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

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



Message

TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/9/2013 10:03:05 AM)

Wow, I go to bed and this is what happens.

Tafkaa, I did have you on hide, but I check back and fourth to see if you have actually calmed down a bit to have an intelligent convo. By the way, thank you for admitting that if some fin domme get fulfillment that is a bonus, bc some of us do. Also are you Gorean? If so that explains why you feel women aren't dominant.

Jinx, I can take no credit here, this is all rochsub thread. I just though it would be good to have more opinions on the matter. If you have any slaves that you would allow to comment, we would like that.


Every D/s relationship is different, as I have said before...there is no lumping us together. Everyone knows I'm not a fan of the 19 year old fuck you pay me princess profiles, but I know they are doing something that someone wants bc they are everywhere and continuing to pop up. So there must be a calling for them. That is a part of this just like any other fetish.



TheLilSquaw -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/9/2013 10:30:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TNDommeK

Also are you Gorean? If so that explains why you feel women aren't dominant.



Did ya have to go there.

There are a handful of Gorean men who used to post on these forums that I have a great amount of respect for. I will also say, they had respect for Free Women within the Gorean community so even they respected "dominant women".




TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/9/2013 11:05:22 AM)

Oh I will admit I have absolutely no idea about nothing Gorean. I saw in another post on this thread that someone mentioned Gorean. So I assumed that's what that meant. My bad....I never go into the Gorean side bc I'm dumb to all those facts, lol.



JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/9/2013 11:31:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TNDommeK
Also are you Gorean? If so that explains why you feel women aren't dominant.

Since I happen to like Gor I'm going to differ with this. Being a "by the book" Gorean (meaning living in a fantasy world) would imply such a thing. I happen to know a few Goreans who live on Earth rather than Gor and they interact with earth women not Gorean women. To my knowledge not one of them would make such a sweeping claim. In point of fact it's not even clear that Norman made such a claim.

For those who don't know, TAFKAA is otherwise known as "awareness" and historically has been... uh... polarizing. I'm always astonished when I read someone bemoaning that he left collarme but the old adage applies, "there's no accounting for taste".

AllisonWilder said: Oh, okay. I didn't realize this was a dominance competition. Next time I'll wear more sensible shoes. ;)
*swoon* Honestly, I don't think it's possible to compete on dominance over the internet. It ends up looking like silly slap & tickle fights. But I do know that I can tell about things like poise and self-discipline on the internet and those things are much more worthy of my respect than "dominance"... especially the swaggerdom style of dominance we're seeing here



Rochsub2009 -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/9/2013 11:42:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC
For those who don't know, TAFKAA is otherwise known as "awareness" and historically has been... uh... polarizing.


Well that explains everything!!! Now that you mention it, his style is EXACTLY like the posts that we've come to expect from Awareness. I just hadn't connected the dots and realized that they are one and the same.

Thanks for clearing that up. Everything makes perfect sense now.



NocturnalStalker -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/9/2013 12:21:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009


quote:

ORIGINAL: TAFKAA

Oh, I wouldn't worry. I'm sure one of the prodomme/findomme lovin' mods will show up and censor me so I don't scare away the male sub cash cows. I just find it incredible that not only do findommes take advantage of suckers, they want to be - of all things - lauded for it.



But don't you see the flaw in your logic. You've made your point. We've heard your point. Now all you're doing is attacking and name calling. How is that helping the conversation?

I certainly hope the mods show up. If I were a mod, I'd delete some of your comments myself. Not because I dislike you, or because I love the findommes, but because you're violation the TOS.

I started this thread, and I try to shepherd my threads as much as I possibly can. But work and personal responsibilities have kept me away for the past week or so. So imagine my shock and disappointment when I returned to the thread only to see that the moderators had to remove some posts, and that you and Nocturnal Stalker were on here acting like jackasses.

Please cease and desist. This has the potential to be a very educational thread. We understand that some of you think that financial Dommes are prostitutes, parasites, hoes, bitches, whores, abusers, etc. It's all been said before. We get it. But is there any new insight that you'd like to add to the discussion?


So you made this topic without thinking that it would never become heated up with vehement stances taken from both sides? I truly wish you'd just admit that it isn't so much an open view you want but a controlled one.

Please don't depress me into seeing you're not quite so mentally incandescent. You knew full well what risks were being taken when making this.




TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/9/2013 12:30:01 PM)

Yea Jeff, like I said I haven't the slightest clue about Gor or the like, so that was My bad.

