quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist
"is that all you got Master?"

quote:

ORIGINAL: NoBimbosAllowed
However, so has JeffBC, so you can happily throw THAT in his/her face ANY time they get uppity with you. [;)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: NoBimbosAllowed

to whtsub4blckdom:

you aren't using an actual userpic of yourself, or you created (I'm am relatively sure), so the use of the word "true" is a bit unfair. You have untruly represented yourself, visually.

However, so has JeffBC, so you can happily throw THAT in his/her face ANY time they get uppity with you. [;)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: NoBimbosAllowed

"Uh.... that in fact is myself and Carol. Your detective skills need some work."

not treally, as it's a silhouette of less than 20% of you, and about 30% of Carol. So, no.

quote:

ORIGINAL: whtsub4blckdom

Hey... I am just starting my first post. Give me a break. Thank you for your replies. I am new to this lifestyle. I know what i want... and yes it will probably take me forever to get it. However I won't settle for someone who wants control over me. I will be submissive to a man that has control over his life and treats his submissive as a gift... because that is what we are :)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NoBimbosAllowed

I can see how'd you'd think so, but no, not really. To the casual observer a pic either looks "casual" and honestly a depiction of the user or it appears swiped. No admittedly Jeff's pic is his own (to use the possessive of the couple, 'their own') but I'd bet the effect on anyone else looking at it is to think it looks exactly like the same pics used by alt.com or bondage.com or any other site's ad. And there is nothing, at all, in Jeff's pic to say "this is us" even if you know it IS them. You have a tiger pic, yet I know you are not a Tiger from The Life of Pi chatting here. The way it is presented changes the entire context of how your photo is received. Because there is no way you are presenting yourself as a 'candied up' version of a bdsm person who may or may not be as good looking as their photo.

Jeff's pic on the other hand AIN'T that.

So no, it's not hypocritical, any more than saying some hipsterwank with a Galaxy Note who takes a snap of a piece of art then scrawls over it with a stylus does not get to call themselves an 'artist'.

As any museum curate will say and has said for decades, the context in which a photo is viewed changes the nature of the photo itself entirely. Whether some hipsterwank 'gets' that or not is immaterial, but YOU get it, Ser.

quote:

ORIGINAL: whtsub4blckdom

By definition, a dominant man is not possessive, because possessiveness is a sign of insecurity, which is a sign of submissiveness.

quote:

ORIGINAL: whtsub4blckdom



Truly dominant men... men who are alpha males, are harder to come by. It's easy to find some guy who wants to own you. Its not so easy to find a man who owns himself. A man who dominates their own lives first, and themselves. Not just some guy who calls himself a Dom. Do you compel obedience in others? Are you a masters of your life and your surroundings? Or just a little boy to insecure to handle a woman in any situation other than her obedience?

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

I'm also not egotistical enough to want to define reality for the entire rest of humanity. Honestly, you sound pretty damned dominant to me if we want to play label games.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Whiplashsmile4

The Possessive nature of humanity is neither a sign of insecurity or security...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Whiplashsmile4

First of all the control anybody has over their own lives is a bit of an illusion. In regards to somebody having their life together, what specific aspects are you focused upon? There are some wealthy people with very little to no control over themselves...or rather come with a lot of issues. This whole matter becomes rather subject and relative when you come to see humanity in it's true glory! Just saying.