RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s?

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

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

Message

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 11:28:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AllisonWilder Tributes aren't payment for services rendered. Tributes are gifts. Before I say this I'd like to point out that you, in particular, I have no issues with as a Findomme. So don't take this as any sort of rant. This is a semantic discussion. For me, a "gift" is non-compulsory. If I order Carol to bring me a cup of coffee it's not a gift. It's her obeying a command and there are consequences to not doing so. It's a gift at gunpoint. Obedience is a compulsory part of our dynamic (if not our larger relationship) and so her obeying me is never a gift. If she brings me one on her own THAT is a gift. So if "tribute" is a compulsory part of your engagement with someone then I don't see it as a gift. It's not the same thing as Carol getting me a Christmas present. And now I close again with... "The fact that I'm quibbling with the word 'gift' doesn't change my overall reaction to findommes and subs."

JstAnotherSub -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 11:38:30 AM)
The problem I have with fin dommes is, no matter how I try to, I can not get away from it seeming, to me, that it is taking advantage of a pitiful, led by his dick, victim. I know the "victim" is an adult, and therefore supposedly capable of making adult decisions. And I think stupid should hurt sometimes. But, I have never met a man who would prefer to be taken for his money, rather than be in a relationship. Now, he may seek out and only have contacts with a findomme because he is incapable of maintaining a relationship, but that still, to me, is him being taken advantage of because of desperation to fulfill a need, fetish, whatever you call it. I will also admit to having most of my knowledge about findommes come from chicks on here that I see posting in a manner that says send me shit, and maybe I will send you pics of my boobs, maybe not. This type of person may make "real" findommes as sick as they do me, but I think that is the impression that many, myself included, have when I hear the word findomme. BTW, here is my wishlist. [;)]

fetisheden -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 11:51:42 AM)
i dont take advantage of anyone. no slave is forced to send me anything.i only deal with adults. some people are more beautiful than others, some are richer than others.life is not fair, everyone has their own cross to bear. yada yada yada quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub The problem I have with fin dommes is, no matter how I try to, I can not get away from it seeming, to me, that it is taking advantage of a pitiful, led by his dick, victim. I know the "victim" is an adult, and therefore supposedly capable of making adult decisions. And I think stupid should hurt sometimes. But, I have never met a man who would prefer to be taken for his money, rather than be in a relationship. Now, he may seek out and only have contacts with a findomme because he is incapable of maintaining a relationship, but that still, to me, is him being taken advantage of because of desperation to fulfill a need, fetish, whatever you call it. I will also admit to having most of my knowledge about findommes come from chicks on here that I see posting in a manner that says send me shit, and maybe I will send you pics of my boobs, maybe not. This type of person may make "real" findommes as sick as they do me, but I think that is the impression that many, myself included, have when I hear the word findomme. BTW, here is my wishlist. [;)]

AllisonWilder -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 11:55:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: AllisonWilder Tributes aren't payment for services rendered. Tributes are gifts. Before I say this I'd like to point out that you, in particular, I have no issues with as a Findomme. So don't take this as any sort of rant. This is a semantic discussion. For me, a "gift" is non-compulsory. If I order Carol to bring me a cup of coffee it's not a gift. It's her obeying a command and there are consequences to not doing so. It's a gift at gunpoint. Obedience is a compulsory part of our dynamic (if not our larger relationship) and so her obeying me is never a gift. If she brings me one on her own THAT is a gift. So if "tribute" is a compulsory part of your engagement with someone then I don't see it as a gift. It's not the same thing as Carol getting me a Christmas present. And now I close again with... "The fact that I'm quibbling with the word 'gift' doesn't change my overall reaction to findommes and subs." I'm at a loss for a way to best describe what I'm trying to say. Maybe you're right, if it's compulsory, then maybe it's not a gift, but (in my case, at least) it's still not a payment for services rendered as I'm still not providing a service the way a pro would. Payments are for pro-dommes, in my opinion and in essence, tributes are supposed to be gifts. The terminology just got sort of clouded somewhere along the way.

AllisonWilder -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 12:05:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub The problem I have with fin dommes is, no matter how I try to, I can not get away from it seeming, to me, that it is taking advantage of a pitiful, led by his dick, victim. I know the "victim" is an adult, and therefore supposedly capable of making adult decisions. And I think stupid should hurt sometimes. But, I have never met a man who would prefer to be taken for his money, rather than be in a relationship. Now, he may seek out and only have contacts with a findomme because he is incapable of maintaining a relationship, but that still, to me, is him being taken advantage of because of desperation to fulfill a need, fetish, whatever you call it. I will also admit to having most of my knowledge about findommes come from chicks on here that I see posting in a manner that says send me shit, and maybe I will send you pics of my boobs, maybe not. This type of person may make "real" findommes as sick as they do me, but I think that is the impression that many, myself included, have when I hear the word findomme. BTW, here is my wishlist. [;)] Those of us that are real don't like the 'send me shit and maybe I'll acknowledge your presence and maybe I'll show you my boobs' posters either. They are the reason I get so many 'If I give you xyz, what will you do for me?' messages and they're the reason that I try to post on the discussion side of CM more often so that more people can see that we're not all here leeching off of unsuspecting men and discarding them when they've run out of money for the month. Some of us have real, long-term, D/s relationships that incorporate more than just money.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 12:09:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub But, I have never met a man who would prefer to be taken for his money, rather than be in a relationship. Stand outside your local strip club and you'll see dozens.

