Financial Domination

Financial Domination (Full Version)

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

Message

KaruSF -> Financial Domination (11/3/2012 9:55:14 PM)
Lots has been said about the traditional form of Financial Domination, but here's a fresh take. There are TONS of guys out there who put themselves out as submissive, or slave, but the only situation they want to pursue is one where they find a Master who keeps them, hides them away from the world, or some similar variation that makes the Dominant financially responsible for their housing, food, healthcare, and all their other upkeep. In its way, that arrangement is every bit as much Financial Domination as the ones where a submissive or masochist pays the Dom. When a Master has to work harder and give up some part of their assets to keep a sub/slave, the real power no longer belongs to the Master - He is working to support a leech, not being served by a slave or sub.

Temp1010 -> RE: Financial Domination (11/3/2012 10:02:10 PM)
I really agree with this post. lurking sometime ago i remember a poster who didn't have the best reputation here who expected a domme to take care of him. he would say he wouldn't cost much to maintain. this is very foolish from my pov. if i still lived at home my parents would be responsible for my health care, food, clothes. it is the same concept to me. Sure i could take care of the hous as far as cleaning and cooking. but it would be cheaper to hire a person to do that in the long run. quote: ORIGINAL: KaruSF Lots has been said about the traditional form of Financial Domination, but here's a fresh take. There are TONS of guys out there who put themselves out as submissive, or slave, but the only situation they want to pursue is one where they find a Master who keeps them, hides them away from the world, or some similar variation that makes the Dominant financially responsible for their housing, food, healthcare, and all their other upkeep. In its way, that arrangement is every bit as much Financial Domination as the ones where a submissive or masochist pays the Dom. When a Master has to work harder and give up some part of their assets to keep a sub/slave, the real power no longer belongs to the Master - He is working to support a leech, not being served by a slave or sub.

JanahX -> RE: Financial Domination (11/3/2012 11:07:10 PM)
You say it like that person doesnt have a choice in doing that. If thats the situation - then it must be something that theyre digging on. If they cant afford it - then they probably wont be doing that.

AthenaSurrenders -> RE: Financial Domination (11/4/2012 1:51:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KaruSF Lots has been said about the traditional form of Financial Domination, but here's a fresh take. There are TONS of guys out there who put themselves out as submissive, or slave, but the only situation they want to pursue is one where they find a Master who keeps them, hides them away from the world, or some similar variation that makes the Dominant financially responsible for their housing, food, healthcare, and all their other upkeep. In its way, that arrangement is every bit as much Financial Domination as the ones where a submissive or masochist pays the Dom. When a Master has to work harder and give up some part of their assets to keep a sub/slave, the real power no longer belongs to the Master - He is working to support a leech, not being served by a slave or sub. I agree that you can call this financial domination, but I disagree with the last part. I assume both parties are going into this eyes open in which case, presumably the Master must feel this is what he wants and is worthwhile to him. I don't have a paid job at the moment. So his wages pay all the bills, food, clothe me etc. I look after the house and the baby, I chauffeur him around, run all his errands, do all his shopping, and when needed I go to his office and help out there. I make it so other than his job, he doesn't have to lift a finger. His free time really is free with no chores or obligations so he can spend it playing with his kid and indulging his hobbies. It is worth it to him, because he is getting the type of service he wants. Of course he still has the power. He determines how I spend my time. He determines my access to money. For the record, for most of our marriage I've actually been the higher wage earner, it's only since the business got more established earlier this year I've been at home, so it's not unwillingness to work on my part. But for now with the young baby this makes most sense for us - this is what makes his household run just right. When I worked I couldn't do all the errands and driving I do now, and all the chores had to be done in the evenings and weekends which cut into his fun time (even if I was doing the chores, it meant some of my time was taken away from him). So what it comes down to, as with all relationship issues, is what works for both parties. That said, I have sometimes reminded people in threads that their fantasy lifestyle is unlikely to exist since it leaves little room for service to the Master and adds a whole lot of work and financial burden. But those tend to be the people who are looking for "extreme 24/7" where they wish to be constantly chained, caged, tortured, kept in a stable or some other variation which requires them to be entirely cared for by the Master without being able to contribute to the household beyond being a warm hole.

DarkSteven -> RE: Financial Domination (11/4/2012 4:04:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KaruSF When a Master has to work harder and give up some part of their assets to keep a sub/slave, the real power no longer belongs to the Master - He is working to support a leech, not being served by a slave or sub. I'll be darned. The whole power exchange thing boils down to no more than who gives money to whom.

