RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy?

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master

Message

GoddessManko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/23/2015 4:28:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Again...harmful only when that belief system is accompanied by actions imposed on those outside the dynamic. But, even your own author stated that to deny that "politically incorrect" beliefs exist in all of us is naive. That the important thing is to be able to consciously override these beliefs when dealing with the world at large. While I agree with the author, I disagree with your interpretation. I don't think the inferior frontal gyrus works quite the way you're thinking. While correlation does not imply causation our intuitions never got that memo, as such all sorts of dumb ideas come up. There's a portion of the brain to suppress the ideas which we know aren't true but if one does consider them true, It doesn't kick in. I'm not re-interpreting anything your author said. I quoted him directly...these are his words, not mine. "We just have to learn to become aware and be willing to acknowledge our own biases and then consciously override them. Denial and professed racial color-blindness only makes things worse." I believe I am color blind because I was raised differently from most, without color being thrust in my face as something that I should give a shit about, never happened. A woman of any color is still a woman and generally if self identify as a woman can identify with other women rather easily of the same background/upbringing/status quo. Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus, is that true/sexist? Well... 4 conversations I have had today between work just to distract me. Vanilla dude I thought was hot; "Can you send me a pic of your body?" Me: No response. Sub 1; "Phone sex will determine compatibility." (from a doctor, yet he makes this dumb comment.) Me; "No, meeting and talking to people measures compatibility." Sub 2; "I can help you with your business, if I get the colors wrong you can kick me in the balls until they are right." Me; "I am not dumb enough to play such a game with my llivelihood." Him; (this was rich) "Be an outside of the box thinker, like a CEO." Me; "Are you a CEO?" Him; "no." Me; "OK, my best friend is, I'll ask him if he thinks your idea makes fucking sense." Me to sub 3; "Been looking at shoes for 3 days straight." Him; "wow, I burn out on shopping after a couple hours." (he knows what I do for a living.) Me; "WOW. fuck. fuck. It is my business. I....was not shopping." Yea, so fair to say men and women (overall) think differently and react differently and thoughts and ideas translate differently in many circumstances. LOL, and yea, this was all in one day. Of the last 365 in the year. I do have a girl who is getting a little clingy on me (if she doesn't hear from me in x amount of time she worries) but so far she's not unbearable. I understand women can get that way. Thoughts and feelings manifest with reason. [:D]

GotSteel -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/23/2015 7:40:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel While I agree with the author, I disagree with your interpretation. I'm not re-interpreting anything your author said. We're always interpreting, that's the only way to get meaning out of these funny squiggles. quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant I quoted him directly...these are his words, not mine. "We just have to learn to become aware and be willing to acknowledge our own biases and then consciously override them. Denial and professed racial color-blindness only makes things worse." This isn't saying that a philosophy of male supremacy is a good thing, or an ok thing. It's saying the opposite.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/23/2015 8:20:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel While I agree with the author, I disagree with your interpretation. I'm not re-interpreting anything your author said. We're always interpreting, that's the only way to get meaning out of these funny squiggles. quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant I quoted him directly...these are his words, not mine. "We just have to learn to become aware and be willing to acknowledge our own biases and then consciously override them. Denial and professed racial color-blindness only makes things worse." This isn't saying that a philosophy of male supremacy is a good thing, or an ok thing. It's saying the opposite. I didn't day that it did day that it's a good thing or a bad thing. Nor, if I recall, did he. In fact, I believe that, rather than calling it good or bad, that it was NAIVE to deny them within yourself. And that is where we disagree...your belief that it's saying the opposite. I believe his statement that we all have our own biases and beliefs. And I believe his statement that we must override...not discard...those beliefs and biases comes into play every time we step into the world at large.

