RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (Full Version)

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



Message

RockaRolla -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 6:15:57 PM)

In theory, I see no reason why it can't work as a kink. The real problem lies in the people behind the kink, trying to abuse it for their own ends.

You can say the same for any kink, yes?
There's the guy looking for a no-limits "slave" only to use and abuse, knowing she won't talk back. M/s is still a valid dynamic.
There's the woman looking for multiple partners, keeping her lovers in the dark about each other, because she has needs they wouldn't understand. Non-monogamy is still valid.
There's the sub girl looking for her perfect Dom to mold her into the perfect sub, because she lacks the discipline to keep herself employed, fed, clothed, washed, etc. M/s is still a valid dynamic.
There's the guy looking for online subs to "train," when in reality he only wants NSA thrills to hide from his wife. Online D/s is still valid. (This one may draw controversy, but I maintain that it's valid when it works and isn't used to take advantage of people, and when everyone involved is happy.)

Name any kink or fetish, and there's a fuckhead looking to abuse it. With Fin-dommery, this comes in the form of floods of demanding duckfaces and ass shots promising perpetual bitchery in return for their free ride. It can be seen, to a lesser extent, with online domination. But is it possible to handle a findom dynamic in which both partners are fulfilled? Can it really be done? Has it been done? Absolutely.

I will give RS some credit and thanks for putting research into this discussion. Usually the complaints about findommes being fake come from sub males who may or may not be trying to get cheap thrills out of every Domme profile they find and get angry when the ladies don't deliver as requested. But it seems the argument rests on the fact that a findomme dynamic is not documented like the "conventional" kinks. But consider the source. Do we really need the APA to validate what it is we enjoy in the bedroom? Wasn't it not too long ago that homosexuality was considered a mental disorder by this same institution?

As for there being no male findoms, I would think that's one aspect taken for granted in a M/f dynamic. Often it's there, sometimes it isn't. But when it is, nobody thinks twice. Perhaps because it's normal for the guy to have control in the relationship. Blame culture and history.

So I remain convinced that the findom/money pig dynamic is a valid, if not oft-abused and misunderstood, dynamic that can be rewarding for both parties if they're open and responsible about what they want.



ExiledTyrant -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 6:26:11 PM)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-qQ_brIsfY



dreamlady -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 7:55:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Rather than "findomme acceptance" I advocate male sub acceptance, treating them like actual human beings instead of ignoring their words unless there's a tribute attached to the front. Short of getting more actual lifestyle females who are not lesbians into the community, the only way to remove these predators if the numbers can't be skewed by adding women is to take an abrasive stance against the practice itself.

First off, I'm a straight switch. Never been a BDSM provider or involved in the sex industry in any way, shape or form.

I'll cut quick to the chase. Do you go around picketing or protesting other forms of sexual gratification that are readily available and accessible at a price to legions upon legions of horny males just looking to get their freak on, and with nothing else of substance to offer a woman? [>:] The now archaic term for having "honorable intentions" toward us ladies.

Where else can a horny net geek, sometimes married and busy cybercheating on his wife or vanilla girlfriend(s), and/or a short, flabby, bald, usually middle-aged or older dude who's ED-challenged and severely deficient in social skills (i.e., doesn't know how to date single women, doesn't even begin to understand women, has commitment issues as in relationship-impaired) going to interest or attract your average available woman just so he can sexually objectify her at his convenience? You might live in la-la land, but by real world standards. . . it ain't happenin.'

Just telling it like it is, or how I see it.

DreamLady



DesFIP -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 8:11:21 PM)

Years ago this discussion came up and Rochsub (sp) who is alas no longer on the site wrote an explanation of it which totally changed my opinion. He said that quite simply, money is power in this world, and therefore giving over your money was giving power. There's no power exchange in this, since the sub doesn't gain any.

When The Man and I play, I'm bound and helpless. But I gain power from it as much as he. I get to feel as though I am still young and beautiful. Because here's this powerful, competent man who is totally focused on me. Who gets sexual arousal because of me. And that's a hell of a power rush.

But in some ways giving power while not gaining any is a more pure form. There's no quid pro quo, just the pure giving over while expecting and getting nothing back.

And I can easily imagine a scene of this, but it isn't one I'd like to see. It would involve verbal degradation until the guy is just sobbing helplessly at which point she takes his wallet, removes the cash, drops it and walks off without looking back. And no aftercare, of course.



Elnard -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 8:26:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady


quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Rather than "findomme acceptance" I advocate male sub acceptance, treating them like actual human beings instead of ignoring their words unless there's a tribute attached to the front. Short of getting more actual lifestyle females who are not lesbians into the community, the only way to remove these predators if the numbers can't be skewed by adding women is to take an abrasive stance against the practice itself.

First off, I'm a straight switch. Never been a BDSM provider or involved in the sex industry in any way, shape or form.

I'll cut quick to the chase. Do you go around picketing or protesting other forms of sexual gratification that are readily available and accessible at a price to legions upon legions of horny males just looking to get their freak on, and with nothing else of substance to offer a woman? [>:] The now archaic term for having "honorable intentions" toward us ladies.

Where else can a horny net geek, sometimes married and busy cybercheating on his wife or vanilla girlfriend(s), and/or a short, flabby, bald, usually middle-aged or older dude who's ED-challenged and severely deficient in social skills (i.e., doesn't know how to date single women, doesn't even begin to understand women, has commitment issues as in relationship-impaired) going to interest or attract your average available woman just so he can sexually objectify her at his convenience? You might live in la-la land, but by real world standards. . . it ain't happenin.'

Just telling it like it is, or how I see it.

DreamLady


Your very first sentence is entirely the issue. You are a straight female switch. You bring up la la land at the end, but I'm the one living in the real world. What can a straight female switch possibly understand about the political budgeting involved in this situation. It was brought up "it doesn't harm anyone" and it sure is easy as hell to say that from that straight female switch armchair.