MariaB -> RE: Financial Domination (11/4/2012 5:14:03 AM)
There are co-dependant types in both the dominant and submissive spectrum. There are as many co-dependant men looking for a free ride as there are co-dependant women. I look at it this way. If I were wealthy and I wanted some young stud of a guy to be my submissive and that guy needed to be looked after then I may decide he's worth spending money on. I get something out of it, he gets something out of it. We both gain. Look at older men who marry much younger women. Sometimes its genuine love but a lot of the time its because he's rich and she needs looking after like a princess. What he gets is some young fit bird for a wife and what she gets is an easy life. I don't think anyone with an ounce of intelligence is fooled by the reality of it.

Muchtado -> RE: Financial Domination (11/4/2012 6:36:40 AM)
This is an interesting question. In our house, our slave will be an at home slave. Their roll is to help out with the day to day running of the household. They will keep the house clean, cook food and keep the dishes clean. Our slave will also help with our businesses as needed. This usually entails helping with paperwork. This keeps our time from being used up with all these tedious responsibilities and frees us to concentrate on the job at hand. We could hire someone to do that but we also enjoy the D/s part of the relationship. That we could not get with a hired worker. In this case it is a mutually beneficial association. I see this as a working relationship and not as economic domination. Even a pro Domme is not a financial domination situation. She is offering a service and the sub/slave agrees to the terms. Another example of this is when you go to a movie. The theaters say what movies they have and what times they will be playing. As the consumer, I can decide if it is worth it to me to go see that movie. Even though I have to adjust to their schedule and they tell me what it is going to cost to be there, there is no financial domination there. If we have a slave come into our house, and it is agreed that she will be an at home slave, then it is our responsibility to provide for our slave everything she needs. In return she will provide to us what we need. I do not see a down side here. There are so many needs, wants and desires within this lifestyle putting a label on it is, many times, difficult at best. As long as all parties are happy with the arrangement, who cares who pays for what. This is just another decision within the lifestyle that would need to be discussed between the interested parties.

Kana -> RE: Financial Domination (11/4/2012 8:19:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KaruSF Lots has been said about the traditional form of Financial Domination, but here's a fresh take. There are TONS of guys out there who put themselves out as submissive, or slave, but the only situation they want to pursue is one where they find a Master who keeps them, hides them away from the world, or some similar variation that makes the Dominant financially responsible for their housing, food, healthcare, and all their other upkeep. In its way, that arrangement is every bit as much Financial Domination as the ones where a submissive or masochist pays the Dom. When a Master has to work harder and give up some part of their assets to keep a sub/slave, the real power no longer belongs to the Master - He is working to support a leech, not being served by a slave or sub. The hell it is. Dunno about anyone else, but when I have a house slave, she earns her keep. I expect things from her, things like cooking, cleaning, keeping my schedule, being in charge of the day to day maintenance (I ain't saying she's gotta do the plumbing or anything silly, but she's gonna be there when he comes and it's on her to make sure he does a good job of it and doesn't gyp me)She's gonna be like an A-one personal assistant. And if not, her ass is gonna be gonedaddygone. I expect nothing less than a bargain, and I'll damn well see I get it

autumnember -> RE: Financial Domination (11/4/2012 10:00:59 AM)
I think if two people agree and it works then who are you to say otherwise? There is more to equity worth than dollars. By your definition, women of the 50s actually had all the power and those poor men had nothing. That is silly. Pay cheques do not equate complete support.

chatterbox24 -> RE: Financial Domination (11/4/2012 10:08:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KaruSF Lots has been said about the traditional form of Financial Domination, but here's a fresh take. There are TONS of guys out there who put themselves out as submissive, or slave, but the only situation they want to pursue is one where they find a Master who keeps them, hides them away from the world, or some similar variation that makes the Dominant financially responsible for their housing, food, healthcare, and all their other upkeep. In its way, that arrangement is every bit as much Financial Domination as the ones where a submissive or masochist pays the Dom. When a Master has to work harder and give up some part of their assets to keep a sub/slave, the real power no longer belongs to the Master - He is working to support a leech, not being served by a slave or sub. I really dont agree with this post. If a master wants a person who is at home all the time taking care of the domestic duties, making life comfortable and they are ok with this person not bringing in $$$. I think its a great arrangement. Its all about a persons priorities. If you are really into your home, and a compatible pleasant companion, there is enough money from one to sustain comfort, $$$$ from both really doesnt matter.

