RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship

RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress

Message

ShaktiSama -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 9:48:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NoreenSwan And I find it interesting that you downplay years of oppression, rape, beatings and denial of basic rights of women yet you make a post complaining that some men get treated unfairly. She has a right to have a personal stance on that subject or any other. And, quite honestly, I do not follow the Israeli Fascist logic that because someone has treated one group badly in the historical past, that this group has a carte blanche to disregard the rights of others. If men are treated unfairly or badly in our community, it IS a problem and one that we should at least think about and try to address.

OttersSwim -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 9:52:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NoreenSwan And I find it interesting that you downplay years of oppression, rape, beatings and denial of basic rights of women yet you make a post complaining that some men get treated unfairly. Men do get treated unfairly. How do the "sins of the past" or the fortune/misfortune of a person's birth gender give another a free pass to treat them unfairly or with malice? More importantly, what you are saying implies that I - a male living in today - should be painted with the same broad brush that males born two hundred years before me are. Yes, women were oppressed....so were Blacks and Jews and Gypsies a whole host of others. People used to drown kittens in bags for God's sake! [:o] It still happens today, but to a different/lesser degree. But I ain't opressin' nobody, so kindly let me, and broad generalizations about my sex, alone...IMO, the "sins of the past" have little bearing on the present.

LadyPact -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 10:02:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aidan quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact I'm curious to know what leads you to think that the leather community is made up of complete strangers. There are a number of folks from across the country who know each other from place to place as we see each other at the same events a number of times during the year. It's no different than any other type of BDSM community. There are rope enthusiasts who see each other at ShibariCon and similar events that know each other and have the same type of common link. But people in the leather community, or in the shibari community, or any community, do not know each other when they first enter into it. When you first enter or join a community, the people in it are for the most part indeed strangers. They are people you are not familiar with. And even further, just because we are familiar with people on this board does not mean that they are not still "strangers" in some conception. It's not an invalid stance to say that somebody is still predominately a stranger if you have not met them face to face and put in the effort to cultivate a personal relationship. I have to agree with Mistress (and I know that's gonna count for a whole lotta nothin' to a lot of folks since...well, you know...) that the idea of letting people I don't know tell me how I can and cannot define myself within the deeply personal realm of sexuality and intimacy is highly off-putting. A question: what should younger dominants, coming in relatively inexperienced, call themselves? What is wrong with the term "Mistress" to apply to a woman 18 to whatever? For some common reference, here are the first few definitions from the Merriam-Webster dictionary: "1 : a woman who has power, authority, or ownership: as a : the female head of a household b : a woman who employs or supervises servants c : a woman who is in charge of a school or other establishment d : a woman of the Scottish nobility having a status comparable to that of a master 2 a chiefly British : a female teacher or tutor b : a woman who has achieved mastery in some field 3 : something personified as female that rules, directs, or dominates" Truthfully, aidan, I'd have been somewhat disappointed if you didn't agree with Her. I tend to think this is one of those issues that contributes to compatibility. I think you would be worlds apart if one of you felt opposed to My opinion and the other agreed with it. That is a far different topic than the original and I'm already straying the course far enough. By definition, however, you are proving My case. In two out of three of the listings, it implies that the M type is relating to a s type. If that is not the case, My questions would be power over whom? Authority over whom? Who is s/he receiving service from if supervising it? If there is a household, who else is a member of it? The second definition when applied to a BDSM context seems to imply skill. Truth be told, topping skills really aren't that difficult to acquire. Darn near anybody can do it if they apply themselves. It's not brain surgery. Learning to swing a whip or tie a knot pales by comparrison. Again, I am going too far off of the topic so let Me put it another way. For arguement's sake, let's say that I have a Dominant personality. (Big stretch, right?) I happen to be married to a male who is not submissive, nor do we have an authority imbalance in our relationship in any way. We have an equal partnership. If I now, or never had boys in My collar, wouldn't slapping the Mistress label on Myself imply something that didn't exist? I'd see Myself as a fraud the same as I would if I called Myself a skydiver or a deep sea fisherman. Not everybody is going to see the subject as the way that I do. I'm fine with that. Yet, if it's acceptable for someone to think they are a M type just because that is what they want to achieve someday, it is just as acceptable for Me to say that I couldn't apply that to Myself unless I've done something toward that goal first.

