quote:

ORIGINAL: littlewonder

Same here. My daughter sooooo disagrees and those her age, in their twenties, seem to think like her...that everything should be straight down the middle and both should do everything just as equally. she got angry the other day because they went to a fancy restaurant and the waiter came over, took her coat, pulled out her chair, asked her if she wanted her meat cut, water glass filled, etc...but he didn't for her boyfriend. She called me that night to complain about it saying it was wrong and that she wanted to tell the waiter off. I had to try to explain to her that they are made to do that because of one, the restaurant they were at was a Brazilian traditional type restaurant. It's what's expected, and two, that they are supposed to that because it's traditional etiquette in such places and most of the world. She completely does not understand it at all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MAINEiacMISTRESS

She should have politely said, "No, but my boyfriend would like HIS meat cut, etc." and made the waiter serve her boyfriend. If he refused, NO TIP.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009
We see many threads on CM that deride financial Dommes. They're often called everything from "fakes", to "prostitutes". And in the deleted thread that I referenced above, someone even stated that financial domination isn't even a legitimate arm of kink/BDSM, and that it doesn't belong on CM. I couldn't disagree with that sentiment more, so here is my response to that assertion.

quote:

This is not only a legitimate fetish/kink, it's a legitimate business.

quote:

ORIGINAL: coldslayer

quote:

ORIGINAL: MAINEiacMISTRESS

She should have politely said, "No, but my boyfriend would like HIS meat cut, etc." and made the waiter serve her boyfriend. If he refused, NO TIP.

lol. excuse my gutter brain but that sounds painful

But really the thought of a non handicapped man not being able to cut his meat sound terrible. But then again it sounds ridiculous for any adult in general

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?

quote:

ORIGINAL: egern

quote:

This is not only a legitimate fetish/kink, it's a legitimate business.

Greetings, am new here too :-)

I do not understand how something can e both a kink and a business. Is it possible to explain further?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009

May I ask a few questions that may move the discussion in a slightly different direction? I have a theory that much of the concern about financial Dommes is based on WHO is doing the financial domination, and not WHAT they're actually doing.

With that hypothesis in mind, how many of you would object to the following scenarios, and why?

1) A known real-world Domme like Lady Pact gets tired of having her time wasted by wankers, so she adds a line to her profile that says, "I spend lots of time discussing BDSM on the message boards. If you want to hear my thoughts on it, you can read them there. However, because so many of you insist on sending me pictures of your cock, begging me to allow you to 'serve me', asking me to 'cuckold you', or agreeing to meet me only to fail to show up, I must now take extra precautions to weed out time wasters. Therefore, I will not respond to any messages from anyone that I have not first met in-person or on the message boards unless you first send a small tribute to show your sincerity."

Would that be acceptable? Would Lady Pact now be classified as a "financial Domme"? Would her behavior cause some of you to think of her as a "prostitute"?

2) What if TNDommeK wrote a post that said, "I am seeking a new long-term financial sub. My financial sub will be required to follow strict protocols and adhere to a tight schedule. You must meet me on webcam 3 times per week at the precise times that I instruct. If you are late by even one second, you will be banished permanently. Once we are on-line, you will get to behold my beauty, and I will control you completely. Over time, my control will grow deeper and deeper, and will eventually become all-encompassing. Of course, you will be required to send tribute to me to show your gratitude. After all, you appreciate the time that I spend with you, and the control that I have over you."

Yeah, I know it's corny, but you get the idea. Would you view that approach negatively? If so, why?

3) A 19 year old "Dominatrix" posts a new profile with almost no information about who she is, what she's into, or what she's looking for. But the profile does include 12 beautiful photos of her in bikinis, lingerie, and a few completely nude. All photos look professionally done, and the "dominatrix" looks so beautiful that she could easily be a professional model. The text of her profile simply reads "I am your new Goddess. I am looking for pay piggies. I will wallet rape you and laugh at you as I suck your bank account dry. My Amazon wish list is XYZ, and I also accept Green Dot cards."

What would you think of this "dominatrix"? Would you have issues with her approach? If so, why?

As you may have guessed, I believe that even those who have expressed a dislike for financial domination will have more issues with scenario 3 than they do with scenarios 1 & 2. I think it's the idea that the profile may be "fake", or that the person doesn't seem to be offering anything (time, attention, webcam sessions, etc.) in return that seems to upset people. I don't think that most people feel as negatively towards it if they know that the Domme is "real", or they believe the sub is getting something in return for their money. But I could be wrong.

Any thoughts or comments?

quote:

ORIGINAL: littlewonder

How is any of that different than dating anyone from anywhere? Why do people make bdsm dating out to be somehow different from meeting someone on match.com or the grocery store?

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: egern

quote:

This is not only a legitimate fetish/kink, it's a legitimate business.

Greetings, am new here too :-)

I do not understand how something can e both a kink and a business. Is it possible to explain further?

Some people love to cook. They spend a great deal of their lives cooking because they love it. Some even open restaurants and get paid to cook. No one has a problem with this.

Some people love kink. They spend a great deal of time doing kinky things. Some even become pros and get paid for it. For some reason a lot of people have a problem with this.
tWhat is the difference?

quote:

ORIGINAL: littlewonder

and you don't do that in other non bdsm relationships?

In all my relationships, be they bdsm or otherwise, someone was always in power. For me it's always been men because I'm attracted to dominant personality men, whether they know about or are not interested in bdsm or they are.

And bdsm dating isn't any different than "other" dating. You meet, you go out for awhile, you get to know each other. Bdsm isn't different. It's not special, it's not deeper. It is the exact same.

quote:

ORIGINAL: egern

ORIGINAL: disretion7

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.


I see two problems with this theory.

One is that if we are talking about gather-hunter societies, nobody knows how they lived.
There are not enough remains to determine that, only a lot of theories and the looking into the few present day gather-hunterer, in which everybody works to get food, including children.

Second, this does not actually explain how dominant women are supposed to have evolved. What is your thought here?

As for the often mentioned scarecity of fem doms I am beginning to think it may be a cultural phenomena, to do with gener roles. In any case, there are more where I am at.

quote:

ORIGINAL: egern

1: I personally really do not like female sexuality being so entwined with money. Men and women have their sexual needs, and they do not have to do with money.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TNDommeK

Now the 19 year old princesses...definitely want a free ride.