disretion7 -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (2/1/2013 3:53:01 PM)
|
Dominance and submission was even a topic that came up on ABC Nightline about 15 years ago, if from an anthropology perspective, but, also, helps explain the pro-Domme phenomenon. The vast majority of today's women evolved to be submissive because their survival was often contingent upon submitting to a Dominant male willing both to fend for and protect them. After the birth of their children, however, prehistoric women often shifted allegiance towards submissive males who were more gentle in helping them raise children. So males evolved more evenly split between being Dominant and submissive. The result is that submissive (AND Dominant) males outnumber naturally Dominant women by a great majority and I've seen figures that say anywhere between 20-30 males must compete for the attention of any one Domme, accordingly. So, it is not surprising that some Dommes would turn their numerical advantage into a cottage industry either to help pay for necessities or luxuries. Given the numerical disparity, the argument about whether pro-Dommes are authentically Dominant or just naturally submissive women taking financial advantage, would seem to be a moot point, except insofar as the quality of the D/s experience they provide. As a male sub, I've been very lucky to be able to submit to Dommes who could, at least, ACT authentic, if they weren't really. Either way, I know that most guys my age, or even half my age, are up against a numerical disparity that results in either pro-Domme or no Domme. So, whatever, the purist arguments, if most guys only get to submit at an hourly rate, or not at all, I imagine that pro-Domination is around to stay.
|
|
|
|