RE: True False or relative?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: True False or relative?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master >> RE: True False or relative?

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: True False or relative? - 5/24/2011 4:19:32 PM

domiguy

Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarcEsadrian

quote:

ORIGINAL: Idealynnbliss
I am very new to this "scene" And I am curious about a statement made to me in response to my request to learn how to Dom a man.

"You cant Dom a man if You cant Dom a female!"

This statement, I'm assuming, implies that female is less than male, and therefore the ability to dominate a female serves as a preliminary litmus test in one's ability to dominate a male. In my experience, comparing the tractability of the sexes in a simple hierarchic scale like that is too one-dimensional. Male and female, each respective to their aggregate archetypes, are two different "systems" biologically and socially, presenting thus two different castles to storm. Each sex (generally) has their own gimmicks, strengths and weaknesses. Then there is individual intellect and persona to account for beyond this, which complicates matters further.

I have no doubt the one you are quoting has "dommed" a female. Whether he has actually dominated a female is something I question. Women can be very complex, manipulative and subversive, once you buff away the veneer of their supposed docility—a veneer more than one woman has used as a mask in beguiling a man with an easily fluffed ego. Be warned, all ye who are so assuming; therein surely lies your Achilles heel.

"If you go to women, don't forget the whip."
—Nietzsche

blah blah blah achilles heel...blah blah blah Nietzsche.

< Message edited by domiguy -- 5/24/2011 4:22:34 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to MarcEsadrian)

Profile

Post #: 21

RE: True False or relative? - 5/24/2011 4:34:27 PM

Arpig

Posts: 9930
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: Increasingly further from reality
Status: offline

quote:

A lot of men want to dominate women in the bedroom because they are unable to dominate other men in vanilla life.

Oh bullshit!! I just like it when they cry and beg.

_____________________________

Big man! Pig Man!
Ha Ha...Charade you are!

Why do they leave out the letter b on "Garage Sale" signs?

CM's #1 All-Time Also-Ran

(in reply to RedMagic1)

Profile

Post #: 22

RE: True False or relative? - 5/24/2011 5:18:36 PM

MarcEsadrian

Posts: 852
Joined: 8/24/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RedMagic1
A lot of men want to dominate women in the bedroom because they are unable to dominate other men in vanilla life.

And "dominate" is a fairly loose term if it's bedroom only.

_____________________________

Omnes una manet nox

Founder, Humbled Females

(in reply to RedMagic1)

Profile

Post #: 23

RE: True False or relative? - 5/24/2011 6:53:34 PM

CarpeComa

Posts: 194
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Idealynnbliss
"You cant Dom a man if You cant Dom a female!"

Notice the statement is 'can't' and not 'won't' or 'don't'. There is a big difference between "can not do", "will not do", and "do not want to do". A lot of people seem to be conflating those three. Let's look at the implied question: Is there any reasonable case where a person could be able to dominate one gender and not the other? I don't think this statement is as ludicrous as everyone else is interpreting it. If I rewrote that statement as "The process of domination is not significantly affected by the gender of the person being dominated", would that seem like "pure bull crappy"? I'm saying the same thing, just phrased in a more neutral way.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sunshinemiss

quote:

ORIGINAL: NuevaVida

You can't have any pudding if you don't eat your meat.

Pink Floyd.

Excellent.

I always heard as "if you don't eat your beets" which seemed reasonable to me. Beets suck

< Message edited by CarpeComa -- 5/24/2011 6:55:37 PM >

(in reply to Idealynnbliss)

Profile

Post #: 24

RE: True False or relative? - 5/24/2011 9:38:31 PM

PdxJ

Posts: 195
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

A lot of men want to dominate women in the bedroom because they are unable to dominate other men in vanilla life.
Oh bullshit!! I just like it when they cry and beg.

LOL!

Ditto to both the 'Bullshit' comment AND the liking it when they beg and cry comment.