Awareness -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/23/2015 11:11:22 PM)
I think what we have seen over the course of this thread is the conflation of several ideas. Generally speaking, people tend to do this, but it's worth teasing them out into separate sections to clarify matters somewhat. Male supremacy is fundamentally the idea that men as a class, can dominate women as a class. And I find it hard to believe that anyone could argue against this precept since it is the very foundation of the feminist movement. Feminism is essentially founded on the notion of patriarchy theory. And patriarchy theory absolutely mandates a history of domination of women by men. Without that, the narrative falls apart. So believing in male supremacy strikes me as believing in reality more than anything else. Otherwise you essentially negate the fundamental premise of feminism. Supremacy is about capability. It's not about ethics, it's not about any notion of intrinsic rightness, it's not about what is philosophically sound. It's simply about capability. And men as a gender have effectively dominated the planet for millenia. Most people are uncomfortable with this idea because it doesn't fit within the essential egalitarian constructs which hold sway in our Western democracies. Some attempt to soften this reality by imposing codes of conduct on top then claiming they're an intrinsic aspect of the definition. (The claim that chivalry is an inherent aspect of supremacy or domination strikes me as a cogent example.) Our societies are complex hierarchical structures in which egalitarian notions appear to convey benefit for society as a whole. I say 'appear to' because the jury's still out and history will be the judge. However it would be naive to think that high level social shocks wouldn't radically alter our societies resulting in gender-egalitarianism being put away as a hindrance to survival. Divison of labour along gender lines is one of the attributes of humanity which has made us such a wildly successful species. Our elevation above survival and subsistence level (mostly due to our technology) has, to a certain extent, insulated us from the realities of survival and it is this which has made gender-egalitarianism possible. As I've mentioned earlier, notions of supremacy, however, are founded in essential ideas about capability. Individual variance crops up when it comes to exploiting that capability. Is every man superior to every woman? No, this is demonstrably false. However men as a gender have the capability to enforce their will on women as a gender. Individual expressions of that capability are going to vary wildly. And that is where the personal judgement call comes in. I didn't draw Kaliko into my orbit with posturing, demands or bravado. I simply made very clear who I was, the standards I aim to hold myself to and the standards I expect from anyone who wants to be close to me. The rest - believe it or not - was pure charm. I expect that if my own expectations were inconsistent with my capability (IE: I wasn't as bright enough to challenge her or I failed to demonstrate consistency in my behaviour) then the whole interaction wouldn't have gotten very far. Kaliko might believe in male supremacy, but that doesn't mean she's naively going to expect that capability instantiated in every man she meets. Some of the reactions here are understandable as they show a fundamental concern with the notion of male supremacy denying them their own agency. However, thinking of the idea as a belief in capability - in potential - might allow them to process it without inducing such a visceral reaction.

NookieNotes -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 3:29:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness I think what we have seen over the course of this thread is the conflation of several ideas. Generally speaking, people tend to do this, but it's worth teasing them out into separate sections to clarify matters somewhat. Male supremacy is fundamentally the idea that men as a class, can dominate women as a class. Many people in this thread are equating supremacy with superiority. I think that is the main rub. It is one way the word is used (supreme pizza, for example, it not inherently more powerful than meat lovers), despite dictionary definitions, and therefore, they are riled against it. I was, until I read the definition for myself, and decided that it works for this, exactly as written, and does not cause or exacerbate any harmful sexist thoughts or behaviors.

dreamlady -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 3:34:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko FOR HER. Some roleplay but when you are doing tease and denial for months on end, uh...you try it, tell me if it feels like roleplay. Some people live it, they have daily protocols and rituals. You are bedroom only so it is beyond your comprehension in some ways understandably. I think right along this thread has mostly been about terminology confusion. Nobodies saying that her lifestyle isn't real, calling something roleplay isn't meant to diminish the dynamic between the people involved. It is meant to differentiate it from a worldview since the belief system that natural order dictates the supremacy of one sex over the other is a harmful worldview. Not to mention that for many, role play is role fulfillment to them. I have known women who believe that they and/or other women are "sluts" for enjoying sex, even in a monogamous situation, with their own husbands. They have internalized an ugly message that was thrust upon them non-consensually, and in many cases by spurned or vindictive, immature males when they were coming of age or as a young adult. (I am not speaking about those submissives or kinksters, both male and female alike, who toss about this term provocatively among themselves.) Furthermore, I know African-Americans who are deeply offended when other African-Americans call them the n-word; it's not a joking or endearing term, and them's fighting words. . . for which they must "consciously override" the impulse to punch the offender in the face. To claim that one's idiosyncratic worldview does not or won't ever spill over into other areas of one's and others' lives, is the epitome of naiveté. DreamLady

