RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

Teroh -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/23/2012 5:07:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009


quote:

ORIGINAL: Teroh
I can't help thinking how pathetic it is... On the part of both parties.


Why is it pathetic (particularly if both parties agree to it)? Is it more "pathetic" than being a human toilet? Is it more pathetic than craving humiliation?

quote:


In an ideal world I'd try to be understanding and say 'to each his or her own', but realistically I believe most people are on the same page as me, it is pathetic, and cheapens the legitimacy of the lifestyle as a whole in the eyes of the world.


I think you may be right about the fact that the majority probably share your opinion. Just look at how many threads we have each week that complain about financial Dommes.

However, I disagree with your point that it cheapens the legitimacy of the lifestyle in the eyes of the world. Frankly, I doubt that most vanilla folks even know that financial Dommes even exist. However, they probably have a pretty negative opinion of the kinks that they are aware of. So the all of the rest of us (i.e. non financial Dommes) are doing a great job of cheapening the lifestyle in the eyes of the world.


I should've been more clear, the thing I find pathetic is the motivations of the practitioners, believing them to be in 99.9% of scenarios to be less than genuine and benevolent.

----

I think what people are easily apt to forget about all this is that everyone starts out vanilla. Nobody comes here with an absolute certainty about what they enjoy to what degree. Practices that this thread discusses run a risk of changing an initial on-lookers perspective understanding of BDSM to that of yet another Internet scam, something that anyone who spends time on the Internet are all to wary of. Nothing in this world is immune to becoming monitized I admit, but I also recognize that monitization of most practices inherently devalue their intimate appeal, and the passion of the parties involved.




TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/24/2012 11:47:58 AM)

Thanks LP for joining in!! I knew you had more insight on classes and such.



JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/24/2012 3:52:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Teroh
I should've been more clear, the thing I find pathetic is the motivations of the practitioners, believing them to be in 99.9% of scenarios to be less than genuine and benevolent.

OK, I'll take the bait on this one. What "motivations" exactly do you ascribe to "the practitioners" and why are they pathetic?

quote:

I think what people are easily apt to forget about all this is that everyone starts out vanilla. Nobody comes here with an absolute certainty about what they enjoy to what degree. Practices that this thread discusses run a risk of changing an initial on-lookers perspective understanding of BDSM to that of yet another Internet scam, something that anyone who spends time on the Internet are all to wary of. Nothing in this world is immune to becoming monitized I admit, but I also recognize that monitization of most practices inherently devalue their intimate appeal, and the passion of the parties involved.

This sounds suspiciously like "Save the Subs" hand waving to me -- although in this case perhaps "save the newbies" but I'd guess you're more worried about the subs than the doms.

Is there some reason I cannot just assume that adults are adults and for the most part they are not fools? And while I'm at it, do you have some plan to save the fools from themselves? That's historically been a losing proposition.



nakedfreedom -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/24/2012 4:08:23 PM)

I wonder if Collarme.com can be held accountable for providing the resources for erotic services. You really can't tell who is a real "financial domme" and a prostitute posing as one. But like it or not, it's up to Collarme.com to be abe to tell. And if they can't tell, the, as a matter of prudence, they need to create a policy that states that they anyone using collarme.com for erotic services can be held accountable. They can even allow law enforcement to come into the site to "snoop" around and see which "financial dommes" are really prostitutes. Where is collarme.com located? I wonder what the prostitute laws are like in that location.



LadyPact -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/24/2012 4:19:40 PM)

If you read ToS carefully, you can see where CM takes very good care of itself to ensure that they are not legally liable for any transaction that members would CHOOSE to make. They are also very clear on this same issue on forum guidelines.

Frankly, a very high majority of financial dommes NEVER have physical contact or even proximity with the submissives who CHOOSE to give them money. No sexual CONTACT means no prostitution. Perhaps you can show Me a law on the books that would validate such a charge? Nothing but a strawman.





RumpusParable -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/24/2012 4:38:46 PM)

lol.... Some people's values, again, never cease to bewilder me....

