RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy?

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

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

Message

DominantWoman65 -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 1:59:04 PM)
As I believe a few of us commented on what works for us, it just happens to differ in opinion. It's only an issue if you make it one. I see it more as a debate on personal preferences.

GoddessManko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 2:07:25 PM)
Ah OK, perhaps my issue is I do not see the offense here. I like being able to have personal rules and draw lines in the sand. It keeps everything in my life nice and organized, and in perspective. I was raised by a man, I do not see all men as inferior. He was better than me in every way. I do believe in the concept of "Ladies first". Things you might not see as "Supremacy" I might label as such. I think this is where wires are being crossed because I am confused a bit.

UnholyBear -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 2:54:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko We are different. If I bottomed for anyone I would consider myself a switch or a fetishist but not a Dominant. So our perceptions foundationally differ. So in essence, you are saying that the actions determine if a person is a dominant or submissive...according to your concept?

NookieNotes -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 2:57:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko quote: ORIGINAL: NookieNotes And you have a right to feel that. I feel that if my own dominance were threatened by something as silly as a BJ or enjoying the sensation of rope, I would not be all that dominant. Well right. I don't feel threatened by dick or rope. The funny thing is you're both WAY off mark here. My point about depth perception, knowledge, self awareness and security and not always have to be in a cat fight to one up someone who's different. No one is cat fighting, AFAIK. I'm simply suggesting that here: quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko We are different. If I bottomed for anyone I would consider myself a switch or a fetishist but not a Dominant. So our perceptions foundationally differ. You are clearly stating that your dominance is threatened by bottoming. Or changed. Or no longer valid. I'm simply pointing out that I don't believe this, and I would personally not feel dominant if I did. quote: ORIGINAL: UnholyBear quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko We are different. If I bottomed for anyone I would consider myself a switch or a fetishist but not a Dominant. So our perceptions foundationally differ. So in essence, you are saying that the actions determine if a person is a dominant or submissive...according to your concept? This is how I read it, at least for her.

UnholyBear -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 3:04:18 PM)
For sure NookieNotes and I am quite serious to my questioning as that is the gist I get. Then add in the concept that even when a dominant person is scening with a submissive, even though the sub/bottom is receiving the sensations to the activities given, the dominant is still literally receiving sensations in the form of visual and aural stimulation. This is valid when you really think about it, especially when you take it in a very literal sense.

GoddessManko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 3:12:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: UnholyBear quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko We are different. If I bottomed for anyone I would consider myself a switch or a fetishist but not a Dominant. So our perceptions foundationally differ. So in essence, you are saying that the actions determine if a person is a dominant or submissive...according to your concept? Again, I am stating what works FOR ME.

GoddessManko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 3:14:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NookieNotes quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko quote: ORIGINAL: NookieNotes And you have a right to feel that. I feel that if my own dominance were threatened by something as silly as a BJ or enjoying the sensation of rope, I would not be all that dominant. Well right. I don't feel threatened by dick or rope. The funny thing is you're both WAY off mark here. My point about depth perception, knowledge, self awareness and security and not always have to be in a cat fight to one up someone who's different. No one is cat fighting, AFAIK. I'm simply suggesting that here: quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko We are different. If I bottomed for anyone I would consider myself a switch or a fetishist but not a Dominant. So our perceptions foundationally differ. You are clearly stating that your dominance is threatened by bottoming. Or changed. Or no longer valid. I'm simply pointing out that I don't believe this, and I would personally not feel dominant if I did. quote: ORIGINAL: UnholyBear quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko We are different. If I bottomed for anyone I would consider myself a switch or a fetishist but not a Dominant. So our perceptions foundationally differ. So in essence, you are saying that the actions determine if a person is a dominant or submissive...according to your concept? This is how I read it, at least for her. I do not understand the concept of a Dominant being a bottom for anyone, ever. And I don't pretend to be an expert on the matter nor teach classes about it either.

