RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"?

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress >> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"?

Page: << < prev 21 22 [23] 24 25 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/10/2009 10:57:47 AM

Posts: 2860
Joined: 9/1/2008
Status: offline

Miss Kuma, with respect, I have to say that I am really starting to think of you as a troll on these forums. You have never, as far as I can tell, posted a positive contributing word and everything I have ever read from you is hateful, negative and mean.

I am not sure if that is how you want to be perceived...

_____________________________

I am on a journey of authenticity and self.

(in reply to MISTRESSKUMA)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/10/2009 11:16:01 AM

Posts: 226
Joined: 8/15/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama

(But I am willing to bet those women DO get a positive response from men who have an erotic reaction to them.)

On the other hand, these attitudes of mine are in part a reflection of who I am in daily life, who I want to be 99% of the time with a submissive partner, and what I am looking for in a relationship.

I am based almost entirely in reality, not fantasy. I exercise my dominance as an extension of my every-day personality; it is a constant in daily life. I cannot separate my BDSM identity from the rest of my life, and confine my role as a dominant to scenes of fantasy with casual partners for very limited periods of time.

I have to logically assume that the way these people present their profiles is compatible with their own needs and wants.

A person who is instantly and aggressively dominant in her profile is saying "Let's cut through the bullshit and get straight to business", effectively--because she has no interest in relating to submissive men on the vanilla level as people--she wants to objectify and use and abuse them to gratify her dominant urges, not get to know them.

The person who is instantly submissive in his profile and his messages is telling me that he is looking to live out a fantasy, not form a relationship with a real person--I can take this as a rejection if I choose, or I could just recognize his offer of "instant submission" as a compliment of sorts, because he is willing to give his fantasy my form. He's not compatible with my needs and lifestyle, but the fact that he's barking up the wrong tree and not reading my signals very well is its own punishment, because he's wasting his time. I don't need to take it as a personal affront.

To me, "Send me tribute, worm" is a message of instant kink. It is in no way different from a command to perform any other humiliating act in a profile or a message. Men who respond positively to that message are getting exactly what they want--a zero-strings boner and a humiliation fantasy that works for them. No fuss. no muss, no getting to know ya.

I don't do a lot of instant kink myself, but I do think it's possible to take a step back once in a while and consider the appeal of the stranger-on-a-train instant hook-up: instantaneous zero-effort chemistry, zero-strings indulgence of fantasy, no thought of consequences or need to adjust the interaction to make a long-term relationship viable, no unromantic or unsexy moments where lamentably real life intrudes on the perfection of the scene...and the ability to leave your partner BEHIND in fantasy land when you are finished, and return to your cozy real life afterward without consequences.

Sure, I see it. *shrug* Just because it isn't my thing doesn't make it wrong for everyone--it's just wrong for me.

_____________________________

http://myspace.com/suprstr75

(in reply to ShaktiSama)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/10/2009 11:44:47 AM

Posts: 6470
Joined: 5/10/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama

quote:

ORIGINAL: RedMagic1

I actually kinda like women in fuzzy slippers.

Pervert.

Flatterer.

_____________________________

Not with envy, not with a twisted heart, shall you feel superior, or go about boasting. Rather in goodness by action make true your song and your word. Thus you shall be highly regarded, and able to live in peace with all others.
- 15th century Aztec

(in reply to ShaktiSama)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/10/2009 3:50:39 PM

Posts: 376
Joined: 12/20/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MISTRESSKUMA
A lot dominant women want your submission, huh? Get over yourself.

I must admit I had the same reaction.

but...Peon pimps some studly photos in his profile, though. That's probably where the extra cmail is coming from, lol.

Thing is, judging by his words shared here and his profile, he looks like he's looking for a pretty traditional relationship with a dash of kink. Nothing wrong with that...but it causes confusion in a forum featuring actual Mistresses (capitol M) as guests.

same thing goes for the other gent in the hat, I'd say.

(in reply to MISTRESSKUMA)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/10/2009 5:20:22 PM

Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

I must admit I had the same reaction.

but...Peon pimps some studly photos in his profile, though. That's probably where the extra cmail is coming from, lol.

Thank you Isaac. I think.

I've no idea what other subs' profiles look like, so I can't compare.

Thing is, judging by his words shared here and his profile, he looks like he's looking for a pretty traditional relationship with a dash of kink. Nothing wrong with that...but it causes confusion in a forum featuring actual Mistresses (capitol M) as guests.