La la land is shutting your eyes to the problem. And the reason this is a hot topic in the community is because it DOES affect other people unlike actual lifestyle kinks. By it's nature it is a budgeting issue, a lack of female dominants willing to understand (la la land) that males are not different than females, we are all people, and knowing you don't get to play except if entering a casino and gambling away money to offer a plea is not a healthy direction for the community to go. But part of la la land is being complacent in not understanding because you have no need to understand (straight female switch) so this issue doesn't affect your prospects or seem harmful.

It is NOT and never will be healthy for a community's supply/demand of participants to be so skewed that there is a veritable casino where you pay upfront for a chance to play the game and make your plea on a dating site. You can hide it behind saying its a kink, but the problem CAN be fixed and it's an easy fix. It comes down to a rejection of all that terrible bs and extrapolation about male whatever I just read in what I quoted (because males apparently are distinct from every other species the earth has spawned and female subs also aren't looking to get their needs met)

EVERYONE is looking to get their needs met, it's a matter of a deficit based on being born with a penis that is unjustified and can't get better until we all understand (and have need to understand because we aren't complacent or accepting of scams) that sub men are allowed to have interpersonal value beyond their wallet.

I want to do an exercise and imagine what it would be like to search for a female sub, what you would expect from that as a bisexual switch/domme. Now keep all of those expectations constant, and switch one variable, make that sub a male now, keeping every mental trait and appealing point of value at a constant. This is the problem and this is the need to understand, this is the interpersonal political budgeting issue, and this is why the problem will only get worse if it is swept under the rug.



ResidentSadist -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 8:36:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

Years ago this discussion came up and Rochsub (sp) who is alas no longer on the site wrote an explanation of it which totally changed my opinion. He said that quite simply, money is power in this world, and therefore giving over your money was giving power. There's no power exchange in this, since the sub doesn't gain any.

When The Man and I play, I'm bound and helpless. But I gain power from it as much as he. I get to feel as though I am still young and beautiful. Because here's this powerful, competent man who is totally focused on me. Who gets sexual arousal because of me. And that's a hell of a power rush.

But in some ways giving power while not gaining any is a more pure form. There's no quid pro quo, just the pure giving over while expecting and getting nothing back.

And I can easily imagine a scene of this, but it isn't one I'd like to see. It would involve verbal degradation until the guy is just sobbing helplessly at which point she takes his wallet, removes the cash, drops it and walks off without looking back. And no aftercare, of course.

Good call, I remember that post by Rochsub. Anyone got a link to it?



ThePrincessKali -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 9:25:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard


quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady


quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Rather than "findomme acceptance" I advocate male sub acceptance, treating them like actual human beings instead of ignoring their words unless there's a tribute attached to the front. Short of getting more actual lifestyle females who are not lesbians into the community, the only way to remove these predators if the numbers can't be skewed by adding women is to take an abrasive stance against the practice itself.

First off, I'm a straight switch. Never been a BDSM provider or involved in the sex industry in any way, shape or form.

I'll cut quick to the chase. Do you go around picketing or protesting other forms of sexual gratification that are readily available and accessible at a price to legions upon legions of horny males just looking to get their freak on, and with nothing else of substance to offer a woman? [>:] The now archaic term for having "honorable intentions" toward us ladies.

Where else can a horny net geek, sometimes married and busy cybercheating on his wife or vanilla girlfriend(s), and/or a short, flabby, bald, usually middle-aged or older dude who's ED-challenged and severely deficient in social skills (i.e., doesn't know how to date single women, doesn't even begin to understand women, has commitment issues as in relationship-impaired) going to interest or attract your average available woman just so he can sexually objectify her at his convenience? You might live in la-la land, but by real world standards. . . it ain't happenin.'

Just telling it like it is, or how I see it.

DreamLady


Your very first sentence is entirely the issue. You are a straight female switch. You bring up la la land at the end, but I'm the one living in the real world. What can a straight female switch possibly understand about the political budgeting involved in this situation. It was brought up "it doesn't harm anyone" and it sure is easy as hell to say that from that straight female switch armchair.

La la land is shutting your eyes to the problem. And the reason this is a hot topic in the community is because it DOES affect other people unlike actual lifestyle kinks. By it's nature it is a budgeting issue, a lack of female dominants willing to understand (la la land) that males are not different than females, we are all people, and knowing you don't get to play except if entering a casino and gambling away money to offer a plea is not a healthy direction for the community to go. But part of la la land is being complacent in not understanding because you have no need to understand (straight female switch) so this issue doesn't affect your prospects or seem harmful.

It is NOT and never will be healthy for a community's supply/demand of participants to be so skewed that there is a veritable casino where you pay upfront for a chance to play the game and make your plea on a dating site. You can hide it behind saying its a kink, but the problem CAN be fixed and it's an easy fix. It comes down to a rejection of all that terrible bs and extrapolation about male whatever I just read in what I quoted (because males apparently are distinct from every other species the earth has spawned and female subs also aren't looking to get their needs met)

EVERYONE is looking to get their needs met, it's a matter of a deficit based on being born with a penis that is unjustified and can't get better until we all understand (and have need to understand because we aren't complacent or accepting of scams) that sub men are allowed to have interpersonal value beyond their wallet.

I want to do an exercise and imagine what it would be like to search for a female sub, what you would expect from that as a bisexual switch/domme. Now keep all of those expectations constant, and switch one variable, make that sub a male now, keeping every mental trait and appealing point of value at a constant. This is the problem and this is the need to understand, this is the interpersonal political budgeting issue, and this is why the problem will only get worse if it is swept under the rug.


