Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master >> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? Page: <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 12:18:23 AM   
orgasmdenial12


Posts: 613
Joined: 9/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw
Although- GotSteel IS into chastity and this thread was started by someone with the screen name orgasmdenial...has this been a long con troll? o_o


Lol, I don't even agree with Got Steel. I might be willing to concede some confusion if we were saying the same thing (we're not). Anyway, chastity and orgasm denial are very different kinks. Chastity is one of my hard limits. And a lot of people who do chastity, would balk at orgasm denial.

(in reply to shiftyw)
Profile   Post #: 181
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 12:20:50 AM   
orgasmdenial12


Posts: 613
Joined: 9/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel


quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12
Then why populate a thread about consensual male supremacy, with criticisms of non-consensual male supremacy? I've clearly used the word consensual over a dozen times, and in the title too.

*confused*


I can clear that up, take for example consensual slavery, the two terms can't be used together literally, they're mutually exclusive. So depending on which term is literal people and should have very different opinion of the practice.

In my book:
Consensual "slavery" = cool, have fun with that.
"Consensual" slavery = hold on a second while I call the cops.

So with that in mind if you look through the thread you'll probably find that a number of the confusing responses are related to consensual "supremacy" vs. "consensual" supremacy.



But supremacy and slavery are very different things, so it's not useful to give one as an example of the other.

Supremacy means being in charge or having power. Can you not see how one can consensually have power? Most Prime Ministers and CEOs seem to manage it.

(in reply to GotSteel)
Profile   Post #: 182
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 12:24:08 AM   
orgasmdenial12


Posts: 613
Joined: 9/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit
Eeee yeah getting pregnant is terrifying to me http://blogs.plos.org/dnascience/2012/10/25/male-dna-in-female-brains-revisited/ getting pregnant the man actually highjacks your dna, you physically change to become patially them once you get preggers.... I of course have this whole horror movie scenario planned out in my head. I get pregnant and turn into a stepford wife, "welcome home hunny" as I smile and my head turns all the way around.


Yeah, they can find the kid's DNA in you for life, even if you miscarried it before you knew you were pregnant. It's wonderfully freakish lol. Interestingly, they find the cells most at sites of injury in the mother and they think the cells might be trying to help heal the injured bits, as they would in a growing foetus. They think this might be one of the reasons that mothers may live longer than women who didn't have children.

As regards the man hijacking my DNA causing physical changes / horror movie scenario - oh hell yes! See, it all becomes very exciting once you start eroticising that fear.

(in reply to DerangedUnit)
Profile   Post #: 183
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 12:25:34 AM   
orgasmdenial12


Posts: 613
Joined: 9/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant
Is there something I am missing here that indicates why this belief must/should only be carried out as play? Something that says that this belief...unlike belief in D/s structural harmony...cannot be kept in check in the real world?


This is exactly my point of view - everyone has beliefs they don't carry into their day to day world, CMS is no different.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 184
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 12:36:17 AM   
orgasmdenial12


Posts: 613
Joined: 9/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw
...if OP DID believe in Male Supremacy- she would defer to ALL men. Not the ones she picks and chooses.


I don't believe in Male Supremacy, I do keep saying that. I believe in Consensual Male Supremacy. Some random guy out in the world has not consented to have me defer to him. If every guy in the world said 'hey listen sweet cheeks, any time you want to believe I'm superior, you go for it' then we might be having a very different conversation, but they haven't. I suppose the consent aspect of play is more important to me than any other aspect, so I can't say how I would act without that issue. Consent is paramount.

Anyway, I reiterate my point that if you are using gender as a deciding factor in who does and does not have power, with power being automatically afforded to the men who have consented, and automatically removed from the women who have consented, then that is Consensual Male Supremacy.

I don't pick and choose who I defer to, I defer to the men who consent to CMS, within our social group. It's the men who self-select for this, not me who selects them. Since it involves a structural power transfer that goes beyond individual relationships and is based on gender then to me it is a supremacist belief that transcends a simple male-led relationship. It's more of a male-led community. But what's the difference between a male-led community and male supremacy?



(in reply to shiftyw)
Profile   Post #: 185
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 12:38:49 AM   
orgasmdenial12


Posts: 613
Joined: 9/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw
There's a difference between "I think men are better than women" and "I think men are better at leading my relationships"

One implies a belief in supremacy, the other doesn't.


The first one implies a belief in male superiority; the second one implies a belief in male supremacy.