My slave sitting still to be cut into, bleeding, and feeling nauseated by it is fine...

...But that an hour earlier he bought me a new camera to record our scene together "cheapens the legitimacy of the lifestyle in the eyes of the world"...

Yeah, I'll get right on to telling Chael not to buy me presents or rely on me to pay our bills on time so as not to offend those who feel we're fucking up BDSM for all of humanity.

*giggle*


Edited to add a moment later:



Just told Chael about how him buying me things "cheapens the legitimacy of the lifestyle in the eyes of the world".

He responds that "that's incentive to stop buying them".

So giggle on his end, too.



RumpusParable -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/24/2012 4:55:27 PM)

Oh, and certainly totally contrary to the intention of the poster who said it, statements like something I'm doing "cheapens the legitimacy of the lifestyle in the eyes of the world" doesn't make me feel bad or ashamed.... it makes me feel really great to have that sort of power applied to me.

Now, logically I know I don't have that and it's funny, but gut reaction? It just feeds this narcissist's ego.

KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!



nakedfreedom -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/24/2012 6:29:23 PM)

quote:

If you read ToS carefully, you can see where CM takes very good care of itself to ensure that they are not legally liable for any transaction that members would CHOOSE to make. They are also very clear on this same issue on forum guidelines.

Frankly, a very high majority of financial dommes NEVER have physical contact or even proximity with the submissives who CHOOSE to give them money. No sexual CONTACT means no prostitution. Perhaps you can show Me a law on the books that would validate such a charge? Nothing but a strawman.


Fair enough. If that's the law and I guess that it all depends on the law in which Collarme.com registered itself as a business. And you're right, if they choose to do it, then that's their business. I think some of them are just whores using the site to make money. Since fin/dom/mes are in the BDSM spectrum, you really can't tell who is who. In my original post, I thought that a dom/me is someone who wants to have a relationship with a sub and those who offer a 'quickie' fin/dom/me session are most likely whores. A dom/me is a dom/me, right? Whether financial or not?

Thanks for your post.



AllisonWilder -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/24/2012 6:44:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: nakedfreedom

I wonder if Collarme.com can be held accountable for providing the resources for erotic services. You really can't tell who is a real "financial domme" and a prostitute posing as one. But like it or not, it's up to Collarme.com to be abe to tell. And if they can't tell, the, as a matter of prudence, they need to create a policy that states that they anyone using collarme.com for erotic services can be held accountable. They can even allow law enforcement to come into the site to "snoop" around and see which "financial dommes" are really prostitutes. Where is collarme.com located? I wonder what the prostitute laws are like in that location.


There's a really simple way to tell who is a real financial Domme and who isn't. It's called a conversation. If I don't see that someone has viewed my profile before contacting me, in my first message I direct them to it so that we're on the same page about everything right from the start. It's the easiest way.

Hell, in an initial message someone could just throw in the question of 'Are you a finDomme?' if for some reason they're unclear and just get it out of the way and potentially save yourself some time and effort.




TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/24/2012 6:59:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

If you read ToS carefully, you can see where CM takes very good care of itself to ensure that they are not legally liable for any transaction that members would CHOOSE to make. They are also very clear on this same issue on forum guidelines.

Frankly, a very high majority of financial dommes NEVER have physical contact or even proximity with the submissives who CHOOSE to give them money. No sexual CONTACT means no prostitution. Perhaps you can show Me a law on the books that would validate such a charge? Nothing but a strawman.





