RE: Doms and whores.

RE: Doms and whores. (Full Version)

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

Message

juliaoceania -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/10/2006 10:04:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: zenofeller quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania The human species is the only one that socializes its females not to be protective of their young, but instead to rely on men to do it for them.. although our instinct will usually win out when push comes to shove and we have to protect our kids.... if by protection you mean resorting to violence, the human species tries to socialize all individuals, irrespective of gender, to avoid it, and instead use "violence substitutes" like the police and courts. as to the rest, i am sorry to see you have to push things into this feminist siege mentality atmosphere. the original post discussed something entirely different, it never was a question of "women are so and so". read it again. You are obviously basing this solely on your own culture and society, which when compared with the rest of humanity and their cultural norms and traditions we are a drop in the bucket..note I said human species, not American species. I think you just like to argue and insult and make people feel bad Zeno...

marieToo -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/10/2006 10:12:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: zenofeller quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania The human species is the only one that socializes its females not to be protective of their young, but instead to rely on men to do it for them.. although our instinct will usually win out when push comes to shove and we have to protect our kids.... if by protection you mean resorting to violence, the human species tries to socialize all individuals, irrespective of gender, to avoid it, and instead use "violence substitutes" like the police and courts. as to the rest, i am sorry to see you have to push things into this feminist siege mentality atmosphere. the original post discussed something entirely different, it never was a question of "women are so and so". read it again. I kind of had the impression that it was directed at females, too. I think in my earliest post I stated that gold diggers can be found in both genders. Your OP came off like it was about female dommes taking tribute. Did I misunderstand?

juliaoceania -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/10/2006 10:14:28 PM)
Oh and to make clear, this thread was derailed before I even posted on it. I was responding to someone else's post, but you seem to be singling out me as the train that wrecked your thread.. not true. The post you highlighted was responding to a different conversation. Again, you post something, it opens the thread up to discourse, you cannot control where that train goes after it leaves your station.

zenofeller -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/10/2006 10:22:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania You are obviously basing this solely on your own culture and society, which when compared with the rest of humanity and their cultural norms and traditions we are a drop in the bucket..note I said human species, not American species. I think you just like to argue and insult and make people feel bad Zeno... why are we discussing ad hominems yet again i do not know. however, i am not american. quote: Again, you post something, it opens the thread up to discourse, you cannot control where that train goes after it leaves your station. i have no problem with that. i would more or less like to see ideas exchanged, instead of misunderstandings, no matter how monstrous them ideas might seem. but, that, just as a matter of preference. quote: ORIGINAL: marietoo I kind of had the impression that it was directed at females, too. I think in my earliest post I stated that gold diggers can be found in both genders. Your OP came off like it was about female dommes taking tribute. Did I misunderstand? you misunderstand the scope. i never meant it's in some manner specific to females. the example that started the discussion happened to be a female. thus, obviously, there are females doing it. it is then reasonable to discuss females doing it. does that imply only females are doing it ? no. does that imply all females are doing it ? no. the fact that "yes" would be automatically implied brought the feminism siege mentality comment.

SweetDommes -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/10/2006 10:22:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: zenofeller quote: ORIGINAL: SweetDommes In my opinion, if it's not noticed as much, then it's better hidden - intentionally or not what a conspirationist mindset. so by this logic, flying pigs are alot better hidden than normal pigs, because we have yet to see one. could it be something is not noticed as much because it doesn't actually happen that much ?. Your comparison is flawed. There is no evidence whatsoever of flying pigs - no sightings (outside of cheesy movies and the occational even cheesier commercial), no stories, no fossil evidence, etc. However, we have run across multiples of the male version of what you seem to think only women do - we have talked to other women (both submissive and Dominant) who have also run across males like this ... therefore, there is evidence that they do, indeed, exist - unlike your flying pigs. I still don't think it's a conspirationist mindset - it's just true. We get irritated by them, and then move on. I may post a journal entry or vent to friends if I run across more than 2 or 3 in a short time, but then it's done and over. I move on ... maybe a bit slowly at times, but I do move on. And when I'm with a group of female friends and we start on a bitch session and the topic comes up ... it turns out that others have had the same experiences that Holly and I have. But we don't tend to dwell on the topic for very long ... there are too many other things to bitch about during a bitch session. On the other hand, it seems that there are a lot of guys that only have this topic to bitch about, with respect to women who expect to be totally supported and not have a real job (and by "real" I mean something that pays at least close to what a person would need to survive ... part time jobs count, even though most people couldn't survive on just one part time job). You want to know why women do this ... I want to know why you think that only women do it ...