And this is exactly why finsubs don't chime in. Believe me there are plenty of men out there who want nothing more than to buy gifts or tribute women. It's what they get off on. I can say that 100% certainty. I have two that I see regularly. I am not predatory in any way. They approached me. And honestly both have told me they wished I dehumanize them more. But harsh, judgemental posts like this are exactly what scares finsubs away from discussions such as this.



Gauge -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 9:38:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Your very first sentence is entirely the issue. You are a straight female switch.



I responded to you first, or... did you not notice that? I am a straight male dominant, if that wasn't clear.

quote:



You bring up la la land at the end, but I'm the one living in the real world.



That statement is currently up for debate in my thinking.

quote:



What can a straight female switch possibly understand about the political budgeting involved in this situation.



What political budgeting is involved here? Political budgeting? Seriously? See my statement above.

quote:



It was brought up "it doesn't harm anyone" and it sure is easy as hell to say that from that straight female switch armchair.



That's great. Except for one small point that you may have missed. She didn't say it. I did.

quote:



La la land is shutting your eyes to the problem.



La La land can also be the inability to realize that your opinion does not count as facts.

quote:



And the reason this is a hot topic in the community is because it DOES affect other people unlike actual lifestyle kinks.



"Actual" lifestyle kinks do affect other people sometimes... both positively and negatively.

quote:



By it's nature it is a budgeting issue, a lack of female dominants willing to understand (la la land) that males are not different than females, we are all people, and knowing you don't get to play except if entering a casino and gambling away money to offer a plea is not a healthy direction for the community to go.



Wow. Just... wow. What does this even mean?

quote:



But part of la la land is being complacent in not understanding because you have no need to understand (straight female switch) so this issue doesn't affect your prospects or seem harmful.



Maybe it doesn't seem harmful because it isn't. I stated earlier that I want to understand financial domination (straight male dominant) does this make me a better audience for your diatribe?

quote:



It is NOT and never will be healthy for a community's supply/demand of participants to be so skewed that there is a veritable casino where you pay upfront for a chance to play the game and make your plea on a dating site.



Dude, the only person here that has been skewed is you. Most participants in this thread have had a level-headed discussion about the topic until you came in here spewing vitriol.

Could you please leave the casino analogy out of your posts... it is a terribly poor analogy and does not make the point you want it to make.

quote:



You can hide it behind saying its a kink, but the problem CAN be fixed and it's an easy fix.



The question is from the OP as to financial domination and where it fits, if it fits, in the community of BDSM. This is not the problem you think it is.

quote:



It comes down to a rejection of all that terrible bs and extrapolation about male whatever I just read in what I quoted (because males apparently are distinct from every other species the earth has spawned and female subs also aren't looking to get their needs met)



My brain hurts. Seriously.

quote:



EVERYONE is looking to get their needs met, it's a matter of a deficit based on being born with a penis that is unjustified and can't get better until we all understand (and have need to understand because we aren't complacent or accepting of scams) that sub men are allowed to have interpersonal value beyond their wallet.



I went back... no really, I read the entire thread 4 times just to be certain.... nowhere has anyone indicated that ALL submissive males are financially submissive, or are not allowed to have interpersonal value. Nowhere... except once... you. You said it. Just you.

Let that sink in for a moment.

quote:



I want to do an exercise and imagine what it would be like to search for a female sub, what you would expect from that as a bisexual switch/domme. Now keep all of those expectations constant, and switch one variable, make that sub a male now, keeping every mental trait and appealing point of value at a constant. This is the problem and this is the need to understand, this is the interpersonal political budgeting issue, and this is why the problem will only get worse if it is swept under the rug.



I would like to do an exercise too. I would like to imagine what it would be like if you would simply stop talking in absolutes, realize that you are railing your opinion around like it is some sword that has been blessed by God Himself and just relax a bit. I like this exercise. No, I really, really do.

There is little doubt in my mind that financial domination, whether or not it is embraced by the entirety of the BDSM community and even eventually works its way into the diagnostic guidelines for a proper fetish, will continue to exist regardless of how many folks complain, moan or bitch about it. Someone is making money... someone is losing money... which means someone is going to bitch somewhere along the line.

ResidentSadist, I apologize for engaging this member and potentially derailing your thread. I am not going to sit idly by and watch someone vomit on the floor.




Gauge -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 9:40:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ThePrincessKali

And this is exactly why finsubs don't chime in. Believe me there are plenty of men out there who want nothing more than to buy gifts or tribute women. It's what they get off on. I can say that 100% certainty. I have two that I see regularly. I am not predatory in any way. They approached me. And honestly both have told me they wished I dehumanize them more. But harsh, judgemental posts like this are exactly what scares finsubs away from discussions such as this.



Forgive my tone, but do not let someone run you off because they are using language you find upsetting. I am finding the discussion very interesting, losing your input would be unfortunate.



dreamlady -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 10:24:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard
Your very first sentence is entirely the issue. You are a straight female switch. You bring up la la land at the end, but I'm the one living in the real world. What can a straight female switch possibly understand about the political budgeting involved in this situation. It was brought up "it doesn't harm anyone" and it sure is easy as hell to say that from that straight female switch armchair.

And you are somehow more qualified to weigh in on this matter, because you are. . . a lesbian slave. Who is young enough to be my daughter, I might add, since I have twice the timespan of nitty-gritty life experience than you do. You could argue that yours is more compressed than mine -- but we're not here for a member-measuring contest, now are we. [:D]

You took my 'la-la land' remark personally. Why? Are you actually a male sub seeking a Domme? Are there lesbian finDommes with whom you take issue? If so, nobody is "forcing" you to enter into a power exchange dynamic with them with the money-vending machine being the power vehicle of choice.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

La la land is shutting your eyes to the problem. And the reason this is a hot topic in the community is because it DOES affect other people unlike actual lifestyle kinks. By it's nature it is a budgeting issue, a lack of female dominants willing to understand (la la land) that males are not different than females, we are all people, and knowing you don't get to play except if entering a casino and gambling away money to offer a plea is not a healthy direction for the community to go. But part of la la land is being complacent in not understanding because you have no need to understand (straight female switch) so this issue doesn't affect your prospects or seem harmful.