In a sense what I'm looking for is both traditional and very strongly D/s. The one side can't reach its full potential without the other side doing the same. The tension of that contradiction is what makes it all work for me. Or at least, it does in theory and as best as my feelings tell me. (Something like: "you can only seen the joy of being a slave from the position of someone who isn't a slave; the more you're not a slave, the more you see the joy of it")

Ideally, I want a partner who's 'the full thing' (hell, want of a better phrase) and my best friend and lover. Whether that's achievable in practice, I don't yet know. But I won't go into a relationship without knowing as much as I can about myself, nor failing to let a prospective partner know what I am and how I think and feel.

Lastly, the 'gentleman in the hat', to me, is someone who's working things out in his own way. His isn't mine and mine isn't his - of course. But one thing I will always admire in people is their effort to work out their feelings and thoughts. This is a much rarer quality than I once thought.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com

(in reply to SimplyIsaac)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/10/2009 6:01:57 PM

Posts: 2400
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Austin, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 4u2spoil
Not really sea. It's not eloquent, but to say that this is the way things have been for a while, and still are is perfectly valid reasoning. In recent history, perhaps things were done in a certain way because men typically had more money and controlled the gift giving ability. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean that's not the way things are. You're welcome to examine why you don't want to do something that's the norm (perhaps you like going against norms, maybe it just doesn't feel right to you), but it doesn't mean the norm is not there.

While the norm is observed much more greatly than not, I think it is currently in flux and it is not universally observed as it was in the past. For sake of discussion, let's ignore this point and assume it's universally held.

Norms are cultural values, which are rarely absolute. If I question a norm, it is not for sake of being a rebel but for intellectual reasons. There are other norms that are still there but we go outside them in this dynamic. The point about income disparity and biological wiring are more along the lines of the discussion I was seeking. It is this type of discussion that carries meaning for me versus simply saying a norm is there.

Incidentally, I think the income disparity is the most resilient reason given thus far for a unidirectional flow. The biological discussion does not resonate with me and I will gladly elaborate if needed.

quote:

My only issue is that you keep asking the same question, even though it's been answered.

I assume you refer to my question for intellectual basis for such expectations in only one direction. I keep asking it because I have seen various justifications that do not appeal to me intellectually. I have explained above why saying it is the norm does not appeal to me intellectually. Thus, while you might think you have answered the question with a reason because it makes sense to you, that reason does not make sense to me and the question remains unanswered for me. You are then welcome to address my explanation for why the reason does not appeal to me, or agree that the reason you give appeals to us differently (versus saying that I am asking the same question that has been answered).

I do not ask that people shift their views but that they explain their views, and, if they write to disagree with me, they address what flaw they see with my points. I am receptive to different views when I can see a basis that makes sense to me. There are various matters about which I have shifted my view because someone was able to give reasoning that made sense to me. Even in this thread, based on your posts and ensuing reflections, I have recognized your distinction between financial domination and what you enjoy, and shifted my view at least somewhat about those who like to receive gifts to be spoiled by comparing it to a wish to be spoiled via attentive pampering.

quote:

You don't like the norms, you don't like people who adopt the norms with regard to their own views, and you seem to keep questioning it in the hopes that they'll shift to your view of the norms or feel bad about their own view for some reason.

Your statement above misrepresents me. If you refer to the unfriendly energy in my posts to some others, it is not the view but the approach and what I perceive to be disrespectful content of posts which bring the unfriendly energy. I appreciate that you have disagreed intelligently and respectfully, and I see the energy in our conversation to be fair even though we don't have the same view.

Cheers,

Sea

< Message edited by undergroundsea -- 2/10/2009 6:10:34 PM >

(in reply to 4u2spoil)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/10/2009 8:48:32 PM

Posts: 2400
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Austin, TX
Status: offline

quote:

I wouldn't call you cheap, but I would say that (based on your posts) money is important to you and you're very cautious about who you give it to. You likely subscribe to the view "a fool and his money are soon parted," and apply it to romantic/personal situations as well. If a woman really wants you, she won't ask you to part with your money or expect it. As it relates to D/s, you likely feel that if a woman is really interested in your service, it won't involve money. Since you've mentioned that you have casual sessions rather than relationships, I don't necessarily see this as being cheap. You've said that when it comes to people you care about, you don't have a problem giving gifts or doing things that require money. I don't hold it against you if you don't care about a person from the first email or phone conversation.