XxLarryxX -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 12:15:16 PM)
Tributes can be considered as gifts if it not something that is required. I want to also point out asking for a tribute is a little bit different that financial domination. I don't think there is anything wrong with somebody giving tribute. But if you are giving tribute do not expect something in return because a tribute is much different by definition than being asked to pay to serve. If tributes are required to serve then essentially the sub is ultimately paying for a service. I think JeffBC's definition of a what is a gift is pretty accurate. Although I believe the actual act submitting to a dominant as a slave is a gift, the every day tasks that are expected from a submissive should not be considered a gift. Like JeffBC stated, the definition of a gift evolves info things a sub does extra in tribute to his or her dominant once guidelines are established of what is expected.

JstAnotherSub -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 12:17:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub But, I have never met a man who would prefer to be taken for his money, rather than be in a relationship. Stand outside your local strip club and you'll see dozens. Touche', but that could fall into the led by their dick thing again also!

JstAnotherSub -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 12:19:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AllisonWilder quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub The problem I have with fin dommes is, no matter how I try to, I can not get away from it seeming, to me, that it is taking advantage of a pitiful, led by his dick, victim. I know the "victim" is an adult, and therefore supposedly capable of making adult decisions. And I think stupid should hurt sometimes. But, I have never met a man who would prefer to be taken for his money, rather than be in a relationship. Now, he may seek out and only have contacts with a findomme because he is incapable of maintaining a relationship, but that still, to me, is him being taken advantage of because of desperation to fulfill a need, fetish, whatever you call it. I will also admit to having most of my knowledge about findommes come from chicks on here that I see posting in a manner that says send me shit, and maybe I will send you pics of my boobs, maybe not. This type of person may make "real" findommes as sick as they do me, but I think that is the impression that many, myself included, have when I hear the word findomme. BTW, here is my wishlist. [;)] Those of us that are real don't like the 'send me shit and maybe I'll acknowledge your presence and maybe I'll show you my boobs' posters either. They are the reason I get so many 'If I give you xyz, what will you do for me?' messages and they're the reason that I try to post on the discussion side of CM more often so that more people can see that we're not all here leeching off of unsuspecting men and discarding them when they've run out of money for the month. Some of us have real, long-term, D/s relationships that incorporate more than just money. I understand what you are saying. Having a relationship other than having things given to you changes my perspective totally, but that is not something seen often, at least for me.

Teroh -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 12:19:28 PM)
You know what I find interesting on this... There doesn't appear to be any posts from the... What do they call them, "pay piggies"? That seems rather odd. I'd wager that if I created a thread denouncing or questioning the legitimacy of queening, strap-ons, etc. that male subs would be crawling out the electronic woodwork to defend their Dommes. So out of curiosity, where are yours champions of finDomme?

Hillwilliam -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 12:25:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub But, I have never met a man who would prefer to be taken for his money, rather than be in a relationship. Stand outside your local strip club and you'll see dozens. Touche', but that could fall into the led by their dick thing again also! Findoms, strippers, they lead weak minded people by the dick and get them to empty their wallet. Same thing.

AllisonWilder -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 12:27:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Teroh You know what I find interesting on this... There doesn't appear to be any posts from the... What do they call them, "pay piggies"? That seems rather odd. I'd wager that if I created a thread denouncing or questioning the legitimacy of queening, strap-ons, etc. that male subs would be crawling out the electronic woodwork to defend their Dommes. So out of curiosity, where are yours champions of finDomme? Since when do Dommes of any kind need someone to be their hero? And not every sub into financial domination is a paypig.

Teroh -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 12:28:47 PM)
Also, by definition a "tribute" can be a gift OR payment (literally by its definition). The issue is, historically, and in this context, there is an implicit meaning behind tribute. Did ancient Greeks set tribute in their gods temples just for fun? No, they were simultaneously praying for or expecting something (love, rain, etc.). Did the citizenry of conquered nations offer tribute to Caesar because they thought he was a great guy? No, they'd just rather prefer to end the raping and pillaging. So you see, even in ancient history, a tribute while loosely defined, always has an underlying agenda to it. Edit: I think it's also worth pointing out that these historical examples of tribute served only as lessons in futility. The Greek gods didn't bring love or rain The legions did not stop their pillaging