JeffBC -> RE: Financial Domination (11/4/2012 11:28:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KaruSF When a Master has to work harder and give up some part of their assets to keep a sub/slave, the real power no longer belongs to the Master blink huh??? This thing you call "power" I can't understand. It this like saying I lose my power because I posted photos of myself in black lace panties? Can you describe... specifically... this "power" thing you seem so fixated on? quote: He is working to support a leech, not being served by a slave or sub. So what you're saying is that because I've always earned more than Carol over the 18 years of our relationship then she's a leech who does not serve me and I'm actually the sub? Did you get this from castlerealms?

ClassAct2006 -> RE: Financial Domination (11/4/2012 11:30:06 AM)
We always worked full time and had children as that made sense for us. You have to work out what works for you but both have a duty to consider the long term interests of the other. Ensure the weaker party knows the legal differences where you live depending on whether married or not so they are not lulled into thinking they have non existent common law rights when it all goes wrong. If you take on a housewife be aware that often works out badly and ensure you may lose your children and most of your money. If like I am you marry someone who earns a lot less be aware that means you make a large pay out in the UK (and US) when the marriage ends - pretty painful but of course perfectly fair that the law is gender neutral. I also think it depends on your presonality and life stage. Some people are useless with money so should not be the eperson handling it. I ddi both our tax returns. We both saw everything, Everything was jiont. We had the same attitude to money so no issues. Some couples have huge arguments as their ethos is different or one earns little and the other a lot. The bottom line is that in the US and UK many women shoot their careers to pieces when they give up work to help at home and later regret it when they are left high and dry and in fact it may be for the dom to say - hang on let'#s pay a cleaner/ housekeeper/nanny and you carry on working because in my role as protector of you I can see that works best in your interests and you are made for more than dull low grade unpaid cleaning - let us exploit your talents to the full and see your career take off however pretty uou might look bent over wielding a duster (we can keep that for Saturday afternoons when the baby is out for a walk with its nanny)

QueenRah -> RE: Financial Domination (11/4/2012 12:58:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KaruSF Lots has been said about the traditional form of Financial Domination, but here's a (not so very) fresh take. There are TONS of guys out there who put themselves out as submissive, or slave, but the only situation they want to pursue is one where they find a Master who keeps them, hides them away from the world, or some similar variation that makes the Dominant financially responsible for their housing, food, healthcare, and all their other upkeep. In its way, that arrangement is every bit as much Financial Domination as the ones where a submissive or masochist pays the Dom. When a Master has to work harder and give up some part of their assets to keep a sub/slave, the real power no longer belongs to the Master - He is working to support a leech, not being served by a slave or sub. Are you offering a discussion on a house slave, who conducts most, if not all, housekeeping, repairing, auto upkeep, office assistance, and/or other useful skill sets; or the "chained slave," who is not really a slave, in any tangible sense, at all? If you are speaking of the house slave, I would have to disagree with you. The Master/Domina (I LOATHE the word "Mistress!") receives the benefit, not only of the slave's body and its uses, but also the slave's effort in maintaining the home, et cetera. If you are speaking of the 24/7 "chained slave," that scenario raises its ugly head on a nauseatingly regular basis, over at the "Ask a Mistress" forum! And, in that case, I, for one, agree completely! QR

littlewonder -> RE: Financial Domination (11/4/2012 1:13:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kana The hell it is. Dunno about anyone else, but when I have a house slave, she earns her keep. I expect things from her, things like cooking, cleaning, keeping my schedule, being in charge of the day to day maintenance (I ain't saying she's gotta do the plumbing or anything silly, but she's gonna be there when he comes and it's on her to make sure he does a good job of it and doesn't gyp me)She's gonna be like an A-one personal assistant. And if not, her ass is gonna be gonedaddygone. I expect nothing less than a bargain, and I'll damn well see I get it This. I do all of the above mentioned stuff for Master. But I'm also the type that even if I was currently working, I would do those things for him because I am his slave and that's what I signed up for. If you feel your slave is leeching off of you, I'm wondering why you aren't taking advantage of her being a slave.

Kana -> RE: Financial Domination (11/4/2012 3:44:34 PM)
I prefer to think of as far less "taking advantage" than maximum utilization :-)

KaruSF -> RE: Financial Domination (11/8/2012 8:46:48 PM)
Just for the sake of broadening the discussion - I have been working on building a poly household. There is enough work to keep one FT slave busy cleaning and cooking, but beyond that, not so much. The real issue that brought this all to a head was that the majority of the postings by male slaves and subs on here are from individuals who want to be kept as housebound slaves, without outside jobs or lives, and without making any contribution to the cost of keeping a house. In a poly family, just keeping everyone fed, housed and cared for when illness strikes means that not everyone can be the houseslave. Lots of people say they want to be part of a poly family, but surprisingly few seem to have any awareness of what it takes to make such a thing work.