You do not know me and, understandably, your description does not fit me. I consider my BDSM activity social activity and treat my BDSM relationships like social relationships based on mutual social interest.

I am sometimes cautious, sometimes not. I am cautious when someone gives me a reason to be cautious. I do not apply the view you mention to my romantic and personal (friends, family) relationships. How I feel and act depends on the sincerity I associate with a person. One can tell when another is a narcissist, be it with money or with other things. It is with people like this when I become cautious.

quote:

I acknowledge that it probably doesn't feel good to be viewed as cheap because you're going against norms, but there's no lack of understanding as to why you are viewed in this way. If someone called you a wimp for wanting to submit to a woman sexually, I wouldn't agree at all, but could understand why the assessment is made.

So then are you calling me cheap or not? ;-)

Maybe I am cheap and don't even know what it means. What characterizes each a man and a woman as cheap and not cheap?

For perspective, all along I have said that a material offering is a positive gesture, not a duty. Equating this statement to not giving positive gestures is incorrect. I think the argument of those who describe me as cheap represents intellectual laziness (rather than addressing the points I raise they are using a loaded word to undermine my argument that threatens or offends them for whatever reason) and is disrespectful.

My points:

1. Material gestures are positive gestures but not a duty. If they are a duty, how so?
2. It is a good idea (but not duty) to extend positive gestures through whichever way in both directions in not necessarily similar volume but in similar spirit.

If point 1 is untrue, then one can say a man who is not giving a material gesture is neglecting duty and is wrong for doing so. I can see why those who disagree with point 1 will find my position wrong but I have not seen a compelling argument yet.

Incidentally, per point 2, I do not advocate going dutch. I think it is warmer to treat. However, the gesture is a positive gesture and it's polite to reciprocate the warmth appropriately. It is this approach I like to follow.

quote:

If she only goes on dates with guys she's interested in (and not just for the meal), a man starting a courtship in that way could be viewed as feeling money is more important than the person he's pursuing. It might not be correct in all cases, just as your view that requests for gifts will lead to a financial Domme isn't always correct. But she may have tried it before and found that the man wasn't cautious, but just cheap.

Fair enough. And the converse is equally fair.

Cheers,

Sea

(in reply to 4u2spoil)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/10/2009 8:52:58 PM

Posts: 2400
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Austin, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsDonnaMia
voluminous (but articulate) bitching and snarkery from Sea & Company.

Thank you for the compliment that my posts are articulate.

Can you put your finger on what it is about my 2 points (which I list in post 447) that you find offensive or threatening to you?

Cheers,

Sea

(in reply to MsDonnaMia)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/10/2009 9:01:48 PM

Posts: 376
Joined: 12/20/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: undergroundsea

Maybe I am cheap and don't even know what it means. What characterizes each a man and a woman as cheap and not cheap?

Oh boy.

(in reply to undergroundsea)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/10/2009 9:18:14 PM

Posts: 2400
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Austin, TX
Status: offline

Despite your name calling, my last response to you was fairly restrained. I am going to borrow a bit from the spirit of your post here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama
Probably the same way I would feel about someone who kindly offered to beat my ass with a flogger or rape me in a really "fun" way.

You see, I'm not a submissive or a masochist. My needs are not met by a dominant partner. I *AM* the dominant partner

Your assumption that any masochistic activity carries universal appeal is incorrect. Furthermore, you did not answer the question because it would support my original point.

quote:

Honey, YOU need to go back to the beginning of this thread and its title. PARTNERS AND FRIENDS ARE EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

Please don't call me Honey. It's sexist. Or condescending. Or whatever it is when some man uses the term with you.

There are multiple conversations in this thread. If you quote me, then you invoke the context of my post. If you want to refer to the beginning of the thread instead of what I have spoken, then please quote the beginning of the thread instead of my post.

quote:

hysterically invoke as the Absolute End of the World and the The Worst Thing Ever is in fact a kink that many men and women mutually enjoy. I mention this despite the fact that it really has NOTHING to do with the original topic of this thread.

Hysterically?! You amuse me. The tone in my posts is fairly composed. You, however, could benefit from some yoga.

quote:

The sadist in me knows that it is something you really secretly want; that's how it works to be a pervert.

I am afraid your intuition as a dominant or sadist needs more work. I hope this statement is for sake of whatever you are trying to achieve in your writing and is not how you operate in practice.