CreativeDominant -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 8:10:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko FOR HER. Some roleplay but when you are doing tease and denial for months on end, uh...you try it, tell me if it feels like roleplay. Some people live it, they have daily protocols and rituals. You are bedroom only so it is beyond your comprehension in some ways understandably. I think right along this thread has mostly been about terminology confusion. Nobodies saying that her lifestyle isn't real, calling something roleplay isn't meant to diminish the dynamic between the people involved. It is meant to differentiate it from a worldview since the belief system that natural order dictates the supremacy of one sex over the other is a harmful worldview. Not to mention that for many, role play is role fulfillment to them. I have known women who believe that they and/or other women are "sluts" for enjoying sex, even in a monogamous situation, with their own husbands. They have internalized an ugly message that was thrust upon them non-consensually, and in many cases by spurned or vindictive, immature males when they were coming of age or as a young adult. (I am not speaking about those submissives or kinksters, both male and female alike, who toss about this term provocatively among themselves.) Furthermore, I know African-Americans who are deeply offended when other African-Americans call them the n-word; it's not a joking or endearing term, and them's fighting words. . . for which they must "consciously override" the impulse to punch the offender in the face. To claim that one's idiosyncratic worldview does not or won't ever spill over into other areas of one's and others' lives, is the epitome of naiveté. DreamLady And when...and if...people are NOT able t consciously override their beliefs and therefore take actions that are harmful, there are laws to deal with that. I'm curious though...what parts of your beliefs that go into your D/s dynamic have spilled over into your life outside the dynamic?

dreamlady -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 8:35:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant And when...and if...people are NOT able t consciously override their beliefs and therefore take actions that are harmful, there are laws to deal with that. I'm curious though...what parts of your beliefs that go into your D/s dynamic have spilled over into your life outside the dynamic? You're asking the wrong person about this. I am not a Supremacist, nor do I believe that Dominants are superior to switches or submissives. [:)] We all have our strengths and weaknesses. An inferior being hardly has enough personal power to make a bona fide power exchange with a superior being. Believing otherwise would just be a farce. DreamLady

GotSteel -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 10:43:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NookieNotes Many people in this thread are equating supremacy with superiority. I think that is the main rub. It is one way the word is used (supreme pizza, for example, it not inherently more powerful than meat lovers), despite dictionary definitions, and therefore, they are riled against it. Actually the name is a statement that it's the greatest, the best of pizzas. In that case it's just a marketing gimmick and isn't taken seriously also no one cares about pizza equality. quote: ORIGINAL: NookieNotes I was, until I read the definition for myself, and decided that it works for this, exactly as written, and does not cause or exacerbate any harmful sexist thoughts or behaviors. First there isn't just a single "the definition" note that there's variation between sources. Second if you're making reference to the other thread: quote: ORIGINAL: NookieNotes http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4793368 Obviously prejudice does NOT apply to treating the sexes differently, if you have developed your manners of treating them differently based on experiences, and are willing to be flexible for individuals. It's glaring sexism. Claiming it's not sexism because you make exceptions is no different from "I have a black friend so I can't be racist". You also claim "based on experiences", everyone thinks that, even the people wearing white hoods claiming that a black person is 3/5th's of a human being think that. The problem is that correlation usually is not causation: quote: ORIGINAL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_correlation Illusory correlation is the phenomenon of perceiving a relationship between variables (typically people, events, or behaviors) even when no such relationship exists. A common example of this phenomenon would be when people form false associations between membership in a statistical minority group and rare (typically negative) behaviors as variables that are novel or salient tend to capture the attention.[1] This is one way stereotypes form and endure.[2][3] Hamilton & Rose (1980) found that stereotypes can lead people to expect certain groups and traits to fit together, and then to overestimate the frequency with which these correlations actually occur. How it Works [image]local://upfiles/566126/9161E91867AE4A25815C39C5A11ECC86.jpg[/image]

CreativeDominant -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 11:21:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant And when...and if...people are NOT able t consciously override their beliefs and therefore take actions that are harmful, there are laws to deal with that. I'm curious though...what parts of your beliefs that go into your D/s dynamic have spilled over into your life outside the dynamic? You're asking the wrong person about this. I am not a Supremacist, nor do I believe that Dominants are superior to switches or submissives. [:)] We all have our strengths and weaknesses. An inferior being hardly has enough personal power to make a bona fide power exchange with a superior being. Believing otherwise would just be a farce. DreamLady But the question is not just concerned with those beliefs. The question concerns any D/s beliefs.

