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

Teroh -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/28/2012 8:36:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder In this day and age, the only reason for ignorance is stupidity imo. I still stand by that if you are an adult and you cannot figure out how to take care of yourself, I hope a court is able to appoint a guardian for you. I disagree completely. The more you learn, the more you realize you are ignorant of a great deal more than you are aware. Ill take a wild guess and say you are ignorant of how to derive the partial molar volume of solutions or accurately tabulate stress-strain diagrams. In my world that makes you ignorant. Just as I'm sure I would be considered ignorant in your profession. Just as newbies would be considered ignorant here.

TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/28/2012 8:38:38 PM)
Talk about "having the most annoying trend of dodging" things.

Killerangel -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/28/2012 8:43:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Teroh I can see how selling sex appeal does on surface appear to be prostitution. In the reallity we live in though, a more appropriate term would simply be business. As I've stated before my chief issue with financial domination is the message it sends to new comers. Just like you wouldn't want a strip club next to an elementary school. Lets say for a moment that absolutely every finDomme and finsub are completely knowing and appreciative of service rendered past present and future. Lets go as far to say in some mechanism that has yet to occur or be explained to me it is even a legitimate aspect of BDSM. We all still see it enough for threads like this to be prevalent and lengthy, so it is reasonable to expect that new comers also see it. I think in all likelihood it does a great deal therefore to damage the impression an even moderately objective individual has of the site. Certainly a profitable business model for the FinDommes, although partially deteriorative for everyone else. Now I'm sure the argument will be brought up that any kink can have this potential affect. Although technically true, the fact that money changes hands as the explicit purpose of the interaction makes it business. Quite literally mixing business with pleasure is different conceptually than preferring certain pleasures and being revolted by others. This premise of protecting newbies from their own sexuality is absurd. What's next, saying we all have to be protected from ourselves as we go about the business of being a consumer? Are we going to have nannies appointed in stores everywhere to offer advice to those who aren't well versed enough in choosing what products to buy? On the topic of mixing business with pleasure, if someone wants to buy tickets to a concert will they have to undergo some training in order to understand if they REALLY want to spend money on that evening of entertainment or go for something else...?

littlewonder -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/28/2012 8:45:57 PM)
quote: you are ignorant of how to derive the partial molar volume of solutions or accurately tabulate stress-strain diagrams. In my world that makes you ignorant. The only reason I'm ignorant of such is because I haven't googled it and it isn't my career. But how hard is it to have sex and a relationship in whatever way you want? I mean, if you're an adult and you still can't figure out how to get into a relationship, then you're beyond saving imo. Bdsm is not a career and it's not something difficult. It's as easy as breathing air as far as I'm concerned. Those who have difficulty with bdsm are imo, the same people who have difficulty with leaving their homes and socializing with other people and most likely have never once had a successful relationship and very few friends.

Teroh -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/28/2012 8:46:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TNDommeK quote: ORIGINAL: Teroh quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: Teroh I can see how selling sex appeal does on surface appear to be prostitution. In the reallity we live in though, a more appropriate term would simply be business. As I've stated before my chief issue with financial domination is the message it sends to new comers. Just like you wouldn't want a strip club next to an elementary school. Lets say for a moment that absolutely every finDomme and finsub are completely knowing and appreciative of service rendered past present and future. Lets go as far to say in some mechanism that has yet to occur or be explained to me it is even a legitimate aspect of BDSM. We all still see it enough for threads like this to be prevalent and lengthy, so it is reasonable to expect that new comers also see it. I think in all likelihood it does a great deal therefore to damage the impression an even moderately objective individual has of the site. Certainly a profitable business model for the FinDommes, although partially deteriorative for everyone else. Now I'm sure the argument will be brought up that any kink can have this potential affect. Although technically true, the fact that money changes hands as the explicit purpose of the interaction makes it business. Quite literally mixing business with pleasure is different conceptually than preferring certain pleasures and being revolted by others. Wait. We have to 'save the newbies' because money is changing hands? Are you also of the mind that people new to the lifestyle don't understand pros booking sessions? This position of how people new to BDSM have to be protected from kinks or practices that some people don't like is rather self-righteous. Everyone has a vested interest one way or another in a growing community. As far as pro Doms go, I'm not nearly as opposed to them as I am financial ones for these reasons: 1) I perceive on a percentage basis they have a greater legitimate interest in BDSM. 2) the subs theoretically have a better idea of what they're paying for 3) services rendered are more tangibly evident So what if one is Pro AND fin? In my opinion that makes them an entrepreneur. Albeit a particularly distasteful one, but that's just my belief. I have no problem and in fact encourage people to make a living off what they love to do. That being said, I'd still be very unlikely to date or befriend them. My ideal woman has better means of making a living. (I'm sure ill hear responses to this such as 'oah I could do so many other things and make more but I just love doing this', but I have to say, the parties I'm concerned about can't, and therefore are here).