This.^^ Because it needs to be said over and over again.
I'm with Allison on this one. The first line in My profile explains everything up front. If people took the time to actually read these things, I think they would get less butthurt about running into these profiles. I think what happens in a nutshell, is that the sub is attracted to the pic, he send message, maybe has good convo for a while, then looks surprised when things turn toward the fin domme path. Easy way to remedy that is...READ!! I admit, I'm sure there are a few profiles that lure subs in with promises of LDE (lifestyle Domme experience...I totally just made that up :} ) then when things are going swimmingly for the sub and everything looks promising, she hits him with the money thing. I Understand the frustration, but to lump every one of us in that group and claim we are prostitutes, is just foolish and stupid. Financial domination IS a very legit form of D/s.



littlewonder -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/24/2012 8:26:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: nakedfreedom

I wonder if Collarme.com can be held accountable for providing the resources for erotic services. You really can't tell who is a real "financial domme" and a prostitute posing as one. But like it or not, it's up to Collarme.com to be abe to tell. And if they can't tell, the, as a matter of prudence, they need to create a policy that states that they anyone using collarme.com for erotic services can be held accountable. They can even allow law enforcement to come into the site to "snoop" around and see which "financial dommes" are really prostitutes. Where is collarme.com located? I wonder what the prostitute laws are like in that location.



If you have a problem telling the difference between a findomme and a prostitute, that's on you bud, not on CM. I seem to have zero problems telling the difference. It's quite easy actually.




JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/25/2012 11:47:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: nakedfreedom
I find fin/dom/me who don't identify themselves to be a pain in the ass. The others that do - I don't give a shit.

OK, so now we're finally getting somewhere. It's not findommes you hate. It's liars. Had you said that right up front most of us would have agreed with you. And this doesn't just come in the findomme stripe either. Last I checked there are a non-trivial number of men preying on women promising all sorts of things to get some pussy. Yup, deceitful people suck... no doubt about it.

quote:

I think most of them really aren't dom/mes, they just found a way to make money.

Ah yes, the motivation police. You know back in the day the motivation police wrote Carol and I a motivation ticket too. Apparently "love" isn't a reason for submitting. And by the by... until you disabuse yourself of this notion that there is a "true" way to be dominant or submissive you will never understand the BDSM world.

quote:

Too bad they don't just go to another site, but they're a pest that will have to be tolerated simply because BDSM does have fin/dom/mes in its spectrum of fetishes.

Do you have any idea how unattractive that is... "Your kink isn't my kink so your a pest". What an incredibly narcissistic thing to say. So what you'd really like is for collarme to be totally focused on you and what you want and appropriate partners for you. I'm afraid that gets back to making your own web site where you can ban findommes and whoever else all you want. I, however, appreciate diversity. I don't really care what their motivations are. I don't care if it's a "valid kink" or not. I don't care whether it's "proper D/s" or not. All I care about is whether someone is hurting or helping people. People who are doing good things that happen to be different than I am are interesting to me, not pests.



Teroh -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 9:12:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

quote:

ORIGINAL: Teroh
I should've been more clear, the thing I find pathetic is the motivations of the practitioners, believing them to be in 99.9% of scenarios to be less than genuine and benevolent.

OK, I'll take the bait on this one. What "motivations" exactly do you ascribe to "the practitioners" and why are they pathetic?

quote:

I think what people are easily apt to forget about all this is that everyone starts out vanilla. Nobody comes here with an absolute certainty about what they enjoy to what degree. Practices that this thread discusses run a risk of changing an initial on-lookers perspective understanding of BDSM to that of yet another Internet scam, something that anyone who spends time on the Internet are all to wary of. Nothing in this world is immune to becoming monitized I admit, but I also recognize that monitization of most practices inherently devalue their intimate appeal, and the passion of the parties involved.

This sounds suspiciously like "Save the Subs" hand waving to me -- although in this case perhaps "save the newbies" but I'd guess you're more worried about the subs than the doms.

Is there some reason I cannot just assume that adults are adults and for the most part they are not fools? And while I'm at it, do you have some plan to save the fools from themselves? That's historically been a losing proposition.



I believe that the majority of self-ascribed financial dominants have a glaring lack of legitimate interest in BDSM. In this scenario they are intentionally mid-representing themselves for financial profit. This to me is morally faulty.

Calm down guys, I'm not saying any sub who buys any Dom a present is falling victim to some scheme. The targets of my distrust are the people who in bulk line up subs for financial exploitation.

