RE: What do subs mean when they say "female superiority"? (Full Version)

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



Message

LaTigresse -> RE: What do subs mean when they say "female superiority"? (3/1/2009 6:34:13 AM)

Some very good points.

It really does all come down to what is "real" to us, in our lives. Regardless of what other people believe or not.



Twicehappy2x -> RE: What do subs mean when they say "female superiority"? (3/1/2009 8:49:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hardbodysub


quote:

ORIGINAL: Twicehappy2x

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoveNDominance

Isn't the definition of female superiority that simply by virtue of being a female, one is superior to males?


I think the above statement is also wank fodder. Neither sex is superior to the other simply by virtue of being said sex.


Let's not get into that argument again. It's been going on for weeks in another thread.



One.....i've never read the "other" thread you are commenting on.
 
Two.....did i miss somebody appointing you as keeper of my posting topics?



MarcEsadrian -> RE: What do subs mean when they say "female superiority"? (3/1/2009 12:05:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FullfigRIMAAM1
This site is about wanker fantasies that become reality...Otherwise, we'd all be on match dot com.


quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse
It really does all come down to what is "real" to us, in our lives. Regardless of what other people believe or not.



Agreed.




LoveNDominance -> RE: What do subs mean when they say "female superiority"? (3/1/2009 4:27:23 PM)

Thank you all for your comments. 
Wasn't sure what my post would generate. I've enjoyed reading  what has been said.

Since I didn't mention my thoughts on the topic I would like to take a moment to do so. I think female supremacy is silly as all generalities are absurd.  By virtue of my genetic sex, I'm neither better nor worse than others.

How I conduct myself will determine if someone wants to view me as superior to them.  Or not....it's really their choice.



FullfigRIMAAM1 -> RE: What do subs mean when they say "female superiority"? (3/2/2009 12:27:51 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoveNDominance
I think female supremacy is silly as all generalities are absurd.  By virtue of my genetic sex, I'm neither better nor worse than others.
Human doormats aren't really doormats.   Even the so called worthless worms, aren't.    Why is it so difficult to comprehend the concept that personal relationship philosophies often differ vastly from how we relate to the world at large?     When anyone calls himself a dominant, does he really mean to infer that he goes around assuming authority over "all" others, in "all" areas of life, and doing to them as he wishes?  

Fem supremacy is fairly absurd in a paternalistic, male dominated society...      And yet, here we are, dominant women, relating to, or seeking to relate to men who are down with that kind of thinking for personal relationships.   

I used to become uncomfortable when these threads came up, given the fact that in everyday life, I am an unassuming black lady, aware of a good amount of history, who prefers to avoid conflict, and only takes the lead when there is a vacum/need.   I am not on collarme to find the type of relationship most people are comfortable with or necessarily approve of.    I've had lovely D/s relationships, where the ranks simply were, and discussion of supremacy never came up, as we were simply ourselves enjoying the symbiosis. 

Evidently, even the dominant women here feel that supremacy, or dominant rank and authority, should be left to the men as that is the way of the world, or natural order of things.   At least so it would seem...  
I would just love to one day see one of these threads begun in "ask a master," or "gorean lifestyles."    Inquire about the kind of thinking that says women ought to be their submissives or slaves...  In fact, ask them where they get off thinking that way, and wanting what they want?   This of course never happens, because the women don't dare, and men generally don't hate themselves enough to break the image in the mirror IMHO.    M



Esstee -> RE: What do subs mean when they say "female superiority"? (3/2/2009 9:13:27 AM)

First, FullrigRIMAAM1,  I'd like to say that I've read many things you've written and very much enjoyed them. In general your writing causes me to think, and often to smile.

I agree that this is a male dominated, paternalistic society. (And, in my perception that's a problem that I've spent most of my adult life working on, but that's a tangent.)

Rather than female dominance being absurd , I think it's a natural repudiation of the way we were socialized to believe that aggressive qualities are essentially male and receptive qualities are essentially female. The social shorthand for this is "Boys will be boys and girls will not" in which we learn(ed) that boys practice doing what they want, in anticipation of becoming men, and girls practice participating in their own erasure by putting up with the boys' behaviour and demands, in anticipation of becoming women.

I think that the whole "sex superiority" thing, for either sex, is equally ridiculous. Males and females of the human species are quite a lot alike - certainly they're more like each other than either of them are like the males or females of any *other* species. It's because of this similarity that we assigned gender characteristics to the two sexes and began imposing them on humans from the minute they're born. As I see it, the invention of gender so that we could assign "normal" characteristics based on sex is a serious problem that we've been socialized into perceiving as forces of nature. Part of that problem is that women have been socialized to be in competition with each other - and express that socialization by criticizing various aspects of each other.

It takes all kinds, and we really are all kinds. Some women, and some men are naturally dominant. Some women and some men are naturally submissive. The "common sense" that tells us otherwise is socially constructed. It's that socially constructed common sense that keeps us upholding the status quo. 

Because distance is a prerequisite for perspective, sometimes being in some way marginalized (such as being sexually "deviant") helps us have some sort of perspective on other parts of our socialization, and challenges start to arise - which is what I see happening here.







FullfigRIMAAM1 -> RE: What do subs mean when they say "female superiority"? (3/2/2009 9:25:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Esstee
It takes all kinds, and we really are all kinds. Some women, and some men are naturally dominant. Some women and some men are naturally submissive. The "common sense" that tells us otherwise is socially constructed. It's that socially constructed common sense that keeps us upholding the status quo.
This makes a great deal of sense to me, in that it's much better (on the ego, lol) than simply considering oneself a deviant, who makes even a lot of women uncomfortable. 

quote:

Because distance is a prerequisite for perspective, sometimes being in some way marginalized (such as being sexually "deviant") helps us have some sort of perspective on other parts of our socialization, and challenges start to arise - which is what I see happening here.
Thank you Esstee for the awesome post, giving me a perspective I hadn't considered.   Especially since after reading it I said "of course!"...   And thank you for the kind words,    M



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125