RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post

RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

NocturnalStalker -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/14/2011 8:12:19 PM)
You're living in a Gingerbread House on Gumdrop Avenue located in Candyland if you think that someone who works in food does so with the intentions of being a "sex magnet." Where does someone who is a fast-food worker work? At McDonalds. What do they do? They serve fast-food. Where does someone who is a pro-domme work? In some building/house. What do they do? They offer their services for men/women if there are any that do it. As for your whole, "Whipping/bondage does not have sexual penetration therefore it is not sexual." Uh, what? You do know what a "fetish" is, do you, Ms. PhD? If I was a cop and handcuffed someone and they were aroused by it, I didn't know about that nor really want to - my duty is to uphold the law. If a woman is prancing around in stiletto heels, leather clothing, and a cop hat while knowing full well if she ties her client up they'll get aroused then guess what? That's what the client has paid to have done and that is what she advertises herself as: someone that helps bring your deviant fantasies to as close a reality she can provide. The person paying obviously gains erotic thrills from it, and to them may be even better than sexual intercourse itself. So really, you're a sex worker in the end. Don't sugarcoat it as anything else. It is what it is. You don't need a Masters or a PhD to see that.

roguekittie -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/14/2011 8:21:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NocturnalStalker You're living in a Gingerbread House on Gumdrop Avenue located in Candyland if you think that someone who works in food does so with the intentions of being a "sex magnet." Where does someone who is a fast-food worker work? At McDonalds. What do they do? They serve fast-food. Where does someone who is a pro-domme work? In some building/house. What do they do? They offer their services for men/women if there are any that do it. As for your whole, "Whipping/bondage does not have sexual penetration therefore it is not sexual." Uh, what? You do know what a "fetish" is, do you, Ms. PhD? If I was a cop and handcuffed someone and they were aroused by it, I didn't know about that nor really want to - my duty is to uphold the law. If a woman is prancing around in stiletto heels, leather clothing, and a cop hat while knowing full well if she ties her client up they'll get aroused then guess what? That's what the client has paid to have done and that is what she advertises herself as: someone that helps bring your deviant fantasies to as close a reality she can provide. The person paying obviously gains erotic thrills from it, and to them may be even better than sexual intercourse itself. So really, you're a sex worker in the end. Don't sugarcoat it as anything else. It is what it is. You don't need a Masters or a PhD to see that. giggles You summed up what I was thinking perfectly. Damn, you are so sexy.

Hisprettybaby -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/14/2011 8:23:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather quote: Yes, the customer may be getting sexual thrills out of it, BUT if there is no sex actually taking place, then she is not a prostitute. bullshit and you fucking well know it. its the fucking sex trade, and they are sex workers, so they are prostitutes. Sorry Hannah, but NO bullshit. You just can't stand to have someone disagree with you and you get in their faces when they do with your fucking this and fucking that and bullshit bullshit bullshit. So what if someone happens to disagree or feels differently than you do about it? I don't expect everyone to agree with me, but I don't go telling all those who DO disagree with me "fuck you" & that they are full of bullshit. So then, using your reasoning, just because someone gets sexual thrills then the ProDomme is a prostitute? By that reasoning, when a man just takes a woman out for coffee and he pays for it, even though they get nowhere near a bedroom or a dungeon, then she must still be a prostitute because he gets sexual thrills from eyeballing her cleavage. This, I think, is ridiculous but then, you're entitled to your opinion. The thing is, everyone else is entitled to theirs too. ~Hisprettybaby~

LadyConstanze -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/14/2011 8:32:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: roguekittie giggles You summed up what I was thinking perfectly. Damn, you are so sexy. Really? Would that be then in this century or the last? Have you figured out in which century we actually live? I assume you come from the same educational background where centuries don't really matter, so I guess I rest my case. But compliments, you mastered the art of googling dictionaries. Now does that help you with your job? And no thanks, no milk or sugar, I take mu coffee black and to go...

