quote:

ORIGINAL: VeryMercurial

quote:

ORIGINAL: XYisInferior

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
b) the fact that the proportion of femdoms to submales is so skewed, as well as a bunch of other things. 

I tend to believe the proportion isn't as skewed as many may think. Genuinely submissive men are rare; I think many dominant Females can attest to that. Subtract the half-balding middle-aged masochists and fetishists and young studs looking for what is essentially a booty call in leather and you have a much narrower set of men standing.

I agree with this statement, I will even add that when you subtract the other categories there is a very, very tiny set of men standing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElanSubdued

I'm not sure I find this style of labeling productive or helpful.  Regardless of which side of the gender equation you look from, the potential is there for misguided hubris and elitism.

Finding a compatible partner is difficult for anyone, be they vanilla or kinky.  As for filtering statements about submissive men, one could easily make similar statements about any, kinky demographic.  Example: the domineering dominant who really isn't dominant at all.  There are certainly plenty of these and one might be tempted to conclude that actual dominants are few and far between.  Do you see my point?  What's the value in carrying around this kind of mentality?  It's certainly unattractive to your target audience.

When intellectual attraction, pheromones, physical attraction, geographic issues, economic concerns, social backgrounds and differences, religious backgrounds and differences, sexual desires, educational goals, career goals, life goals, concerns regarding children, and many other factors all come together and gel, relationships are often magical.  We humans have complicated mating and partnering rituals.  Despite this and all the potential mismatches, I meet many people whose company is an absolute joy, pleasure, and privilege to experience and share.  Carry this kind of mindset and your view changes considerably.

Ironically, it seems a significant hurdle kinksters must sometimes overcome is a mindset focused on roles (dominants, switches, submissives, slaves, etc.) instead of people.  Given a people-focused instead of role-focused perspective, it's easier not to be marginalized and overcome by the masses (especially in a communications medium like Collar Me).  True enough, the very nature of a forum such as "Ask A Mistress" tends to place BDSM roles at the forefront of each participant's mind.  But, that's easy to counteract.

I often see submissives asking how to approach dominants or, conversely, dominants asking for advice on showing affection to submissives without losing the "dominant mystique".  Truth be told, I've yet to meet anyone who doesn't appreciate being approached with courtesy, a sense of humour, intelligence, friendliness, empathy, and respect.  This is a great starting point for anyone, regardless of gender and role, and it's a wonderful continuation point too.

Alright.  I've used up my self-allotted posting time for today.  I'm off. :-)

Elan.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama



Simple.  Both male and female dominants are inclined to make sure their needs are met by their submissive partners in a D/S dynamic.  The needs of a man are much less likely to be economic than they are to be sexual and domestic, in our society. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama
But for some reason, sexual and domestic needs in a dominant are sacralized as "correct", while material resources and labor are often demonized as "incorrect" or "morally wrong" contributions from a submissive--not because there is any real harm associated with the fulfillment of these needs, but because they are not as common in men as they are in women, and only the dominant needs of men are "correct" and "ok".

quote:

ORIGINAL: NoreenSwan

Yup. Bottoms shouldn't feel insulted that they are bottoms. Nothing wrong with kinksters. But all bottoms and switches and switches into men aren't the type of men a domme wants. Why do you think there's so much a disparity between what these alpha women are saying and what these so-labelled "subs" are saying. Total mismatch. But hey how many "subs" er bottoms are still looking.

quote:

Yup. Bottoms shouldn't feel insulted that they are bottoms. Nothing wrong with kinksters. But all bottoms and switches and switches into men aren't the type of men a domme wants. Why do you think there's so much a disparity between what these alpha women are saying and what these so-labelled "subs" are saying. Total mismatch. But hey how many "subs" er bottoms are still looking.

quote:

Because the ones who are demonizing about dominant women getting SERVED are BOTTOMS and SWITCHES and other female kinksters because for some reason they are threatened by female power or jealous.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CarrieO

quote:

Because the ones who are demonizing about dominant women getting SERVED are BOTTOMS and SWITCHES and other female kinksters because for some reason they are threatened by female power or jealous.

I find these statements to be more than a bit ironic given that they're being said by a person who chooses to label themself as a switch.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElanSubdued

<snip>

It's certainly unattractive to your target audience.

When intellectual attraction, pheromones, physical attraction, geographic issues, economic concerns, social backgrounds and differences, religious backgrounds and differences, sexual desires, educational goals, career goals, life goals, concerns regarding children, and many other factors all come together and gel, relationships are often magical.  We humans have complicated mating and partnering rituals.  Despite this and all the potential mismatches, I meet many people whose company is an absolute joy, pleasure, and privilege to experience and share.  Carry this kind of mindset and your view changes considerably.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

You assume here that people see physical intimacy the same as they do money, and I'm not so sure that's a very common perception, notwithstanding your advocacy for this position. To me, its apples and oranges. Its kind of like comparing a job (where you get paid) to a hobby (which you practice out of personal interest.)

Some people obviously are able to connect physical intimacy with money, in the same way that many submissive men connect physical intimacy with footwear, or gender-inappropriate clothing, or age-inappropriate clothing and behavior, etc..  They call them "fetishes" for a reason, I'm afraid.  The juxtaposition of sexual arousal with something that in the vanilla world is NOT sexually charged is pretty common in this community.

As for "advocating a position"--I am not a financial player myself.  I simply don't think it is a kink or behavior that is substantially worse or less moral than any other power exchange.  ALL d/s activities are dangerous and even potentially deadly in the hands of an abuser.