And wow, I actually like "awareness"posts....they do not seem at all the same to Me. But it was on different subjects so that could be why. I just always saw Awareness as a mature person, not what I have seen from Tafkaa.



VideoAdminChi -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/9/2013 12:51:02 PM)

FR,

Locked for additional review.



VideoAdminAlpha -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/11/2013 4:06:02 AM)

Fast Reply: I have reviewed the last of the thread, (my apologies for taking so long. ). Some posts have been restored, because although some are heated, in my opinion they do not violate TOS. I have also removed some others. If you had a post go missing since the lock, it was either a personal attack or a post that quoted a personal attack. If your post was restored, then (in my opinion) although probably close, was not a personal attack. Therefore, any post previously pulled for referring to it would have been restored also. Heated comments disagreeing with the subject of the thread are allowed, but hopefully this time, more concentration and discussion can be made on the topic, and not the posters involved, and/or any imagined favoritism towards the same.

Since it has been a couple of days(again, my apologies) hopefully everyone has had a chance to breathe, and have more productive discussion . If someone would like to discuss Gorean concepts on any subject, (since the comments here that reference possible Gorean concepts do not address financial domination) I would urge you to start a thread. I will also say that not all threads that contain the term "Gorean" have to be strictly on the Gorean Board. You may start it in the Gorean area,offtopic, or General BDSM(even though Goreans typically do not identify their beliefs as BDSM based, the discussion would get more exposure in General than offtopic).

Have a wondrous day!



spideycool69 -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/11/2013 5:24:19 AM)

I don't think there is a correlation between financial domination and BDSM



TAFKAA -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/11/2013 6:01:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheLilSquaw
You are right, acting like a child isn't against the TOS, attacking other posters or their kink is however.
Really? Perhaps you'd be so good as to point me to the exact place in the Terms of Service where it says that.



TAFKAA -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/11/2013 6:05:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml
Reporting posts a sign of weakness? Nothing of the sort.
In the majority of cases, it is.

quote:

If you report a post and it's removed, it's because it's regarded as a violation of the TOS
No. Reported posts will relatively infrequently contravene the Terms of Service.

quote:

To characterise reporting posts as a sign of weakness is plain silly.
No, it's an accurate assessment of the behaviour in the majority of cases.

quote:

I'm sorry that your experience of women has been so lacking in variety that you've never met one who is dominant. I guess that I'm lucky in that I do appear to have had a somewhat wider and richer experience than you.
No. More likely you're just lacking my level of insight.



MariaB -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/11/2013 7:21:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TAFKAA

See this is why I find women's claims of dominance to be fucking ludicrous.

In any given interaction, you have the option of hardening up, responding in kind or ignoring it.

Instead, you chose to bitch to mommy to come and save you from the nasty man. Explain to me, exactly how this cry for help is congruent with a dominant nature.


There is no real (and I hate to use that word!) domination without leadership and so you are either talking about the physical actions of dominance alone as in 'Topping' or you are saying that women can't lead? Perhaps you are saying both.

Why would a submissive invest their time and energy into someone who can clearly flog them with accuracy but doesn't have the ability to lead them? My long term submissives have been female. They have had relationships with male dominants but have chosen me over them. Why would that be? Its because I can get into their minds and their hearts. They felt that I could guide them and not just use them as a play thing. They invested their time in me because their intuition told them it all felt right.
Those female subs don't desire me because I have brute strength.
A woman doesn’t naturally have that brute strength that our male counterparts have. Even if she wanted to, she couldn’t drag a screaming man into her boudoir and ravish him until her needs are met unless of course it was consensual, but that’s the whole point isn’t it?
I have always seen this part of BDSM as titillation and us women are just as capable of having titillating fantasies as men are.

Now about female leaders, of which there are plenty. One only has to Google female leaders and you will come up with many thousands of good examples.
Throughout history women were repressed, often with brute strength because men feared the capabilities of a woman with a freethinking mind. We still see this today in some of the Middle East. Its not that the woman is weaker, more vulnerable, submissive!! Its ignorance and the mail ego that keeps a woman firmly in her place, unconsensually of course.



VideoAdminAlpha -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/11/2013 7:23:13 AM)

**Gently points to the topic of the discussion,which is financial domination being a legit kink or not.



TheLilSquaw -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/11/2013 7:28:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TAFKAA


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheLilSquaw
You are right, acting like a child isn't against the TOS, attacking other posters or their kink is however.
Really? Perhaps you'd be so good as to point me to the exact place in the Terms of Service where it says that.