catize -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/10/2006 10:23:00 PM)
quote: I think you just like to argue and insult and make people feel bad Zeno... He's an attention WHORE; it's a learned behavior and the prognosis is dismal.

zenofeller -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/10/2006 10:27:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SweetDommes quote: ORIGINAL: zenofeller quote: ORIGINAL: SweetDommes In my opinion, if it's not noticed as much, then it's better hidden - intentionally or not what a conspirationist mindset. so by this logic, flying pigs are alot better hidden than normal pigs, because we have yet to see one. could it be something is not noticed as much because it doesn't actually happen that much ?. Your comparison is flawed. i was however not making a comparison. specifically, i was not comparing the males whoring it out to flying pigs. i was giving an example. to the hypothesis you offered, namely, "In my opinion, if it's not noticed as much, then it's better hidden - intentionally or not" i constructed the example "flying pigs are not noticed, are they therefore hidden ?" with the intention to show that, from absence, we can not infer "hidden". it could as well be "inexistent" that you seem to automatically infer "hidden" opens way to the conspiracy mindset comment. because hidding takes intent, whereas inexistence does not, and to prefer an explanation involving intent over a competing explanation not involving intent is, really, the gist of a conspiracy theory.

SweetDommes -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/10/2006 10:28:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: zenofeller quote: ORIGINAL: marietoo I kind of had the impression that it was directed at females, too. I think in my earliest post I stated that gold diggers can be found in both genders. Your OP came off like it was about female dommes taking tribute. Did I misunderstand? you misunderstand the scope. i never meant it's in some manner specific to females. the example that started the discussion happened to be a female. thus, obviously, there are females doing it. it is then reasonable to discuss females doing it. does that imply only females are doing it ? no. does that imply all females are doing it ? no. the fact that "yes" would be automatically implied brought the feminism siege mentality comment. Actually, your OP implies very strongly that it's a 'female thing' ... quote: So, nothing is free, except that doesn't mean she has to pay for getting whatever it is she wants, it's someone else that has to pay for some vague "privilege" of some sort. contorted. when did you last hear about a male dominant requiring "tributes" ? and isn't it strange that half the female self proclaimed "lifestyle domme" seem to ? and slaves work about the same way, it's usually boys that pay their fare and girls that expect the master to do it. there's a distinct yet similar category, of women that don't outright beg for money, but still are looking for something very speciffic. a nice house. a better matress than they can afford. real wine. real kashmir. a better car. lifestyle as in plush couch not necessarily as in sweat and blood. all the bdsm contraption then become something tollerated, for the caviar and mumm, it isn't as bad as it seems, it doesn't last that long, heck, why not sort of thing. so, the question is, do you belive that females more than males whore it out for material advantage in the bdsm community ? or is the above just an internet artefact ? Your focus is quite clear to me, and others apparently - and that is that you seem to think that males do not exhibit the "money grubbing" behavior.

AAkasha -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/10/2006 10:28:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SweetDommes On the other hand, it seems that there are a lot of guys that only have this topic to bitch about, with respect to women who expect to be totally supported and not have a real job (and by "real" I mean something that pays at least close to what a person would need to survive ... part time jobs count, even though most people couldn't survive on just one part time job). You want to know why women do this ... I want to know why you think that only women do it ... Exactly. I think he'd be surprised to see some of the emails I get from subs who want me to support them because they've got wind that I am a career woman and want a stay-at-home-man. My husband does not work and that's what I have chosen. However, until I met him, I found that most men when put in that situation are lazy and want to be catered to. No thanks. Akasha

SweetDommes -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/10/2006 10:31:20 PM)
I explained why your comparison is flawed. For some reason, you seem to think that male "money grubbers" do not exist in any kind of numbers ... you are wrong. Therefore, comparing something that doesn't exist to them is a flawed comparison. I am not denying the existance of female "money grubbers" - I'm simply stating that there are just as many male "money grubbers" ... who don't get nearly the attention that females do.