_____________________________

Imagine what you could learn if you could learn to imagine.

the 'Official Sunny Stalker'

(in reply to Arpig)

Profile

Post #: 25

RE: True False or relative? - 5/24/2011 9:40:34 PM

theRose4U

Posts: 3403
Joined: 8/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

Let me guess. Was this from a les sub trying to get you to Top her?

My vote is bossy male bottom trying to get poly without the effort.

_____________________________

Finding a good sub is like sifting through trail mix. You find a few fruits, a lotta nuts and have to sift to get to the sweet and special ones
drama llama

(in reply to DarkSteven)

Profile

Post #: 26

RE: True False or relative? - 5/24/2011 9:54:50 PM

MarcEsadrian

Posts: 852
Joined: 8/24/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CarpeComa

Notice the statement is 'can't' and not 'won't' or 'don't'. There is a big difference between "can not do", "will not do", and "do not want to do". A lot of people seem to be conflating those three.

I see the quote as an if (predicate: you can't "dom" a female) then (consequent: you can't "dom" a male) condition; it seems to imply a propositional denial of the ability to handle a male if you can't handle a female, or at least that's the way I read it. Also note how the author refers to males as men and females as females. Subtle, but worth considering in terms of the sexist intent and/or interpretation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CarpeComa
Let's look at the implied question: Is there any reasonable case where a person could be able to dominate one gender and not the other? I don't think this statement is as ludicrous as everyone else is interpreting it.

To me, the implied questions are as follows:

a. If I can dominate a male, does that mean dominating a female is going to be easy?

b. Are all females more docile than all males?

c. Is the reverse of the original statement actually true?

Of course the entire exercise is flawed, because it's predicated on a bad premise to begin with, which I suppose is obvious.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CarpeComa
If I rewrote that statement as "The process of domination is not significantly affected by the gender of the person being dominated", would that seem like "pure bull crappy"? I'm saying the same thing, just phrased in a more neutral way.

And by observing that neutrality, you are making a far more defendable and far less likely to be misinterpreted statement.

_____________________________

Omnes una manet nox

Founder, Humbled Females

(in reply to CarpeComa)

Profile

Post #: 27

RE: True False or relative? - 5/24/2011 10:50:32 PM

NuevaVida

Posts: 6707
Joined: 8/5/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CarpeComa

I always heard as "if you don't eat your beets" which seemed reasonable to me. Beets suck

Nope, it's meat. Meat is good. Beets is not.

And a special

to sunshine miss, because yes, Pink Floyd is excellent.

As for the actual OP, it's a bullshit statement, particularly if said without any sort of explanation of where it was coming from.

_____________________________

Live Simply. Love Generously. Care Deeply. Speak Kindly.

(in reply to CarpeComa)

Profile

Post #: 28

RE: True False or relative? - 5/25/2011 12:08:11 AM

RedMagic1

Posts: 6470
Joined: 5/10/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PdxJ

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

A lot of men want to dominate women in the bedroom because they are unable to dominate other men in vanilla life.
Oh bullshit!! I just like it when they cry and beg.

LOL!

Ditto to both the 'Bullshit' comment AND the liking it when they beg and cry comment.

Heh. If you guys think my comment is bullshit, you haven't been to many scene events. The bigger issue, though, is why men think women are easier to control than men. Objectively, statistically, women are more often in inferior positions and less often in positions of authority, in this society. I have no idea what motivated the original commenter, but I believe the thought is held by people in vanilla, not just D/s.

(and yes, Marc, I should have said "at home" not "in the bedroom")

_____________________________

Not with envy, not with a twisted heart, shall you feel superior, or go about boasting. Rather in goodness by action make true your song and your word. Thus you shall be highly regarded, and able to live in peace with all others.
- 15th century Aztec

(in reply to PdxJ)

Profile

Post #: 29

RE: True False or relative? - 5/25/2011 12:24:19 AM

Awareness

Posts: 3918
Joined: 9/8/2010
Status: offline

The two are not remotely comparable. Dominating a woman requires will, intent, self-confidence. Dominating a man apparently just requires you to show up.