Can we please stay on topic, which is financial domination as a legitimate kink / fetish or not.

That part of the TOS has been discussed in other threads, like the decline of CM and the moderation thread and we have been specifically told by mods to not discuss moderation here because this isn't a topic about moderation.

Or did you NOT read that as well?




MariaB -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/11/2013 7:44:05 AM)

I have said it before and I will say it again... I believe financial domination is a one sided kink and only a small percentage of the paying men get off on paying.
Most paying men pay because its an opportunity to feel dominated. Some men feel more controlled when they are being blackmailed or having their finances put into the hands of a dominant woman. Men who go on to become the definition of 'money pigs' have been know to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars/pounds/euros on their dominant. These men get huge satisfaction out of gifting and what does the woman get out of it? she gets some beautiful presents and cash in her bank and in return she shows the submissive her gratitude. Its a win win.

I don't see this as any different from a sugar daddy taking on a young woman half his age. He knows she wouldn't be with him if it wasn't for his wealth but what he gets is a pretty little handbag to hang off his arm and what she gets out of it is a nice spoilt lifestyle.



Alltiedup57 -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/11/2013 7:57:25 AM)

I don't know if this applie.. But here it is.
I was looking to be trained n mentored, I was approached by person at the munch n I met with him n his wife/slave.
We talked about what's expected etc, n 2nd time we all scened.
The 3rd time when they both wanted me over for the wkend, she became ill, so I did my best to help n cleaned her or should say his home.
He ended it after I left through text message.
Here's where I think it was her decision to make him end it.
She got a car for Christmas , n she carried him financlly.
Without her I don't believe he would have made it.

So what about when one person dominates the other bc of their financial success, making other give up a person??



TheLilSquaw -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/11/2013 8:27:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alltiedup57

So what about when one person dominates the other bc of their financial success, making other give up a person??


THIS is what I find funny.
Financial domination happens a lot in relationship.
It is a dynamic to some degree in many d/s or m/s relationships, hell in many vanilla relationships.

To ME I think the issue for many people is the idea that if the financial domination is the ONLY dynamic for THEM it's not a d/s or m/s dynamic or a relationship at all.

To ME I also think that many see it as part of their structure not as a kink / fetish therefore it can't be a fetish / kink because it's not to them.

Just like to some if you don't live with someone you can't have a TPE relationship.





nephandi -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/11/2013 9:13:07 AM)

Greetings

quote:

There are a handful of Gorean men who used to post on these forums that I have a great amount of respect for. I will also say, they had respect for Free Women within the Gorean community so even they respected "dominant women".


Just one correction here and I will get back on topic, being a Gorean Free woman do not mean that one is Dominant, most free women are actually submissive. Being a free woman do not mean that one is Dominant it means that one is free, those two are not the same. I am a Gorean free woman and I am also submissive, I am free to choose for myself how to live my life, but I am submissive by nature.

quote:

I don't think there is a correlation between financial domination and BDSM


This is kind of like saying I do not think cheese is a food and then just leave it at that with no explanation as to why you think this? BDSM includes the terms Dominance and submission, how is it not submission to want to submit a part of one's personal power, as in money to another, and how is it not Domination to want to be the one to accept such a submission? I mean it may not be something you yourself are into but as far as I know BDSM is not defined out from what one individual desires and are into but rather it is a pretty sweeping term.

I wish you all well



TheLilSquaw -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/11/2013 9:17:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: nephandi

Greetings

quote:

There are a handful of Gorean men who used to post on these forums that I have a great amount of respect for. I will also say, they had respect for Free Women within the Gorean community so even they respected "dominant women".


Just one correction here, being a Gorean Free woman do not mean that one is Dominant, most free women are actually submissive. Being a free woman do not mean that one is Dominant it means that one is free, those two are not the same. I am a Gorean free woman and I am also submissive, I am free to choose for myself how to live my life, but I am submissive by nature.

I wish you well

Not to get into a debate about goreans or to make this thread about them.

However, from what I remember of the books and the rl Gorean's I know.
Free woman are not submissive to everyone in the sense or manner that a kajira is.
Perhaps they submit to their FC or family.
However, I have never known or understood FW to act as slaves.
In-fact typically the ones that did (in the books) were quickly collared and made slaves.

ETA: Perhaps equating FW to a dominant was the wrong term for me to use.




Page: <<   < prev  35 36 [37] 38 39   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.109375