RE: m f comparisions

RE: m f comparisions (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

dreamlady -> RE: m f comparisions (3/13/2015 6:23:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littleladybug Ok, in terms of what I have seen as far as expectations from male dominants. It ranges from "let's meet and see" to "I will keep you in a cage, period". The majority I have seen trend toward the former. I personally don't feel that all dominants that complain about not being able to find someone is suffering from "sour grapes". But, in my experience, there are a lot of them. There's a shitload, as I have seen, of "me Dom, you sub" going on, and I'm seeing that a lot from female dominants. And, when things go south, it's generally blamed on the sub-- because, you know, they haven't "done things right". Hence, my query-- what is the expectation? and, where does it come from? Personally, I think just about everybody either complains or takes issue with somebody to one extent or another. . . not a real submissive/slave, not a real Dominant/Master, not a real switch, not a real man or husband, not a real woman or wife, etc. This is almost like asking what came first, the chicken or the egg? Are the Doms who want to keep a slave caged up (probably to let out during the day to make a living, however) motivated by their own fantasy image of what a slave wants from a Master, or from what they are being told that (female) submissives want? I don't hear of any Dommes who want to keep her sub locked up in a cage all the time when not in use; Imo it's primarily male subs with caging fantasies -- either an enclosure or locked up in a cockcage. (This sounds like an effective way to screen out inexperienced Dominants who have no real-life experience in actually owning a sub.) As for the blame game, that's hard to say. Not much different than when vanilla couples break up with the finger-pointing, I would venture to guess. shrug

DaddySatyr -> RE: m f comparisions (3/13/2015 6:25:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady Circling back to the most frequently heard/expressed complaints by Dominants, then. Now I will address you in terms of a couple remarks you made that struck me as "poor little rich girl" when it comes to Dommes complaining about subs. (I think you meant male subs in particular.) I'm wondering whether you feel any Dominant who "complains" about submissives is just sour grapes, or if there is a significant difference in substance between F/m and M/f, either as to a Dominant's expectations of submissive performance or any other characteristic. (This isn't to put you on the spot, and anybody can opine, but I am curious about this angle.) To kick this off then, taking fetishists for example, do male Doms express a similar degree of frustration with all the female fetishists or female bottoms out there who aren't "truly" submissive? You said anyone may opine so, here's my .02¢: For quite some time, there's been a contingent, here that has bristled at the sweeping "she stood me up. She's obviously not submissive." statement; probably rightly so, although it's a bit too picky about a personal observation, coming from someone. They would prefer "she's not a good submissive for me". Fair dues, if it wasn't delivered by some of the same people that are constantly bemoaning that almost no males are truly submissive. Anyway, I am just saying that I won't entirely get behind whether or not someone is truly submissive (although it is painfully obvious to me, when they aren't). I will say that I agree that there is just as much fantasy-driven, non-reality-based demands coming from the ladies as there is from the guys, but, around here, the genders tend to be treated differently (and it doesn't matter which side of the kneel the genders find themselves occupying). I have taken the time to get to know a few ladies from the site (more than a few) and, once I get passed the ones that swear up and down that they've read my profile, when they haven't, I get to move on to the ones that are determined to "change me". They've read the profile but they believe the right lady will make me "normal", again. Once those two groups are eliminated, you get to the ladies that will "do anything for the right man/dominant/master/whatever" and to some degree, they've decided that I'm that man ... until I ask them to do something the least little bit that's out of their comfort zone. One young lady raised her voice at me in my house and was appalled when I sent her for some "corner time"; not the "damage" it did, but the very gall of me to demand it of her. Certainly that's not a request that is dangerous and "harmful" could be strongly debatable. I absolutely believe, at the end of the day, it's about individuals ... how a particular person will act, but I will grant that there is something to gender roles (still) and lifestyle identifications. As you spend more time, here, you will note a decided slant as to how females (be they dominant or submissive) and males (same qualifier) are treated. It has gotten better over the last year or so but only to the degree in which the behavior is carried out. The truth is, when it comes to this particular website, at least, gender still matters. Michael

