RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme?

RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress

Message

DMFParadox -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 4:48:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze I grew up with "My freedom ends where I infringe the freedom of another person" - so whatever I do at home is my business, if I mix with others, I behave according to the rules of the society I mix in. Positive freedom and negative freedom, they call that, in political science. 'Freedom-from' and 'freedom-to', respectively. Yep, we all have to remember the assumptions about manners and etiquette of others. A corollary to this is that the more people there are, the less total freedom exists. Bumping elbows more means you have to mind your manners more.

WyldHrt -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 5:06:26 PM)
quote: Wasn't replying to you, pahunk; I was replying to the ladyhibiscus, who coincidentally I'd hidden a while ago so I only saw her stuff through your reply. You got caught in the crossfire, I was not really talking to you or for your benefit, except to acknowledge that you were indeed applying your irony in ways I agreed with. Edit - ugh, in reply to PAHUNKBOY, not peon. Fucking buttons behaving badly up ins. Ummm... PA isn't on this thread, unless you are seeing posts that the rest of us aren't... [8D]

domiguy -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 5:09:50 PM)
This is the wonderful thing about Fet. Naughty Nick doesn't get to participate. Booted him out of one group, myself. Out here there is no escape. It's a fuck for all. Want to have a meaningful conversation? Try it with popeye, naughtynick and the likes of tuckingslaves floating around.

PeonForHer -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 5:12:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DMFParadox fucking with women gets their attention. Teasing them. Saying something nice, then qualifying it, that gets attention. OK. In all seriousness . . . Per Lady Hib's comment - no, I do know that she was talking about better manners and that being a small price to pay, rather than grovelling or 'toadying', as I put it. Seen in terms of the economy of the pocket and even the 'economy of the mind' - it seems well worth it for a male to polish his manners in the dating game. I meant it when I said that smooth manners in a male are his equivalent of stockings and suspenders in female. I've empirically tested it, and it works. In fact, it works so well it almost feels like cheating. (Somewhat in the same sense as when women accuse other women of 'cheating' when those other women wear tops that are 'too revealing'.) As for your comments along the lines of . . . " . . . know, you have to somehow make them doubt your sincerity. Overplay your hand. Make them think you're not really interested. Turn it into a joke - not a mean one, but just one that's friendly and gives you an out. Makes you unattainable . . . ." I think that also works - but that it misses a fundamental principle, without which it fails very badly. Again, I know this myself from experience. The principle is that it won't work unless the woman is very clear that you have an underlying fondness for her. Beneath that is a firm belief that I've developed over quite a long time - that the men who are most successful with women are the ones who like them the most. I do mean 'like' - not 'get turned on by', 'worship' or 'adore'. It's not that hard, really, once you can get past a few of your own securities, and a few of their prickles.

ElanSubdued -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 5:24:30 PM)
Peon, quote: PeonForHer to DMFParadox: You don't know me very well, do you? [;)] Unfortunately, the rest of us do. Greedy slut. If you want a "gallon" you're gonna' have to put out! (Edited for more accurate characterization. :-) E.

ElanSubdued -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 5:33:10 PM)
quote: WyldHrt: Ummm... PA isn't on this thread, unless you are seeing posts that the rest of us aren't... [8D] Hey... HottieHrt is back in the thread. That's always a good thing. :-) E.

seekingOwnertoo -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 5:36:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Per Lady Hib's comment - no, I do know that she was talking about better manners and that being a small price to pay, rather than grovelling or 'toadying', as I put it. Seen in terms of the economy of the pocket and even the 'economy of the mind' - it seems well worth it for a male to polish his manners in the dating game. I meant it when I said that smooth manners in a male are his equivalent of stockings and suspenders in female. I've empirically tested it, and it works. In fact, it works so well it almost feels like cheating. (Somewhat in the same sense as when women accuse other women of 'cheating' when those other women wear tops that are 'too revealing'.) I believe, we have just moved from theory, to hypothesis here! [:)]

