RE: Money Slaves

RE: Money Slaves (Full Version)

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

Message

AquaticSub -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 8:31:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mastermozilla Yeah MistressNoName I totally agree and that is the right relationship. And yes I do believe a slave should have a savings account. What im talking about are slaves who give away money to someone either they have never met or will never meet. Like on here they say never send money to another country I feel you need to meet to give the money away to someone who really exists not someone who dont know if they are real or not. Ok... so you only object when they haven't met the Domme yet, but it's ok for a Domme to take all their money once they have met and are in "real life" relationship? Just so I'm clear.

Trampler -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 8:34:10 AM)
Well in regard to online money slaves, there is a sucker born every minute. Those men are not really thinking with their heads. (at least not the one above their shoulders.) lol

Mastermozilla -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 8:34:31 AM)
Yeah because I feel that true relationships are through the meeting of the person. The relationship I feel is brought together when you meet. Then I feel the male can give up all their money to the Domme. But what if even if you get a woman on webcam if someone it turns out a male is paying her to make the slave think that she is real so he will give up money. To meeting the person and spending time together is the key.

Mastermozilla -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 8:35:57 AM)
Yeah Trampler I was only talking about online money slaves. Not when you meet.

LordDarkPleasure -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 8:40:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MistressNoName quote: ORIGINAL: Mastermozilla I am a Male Supremacist and I was wondering about Dommes and the idea of a money slave. I think if you have a slave or slaves you actually need a relationship with them not just them giving you stuff. I would like to know are there any money slaves and if so why do you allow yourself to give all your money away for the chance to never meet your domme. Owners and slaves need relationships not just giving money away. -TheNotSoExtremeMaleSupremacist First off all, I certainly hope that no one is or would be naive enough to give away all of their money just for a chance to meet some Domme...that would be very dangerous and short-sighted. But secondarily, why is it considered a bad thing for a Domme to want to be in financial control of the relationship? And why does your question presume that no relationship exists in these type of arrangements? The type of financial control I am talking about is for the Female Head of the relationship to know exactly what is going on financially within the relationship at all times and to carefully manage and control those finances. I'm not sure what is wrong with that. And I do not advocate that a slave necessarily has no money of his own. A slave should have at the very least a savings account which could be used for relocation, etc in case the relationship fails and the slave is released from service. And/or whatever other practical considerations there may be. All money matters should be discussed at length before the parties enter into a power-exchange relationship. MNN You are right, or at least would if things went the way you put it. But the majority of people I've seen mention or describe financial domination is to simply go shopping. They basically want a sugar daddy, but since they feel dominant, will call that financial domination instead of having a sugar daddy. Now the problem is the person being "dominated" can take this seriously enough to end up in deep trouble. Financial domination is dangerous, just like using a single tail whip if you don't know how to do it, but much sneakier because the sub doesn't have a physical input telling him "holy crap, she doesn't know what she's doing!"

AquaticSub -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 8:41:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mastermozilla Yeah because I feel that true relationships are through the meeting of the person. The relationship I feel is brought together when you meet. Then I feel the male can give up all their money to the Domme. But what if even if you get a woman on webcam if someone it turns out a male is paying her to make the slave think that she is real so he will give up money. To meeting the person and spending time together is the key. Interesting. Does that mean that apply to obedience as well or just money, and what about those who are aroused by giving away their money?

Rover -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 8:42:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LordDarkPleasure You are right, or at least would if things went the way you put it. But the majority of people I've seen mention or describe financial domination is to simply go shopping. They basically want a sugar daddy, but since they feel dominant, will call that financial domination instead of having a sugar daddy. Now the problem is the person being "dominated" can take this seriously enough to end up in deep trouble. Financial domination is dangerous, just like using a single tail whip if you don't know how to do it, but much sneakier because the sub doesn't have a physical input telling him "holy crap, she doesn't know what she's doing!" And you come to this conclusion based upon what data? Or is it just your imagination? John

sambamanslilgirl -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 8:45:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mastermozilla Yeah Trampler I was only talking about online money slaves. Not when you meet. your original post does not make that distinction

Mastermozilla -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 8:50:25 AM)
Ok but I did say relationship and for me mostly that means real life. And obedience is a hard thing to know if it should be just real life. I would always want in the end a face to face but for others its different. It all in what they want. But with money losing so much money could harm you beyond repair compared to obedience. Total obedience can also hurt you.

MistressNoName -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 8:52:10 AM)
Well, to my understanding, what I posted earlier is what financial domination is - plain and simple control and management of the finances within the D/s relationship...Anything else could be considered either a business transaction, a scam or for some, something they agree to do together. In cases where someone is being scammed, hopefully they will wise up before it's too late, or report the crime after the fact. Hopefully, if you suspect that someone you know is being scammed you will warn them and hopefully prevent them from being ripped off...But as far as trying to get some answer to the OP's question/concern, he may just be barking up the wrong tree by posting here...not that he is not allowed to post here, but I tend to think that these scammers he is talking about probably don't spend much time on the forums. I would think that these people are more the take-the-money-and-run types...But I wouldn't know about that, as I'm just your average, everyday paycheck-to-paycheck Domme. MNN

sublizzie -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 8:53:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mastermozilla But with money losing so much money could harm you beyond repair compared to obedience. Total obedience can also hurt you. Total obedience could kill you, which would be beyond repair in my book. Just my thoughts.......