Now moving on to this reply, you should expect people to be responsible adults on an individual basis. If you look at the machinations of our society though, you'll notice a pretty important trend in regulation designed to sadly and quite literally protect people from themselves.

Examples:

Not everyone is a toxicology expert, so medications have dosages on them

Not everyone is an electrician, so high voltage equipment is specifically labeled

Not everyone is a legislative savant, so we entrust representatives to congresses

Now the OP's question was is financial domination legitimate. My opinion is it is not, far from it in fact. Are presents in a long developed relationship bad? Certainly not. Does financial dominant activity effect me personally? Not in the least.

A big part of my profession is designing Failsafes, AKA dumbass precautions. Historically, without such precautions (saving fools from themselves as you so eloquently put it), we would have quite a body count on our hands :)



mnottertail -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 9:15:02 AM)

quote:


Not everyone is a legislative savant, so we entrust representatives to congresses


And we find congress to be in a dearth of savants, but no lack of idiots.  So, sometimes that isn't the end all to be all.



XxLarryxX -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 10:21:20 AM)

Some of this has already been said but I wanted to give my two cents on this matter.

In my opinion people should be allowed to do what they want with their money. Most relationships of any kind require a bit of gift giving. When you think about it in a vanilla relationship most guys are expected to buy at least 6 gifts in the first year. These 6 gifts would celebrate the first month together, valentines day, sweetest day, her birthday, Christmas, and the one year anniversary gift. Also, in society today women generally control the majority of the finances in a marriage.

However, I do not fully understand the "kink" as a sub that comes from handing over your money to be a slave. If you ware paying money to be somebody's subordinate aren't you in essence actually paying for a service? Am I crazy to think that creates a role reversal of some sort? I mean, if I am paying for a service doesn't that mean the person who I am giving money to essentially serving me? Many of the Dominants on here are not Dominants in my opinion. From my perspective, if you are asking for money for somebody to serve you then essentially you are asking people to pay for service. Therefore the person asking for money for a service is actually the submissive. And your profile should reflect that accordingly.

Submission is a gift that should not be taken for granted. If you exploit other peoples fantasy or preferred lifestyle for financial gain you are not a goddess in my eyes.

Sorry.




SadisticPredator -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 10:23:46 AM)

Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s?

No.



stef -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 10:33:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SadisticPredator

Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s?

No.

Thank god you came along to clear that up.



myotherself -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 10:52:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SadisticPredator

Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s?

No.



..so sayeth the person who seemingly wants to 'take everything from you'.

Pot...meet kettle? [:'(]



AllisonWilder -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 10:56:30 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: XxLarryxX


However, I do not fully understand the "kink" as a sub that comes from handing over your money to be a slave. If you ware paying money to be somebody's subordinate aren't you in essence actually paying for a service? Am I crazy to think that creates a role reversal of some sort? I mean, if I am paying for a service doesn't that mean the person who I am giving money to essentially serving me? Many of the Dominants on here are not Dominants in my opinion. From my perspective, if you are asking for money for somebody to serve you then essentially you are asking people to pay for service. Therefore the person asking for money for a service is actually the submissive. And your profile should reflect that accordingly.



Tributes aren't payment for services rendered. Tributes are gifts.

If someone is asking for money, then walk away from them quickly. A dominant shouldn't have to ask for things that have already been discussed before a relationship even begins. (ie. Telling your slave that you want coffee made at 7am every day. You shouldn't have to ask for that to happen, it should just be done.) I've never asked for a cent from my subs. They know what's expected of them and they do it, without being asked.

Before someone jumps down my throat about that, let me clarify. I do not require tributes from strangers as they aren't my subs and I'm not entitled to a response from them, let alone their money. I do, however, require tributes from subs that are mine and this is something that's pre-determined based on a lot of things that are irrelevant to this conversation.


ETA: Coffee and money are clearly not the same thing, but coffee is all I have near me and I couldn't come up with a better example on the fly.



JstAnotherSub -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 11:12:13 AM)

nevermind, saw Theta's comment. Gonna use report instead.



Page: <<   < prev  17 18 [19] 20 21   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125