Teroh -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/28/2012 8:49:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder quote: you are ignorant of how to derive the partial molar volume of solutions or accurately tabulate stress-strain diagrams. In my world that makes you ignorant. The only reason I'm ignorant of such is because I haven't googled it and it isn't my career. But how hard is it to have sex and a relationship in whatever way you want? I mean, if you're an adult and you still can't figure out how to get into a relationship, then you're beyond saving imo. Bdsm is not a career and it's not something difficult. It's as easy as breathing air as far as I'm concerned. Those who have difficulty with bdsm are imo, the same people who have difficulty with leaving their homes and socializing with other people and most likely have never once had a successful relationship and very few friends. My point exactly, the FinDommes I find particularly loathsome try to make BDSM ( or in their case, potentially the lack of ) a career

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/28/2012 8:51:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Teroh As I've stated before my chief issue with financial domination is the message it sends to new comers. Just like you wouldn't want a strip club next to an elementary school. Slow down there Tex. Don't make assumptions of what I'd prefer to have near my elementary school. As near as I can tell sex isn't damaging to minors... parents and their hysterical hand-waving are. Don't map your sexual phobias onto me... I got my own The rest of this... I just don't know what to say other than... "Dude, your youth is showing." Your arguments are self-referential. You take it as axiomatic that financial D/s is bad then construct a proof based on that axiom. How hard is it for you to understand that something which violates your own personal aesthetic about the one true way of BDSM means jack shit to the rest of us? You continue to make your assertion that financial D/s is bad but you have yet to support the argument with anything other than self-referential crap. Your stuck inside a mirror-box limited by your own prejudices. So until you can construct an argument that clearly shows some sort of negative impact of financial D/s that doesn't rely on "because it's bad, mmmmkay?" I'm afraid that you'll get nowhere with me. While we're at it, I am utterly certain that aspects of my relationship with Carol would offend your delicate sensibilities MUCH, MUCH worse than any simple financial transaction. As I try to imagine what you think a fin d/s relationship is all about I'm willing to bet good money that you'd be MUCH more horrified if you knew some of the details of Carol's and my marriage -- assuming you could even wrap your head around them. But you know what? I also don't care about that unless you can support your work with more than personal bias. And despite the fact that I've blown off little tidbits like "safe", "sane" and "consensual" along with a raft of other "BDSM wisdom" the BDSM world has not imploded -- nor has my marriage -- go figure. DAILY on these boards I read threads that, if applied to me, would be calling me delusional and/or abusive. I'm sure you can guess how much I care about that too. See... that's the thing about dominant personalities. We don't get pushed around by smoke & mirrors. The bottom line: Come up with an actual argument or expect most of us to continue laughing. PS: you might reread littlewonder's post about 2000 times till you get it. Your whole quixotic quest to save BDSM would probably sell to a naive 18 year old newbie sub but I'm afraid it's going to be a bit tougher with the rest of us.

Teroh -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/28/2012 8:52:47 PM)
To reclarify, I'm not interested in 'saving them from themselves'. My point is I don't want the people joining the site to see 101 findoms and be turned off because of it. Is that unreasonable? Not wanting people trying to find real meaningful relationships to have to sort through 101 scammers or princesses or extortionists?

TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/28/2012 8:53:35 PM)
And what makes you feel they would want to befriend someone as close minded as you? Distasteful? Not quite. I am a lifestyle Domme to female slaves, a fin/pro to males slaves. I also have three other means of income. (As My signature says "the working fin Domme) And in not one of those jobs am I having sex for money. Distasteful in whose opinion? Yours? That would be the equivalent (and absurd)of me telling Little Wonder that her and Kana's relationship is wrong. Who the hell am I to judge? You can't tell others about how and what they do is wrong. Fin Domme is just as legit as any of the kinks you have listed on your profile. No better or worse. Of course there are people who make anything look bad, but why suffer the good with the bad. Ignore the bad and find the good with the good. ETA: I think Jeff's statement "dude your youth is showing" should be a sunny quote of the day!! And after viewing his profile I am not aware that he is 22. [8\|] I always like the young ones that are mature..they seem to be so scarce around here.

AllisonWilder -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/28/2012 10:05:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Teroh To reclarify, I'm not interested in 'saving them from themselves'. My point is I don't want the people joining the site to see 101 findoms and be turned off because of it. Is that unreasonable? Not wanting people trying to find real meaningful relationships to have to sort through 101 scammers or princesses or extortionists? It's nice that you've taken it on yourself to worry about the newbies on the site. Feel free to direct them to the 'hide profile' button and go on about your merry way. Maybe you should get an official badge for your profile so that people know that you're an official representative of CollarMe and that they should heed your warnings against all that you are morally against. Oh, wait...you only speak for yourself. Who cares if people are turned off by findommes? Why is that even an issue? Edited to add: I find it odd that you're here, complaining about all the fakes and scammers when you yourself have a fake picture stolen from the internet.