NookieNotes -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 11:49:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: NookieNotes Many people in this thread are equating supremacy with superiority. I think that is the main rub. It is one way the word is used (supreme pizza, for example, it not inherently more powerful than meat lovers), despite dictionary definitions, and therefore, they are riled against it. Actually the name is a statement that it's the greatest, the best of pizzas. In that case it's just a marketing gimmick and isn't taken seriously also no one cares about pizza equality. The point is that it has nothing to do with equality. Supremacy, or supreme in most definitions focuses on power, not superiority int he sense of being "better than." If you want to find offense in a word not meant to cause it (at least in this thread), that's on you. quote: ORIGINAL: NookieNotes I was, until I read the definition for myself, and decided that it works for this, exactly as written, and does not cause or exacerbate any harmful sexist thoughts or behaviors. First there isn't just a single "the definition" note that there's variation between sources. Yes, and as I've noted, they agree that the primary focus is on power, not "better than," and that is also the point of the definition posted BY THE OP. quote: Second if you're making reference to the other thread: quote: ORIGINAL: NookieNotes http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4793368 Obviously prejudice does NOT apply to treating the sexes differently, if you have developed your manners of treating them differently based on experiences, and are willing to be flexible for individuals. It's glaring sexism. Claiming it's not sexism because you make exceptions is no different from "I have a black friend so I can't be racist". I wasn't referring to that other thread. Claiming it is sexism when you have been told by several people that the posts you are making support my POV does not make it sexism. quote: You also claim "based on experiences", everyone thinks that, even the people wearing white hoods claiming that a black person is 3/5th's of a human being think that. Not true. Many people admit they have never met, kissed, dated/whatever a person of XXX race, yet have beliefs, because they were told by someone they look up to. quote: The problem is that correlation usually is not causation: quote: ORIGINAL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_correlation Illusory correlation is the phenomenon of perceiving a relationship between variables (typically people, events, or behaviors) even when no such relationship exists. A common example of this phenomenon would be when people form false associations between membership in a statistical minority group and rare (typically negative) behaviors as variables that are novel or salient tend to capture the attention.[1] This is one way stereotypes form and endure.[2][3] Hamilton & Rose (1980) found that stereotypes can lead people to expect certain groups and traits to fit together, and then to overestimate the frequency with which these correlations actually occur. How it Works [image]local://upfiles/566126/9161E91867AE4A25815C39C5A11ECC86.jpg[/image] And you throwing random web links at me and ignoring the actual facts included in my individual responses to you means you are taking YOUR experiences (or prejudiced beliefs), and applying them to me, regardless of the words or points I am making. So nice to see yet another pot complaining about the kettle.

GoddessManko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 11:57:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel I think right along this thread has mostly been about terminology confusion. Nobodies saying that her lifestyle isn't real, calling something roleplay isn't meant to diminish the dynamic between the people involved. It is meant to differentiate it from a worldview since the belief system that natural order dictates the supremacy of one sex over the other is a harmful worldview. Not to mention that for many, role play is role fulfillment to them. I have known women who believe that they and/or other women are "sluts" for enjoying sex, even in a monogamous situation, with their own husbands. They have internalized an ugly message that was thrust upon them non-consensually, and in many cases by spurned or vindictive, immature males when they were coming of age or as a young adult. (I am not speaking about those submissives or kinksters, both male and female alike, who toss about this term provocatively among themselves.) Furthermore, I know African-Americans who are deeply offended when other African-Americans call them the n-word; it's not a joking or endearing term, and them's fighting words. . . for which they must "consciously override" the impulse to punch the offender in the face. To claim that one's idiosyncratic worldview does not or won't ever spill over into other areas of one's and others' lives, is the epitome of naiveté. DreamLady Thank you for stating this and I agree wholeheartedly. I once had a skinhead who fell in love with me right after I had moved into my first apt. He had issues with drugs and alcohol, had done terrible things in his life and his very life was at risk when I met him. However, he respected me and grew to love me despite my skin color and had I not tried to have some measure of understanding in his beliefs and tried to share dialogue with him (he was highly intelligent), I don't know where his life would be today. Last we spoke, he was married, had a child, still had those awful tattoos all over him but he worked with people of color and also with children and he turned his life completely around. I do not know what hand I had to play in his personal change but what I do know is that had I been "hypersensitive and dismissive" of him and all he represented then there would have been an utter failure at some measure of understanding and friendship. I realized a long time ago close mindedness would do nothing but close many doors in my face therefore I like to keep my mind as open as humanly possible. If I cannot understand a concept, I spare it judgement and acknowledge there is a rhyme and reason for it. I believe emotional decisions absent thought are almost always poor ones. quote: ORIGINAL: NookieNotes quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness I think what we have seen over the course of this thread is the conflation of several ideas. Generally speaking, people tend to do this, but it's worth teasing them out into separate sections to clarify matters somewhat. Male supremacy is fundamentally the idea that men as a class, can dominate women as a class. Many people in this thread are equating supremacy with superiority. I think that is the main rub. It is one way the word is used (supreme pizza, for example, it not inherently more powerful than meat lovers), despite dictionary definitions, and therefore, they are riled against it. I was, until I read the definition for myself, and decided that it works for this, exactly as written, and does not cause or exacerbate any harmful sexist thoughts or behaviors. I agree with Awareness on all counts and according to the English dictionary those words are synonymous. I also believe his personal views are interchangeable genderwise. It really depends on personal views and experience which can be vastly different, no matter one's title. su·pe·ri·or·i·ty səˌpirēˈôrədē/ noun noun: superiority the state of being superior. "an attempt to establish superiority over others" synonyms: supremacy, advantage, lead, dominance, primacy, ascendancy, eminence "the military superiority of the North" a supercilious manner or attitude. "he attacked the media's smug superiority" Translate superiority to Use over time for: superiority I think people are thinking of it in the second definition.

