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

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



Message


AAkasha -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/26/2013 6:43:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: garyFLR


It doesn't take a genius to differentiate between 'legitimate' financial domination where there is a genuine relationship between Domme & sub, & the people who advertise themselves as such, in the hope of making a few quid. Akasha's rejection theory makes a good deal of sense.
The guys who have a kink for rejection have their needs catered for, for nothing, while the 'finDommes' are screaming FAKE from the highest rooftop.

It's a case of the kink provider seriously misjudging their client base.





And if makes the angry subs feel any better, really, the 'fake findoms" are completely wasting their time and the subs getting off on rejection are getting exactly what they want for free - every single time.

This is 100% a legitimate fetish. These men love, love, love unobtainable women, especially younger princess types who receive money and gifts from men who are richer and better looking (and have bigger cocks) then them. Just like cuckolding. And I can guarantee you that instead of ignoring the subs who email them and engage them, the money findoms respond EVERY SINGLE TIME and the sub strings them along, masturbating, until the sweet, sweet insulting rejection letter finally comes, and he HOPES it includes a big fat juicy insult about how he can't afford her. BINGO! And all for FREE! Then he moves on to the next findom.

Meanwhile, Collarme racks in the pageviews. Everyone is happy except the findom, and the subs that come here complaining about the findoms.

Akasha




Rochsub2009 -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/29/2013 8:22:19 AM)

Bump.

There are several threads on the front page that were already answered here. So I'm bumping it back up to the 1st page. But in truth, I doubt that we can stop people from creating 10 new financial domination threads each week. But I still decided to try.




MariaB -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/29/2013 9:51:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AAkasha


And if makes the angry subs feel any better, really, the 'fake findoms" are completely wasting their time and the subs getting off on rejection are getting exactly what they want for free - every single time.

This is 100% a legitimate fetish. These men love, love, love unobtainable women, especially younger princess types who receive money and gifts from men who are richer and better looking (and have bigger cocks) then them. Just like cuckolding. And I can guarantee you that instead of ignoring the subs who email them and engage them, the money findoms respond EVERY SINGLE TIME and the sub strings them along, masturbating, until the sweet, sweet insulting rejection letter finally comes, and he HOPES it includes a big fat juicy insult about how he can't afford her. BINGO! And all for FREE! Then he moves on to the next findom.

Meanwhile, Collarme racks in the pageviews. Everyone is happy except the findom, and the subs that come here complaining about the findoms.

Akasha



Bang on!!!




TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/29/2013 11:12:54 AM)

This. ^^

Every time I read a journal entry of some fin duck posting the user name and calling him losers and such bc he didn't pay her, I just shake my head. DON'T GIVE AWAY WHAT WE CAN SELL!!! Lol




VideoAdminChi -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/29/2013 12:45:13 PM)

quote:

There are several threads on the front page that were already answered here. So I'm bumping it back up to the 1st page. But in truth, I doubt that we can stop people from creating 10 new financial domination threads each week. But I still decided to try.


If you Report threads that duplicate existing current topics, we mods will be happy to lock or zap them.

[sm=mistress.gif]




Spiritedsub2 -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/29/2013 1:31:26 PM)

I think the entire topic of financial domination is so endlessly fascinating that it deserves its very own permanent sticky thread, with all questions and comments on the topic posted in that sticky only! That way we never have to risk missing a single financial domination post and the rest of the forum contents is easier to see. [:)]




TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/29/2013 2:59:52 PM)

I think we tried to get this one to be a sticky. This is the best thread of it I've ever seen.
Aside from the ignorance a few pages back, that I think we're wiped clean. This thread is very educational.




LadyPact -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/29/2013 5:50:01 PM)

It was a sticky for less than a day. Alpha put up an explanation that it wouldn't be fair to make this a sticky over and above questions on other kinks. I do see her side of things when coming from that angle.

So, the answer is now simple. As long as this thread stays current, from what Chi is saying, they will zap what would be considered duplicate threads on the same topic. We could literally rid ourselves of the continual pile of rants about fin kink if we just manage to keep this one on the board.