GotSteel -> RE: m f comparisions (3/13/2015 6:42:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Then i wont respond to it..... but i sure as hell have no interest in anyones "outing". the paranoia over being disagreed with, seems to be strong today, and making dumb assumptions to. I dont get it. happily Rereads the OP Paranoia, really? It's news to me that the OP has anything to do with outing you, I've got no idea what you're talking about [sm=idea.gif] P.S. You put up the video while I was writing my last response, so please don't take it as a response to the video. I'm watching the video, thank you for endeavoring to move the conversation forward.

shiftyw -> RE: m f comparisions (3/13/2015 6:48:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady <snip> To kick this off then, taking fetishists for example, do male Doms express a similar degree of frustration with all the female fetishists or female bottoms out there who aren't "truly" submissive? In my experience- yes. I'm a bottom and I've had trouble with this. Certainly I can't speak for everyone. but in my experience- yes.

NookieNotes -> RE: m f comparisions (3/14/2015 1:52:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko quote: ORIGINAL: NookieNotes quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko where just saying "men and women are different" Personally, I think "men and women are different" is a very different beast from "Also people need to stop comparing male subs to female subs, it is a totally, totally different ballgame here. I wouldn't know where to begin." It's a matter of degree. I agree with the first statement, not the second, at least as far as I understand/read it. Out of curiosity, it seems like we are also bringing male and female bottoms into the picture? And fetishists? Not just subs, right? Hmmm in my experience male subs and female subs are very different, both kink wise and service-submission wise as well as the way they see a Dominant female. I treat them differently as well and those reasons are applicable to my methods. Ok. I get this. In my experience, I don't experience much difference. But that could be that where I look for differences (ie: behavior modification) is more similar than different, and the rest of the stuff (activities) is all for show, and varies wildly from person to person more than from sex to sex (again, in MY offline experience). To me, a submissive who desires to serve and be taken to the deepest levels of intimacy will be, mentally, much like any other. The pathways are the same, the scenery is just different. Perhaps you are discussing the scenery, and I am thinking of the journey itself? Because I find with BeMod, that most people are the same. In fact, most mammals are the same, and training a dog and training a person are more similar than different. Then again, it's also a matter of sample size. We all select for what we want/desire/respond best to. I also train others to train, but their experiences outside of training may be wildly different. quote: ORIGINAL: littleladybug I personally don't feel that all dominants that complain about not being able to find someone is suffering from "sour grapes". But, in my experience, there are a lot of them. There's a shitload, as I have seen, of "me Dom, you sub" going on, and I'm seeing that a lot from female dominants. And, when things go south, it's generally blamed on the sub-- because, you know, they haven't "done things right". Hence, my query-- what is the expectation? and, where does it come from? I find this fascinating. In my experience, i see this happening equally with men and women. Again, I'm using meat-space experiences, rather than online as my primary weighted factor, because that where I see people day-in, day-out consistently over years. Also, to be clear, for me, as a female dominant, the responsibility for ANY relationship I enter into is on MY shoulders. Even if the sub is a lying sneak, that's on my for choosing incorrectly, and believing a wrong fit was right. It is on me to find the right person, make the right decisions, help them be the best they can be, or release them. Period. quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr The truth is, when it comes to this particular website, at least, gender still matters. So, then the debate is: online behavior, and the people who go primarily with that as experience or real life behavior and experience. I am NOT knocking online. It just has a different set of rules and expectations I could never really follow.

GotSteel -> RE: m f comparisions (3/15/2015 2:00:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko If I can allow this argument to get a bit more cerebral and less "neener neener", here is a video about objectification vs subjectification in genders. http://elitedaily.com/women/sexual-subjectification-vs-objectification-why-we-all-need-to-learn-the-difference-video/ I agree objectification is a thing (I'm a fan of that sex educator by the way). Thing is it's not a matter of "inherent nature" it's cultural. Raise both genders to objectify women: http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/03/womens-magazines-objectify-women-just-as-much-as-mens-magazines-do/274330/ And the results aren't terrible surprising, both genders objectify women. Now here's the interesting part, what happens when women are raised a bit more like men, aka with more objectification of men and less "slut shaming". Well the modern couple of generations have been answering that question, turns out women have sex drives and enjoy objectifying men just fine: quote: ORIGINAL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_objectification#Sexual_objectification_of_men Feminist authors Christina Hoff Sommers and Naomi Wolf write that women's sexual liberation has led many women to a role reversal, whereby they view men as sex objects,[22][23][24] in a manner similar to what they criticize about men's treatment of women. Research has suggested that the psychological effects of objectification on men are similar to those of women, leading to negative body image among men.[25] Instances where men may be viewed as sex objects by women include advertising, music videos, movies and television shows,[26] beefcake calendars, women's magazines, male strip shows, and clothed female nude male (CFNM) events.[27][28] Also, more women are purchasing and consuming pornography.[29][30][31][32][33]

shiftyw -> RE: m f comparisions (3/15/2015 2:26:57 PM)
ahem http://youtu.be/RwPR0q5es0A