If your logic holds then based on your comments about dominant men and partriarchy, you long to be a gorean slavegirl kept on a leash. Shall we create another profile for you?

quote:

You infer it because of your neverending Whore Agenda.

I have no such agenda. Are you using the same ugly words you discourage others from using to invoke emotions and incorrectly tie me to some imagined position?

quote:

quote:

Why you do base your sense of worth on whether or not someone whom you have just met is spending on you?

Why do you assume that wanting someone who is submissive or masochistic to me is about my "sense of worth"?

I do not make the assumption you suggest. My quote is two lines above. Your quote is one line above. And how we went from one to the other is anyone's guess. As for the question I did ask, I base it on the words you used in your post. When you have figured out what you really want to ask me, please do so.

quote:

Why is this so mysterious and incomprehensible to you? Why do you continually persist in reconstruing dollar domination as something it is NOT? Why does this kink need to be elevated or denigrated beyond the obvious?

This statement is bizarre. For me to respond, please clarify (1) how do you see me to reconstrue dollar domination and (2) what is the ShaktiSama endorsed interpretation so that I can determine how it should be construed. (3) How is the kink being elevated or denigrated beyond the obvious and what you think should be done instead?

quote:

No, it represents a desperate attempt to return anywhere NEAR to the topic of thread, which was about What Dommes Want and Why They Want It. Forgive me, I didn't recognize your derailment into Why Undergroundsea Won't Submit to a Dollar Domme, Part Million-and-Six, as a holy mandate from on high.

Then your desperate attempt was as poorly executed as this desperate attempt to dodge the point. If the topic of thread was about what dommes want and why they want it, and I am talking about what some dommes demand, you reference to bitching about competing with other men still does not make sense because no such bitching occurred.

quote:

The caustic tone of my post is a reaction to the fact that you have repeated yourself and pursued this same argument and line of reasoning across multiple threads on multiple occasions.

I am consistent in my beliefs. When a topic comes up, I don't change these beliefs for sake of variety. Therefore, if you read my posts on a subject that arises repeatedly, you will see the same argument across multiple threads. If I keep going to the same threads, then so do you. If you have had enough of this topic, there is new material on the Gorean boards. I know you secretly want it.

quote:

If you were under the impression that no one could ever get sick of reading your self-righteous novels on this subject--think again. ENOUGH already,for heaven's sake, sea.

So then we should not banter here and stay on topic per another recent episode of your diatribes. But we can stay on topic only if we make points that align with how you feel. Shall we start sending you two-page proposals for each topic and post we make here?

And if you think no one could ever get sick of reading your intolerant, vitriolic, sarcastic, sensationalized OMG diatribes everytime you have a disagreement with someone, think again. I'll take 6 pages of off-topic banter over that any day.

Now that we have navigated through the mess of your writing, let's have some good communication.

I did not appreciate the tone of your posts nor the namecalling. If you wish me to be respectful and tactful in my posts to you, I ask you do the same. If you are interested to blow hot air and not really engage in discussion, your current approach is achieving it. If you wish to get your point across, I find it to drown in the bitterness, sarcasm and emotive content.

Each of us can continue making posts that will agitate each other rather than move forward a conversation. Not much will result from exchanging such posts other than negativity, which neither of us needs. If you have an issue with what I say and would like to discuss it constructively, I will gladly do so. If it is more along the lines of the type of post you last wrote, I am uninterested.

Cheers,

Sea

< Message edited by undergroundsea -- 2/10/2009 9:54:04 PM >

(in reply to ShaktiSama)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/10/2009 9:28:03 PM

Posts: 376
Joined: 12/20/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: undergroundsea

quote:

No, it represents a desperate attempt to return anywhere NEAR to the topic of thread, which was about What Dommes Want and Why They Want It. Forgive me, I didn't recognize your derailment into Why Undergroundsea Won't Submit to a Dollar Domme, Part Million-and-Six, as a holy mandate from on high.

Then your desperate attempt was as poorly executed as this desperate attempt to dodge the point. If the topic of thread was about what dommes want and why they want it, and I am talking about what some dommes demand, you reference to bitching about competing with other men still does not make sense because no such bitching occurred.

That's rich. Come on now, Seaman. Several people have called you out on your same woeful equivocations, and their recurring patterns.

(in reply to undergroundsea)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/10/2009 9:30:43 PM

Posts: 2400
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Austin, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyIsaac
That's rich. Come on now, Seaman. Several people have called you out on your same woeful equivocations, and their recurring patterns.