In case you hadn't read my earlier posts on this thread, I have not been advocating or turning a blind eye to this controversial subject. I have actually presented arguments against findom/mery (by either Dommes or Doms) and BDSM Topping-for-hire as being bona fide expressions of D/s, as opposed to fantasy make-believe D/s. This is based on my personal opinion of a D/s ownership commitment being a critical component of this relationship dynamic. A customer or client is not "owned" by a Mistress and does not engage in more than a temporal authority exchange where he pretends to relinquish control when his Domme provider decides which items on his do-me list are featured on her BDSM Topping menu.

By [totally] 'straight' I was making it clear that I have a 100% vested romantic interest in males, whether they be submissive, switch or 'nilla. (I am Domme-leaning, so I haven't been with a Dom before.) I also have many male sub friends who are not into financial domination and are frustrated by not being able to find a lifestyle Domme to be their Mistress who either isn't already married or has a primary partner, and they don't want to settle for playing second fiddle. Do you take exception to the scarcity of available monogamous, heterosexual Dommes for them to date seriously in the hopes of becoming their sub husband, and what would be your "budgeting" solution to that state of affairs? [8|] A rallying cry of anti-heteroflexibility and anti-polyamory or consensual polysexuality, or anti-open relationship? Good luck with that.

Furthermore, you don't know my history, and it wasn't relevant to the discussion other than to point out that I have no dog in this fight and never have. I have been an FLR Domme for much, much longer than I have been a switch, if you really must know. In fact, I would like to boycott all non-FLR male subs who aren't marriage-minded. There, that should do it, on par with your own feeble protests.

Repeated for emphasis:
quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

males are not different than females

Pardon my French, but are you fucking crazy? Let us know when your barge floating on the river de Nile disembarks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

EVERYONE is looking to get their needs met, it's a matter of a deficit based on being born with a penis that is unjustified and can't get better until we all understand (and have need to understand because we aren't complacent or accepting of scams) that sub men are allowed to have interpersonal value beyond their wallet.

I want to do an exercise and imagine what it would be like to search for a female sub, what you would expect from that as a bisexual switch/domme. Now keep all of those expectations constant, and switch one variable, make that sub a male now, keeping every mental trait and appealing point of value at a constant. This is the problem and this is the need to understand, this is the interpersonal political budgeting issue, and this is why the problem will only get worse if it is swept under the rug.

I must have missed the part where guns were being held to these men's heads. Big heads. Or little heads, whichever one they do most of their thinking with, which is not limited to only submissives. [8D]

DreamLady



Elnard -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 10:29:18 PM)

The reason I didn't respond to male dom guy is because in addition of him having nothing of value to contribute to dissecting the arguments other than going sentence for sentence so gives the illusion of some sort of dissertation (no, or my brain hurts, or nuh uh, or politics seriously?) he's within a section of a culture that is as foreign and unimportant to this topic that the opinion has no value to me. This is why I don't consult or ask an opinion or care what a baseball analyst thinks about interior car design. A straight male dom has no intersect, raising awareness of this dynamic to a male dom is about as useful to me as raising awareness of French syntax to Japanese schoolchildren. Not only is it not constructive to the cause in any way, but in addition to it being a waste of energy, he's also clearly not ready to discuss the issue because it hurts his brain and he's still somewhere figuring out how to make sense of the world that he thinks politics is a word that applies to only governments.

Also waiting for those male finsubs to chime in. My bet is on they are glad this issue is being brought up. Them contacting you is not indicative of them wanting it. It's indicative of them having no possible moves to meet a dominant other than paying more money for more attention. Of course they are going to contact you. It's not unreasonable to expect if someone signs up on a dating website, subculture or not, they are looking for someone. It's also not unreasonable to expect that because sub men, despite having societal characteristics of the submissive role that is often pursued in women, are not pursued by domme women. It is then not unreasonable to assume that on a dating website, if they get no messages and want to utilize the function of meeting people, and the only avenue is to pay for it, then they will do so. Remember they signed up to meet people, so they aren't going to take a half measure to sign up, then not talk to anyone and go play tennis. The part that makes you believe they want this is they've learned its the only way they get responses.

No one is going to contact them because they aren't gay male subs contacted by gay masters. They've learned the only way they will get any sort of response is to put money up front, and it becomes a self feeding cycle that invites more disingenuous scammers into the community, and perpetuates a belief that because so many men contact you offering to pay you money out of the blue, that men like this. The problem is if gay masters can find value in gay subs without demanding tribute to plea a case for a relationship, then this is a desire that exists across all humans, and a value that is sought and had in everyone. That's why the problem is also easy to fix, understanding to Female Dominants (not baseball statisticians in Montreal like this one guy up here) that the market for submissives is larger than they think it is, and that it's a better place for everyone when value is normalized and predators aren't given the chance to come in and profit off gender stereotypes.



Elnard -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 10:34:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady


quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard
Your very first sentence is entirely the issue. You are a straight female switch. You bring up la la land at the end, but I'm the one living in the real world. What can a straight female switch possibly understand about the political budgeting involved in this situation. It was brought up "it doesn't harm anyone" and it sure is easy as hell to say that from that straight female switch armchair.