(in reply to shiftyw)
Profile   Post #: 186
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 12:45:12 AM   
orgasmdenial12


Posts: 613
Joined: 9/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady
Supreme translates to that which is superior. . . and then some -- at the top of the heap of superior.


I disagree. Dictionary.com defines supremacy as:

noun
1. the state of being supreme.
2. supreme authority or power.


Merriam-Webster defines it as:

the quality or state of having more power, authority, or status than anyone else : the state of being supreme.

This supports my view that supremacy refers to the power or authority that one has, rather than referring to the value that one has.

(in reply to dreamlady)
Profile   Post #: 187
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 2:27:28 AM   
NookieNotes


Posts: 1720
Joined: 11/10/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12

quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady
Supreme translates to that which is superior. . . and then some -- at the top of the heap of superior.


I disagree. Dictionary.com defines supremacy as:

noun
1. the state of being supreme.
2. supreme authority or power.


Merriam-Webster defines it as:

the quality or state of having more power, authority, or status than anyone else : the state of being supreme.

This supports my view that supremacy refers to the power or authority that one has, rather than referring to the value that one has.


I was actually going to post this a few days back when I looked up the definition. I got sidetracked. This, I agree with. Words. They have meanings.

_____________________________

Nookie
--
https://datingkinky.com

I Write! A few of my books on Amazon: http://amazon.com/author/msnnotes

(in reply to orgasmdenial12)
Profile   Post #: 188
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 3:00:02 AM   
dreamlady


Posts: 737
Joined: 9/13/2007
From: Western MD
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw

No. Choosing a male or female led relationship is different than supremacy:

Supremacy is defined as: the state or condition of being superior to all others in authority, power, or status.


Your basic hierarchical model.
A subordinate is inferior in rank to his or her superior. Note this has nothing to do with the actual value of the subordinate.
You are your boss's subordinate. He or she is your superior in rank and grade. His or her higher salary reflects his or her greater value to the organization due to his or her higher pay grade.
Going up the chain of command, then, there is a shifting back and forth between subordinate and superior.
At the top of the chain, at the apex (Chairman of the Board) or triumvirate (President, CEO/COO, CFO) or however you wish to delineate the distribution of power and authority, is the Commander-in-Chief or the Supreme Leader.

This Supreme personage, Supreme entity is above all the others who are superiors to their subordinates in "authority, power, or status."

quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12
quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady
Supreme translates to that which is superior. . . and then some -- at the top of the heap of superior.


I disagree. Dictionary.com defines supremacy as:

noun
1. the state of being supreme.
2. supreme authority or power.

Merriam-Webster defines it as:

the quality or state of having more power, authority, or status than anyone else : the state of being supreme.

This supports my view that supremacy refers to the power or authority that one has, rather than referring to the value that one has.

We can go around and around in circles splitting hairs with semantics and dictionary sources on this, and end up chasing our tails. You can stand on your mountain, I can stand on mine, others on theirs.

quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12

I don't believe in Male Supremacy, I do keep saying that. I believe in Consensual Male Supremacy. Some random guy out in the world has not consented to have me defer to him. If every guy in the world said 'hey listen sweet cheeks, any time you want to believe I'm superior, you go for it' then we might be having a very different conversation, but they haven't. I suppose the consent aspect of play is more important to me than any other aspect, so I can't say how I would act without that issue. Consent is paramount.

Anyway, I reiterate my point that if you are using gender as a deciding factor in who does and does not have power, with power being automatically afforded to the men who have consented, and automatically removed from the women who have consented, then that is Consensual Male Supremacy.

I don't pick and choose who I defer to, I defer to the men who consent to CMS, within our social group. It's the men who self-select for this, not me who selects them. Since it involves a structural power transfer that goes beyond individual relationships and is based on gender then to me it is a supremacist belief that transcends a simple male-led relationship. It's more of a male-led community. But what's the difference between a male-led community and male supremacy?

Your social group of Consensual Male Supremacists is akin to (consensual) patriarchy. It is a patriarchal tribal model, and in that sense no different than patriarchal cultures which steadily overthrew matriarchal/matrilineal societies a few millennia ago. I'm sure they saw and see patriarchy as consensual among themselves.

DreamLady

(in reply to orgasmdenial12)
Profile   Post #: 189
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 3:42:44 AM   
Kaliko


Posts: 3381
Joined: 9/25/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12

quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw
...if OP DID believe in Male Supremacy- she would defer to ALL men. Not the ones she picks and chooses.


