining up to submit" - sure, but they all have an agenda, and all require the currency of time to be screened, evaluated, vetted for honesty, and then there's the issue of trust. Whose house? Whose toys? And the idea that no strings is really that - no strings. Do as I say, then leave. If a man is incredibly easy on the eyes, skilled at bottoming, comes in a fully stocked dungeon, knows how to please dominant women, totally open minded - what's not to like about that? Clearly money well spent, IMHO. If there were as many pro male subs as there are pro femdoms, so a lady could literally flip through pages for a look, style, gear she liked -- hell yes I would be a consumer of those goods. Akasha

LadyHibiscus -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 8:37:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael quote: ORIGINAL: LadyHibiscus Honestly? Chicks don't have to pay for it. Not with cash, anyway. [;)] Don't bet on it, while it isn't common, it does happen. There are at least two well known male dominants who pro-domm women in LA. They don't get much business but they do get it. If they want a good looking talented dominant who isn't going to make any demands outside of a scene, there are professional women who make enough to just hire talent, especially if they don't want to spend a bunch of time screening people they don't want to have a long term thing with or they don't want to meet in public. You have to remember that places like Los Angeles are not like the rest of the world, three bedroom apartments in good neighborhoods can be $2,500, different financial world. Wowser!! I can see that kind of thing happening, though, pro dominant as gigolo... and I could see myself hiring a serious pain slut, if I had that level of lucre. A serious pain slut with a good unit, and skillz... but that's another fantasy.

SocratesNot -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 10:00:10 PM)
quote: How come there are tons of female dominatrices but no male ones? Because women are extremely unwilling to pay to be dominated by men, there are few exceptions, but knowing that the scene practically doesn't exist, even those women who are willing to pay to be dominated by men have a hard time to find a dom, so the supply is extremely limited due to extremely small demand, and then even this extremely small demand is even more limited due to practically non-existent supply. In general, the main, fundamental, yet politically incorrect reasons are (which also applies to all the other forms of paid sexual activities): a) women, in general, have weaker sex drive (libido) than man, they simply don't desire sex and all the other sexual things as strongly as men b) women, in general, are more sexually repressed than man and the society judges women and men who do exactly the same things completely differently. For example: a man who has had a lot of women is considered to be a Don Juan, womanizer, etc (all these words do not have very strong negative connotation), while women who has had a lot of men is considered to be a whore (extremely disapproving). Another example is that it is more acceptable and less judged in society if men pays for sex or other sexual services than if a women does it. In general, there still exists unequal treatment of genders in many, many subtle ways. So the answer is smaller sexual desire of women + even this smaller desire is strongly repressed by society = extremely small demand for sex services provided by hetero men to women The interesting thing is that there are lot of lesbian and straight women who will pay female dominatrices to dominate them. When it comes to lesbians, by being a part of LGBT community they are already somewhat emancipated from sexual repression so they are more willing to pay for sexual services. When it comes to straight women they will pay a pro domme for 3 reasons: - there are almost no pro Doms - even if there are pro Doms, women are more likely to TRUST another women than men, especially if the man is a stranger - it is less sexually inappropriate (in a greater society) if it remains among women - plus they believe that the Domme will keep a secret.

tazzygirl -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 10:11:09 PM)
quote: a) women, in general, have weaker sex drive (libido) than man, they simply don't desire sex and all the other sexual things as strongly as men b) women, in general, are more sexually repressed than man and the society judges women and men who do exactly the same things completely differently. Please tell me you dont believe this.

SocratesNot -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 10:20:40 PM)
quote: Please tell me you dont believe this. I do believe this because this is true, even though this is inconvenient.

sexyred1 -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 10:25:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SocratesNot quote: How come there are tons of female dominatrices but no male ones? In general, the main, fundamental, yet politically incorrect reasons are (which also applies to all the other forms of paid sexual activities): a) women, in general, have weaker sex drive (libido) than man, they simply don't desire sex and all the other sexual things as strongly as men b) women, in general, are more sexually repressed than man and the society judges women and men who do exactly the same things completely differently. For example: a man who has had a lot of women is considered to be a Don Juan, womanizer, etc (all these words do not have very strong negative connotation), while women who has had a lot of men is considered to be a whore (extremely disapproving). Another example is that it is more acceptable and less judged in society if men pays for sex or other sexual services than if a women does it. In general, there still exists unequal treatment of genders in many, many subtle ways. So the answer is smaller sexual desire of women + even this smaller desire is strongly repressed by society = extremely small demand for sex services provided by hetero men to women Not only have you no experience in D/s but apparently, have met all the wrong women. Poor thing.

tazzygirl -> RE: No Male dominatrices? (6/14/2010 10:27:23 PM)
LOL thats what i was thinking. My last two relationships semi-complained about my sex drive! i say semi because they definitely reaped the rewards [:D]

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875