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/28/2012 10:15:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Teroh To reclarify, I'm not interested in 'saving them from themselves'. My point is I don't want the people joining the site to see 101 findoms and be turned off because of it. Is that unreasonable? Not wanting people trying to find real meaningful relationships to have to sort through 101 scammers or princesses or extortionists? And once again I will try to break this down for you but I'm beginning to despair. My point is I don't want the people joining the site to see 101 findoms and be turned off because of it. Is that unreasonable? Yes and the fact that you cannot see that is kind of creepy. What you are saying is you want everyone to obey you. Good luck. YOU "don't want" something and you expect the rest of us to care. You really don't see how creepy that is? I kind of feel like I'm talking to a very, very young dominant who hasn't quite figured some things out yet. You are dominant. So you want to control a situation you don't find appealing. But you haven't bothered to ask yourself whether you actually CAN control it or not. Nor have you asked yourself whether you SHOULD control it or not. You've just gone off half-cocked trying to boss everyone around. Not wanting people trying to find real meaningful relationships to have to sort through 101 scammers or princesses or extortionists? Why can you not understand that I have the exact same damned problem? So do we all. If I wanted a new slave I'd have to sort through 101 sex slaves, fin slaves, scammers, and god knows what else. You do get it, right, that the vast majority of everyone is not appropriate for everyone else. The difference here is that you seem to think that what is not appropriate for you is simply wrong. You're wrong. Please, please go read the "gynarchy" thread over in the "Ask a Mistress" section. YOU are that guy. Just like him, you are trying to impose your fantasy on everyone else. Good luck with that.

Teroh -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/28/2012 10:37:03 PM)
Look guys, it's just my opinion. You're right, I can't force it on other people nor would I want to. I thought maybe if I came here and expressed it as logically as I could it would ring true with some of you. That clearly isn't happening potentially due to my inability to communicate exactly what I mean or possibly because there's error in my reasoning I am unaware of. In either case this is clearly a lost cause so I won't trouble you any further.

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/28/2012 10:55:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Teroh That clearly isn't happening potentially due to my inability to communicate exactly what I mean or possibly because there's error in my reasoning I am unaware of. Opinions are good. We all have them. Sharing them is good. But I agree that you are failing to communicate or else your reasoning is flawed. I still have not gotten a clear explanation of why you feel financial d/s is so bad. Let me say with real sincerity that I'd love to hear the reasoning. I don't need it to be rock solid. I just need it to be based on more than personal preference and conjecture about responses in new male subs. I'd like to ask a serious question. Do you think that prostitutes (real actual prostitutes) tarnish the sanctity of marriage? I'm just trying to understand the connection between money/sex/romance in your head that is causing the red flags to go off in your head because I just don't get them.

LadyPact -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/28/2012 10:57:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Teroh To reclarify, I'm not interested in 'saving them from themselves'. My point is I don't want the people joining the site to see 101 findoms and be turned off because of it. Is that unreasonable? Not wanting people trying to find real meaningful relationships to have to sort through 101 scammers or princesses or extortionists? Out of all the stuff associated with BDSM, trust Me, something like financial domination isn't the thing that is going to be the shock factor. Signed, Your friendly neighborhood sadist

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/28/2012 11:26:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact Out of all the stuff associated with BDSM, trust Me, something like financial domination isn't the thing that is going to be the shock factor. ... for instance... the fact that I have trained Carol to kill herself upon command? You'd think something like that would freak out a newcomer a bit more than demands for tribute. Even just the attempt to do such a thing really oughta raise more than a few eyebrows.

Nakhla -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/29/2012 1:10:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009 Personally, I think it's rather silly that prostitution is illegal. It's not called "the world's oldest profession" for nothing. As long as men lust for sex, and women have sexy bodies, prostitution will exist. The fight against it is just an hopeless as the war on drugs. Moreover, I guess I'm a bit libertarian in my views that it's not the government's job to protect adults from themselves. If a woman wants to sell her body, why shouldn't she be able to? But we digress. IMO, the findoms who cause people the most grief are the scammers and the pretty princesses. Both ask for money, and give little or nothing in return. No attention. No cam sessions. No face-to-face interaction. And certainly no sex. With that being the case, I have a difficult time understanding how someone can call that prostitution. If we're following the words of your second paragraph to the letter, then I'd say that that according to that definition findommes aren't prostitutes - but they may be scammers. Are they openly stating no interaction whatsoever? Now buyer beware and so forth, and in general giving money to strangers online is a bad plan, but if someone is wanting a cam session online and miss findomme offers it for x amount of dollars and miss findomme then disappears into the ether, it's a scam and a fraud as far as I'm concerned. ( In which case "not being a prostitute" is hardly a badge of honor any more than "not being an insurance salesman" is if you're a fraudulent insurance company. Prostitution is a far more respectable business practice! ) I've never engaged with a findomme or male version of the like ( I don't know, maybe the fact that the real thing is so readily available that the appeal is zilch? ), but I'm kind of scratching my head at their popularity if they're truly offering nothing in an up-front manner. Surely someone must think they're getting something somewhere? ( Really, I'm sincere in asking this - I have no clue what their business practices are. )