NookieNotes -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 12:26:18 PM)
shrugs They are not the same word. The dictionaries I've looked at SOMETIMES use them as synonyms, sometimes do not. And even synonyms are not the exact same, much of the time. They have nuances. Frankly, I think it's important to note these nuances, especially before attacking someone's belief system. The OP has said she is speaking specifically of power, not a state of being "better than." That's enough for me to give her her kink, without crying foul.

dreamlady -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 1:46:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant But the question is not just concerned with those beliefs. The question concerns any D/s beliefs. Then how would your question about how others practice their D/s dynamics which does not involve their Weltanschauung of Supremacist beliefs be relevant? In fact, I don't see how my practice of D/s has to do with grouping whole segments of the population categorically. I am equally suspect of anybody who calls themselves by any label. I see the individual first and then try to ascertain his motivations. Whether he says he's a slave, a slut, a fetishist, a kinkster or BDSM bottom, a switch, or a secretly submissive and/or switchy Dom is up for grabs. It's a subjective process on my part, but worldview doesn't enter into the picture. I have a personal preference not to deal with masochists because we would not be a match, but I don't judge whether masochists or sadists are inferior or superior to one another or to me -- they're not on my intimate radar irrespective of their propensity for sadomasochism. The difference is that orientations cannot be readily identified by unalterable (under ordinary circumstances) physical characteristics such as the gender or the ethnic heritage you were born with that are being pre-judged according to how supreme or ultimate a pizza slice it belongs to. [X(] DreamLady

shiftyw -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 3:08:26 PM)
I care a great deal about pizza equality. I do all I can to eat all the types of pizza out there. [:D]

UnholyBear -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 3:29:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant And when...and if...people are NOT able t consciously override their beliefs and therefore take actions that are harmful, there are laws to deal with that. I'm curious though...what parts of your beliefs that go into your D/s dynamic have spilled over into your life outside the dynamic? You're asking the wrong person about this. I am not a Supremacist, nor do I believe that Dominants are superior to switches or submissives. [:)] We all have our strengths and weaknesses. An inferior being hardly has enough personal power to make a bona fide power exchange with a superior being. Believing otherwise would just be a farce. DreamLady But the question is not just concerned with those beliefs. The question concerns any D/s beliefs. Yet don't some of the beliefs a person holds on life and themselves in general also applies to how they employ those beliefs in a D/s situation?