DMFParadox -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 5:39:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: DMFParadox fucking with women gets their attention. Teasing them. Saying something nice, then qualifying it, that gets attention. OK. In all seriousness . . . Per Lady Hib's comment - no, I do know that she was talking about better manners and that being a small price to pay, rather than grovelling or 'toadying', as I put it. Seen in terms of the economy of the pocket and even the 'economy of the mind' - it seems well worth it for a male to polish his manners in the dating game. I meant it when I said that smooth manners in a male are his equivalent of stockings and suspenders in female. I've empirically tested it, and it works. In fact, it works so well it almost feels like cheating. (Somewhat in the same sense as when women accuse other women of 'cheating' when those other women wear tops that are 'too revealing'.) As for your comments along the lines of . . . " . . . know, you have to somehow make them doubt your sincerity. Overplay your hand. Make them think you're not really interested. Turn it into a joke - not a mean one, but just one that's friendly and gives you an out. Makes you unattainable . . . ." I think that also works - but that it misses a fundamental principle, without which it fails very badly. Again, I know this myself from experience. The principle is that it won't work unless the woman is very clear that you have an underlying fondness for her. Beneath that is a firm belief that I've developed over quite a long time - that the men who are most successful with women are the ones who like them the most. I do mean 'like' - not 'get turned on by', 'worship' or 'adore'. It's not that hard, really, once you can get past a few of your own securities, and a few of their prickles. I've highlighted the bits I'm responding to. on smooth manners - I'll have to match your empiricism against mine, because I've gotten different results. The issue is complex; different women respond differently, there's no uniform code of behavior. I'd say that the main rule is to be completely congruent with whatever approach you take, whether it be smooth or rough. Don't sabotage yourself, either way. on underlying fondness - this depends on the timing. Basically, the woman must earned your fondness, or she won't value it. What she does to earn it varies by user; for me, if she's pliant and attentive, and has interesting ideas about things I've not discovered before. For you, it may be that she naturally takes charge of things. But whatever it is, your fondness must be deserved. If you give it too soon for the wrong reasons - for example, to gain her attention - then it works against you. Disinterest and even abrasiveness work better, out of the gate. Though a mixed approach that factors in a wide range of emotional cues, both positive and negative, works best of all. On men who like women being the most successful - meh. It could be said that you're putting the cart before the horse; I agree that there's a clear correlation, but I'm no longer certain one causes the other. It could be that men who are more successful with women like them more; a different chain of events. Or they could both relate to a third factor that dictates both. But loving women and being comfortable with them does not seem to directly improve your chances of having a girlfriend instead of girl friends. And I say this after being a firm advocate of the philosophy for years... I've seen and done things that make me doubt its truthfulness. I can get behind the idea that men who like women tend to keep them, if only because they avoid the more egregious methods of self-sabotage; but even there I have reservations.

ElanSubdued -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 5:44:19 PM)
domiguy, Just noticed you're back. We didn't always agree, but it's good to see you again. Welcome back to the circus. :-) E.

DMFParadox -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 5:48:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seekingOwnertoo quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Per Lady Hib's comment - no, I do know that she was talking about better manners and that being a small price to pay, rather than grovelling or 'toadying', as I put it. Seen in terms of the economy of the pocket and even the 'economy of the mind' - it seems well worth it for a male to polish his manners in the dating game. I meant it when I said that smooth manners in a male are his equivalent of stockings and suspenders in female. I've empirically tested it, and it works. In fact, it works so well it almost feels like cheating. (Somewhat in the same sense as when women accuse other women of 'cheating' when those other women wear tops that are 'too revealing'.) I believe, we have just moved from theory, to hypothesis here! [:)] Do what now? This is all hypothesis and conjecture. Theory happens when you've started with a hypothesis, tested it, repeated the test under controlled conditions exhaustively, and come up with a theory that encompasses the results of the test AND makes other predictions that turn out to bear fruit. Ain't nobody controlling these conditions. Some may like to think they are, but they are off their gourd. Theories will have to be constructed by our computer overlords, because we're too close to the problem.