ShaktiSama -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 10:11:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact I'm curious to know what leads you to think that the leather community is made up of complete strangers. There are a number of folks from across the country who know each other from place to place as we see each other at the same events a number of times during the year. It's no different than any other type of BDSM community. There are rope enthusiasts who see each other at ShibariCon and similar events that know each other and have the same type of common link. Honestly, I consider virtually everyone in the bdsm community a complete stranger, until I've met and interacted with them on a personal level. And even the on-line acquaintances I have that I genuinely like are NOT people that I would allow to dictate something as personal as my sexual identity or the words that are used in my personal relationships. I would never in a million years submit myself to that kind of control from people who have not and will NEVER earn that kind of trust. quote: It's true that many people chose a name that is an aspiration, rather than a reflection of who they are and what experiences they have encountered. I could start calling Myself an expert horse trainer, thinking that is what I might want to do that someday. Expert horse trainers are generally people who hang out a shingle and have a business. As such they must live up to standards that are set by the marketplace. They are also expected to control large, dangerous animals who have no control over themselves by nature, and teach them to be useful and obedient. If you are a professional domina, and your business revolves around "breaking" humans who are physically dangerous and have no control over themselves by nature to make them useful and obedient? Then yes, I guess there might be some real harm associated with using the word "Mistress" when you have no experience. In the real world, where dominance, submission, topping and bottoming, and ownership are really all just fun games that consenting adults who are NOT criminally insane play? Sorry, but I don't believe your logic holds. A horse doesn't WANT to be trained; a submissive man does, which is what makes the act of dominating him acceptable and fun, rather than criminal and morally reprehensible. I don't believe that people should lie when they are asked about their level of experience, but I also do not believe that putting a Dominant Tag on yourself to identify your orientation and needs to others is a lie just because you don't have years of experience as a top or slave owner. Most dominants are dominant from a very early age, long before they step out into the world as sexual beings. It's an orientation as basic as gay or straight, not just a job you learn to do over time. quote: And, I'm honestly not saying that people have to live up to the standards that I've set for Myself. That is their own personal choice. They can be a self appointed Mistress/Master all they like, but it doesn't mean that I'm going to agree with them. They are absolutely free to have their own standard, just the same as I'm entitled to Mine. Well, you started this thread with the argument that there is a standard that should be applied to everyone, and which is unilaterally applied to men. I can't disagree with you on how this standard is applied to men, because I honestly don't know the facts. You are probably right about it. But when it comes to having an Old Guard standard applied to everyone, regardless of whether they want to be part of that club--I do disagree. Speaking to the idea that someone else's dominant identity is "self-appointed"? I gather you think that's a bad thing, but again I disagree. I have at least as much respect for people who determine their own identity as people who allow who they are, or who they can be, to be dictated by strangers--or even people who would be, by your description, friendly acquaintances.

LadyPact -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 11:31:37 AM)
One quick interjection here regarding your comment, Noreen. Shatki and I have debated a number of things over the past couple of years. We have vastly different ways of doing things. Probably further apart than most. Yet, neither of us treats the other with discourtesy or disrespect. We've often been complimented in knowing how to play in the big girl's sandbox with each other. We each bring differing view points to challenge the other, rather than resort to personal attacks. I can appreciate her for that and I hope she sees Me the same way......... Even with the stray capital M or lower case s. quote: ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama quote: ORIGINAL: NoreenSwan And I find it interesting that you downplay years of oppression, rape, beatings and denial of basic rights of women yet you make a post complaining that some men get treated unfairly. She has a right to have a personal stance on that subject or any other. And, quite honestly, I do not follow the Israeli Fascist logic that because someone has treated one group badly in the historical past, that this group has a carte blanche to disregard the rights of others. If men are treated unfairly or badly in our community, it IS a problem and one that we should at least think about and try to address.