And you are somehow more qualified to weigh in on this matter, because you are. . . a lesbian slave. Who is young enough to be my daughter, I might add, since I have twice the timespan of nitty-gritty life experience than you do. You could argue that yours is more compressed than mine -- but we're not here for a member-measuring contest, now are we. [:D]

You took my 'la-la land' remark personally. Why? Are you actually a male sub seeking a Domme? Are there lesbian finDommes with whom you take issue? If so, nobody is "forcing" you to enter into a power exchange dynamic with them with the money-vending machine being the power vehicle of choice.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

La la land is shutting your eyes to the problem. And the reason this is a hot topic in the community is because it DOES affect other people unlike actual lifestyle kinks. By it's nature it is a budgeting issue, a lack of female dominants willing to understand (la la land) that males are not different than females, we are all people, and knowing you don't get to play except if entering a casino and gambling away money to offer a plea is not a healthy direction for the community to go. But part of la la land is being complacent in not understanding because you have no need to understand (straight female switch) so this issue doesn't affect your prospects or seem harmful.

In case you hadn't read my earlier posts on this thread, I have not been advocating or turning a blind eye to this controversial subject. I have actually presented arguments against findom/mery (by either Dommes or Doms) and BDSM Topping-for-hire as being bona fide expressions of D/s, as opposed to fantasy make-believe D/s. This is based on my personal opinion of a D/s ownership commitment being a critical component of this relationship dynamic. A customer or client is not "owned" by a Mistress and does not engage in more than a temporal authority exchange where he pretends to relinquish control when his Domme provider decides which items on his do-me list are featured on her BDSM Topping menu.

By [totally] 'straight' I was making it clear that I have a 100% vested romantic interest in males, whether they be submissive, switch or 'nilla. (I am Domme-leaning, so I haven't been with a Dom before.) I also have many male sub friends who are not into financial domination and are frustrated by not being able to find a lifestyle Domme to be their Mistress who either isn't already married or has a primary partner, and they don't want to settle for playing second fiddle. Do you take exception to the scarcity of available monogamous, heterosexual Dommes for them to date seriously in the hopes of becoming their sub husband, and what would be your "budgeting" solution to that state of affairs? [8|] A rallying cry of anti-heteroflexibility and anti-polyamory or consensual polysexuality, or anti-open relationship? Good luck with that.

Furthermore, you don't know my history, and it wasn't relevant to the discussion other than to point out that I have no dog in this fight and never have. I have been an FLR Domme for much, much longer than I have been a switch, if you really must know. In fact, I would like to boycott all non-FLR male subs who aren't marriage-minded. There, that should do it, on par with your own feeble protests.

Repeated for emphasis:
quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

males are not different than females

Pardon my French, but are you fucking crazy? Let us know when your barge floating on the river de Nile disembarks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

EVERYONE is looking to get their needs met, it's a matter of a deficit based on being born with a penis that is unjustified and can't get better until we all understand (and have need to understand because we aren't complacent or accepting of scams) that sub men are allowed to have interpersonal value beyond their wallet.

I want to do an exercise and imagine what it would be like to search for a female sub, what you would expect from that as a bisexual switch/domme. Now keep all of those expectations constant, and switch one variable, make that sub a male now, keeping every mental trait and appealing point of value at a constant. This is the problem and this is the need to understand, this is the interpersonal political budgeting issue, and this is why the problem will only get worse if it is swept under the rug.

I must have missed the part where guns were being held to these men's heads. Big heads. Or little heads, whichever one they do most of their thinking with, which is not limited to only submissives. [8D]

DreamLady


Oh ok you are one of THOSE people who think men and women are different. Barring some asinine semantics like "well one has a penis" because that's not sound categorical logic, there's nothing we can debate.

You know almond nuts are not cashew nuts, you can go into asinine semantics about how they are different but people are willing to follow the knowledge tree high enough to consider them similar enough to be both nuts. But they are not the same right because we can validate some stupid criteria like one starts with an "a" and one starts with a "c". That goes back to the point of us two having nothing more to talk about because you are clearly one of those misandrist who somehow believe men and women are different.



dreamlady -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 11:04:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard
quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady

By [totally] 'straight' I was making it clear that I have a 100% vested romantic interest in males, whether they be submissive, switch or 'nilla. (I am Domme-leaning, so I haven't been with a Dom before.) I also have many male sub friends who are not into financial domination and are frustrated by not being able to find a lifestyle Domme to be their Mistress who either isn't already married or has a primary partner, and they don't want to settle for playing second fiddle. Do you take exception to the scarcity of available monogamous, heterosexual Dommes for them to date seriously in the hopes of becoming their sub husband, and what would be your "budgeting" solution to that state of affairs? [8|] A rallying cry of anti-heteroflexibility and anti-polyamory or consensual polysexuality, or anti-open relationship? Good luck with that.

Oh ok you are one of THOSE people who think men and women are different. Barring some asinine semantics like "well one has a penis" because that's not sound categorical logic, there's nothing we can debate.

. . . That goes back to the point of us two having nothing more to talk about because you are clearly one of those misandrist who somehow believe men and women are different.

So, you missed the part where I state in no uncertain terms that I am romantically, erotically, and sexually attracted to men. Just men. (Well, just one man, since I'm a one-man woman.) I am the furtherest woman from a misandrist that you will probably (not) ever meet.

Not to mention, almonds and cashews are not seamlessly interchangeable in a recipe and do not have the same flavor or properties. You are thinking of substitution, where ingredients may be alike in many ways, but are not the same. (Go mindlessly substituting peanuts for cashews and see what happens with somebody who has a peanut allergy. Not. the. same.)

