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

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/5/2013 7:30:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TNDommeK I agree, I feel I give something very helpful to my slaves. Sure, but it's not for you to set the value on whatever it is you give them. Only the recipient can determine that. Although I'm pretty certain you'd score well in that category also... probably better than your own self-score if I were to hazard a guess.

TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/6/2013 1:28:22 AM)
I'd say you're right. I'm my own worst critic. But my slaves swear by me. And I'd assume they wouldn't keep fuckin with me if I wasn't doing something right. I know I wouldn't fuck with anyone that didn't please me.

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/6/2013 7:51:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TNDommeK I'd say you're right. I'm my own worst critic. But my slaves swear by me. And I'd assume they wouldn't keep fuckin with me if I wasn't doing something right. I know I wouldn't fuck with anyone that didn't please me. So then... in a roundabout sort of way does this tangent return to the thread? It would seem obvious that any findomme who's got one or more long-term s-types who are happy demonstrates that there IS a relationship and ergo "relationship money rules" apply rather than business ones. Which, to be fair, is about how I feel about anyone else. For instance, the guy who proudly says he's trained lots of slaves in his life leaves me laughing and thinking, "... but couldn't manage to keep one of them." It's so hard to discuss this because there's the ducklips variety then there's the relationship variety of findomme. I wonder if it all comes down to that? I mean, I doubt we'd be very nice to some "master" who came here and posted how he "enslaved" some chick at the party last night then they had a banging time then they both went to their respective homes and it was over. We would all be very quick tell him that he's no master and that was not a slave and his conception of M/s was so shallow that you couldn't float a dandelion seed in it. That's about exactly how I feel about the ducklip variety and their one-night stand cash-registers which are called "slaves". I guess what I'm getting at is other corners of BDSM (M/s in this case) also have our... uh.... "light versions". I wonder if findomme gets a bad wrap because most of us only knew of the "light" version before we knew of anything else. It was you and Allison who gave me data points beyond the ducklip profiles.

TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/6/2013 8:27:50 AM)
Yes of course. I do consider myself to have relationships with my slaves. Are there some who simply write me and say "here's a gift and I sent I want to give you a gift card"without me saying hello? Sure there are. I would assume that's lite version. As far as the " I've trained so many slaves" guy....maybe they all were under short term training with him. I think about other possibilities before writing him off. It wasn't until I think say year or year before that I decided to take on a long term slave. So who knows, maybe said guy has trained lots of slaves. Maybe his and her definition of training is what they did or do. As far as the duckies...I would assume they aren't wanting a relationship. It would require work on their behalf. Maybe they're young and don't understand that they'd profit more from it...who knows. Glad me and Allison could shed some new light on the situation for ya. :)

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/6/2013 8:45:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TNDommeK As far as the " I've trained so many slaves" guy....maybe they all were under short term training with him. I think about other possibilities before writing him off. It wasn't until I think say year or year before that I decided to take on a long term slave. So who knows, maybe said guy has trained lots of slaves. Maybe his and her definition of training is what they did or do. Oh, don't get me wrong. I believe he did something that HE believes has something to do with what HE defines as M/s. It's just his definition and mine are galaxies apart because my definition includes some sort of ... well ... ownership.

TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/6/2013 12:24:16 PM)
I agree, even if its just for a short time period. I'm not talking a week or so, I'm saying a few months maybe. The former, to me is just him fuckin her with those cheap plastic handcuffs and calling it BDSM.

TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/12/2013 4:45:40 AM)
I just had a slave message me with a gift card, I've never met him. Never talked to him. He says he gets off on sending beautiful women tributes. I have to say, I respect his kink.

xxblushesxx -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/12/2013 5:57:05 AM)
I love the hit and runs!! (ewww....that sounds really gross!) I love the hit and run gifters! How fun are they? Very. That's how. :)

TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/12/2013 7:10:18 AM)
This one is actually sticking around so far.

Errastas -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/13/2013 5:33:49 AM)
To be honest its relatively unimportant but I would prefer if there was a way to screen out anyone who indicates 'findom/tribute or pay me' on their profile. I really cringe when I search and all I get are adverts. It is a waste of my time and degrades the value of using the site.

