RE: Why Just Pros? (Full Version)

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



Message


Level -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/20/2010 12:45:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

I don't believe it is as damaging for the male. They are paying for the service and do not look upon the woman as much more than the sum of her holes.


I have to say the part in red doesn't always work that way.  Some clients really do see their pro as an actual relationship, rather than just a business transaction. 



Again, is this damage brought about by the pro/action, or is the person pre-damaged? A bit of both? Sometimes one, sometimes the other?

I just don't see a lot of this falling into any easily defined categories.




juliaoceania -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/20/2010 12:49:59 PM)

As long as all men look like this (damn I wish all of you did[:D])

[image]local://upfiles/269948/CA243210FB3C4FBDA48F6545CE808E0C.jpg[/image]

Edited to add, I wouldn't kick him out of my bed for smoking, and that is saying a lot




Level -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/20/2010 1:03:38 PM)

[8D]

[image]http://roflrazzi.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/johnny-depp-girls-we-all-know.jpg[/image]




zephyroftheNorth -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/20/2010 1:08:13 PM)

Damn right *drools*




daddysprop247 -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/20/2010 6:19:15 PM)

uhh, before realizing that was a picture of Johnny Depp, i actually thought it was a chick. [sm=confused.gif] dudes who could pass for chicks are not my idea of hot.




juliaoceania -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/20/2010 6:21:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: daddysprop247

uhh, before realizing that was a picture of Johnny Depp, i actually thought it was a chick. [sm=confused.gif] dudes who could pass for chicks are not my idea of hot.


he was about 20 years younger in that photo....just so you know

And funny, I never thought of him as looking like a girl, just because he is wearing longish hair... *shrugs*....




daddysprop247 -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/20/2010 6:25:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania


quote:

ORIGINAL: daddysprop247

uhh, before realizing that was a picture of Johnny Depp, i actually thought it was a chick. [sm=confused.gif] dudes who could pass for chicks are not my idea of hot.


he was about 20 years younger in that photo....just so you know

And funny, I never thought of him as looking like a girl, just because he is wearing longish hair... *shrugs*....


the hair has nothing to do with it. it's just the general bone structure of the face, combined with the smooth and soft appearance of the skin. but i realize that androgynous look is very popular.




Lucienne -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/20/2010 6:29:16 PM)

dudes who can pass for good guardians, on the other hand....




juliaoceania -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/20/2010 6:39:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: daddysprop247

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania


quote:

ORIGINAL: daddysprop247

uhh, before realizing that was a picture of Johnny Depp, i actually thought it was a chick. [sm=confused.gif] dudes who could pass for chicks are not my idea of hot.


he was about 20 years younger in that photo....just so you know

And funny, I never thought of him as looking like a girl, just because he is wearing longish hair... *shrugs*....


the hair has nothing to do with it. it's just the general bone structure of the face, combined with the smooth and soft appearance of the skin. but i realize that androgynous look is very popular.



I think he is plenty manly.... just me, etc




Level -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/20/2010 6:56:36 PM)

I just spoke to Johnny, and he is in favor of Pros.




juliaoceania -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/20/2010 7:03:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

I just spoke to Johnny, and he is in favor of Pros.


Hmmmm... is that a direct quote?

He seems pretty wild about the mother of his children (lucky bitch)




Level -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/20/2010 7:28:05 PM)

Damn, I just Googled her.... she doesn't do much for me, but like you said, he seems into her. [:)]




pdv99 -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/21/2010 11:01:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

Maybe I've got this thing all wrong. I ......... look down on the men who are so driven by unmet fetishes that they need to pay.


Why? There are more male subs around than female dominants....therefore good Dommes are a valuable commodity, and many submissives will be unable to find a Domme just by going along to munches etc. Do you believe they should they resign themselves to being unfilled? Some people have a good 'nilla relationship and just need one particular need met, without starting another relationship. A pro-domme meets that need without any personal involvement which might compromise their main relationship. While it doesn't suit everyone (I don't think it would work for me), I see no reason to look down on people who meet needs in this way.

Do you look down on people who can't fix their own car or computer and pay someone to service it? Do you look down on people who pay a professional dentist instead of getting a friend to pull that troublesome tooth?