NoreenSwan -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 12:09:54 PM)
Firstly ladypact, what do I care about your relationship with her? So what. Does this make you extra special or something? Does that make you any better of a woman because you have this relationship with her? Frankly I couldn't really care less. Secondly, I never said you can't have your own opinion and neither did we promote two wrongs making a right for the simple fact that it's not. Umm, what I find just melts my butter and totally hilarious is-your complaints about men getting treated unfairly in the bdsm community and at the same time your condescending attitude about the horrendous unfair treatment of women and minorities by men for years and years. And moreover, why do you care what someone titles themselfs with? So what if they do call themselves master-mike or whatever. Why should there be standards according to you? Who makes the standards? Why do they have to live up to your standards? I say they can call themselfs mastermike according to their own standards, and NOT yours. :shrug: You capitalize yourself as if we are supposed to take you as some authority figure or something. So we all have to deal with things odd to us. ::shrug::

LadyPact -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 12:27:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact I'm curious to know what leads you to think that the leather community is made up of complete strangers. There are a number of folks from across the country who know each other from place to place as we see each other at the same events a number of times during the year. It's no different than any other type of BDSM community. There are rope enthusiasts who see each other at ShibariCon and similar events that know each other and have the same type of common link. Honestly, I consider virtually everyone in the bdsm community a complete stranger, until I've met and interacted with them on a personal level. And even the on-line acquaintances I have that I genuinely like are NOT people that I would allow to dictate something as personal as my sexual identity or the words that are used in my personal relationships. I would never in a million years submit myself to that kind of control from people who have not and will NEVER earn that kind of trust. That's fair enough. I don't really see any online acquaintance as a part of the BDSM community that I attend. Sure, there are a number of people on this site that I enjoy reading their comments and I think we would get along famously in real life. However, anyone that I have ever said in recognition that they are a part of the community that I attend, is someone that I have seen with My own eyes show up at the door. quote: It's true that many people chose a name that is an aspiration, rather than a reflection of who they are and what experiences they have encountered. I could start calling Myself an expert horse trainer, thinking that is what I might want to do that someday. Expert horse trainers are generally people who hang out a shingle and have a business. As such they must live up to standards that are set by the marketplace. They are also expected to control large, dangerous animals who have no control over themselves by nature, and teach them to be useful and obedient. If you are a professional domina, and your business revolves around "breaking" humans who are physically dangerous and have no control over themselves by nature to make them useful and obedient? Then yes, I guess there might be some real harm associated with using the word "Mistress" when you have no experience. One of the issues that a lot of people tend to fall back on with the leather community is that there is no standard measurement of achievement. It's not like being an accredited lawyer who has passed the bar, rather than someone who has handled their own civil case. Both can win at trial, but I'm going to have more faith in one rather than the other. Let's not confuse the professional issue with this. There are a number of gals out there who have figured that this is a way to make a buck. That doesn't make them skilled in their profession. Yet, anybody who decides to throw that "pro" label on themselves without practical knowledge has a potential to harm. The same is true for those who aren't making bank. quote: In the real world, where dominance, submission, topping and bottoming, and ownership are really all just fun games that consenting adults who are NOT criminally insane play? Sorry, but I don't believe your logic holds. A horse doesn't WANT to be trained; a submissive man does, which is what makes the act of dominating him acceptable and fun, rather than criminal and morally reprehensible. The wanting to be trained is inconsequential. As they say, it's all fun and games until someone puts an eye out. quote: I don't believe that people should lie when they are asked about their level of experience, but I also do not believe that putting a Dominant Tag on yourself to identify your orientation and needs to others is a lie just because you don't have years of experience as a top or slave owner. Most dominants are dominant from a very early age, long before they step out into the world as sexual beings. It's an orientation as basic as gay or straight, not just a job you learn to do over time. And, I'm honestly not saying that people have to live up to the standards that I've set for Myself. That is their own personal choice. They can be a self appointed Mistress/Master all they like, but it doesn't mean that I'm going to agree with them. They are absolutely free to have their own standard, just the same as I'm entitled to Mine. As I've said before, I have My own different definitions of top, Dominant, and Master/Misterss. You are adding here another separate one of slave owner. Why would anyone call themselves a slave owner who has never owned a slave? Topping, I believe, is a job that you learn to do over time. It doesn't take a lot of time, but there is some learning involved. quote: Well, you started this thread with the argument that there is a standard that should be applied to everyone, and which is unilaterally applied to men. Acutally, I looked back. I used the word should a couple of times. I said that males should be treated the same as fenales. For better or worse, I do believe that. I also said that if I was going to claim Myself as a M type, I should be willing to work just as hard to be that as My male counterparts. Not everyone is going to aspire to that. For Me, I'm never going to be satisfied with the thought that I'm a good top because I have tits. I'm a good top because I've worked on becoming skilled. I won't settle for less. quote: I can't disagree with you on how this standard is applied to men, because I honestly don't know the facts. You are probably right about it. But when it comes to having an Old Guard standard applied to everyone, regardless of whether they want to be part of that club--I do disagree. All of the statements that I have made have been prefereced with the comment that these things are My opinion. It's the way I live. I don't expect everyone to live the same way. At the same time, if someone asks what My standard is and they don't see themselves as having accomplished that, do not blame Me. Maybe that will be what drives them to aspire to be something more, if they feel they are lacking. If they were confident enough in their own position as a M type, they wouldn't be asking Me in the first place. quote: Speaking to the idea that someone else's dominant identity is "self-appointed"? I gather you think that's a bad thing, but again I disagree. I have at least as much respect for people who determine their own identity as people who allow who they are, or who they can be, to be dictated by strangers--or even people who would be, by your description, friendly acquaintances. I never said that about someone's Dominant identity. I did, however say that it matters when someone claims themselves a Master/Mistress. At the very minimum, there should be an s type who applies that label to them as well. Edited for the quoting feature that I messed up several times.

ShaktiSama -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 12:31:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NoreenSwan Firstly ladypact, what do I care about your relationship with her? You should care about the "relationship" because there is a right way and a wrong way to interact with your peers as a dominant. LadyPact and I disagree on a number of subjects. Our disagreements can become quite heated from time to time. But I would never stoop to spelling her name in lower case letters or any other such childish stunt to try to diminish or insult her. It isn't necessary. When I speak to her, whether in posts or in person, I am addressing an equal and I behave accordingly. If you want other people to respect you and listen when you speak, whether they agree with you or not, you need to treat them as you want to be treated.

PeonForHer -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 12:40:45 PM)
Deleted. Too silly.

LadyPact -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 1:00:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NoreenSwan Firstly ladypact, what do I care about your relationship with her? So what. Does this make you extra special or something? Does that make you any better of a woman because you have this relationship with her? No, it only shows that I have a sense of decorum. quote: Frankly I couldn't really care less. Secondly, I never said you can't have your own opinion and neither did we promote two wrongs making a right for the simple fact that it's not. Umm, what I find just melts my butter and totally hilarious is-your complaints about men getting treated unfairly in the bdsm community and at the same time your condescending attitude about the horrendous unfair treatment of women and minorities by men for years and years. Wrong again. What I said was that the unfair treatment of women and minorities for years and years have no direct effect on Me. What they suffered is not something I should benefit from. I should not be compensated for the victimization or another, nor should I be accountable for My father's sins. quote: And moreover, why do you care what someone titles themselfs with? So what if they do call themselves master-mike or whatever. Why should there be standards according to you? Who makes the standards? Why do they have to live up to your standards? I say they can call themselfs mastermike according to their own standards, and NOT yours. :shrug: You capitalize yourself as if we are supposed to take you as some authority figure or something. So we all have to deal with things odd to us. ::shrug:: I made My own standards. In case you didn't notice, I didn't consult you during any time that I did so. If you are so inclined, you may want to read what I and many others have said on the topic regarding how we came to our own conclusions. If My opinion is so unworthy, no one would allow it to bother them if they disagreed with it. Edited for...... Damn! Two in a row for the quote feature. I'm slipping in My old age.

