|
FirmhandKY -> RE: Just a little ill with it! (9/23/2004 9:11:58 PM)
|
Very interesting reading.
Personally, people who enjoy this kind of life style aren't any different (at least to me), than the general population. You have the full range of idiots to geniuses, from psychos to gentlemen and ladies.
What makes it so bad for the submissive women is that the ratio of men to women is so high (10 to 1?) on sites like this, and most often it is the less ... ahhh .... shall we say ... mannered? ... men - who have no shame and no compunction (or no clue) of what life is about, much less what Bdsm is about, or what women are about - that easily clog up the email boxes of any woman who admits that she likes a submissive lifestyle.
As a consequence, women get absolutely bombarded with the worst of the life, and the worst of the men, become very suspicious (as they should), and difficult to approach. A case of the bad driving out the good.
Whenever I email a woman, I try very hard to met all her criteria, read her profile and be intelligent and entertaining when I write. No form letters, although sometimes my emails may be short, if the ladies profile is short, or there is only a little there to see if there could be any connection. I get responses a fair amount of times. But If I do get a response, I am looking for the same things that the fem posters here say they are: intelligence, politness, the ability to think coherently .... too often I don't get that. Either because she isn't any of those things ... or she is just worn out from answering all the idiots.
And the comments about looks versus personality ...
I don't want to tick anyone off, but if you think that appearances aren't a factor, and you can base any decisions about how well you will like someone, or find someone sexual exciting based only on personality ... I gotta disagree.
Call me shallow if you must, but there are certain physical characteristics that evolution has hardwired into us to find attractive. Does this mean that everyone must be a ravishing beauty? Does this mean that if you are less than perfect, you have no chance to get a partner based on personality? No, not at all.
In my experience, people of outstanding beauty are often shallower than people of average or sub-average appearance (a generalization). Why? Because, in general, "good looking" people have been able to get along in life, get what they want from other people without mastering all the social skills that a less than "beautiful" person must. When you find a combination of both in a person ... keep em, they are definite winners.
These personal skills are what "less than perfect" people use to entrance and capture the hearts of their partners. These skills are the social equivalent to physical beauty, but more difficult to judge than physical appearance.
But even if you are attuned to these facts, there are still certain people that you may never get to know, who you may never get to learn of their beautiful personalities, because you won't make the effort based on their physical appearance.
Like I said, appreciation of physical appearance is hard wired into the human brain, and is the first criteria that ANYONE uses to judge a potential partner. Personality must be experienced, and verified before it can overcome this fact. Can you honestly tell me that you have never "passed" on a potential partner, based solely on their looks (or lack thereof)?
Why is it so noteworthy when a beautiful woman is seen on the arms of a troll of a man?
Why does everyone chatter when a studly man shows up at a party with a plain jane woman?
Because it is so darn uncommon, that's why!
In a perfect world, it shouldn't be.
Wake me up when the perfect world gets here, ok?
just my $0.02
FHK
|
|
|
|