HannahLynHeather -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/14/2011 8:38:23 PM)
quote: "Look, I have a few hard limits (names them) and I really get into a submissive mindset if I see (insert outfit) and I just love being whipped/spanked/slapped" - can't you see that? what the fuck are you blathering on about? did you even read what i wrote? here, lets try again. you said there were men who wanted to let the woman take charge. so they pay her to do that. that is their fetish, that is the fucking kink they are trying to fulfill. they pay, she obliges. they are no different from the men who want something specific, say to be pegged by a nun, and will pay for it. that's their fetish, that is the fucking kink they are trying to fulfill. they pay, she obliges. either way, it is the one paying who decides what happens, either that she gets to do whatever she wants, or that she follows his script, that is up to him, they are both just fantasy scenarios they are paying to have fulfilled. her only fucking choice is to accept his money or not. once she accepts his money, then she is honour bound to play out whatever fucking scenario it was he paid for, and she really has no right to decide on her own that he really wants a different scenario, that's not her fucking job, her job is to deliver the service she has been contracted to deliver, and that service is his fetish, she is a fetish delivery person, that is her fucking trade. do you see now how the fucker wanting her to take charge is no different from the fucker wanting her to follow a script?

HannahLynHeather -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/14/2011 8:41:20 PM)
quote: I never knew this before. i guess you haven't actually read this thread then have you, its only been mentioned by me and others about a hundred fucking times so far.[8\|]

Hisprettybaby -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/14/2011 8:46:44 PM)
It just floors me that this thread is already on page 17. lmao

HannahLynHeather -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/14/2011 9:00:23 PM)
quote: Oh. I see your point now. and just how the fuck does what i said differ from what you said? you said i was entitled to my opinion but i was wrong, and i said the same fucking thing back to you. if its fair for you to say, its fair for me to say.

HannahLynHeather -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/14/2011 9:02:14 PM)
quote: Flips hair around effeminately. swoon!

xxblushesxx -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/14/2011 9:37:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather quote: Oh. I see your point now. and just how the fuck does what i said differ from what you said? you said i was entitled to my opinion but i was wrong, and i said the same fucking thing back to you. if its fair for you to say, its fair for me to say. I had hoped you would address my assertion, that not all "sex workers" are prostitutes, and the reasons I gave. I was curious as to your response to what I said, so I was disappointed with a big Fuck you, instead of an interesting argument. That's all.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/14/2011 10:11:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hisprettybaby quote: ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather quote: Yes, the customer may be getting sexual thrills out of it, BUT if there is no sex actually taking place, then she is not a prostitute. bullshit and you fucking well know it. its the fucking sex trade, and they are sex workers, so they are prostitutes. Sorry Hannah, but NO bullshit. You just can't stand to have someone disagree with you and you get in their faces when they do with your fucking this and fucking that and bullshit bullshit bullshit. So what if someone happens to disagree or feels differently than you do about it? I don't expect everyone to agree with me, but I don't go telling all those who DO disagree with me "fuck you" & that they are full of bullshit. So then, using your reasoning, just because someone gets sexual thrills then the ProDomme is a prostitute? By that reasoning, when a man just takes a woman out for coffee and he pays for it, even though they get nowhere near a bedroom or a dungeon, then she must still be a prostitute because he gets sexual thrills from eyeballing her cleavage. This, I think, is ridiculous but then, you're entitled to your opinion. The thing is, everyone else is entitled to theirs too. ~Hisprettybaby~ The difference is the INTENTION. Everyone wants to play with words and how guys get aroused/turned on by various mundane activities. The fast food worker is an unknowing participant in the guy's fetish. The woman having coffee? Not quite as much in the unknowing department. But the pro domme? Very much intending to get the client aroused. You know it. I know it. Hannah knows it. Everyone on this site and just about anyone who knows what a dominatrix is knows it. INTENTION is where the rubber meets the road so to speak. From a legal standpoint, actual sexual penetration does NOT need to occur for the act to be considered prostitution. "Sexual contact" is a very broad term. Are strippers prostitutes? Quite a few could be busted as such, and many are. That is a fact. They didn't have "actual" sex with the customer either. But if they allow a customer to touch their breasts or play what is known in the erotic dancer business as, "stinky finger," then yep, under the law they have engaged in prostitution. So sorry to break it to you, but yes, YOUR personal definition of "prostitution" IS bullshit in the eyes of the law. Obviously, there is cultural difference between the continents. In the US, prostitution is illegal in all but some parts of Nevada. If a guy solicits a hooker to step on bugs for him, she can be arrested for prostitution, him for pandering, yet, no actual sex act took place. Has Hannah been talking about the legality of one versus the other? No, I don't think so. However, considering we have several here that claim to have "studied" law, and now are working in the sex trade, I find it hard to believe they are making enough money in their chosen field to cover expenses and are now doing it purely for their enjoyment. And LC, there is never a time where you will win your argument by talking about how much money you made at your day job, so didn't need the cash to survive. It's crass and a completely lacking in any class at all. As for the fact that you have a PhD, it's irrelevant. I happen to think you are a nice gal, but I have to tell you that your comments on this thread have made you appear completely irrational, classless and appearing to have not learned a damn thing with the education you claim to have. Somewhere along your educational path, I'm sure you learned that in order to make a point in an argument, you must be able to argue the merits of your position. Your attempts here to do that have been a colossal fail.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/14/2011 10:18:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xxblushesxx quote: ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather quote: Oh. I see your point now. and just how the fuck does what i said differ from what you said? you said i was entitled to my opinion but i was wrong, and i said the same fucking thing back to you. if its fair for you to say, its fair for me to say. I had hoped you would address my assertion, that not all "sex workers" are prostitutes, and the reasons I gave. I was curious as to your response to what I said, so I was disappointed with a big Fuck you, instead of an interesting argument. That's all. Actually the term you are looking for is "legal prostitution." That is what those jobs are typically referred to as.