ElanSubdued -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 5:49:30 PM)
quote: DMFParadox: On underlying fondness - this depends on the timing. Basically, the woman must earn your fondness or she won't value it. What she does to earn it varies by user; for me, if she's pliant and attentive, and has interesting ideas about things I've not discovered before. For you, it may be that she naturally takes charge of things. But whatever it is, your fondness must be deserved. If you give it too soon for the wrong reasons - for example, to gain her attention - then it works against you. Disinterest and even abrasiveness work better, out of the gate. Though a mixed approach that factors in a wide range of emotional cues, both positive and negative, works best of all. This isn't quite how I'd have expressed the same concept, but, none-the-less, there is a lot of truth in these words. E.

seekingOwnertoo -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 5:52:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DMFParadox This is all hypothesis and conjecture. Theory happens when you've started with a hypothesis, tested it, repeated the test under controlled conditions exhaustively, and come up with a theory that encompasses the results of the test AND makes other predictions that turn out to bear fruit. Yeah ... and your point ... is exactly ... WHAT? [:D] And how is THAT working for you?

DMFParadox -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 5:56:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WyldHrt quote: Wasn't replying to you, pahunk; I was replying to the ladyhibiscus, who coincidentally I'd hidden a while ago so I only saw her stuff through your reply. You got caught in the crossfire, I was not really talking to you or for your benefit, except to acknowledge that you were indeed applying your irony in ways I agreed with. Edit - ugh, in reply to PAHUNKBOY, not peon. Fucking buttons behaving badly up ins. Ummm... PA isn't on this thread, unless you are seeing posts that the rest of us aren't... [8D] The hell...? I could have sworn. You are correct, of course. Thanks for pointing this out.

DMFParadox -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 6:03:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seekingOwnertoo quote: ORIGINAL: DMFParadox This is all hypothesis and conjecture. Theory happens when you've started with a hypothesis, tested it, repeated the test under controlled conditions exhaustively, and come up with a theory that encompasses the results of the test AND makes other predictions that turn out to bear fruit. Yeah ... and your point ... is exactly ... WHAT? [:D] That I've got no idea what you were talking about, going from theory to hypothesis. Ibn Alhazen and Galileo and Robert Bacon are producing thanatropic energies for you right now, a la dresden codak... http://dresdencodak.com/2010/06/10/dark-science-02/ (edited to add, thanatropic)

ElanSubdued -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 6:07:30 PM)
DMFParadox, quote: DMFParadox to WyldHrt: The hell...? I could have sworn. Priorities, sir. The sexy Heart lady is back. Who cares if you swore? :-) Elan.

WyldHrt -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 6:10:45 PM)
quote: Priorities, sir. The sexy Heart lady is back. Who cares if you swore? :-) Careful, Elan, or you may get accused of 'sucking up' by the other guys... [;)] smooch!! [:D]

RedMagic1 -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 6:44:23 PM)
Both Peon and DMF are correct. Women have guy friends who like them, but the guys they consider fuckable are the ones who like them and are sexually bold. A few years ago, I decided, "Fuck being the nice guy who is always the sweet friend," and I started saying "inappropriate" things to women right out of the gate. And damn if it didn't get them hot as hell. I was suddenly the nice guy with the bad boy streak. Let me tell you, there ain't no turning back now. (Example: I no longer say things like, "You are pretty," except to friends. I say things like, "You have a banging body," or, "When you smile like that, I want to treat you like a caveman." Also, I barely compliment women on their looks. I say things like, "I really enjoy how you put this, but I see things differently because of this experience.") People can debate until the end of time how things should be. ElanSubdued even disagreed with me here, just a couple days after he posted at length on another thread about how he doesn't even give out his photo easily. Not exactly a high-percentage dating strategy, either one, and combined, holy smoke. Posts like his, and like nick's, seem driven by a desire to avoid further romantic pain by constructing reasons it is ok not to date successfully, instead of learning from the material world how to maximize success. I don't care about should; I care about results.