juliaoceania -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/10/2006 10:37:26 PM)
Here I highlight in bold for you the parts that made it about females and prostitution.. and I am not a feminist of any stripe, I am a humanitarian, which means I want all humans treated decently.. including women. when did you last hear about a male dominant requiring "tributes" ? and isn't it strange that half the female self proclaimed "lifestyle domme" seem to ? and slaves work about the same way, it's usually boys that pay their fare and girls that expect the master to do it. there's a distinct yet similar category, of women that don't outright beg for money, but still are looking for something very speciffic. a nice house. a better matress than they can afford. real wine. real kashmir. a better car. lifestyle as in plush couch not necessarily as in sweat and blood. all the bdsm contraption then become something tollerated, for the caviar and mumm, it isn't as bad as it seems, it doesn't last that long, heck, why not sort of thing. so, the question is, do you belive that females more than males whore it out for material advantage in the bdsm community ? or is the above just an internet artefact ? This above seems to state that women involved with BDSM tend to be whores, and I have seen other posts from you in the past that inferred the same thing, that we all wanted to date you for money.. so I basically married what I knew about you already to what I read here tonight and made an assumption... maybe a right one or a wrong one, but nonetheless you seem to not respect women very much.. perhaps I am mistaken in that thinking. I thought you were an American, sue me, the vast majority posting here are.. I did not mean to offend you, and I take no sense of superiority in being one myself. I still think that your view of how women are socialized is ethnocentric based upon your culture and not on the way women are treated and socialized globally, Although most men are reared that they should protect women even to the point of violence and this is manly, and it is unseemly for women to do the same.. at least this was the way I was raised, and seeing I have more in common with common people I would say this view is more accurate in regard to how the vast majority of us were socialized.. Perhaps this is just in America though? Lastly, I am tired and going to bed soon, post away.

zenofeller -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/10/2006 10:43:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SweetDommes I explained why your comparison is flawed. all you did was fight a straw man. i never made a comparison. my post does not imply it's a female thing. my post implies men do not seem to be doing it as much. not the same thing. now, i think the drama has run it's course, and we can draw the conclusions. namely, a good number of women claim that, in their experience, males money grubbers are just as prevalent as female. admittedly, women are in a much better position to judge sexual behaviour of males. however, some (presumably male?) posters seem to think that moreover the behaviour is more prevalent among females. yet others say that while the matter of prevalence remains unclear, there could be brought an argument for the pervasiveness of social bias, that would act both to corrupt the behaviour of females as well as the way said behaviour is perceived. to this, i have one simple quesiton. will counting profiles of either gender now available on collarme be acceptable ascertainment of fact, and therefore proof ? and a comment, namely that i don't care about societal bias. if it exists, it belongs. i do not believe in reforming society.

scottjk -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/11/2006 1:16:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong and the fact that the male Y chromosome is shrinking doesn't help either.. (really..) Agreed, and I'm wondering if it's due to environmental factors, social factors, or as a species, we're a dead end and the dolphins are the next dominant species.

scottjk -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/11/2006 1:49:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jasmyn Scott ..have you ever entertained the possibility when looking at the animal kingdom ...the point to having an alpha male as opposed to a beta male attached to a pack, is the protection he affords the herd/the pairing, the young? And yes, you are correct ...it comes down to the ability to fend off the male ... please entertain the idea that many female animals do, and will ... and she'll clamp up tigther than a fishes bum and he'll beg off until she is more accomodating. Don't make the assumption it is physical strength that is the winner on the day...as it's often not the case. chuckle Jasmyn, where have I not entertained that possibility? quote: Take the stallion, romanticised as the virile strong stallion protecting his herd ... and yes, indeed he does ... but are you also aware ...that it is the older mares in the pack that have control ...if they do not want him to mate with mares in the herd, at that time, or ever ... they will attack him till he backs off, or round up the herd and move them away from him, chasing him away until he gets the big picture. Which makes me think the animal kingdom is probably more respectful of the feminine in their species than humans. Considering that humans can be compared to equines is pointless, I won't go there. I recommend finding reasons 'why', equines would behave that way other than what might be obvious (or preferential) to you. As for humans treating females badly? Women in the last couple of centries have a pretty good track record when it comes to respecting males. No awards for altruism there, Jasmyn, especially considering the laws we have put in place that empower women at the expense of men in marriage, education, workplace and the raising of our children.(At least in the US. Something I won't go into here, but I'll say they're often abused for personal gain or revenge.) I suggest you focus on the primates, rather than lions, horses and penguins. I don't focus on the what, I also consider the why in animal behaviors. Occam's Razor tends to prevail, rather than romanticised wishful thinking, even if it's against my personal view of what we do as humans. The origional point of my objection was that some one said "Women are conditioned to be submissive and men are conditioned to be dominant." It's pure rubbish in my view. Conditioning had little to do with it. History is replete with examples of men dominating society from the act of might, rather than right. Men did it because they could. It was only recently that we've begun to realize that might not be such a good idea because of the inherent intelligence of women, and that resource would be wasted if we didn't put laws in place where the intelligence of women can be developed and exploited along side the men. (That IS an idealisitic view, btw, but whatever gets the job done as far as I'm concerned.) And that brings another point, the ONLY reason that you can do as you want, by choice, is because laws are in place to ensure that. Without those laws, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. And to be on the record? (Just to avoid misunderstandings) I'm not mysonogistic. I adore women. :) However, I'll fight mysandry (sp?) just as much as mysogeny. (One friend, in fact is in awe of the fact that I DON'T hate women, after hearing a recounting of my history.) I guess what I'm trying to say is, DON'T use the animal kingdom to make comparisons, as far as I'm concerned, the closest comparisons we can make is with the primates. And again, I'll say this, dominance and submission is played out EVERYWHERE in some form in the animal kingdom, however we should focus on the primates to get even close to a comparison, otherwise, it's pointless and misleading.