HeatherMcLeather -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/14/2011 10:19:24 PM)
quote: This, I think, is ridiculous That's because it is, and anybody with any sense could see that. The difference is in the intent. With the man buying a coffee, the sexual thrill is incidental to the encounter on both sides, with the top-for-pay and her client, the sexual thrill is the entire purpose of the encounter. That, I think, is what makes the difference. At least it does to me. <And I see LL beat me too it, oh well, consider this a "What she said" post then> [:D]

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/14/2011 11:02:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HeatherMcLeather quote: This, I think, is ridiculous That's because it is, and anybody with any sense could see that. The difference is in the intent. With the man buying a coffee, the sexual thrill is incidental to the encounter on both sides, with the top-for-pay and her client, the sexual thrill is the entire purpose of the encounter. That, I think, is what makes the difference. At least it does to me. <And I see LL beat me too it, oh well, consider this a "What she said" post then> [:D] Interestingly enough, that "intent" can also get the man with the coffee charged with harassment.

HeatherMcLeather -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/14/2011 11:06:08 PM)
quote: Interestingly enough, that "intent" can also get the man with the coffee charged with harassment. I'll keep that in mind the next time some guy just won't shut up about my tits. Ladies, on the other hand, feel free to ogle all you want, that's what they are there for. [:)]

PeonForHer -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/15/2011 3:50:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact I haven't read past this point, but she's exactly right here. I don't go to play parties and say "I Dominated a guy for an hour". I went out and topped to a person who bottomed to Me.x Careful, LP. We're using dictionary definitions here. 'Top' doesn't appear in any recognised dictionary in the sense you mean it. 'Dominate' means 'to have control over' and it's always been questionable that you're really controlling someone who wants to be controlled. No matter how many times some people here desperately want to convince themselves that 'it's all as simple as [fuckity fuck fuck, add your expletive] this', it really isn't.

PeonForHer -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/15/2011 4:13:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: roguekittie quote: WHORE -noun - 1. a woman who engages in promiscuous sexual intercourse, usually for money; prostitute; harlot; strumpet. Here is the dictionary definition of a whore. I hope this clears up any confusion on the matter. Yes it does. Thank you. Sexual intercourse is defined as "the act of sexual procreation between a man and a woman; the man's penis is inserted into the woman's vagina and excited until orgasm and ejaculation occur" (WordWeb). It 'commonly refers to the act in which a male's penis enters a female's vagina for the purposes of sexual pleasure or reproduction' (Wikipedia). Which implies that the only women who can properly be called prostitutes are those who are paid for allowing penises into their vaginas. As I understand it, this is a rarity for pro-Dommes and their customers. Pfft. I really don't care. The moralists can argue that everyone is a prostitute, that no-one is, or anywhere in between. It makes no odds to me. This, like the other main arguments on this thread, has been turned into a matter of 'black and white'. My basic point is that this goes nowhere. Very little in D/s is black and white. Very little in relationships of any kind at all is black and white.