Dude, put some substance behind your thoughts so I can see how your mind works and how you are arriving at what you are saying.

Otherwise, I can tell you more about some of my experiences so you can go jack off to them.

Cheers,

Sea

(in reply to SimplyIsaac)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/10/2009 9:33:13 PM

Posts: 376
Joined: 12/20/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: undergroundsea

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyIsaac
That's rich. Come on now, Seaman. Several people have called you out on your same woeful equivocations, and their recurring patterns.

Dude, put some substance behind your thoughts so I can see how your mind works and how you are arriving at what you are saying.

Otherwise, I can tell you more about some of my experiences so you can go jack off to them.

There's plenty of substance given to you in gigabytes in this thread, and as far as masturbating, you're doing a fine job there on your own.

(in reply to undergroundsea)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/10/2009 11:23:41 PM

Posts: 152
Joined: 12/22/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

I'm just getting a bit tired of the expectations guys have

That's just it, though, Lady C. That seems to have been the problem with this whole thread: assumptions. On all sides. Assumptions about how people should act, assumptions about other people's assumptions . . . . I've recognised a few of my own in the past few days. I've also recognised that they're not going to change very much in the future, either.

One of my own assumptions means that, far from treating dominas as people who'll give me a free tickle to my kink, I don't treat them as dominas at all. I treat them pretty much as I would all non-dominant women, and will continue to do so. You might be surprised by just how often that's rankled with self-identifying, "dominant women" who imagine that I'm going to be automatically submissive towards them (while not going so far as to get a jolly-on from talking to them, of course). That's not by any means directed at your good self, Lady C - it's a general comment.

I agree with you about the assumptions. And, like you, I am not automatically submissive to any woman. I will submit to Her, and She will define what I am when the time comes.

quote:

allthatjazz

Servitude tends to be very direct and is of course a form of ultimate submission. They look for a Dominant Mistress and so of course it does come under the umbrella of Dominance/submission. I don't believe any of this is unselfish. We are all in this for our own reason and I for one have never met a servitude sub who is not into being dominated in some way or form even if it is only verbal firmness

Thank you for that allthatjazz. Every single person has their own reasons for being drawn to this lifestyle in whatever level and capacity they choose. Why do we need to judge and make assumptions about them? We are in enough of a minority as it is. To have some say "You are not a true submissive," or "You are not a true Mistress," or "You are not a true_______________," because you do this and don't do that, well, that is such a waste of energy. We should be rejoicing in the fact that we can find happiness and joy in whatever form that comes in for us.

If someone finds true happiness and joy in FS than I applaud that and wish them well. If they don't, then by all means, avoid it at all costs. (No pun intended. lol) If someone finds they have heavy masochistic tendencies while another prefers a gentle approach, does that make one a better submissive/slave over the other? No. It is all about intent, respect and yes, selfishness, for if one does not enjoy being submissive and does not get something out of it, would they be doing it?

As a community of kinksters, I find it quite fascinating how many can tear each other apart for not being what they consider to be BDSM, M/s or D/s correct. My goodness sakes. I have gotten much judgment from some vanilla people because I came out about my BDSM side. I have lost a friend or two because of my "perversion".

I used to ignorantly believe I would be accepted by a community that "understood" me, only to find that in such a community you have all the same kinds of judgmental people, except they're kinky. lol So, I found a nice niche with other "outcasts" who love one another, care about one another and try to understand one another. Sure, we have differing opinions about the labels we all use, but heck, it's a friggin label! Sure, it's a lifestyle, but hey, it's not written in stone. Some people are more dogmatic than a Bible thumping evangelist when it comes to BDSM. From them I walk away.

quote:

LadyConstanze
I would think servitude is about SERVING somebody, serving somebody is different from domination (since you said in another post you were a pro domme, I would have thought you know the difference). Service is an unselfish act, which is about the person who is being served, not the one serving. So in case the guy wants a head fuck from it, he doesn't want to serve, he wants his kinks fulfilled, simple as that.

As I have begun exploring aspects of myself, I have spoken with some slaves and submissives at a group I have attended. A few serve the same Master, and each serves Him in their own way. Yet, each as said that they decided to submit to serve Him. Please forgive me for I am rather new to these terms, especially when it comes to embracing them in a means of discovering more of where I lean.

