|
orgasmdenial12 -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/14/2015 3:37:05 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: shiftyw
What would the difference be between consentual male supremacy and a male led relationship be?
I guess the difference would be the philosophy behind the actions. Any female submissive could have a male-led relationship, it doesn't say anything about their views on gender. Whereas a CMS (consensual male supremacy) relationship explicitly seeks to create a certain gender relation. So, for example, I've been into BDSM for 14 years now, and had many Doms, so all of them were male-led relationships, but none of them were CMS except for my current one.
However, from an outside viewpoint, I guess the answer is - there's no difference. It's unlikely that participants in a CMS relationship would go out of their way to share their views with you unless they were sure you wanted to hear them. The chances are, you probably know a whole bunch of CMS relationships, you just didn't realise it. This kind of backs up my point that CMS doesn't necessarily mean that you go round being a sexist twat to a load of people who are not in your relationship, any more than a sadist feels the need to inflict pain on people who haven't consented to it.
quote:
ORIGINAL: shiftyw
...supremacy involves a whole group of people who aren't in your relationship?
This is your opinion and it's one I don't share. I'd venture to say it's the main point of disagreement on this thread. I believe it's perfectly possible (and very common) to have viewpoints about the human race that other people don't share. I'd say it's also very common for people to keep their opinions to themselves. So although a CMS may have a whole raft of opinions about life, humanity and how to be happy, there's no reason to believe they'd force them on anyone else.
What's more, there are different levels of CMS, and it's a real shame we haven't been able to explore those in this thread. For example, one can believe that everyone should have equal rights, yet simply believe that men will tend to rise to the top in politics, business, etc. Or one could believe that it's a question of personality and there will be dominant women and submissive men but, on the whole, men tend more towards leadership than women; or one could believe that men and women are completely the equals in politics and business and friendship and shopping and movies and everything else, but that human reproductive biology suits a male head of household.
Let's take the last idea - that one can accept equality yet think men are more suited to being head of the household. Honestly, look around your life, how many couples do you know that, at core, still display some old-fashioned gender roles? Where women do the cleaning, or the laundry whilst men fix the car or put up shelves? Because in my workplace I know many brilliant, successful women who still take time off to have a baby, return to work part time, still expect the husband to work full time *and are happiest that way*. How many men do you know who took a long time off after the birth of their baby? Because frankly, I don't know any. If I had a male friend who decided to do so, I would 100% support him, because a happy parent is a wonderful thing for any child. It's just that, honestly, most men don't do that, and in most settled relationships with kids, most mothers provide the majority of care and rely, to some extent, on the earnings of their partners. We all know women who kick ass in the workplace before and after having kids - but I still think that, on the whole, for all kinds of reasons, women still occupy the main nurturing roles and men still value themselves as leaders and protectors. And, as a CMS, I think there is nothing wrong with that. I am comfortable with men, consensually, having more power. I am comfortable with women, consensually, having less power. I am comfortable in situations where men, consensually, have power over women. Am I comfortable with denying women power? No, because it's not consensual. Am I comfortable with forcing men into positions of power when it doesn't suit their personality or capabilities? No, because it's not consensual. Am I comfortable with lecturing men or women on what their gender personalities or roles should be? No, because variety is the spice of life and everyone should get the chance to explore their own version of the ideal relationship. What if I woke up tomorrow and women had 50% of all power and control in the world? Great! But do I think it will happen? No, probably not. Am I comfortable with female leaders? Totally, I've had some fantastic female bosses (and I kind of like to think I've been one for other people as well!) but do I think that women naturally gravitate towards leadership positions in the same way that men do? No, I do not. And that's okay. Equal treatment does not mean equal outcome. Would I promote a female member of staff as readily as a male member of staff? Of course, and I have done so many times.
But none of this changes my belief in CMS.
I guess my key belief is this; if everyone in the world was allowed to rise or fall to the exact level of social, political, economical and other power that they preferred, it is my belief that more men would take power than women. It is my belief that if every woman could have the exact level of power in a relationship that she preferred, more women would choose to be submissive than dominant. And there's nothing wrong with that.
So how, exactly, do my views affect people not in my relationship? They don't. It's as simple as that. In fact I'm an ardent feminist, because equal rights is profoundly important to me. But do I think that equal rights will lead to equal outcome between the genders? Not at all.
I suppose to summarise, for me, CMS is not about what people *should* do, it is more about what people *probably will do*.
But I'd still love to hear from anyone else who has this dynamic and what their views are, because I'm new to it and curious, rather than an expert on the subject.
|
|
|
|