kalikshama -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/15/2011 5:01:55 AM)
quote: Pro-doms do not always provide a sexual service. Many NEVER do. There are many reasons for visiting a pro-dom and they are not all sexual. Some are psychological, some are very personal, but they do not always revolve around a man's cock. I personally, perform a sexual service for money, and am not a prostitute. I cannot be arrested for what I do. Strippers perform a sexual service for money and are not prostitutes. They cannot be arrested for what they do. You seem to want to lump everyone in the "prostitute" category. I get why you do, but it doesn't make it true. In YOUR jurisdiction, you are correct: Prostitution in [your state] is defined as when one engages in or offers to engage in sexual conduct with another person in exchange for money, valuables or another fee. Sexual conduct is considered sexual intercourse or any other act of sexual gratification involving the genitals. In some states (like Arizona), laws related to prostitution include sadomasochistic acts.

kalikshama -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/15/2011 5:10:41 AM)
quote: if the ProDommes are not doing any actual sex with the customers(including strap-on) then they are not prostitutes. Yes, the customer may be getting sexual thrills out of it, BUT if there is no sex actually taking place, then she is not a prostitute. Again, (and again and again), it depends in the jurisdiction. And even in jurisdictions where BDSM ≠ prostitution, arrests still get made, as in New York City in 2008. http://blogs.law.columbia.edu/genderandsexualitylawblog/2010/04/20/clinic-students-seek-to-compel-nypd-to-release-records-related-to-prostitution-arrests-and-dungeon-raids/ According to multiple reports, between April and September of 2008, the NYPD conducted a series of raids targeting establishments that offer sex services including bondage and discipline, dominance and submission, and sadism and masochism (BDSM). During the raids, the police made multiple prostitution arrests. Afterwards, numerous BDSM businesses in New York closed. More recently, the Clinic has encountered repeated reports of police officers confiscating condoms and using them as evidence that the condom carrier was committing a prostitution-related crime. The filing seeks information regarding these arrests as well. “Carrying condoms and participating in BDSM experiences are not crimes,” said Larra Morris, ’11. “New Yorkers have a right to know how prostitution laws are applied and whether their legal conduct might result in arrest.” http://kinkresearch.blogspot.com/2010/01/prostitution-and-kink-professionals.html Sex workers have often been the suppliers of last resort for non-normative sex acts, whether that means homosexuality, oral sex, or kink. Virtually all prostitution specializing in kink serves male masochistic or submissive fantasies. The sex workers involved often do not personally identify as sadists / dominants, and may not identify as prostitutes, either. By avoiding penetrative sex or other particular actions, BDSM for pay may skirt anti-prostitution laws in many jurisdictions, much as massage parlors do. Nevertheless, BDSM professionals overlap with prostitution, and may be seen as something of a lucrative sub-field, requiring expensive gear, more knowledge of specific fetishes, and a more complicated performance element. (Chapkis 1997) This industry has periodically faced legal attacks in its own right, and in some countries, like Germany, it is the locus of most of the legal cases involving BDSM (Various 2006).

LadyPact -> RE: Yet ANOTHER Pro Domme post (10/15/2011 5:28:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Careful, LP. We're using dictionary definitions here. 'Top' doesn't appear in any recognised dictionary in the sense you mean it. 'Dominate' means 'to have control over' and it's always been questionable that you're really controlling someone who wants to be controlled. No matter how many times some people here desperately want to convince themselves that 'it's all as simple as [fuckity fuck fuck, add your expletive] this', it really isn't. Well, then we get back into who is really in charge if it's a paid service. That takes us back to around page three or so. I'm not sure if anybody want to do that. [8D] There was a prior post that you made that was an interesting. To paraphrase, you mentioned how a paid session would have to work for you because it wouldn't if you and she didn't feel a certain way about it. I see that as the very same thing that the client wanted, just in a different way. He didn't necessarily want to give power over during the sessions. Here's the part that I find funny as heck about this whole thread. Every time somebody comes across these boards and gets labeled as a 'do-me' bottom, the first thing they get told is to go to a pro because they only want their kink fulfilled. That's exactly what the guy in the scenario presented did. It just so happens that giving up control during play wasn't a part of his kink. He just wanted to bottom for the sensations, rather than actually submit. So, now that I've tied this back into the original post, I'll wait for somebody to come back and tell Me about how all of their clients, every single one that they've had over the years, were all truly submissive and not any of them just wanted to bottom like the guy in the OP.

Page: << < prev 13 14 15 [16] 17 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875