AquaticSub -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 8:54:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mastermozilla Ok but I did say relationship and for me mostly that means real life. And obedience is a hard thing to know if it should be just real life. I would always want in the end a face to face but for others its different. It all in what they want. But with money losing so much money could harm you beyond repair compared to obedience. Total obedience can also hurt you. The problem is that you need to specify. Is a relationship no longer a relationship if it started local and then a partner had to move so it's an online and over the phone relationship? Is a relationship a relationship when it starts as snail mail pen pals? Total obedience can hurt you, particularly when you are with a dominant who is uncaring as to your physical and emotional safety. But since I highly doubt you have ever served a Domme, particularly as a money slave, how do you know exactly how much money is being sent in most cases? I don't claim to know. But I do know that most of the Dommes I've talked to who want money slaves don't want someone stupid enough to squander all their money on them. Just their spending cash.

LordDarkPleasure -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 9:00:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rover And you come to this conclusion based upon what data? Or is it just your imagination? John Discussions and witnessing such activities. They involved a dozen different women doing this. I agree that the ammount can be quite small, but enough to at least observe that what I described does exist. A rule of thumb I've been told is that Dommes being Dommes for the sake of financial domination commonly fall in what I described while those who do it in a more sane approach discuss this when the relation actually exists and not before.

Rover -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 9:08:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LordDarkPleasure quote: ORIGINAL: Rover And you come to this conclusion based upon what data? Or is it just your imagination? John Discussions and witnessing such activities. They involved a dozen different women doing this. I agree that the ammount can be quite small, but enough to at least observe that what I described does exist. A rule of thumb I've been told is that Dommes being Dommes for the sake of financial domination commonly fall in what I described while those who do it in a more sane approach discuss this when the relation actually exists and not before. I think you missed the point. No one disputes that "financial domination" exists. But your portrayal of it as "dangerous" reminds me of all the BDSM related deaths discussed online. If even half of them were true, we'd be up there with coal mining and crab fishing. The point is that you're using online gossip to draw real life conclusions. It's flawed from the outset, in the extreme. John

MistressNoName -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 10:30:12 AM)
Rover, I don;t think LDP missed any points here. I think he is basically agreeing with everyone so far who is saying that this type of financial domination - the kind that seeks to just take advantage of others - what I call scamming, is dangerous. I'm taking him to mean that left in the hands of a Domme who either doesn't know what she is doing or is who is seeking to cause harm by ripping someone off, a sub who otherwise may not know any better or who buys into the con game may be at risk. Or perhaps I have missed the point. I dunno. That's just what I am getting from his posts so far. MNN

FelinePersuasion -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 11:18:21 AM)
Do not presume to speak for EVERY owner and slave as to what they need. You can not speak for every one. Not every one is the same, so not every one NEEDS the SAME thing. Second of all, not all money slaves never see their mistress, some are real life face to face. Do not assume all are online simply handing money to someone they never will or have met. Some might, but again not all are. quote: ORIGINAL: Mastermozilla I am a Male Supremacist and I was wondering about Dommes and the idea of a money slave. I think if you have a slave or slaves you actually need a relationship with them not just them giving you stuff. I would like to know are there any money slaves and if so why do you allow yourself to give all your money away for the chance to never meet your domme. Owners and slaves need relationships not just giving money away. -TheNotSoExtremeMaleSupremacist

MissOchistic -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 11:48:52 AM)
You are aware that there are female financial slaves, yes? And male Dominants who stay at home and have their slave girl support them?

MsPleasure -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 11:56:34 AM)
You are wasting your time with this one. People are going to do what THEY want to do just as YOU are doing. Men have offered themselves to me TOTALLY including finances. Being new I know Im not ready to take responsibility for that yet. These men enjoy pleasing and seeing the pleasure their money brings a Mistress. All they care about it making their Mistress happy. It could be a form of control to the guy with the money, because he can easily get a Mistresses attention. Bottom line, bdsm allows for all variations if its not your thing move on.

Grlwithboy -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 2:15:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterFireMaam For some people, financial domination is a fetish. It excites them to give money to a Female. It excites them to be used in this manner. I don't see it as any better or worse that humiliation play and getting off on being used sexually. It's simply another way to control someone and can be done in a manner that is healthy. Master Fire Bingo. Shall we all discuss how disgusting scat is now, it seems to be the second most unpopular fetish out there.

Lockit -> RE: Money Slaves (6/29/2007 3:25:18 PM)
I have seen many submissives that will not go into a relationship, but wish to give their money. I don't understand it, but it happens. I've even tried to talk to them about it and they insist. Whatever reason they have for doing it, they insist on doing it even when offered more. Just like one who wants to be humiliated. In some ways I don't find that a healthy thing, but for them, it is all they want. Who am I to challenge what makes them happy? I may not agree, but I don't have to deal with them. I don't like people giving a bad name to the lifestyle... but who determines what that is?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.296875