quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw

I think, and I like you, but frankly, you are having a hard time understanding supremacy.

Supremacy by definition almost always causes oppression. If you believe in female supremacy you are negating my feelings as a female sub who finds male submissives a turn off. That is what my issue is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12

quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw

Also- I meant your service and role is based solely on you having a vagina.

If I had to make a distinction, it's based more on me having a womb. But I take your point.

I could wax lyrical here about what I see as the power and beauty of male impregnation of the female body but no doubt it would have you all up in arms. And, no doubt, I'm sure there are many Mistresses (and other men and women) who see it as an act of female, rather than male power. But either way, there is something about pregnancy and the different biology that seems to bring femininity and masculinity into sharp focus. It's amazing how many women, who seem very plain and unremarkable, just blossom into outrageous, gorgeous, sexy femininity once they are pregnant. I've never been able to see it as anything but the ultimate act of femininity, self-sacrifice, a certain masochistic commitment to suffering for what one loves and a transformation into a different state of being. When a man caresses the round shape of his pregnant partner, and knows that a part of himself, his child, is growing inside the woman, and that it was his action that placed it there, I just can't see it as anything except dominion. I used to be 'child free' and see it as a hideous, terrifying and unwanted loss of control over one's own body, but now I see it as beautiful for just the same reasons. I suppose I see it as a very female act of submission.

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*

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

Just to throw a bit of bolt into the smooth running gears of the conversation: could it not be said that we are talking about something practiced between two people that are partners? Appended to that is a couple of serious questions: Is the partner on the receiving end of this particular practice also being harmed...especially if she's already been geared this way for awhile? Is she forcing or attempting to force her beliefs on others or does she share those opinions? Is the one on the 'giving' end of this practice willfully harming his subject...not preparing her to deal in the real world with its differing way of doing things...working this into her head in such a manner that he can later use her belief in the system in order to allow him to do actual mental or physical harm to his 'believer'? Does he force the views practiced between them onto other?

Those that practice D/s in their relationships as a 24/7 choice have..I'll go out on a limb....within our a core a belief that a relationship, be it male-led or female-led, functions best with a leader and a follower. We believe that and yet, many of us go to work each day and...in some instances...set that belief aside...to function in the day to day world. Believe me, there are times when I want to say to certain ones of my patients "just shut up, do as I say, and you will get well. Stop fighting me.". But I don't...because my belief that what is right in my personal life is a belief that I cannot afford to carry over and act upon in the REAL world every single time I interact with it.

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 should help move towards the goal, shifty)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

Just to throw a bit of bolt into the smooth running gears of the conversation: could it not be said that we are talking about something practiced between two people that are partners? Appended to that is a couple of serious questions: Is the partner on the receiving end of this particular practice also being harmed...especially if she's already been geared this way for awhile? Is she forcing or attempting to force her beliefs on others or does she share those opinions? Is the one on the 'giving' end of this practice willfully harming his subject...not preparing her to deal in the real world with its differing way of doing things...working this into her head in such a manner that he can later use her belief in the system in order to allow him to do actual mental or physical harm to his 'believer'? Does he force the views practiced between them onto other?

Those that practice D/s in their relationships as a 24/7 choice have..I'll go out on a limb....within our a core a belief that a relationship, be it male-led or female-led, functions best with a leader and a follower. We believe that and yet, many of us go to work each day and...in some instances...set that belief aside...to function in the day to day world. Believe me, there are times when I want to say to certain ones of my patients "just shut up, do as I say, and you will get well. Stop fighting me.". But I don't...because my belief that what is right in my personal life is a belief that I cannot afford to carry over and act upon in the REAL world every single time I interact with it.

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 should help move towards the goal, shifty)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerangedUnit

quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12

quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw

Also- I meant your service and role is based solely on you having a vagina.

If I had to make a distinction, it's based more on me having a womb. But I take your point.

I could wax lyrical here about what I see as the power and beauty of male impregnation of the female body but no doubt it would have you all up in arms. And, no doubt, I'm sure there are many Mistresses (and other men and women) who see it as an act of female, rather than male power. But either way, there is something about pregnancy and the different biology that seems to bring femininity and masculinity into sharp focus. It's amazing how many women, who seem very plain and unremarkable, just blossom into outrageous, gorgeous, sexy femininity once they are pregnant. I've never been able to see it as anything but the ultimate act of femininity, self-sacrifice, a certain masochistic commitment to suffering for what one loves and a transformation into a different state of being. When a man caresses the round shape of his pregnant partner, and knows that a part of himself, his child, is growing inside the woman, and that it was his action that placed it there, I just can't see it as anything except dominion. I used to be 'child free' and see it as a hideous, terrifying and unwanted loss of control over one's own body, but now I see it as beautiful for just the same reasons. I suppose I see it as a very female act of submission.

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.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

<snip>

Back to the relationship dynamic. For those people that are truly involved in a 24/7 power exchange, I think the idea that one gender or the other is "superior" in some way has to be so stipulated almost from the outset. Why else would anyone acquiesce to the other person, so completely.

Michael[/color]

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.

Hmm. I'm finding myself agreeing with you, GotSteel.
(We've got to nip that in the bud. )

OP, you posted that Supremacy /= Superiority. Supreme translates to that which is superior. . . and then some -- at the top of the heap of superior.

It isn't any accident that Aryan Supremacy isn't just about their delusional belief in the superiority of whites over all other races and ethnic groups. Plus, they have their own standard for "purity" of whiteness, and not blended or mixed Caucasian ethnicities. It means that they claim the "God-given right" to rule over all other races by subjugating them. Pro-actively. Aggressively. (That was just for you, GS. ) Not hidden from inside a closet.

DreamLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: smileforme50

What about in a gay or lesbian D/s relationship? There is obvious power exchange in the relationship but it certainly isn't based on gender. Why else would anyone acquiesce to the other person so completely? Ummm....maybe because they feel especially submissive toward this ONE particular person?

Do they acquiesce to EVERYONE else in their own gender? How would something like that work in a belief system where one gender is superior to the other?