RE: my take on financial domination

RE: my take on financial domination (Full Version)

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

Message

LaTigresse -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 4:35:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Venatrix Why are pro-dommes and financial dommes so defensive about what they do? If they really feel comfortable about the service they provide, why so many posts justifying the ins and outs of it? "Oh, we're not prositutes, we take only the best, the sub doesn't control the scene, I deserve money because I'm spending my time on these guys, blah, blah, blah." Honestly, the more I hear about pro-dommes and financial dommes, the sadder I find them. For the same reason you see female dominants getting bitchy and snarky at each other, male dominants strutting about trying to prove they are the dommiest dominant on the planet while arguing stupidity and female sub/slaves arguing who is more submissive........etc etc etc Insecurities coming out as silly childish behaviour. Not that I mind, I find it all, hugely entertaining.

sirsholly -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 4:41:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse For the same reason you see female dominants getting bitchy and snarky at each other, male dominants strutting about trying to prove they are the dommiest dominant on the planet while arguing stupidity and female sub/slaves arguing who is more submissive........etc etc etc Insecurities coming out as silly childish behaviour. Not that I mind, I find it all, hugely entertaining. this thread would be even better after a few "glugs" of wine[:)][:)]

LaTigresse -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 4:49:28 AM)
Since Sunday night, I've had 8 full time house guests ( 4 of which are under 18) and 8 additional ( including 1 newborn and my beloved 2 Terrors, age 4 and 5) that have been coming and going, spending a night here and a meal there. Tomorrow is the hog roast for about 70 - 80 various family members There have been many MANY glugs of wine. And will be many more........

thishereboi -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 5:04:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl again, i wonder.. of the Pro Dommes who are posting.. what happens to the tributes? because, in many cases, the money submissives give to the Doms is set aside, or spent to pay bills for them both. When my ex was a pro, she used the money to pay our bills. It was a job and she used her paycheck like she would in any job.

thishereboi -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 5:08:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MistresseLotus You need to re-read what I wrote and make up a more accurate assumption. Try again :) (maybe not.. you are really trying way too hard too form an obtuse insult and it's not working.) [:D] (P.S. Where did you get the idea that I ever charged?) I wondered about that when I read her reply. It seems like the thread got a bit twisted.

LadyLupineNYC -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 5:13:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse Insecurities coming out as silly childish behaviour. I am sorry you feel that way, but I take exception to that; while I may not be 'acting' in the more 'childish' ways of some (though everyone has thier moments), I still find that there are a lot of unfair categorizations. While I cannot and do not presume to speak for everyone, it is equally presumptions to assume that anyone who does take exception, defend or otherwise engage in ProDomme of financial domination who choose to also speak up is doing so out of insecurity. I could argue it is no less childish to dismiss an entire argument or even practice within the community as indefensible on face just because it doesn’t always have the most articulate defenders. If that was the case, no ‘side’ of any argument on these boards would get very far.

colouredin -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 5:31:02 AM)
Fr There is a differance between a Pro Dom/me and someone who wants lots of presents, at least a Pro is honest about it. At the end of the day its providing a service isnt it some sell their bodies to telesales companies others to fullfilling desires, nowt wrong with that to me. I do think it gets a bit stupid when they claim that they arent selling themselves yet still demand tributes, then i guess my advice would be move on to someone else. I personally havent been involved in that type of dynamic, I pay for stuff, food and treats and that kind of thing but then thats part of being in a relationship really. I dont think that its integral to being a s-type that you buy your Dominant gifts or give them money, that doesnt make you 'better' or 'worse' really its just a case of calling a spade a spade. If you are paying for it then its a service if not then its a relationship.

DeviantLady -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 5:36:20 AM)
Well alot of Dom/mes require some sort of sexual service as part of their submission. So does that mean that they are demanding a gift of a sexual act? I think that demanding or requiring a gift for your time is at the discression of two people. Some people are here looking for the one and would never think of asking for a gift and some are here to have fun and enjoy gifts from subs that are grateful to send them. quote: ORIGINAL: CalifChick quote: ORIGINAL: DeviantLady So the Domme that is into FD or asks for a tribute for her time is a prostitute or wrong? Ask or require? Usually it's "require." If nothing else, she certainly has a poor grasp of the English language. You cannot "require" a tribute, which is a gift; the act of requirement negates the definition of "tribute". Cali

CalifChick -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 6:33:34 AM)
Your comparison stretches it too far to be valid. Cali