My only concern about the world of pro-domination is about the quality of service some guys receive for their money - there is a need for a forum in which the consumer end of this little market can be represented, services reviewed etc.




pdv99 -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/21/2010 11:20:07 AM)

quote:

Steven: Let's use the McDonalds analogy. There is a lot of pressure on them to supply healthier foods. But the fact is that they simply supply what the market wants. The unhealthy food is brought about because of the buyers, who I consider ultimately responsible.


Many people choose to eat at McDonalds, it's a quick way to assuage a hunger - but that doesn't mean the only way to eat good food is to cook it yourself at home - if you go to a restaurant run by Raymond Blanc, Heston Blumenthal or Gordon Ramsay, you may taste food the average cook never dreamed of. You pay for a top chef's experience and expertise.

Of course, more people can afford a 99p McD than fine dining, so there are more fast food outlets than top restaurants. I'm guessing the pro-domination market isn't that different.




pdv99 -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/21/2010 11:28:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

Pro dommes ........... have virtually no skills whatsoever. They are people that usually through great fault of their own have decided to rely on the lowest common denominator of human capabilities to eek out a living.



WHOA!

I've known several professional dominants as personal friends. In each and every case they were people who had held down responsible jobs at other times in their lives, and either chose to combine their nilla career with a kiinky one, or took their hobby up professionally when they realised the demand for such services through their social life. And in each case, they were damn good Dommes, whether they were doing it for fun or cash.




MarcEsadrian -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/21/2010 12:09:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

I know this sounds weird but it is about the "spirit." I know that sounds fucking crazy to come out here and suggest something as odd as that. But there is a tremendous validity in making the connection. Certain occupations are simply damaging. Because they in no way nurture the inner self. But I would be willing to guess that both of these play a certain part.

We try to keep people from utilizing heroin because of the devastating consequences.....11 out of forty playmates have died fairly awful deaths...


Suicide rates are higher in professions with easy access to lethal drugs, such as actors, musicians, pharmacists and veterinary doctors. Focusing on musicians, for instance, is a fairly familiar territory for most. How many musicians died from drug overdoses or suicide? Without statistics, most can count at least one or two from memory alone. Here's a partially compiled list, couched in biblical warnings, no less: http://www.av1611.org/rockdead.html

The more scientific types can read about a study in Jour­nal of Epi­demial Com­mun­ity Health conducted by the Cen­tre for Pub­lic Health at Liv­er­pool John Moores Un­ivers­ity here: http://jech.bmj.com/content/61/10/896.full#ref-22



Female issues in regards to "spirit" are not so cut and dry, by the way. Women suffer from depression twice as much as men. This two-to-one ratio exists regardless of racial and ethnic background or economic status. 1 It's a mixed bag, and one that is increasingly complex. The lives of women in the United States have improved over the past 35 years by many objective measures, yet measures of subjective well-being indicate that women’s happiness has declined both absolutely and relative to men. 2

The reasons stem from biological differences to environmental and social pressures. Depressives (girls and boys) were found to come from families in which there was marked striving for prestige with the patient as the instrument of this need; the family showed marked concern for social achievement and the childhood background was characterized by envy and competitiveness. 3

We know that untreated depression is the number one cause for suicide, too. I found these two facts interesting in light of the observation that prestige and social achievement seem to be the partial crux of your argument against pros. The reality is that negative attitudes which support prevailing stigmas have more to do with depression and suicide than anything else, and many of them are dressed in moral arguments.

As an aside, while females suffer greater depression, males take their own lives at nearly four times the rate of females and represent 79.0% of all U.S. suicides. Men have some issues with coping far more than women do, it would seem, and they comprise the client side of sex work. It seems we have some work to do in society if we really want to get to the bottom of things. Bitching about professional domination isn't going to make any progress to that end.


1: Facts and Figures www.afsp.org
2: The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness (Betsey Stevenson & Justin Wolfers, 2006)
3: The Depressed Women (Weissman & Paykel, 1974)




pdv99 -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/21/2010 12:10:59 PM)

This post bears witness to a whole lot of hurt and hostility - it's been a long but educating read. I'm sad for those professionals on here who feel society doesn't respect what they do - but that's society at large, who have only the vaguest understanding of WIITWD, or of the "sex services industry. And I know, before I get flamed, that for some people, Pro-domme and sex work is a world apart. And for some it isn't.