GoddessManko -> RE: m f comparisions (3/15/2015 2:45:43 PM)
Gotcha GotsSteel but the issue here is not only propensity of objectification vs subjectification. Male and female sexual behaviors, patterns and responses are entirely different, in almost every way I can think of right off the top of my head and dealing with both genders. I'm fine with your current position presented but that doesn't change the premise of my statement, especially in regards to male and female subs. If a male sub defies my predisposed thoughts of what to expect vs a female sub and how to approach her then that would change my perspective entirely. But I have met thousands of people in my life and yes, they are individuals but humans are also mammals as one person said. They are gregarious and they have behavior patterns. If that wasn't the case the stock market, advertising and our entire logistical system wouldn't be so easily controlled and predictable. The color pink weakens men, the color blue subdues hunger, the colors red and yellow incite hunger (think fast food logos). I also apologize for flirting with someone else's sub publicly but she's quite a delight and a personal favorite. [:D]

GotSteel -> RE: m f comparisions (3/15/2015 7:53:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko Male and female sexual behaviors, patterns and responses are entirely different, in almost every way I can think of right off the top of my head and dealing with both genders. quote: ORIGINAL: ]http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/21/opinion/sunday/the-tangle-of-the-sexes.html?ref=opinion&_r=1 Across analyses spanning 122 attributes from more than 13,000 individuals, one conclusion stood out: instead of dividing into two groups, men and women overlapped considerably on attributes like the frequency of science-related activities, interest in casual sex, or the allure of a potential mate’s virginity. Even stereotypical traits, like assertiveness or valuing close friendships, fell along a continuum. In other words, we found little or no evidence of categorical distinctions based on sex.

NookieNotes -> RE: m f comparisions (3/16/2015 1:49:33 AM)
It seems to me that it's a matter of the superficial. Men and women in general have different superficialities. That I am in agreement with.The initial approach for men and women, for me, will be different. Scratch the surface, just the slightest bit, and they are all the same. That's where I like to play. However, very many people play mostly on the surface (this is not a judgement call, just talking the difference between kink/physical play/fun versus full-on behavior modification and such), and so, in those experiences, the differences may be as vast and deep as the ocean. Or even just talking about those levels only, the differences may be wild. However, in my eyes, overall, the differences are worth noting and dealing with, but in the long run mean very little, as my main interest is in the deep bits. And may I say, the superficial differences are what make or break most relationships long term (toilet seat debate, anyone?).

GoddessManko -> RE: m f comparisions (3/16/2015 7:53:30 AM)
Men and women are very different, includes male and female subs, includes play but it depends on how much you explore to discover this. A handful of kinks won't cut it. That is all. I have work to do.

shiftyw -> RE: m f comparisions (3/16/2015 8:02:38 AM)
I always wish there were more gender neutral/fluid folks around these parts to have some input.

GoddessManko -> RE: m f comparisions (3/16/2015 8:12:14 AM)
CDs are men who like to dress because it's taboo and for some the admiration of women or seeing women as Supreme. The opposite of greek society that saw women as "deformed men". MtF are women, FtM are men so the rules apply to them along those guidelines. There is a difference between playing with someone for a month and exploring with your sub and others for over 10 years. There is a difference in learning depending how far into the soul you are willing to go. There are demographics, the way people shop, the way they act and react to others that tells you a lot about the beauty or ugliness of their soul. I go very deep and therefore I see people for who they are. I enjoy seeing parts of people of which they are not aware. But this is getting again, really too in depth and this discussion as stated before made little to no sense because not everyone sees the world the way I do. The numbers on the stock market are people, do you see them that way? And this is a little too cerebral for a Monday, with that, enjoy the forums everyone. I take my leave.