MissToYouRedux -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/29/2013 5:55:28 PM)

The sticky should say "FinDomme Questions/Comments go here" and provide a link to this thread. It would make everyone's lives easier. [:)]




SeekingTrinity -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/29/2013 6:43:18 PM)

Might I suggest setting up appointments for the "FinDomme is a fake/prostitute/won't give me time of day/<fill in the complaint>" and then charge $100 per character for their rant? If we all got a split, the whining ad nauseum we listen to would be worth it [:D]




TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/29/2013 7:46:46 PM)

I'll keep this thread going everyday if I have too.

However, if someone had a legit question about fin Domme, would they know to ask it here? I don't mind serious questions, but idiotic statements should be banned.

I'm with ST, we could get rich real quick.




MariaB -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/30/2013 12:28:52 AM)

I think one of the things, which would be very simple to do, is put a tick box (if you are a financial or pro Domme) in the profile page. So many of the complaints come from men who say they start chatting to someone and suddenly discover she's a fin Domme. A simple tick would solve that and it would also be helpful to the fin/pro Dommes because people who clicked on their profile are more likely looking for a fin/pro Domme.




LadyPact -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/30/2013 12:31:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB
I think one of the things, which would be very simple to do, is put a tick box (if you are a financial or pro Domme) in the profile page. So many of the complaints come from men who say they start chatting to someone and suddenly discover she's a fin Domme. A simple tick would solve that and it would also be helpful to the fin/pro Dommes because people who clicked on their profile are more likely looking for a fin/pro Domme.

If they only discover that after they start chatting, what makes you think the woman would check the box?





TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/30/2013 1:07:57 AM)

My profile says that on the first line.




tazzygirl -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/30/2013 1:10:46 AM)

pft.. 4th.. I just checked [8D]




TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/30/2013 2:09:30 AM)

Lol...well it's close to the top,lol.




crazyml -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/30/2013 2:15:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AAkasha


quote:

ORIGINAL: garyFLR


It doesn't take a genius to differentiate between 'legitimate' financial domination where there is a genuine relationship between Domme & sub, & the people who advertise themselves as such, in the hope of making a few quid. Akasha's rejection theory makes a good deal of sense.
The guys who have a kink for rejection have their needs catered for, for nothing, while the 'finDommes' are screaming FAKE from the highest rooftop.

It's a case of the kink provider seriously misjudging their client base.





And if makes the angry subs feel any better, really, the 'fake findoms" are completely wasting their time and the subs getting off on rejection are getting exactly what they want for free - every single time.

This is 100% a legitimate fetish. These men love, love, love unobtainable women, especially younger princess types who receive money and gifts from men who are richer and better looking (and have bigger cocks) then them. Just like cuckolding. And I can guarantee you that instead of ignoring the subs who email them and engage them, the money findoms respond EVERY SINGLE TIME and the sub strings them along, masturbating, until the sweet, sweet insulting rejection letter finally comes, and he HOPES it includes a big fat juicy insult about how he can't afford her. BINGO! And all for FREE! Then he moves on to the next findom.

Meanwhile, Collarme racks in the pageviews. Everyone is happy except the findom, and the subs that come here complaining about the findoms.

Akasha



This




MariaB -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/30/2013 5:57:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB
I think one of the things, which would be very simple to do, is put a tick box (if you are a financial or pro Domme) in the profile page. So many of the complaints come from men who say they start chatting to someone and suddenly discover she's a fin Domme. A simple tick would solve that and it would also be helpful to the fin/pro Dommes because people who clicked on their profile are more likely looking for a fin/pro Domme.

If they only discover that after they start chatting, what makes you think the woman would check the box?




On Informed Consent, which has now closed down, they had this system in place. They put a warning up to financial and pro Dommes, asking that they tick the box if they were using that site to collect money or gifts. It quite clearly stated, if they didn't tick the box but continued to tout people regardless, when found out they would be banned.

In all the years they did that, I saw people were happy to tick the box and I never heard any complaints about people being deceitful. I generally don't think people want to be dishonest.




MissKittyDeVine -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/30/2013 6:00:54 AM)

And if we ticked such a box, we would still get whiny rants from certain quarters about all findoms/prodommes being whores and scammers.




imtempting -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (7/30/2013 6:07:59 AM)

No its not.




Page: <<   < prev  66 67 [68] 69 70   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
5.859375E-02