I am, however, even more saddened by the hostility I read, from people on the board, towards either "pro-dommes" dismissed as being useless, or paying subs, dismissed as being pathetic. We are all unique individuals. Yeah, some "lifestylers" turn out to be pros. They deserve to be outed. Some pros are scammers who offer little in return for cash. They deserve to be exposed. Some "pay-subs" are just "needy bottoms" who can't sustain or don't want a D/s relationship: so what? Who is harmed if a pro-top meets their needs?
Some pay-subs lack the social skills to initiate a D/s relationship - so how should they start and learn without meeting/hiring a pro-Domme?

So can we manage without the holier than thou, "My way is the twoo way" egocentrism?





LadyPact -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/21/2010 1:18:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pdv99
Why? There are more male subs around than female dominants....therefore good Dommes are a valuable commodity, and many submissives will be unable to find a Domme just by going along to munches etc. Do you believe they should they resign themselves to being unfilled? Some people have a good 'nilla relationship and just need one particular need met, without starting another relationship. A pro-domme meets that need without any personal involvement which might compromise their main relationship. While it doesn't suit everyone (I don't think it would work for me), I see no reason to look down on people who meet needs in this way.

Do you look down on people who can't fix their own car or computer and pay someone to service it? Do you look down on people who pay a professional dentist instead of getting a friend to pull that troublesome tooth?

My only concern about the world of pro-domination is about the quality of service some guys receive for their money - there is a need for a forum in which the consumer end of this little market can be represented, services reviewed etc.

I really don't want to get into the debate of the "filling one need outside the vanilla relationship" bit.  The same thing could be said of a vanilla couple that has a great sex life on all other accounts, but she doesn't want to engage in oral sex, and he really NEEDS a blow job.  In addition, I don't want to drag this discussion into the 'married and cheating realm'.  I don't think anybody here is willing to fool themselves into believing ALL of those married using pros are doing so with the partners consent.  (Doesn't happen in the lifestyle side of things, so I'm not going to think it happens on the professional side.)

I'm not quite sure the fixing the car or the dentist analogies work here.  You're specifically speaking of professions where you literally have to train in order to seek work in the fields.  Also, this is different in our respective locations, as My car mechanic isn't offering a service that isn't legal and isn't regulated.

As to your last paragraph, it goes more to the point of the original.  If such a "review" of pros would be recommended for the site, why shouldn't there be a "review" of clients as well?  Maybe it would help pros to find out who wasn't courteous or polite?  Do they have a habit of canceling their appointments at the last minute or show up smelling like they just came from the gym? 

Sounds an awful lot like the blacklisting they refer to which is against TOS.




domiguy -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/21/2010 1:37:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarcEsadrian


quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

I know this sounds weird but it is about the "spirit." I know that sounds fucking crazy to come out here and suggest something as odd as that. But there is a tremendous validity in making the connection. Certain occupations are simply damaging. Because they in no way nurture the inner self. But I would be willing to guess that both of these play a certain part.

We try to keep people from utilizing heroin because of the devastating consequences.....11 out of forty playmates have died fairly awful deaths...


Suicide rates are higher in professions with easy access to lethal drugs, such as actors, musicians, pharmacists and veterinary doctors. Focusing on musicians, for instance, is a fairly familiar territory for most. How many musicians died from drug overdoses or suicide? ......

It seems we have some work to do in society if we really want to get to the bottom of things. Bitching about professional domination isn't going to make any progress to that end.


That was an incredibly boring and irrelevant read.

All I am saying is that the Pros should find something more meaningful to do with their time and they would internally and mentally be more satisfied. As well as happy to boot.

The same goes for you as well.

I don't trust your judgement. You pursue too many activities with ease that would cause many pause.

Maybe the actions don't dictate the Dom...I am not so sure.

There is something about becoming emotionally and morally bankrupt that often does not allow one to make out the Pro Dommes from the damaged or the forest.




MarcEsadrian -> RE: Why Just Pros? (6/21/2010 4:06:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy
That was an incredibly boring and irrelevant read.


Sorry, I'll include pictures next time!




Page: <<   < prev  6 7 8 [9] 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125