I did watch one slave interacting with his Master and there was some D/s involved. Yes, Master knows that slave is there to serve and slave does it with such heart and soul and love, but there was one time slave said what he thought he'd do and Master corrected him. Perhaps that is not D/s. Again, labels can get so confusing, *for me*.

As for servitude being an unselfish act, well, when I see that smile on Her face, or know that I have pleased Her, I feel good inside, so I do consider my servitude to be selfish for it makes me feel good. Again, it is the way I perceive it. Maybe it's just a matter of semantics. I do think I understand where you are coming from. I just perceive it a bit differently.

quote:

undergroundsea
Maybe I am cheap and don't even know what it means. What characterizes each a man and a woman as cheap and not cheap?

For perspective, all along I have said that a material offering is a positive gesture, not a duty

Sea, first off, I am in no way as articulate as you, so please forgive me if I seem to scramble for words here.

I think that cheap is all a matter of perspective. I hear that word bantered about all day since I work in retail. Many use it to describe someone who is not willing to spend $50 on a face cream and opts for the $9.99 one. I prefer to think of them as cost conscious. Not everyone has $50 to spend on face cream, while others can buy two of the $149 ones in one shot. It's all what is within one's means.

I went back to read the OP and find that once again, it is a matter of perception. What is financial success? That has been answered by many.

And, I agree with you about a material offering being a positive gesture, not a duty. When I was experimenting with men, I met with several and we met over coffee. I preferred dutch. I did not know them well and that is how I felt most comfortable. Some were very adamant about paying so I let them.

One Master and I got together several times. We became friends. Our first meeting was dutch, and he respected my reasons. The next time it was his treat, and I was fine with it. The next time I bought steak, veggies and he got the wine and I cooked dinner. It was all relative to how we progressed as friends. I think that is the point you were trying to make. I did not see you coming off as cheap, but as selective. Correct me if I am wrong in using that word.

Then when I thought I met The One for me, well, it started out with several emails. Then, because I knew I was taking up Her precious time, I told Her I wished to offer Her something for I valued what She was giving to me. She understood and let me know how I could please Her, and it was a charitable contribution, not something material for Her. I wanted to give to Her. But, it did not start of like that and She did not expect it, but She was touched.

Perhaps it is because I relate so much to what you said. I used to be overly generous with gifts as a young woman and now am more selective in my choice of who I shall give gifts to. I may be considered cheap by some because I do not celebrate Christmas. I buy gifts for friends if I see something they like and give it to them right away. I do not like any "custom" to tell me, "Now is the time to buy all those you love the gifts they need." Most everyone I know has too much stuff anyway and they too did not buy much this past Christmas.

If I do the Christmas thing it is a donation in the name of someone I love to an organization like Kiva or Seva. My niece and nephew loved that they were responsible for giving someone sight. So, I'm cheap because in some people's eyes because I did not buy toys or games, which they have plenty of, but I taught them about micro-loans and that what we can spend on dinner and a movie can buy someone the gift of sight.

And again, I may have missed the point you were making. You are giving, but not to a total stranger. You are generous with those you care about and love, and perhaps to others you did not mention. Please correct me if I am wrong in this, oh oh, *assumption* ;0)

Thank you all for your insights.

TT

_____________________________

“Listen, I am trying to cope with the presence of God and the Universal Human Experience, and I haven’t even had a cup of tea yet!” -French and Saunders

(in reply to PeonForHer)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/10/2009 11:30:43 PM

Posts: 152
Joined: 12/22/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyIsaac

quote:

ORIGINAL: undergroundsea

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyIsaac
I think what you say is pretty much written in water, Seaman.

If you are trying to get me to reconcile by taking you from the back, I must clarify I am het.

Don't worry, man; no one is saying you're gay. No, really.

Hmm. I will just never understand why straight men think making gay references is an insult. Or am I missing the point of this repartee? My best friends are gay men and they would get a kick out of it I guess.

I have no witty comeback so I must defer to that great comedienne, Catherine Tate, and her wonderful character Derek Faye:

From The Catherine Tate Show series three:

Gay, dear? Who, dear? Me,, dear? No, dear. Just because a man is partial to an evening of musical theatre and doesn’t shy away from a chest wax, you assume he likes his shopping dropped off around the back.

And:

Gay, dear? Who, dear? Me, dear? No, dear. Just because a man minds his p’s and q’s and isn’t all at sea with a mascara wand, you assume he travels up the chocolate escalator.

Am I bovered? Look at this face!

Look at this face!