CreativeDominant -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 3:33:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant But the question is not just concerned with those beliefs. The question concerns any D/s beliefs. Then how would your question about how others practice their D/s dynamics which does not involve their Weltanschauung of Supremacist beliefs be relevant? In fact, I don't see how my practice of D/s has to do with grouping whole segments of the population categorically. I am equally suspect of anybody who calls themselves by any label. I see the individual first and then try to ascertain his motivations. Whether he says he's a slave, a slut, a fetishist, a kinkster or BDSM bottom, a switch, or a secretly submissive and/or switchy Dom is up for grabs. It's a subjective process on my part, but worldview doesn't enter into the picture. I have a personal preference not to deal with masochists because we would not be a match, but I don't judge whether masochists or sadists are inferior or superior to one another or to me -- they're not on my intimate radar irrespective of their propensity for sadomasochism. The difference is that orientations cannot be readily identified by unalterable (under ordinary circumstances) physical characteristics such as the gender or the ethnic heritage you were born with that are being pre-judged according to how supreme or ultimate a pizza slice it belongs to. [X(] DreamLady Because the initial thrust against the O.P.s belief system was that somehow those specific beliefs of hers...practiced within her dynamic...cannot be contained or, as Mr. Williams (GotSteel's author) put it, consciously overridden when dealing with the public. A male-led relationship or female led relationship? Fine. But a male-led relationship involving a belief in male supremacy? A female -led relationship involving female supremacy? Nope. Those beliefs cannot be contained. A relationship involving a partner of a different race? Great! So long as that relationship is not built on a belief that one race is better at leading/following within a relationship. Again, because that belief cannot be contained or consciously overridden.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 4:16:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: UnholyBear quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant And when...and if...people are NOT able t consciously override their beliefs and therefore take actions that are harmful, there are laws to deal with that. I'm curious though...what parts of your beliefs that go into your D/s dynamic have spilled over into your life outside the dynamic? You're asking the wrong person about this. I am not a Supremacist, nor do I believe that Dominants are superior to switches or submissives. [:)] We all have our strengths and weaknesses. An inferior being hardly has enough personal power to make a bona fide power exchange with a superior being. Believing otherwise would just be a farce. DreamLady But the question is not just concerned with those beliefs. The question concerns any D/s beliefs. Yet don't some of the beliefs a person holds on life and themselves in general also applies to how they employ those beliefs in a D/s situation? Yes, my friend they do. But there have been things in place in my dynamics that were built on beliefs that would not fly when carried over to the real world or my life in the real world. I won't go into those here because I don't want to spend another 10 pages going into the same explanations. But as always, my furry friends, if you wish to correspond about it, I am free on the other side.

GoddessManko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 6:07:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NookieNotes shrugs They are not the same word. The dictionaries I've looked at SOMETIMES use them as synonyms, sometimes do not. And even synonyms are not the exact same, much of the time. They have nuances. Frankly, I think it's important to note these nuances, especially before attacking someone's belief system. The OP has said she is speaking specifically of power, not a state of being "better than." That's enough for me to give her her kink, without crying foul. Some people believe "better than" in the context of a relationship and often it's because they are right/ it's their desire actualized. And no one on the forum is going to change this regardless of whether they cry foul or not.

dreamlady -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/24/2015 6:13:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Because the initial thrust against the O.P.s belief system was that somehow those specific beliefs of hers...practiced within her dynamic...cannot be contained or, as Mr. Williams (GotSteel's author) put it, consciously overridden when dealing with the public. A male-led relationship or female led relationship? Fine. But a male-led relationship involving a belief in male supremacy? A female -led relationship involving female supremacy? Nope. Those beliefs cannot be contained. A relationship involving a partner of a different race? Great! So long as that relationship is not built on a belief that one race is better at leading/following within a relationship. Again, because that belief cannot be contained or consciously overridden. Let me put it another way. Suppose you were the type of male who thought all women are sluts and whores, an all-around sexist. In your own D/s dynamic with a submissive, you find a woman who has a sexual humiliation fetish, and the two of you get off on this slutty-whore business. I'm not saying that you do, and I'm not saying that you don't. But this denigrating mentality is one that you believe down to the core of your being. Your sub also shares your belief but doesn't mind being treated as if she is a lowly slut (much like there are male subs who identify as lowly pathetic worms). Tell me that such a man with such misogyny won't treat other women as not deserving of any respect, or else feel entitled to use women in general as nothing but sex objects for his own gratification. Tell me that such a woman will be able to impart any sense of self-worth to her daughter or to girls who might be in her charge, while she shows blatant favoritism to all males or to only boys. Either one of them may hold a position of responsibility as an educator or a childcare worker. Take sexism out of the equation, and substitute it with racism - including anti-Semitism - or substitute it with homophobia and gay-bashing. Different superiority/inferiority complexes and one-sided slanted supremacy beliefs, but similar damaging outcomes which have not been consensually entered into by all parties who may be affected. This is why hate crimes are recognized nowadays, which is a relatively recent development in the judicial system, because of their impersonal and nefarious nature. DreamLady

Page: << < prev 13 14 [15] 16 17 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125