I must have also missed the part where men and women are so alike that it shouldn't matter to you who you get with, then, should it? After all, we're interchangeably the same according to your philosophical outlook. Why do you even have a gender preference, in that case, dearie? [:-]

DreamLady



Elnard -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 11:13:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady


quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard
quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady

By [totally] 'straight' I was making it clear that I have a 100% vested romantic interest in males, whether they be submissive, switch or 'nilla. (I am Domme-leaning, so I haven't been with a Dom before.) I also have many male sub friends who are not into financial domination and are frustrated by not being able to find a lifestyle Domme to be their Mistress who either isn't already married or has a primary partner, and they don't want to settle for playing second fiddle. Do you take exception to the scarcity of available monogamous, heterosexual Dommes for them to date seriously in the hopes of becoming their sub husband, and what would be your "budgeting" solution to that state of affairs? [8|] A rallying cry of anti-heteroflexibility and anti-polyamory or consensual polysexuality, or anti-open relationship? Good luck with that.

Oh ok you are one of THOSE people who think men and women are different. Barring some asinine semantics like "well one has a penis" because that's not sound categorical logic, there's nothing we can debate.

. . . That goes back to the point of us two having nothing more to talk about because you are clearly one of those misandrist who somehow believe men and women are different.

So, you missed the part where I state in no uncertain terms that I am romantically, erotically, and sexually attracted to men. Just men. (Well, just one man, since I'm a one-man woman.) I am the furtherest woman from a misandrist that you will probably (not) ever meet.

Not to mention, almonds and cashews are not seamlessly interchangeable in a recipe and do not have the same flavor or properties. You are thinking of substitution, where ingredients may be alike in many ways, but are not the same. (Go mindlessly substituting peanuts for cashews and see what happens with somebody who has a peanut allergy. Not. the. same.)

I must have also missed the part where men and women are so alike that it shouldn't matter to you who you get with, then, should it? After all, we're interchangeably the same according to your philosophical outlook. Why do you even have a gender preference, in that case, dearie? [:-]

DreamLady


No you clearly are a misandrist. Misandry/misogyny is not mutually exclusive with being repelled or attracted to that sex. Again your problem is your insistent on semantics that don't matter, and it makes our debate useless. By our nature we will clash. You are hiding behind justifying language instead of paralleling the actual reasoning.

You went through so much trouble to describe how almonds and cashews are not the same because you forgot I used it as a segway. Playing devil's advocate and saying I agree with you, that they are not the same because you were able to zone in on elements as specific as you needed to get to prove difference, you just sunk your own argument about men and women being the same because you had to reach so far to find elements that prove almonds and cashews are not subatomically the same substance.

You have to understand how there's no way for us to agree. You used a similar argument strategy by saying no one is forcing anyone with a gun to their head to come up here to describe needs (again with your semantic reliance rather than physical/natural world reliance for your argument)

So devil's advocate once again, if I were to reduce that argument down to absurdity (as you have done with the gun) but only I took it even further than you did all the way back to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, no one needs to do anything with a gun pointed to their head.

Security is level 2 on the pyramid.
Physiology is level 1 on the pyramid.

I reduced it further so I win. This is essentially why we are not compatible and we will be using our rhetoric as enemies instead of allies, which is a shame when a subculture is already at such a fringe.




Gauge -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 11:22:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

The reason I didn't respond to male dom guy is because in addition of him having nothing of value to contribute to dissecting the arguments other than going sentence for sentence so gives the illusion of some sort of dissertation



You sure you want to pick this fight? I have plenty to offer, I have proffered questions, proposed scenarios and discussed opinions. You, on the other hand, have shouted the loudest that you are right, everyone else is wrong and we all should listen because you have posted. Not only that, when the questions have been posed to you, you become dismissive, while I do maintain that if you put your personal bias aside, you might actually have something of value to contribute. I live in a dream world however and I am subject to fits of delusional thinking based on the fact that I truly believe people can be reasonable when they want to be.

I give the illusion of some sort of dissertation by accident more than you have done on purpose.

quote:



(no, or my brain hurts, or nuh uh, or politics seriously?) he's within a section of a culture that is as foreign and unimportant to this topic that the opinion has no value to me.



Just because my opinion has no value to you specifically, does not mean that my opinions are then somehow magically invalidated. I have as much to offer on this topic as anyone... up to, and including you.

quote:



This is why I don't consult or ask an opinion or care what a baseball analyst thinks about interior car design. A straight male dom has no intersect, raising awareness of this dynamic to a male dom is about as useful to me as raising awareness of French syntax to Japanese schoolchildren.



That's nice. I didn't need my awareness raised on this topic, I already know about it, but wish to learn more because of my own insatiable curiosity. I guess that is a terrible thing in your world. Seeing people as invalid because what you have to offer is so much better than anyone else.

quote:



Not only is it not constructive to the cause in any way, but in addition to it being a waste of energy, he's also clearly not ready to discuss the issue because it hurts his brain and he's still somewhere figuring out how to make sense of the world that he thinks politics is a word that applies to only governments.



Let's make something expressly clear, your logic hurts my brain, the topic does not. I also possess the command of a fairly decent vocabulary and I have the intellect to use it... sometimes with difficulty in the proper mechanics, but with relative clarity. I know the word "politics" and frankly, you used it, I did not. Somehow you took me to question how it related to governmental politics, it seems that you believe that you are the Amazing Kreskin and can know what I am thinking. Good luck with that. What am I thinking right now?

quote:



Also waiting for those male finsubs to chime in. My bet is on they are glad this issue is being brought up. Them contacting you is not indicative of them wanting it.



I don't want them to contact me, I would like to hear from them, on this thread, dealing with this topic, and participating in a reasonable fashion. I do believe that others desire this as well. If they are so glad this is being brought up, why have they not flocked to this thread? Why must it be you, a poorly chosen spokesman, that is their champion?

quote:



It's indicative of them having no possible moves to meet a dominant other than paying more money for more attention. Of course they are going to contact you. It's not unreasonable to expect if someone signs up on a dating website, subculture or not, they are looking for someone. It's also not unreasonable to expect that because sub men, despite having societal characteristics of the submissive role that is often pursued in women, are not pursued by domme women. It is then not unreasonable to assume that on a dating website, if they get no messages and want to utilize the function of meeting people, and the only avenue is to pay for it, then they will do so. Remember they signed up to meet people, so they aren't going to take a half measure to sign up, then not talk to anyone and go play tennis. The part that makes you believe they want this is they've learned its the only way they get responses.