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/13/2013 6:32:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Errastas To be honest its relatively unimportant but I would prefer if there was a way to screen out anyone who indicates 'findom/tribute or pay me' on their profile. I really cringe when I search and all I get are adverts. It is a waste of my time and degrades the value of using the site. I understand. Really I do. And I wish there was a way to screen out all the "slaves" who want to be human cows, sex slaves, part-time slaves, etc. etc. etc. They are a waste of my time and degrade the value of using the site.

searching4mysir -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/13/2013 7:44:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Errastas To be honest its relatively unimportant but I would prefer if there was a way to screen out anyone who indicates 'findom/tribute or pay me' on their profile. I really cringe when I search and all I get are adverts. It is a waste of my time and degrades the value of using the site. When I was searching, I wish there were a way to screen out married guys or poly guys, because they were a waste of my time. The difference is, I was a grown-up and didn't expect a site to do the work of finding a mate for me.

TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/13/2013 7:50:30 AM)
Both of y'all's responses made me smile. Errastas, nothing I do degrades the value of this site. But it's good that you shared your opinion.

stinger5303 -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/13/2013 9:32:25 AM)
A lot of this site is turning into Financial Domme Central. Not being critical of it just tired of seeing it in every young "domme's " profile. I've subbed for pro dommes and understand totally about fees. You get a service you pay for it. I'm sure there are guys who get off on being wallet raped and that's cool. It's the one's who say they're "Fin Dommes" and offer no dominance whatsoever other than taking a guy's money. Yes I understand what a Fin Domme is all about, but it's sort of an insult to the dommes who know what makes a sub tick. Pros know exactly what makes a guy become more and more submissive. They actually get a lot of satisfaction rendering a sub powerless. They actually use a hands on approach. Just my choice and if there are women who can exploit subs for nothing but cash, more power to you. I'm sure there are enough subs who submit to this because there are enough Fin Dommes on this site. So it must be a popular aspect. Not for this guy though.

garyFLR -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/13/2013 11:42:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TNDommeK I just had a slave message me with a gift card, I've never met him. Never talked to him. He says he gets off on sending beautiful women tributes. I have to say, I respect his kink. You go girl [:D]!!

thishereboi -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/13/2013 5:26:31 PM)
quote: I would prefer if there was a way to screen out anyone who indicates 'findom/tribute or pay me' on their profile. there is, it's called the block feature. And the really great thing about it is they don't even have to mention a key word. All they have to do is have a profile you are not interested in and you can block it.

OsideGirl -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/13/2013 5:28:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: I would prefer if there was a way to screen out anyone who indicates 'findom/tribute or pay me' on their profile. there is, it's called the block feature. And the really great thing about it is they don't even have to mention a key word. All they have to do is have a profile you are not interested in and you can block it. ^^^ This.

slavekate80 -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/13/2013 6:43:25 PM)
What makes financial domination different from other aspects of BDSM? Just because the kink - or preference, depending on your POV - isn't particularly common in that distilled form doesn't mean it's not as valid as any other. And I think if you broaden the definition to include asking permission before making large purchases with one's own money, discussing what types of jobs a Dom(me) will permit the sub to apply for, etc. then you'd find more people than you think do practice a form of financial domination or submission. Some people focus on emotional domination. Some people focus on physical and/or sexual. There's some overlap, of course. Financial is just another type, can be mixed with others, can be enjoyed on its own. There's probably more incentive for people to try making money that way and offering little to nothing in return, but it seems like that usually wouldn't be very lucrative. And if it happens to work once in awhile because someone else enjoys paying money to people and getting little else back, well, they both got what they wanted, why judge?

LookieNoNookie -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/13/2013 7:04:03 PM)
QR.....No....no and no again! (That would be a no then).

MistressDarkArt -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (9/13/2013 7:16:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sml53 pay for doms make me sick.i know it a free country and i beleive it is thier right being some what a libterian.however i still find it disguting and a slap i8n the face to those seeking bdsm relationship.they seem to ruin what it stands for at least to me and no IT IS NOT REAL, just real bullshit.i wonder what the ladies on here say??? Here's what THIS lady says: For all intents and purposes, I'm a 'financial' domme to my partner S. He looks to me to make sure 'the value is there' when making both small and large purchases and financial decisions. Why? Because I'm shrewd at money management, researching and finessing deals. He's better in other areas of life. I don't charge for my service, and he saves a lot of money. How exactly is that disgusting, a slap in the face and not real? PS: I see you STILL have not taken the good advice given in your other threads about spiffying up your profile. What did I say about 'Mystress'? Oh, never mind, dude. Keep it as it is for more 'my stress'. Freudian slip, perhaps? Cripes...[&:]

Page: << < prev 79 80 [81] 82 83 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625