Anemone3
Posts: 6
Joined: 5/11/2006
Status: offline
|
As a new member of this site, I was fascinated by this discussion. The variety of opinions and personalities is amazing. So is the metamorphosis of the threads from one theme to another under the topic of pro-domination.
First of all, I would like to state that I am well educated), but do not consider education as enough to justify certain positions in arguments. In fact, many well-educated people will readily admit that they do not know everything, and that education is really the process of training a person to seek accurate information, to examine their ethics, and to be aware of their own values and limitations as well as their gifts. I believe education is really about life-long critical thinking and having the ability to see the viewpoint of others without necessarily agreeing with them or changing one’s own perspective.
As a non-pro Domme, I seek a relationship in the BDSM realm. I want to share the joy and friendship of a willing submissive in the context of caring and sharing. For me, that would be difficult if I depended on my living from the fees or gifts of submissive. That is my personal choice. That said, there are many more male submissive than female dominants. I am not sure why this is so, but I do know that there are many wonderful, nice, obedient, kinky submissive men who long for their dominant match who may not be able to find it. Also, there are people who for whatever reasons of circumstance, choice, marriage, children, occupation, physical traits, or mental development are unable or unwilling to find the female dominant that meets their needs. For these persons, a professional dominant fills a need that is not met in other ways. I support the freedom of choice for those persons to go to professionals, and support the rights of willing, smart, and ambitious women who want to practice this profession (and I think it can be a profession).
The problem is the moral and legal framework that regulates so-called “sex work” and the persons who are employed in this group of occupations. Laws exist to coerce certain forms of behavior, supposedly to protect the public health and safety. There are only a few places that acknowledge sex work as a valid occupation and attempt to make it safe for the employees and the customers. For example, the state of Nevada has legalized and regulated the activities of sex workers in a few counties. There are several brothels that are licensed, located by law in counties with a population of less than 10,000. These businesses provide a safe environment for the sex workers, and some assurances for the customers of safety from sexually transmitted diseases provided by screening the sex workers for diseases and requiring the customers to wear condoms. The workers are monitored, and safer from abuse and injury than workers who are under the management of so-called pimps. I am not trying to compare professional dominants to sex workers in Nevada, but to point out that the legalization of activities involving sex work and acknowledge that being a professional dominant is an occupation would go a long way to legitimize the activities and services provided by these woman. It seems the name-calling and splitting of hairs in this thread is really an attempt to impose moral arguments on others and trying to control their opinions. Of course, when you get a bunch of people who are naturally inclined to control, I guess it should be expected!
Anyway, I was also interested in the comparison of nurses to professional dominants. I think the thread was interesting. In the early history of nursing, some nurses were recruited from the ranks of prostitutes. People such as Florence Nightingale realized that these people did not have the training to care for the ill, and promoted changes in environmental and caring standards that improved the outcomes for patients. Nursing has a long history of examining ethics and promoting the welfare of the patient. Professional dominants could do well to develop codes of ethics and standards for the care of their clients. A nurse who abuses a client, takes belongings or funds, or fails to provide a reasonable standard of care will not be practicing as a nurse because they will not have a license for very long!
I think that a lot of the moralizing and name-calling that I have read in this discussion stems from the feelings of superiority that some members of the BDSM community seem to feel over others due to the exchange of funds. Just as a nurse will most certainly lose a license to practice if a client is taken advantage of monetarily and can be sued for malpractice, professional dominants should aspire to treat the submissive in their care in the same way and not take advantage of the deep needs of their clients to extract money. This does not mean I thing a professional should not be paid for services; I think that if one is earning money for BDSM, then one owes a duty to the client to provide safe and quality services. If a professional dominant is doing that, then it should not be the purview of the BDSM community to sit in judgment on the choices of the persons who has chosen this occupation.
Thanks for this forum and opportunity to express my opinion!
Ms. Anemone
|
Professional Dominanation as an Occupation - 
Profile
not even going to go there, i'm so tired of these arguments back and forth.
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread