undergroundsea
Posts: 2400
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Austin, TX
Status: offline
|
By tribute I mean a material offering that is critically required in what is otherwise a personal relationship.
Context matters and creates exceptions to general likelihoods. In general I seek a partner for a romantic BDSM companionship and I object when I perceive a sense of unworthiness attributed to male subs or myself that I find unerotic and disrespectful--be it a statement that I must have skills and perform acts of service in order to earn attention of a domme, or that I must somehow pay for a domme's time. The underlying sentiment I perceive in such a demand is that what I otherwise bring as a person is not enough. If I am not interesting enough to a given person, fair enough. I will then seek compatibility elsewhere rather than pay tribute.
I am also aware that my skills and my financial success are a part of who I am. Still, there is an inappropriate way to go about the matter. To convey my point, a woman knows her sensuality is part of who she is and that a man might have sexual expectations. However, if he brings focus to these traits at the outset and insists on sexual gratification at the outset, it will likely turn her off.
That I object to demands for service skills or demands for tribute in this manner does not mean I do not willingly perform acts of service or do not willingly extend material gestures of good will and appreciation when I am courting or in a relationship. Thus, to equate an objection to tribute to being cheap is an invalid equivalance.
An objection to giving tribute in order to earn time or attention does not translate to an objection against paying for coffee or a meal. I generally practice the latter but not the former.
Similarly, an objection to giving tribute upon first contact or in early stages of becoming acquainted does not translate to an unwillingness to offer control over finances to someone with whom one is in an established relationship.
On subject of paying for coffee or meals, I agree it is a nice, practical gesture that falls within chivalry. I expect that for most people in this discussion this issue does not arise when a relationship begins organically. I do, however, take issue with a sense of entitlement--I do not see it as a duty for men to treat and a right for women to be treated, but as a courtesy or friendly gesture extended by whoever extends this gesture.
I see a double standard at work by women who criticize men who do not treat if they themselves are not willing to even pay their share, let alone treat. And I see this double standard at work when a woman refuses to go on a second date with a man only because he did not treat on the first date.
As for comments by LadyH and Venatrix, I consider an interest in BDSM to be distributed across population. When I hear of a certain trend across a demographic, I wonder if some reasonable explanation exists. Intuitively, I do not see why submissive men would be inherently more cheap than other roles. Intuitively, I do see that they might be more cautious because of the reality that exists. If there are women who cannot grasp why submissive men might be cautious in this manner, it might help to browse profiles of dommes to see what submissive men see.
If it is reasonable for sincere submissive men to be aware that dominant women encounter many who are there to sexually use them and it is wise for the sincere ones to distinguish self from those who sexually use, it is reasonable for dommes to be aware that submissive men encounter many who are there to financially use them and it is wise for sincere ones to distinguish self from those who financially use.
quote:
In genuine bdsm Owner/slave relationships, both parties understand that slavery means ownership, and ownership means having a right to the time and labor of the slave. This legitimate right can be expressed in many ways, through actual work, as I did when I was owned while in school, or to payment of money which we have been calling tribute. I regret if you have not experienced the full joy of slavery. Without it, the rest of all of these activites are just play and play is for those too timid to risk the real thing.
BDSM relationship come in many flavors and they do not all involve slavery.
I disgaree that anything that is different than the level you practice is lesser and comes from timidness. I think there is no one way to do BDSM. Also, a person might not seek the type of dynamic you describe not for sake of timidness, but for sake of a greater balance between masochistic wants and wants for romance, companionship, and family in a manner that fulfills the masochistic and other components of one's psychology. I am not aware of what your ideal dynamic is like and might be incorrectly projecting a given M/s dynamic upon you which has a non-romantic interpersonal distance. Whether or not I am doing so, I think you are projecting your subjective wants and relationship philosophy on others, which does not always hold.
Cheers,
Sea
|
RE: BOIZ, LEMME TELL YOU HOW IT'S DONE....THAT TIRED OL... - 
Profile
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