_____________________________

Ever notice how fucking annoying most signatures are? - Yes, I do appreciate the irony.

(in reply to Idealynnbliss)

Profile

Post #: 30

RE: True False or relative? - 5/25/2011 12:31:41 AM

PdxJ

Posts: 195
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RedMagic1

quote:

ORIGINAL: PdxJ

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

A lot of men want to dominate women in the bedroom because they are unable to dominate other men in vanilla life.
Oh bullshit!! I just like it when they cry and beg.

LOL!
Ditto to both the 'Bullshit' comment AND the liking it when they beg and cry comment.

Heh. If you guys think my comment is bullshit, you haven't been to many scene events. The bigger issue, though, is why men think women are easier to control than men. Objectively, statistically, women are more often in inferior positions and less often in positions of authority, in this society. I have no idea what motivated the original commenter, but I believe the thought is held by people in vanilla, not just D/s.
(and yes, Marc, I should have said "at home" not "in the bedroom")

I still think it was a bullshit comment. And what does a scene event have to do with how a man is in dealing with other men in vanilla life? Granted, I'm sure some men are like that but saying 'a lot' of men are that way is a little far fetched. That's like saying most subs are subs because they are in positions of authority in vanilla life. That is crap even though it is true for some.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness
The two are not remotely comparable. Dominating a woman requires will, intent, self-confidence. Dominating a man apparently just requires you to show up.

LOL!

_____________________________

Imagine what you could learn if you could learn to imagine.

the 'Official Sunny Stalker'

(in reply to Awareness)

Profile

Post #: 31

RE: True False or relative? - 5/25/2011 1:46:58 AM

RedMagic1

Posts: 6470
Joined: 5/10/2007
Status: offline

"____% of men who identify as Masters, and ____% of men who identify as Gorean are compensating for something."

How high do the numbers in the blanks have to be before there are "a lot?" How high do you think the numbers actually are?

_____________________________

Not with envy, not with a twisted heart, shall you feel superior, or go about boasting. Rather in goodness by action make true your song and your word. Thus you shall be highly regarded, and able to live in peace with all others.
- 15th century Aztec

(in reply to PdxJ)

Profile

Post #: 32

RE: True False or relative? - 5/25/2011 2:18:19 AM

PdxJ

Posts: 195
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RedMagic1

"____% of men who identify as Masters, and ____% of men who identify as Gorean are compensating for something."

How high do the numbers in the blanks have to be before there are "a lot?" How high do you think the numbers actually are?

A lot would be:
75% or more that identify as being dominate - not just as Masters. There are a lot of Doms that refuse to use the 'Master' title.

How high do I think the numbers actually are? lol - maybe 25%

Goreans, I know very little about and I'll refrain from posting my opinion on.

< Message edited by PdxJ -- 5/25/2011 2:24:28 AM >

_____________________________

Imagine what you could learn if you could learn to imagine.

the 'Official Sunny Stalker'

(in reply to RedMagic1)

Profile

Post #: 33

RE: True False or relative? - 5/29/2011 11:33:15 PM

Idealynnbliss

Posts: 4
Joined: 2/20/2007
Status: offline

No it was not a Female

-Male "Dom"
he had his own interests and motives. Did not mesh with my ethical sluttiness...

(in reply to DarkSteven)

Profile

Post #: 34

RE: True False or relative? - 5/30/2011 4:55:18 AM

crazyml

Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline

Chokes on coffee

Fucking excellent. I salute you.

_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to PdxJ)

Profile

Post #: 35

RE: True False or relative? - 5/30/2011 5:37:25 PM

masterlink65

Posts: 683
Joined: 11/3/2007
Status: offline

nonsense

(in reply to Idealynnbliss)

Profile

Post #: 36

RE: True False or relative? - 5/30/2011 5:39:10 PM

masterlink65