OK. They can send me a dollar that I will instantly refund to them, that way they can have my attention because they payed me. I bet if just one financial submissive posted, they would get responses, for free. Free I tell you. Free. No money. Free.

Free.

quote:



No one is going to contact them because they aren't gay male subs contacted by gay masters. They've learned the only way they will get any sort of response is to put money up front, and it becomes a self feeding cycle that invites more disingenuous scammers into the community, and perpetuates a belief that because so many men contact you offering to pay you money out of the blue, that men like this. The problem is if gay masters can find value in gay subs without demanding tribute to plea a case for a relationship, then this is a desire that exists across all humans, and a value that is sought and had in everyone. That's why the problem is also easy to fix, understanding to Female Dominants (not baseball statisticians in Montreal like this one guy up here) that the market for submissives is larger than they think it is, and that it's a better place for everyone when value is normalized and predators aren't given the chance to come in and profit off gender stereotypes.



Yeah, we're done here. You just want to espouse your doctrine and soil yourself in admiring how fucking clever you are. I have news for you, you aren't clever, in fact, you are transparent.

Good day to you.



dreamlady -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/13/2015 11:43:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Misandry/misogyny is not mutually exclusive with being repelled or attracted to that sex.


You of all people would know. A misogynist "lesbian." "Lesbian slave," no less. This makes you more knowledgeable than a straight Dom like Gauge, according to your logic.

Let's look at the commonalities. Gauge is a Dominant and can relate to other Dominants better than you can. He is a straight male and can relate to other straight males. You ostensibly aren't any of the three.
You claim to be a slave, so you can relate to finslaves? To lesbian finDommes? Nope. Gauge has you beat by 3 to 1.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Security is level 2 on the pyramid.
Physiology is level 1 on the pyramid.

I reduced it further so I win.

No, you didn't. You merely went from a food group to needs pyramid.
I proclaim Gauge the winner by a landslide! [sm=lol.gif]

DreamLady



JVoV -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/14/2015 12:16:44 AM)

A lot of guys at a certain age and stature become finsubs.

Though the court usually calls it 'alimony'.



Elnard -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/14/2015 12:46:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady


quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Misandry/misogyny is not mutually exclusive with being repelled or attracted to that sex.


You of all people would know. A misogynist "lesbian." "Lesbian slave," no less. This makes you more knowledgeable than a straight Dom like Gauge, according to your logic.

Let's look at the commonalities. Gauge is a Dominant and can relate to other Dominants better than you can. He is a straight male and can relate to other straight males. You ostensibly aren't any of the three.
You claim to be a slave, so you can relate to finslaves? To lesbian finDommes? Nope. Gauge has you beat by 3 to 1.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Security is level 2 on the pyramid.
Physiology is level 1 on the pyramid.

I reduced it further so I win.

No, you didn't. You merely went from a food group to needs pyramid.
I proclaim Gauge the winner by a landslide! [sm=lol.gif]

DreamLady



You should know by now you aren't in the same league as me. It takes me seconds to find your fault. First of all you created a problem of induction, in which you assume to know all the elements. Your logic fails in that you assume there are only 4 elements in the set, in which I possess one and that other guy possesses 3.

I'm not trying to convince you, as we know we are opponents. I'm raising awareness in my camp now, to help them understand, as I already know you aren't going to ever sway. Ever seen a Kent Hovind debate at a college?

The second assumption you make is that I am a female lesbian slave, which I have never confirmed or denied. What I have confirmed is that I can see further than you can, like someone standing higher up that can see when a car wreck is going to happen. Normally it is a douchey thing to do, but people are actively being hurt by the findom community so sometimes I takes someone who is at a higher vantage point to be a jerk and say (you go here and trust me on it and you go here) so that car wreck way down the road that you can't see doesn't happen.

Welcome to findomme. That is that car wreck on the horizon, if you can't tell by how often this discussion pops up. Now trust me and move to your left.



Moderator3 -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/14/2015 1:05:19 AM)

Oh boy. I guess I have some catching up to do.



NookieNotes -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/14/2015 2:48:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gauge

One other point that I have yet to bring up is that financial domination appears to be a one way street, meaning simply that it appears that the dominants are exclusively female and the submissives are exclusively male. I find that to be oddly out of proportion respective to other parts of BDSM.

(In before ET declares himself the first male financial dominant)


Bingo. This is why this is one instance where it's not about kink acceptance, it's about protecting straight male subs and putting a foot down and pushing against this findomme stuff ever being accepted in the community.


Wow. Bitterness boner, much?

quote:

It is a one way street, fin"subs" don't enjoy it.


You know this, how?

quote:

They recognize patterns, that they only gain any response attention when there is a dollar sign attached to get their message through the door. How many female subs have to tribute female dommes to get an in? Didn't think so. It's a predatory practice based on horribly skewed and under-represented ratios of male slaves to female dominants.


Actually, you are undermining your own argument by misconstruing the facts.

There are about as many female dominants as there are male subs/slaves. Where the issue skews is that there are more male fetish-wanters (kinky fuckers without much, if any submissiveness in them) than there are female fetish-providers.

quote:

This is why there are no male findoms. Because the practice itself is so farcical there has to be a completely unsustainable ratio in play for someone to give up money just for a chance to be acknowledged.


You are saying three things here, none of which are related:

1. No male findoms. As we have already discussed, there is another thread, recently posted, about male dominants demanding tribute. Also, in gay culture, there are many, many male finsubs.