Teroh -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 12:33:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AllisonWilder quote: ORIGINAL: Teroh You know what I find interesting on this... There doesn't appear to be any posts from the... What do they call them, "pay piggies"? That seems rather odd. I'd wager that if I created a thread denouncing or questioning the legitimacy of queening, strap-ons, etc. that male subs would be crawling out the electronic woodwork to defend their Dommes. So out of curiosity, where are yours champions of finDomme? Since when do Dommes of any kind need someone to be their hero? And not every sub into financial domination is a paypig. Oah I'm certain they don't need them, just as you don't. I simply find their absence strange and suspect. I certainly defend things I believe in whether I'm asked to or needed to or not

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 12:52:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AllisonWilder I'm at a loss for a way to best describe what I'm trying to say. Maybe you're right, if it's compulsory, then maybe it's not a gift, but (in my case, at least) it's still not a payment for services rendered as I'm still not providing a service the way a pro would. Payments are for pro-dommes, in my opinion and in essence, tributes are supposed to be gifts. The terminology just got sort of clouded somewhere along the way. You know this is just my pragmatic engineer's brain talking but were it me I think I wouldn't bother with the distinction. This is my relationship. This is how it works. It either makes the folks in it happy or it does not. You want to call them "tributes", "gifts" or "blatant extortion" I really don't care. For crying out loud, I call Carol "property". Surely a bit of extortion is better than outright slavery. That is, in fact, exactly how I deal with the more troublesome [to others] parts of my own marriage. It is what it is. It doesn't need to be justified or supported or validated. I really don't care that some people don't see it as "valid BDSM" or "a legitimate kink" or anything else. In case it helps you any, I've been directly called "abusive" or some word like that a few times on these boards and I am "abusive by implication" pretty much constantly. Yours is not the only kink (or whatever) that runs afoul of "The BDSM rules".

FilmWithMistrix -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 12:52:54 PM)
I am a lifestyle & pro domme, and yes, I do engage in financial domination with a select group of subs. In general however, even my fin subs eventually meet me in person, as in all online/distance training I actively invoke a desire to serve in person. I do not like distance play for the sake of distance play. For me, the pay off is in looking into the sub/slaves eyes when I twist them round. There are many who approach from wildly foreign countries in which I KNOW there is no realistic expectation of meeting RT, and frequently, after significant probing they come to understand that while a gift or two is nice and appreciated, its not going to satisfy either of us in the way that we both ultimately want... RT. That said, I travel Europe, USA and Canada so I DO get more chances than most to meet with subs of all genres (not just fin subs) and do deviant things to their bodies and brains... its good to be me. I don't get off on the control without knowing its going somewhere real time. The reality is that it is a sincere form of control when exercised correctly. Saying I'm 20 & look hot in a bikini so give me money, however is not my vibe. As with ALL forms of DS, I also feel if you are stuck in bitchy ranting raving twat mode twenty-four-seven then you've watched too many movies, its a role, not a reality for you. If you cant laugh and smile while turning the screws... well... then its not really something you enjoy now is it? Despite arguments to the contrary proffered on this and other forums quite often, yes, one can firmly be both lifestyle and take pro sessions as well. Lets be frank, not everyone is personal play partner material, and many are in vanilla relationships that they value & do not wish to end to feed a kinky need. Many perfectly fun, good people have specific ideals they have woven into their pervy fantasies as well (often appearance based), and for those guys pro sessions are simply more realistic way to get the itch scratched. I have an awesome play space, loads of gear and latex, and why not share it with the sane subs of the world (note i specified sane!). While my primary form of income actually isn't domination, it does allow me more time & $ to spend on things I enjoy.. like the pretty lil masochist I've decided to keep around as long as no remains out of his vocabulary ;)

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 12:56:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Teroh You know what I find interesting on this... There doesn't appear to be any posts from the... What do they call them, "pay piggies"? That seems rather odd. I'd wager that if I created a thread denouncing or questioning the legitimacy of queening, strap-ons, etc. that male subs would be crawling out the electronic woodwork to defend their Dommes. So out of curiosity, where are yours champions of finDomme? In case it interests you, pretty much every single thread on these boards denounces Carol and those like her. Despite the fact that I know these people exist and are active in the BDSM community they don't post here. Is that really a big surprise? I on the other hand DO post here. Again, is it any surprise that I do and she does not given our relative personalities? I agree with you though. I'd love to here some financial subs on this thread.

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 1:08:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Findoms, strippers, they lead weak minded people by the dick and get them to empty their wallet. Same thing. Wow. I've gone to strip clubs. Now I am "weak minded" and "led by my dick". Man, I just learn new things every day on these boards. It's what keeps me coming back.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 1:10:43 PM)
Did you empty your wallet Jeff or did you just go for entertainment? If you didn't empty it, the strippers were disappointed but you're not that weak minded wealthy one that they were really looking for.

AllisonWilder -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/26/2012 1:16:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC Man, I just learn new things every day on these boards. It's what keeps me coming back. It's why I keep coming back, too. Today I learned that I'm a stripper, which was definitely news to me. Last week I learned that I'm a prostitute, which is odd since I don't have sex but I yam what I yam, I guess. :) I love these forums.

Page: << < prev 18 19 [20] 21 22 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875