GoddessManko -> RE: m f comparisions (3/16/2015 8:14:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko Male and female sexual behaviors, patterns and responses are entirely different, in almost every way I can think of right off the top of my head and dealing with both genders. quote: ORIGINAL: ]http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/21/opinion/sunday/the-tangle-of-the-sexes.html?ref=opinion&_r=1 Across analyses spanning 122 attributes from more than 13,000 individuals, one conclusion stood out: instead of dividing into two groups, men and women overlapped considerably on attributes like the frequency of science-related activities, interest in casual sex, or the allure of a potential mate’s virginity. Even stereotypical traits, like assertiveness or valuing close friendships, fell along a continuum. In other words, we found little or no evidence of categorical distinctions based on sex. Did you see what the study was based on? That's not even scratching the surface. Anyway it was a nice reach.

dreamlady -> RE: m f comparisions (3/16/2015 9:12:28 AM)
(From GoddessManko's post above, bolded hers) quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/21/opinion/sunday/the-tangle-of-the-sexes.html?ref=opinion&_r=1 Across analyses spanning 122 attributes from more than 13,000 individuals, one conclusion stood out: instead of dividing into two groups, men and women overlapped considerably on attributes like the frequency of science-related activities, interest in casual sex, or the allure of a potential mate’s virginity. Even stereotypical traits, like assertiveness or valuing close friendships, fell along a continuum. In other words, we found little or no evidence of categorical distinctions based on sex. After stating "since 2000, scientific journals have published more than 30,000 articles on them [i.e., sex differences]," this article prefaces: "That men and women differ in certain respects is unassailable." Since you are taking the position of sameness or of no significant differences, then you should forward your link onto the national federation of astrologers to refer to in an upcoming symposium. . . although professional astrologers recognize that innate traits get filtered by gender, despite whatever horoscope similarities may be present. 30,000 cases of scientific experts in their fields who are just making stuff up out of thin air for the past decade and a half. That in itself would be noteworthy. [8\|] Notwithstanding, there is the matter of differing motives. Showing overlap in engaging or willingness to engage in casual sex does not delve into the separate motivations of either, whether simply and/or opportunistically for the sake of instant gratification, or to take a prospective boyfriend/girlfriend or partner for a test drive before becoming emotionally involved with that person. Btw, "assertiveness" is not stereotypically a male attribute. This is being confused with aggressiveness. (Just like being receptive as the catcher to a pitcher, and just like being submissive, is not the same as being passive.) I find many little girls to be incredibly assertive about what they want from others. Pushier than little boys, even. I never hear the end of it when my nieces want me to take them to the Mall. My nephews will eventually take 'no' or 'later' for an answer. [8D]

PeonForHer -> RE: m f comparisions (3/16/2015 11:34:57 AM)
quote: Since you are taking the position of sameness or of no significant differences, then you should forward your link onto the national federation of astrologers to refer to in an upcoming symposium. . . although professional astrologers recognize that innate traits get filtered by gender, despite whatever horoscope similarities may be present. In a sense this debate seems a bit of a dead end. 'Sameness' and 'difference' are relative terms. If you wanted to find evidence of a tendency for men and women to be different, you could find it. If you wanted to find the opposite, you could find that, too. To the average female, the average male might look big and physically strong. To the average gorilla, I'd guess there'd be almost no difference between men's and women's relative physical strength that's worth caring about.

dreamlady -> RE: m f comparisions (3/16/2015 12:20:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer In a sense this debate seems a bit of a dead end. 'Sameness' and 'difference' are relative terms. If you wanted to find evidence of a tendency for men and women to be different, you could find it. If you wanted to find the opposite, you could find that, too. To the average female, the average male might look big and physically strong. To the average gorilla, I'd guess there'd be almost no difference between men's and women's relative physical strength that's worth caring about. Good point, depending on whether one's focus is in finding similarities among the family of man, or in finding differences. . . . . . although there are some dudes who resemble big, hairy gorillas. [:-]