AllisonWilder -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/29/2012 1:33:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nakhla quote: ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009 Personally, I think it's rather silly that prostitution is illegal. It's not called "the world's oldest profession" for nothing. As long as men lust for sex, and women have sexy bodies, prostitution will exist. The fight against it is just an hopeless as the war on drugs. Moreover, I guess I'm a bit libertarian in my views that it's not the government's job to protect adults from themselves. If a woman wants to sell her body, why shouldn't she be able to? But we digress. IMO, the findoms who cause people the most grief are the scammers and the pretty princesses. Both ask for money, and give little or nothing in return. No attention. No cam sessions. No face-to-face interaction. And certainly no sex. With that being the case, I have a difficult time understanding how someone can call that prostitution. If we're following the words of your second paragraph to the letter, then I'd say that that according to that definition findommes aren't prostitutes - but they may be scammers. Are they openly stating no interaction whatsoever? Now buyer beware and so forth, and in general giving money to strangers online is a bad plan, but if someone is wanting a cam session online and miss findomme offers it for x amount of dollars and miss findomme then disappears into the ether, it's a scam and a fraud as far as I'm concerned. ( In which case "not being a prostitute" is hardly a badge of honor any more than "not being an insurance salesman" is if you're a fraudulent insurance company. Prostitution is a far more respectable business practice! ) I've never engaged with a findomme or male version of the like ( I don't know, maybe the fact that the real thing is so readily available that the appeal is zilch? ), but I'm kind of scratching my head at their popularity if they're truly offering nothing in an up-front manner. Surely someone must think they're getting something somewhere? ( Really, I'm sincere in asking this - I have no clue what their business practices are. ) Some offer nothing. Not all of us give nothing in return. While the pay me and fuck off thing happens a lot (and there are men that really LOVE to be used that way, they call themselves human ATMs), there are actual things going on. Now, I don't personally do webcam sessions because it feels damn strange (for me) to do a session that way, there are other things that go on.

TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/29/2012 8:32:54 AM)
You beat Me to it Allison. There are ones of us that offer more than just a Houdini disappearing act. People ask for what they get here. If one reads a profile that is chuncked full of "I'm a princess, send me money to even talk and prove you're real" and they send money, well it's kinda on their own risk. Teroh, no one is dismissing your opinions, they are welcome. But not to the point that you are attempting to label everyone as the same. A few of us have informed you how things work with us, which is far from being a prostitute, yet you still are labeling us as such. That is starting to turn into more than an opinion. That is what has people looking at you in such a way.You are young, open your mind to things that may be different.

lizi -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/29/2012 10:06:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Teroh To reclarify, I'm not interested in 'saving them from themselves'. My point is I don't want the people joining the site to see 101 findoms and be turned off because of it. Is that unreasonable? Yes, it is absolutely unreasonable. Some people come here looking exactly for what you want to take away. Who says the newbs are being turned off? You are, and you may be wrong. We're all entitled to search for what fulfills us. You are projecting your own opinions onto the rest of the world....we don't want them. We want our opinions. You were not appointed savior of the BDSM world, I'd say let everyone choose for themselves what is acceptable and what is not. quote: Not wanting people trying to find real meaningful relationships to have to sort through 101 scammers or princesses or extortionists? Who says the others using this site want meaningful relationships? Maybe others are not sorting through the scammers and princesses, but looking FOR them...? Once again, you are not the dictator of what is good and what is not good in BDSM. Step down from the podium, no one elected you to speak for everyone. No one cares what you find distasteful, you are not the arbitrator of taste. I also find it rather funny that you chose to post an image of someone else to represent yourself, I presume you did that because you wanted to be thought of as attractive by others. Is this not deceitful and leading people on? Perhaps there should be a ban on stolen pictures so that people can be protected from wrongly thinking that they are dealing with the person in the picture when they aren't. Oh wait...there IS a ban on stolen pictures...that's right. Clean up your own backyard Teroh before attempting to stand in judgement on someone else.

LeatherBentOne51 -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (12/29/2012 10:09:09 AM)
Ive known Dominants who charge a fee and also submissives. They refer to themselves as professionals and do not offer sex. LBO

Page: << < prev 24 25 [26] 27 28 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625