bignipples2share -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/11/2006 6:07:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong <<Or we can say "screw this" and jerk off to porno ,and then where will you all be?[:D] >> ROFL..! Selling you the porno!!!! OMG, I'm rolling with laughter on this one too. I think that if all men where to stop having sex with women for a month as Home, stated, there would be approx 80% of the female population who would sigh a breath of relief and say FINALLY, a bit of rest! To my understanding, the OP suggested that all women are whores, be they're taking money, or out for the better car, living better, a better couch, etc. Alas, I am a whore, plain and simple. Though I don't want his money, his car, his better couch, etc. I will flourish him sex, along with my body and the rest of me, for the price of his heart, body and mind. I'd hope that he was a whore in the same manner as I am and expect the same. These things are not for purchase to anyone, just someone and I have the choice to decide who it will be, he has the choice to buy into this. If either of us gives more than just that, fine, that's just icing on the cake, but there are some mighty fine cakes out there that require no icing. ~Big

Jasmyn -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/11/2006 6:31:38 AM)
Scott ... nice response ;) and I totally agree with you about the animal kingdom not been a good comparison for humans ... but it was the continued point you were making of animals in dominant/subservient pairings/herds/packs whatever, the male is the dominant one because he has the sheer brute strength to force the act ... my tale of the stallion was to give an example of one of the animal kingdom not actually proving that rule. ... but while we are at it...if it is not okay for me to use an animal to demonstrate dominance & submission that I have seen acted out in the animal world ... but it was okay for you to? It's rhetorical, btw

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/11/2006 6:47:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: marieToo I am not calling you anything. When you make statements about a group of people, you are speaking to each of those people within that group. Since I am within the group you are making generalizations about, you are making statements about me. quote: I wasnt refering to anyone in particular. No, you weren't. But you were referring to people- and I am one of the people in that group to which you were referring. That's the problem with sweeping generalizations- they completely fall apart when you try and apply them in the real world to real people like me. quote: I do not think you lack honor. But I am into financial slavery. This means you either believe that financial slavery is not always dishonorable, or that you believe financial slavery IS always dishonorable, yet somehow also believe I, a financial slave, am honorable- which is a complete contradiction. quote: We are all the sum of our experiences and mine have led me to certain beliefs. Im entitled to those, regardless of who agrees or who tries to railroad me into a personal insult. Its ok to disagree with something a person does, without condemning the person. I completely agree. However, your particular statements were about degrading people themselves- saying they lacked honor, saying they were co-dependent, unhealthy, and other things. You are making statements about what a person does and THEN saying that it makes up part of who a person IS. If you simply said "I think this particular practice sucks" then we'd be having a completely different discussion. What you said was "I think this particular practice sucks AND the people who do it are co-dependent, unhealthy, lack honor, etc." quote: Why is it ok to make a sweeping statement that's positive, but not one thats negative? It's not actually- I've pointed that out to people who have done the same. quote: Maybe thats why you're becoming so frustrated. I'm not. Please try and understand that any emotional response I have to this is "intriguing intellectual discourse and curiousity." I understand that MOST people in the world can't make strong arguments without getting emotional, but trust me, I'm one of them. I'm very well trained at it. Any other emotions you are perceiving here are completely projectioned. quote: "hey, LA, you give some guy your money and he takes it. that makes you a piece of shit". Believe me if thats what I thought I would tell you that. But you did say co-dependent, unhealthy, lack honor and other things. quote: Let me ask you this.... Is there anything that you think is unhealthy or wrong or bad? If so, would you say it here? And would the whole world agree with you?? Of course I think there are things that are unhealthy and wrong and bad. And I would and have told those people "You are being unhealthy if you do this." quote: Who are you to sit all high and lofty and judge whats irrational? The one with the degree in philosophy. That doesn't make me queen of rationality, but it does mean I've trained very well and very hard to understand exactly what rationality is, how it works and how to discern it. I'm smarter than your average bear when it comes to that. quote: Did you just make a sweeping statement about my state of mind? No, it was a very precise and direct statement. quote: Youre judgeing me to be a nut, arent you? You cant say im being irrational without calling me a pyscho. Why dont you just say what you really mean? Being irrational hardly equates to being psychotic. It does mean you are somewhat irrational. This is ok- most people are. quote: Should I say "In my opinion its wrong, but it may not be wrong for everyone?" Would that make it easier to swallow? That goes without saying. when a statement is made, its clear to anyone with half a brain that its the opinion of the person who authored it. I'm afraid simply saying "It's just my opinion" doesn't hold water when it comes to not having responsibility for that opinion. Since you dispute one of my points, I will ask two questions: 1) Do you consider other forms of slavery to be healthy, honorable and not co-dependent? 2) If yes, why do you think financial slavery is necessarily different from those forms of slavery? quote: Look, if we didnt have beliefs, opinions, judgements on what is good/bad, right/wrong, healthy/unhealthy, what foundation would we use to make decisions from? We'd all be bowls of non-judgmental jello. And we've all seen me say hundreds of times that I'm all against being judgemental? Hardly. My issue is that you seem to be holding an irrational and hypocritical judgement about people and what they do. quote: Youre addressing me for something that you feel is wrong. You said I was being irrational and hypocritical. And I still dont think you see me as a piece of shit or as an asshole. I think you just see me as having done something that you dont approve of, no? Being irrational or hypocritical isn't really something to approve or disapprove of. quote: How is that any different than me feeling something you do is wrong? And did you word it in a more palatable way for my benefit?? did you say ...." to me, it seems irrational" ? Or did you just make a sweeping statement that Im being irrational and hypocritical? I'm using the basic laws of logic here.