Money, Mistresses, submissives, whips, chains, whores, sluts, queens, princesses, whipped cream, chocolate... gay references, all of it... Am I bovered? I'm not bovered.

_____________________________

“Listen, I am trying to cope with the presence of God and the Universal Human Experience, and I haven’t even had a cup of tea yet!” -French and Saunders

(in reply to SimplyIsaac)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/11/2009 3:47:26 PM

Posts: 2400
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Austin, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TranceTara
And, I agree with you about a material offering being a positive gesture, not a duty. When I was experimenting with men, I met with several and we met over coffee. I preferred dutch. I did not know them well and that is how I felt most comfortable. Some were very adamant about paying so I let them.

One Master and I got together several times. We became friends. Our first meeting was dutch, and he respected my reasons. The next time it was his treat, and I was fine with it. The next time I bought steak, veggies and he got the wine and I cooked dinner. It was all relative to how we progressed as friends. I think that is the point you were trying to make. I did not see you coming off as cheap, but as selective. Correct me if I am wrong in using that word.

Thank you for your post. It makes perfect sense and delivers my point much better than I did.

Yes, it is the bidirectional courtesies of the type you describe above. When I had taken a domme out a couple of times, she said she wanted to take me out for ice cream as we were leaving a restaurant after the second date. When I invited a domme to dinner and told her nothing was needed, she arrived with a bottle of wine. Another time I took her to dinner, after which we went to a bar she suggested. As we entered she said she was going to get the first round but first she had to go to the bathroom. I said that I'd just go ahead and get it. She said in a wonderfully dominant tone, no, wait here! So I did not get the first round but I did get an erection.

;-)

In each case, I appreciated their gesture, and that they did not take my gestures for granted.

Another gave me her dog tags to enable entry into a club because she did not need them. Another sent a message to her friends in another city I was visiting to try to hook me up with social activities. It is not an amount but the spirit of gesture that matters.

Another domme I met did not reciprocate thoughtful gestures. At first I thought it might be part of a domme persona she thinks she must carry. While I think that reason contributed to how she was, with time I came to see that she was also self-absorbed and thought it was her right to receive courtesies without giving any in return because of the effort she expends to be beautiful. It was an unsatisfying experience to have everything flow one way. It is with her in mind that I make some of my statements and say that energy and courtesies must flow both ways.

quote:

I used to be overly generous with gifts as a young woman and now am more selective in my choice of who I shall give gifts to.

Yes, I relate to this experience also. Aside from being selective, I do think there is a question of appropriateness of gesture based on the relationship which reflects on judgment and eagerness--buying a car as a birthday gift for the cute receptionist at work would be a bit much ;-)

I am particularly impressed with your idea of gifting via a donation and letting your neice and nephew know they are responsible for giving someone the gift of sight. What a wonderful way to also teach the value of compassion!

Cheers,

Sea

(in reply to TranceTara)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/11/2009 4:06:27 PM

Posts: 2400
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Austin, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TranceTara
Hmm. I will just never understand why straight men think making gay references is an insult.

You are absolutely correct. It's very 80s-middle-school like. I am the one who began that line of thought by first saying I am het. It's not quite what I had in mind and apologize in general for a lame comment.

quote:

From The Catherine Tate Show series three:

Gay, dear? Who, dear? Me,, dear? No, dear. Just because a man is partial to an evening of musical theatre and doesn’t shy away from a chest wax, you assume he likes his shopping dropped off around the back.

And:

Gay, dear? Who, dear? Me, dear? No, dear. Just because a man minds his p’s and q’s and isn’t all at sea with a mascara wand, you assume he travels up the chocolate escalator.

Excellent! ;-)

Cheers,

Sea

(in reply to TranceTara)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/11/2009 6:39:34 PM

Posts: 2492
Joined: 1/25/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: undergroundsea
For perspective, the question we seem to be asking with respect to Akasha's friend is why is the flow of gifts or material offerings expected to be unidirectional.

All reasonings, including the explanation by ShaktiSama, do not explain a unidirectional flow but instead suggest a bidirectional flow. Amongst the different reasons given to explain an expectation of unidirectional flow of material offerings, what you say holds most--that it is the cultural norm.