PeonForHer -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 7:26:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 I don't care about should; I care about results. That makes sense, Red, but if I read Elan, DMF and Nick correctly, then it isn't a result if you feel like you're throwing away too big a portion of your soul in order to get it. That'll vary a lot from one man to another. A while ago I read one of those books on 'how to score with women and never fail' (or similar) - and this was pretty close approximation of what the author was recommending. One can end up defeating the object. Actually, the author came across as an authentic psychopath - someone who'd turned pretence of behaviour and feelings into an art form and didn't much care about what he truly felt underneath. I could see how his methods worked - but the price was turn oneself into a machine. All from me for tonight. Stupidly late, as usual.

DMFParadox -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 7:39:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 Both Peon and DMF are correct. Women have guy friends who like them, but the guys they consider fuckable are the ones who like them and are sexually bold. A few years ago, I decided, "Fuck being the nice guy who is always the sweet friend," and I started saying "inappropriate" things to women right out of the gate. And damn if it didn't get them hot as hell. I was suddenly the nice guy with the bad boy streak. Let me tell you, there ain't no turning back now. (Example: I no longer say things like, "You are pretty," except to friends. I say things like, "You have a banging body," or, "When you smile like that, I want to treat you like a caveman." Also, I barely compliment women on their looks. I say things like, "I really enjoy how you put this, but I see things differently because of this experience.") People can debate until the end of time how things should be. ElanSubdued even disagreed with me here, just a couple days after he posted at length on another thread about how he doesn't even give out his photo easily. Not exactly a high-percentage dating strategy, either one, and combined, holy smoke. Posts like his, and like nick's, seem driven by a desire to avoid further romantic pain by constructing reasons it is ok not to date successfully, instead of learning from the material world how to maximize success. I don't care about should; I care about results. This. For women in your green zone, this all the way. Though, women who are high-profile at that moment - a bartender on shift, or the belle of the dance, or the prettiest girl in a group of 4 or so - you need a bit more strategy. This is where disinterest comes in; and it's not that you're snubbing the girl per se, it's that the rest of the world is more interesting. While you're interacting with her, keep some 'distance', be interesting, maybe even sexual, but not 'available'. At least to start. Also, whatever the girl, comments like 'You're like my sister because x, I'm keeping my distance because you might do x' or 'You're not my girl anymore, I've moved on' will, if used correctly, immediately generate more interest than 'I like you because of X.' But you can't stand on one emotion too long. Push, then pull; laugh, then get distracted and wander off; wander back, ask something deep, then forget and caveman the girl. Raise a topic, then drop the thread in the middle and start another. The idea is to have so many unanswered questions about you that the girl's brain fries thinking about it. Then get more friendly, but start pulling away if she shit-tests you. Which she will, more often than not. But since her brain is fried, she'll generally make some motion or gesture immediately retracting once you show you're not to be trifled with. At that point, she's just proven she wants you around, and it's game over. Get the number, get the invite, go wherever you want with it. Something else to remember is that this doesn't just apply to meeting women. A girl you've been seeing for a while, is still female... and still likes to have her brain fried. So if she's worth keeping, then keep your game around and don't get too lazy. Plus it keeps the mind sharp.

LadyHibiscus -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/25/2010 7:44:14 PM)
I'm reminded of the film Magnolia, where Tom Cruise gives those psychopathic. Sales pitches... If a guy is a selfish jerk, is discourteous, ignores me, I interpret that as "just not that into you", rather than seduction. I approve of openness, and guys being themselves, but I am not one of the guys. I am extremely low maintenance compared to most femdoms, but if I don't see any signs that you're interested in ME, not just the broad with the hot rack, then we are done.

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875