seekingreality -> RE: Financial Domination (11/8/2012 10:25:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KaruSF Lots has been said about the traditional form of Financial Domination, but here's a fresh take. There are TONS of guys out there who put themselves out as submissive, or slave, but the only situation they want to pursue is one where they find a Master who keeps them, hides them away from the world, or some similar variation that makes the Dominant financially responsible for their housing, food, healthcare, and all their other upkeep. In its way, that arrangement is every bit as much Financial Domination as the ones where a submissive or masochist pays the Dom. When a Master has to work harder and give up some part of their assets to keep a sub/slave, the real power no longer belongs to the Master - He is working to support a leech, not being served by a slave or sub. The problem with your scenario is you seem to assume the woman is sitting around all day eatting bon-bons. I would think it's more likely she is doing housework and other chores, similar to a 50s husband-wife relationship. If a dom enjoys this relationship, I don't see how he loses power. But, yeah, if he is resentfully doing this, and only paying her bills out of fear of losing her, it's not really a dom-sub relationship. But frankly, I don't know many real-life relationships like the one you describe. I know very few couples who aren't both employed.

QueenRah -> RE: Financial Domination (11/9/2012 1:20:51 PM)
In your original post you wrote: quote: ORIGINAL: KaruSF When a Master has to work harder and give up some part of their assets to keep a sub/slave, the real power no longer belongs to the Master - He is working to support a leech, not being served by a slave or sub. Then, in this post, clarifying your position, you wrote this: quote: ORIGINAL: KaruSF There is enough work to keep one FT slave busy cleaning and cooking, but beyond that, not so much. I wonder if you have any idea how much work is actually involved in keeping a house running smoothly: laundry done, supper made - every day - vacuuming, making beds, writing up a list for- and purchasing household needs, even without one's own money, et cetera. There are hundreds of seemingly inconsequential details involved in making that ship stay afloat. I wonder, in what way does doing all that, successfully, without fail, make someone a "leech?" quote: The real issue that brought this all to a head was that the majority of the postings by male slaves and subs on here are from individuals who want to be kept as housebound slaves, without outside jobs or lives, and without making any contribution to the cost of keeping a house. While it may not be financially feasible, this does not, automatically, make them leeches-to-be. quote: In a poly family, just keeping everyone fed, housed and cared for when illness strikes means that not everyone can be the houseslave. Lots of people say they want to be part of a poly family, but surprisingly few seem to have any awareness of what it takes to make such a thing work. Then, it is up to you to set them strai- on the path to enlightenment. If you are interested in a potential slave boy, but he is unclear what he needs to do, in order to be of use in your household, discuss it with him. Clear communication works wonders. If a boy is really interested and you make it clear that he will need to contribute financially, then the both of you either continue in the direction of that nifty poly household, or you both move on. Easy-peasy. Best luck! QR

KrisKaspersky -> RE: Financial Domination (11/9/2012 6:20:32 PM)
I'm a submissive guy, I love to be dominated and forced to do things I really dislike. when it comes to sex -- I'm thinking only about my partner and I don't care about myself. it's my dark BDSM part. however, being submissive by nature does not make me a [use-any-word-you-want]. I'm a fighter. I make more money then I really need. I'm not looking for protection, instead of it -- I'm the man who will protect you if we meet bad guys on a dark street. I would even die for you without any doubts. well, not for _you_ (sorry, I'm not a gay). if my woman is a fireplace -- I'm the concrete walls and the roof, keeping her safe and protecting her from winds of life. Financial Domination is a game for me. I love to be dominated. I send ~$50k/year for charity and ~$20k/year for domination. who is a slave? it's a person who protects you and makes money. remember the history? slaves always were used like that. if your slave looks for protection... I would say it's a vanilla situation and has nothing to do with BDSM. many 'normal' women (no offense) seek for money/protection. it's called marriage. correct me if I'm wrong.

poise -> RE: Financial Domination (11/9/2012 6:46:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KrisKaspersky who is a slave? it's a person who protects you and makes money. remember the history? slaves always were used like that. if your slave looks for protection... I would say it's a vanilla situation and has nothing to do with BDSM. many 'normal' women (no offense) seek for money/protection. it's called marriage. correct me if I'm wrong. As you wish. You are wrong. I'm a considerably normal woman, and there have been numerous occasions in my relationship where I was earning much more than he was, and it did not diminish the amount of authority he held over me. It's called dealing with real life. Duh! Besides, as my mother always used to say "If you're in it for the money, you always wind up paying for it in the end".

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875