CreativeDominant -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 7:15:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyLupineNYC quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse Insecurities coming out as silly childish behaviour. I am sorry you feel that way, but I take exception to that; while I may not be 'acting' in the more 'childish' ways of some (though everyone has thier moments), I still find that there are a lot of unfair categorizations. While I cannot and do not presume to speak for everyone, it is equally presumptions to assume that anyone who does take exception, defend or otherwise engage in ProDomme of financial domination who choose to also speak up is doing so out of insecurity. I could argue it is no less childish to dismiss an entire argument or even practice within the community as indefensible on face just because it doesn’t always have the most articulate defenders. If that was the case, no ‘side’ of any argument on these boards would get very far. Case in point...you are defending financial domination from the P.O.V. of tribute being paid to a PRO Domme when the thread was started by a femdominant engaging in financial domination while maintaining that this is the way it should be for any submissive wishing to spend time...not BDSM-related time, not D/s-related time, just TIME with any NON-PRO femdominant. When it is being done by a PRO, I consider the tribute to be payment for services rendered. In all honesty, tell me how many guys paid you strictly for your TIME with nothing in the way of BDSM or D/s being rendered? Just male submissive engaged in conversation with female dominant? I would venture my answer...not many.

CreativeDominant -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 7:22:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CalifChick Your comparison stretches it too far to be valid. Cali [sm=agree.gif] Deviant...you keep mentioning this...the idea of equating sex with submission. For many male dominants AND many female submissives, the sexual part comes into play in the same way it does in "vanilla" relationships. It is an indicator that there is an interest in the other party...it is a way of having fun...it is a way of exploring physical and chemical attraction. In a D/s dynamic, it may well be part of the submission but it certainly isn't the only part. And as I have stated and several female submissives have stated...the male dominant who tries to tell a new potential submissive that the ONLY way she gets his time is by servicing him sexually is, in all likelihood, going to be snorted at, slapped, and walked away from.

Lynnxz -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 9:03:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse quote: ORIGINAL: Venatrix Why are pro-dommes and financial dommes so defensive about what they do? If they really feel comfortable about the service they provide, why so many posts justifying the ins and outs of it? "Oh, we're not prositutes, we take only the best, the sub doesn't control the scene, I deserve money because I'm spending my time on these guys, blah, blah, blah." Honestly, the more I hear about pro-dommes and financial dommes, the sadder I find them. For the same reason you see female dominants getting bitchy and snarky at each other, male dominants strutting about trying to prove they are the dommiest dominant on the planet while arguing stupidity and female sub/slaves arguing who is more submissive........etc etc etc Insecurities coming out as silly childish behaviour. Not that I mind, I find it all, hugely entertaining. I'm confused... who is behaving childishly, the ones standing in the street screeching "WHORE! WHORE!" or the one's explaining the topics of financial and professional domination? A page or so back, we have DomDolf calling names, and saying that people deserve to be hit with a baseball bat. He finishes up his argument by saying he will 'not' change his views on the topic. Venatrix feels that pros have low standards, for sessions as well as relationship choices- then follows it up with a quick 'I only take the best' comment, as if trying to prove that she is better. She finds them 'Sad' Now, while I don't agree with the OP and her friend that popped in later- and I am 99% sure it was just a troll effort, it tends to make the hate crew pop out of the woodwork pretty quickly.

CalifChick -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 9:37:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant the male dominant who tries to tell a new potential submissive that the ONLY way she gets his time is by servicing him sexually is, in all likelihood, going to be snorted at, slapped, and walked away from. But walked away from slowly, so he can catch me and tie me to the cross and flog the hell out of me for my unsubbly ways. As long as I don't have to pay. Cali

MmeGigs -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 2:39:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lynnxz I'm confused... who is behaving childishly, the ones standing in the street screeching "WHORE! WHORE!" or the one's explaining the topics of financial and professional domination? That's a pretty unfair way to frame this. I'd say that both the "WHORE!" folks and the "You're a liar if you don't admit that you do this" folks are irrational. There are plenty of narrow minds on both sides of this. quote: Now, while I don't agree with the OP and her friend that popped in later- and I am 99% sure it was just a troll effort, I think that you've got an oversensitive troll-meter. Either that or they're utterly unskilled at trolling.