UnholyBear -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 3:14:34 PM)
Which is what I wrote...jeez hence me using the phrase " according to your concept and " youare saying." ~mutters, here we fukin go again~

GoddessManko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 3:15:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: UnholyBear Which is what I wrote...jeez hence me using the phrase " according to your concept and " youare saying." I don't understand what my beliefs have to do with anyone. It's like saying because I don't shop at Walmart I don't believe anyone should. That makes zero sense.

GoddessManko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 3:36:39 PM)
quote: ~mutters, here we fukin go again~ We literally have never spoken before directly to each other so I have no idea what this means either, LOL.

Kaliko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 3:57:18 PM)
quote: I have to ask you (and Kaliko) this, though, are you speaking about Male Supremacy en toto or about orgasmdenial12's emphasis on Consensual Male Supremacy? Because what she had taken great pains to describe and to clarify, to her credit, is an insular or closed-loop relationship dynamic as she perceives it. I don't think there is a single poster who has come forth to say that they have an issue with what a couple mutually consents to do or how they choose to practice their M/f or F/m relationship dynamic. It's been a few days since I've read my posts, but I believe from the beginning I've been arguing that I shouldn't need anyone's consent to believe in male superiority. (Superiority/Supremacy - I have my reasons for using them interchangeably.) So no, I'm not speaking of a closed-loop dynamic. In fact, I'm not speaking of a dynamic, at all. I'm just talking about what goes on in my head. (Remind me not to do that again.) It's everybody else who assumes that because I think something, that my behavior stemming from those thoughts will result in harm and oppression to others. Sure, it might. But I'd rather wait until it actually does to be judged. I will try something here, which may or may not be successful. We'll see if I delete it all when I'm done: You (general "you") believe that someone else having a belief in male superiority is harmful to others. Your reasons for this are based on your own moral code, socially accepted behavior, and a good number of historical events during which people were harmed through oppression. Okay. I (me) believe that someone else having a belief that abortion is acceptable is harmful to others. My reasons for this are based on my own moral code, socially accepted behavior, and a good number of historical events during which unborn children were harmed (to say the least) through abortion. I find the belief in abortion at whim to be just as morally reprehensible as you (general you) find my belief in male superiority to be. I mean, if we take this definition of oppression: "the exercise of authority or power in a burdensome, cruel, or unjust manner" - that is abortion. To me. So. Can someone who believes in abortion as a choice walk through the world without constantly inflicting their values on others? Without constantly making others feel forced to accept and act by their views? I'm certain it must be possible. Are there a few radicals who try to push? Yes. But there are many more walking among us who believe it's right and don't feel the need to push their values on others. And so. Can someone who believes in male superiority walk through the world without constantly inflicting their values on others? Without constantly making others feel forced to accept and act by their views? I'm certain it must be possible. Are there a few radicals who try to push? Yes. But there are many more walking among us who believe it's right and don't feel the need to push their values on others. So can I assume that, if I'm expected to get anyone's "okay" before thinking male superiority holds any merit, that those who are pro-choice will be checking with me first to make sure it's okay that they think that way? This thread is evidence of how people can think so differently about what being open-minded means.