2. Because the practice itself is so farcical there has to be a completely unsustainable ratio in play. And yet, it exists, and works out long term for many. That's like saying poly relationships don't work, because I tried poly, and it exploded in my face.

3. for someone to give up money just for a chance to be acknowledged. Actually, that is not how real findomming works, anymore than real domination involves blow jobs for free.

quote:

This is the problem and this is how it differentiates from kink acceptance. Rather than "findomme acceptance" I advocate male sub acceptance, treating them like actual human beings instead of ignoring their words unless there's a tribute attached to the front.


Ah. Here is the crux of the matter. Self-hate and bitterness.

Thank you for at least posting honestly about your own troubles coming across as an interesting enough human for the femdoms you contact to engage with.

quote:

Short of getting more actual lifestyle females who are not lesbians into the community, the only way to remove these predators if the numbers can't be skewed by adding women is to take an abrasive stance against the practice itself.


Or, I don't know, how about just not paying them? Seems adult enough.

The whine is strong in you.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard
Your very first sentence is entirely the issue. You are a straight female switch.


And yet, you were railing about there not being enough "actual lifestyle females who are not lesbians."

Like dreamlady. Like me.

quote:

It was brought up "it doesn't harm anyone" and it sure is easy as hell to say that from that straight female switch armchair.


Apparently, from this thread, that's easy to say from many armchairs. Or are you not reading all of the replies?

quote:

And the reason this is a hot topic in the community is because it DOES affect other people unlike actual lifestyle kinks.


How does this affect other people, "unlike actual lifestyle kinks"? If a woman were to take money from a man, that he offered willingly, how is that different from a woman getting oral from a man, that he offered willingly?

quote:

By it's nature it is a budgeting issue, a lack of female dominants willing to understand (la la land) that males are not different than females,


As a bisexual woman, I can assure you, males ARE different from females. I actually tend to prefer males, myself.

quote:

we are all people,


Yes. We are. And yet, for some reason, men have more of a problem treating others as "people," while simultaneously expousing their own peoplehood, usually when they want something from those other "people."

quote:

It is NOT and never will be healthy for a community's supply/demand of participants to be so skewed that there is a veritable casino where you pay upfront for a chance to play the game and make your plea on a dating site.


Your logic is flawed.

1. CollarSpace is free.
2. There are many female dominants on CollarSpace who are not finding what they seek.
3. They are rarely being approached, even, for whatever reason.
4. You may make your plea to any of them, and likely be welcomed, if you have even a modicum of submissiveness and personality.

Now, if you are looking for photos that would make Kim Kardashian envious, and you look like Jason Alexander, with the personality of a mossy rock, well, then, you are likely going to have to pay, one way or another, to make any headway.

So, that's all on you, buddy. If you are, of course, actually submissive, and not just looking to get your kinks met.

quote:

EVERYONE is looking to get their needs met, it's a matter of a deficit based on being born with a penis that is unjustified and can't get better until we all understand (and have need to understand because we aren't complacent or accepting of scams) that sub men are allowed to have interpersonal value beyond their wallet.


Wait? Sub men have value? Now, WHO would have thunk?

Seriously? Are you reading what you're writing, even? Do you actually bother to get to know any female dominants, besides trying to get your kink met? Ever read a profile of a practicing female dominant? Ever read journal entries, essays, poetry by female dominants?

It sounds to me like you spend a lot of time online, in a femdom fantasy world. Because the picture you are painting here is NOT reality.

quote:

I want to do an exercise and imagine what it would be like to search for a female sub, what you would expect from that as a bisexual switch/domme. Now keep all of those expectations constant, and switch one variable, make that sub a male now, keeping every mental trait and appealing point of value at a constant. This is the problem and this is the need to understand, this is the interpersonal political budgeting issue, and this is why the problem will only get worse if it is swept under the rug.


You are not being clear.

I am a bisexual domme. I actually specifically speak to both men and women in my profile:

quote:

For the men:

I am open to the possibility of partnering with a dominant man for love and co-topping, but that would take a truly spectacular man and dominant to earn my heart and mind.

You are a driven, sometimes-aggressive submissive male/slave who enjoys your masculinity and surrendering to me.

You are also preferably heteroflexible or bi. It helps satisfy my greed, LOL! That said, a VERY suitable straight man could be considered.

For the women:

You enjoy courtship and being treated like a woman, being told you are a good girl, and beautiful, while sparring intellectually, and letting your hair down for fun.

You enjoy spending time with women and men, and feeling that rush of sexual energy running through you all day long.

You may be a lesbian or not interested in men sexually. That's possible for the right candidate. Although I would love a completely bisexual girl (who finds my Pet attractive as well), there need not be contact between he and you. However, there would need to be comfort in nakedness and side-by-side serving, with the understanding that no boundaries would ever be crossed.

For all ya'll (in the south, yannow):

You are submissive, and wanting to revel in the deep trust and affection that goes along with offering another your mind, heart, and body.

You get hot texting with your partner(s) to create the sexual tension leading to an intense evening together.

You realize that creating a red hot D/s relationship is often not simple, but it should feel easy, fun and sexy, and the rewards are beyond most people's wildest imaginations.

You realize that attraction does rely at least partially on looks.

Your looks are not all I am interested in, though. You must be smart, curious, interesting, and communicate well to catch my eye.

We will take it slow. I am not interested in collaring you within the week, or beating you black and blue on our first meeting (if ever). I am very into the mental aspects of D/s, and I am the primary leader. I will take your mind for a journey of sexual freedom, self-love, and finding yourself in trust and adoration for your domme.


So, please, clarify for me, where in that males are set aside as less-than, or treated as if they do not have needs and desires.

Because, hell, if I'm part of the problem, and don't know it, then I should be schooled, yes?



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125