I don't believe in Male Supremacy, I do keep saying that. I believe in Consensual Male Supremacy. Some random guy out in the world has not consented to have me defer to him. If every guy in the world said 'hey listen sweet cheeks, any time you want to believe I'm superior, you go for it' then we might be having a very different conversation, but they haven't. I suppose the consent aspect of play is more important to me than any other aspect, so I can't say how I would act without that issue. Consent is paramount.





But why would you need somebody's consent to defer to them?


(in reply to orgasmdenial12)
Profile   Post #: 190
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 5:48:23 AM   
satanscharmer


Posts: 376
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist

Having spent most my teens on the East Side of Detroit, I picked up some awareness habits. I am not always the biggest and strongest guy in the room, so I size up the room. So when I walk into a place, I size up who is physically superior, who the biggest threats are if a brawl broke out. It's not even on a conscious level, it's an automatic survival reflex.

Do girls do that, look to see who is physically superior in a crowd?


Yes, sort of.

One thing I was taught, especially while in the actual city of Detroit, is to be careful with eye contact. As in, avoid it as much as possible to avoid any glances being construed as a lingering stare - an invitation for a fight. If you have great peripheral vision like I do, not much of a problem. I have gotten into the habit of scanning a room for potential threats without making it much too obvious. Eyes forward, chin up, chest out, secretly scanning and observing my surroundings. So, it may not look like I'm doing it, but I am. I'm never looking for just size (that doesn't always matter). I'm looking at the whole picture. Where I'm located now there's not much need to size a room up, but it's become habit. My eye contact restrictions are kept for times I feel like there may be a potential threat. Like you stated, it is a learned awareness.

(in reply to ResidentSadist)
Profile   Post #: 191
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 5:55:14 AM   
shiftyw


Posts: 2837
Joined: 6/6/2013
From: The Shire
Status: offline

TEN PAGES!

OP- Why are you using a different term than just a regular D/s relationship between to straight people? I mean aren't you viewing this as the same thing? Why do you view this as your "first" CMS relationship when you've had plenty of straight D/s relationships before? Is this just the first time you've thought men were biologically better?

To me- yah, I can pick a dude to defer to. Do I believe in CMS? No. I certainly think a hetero normative D/s relationship with traditional roles is fine. But there are plenty of women in the world I feel I could defer to also- because I'm bi. So that eliminates from this "kink" completely? I just don't understand what the differences is- despite having asked several times- I'm still not satisfied with the answer.

I feel like you're putting a pig in lipstick for no good reason. This is, in my opinion, just a normal D/s relationship. Except I guess you now believe men are biologically superior? So...then...sexism? But its ok cause you don't force it on others? So I shouldn't view it as that? Even if I do...

(in reply to Kaliko)
Profile   Post #: 192
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 6:44:40 AM   
satanscharmer


Posts: 376
Status: offline 		FR-

This is how I'm taking the differences here:

D/s relationship: I'm submissive, I need a dominant to lead me. I happen to be a straight female, so the dominant will be male.

Consensual Male Supremacy: To me, men should be in power. I need a man to lead me. I realize not everyone will agree with this, but it is how I view the world for my personal relationships.

Male Supremacy: All power positions should be held by men, not women.

It is all dependent on the thinking behind the actions. The first two sound similar, but there is a slight difference in thinking. Same with the last two. Am I close, OP?

(in reply to shiftyw)
Profile   Post #: 193
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 7:19:47 AM   
shiftyw


Posts: 2837
Joined: 6/6/2013
From: The Shire
Status: offline 		SC- that is what I'm getting at. Thank you for laying it out like that.

(in reply to satanscharmer)
Profile   Post #: 194
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 7:57:27 AM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw

But Michael- Is that supremacy? Or just a personal dynamic preference?

There's a difference between "I think men are better than women" and "I think men are better at leading my relationships"

One implies a belief in supremacy, the other doesn't.
But...why can't she hold the viewpoint that men are better at leading relationships? Not just hers...but relationships in general.

And why does that belief carry any more danger to the outside world than a belief in the rightness of a D/s relationship? If a person is able to divorce themselves from the belief in D/s in order to function in the outside world...as Michael and I gave examples of above...why would they not be able to divorce themselves from this belief?