DerangedUnit -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 4:47:08 PM)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/04/arrests-of-pregnant-women_n_5083480.html In the case of abortion both sides don't leave each other alone, women are constantly being imprisonedfor not meeting standards of what they should do for their fetus... most commonly this is used in drug cases but it has also been used when a woman accidentally fell, been used as threat to force women to give birthin a hospital, force c sections, etc. All because someone decided with a group of people they know what is better for everyone else's life. Child labor laws, stopped kids from being used.... in one way. They also handicapped those that needed a way to support themselves. Antislavery laws, it's no longer legal but southern cali is one of the largest hubs for six trafficking, a third of the country is on welfare and most people here that work 2-3 jobs can't make enough to house themselves. Indentured servitude is still around in the former of volunteer work which people take to look busy while they can't find work... except now they don't get food and housing. The point being with everything there are consequences. There are plus sides and down sides to everything. You will always have bad people and good people and making their choices for them doesn't change that. Back when men were the bread winners and had more access to education and were commonly viewed as superior of course there were people that took advantage of that. Men who beat their wives, who assulted women becausethey knew they wouldn't be charged, doctors who lobotomized women or institutionalized them for being argumentative... some really horrible things happened. But good things also happened. Men took care of their kids they didn't try to duck out as soon as someone waved a pee stick. They supported their families, divorce wasn't something you did to get a younger model. Men, in a time when men were thought to be superior also gave women the right to vote. No matter what you believe, the deciding factor in what your actions portray is not the belief itself. Discernment, self defined morals, being a good person this is what decides how those beliefs are used. edit this argument reminds me of a 'prop 8'(gay rights) picket I was at years ago.... the other side said that if we let gay people marry then they will want to marry cows... I said "why not? Cows need love too" and I wasn't allowed to talk in anyone's defense after that. But I'm sure no more than a couple ended up marrying cows and I don't think it was the law preventing that. Also because I'm an atheist I get this all the time "if you don't believein god what keeps you from raping and murdering all you want?" ...I don't want to. Personally I find it terrifying that the vast hordes of Christians are only one belief in a book away from going on killing sprees, but I don't go handing out "beware the coming hoard" pamphlets... well just a few

NookieNotes -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 6:08:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko I do not understand the concept of a Dominant being a bottom for anyone, ever. And I don't pretend to be an expert on the matter nor teach classes about it either. LOL! If you meant that as a dig, it doesn't bother me, just FYI. I'm not pretending anything, especially about being an expert. I teach, and get rave reviews. People enjoy learning from me. If they didn't, I would be out of teaching offers pretty damn fast. And rightfully so. As far as your belief about dominants bottoming, that's spiffy for you. I separate actions and thoughts. I can bow to the Queen of England and be no less dominant. I can (and do) give way to the leader of a local group and be no less dominant. I can allow my clients to call the shots in business, and be no less dominant. I can take a cock down the throat until I gag and drool and be no less dominant. Because, to me, dominance is simply: dom·i·nance ˈdämənəns/ noun: dominance power and influence over others And THAT I have in my relationships, regardless of those other behaviors. Because I earn it. Because no matter what I do to my Pet or in front of him, I still hold tremendous power over him, and others who have given me that right after spending time with me, and realizing that I will take care of them as I would myself. My personal dominance comes with a lot of rules for me to abide by, personally, but that's different from the definition. quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko quote: ORIGINAL: UnholyBear Which is what I wrote...jeez hence me using the phrase " according to your concept and " youare saying." I don't understand what my beliefs have to do with anyone. It's like saying because I don't shop at Walmart I don't believe anyone should. That makes zero sense. Seems clear to me. You are stating them in this public forum, therefore, people interact with you about them. THAT'S what they have to do with anyone. If you don't want anyone to interact with them, it would be easy to simply not share them. No one is saying you should or should not anything, as far as I can tell.

ExiledTyrant -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 6:10:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko I never said it should be. I have always been speaking of my personal belief system. I have no idea how other people conduct their lives. That's why I ask questions. Kaliko and Awareness shed light into their dynamic and for me it makes perfect sense. FOR THEM. See where I'm going with this? quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko I am the Matriarch in my family, to everyone. Including my mother. Also I do my own mechanic work. [;)] I believe that female leadership is the natural order of things. There are few exceptions to the rule but overall, yes. I believe behind every strong man is a stronger woman. Many sub men and female Dommes would agree. But let's switch that to "ahead of" in my case. [;)] So which is it, Manko, personal belief system or natural order? Choose one. The reason this is going on and on and on is because you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. Choose one... A personal choice. or Natural order in stark contrast to thousands of years of history.