GotSteel -> RE: m f comparisions (3/16/2015 9:29:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady After stating "since 2000, scientific journals have published more than 30,000 articles on them [i.e., sex differences]," this article prefaces: "That men and women differ in certain respects is unassailable." Men have hoohoo's women have haha's, we've been over this. quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady Since you are taking the position of sameness or of no significant differences, then you should forward your link onto the national federation of astrologers to refer to in an upcoming symposium. . . although professional astrologers recognize that innate traits get filtered by gender, despite whatever horoscope similarities may be present. Please tell me you're pulling my leg and understand that astrology's a pile of woo. quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady 30,000 cases of scientific experts in their fields who are just making stuff up out of thin air for the past decade and a half. That in itself would be noteworthy. [8\|] Notwithstanding, there is the matter of differing motives. That's not actually quite what they're saying. quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady Showing overlap in engaging or willingness to engage in casual sex does not delve into the separate motivations of either, whether simply and/or opportunistically for the sake of instant gratification, or to take a prospective boyfriend/girlfriend or partner for a test drive before becoming emotionally involved with that person. As it turns out both men and women have sex for both those reasons. https://tenleytimes.wordpress.com/2013/04/10/casual-sex-in-the-me-generation/ quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady Btw, "assertiveness" is not stereotypically a male attribute. This is being confused with aggressiveness. (Just like being receptive as the catcher to a pitcher, and just like being submissive, is not the same as being passive.) I find many little girls to be incredibly assertive about what they want from others. Pushier than little boys, even. I never hear the end of it when my nieces want me to take them to the Mall. My nephews will eventually take 'no' or 'later' for an answer. [8D] Both assertive and aggressive are classically attributed to male nature, but like your anecdote points out those prejudices don't actually hold up that well in reality.

GoddessManko -> RE: m f comparisions (3/16/2015 9:48:21 PM)
You're actually not answering her. You're simply being dismissive which tends to be what you do because she pointed out the blaring flaw in the study which states the article itself is very "generalized".

dreamlady -> RE: m f comparisions (3/16/2015 11:46:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady Since you are taking the position of sameness or of no significant differences, then you should forward your link onto the national federation of astrologers to refer to in an upcoming symposium. . . although professional astrologers recognize that innate traits get filtered by gender, despite whatever horoscope similarities may be present. Please tell me you're pulling my leg and understand that astrology's a pile of woo. Yes, I admit I was being facetious and should have inserted a smiley. [:D] quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady 30,000 cases of scientific experts in their fields who are just making stuff up out of thin air for the past decade and a half. That in itself would be noteworthy. [8\|] Notwithstanding, there is the matter of differing motives. That's not actually quite what they're saying. Those are my words, and the 'motives' I'm referring to have to do with the individual or private motivations of respondents, not those conducting the study. (Just in case that's how you interpreted it. I matched your dismissiveness and raised it up a notch to flippancy. [:)]) quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady Showing overlap in engaging or willingness to engage in casual sex does not delve into the separate motivations of either, whether simply and/or opportunistically for the sake of instant gratification, or to take a prospective boyfriend/girlfriend or partner for a test drive before becoming emotionally involved with that person. As it turns out both men and women have sex for both those reasons. https://tenleytimes.wordpress.com/2013/04/10/casual-sex-in-the-me-generation/ I am fully aware that men are motivated to conduct test drives as well, to ascertain whether their sexual partner would be a keeper; but the article reference made was specifically to "interest in casual sex" as in NSA, not to hold bedroom auditions for their next girlfriend. quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady Btw, "assertiveness" is not stereotypically a male attribute. This is being confused with aggressiveness. (Just like being receptive as the catcher to a pitcher, and just like being submissive, is not the same as being passive.) I find many little girls to be incredibly assertive about what they want from others. Pushier than little boys, even. I never hear the end of it when my nieces want me to take them to the Mall. My nephews will eventually take 'no' or 'later' for an answer. [8D] Both assertive and aggressive are classically attributed to male nature, but like your anecdote points out those prejudices don't actually hold up that well in reality. Hormonally, males have a greater capacity for aggression overall, but these are not interchangeable temperaments that fall under masculinity. There is calm assertiveness which is not the least bit aggressive in nature. Assertion is not an act of aggression. Passivity is a state of inertia. Receptivity is not, and neither is submission. (OP's Note to Self: Watch wildlife programming in order to observe body language and behaviorial patterns in various creature species as a frame of reference. :o) As a Dom yourself, I sincerely hope that you would know the difference between being Dominant and acting domineering. DreamLady

Page: << < prev 5 6 7 [8] 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625