I didn't see the post you mention here, but I responded on the other thread. I hadn't really been aware until last night how I felt about this, because most men *do* offer to pay on dates. I love getting gifts for my partner, and occasionally treating for dinner (usually on special occasions), but particularly on the first couple of dates, and to some extent in general, I do want him to pay for most of the dates we go on, and like getting little gifts. It needn't be expensive - "good" fast food like Subway or Arby's, a single rosebud from 7-11, or a See's raspberry chocolate truffle can still make me feel mushy and feminine and cherished. It's not that it's expected of him, precisely, more that if he doesn't do it, I have a harder time thinking of him as a gentleman, just as if he doesn't open doors for me. I can open them myself or for him, and do so when it's practical, but I usually like him to be courtly about it. For me, this has nothing to do with the D/s aspect, it's just something I've come to well expect of men I date. If they don't, it's not a dealbreaker, and I don't necessarily consider him weak, lazy, or cheap, but it does tend to set up a bit of a negative vibe. Since I do have other options, it will probably put them at a disadvantage, unless they are really spectacular in other respects. Hmm, another thing is the being physically strong - they don't have to be hulking bodybuilders, but if they aren't strong enough to pick me up in a hug, or that I could trust them to spot me in my gymnastics practice, it wouldn't necessarily put them completely out of the running, but it would be a "strike" on a similar level.

I don't want tribute, or pricey gifts (especially from someone I've never even met), and any efforts in that direction *would* be a dealbreaker and keep me from considering them.

< Message edited by Andalusite -- 2/11/2009 6:43:10 PM >

(in reply to undergroundsea)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/11/2009 7:50:19 PM

Posts: 1710
Joined: 12/3/2005
From: Stockton, California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TranceTara

Hmm. I will just never understand why straight men think making gay references is an insult. Or am I missing the point of this repartee? My best friends are gay men and they would get a kick out of it I guess.

A lot of males are often very self-conscious about their sexuality. Some are so paranoid about it that they'll throw up huge barriers if anyone suspects there might be a gay gene in their body.

Me? I could care less if someone thinks I'm gay, a woman inside a man's body, a stuffed animal inside a human's body, a toaster inside a microwave's body, or whatever. I'm confident in my own sexuality that I don't feel the need to throw up barriers and defensive signals every time someone makes a homosexual quip. People need to learn to laugh those things off. My best friend in college and I used to be debate partners, and if someone even made a joke of that nature (cause they thought it would rile us up), we'd just play with it and start talking like we're lovers, which we discovered made THEM really uncomfortable. This helped me surmise that a lot of these quips come from people who are less confident about their own sexuality than they're letting on, and they tend to use it to push that fear back on others. We used to throw it back in their faces with humor. We didn't care what people thought. We were still going to kick their asses in debate anyway.

As for the bigger pictures in this much larger debate, I don't really have much more to add because I don't think like a dominant woman. I'm self-sufficient in my financial affairs right now, and I feel good about that. I'm probably in a much better place these days to offer submission than I have been in years. I think people worry too much over little, tiny things that seem to overwhelm the bigger picture. For me, finding a dominant woman who might care about me at the same time is my major goal. I want her to be comfortable in her own ways, and I want to contribute to her happiness and satisfaction. At the same time, by being allowed into her life to do that, I might find happiness and satisfaction as well. I think people worry too much about the finer details, so much that they dismiss the obvious choices right in front of them, convinced that something's missing or that it's not exactly what they're looking for. So they find nothing, convinced that what's needed is either right around the corner (but nothing's there when they check) or nothing really exists.

It turns a lot of people into negativity, so that they begin to say nothing but negative things. People lash out at others because they can't find what they're seeking. If they don't find what they're looking for, they turn their guns on everyone else, convinced that lashing out at others will somehow help them find happiness. That rarely works, and only provides for momentary satisfaction before depression sets in again. It's a cycle that doesn't break.

I hope more people can give up this negativity they have and start looking for their future partners in a more positive manner. It sucks that so many people argue back and forth, while practically saying the same things and not even realizing it. I hope you all find what you're seeking, and hopefully it is more than just someone else to argue with.

_____________________________

<---- FYI, this picture looks JUST like me

http://www.littlesarbonn.com/Stickman/Stickman.htm
The Adventures of Stickman and the Unemployed Lego Spaceman

(in reply to TranceTara)

RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "... - 2/11/2009 9:14:47 PM

Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline

What is an "alfa" female? I have never heard that one before.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert

This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi

(in reply to MISTRESSKUMA)

Page: << < prev 21 22 [23] 24 25 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress >> RE: Why is it that most Dommes want subs that are "financially successful"?

Page: << < prev 21 22 [23] 24 25 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.298