GoddessManko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 7:06:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko I never said it should be. I have always been speaking of my personal belief system. I have no idea how other people conduct their lives. That's why I ask questions. Kaliko and Awareness shed light into their dynamic and for me it makes perfect sense. FOR THEM. See where I'm going with this? quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko I am the Matriarch in my family, to everyone. Including my mother. Also I do my own mechanic work. [;)] I believe that female leadership is the natural order of things. There are few exceptions to the rule but overall, yes. I believe behind every strong man is a stronger woman. Many sub men and female Dommes would agree. But let's switch that to "ahead of" in my case. [;)] So which is it, Manko, personal belief system or natural order? Choose one. The reason this is going on and on and on is because you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. Choose one... A personal choice. or Natural order in stark contrast to thousands of years of history. I just stated it succinctly. My belief is that it is the natural order of things.

dreamlady -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 7:10:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kaliko . . . but I believe from the beginning I've been arguing that I shouldn't need anyone's consent to believe in male superiority. (Superiority/Supremacy - I have my reasons for using them interchangeably.) So no, I'm not speaking of a closed-loop dynamic. In fact, I'm not speaking of a dynamic, at all. I'm just talking about what goes on in my head. Who have you been arguing with? Because nobody has once disrespected anything you've stated, or attacked you or your posts. No one has demeaned you or your position, or insinuated that you need anybody else's permission in terms of your right to hold Male Supremacist views, nor that of your Dom, or come out and said to you personally that your way of thinking is an "error on your part." So I have to wonder why you feel as though your character is being attacked? I don't agree with the statement, "A belief in supremacy is unrelated to an individual's ethical beliefs." You don't agree with what some other posters, including myself, have been emphasizing in terms of the cornerstone of mutual consent and how harboring a Supremacist ideology precludes or negates the concept of ubiquitous consent. quote: ORIGINAL: Kaliko This thread is evidence of how people can think so differently about what being open-minded means. How open-minded are you about Female Supremacy then? Is not a Supremacist belief system a paradox in itself, to be tolerant of those who hold an opposing belief than your own, when Superiority/inferiority axes get reversed and you and yours find yourselves on the flipside. DreamLady

GoddessManko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 7:19:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady How open-minded are you about Female Supremacy then? Is not a Supremacist belief system a paradox in itself, to be tolerant of those who hold an opposing belief than your own, when Superiority/inferiority axes get reversed and you and yours find yourselves on the flipside. DreamLady To be honest I'm more fascinated with why or how a Dominant would choose to be topped/allow themselves to be topped and how to regain the Dominant headspace towards the same individual. My lack of understanding there is equivalent to your own towards Dominance/Superiority/Supremacy of either gender.

DominantWoman65 -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 7:37:30 PM)
Simply because I am confident and secure enough in who I am as a person to be able to enjoy what pleasures me contrary to what others may believe is the norm. I also happen to have a mate in my life who respects me and allows me to be who I am without judgement and revels himself in empowering me.

GoddessManko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 7:45:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DominantWoman65 Simply because I am confident and secure enough in who I am as a person to be able to enjoy what pleasures me contrary to what others may believe is the norm. I also happen to have a mate in my life who respects me and allows me to be who I am without judgement and revels himself in empowering me. OK, Your answer is applicable literally to everyone's dynamic.

shiftyw -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/26/2015 7:50:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko quote: ORIGINAL: DominantWoman65 Simply because I am confident and secure enough in who I am as a person to be able to enjoy what pleasures me contrary to what others may believe is the norm. I also happen to have a mate in my life who respects me and allows me to be who I am without judgement and revels himself in empowering me. OK, Your answer is applicable literally to everyone's dynamic. ...what is this Manko? Correct me if I'm wrong DominantWoman but I think DominantWoman means- if she wants to blow her sub thats HER decision- and the sub is going to get blown. If she tells the sub to hit her with the flogger cause maybe she has a maso streak but prefers being dominant- why can't her sub service top her? Is he not just doing as she asks still? When is she relinquishing power?

Page: << < prev 16 17 [18] 19 20 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875