cloudboy -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/11/2006 6:49:57 AM)
The thread is full of defensive reactions and "well men do XYZ" comments. From a Marxist POV, when the marketplace is comodified, the participants in it become alienated from what they do. When soulful human relations are reduced to the level of capitalist exchanges, things have gone too far and most sensible people don't want to participate. Pro Doms operate below the realm of soulful human relations, which is not altogether bad or evil. Its just to say that they operate in the realm of business, exchange of services, and exchange of needs. LA was trying to say "what's the difference between "slavery" and the marketplace?" My answer remains the same, consenual slavery is closer to if not directly in the realm of higher, soulful, human relationships, where things are personal, passionate, caring, and bonding. Mixing this realm with the business one is quite jarring for many people, hence their aversion to the comodification of sex / intimate relations and the corporate mindset that accompanies such behavior. This is one of the reasons subs have an aversive reaction to Pro Doms. Yes, Pro Doms and prostitutes fulfill a need in the marketplace. This is undeniable, but there is also something depressing about it. It takes a chink out of our ideals. When a guy has to get a date for the prom, he hopes to find a girl who accepts his invitation because she WANTS to go WITH HIM. If the guy has to pay a girl to go with him, it kind of invalidates the whole thing. Such a dichotomy is not rocket science. For guys into cross dressing, diapers, and other deviant behaviors, needless to say it gets harder and harder to find a girl who wants to do those things, so he ends up paying for their participation. Its hard to see the upside of kink when guys are forced into such a corner.

AAkasha -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/11/2006 7:37:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy For guys into cross dressing, diapers, and other deviant behaviors, needless to say it gets harder and harder to find a girl who wants to do those things, so he ends up paying for their participation. Its hard to see the upside of kink when guys are forced into such a corner. For guys into things where the reality is that MOST WOMEN ARE NOT INTO, if you remove the option that pro femdoms offer, you leave him with nothing. Or, you push him into getting into relationships and not being honest about his kink, or manipulating his partner into it. The existence of pro femdoms does not impact the number of women who want to do kink on their own or affect any woman who has these desires of her own. If anything, it makes our (femdoms) kinks legitimate. A guy is going to have just as much trouble finding a woman who will put him into diapers (for free) regardless of whether pros are charging for it. Akasha

Homestead -> RE: Doms and whores. (8/11/2006 7:48:26 AM)
Exactly. I realize that pros exist to serve a fringe market-an overabundance of do-me male subs. They will do what most Dommes refuse to-enabling various kinks to be played out-the bottoms way. I really have no issue with this form of bunsiess. What I do take issue with, is the old female entitlement of cunt for money in more dishonst forms. It may have been a valid leveler in days when females were disempowered-but when you have equal rights under the law-it does make one seem more a whore for insisting on it-over simply desiring a time and attention focus from your male partner. Instead, you have gold diggers. In a word, whores. Lying, game playing whores. I have yet to see a woman who was bi or lesbian pulling this crap with a female lover. It simply wouldn't be tolerated. So if it is not right do do it to another women, when is it with a guy?

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875