(in reply to shiftyw)
Profile   Post #: 195
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 10:07:45 AM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant
If a person is able to divorce themselves from the belief in D/s in order to function in the outside world...as Michael and I gave examples of above...why would they not be able to divorce themselves from this belief?



I think, on some level, the one being led has to hold some kind of "supremacy" view and I'll expand on this, again:

While it is a pretty individual thing (people that identify as submissive don't just give themselves to the particular gender), it's also true that if someone claims to be submissive (as opposed to a "kinkster"/BDSMer), they start off, in places like this where they'll meet like-minded individuals. In other words, a heterosexual submissive lady is LOOKING to give herself to a (the RIGHT) dominant man.

If a submissive lady gives herself to a submissive (or 'nilla) man, they run the risk of that guy not viewing relationships (generally; not each specific relationship, per se) the same way that she does. If her partner won't lead, how can she submit? I would go so far as to say that a submissive expects leadership from a dominant. You know what they say about a person that allows themselves to be led by a fool?

Again, it is a matter of some particulars; a lady isn't going to submit to me, if she thinks relationships should be strictly monogamous, but she also wouldn't be looking for a dominant man, if she didn't believe that a man should be the boss/head of household/master/whatever.

As for your other question:

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant
If a person is able to divorce themselves from the belief in D/s in order to function in the outside world...as Michael and I gave examples of above...why would they not be able to divorce themselves from this belief?



I know the answer to this, in this particular instance, but I'll not share it publicly. Contact me, on the other side, if you like.



Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 196
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 10:24:08 AM   
DerangedUnit


Posts: 660
Joined: 2/23/2007
Status: offline 		People actually think that being dominant makes you a superior person?

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 197
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 10:26:50 AM   
GoddessManko


Posts: 2257
Joined: 3/6/2013
From: Dante's Inferno
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw

But Michael- Is that supremacy? Or just a personal dynamic preference?

There's a difference between "I think men are better than women" and "I think men are better at leading my relationships"

One implies a belief in supremacy, the other doesn't.
But...why can't she hold the viewpoint that men are better at leading relationships? Not just hers...but relationships in general.

And why does that belief carry any more danger to the outside world than a belief in the rightness of a D/s relationship? If a person is able to divorce themselves from the belief in D/s in order to function in the outside world...as Michael and I gave examples of above...why would they not be able to divorce themselves from this belief?


Agreed.

_____________________________

Happy consent is the name of the game. You are my perfect Mistress. - my collared.

http://submissivemale.blogspot.com/

The Bird of Hermes is my name, eating my wings to make me tame.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 198
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 10:30:22 AM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw
Although- GotSteel IS into chastity and this thread was started by someone with the screen name orgasmdenial...has this been a long con troll? o_o

Certainly not on my end, if I create a sock to troll he will be named Straw Man and he will be hilarious.

Incidentally orgasm denial, edging and orgasm control are all relatively popular female fetishes that are frequently practiced together. However, unlike the male side of things chastity typically does not make it into that mix.

To the point that there have been women around here into orgasm denial that are offended by/highly condescending toward chastity.

Female chastity hasn't been a very popular US fetish, I think largely because of hardware issues. With the recent advent of entry level chastity belts for women I've been watching the fetish gain popularity so:

YAY!


But we have a LONG way to go to catch up to male chastity.

(in reply to shiftyw)
Profile   Post #: 199
RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/18/2015 10:55:26 AM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant
But...why can't she hold the viewpoint that men are better at leading relationships? Not just hers...but relationships in general.

And why does that belief carry any more danger to the outside world than a belief in the rightness of a D/s relationship?


It seems to me that sexism is still more acceptable than other forms of prejudice around here, to the point that a number of people don't even see it. As such I have an exercise that might make things more clear, take these pro-gender bias arguments, cross out men and women and write in....let's say white and black.

Like this:
[̶q̶u̶o̶t̶e̶]̶O̶R̶I̶G̶I̶N̶A̶L̶:̶ ̶ ̶C̶r̶e̶a̶t̶i̶v̶e̶D̶o̶m̶i̶n̶a̶n̶t̶
But...why can't she hold the viewpoint that m̶e̶n̶ whites are better at leading relationships? Not just hers...but relationships in general.

And why does that belief carry any more danger to the outside world than a belief in the rightness of a D/s relationship?
[̶/̶q̶u̶o̶t̶e̶]̶

Now are you able to immediately articulate the harm? If so just take your response, cross out black and white, write in men and women and you'll be where we are.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 200
Page:   <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master >> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? Page: <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094