LadyLupineNYC -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 3:48:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Case in point...you are defending financial domination from the P.O.V. of tribute being paid to a PRO Domme when the thread was started by a femdominant engaging in financial domination while maintaining that this is the way it should be for any submissive wishing to spend time...not BDSM-related time, not D/s-related time, just TIME with any NON-PRO femdominant. When it is being done by a PRO, I consider the tribute to be payment for services rendered. In all honesty, tell me how many guys paid you strictly for your TIME with nothing in the way of BDSM or D/s being rendered? Just male submissive engaged in conversation with female dominant? I would venture my answer...not many. I did point out the distinction between ProDommes and financial domination in the post I made few minuets before this one so I see no point in rehashing my personal opinion on this matter. As for ‘spending money just for time, even in the ‘vanilla’ world we see this (at least I do)- every time I go out to diner or have drinks with male friends and they insist on picking up the check regardless who asked the other person out. Admittedly, this was not a direct ‘payment’ but I view it as much the same. There were a few times regular client was not able to come in and when he came back he also provided the ‘missed’ payment in the form of an even larger tip, but that really doesn’t count. I know my boy has paid a ‘financial domme’ money, while exchanging nothing more then some emails and nonsexual photos not to mention that he provides me with any income that he brings in. Either way, I don’t agree at all with the OP since I feel that there is more than enough room within the scene to embrace all forms of financial and non-financial arraignments (and that it should remain that way). However, I do take exception (as I stated in my earlier post) to the idea that by defending the financial forms of relationship, someone is inherently defensive and insecure.

AcademyForSlaves -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/26/2008 10:56:06 PM)
Hi. A Mistress I know always puts it this way- If a slave treats the Mistress like a prostitute (by making demands), she'll treat him like a customer (and charge him a fee) Divorce, marriage, and dating costs lots more than a prodom (or a prostitute). At least with a prodom or prostitute you get what you pay for. ;) Don't have money? No problem, but you better be good at serving me!!

Rogue86 -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/27/2008 12:10:14 AM)
IMo: If a submissive expresses an opinion on financial domination that differs from your own and has not submitted to you, it is their right and perhaps you should move on to someone else who is more to your liking. Consider it a Hard Limit, which is also their right. If a submissive agrees to submit to you without knowing that you expect financial tribute and declines, it is your own fault for not being clear and is not topping from the bottom. If a submissive agrees to submit to you knowing that you expect financial tribute and then objects after the fact, they have erred and you should not engage them again. Personally, I find the idea of requiring financial tribute repulsive and feel sorry for anyone who feels like they must submit to such a demand in order to find what they need, outside of Pro-Dom/mes. Having said that, I have had submissives offer me gifts which I have accepted, after being clear that I personally do not expect, nor do I require, such things. Most of these gifts have been in the form of BDSM gear which they hope I will use when we play. Some of these things I have returned to them when when they or I moved on, especially personal items like insertibles. Likewise, I have had collared live-in submissives who have most certainly been expected to contribute to the household in a meaningful way, whether they worked outside the home and paid rent, or provided considerable services in the upkeep of My home and personal effects. If they work, I set up a savings account for them and the 'left over' cash is deposited on their behalf. Submission to another person is a choice. Ultimately, though, even after such a choice is made, personal responsibility remains with the submissive. Submission without choice is coercion - another matter entirely. Rogue ---------- "It's not punishment if you LIKE it."

TheLadyConstance -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/27/2008 5:56:23 AM)
It's amazing to me that we're completely open and supportive of each other's kinks as long as they fall within a certain range. Step outside that range and we all start throwing stones. How about let's all just let our BDSM neighbors go on about their business and let's go about ours?

tazzygirl -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/27/2008 6:21:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheLadyConstance It's amazing to me that we're completely open and supportive of each other's kinks as long as they fall within a certain range. Step outside that range and we all start throwing stones. How about let's all just let our BDSM neighbors go on about their business and let's go about ours? may want to reconsider that, Constance many things could be placed beneath the umbrella of BDSM, many can state its just a kink... some are saying that about ums.. yet that is illegal... just because its a kink or a fetish, doesnt mean it should have free reign... necrophilia is another kink... not supported by law or society when we all smile, and swallow what we feel is wrong, for the sake of "getting along" then we devlope into something we dont recognize anymore

dollenburg -> RE: my take on financial domination (9/27/2008 6:50:19 AM)
It's not prostitution as long as sex isn't the ONLY thing that is exchanged for money.

Page: << < prev 4 5 6 [7] 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125