|
Proprietrix -> RE: Defending "pay for play" online training (6/13/2006 10:05:37 AM)
|
I’m not really concerned with how people spend their money, for what services, or on whom. But I do take issue with some things you’ve said, and I’ve highlighted those things in your post.
Whether we’re talking about phone sex, online Dominantion, or Pro-Domming, I constantly see these women who think they are "better" at it degrading the women who they view as "sleazy misers".
ANYONE can do it if they choose to. EVERYONE has the right to try if they want.
Whether it’s little Sleazy Sallie the gold-digger who lives in a one room apartment in the ghetto, asking for cash only to send a guy a hot fodder email every morning, or it’s Madam Know-It-All with her glorious 4 floor dungeon catering to Doctors, Lawyers, and Judges.
Yours is no better then hers. Hers is no better than yours.
If you want to defend phone sex, online pay-sites, Pro-Domination, and the like, then you need to defend it for everyone who is doing it, not just the "real" and "true" Ladies.
Quit putting up this measuring stick of when it’s "legitimate" "in good spirit", or "true services", or "for real". That’s no different than the folks who come on here and say they are "real and true Masters" and all the others are fakes and scammers.
I really can’t wrap my head around this supposed "grading system" that I see a lot of women on here use when it comes to which pay services are acceptable (to them) and which are not.
There simply are no universal qualifications or credentials for this kind of thing. The only way we could really determine what’s legitimate and what isn’t, is to take it down to the letter of the law and say "What she is doing is legal, and what she is doing is illegal." And even that isn’t going to filter the "good" from the "bad". It’s all subjective.
Either you’re willing to defend people engaging in pay for play, or you’re not willing to defend them.
(Or, like the rest of us, you just don’t care.)
But you can’t say "I defend the real true Ladies and refuse to defend the gold-diggers." when they’re both engaging in the same thing: pay for service.
quote:
ORIGINAL: AAkasha
There have been some recent posts that either slam "online training" as not real or not legitimate, as well as some posts lumping 'pay for play' domination (online) with scammers, tribute demanders, or fly by night money seekers.
This post is not to defend those people online (who are not always even female) who seek a quick buck from unsuspecting or desperate submissives. This is to defend those women who offer legitimate online domination (or phone domination) for a fee. This is a legitimate exchange of services and when consensual between both parties can be fulfilling for both people.
I feel sorry for women that are sincerely interested in exploring online domination (for a fee) but are immediately lumped into a category of scam artists or women simply seeking money. While I believe a LOT of people (not just women, but men pretending to be women) flock to the concept of "online domination" as a quick way to make a buck, those that are for real and prove themselves EARN every dollar they make.
A discerning submissive has the opportunity to make educated decisions about where he spends his money. If he wants to find legitimate online domination (or phone domination) he is in a position to shop around and find a woman who knows what she is doing. There are a lot of extremely creative, passionate women who are very capable.
Once again, this is a market being driven by DEMAND -- not femdoms out there preying on guys and ferociously manipulating them into entering an agreement for money exchange. The sub has the power to delete the email if he is being approached this way.
Akkasha,
I see this argument often between you and Ms. McComb. Slamming one another's pay sites on the basis of intention. She's out to save the subs. You're out to educate. She charges money because of XYZ. You charge money because of ABC.
There really is no difference. You, her, Madame Been-Doing-It-For-40-Years, Sleazy Sally the Scam Artist. You are all charging money for services you provide in the lifestyle. Either charging money for lifestyle services is ok, or it's not. It's either ethical to ask for compensation, or it's not.
Trying to out-do each other with this "It's OK for me because I care, but it's not OK for you because you're a gold-digger." is unbecomming to *any* professional woman.
If you want to defend pay-for-play, then by all means defend it, but not at the expense of those who are doing the very thing you are defending.
|
|
|
|