Lockit -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 1:20:08 PM)
I don't see how defending one group of people can mean that we are ignoring what another suffered. That isn't even something I could consider. We cannot blame all for what some do and to justify poor treatment of someone becasue someone else of the same grouping did bad things is really silly in my opinion. Two wrongs don't make a right. (Man I hate when I have to drag out pat answer's. lol) I will never be a master or mistress with certain skills because I have no interest in them. I do consider myself a dominant and mistress when I have a submissive, but that is a rare title for me. I actually don't even care for it in most situations. Had I found certain things of interest, I would make sure I was taught, able and safe in doing them before I claimed to be a master of it. I won't speak of it if I don't have a clue about it. Mistress can mean many things in my view... but there are limitations of what that means. Because there are so many things we are all different in, I think some may assume mistress means things that it may not in individual situations and yet still means mistress to the people involved. I have no beef with any of it. I do however have a beef with unskilled people doing things that could result in harm with no training or clue, acting as if they have a clue. You don't see me commenting on how to do certain things such as a whip or fireplay. You will see me sitting there and reading about it though! lol And if I ever decide to do either you can bet I will be learning from someone who has the skill. I would say that knowing someone has been capped and trained and has experience that has been built and brought about and tested, is someone I would trust far more in these things. I think it has merit. But at the same time because I am not interested in much of what gets a person capped... I think I am using the right term here... forgive me if I am not.... doesn't mean I am not mistress of what I do take on. I will have baby steps in some things and full on... dominant queen of the house in other's. lol So far it hasn't done me too bad.

PeonForHer -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 1:35:26 PM)
Two wrongs don't make a right. (Man I hate when I have to drag out pat answer's. lol) In individual ethics "two wrongs do not make a right", but that doesn't seem to hold true when applied to social and political ethics. A bad ethic often just becomes 'respectable', somehow, when we're talking of groups rather than individuals. No idea why. Freud once said that people, in groups, act like one big, stupid, childish individual. Maybe he got something right for once . . .

NoreenSwan -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 1:46:22 PM)
"The years of oppression, yadda, yadda" You come off ignorant when you down play what happened to your own gender by saying "blah blah blah, the years of oppression", yet you make a big production out of a few men getting treated unfairly in some bdsm community. "What I and others..." Oh, how we just love to have the team behind us, huh, lady pack? teehee. [8D] Right, your standards are your own and you shouldn't think others need to follow your standards. If you agree, than good.[sm=applause.gif]

Lockit -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 2:01:32 PM)
Oh dear god Noreen! I have been raped and abused before... not one man, but let me tell you that group rape thing could have tainted me for life had I let it! I have fought for many changes in my life time to protect other women and I have fought for father's rights. There is no one who hasn't been hurt somewhere in life or some group that didn't do wrong somewhere in history. I know that LP has worked in some of the same area's as I have. Because one or both of us... which we both did, state that some males are treated differently than women around here for various reasons, does not mean that we are covering up, forgetting or making allowance for other atrosities. Your anger and unresolved issues in these area's are very clear. Could we agree on some things... oh yes... but we have very different solutions.

LadyPact -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 2:13:20 PM)
Again, no, I don't deserve anything that was labored on the back of another. Plain English. quote: ORIGINAL: NoreenSwan "The years of oppression, yadda, yadda" You come off ignorant when you down play what happened to your own gender by saying "blah blah blah, the years of oppression", yet you make a big production out of a few men getting treated unfairly in some bdsm community. Yes, I am more interested in the imbalances today than what happened a thousand years ago. There is a benefit from learning history, not in living in it. quote: "What I and others..." Oh, how we just love to have the team behind us, huh, lady pack? teehee. [8D] If I have the permission for those who have emailed Me privately on the topic, I'll be more than happy to forward the notes to you. As for your "tee hee" in being discourteous in spelling My name incorrectly, I hope that gave you a little joy in your life for today. I get the feeling you might need some. Bless your heart. quote: Right, your standards are your own and you shouldn't think others need to follow your standards. If you agree, than good.[sm=applause.gif] I do. Also, I'd like to mention again that My standards are My own, after years of thoughts on the subject. Not because somebody else had to tell Me what they are. I formulated My opinion after years of contemplation and input. That means input from a variety of sources. As I see it, when someone asks, I am a part of that input, so they can make decisions for themselves. They might decide that what they are doing is good enough, too much, or desire to be something more. No, I'm not going to coddle them and see them from day one as the way I do from those who helped to teach Me who have thirty years in the lifestyle. If they don't like My opinion, they don't have to listen to it. My opinion is only one of many. In My own personal research of any topic, I don't just settle for the information that I agree with or from sources that I like. I take everything into consideration and make My decisions accordingly.

LadyPact -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 2:27:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lockit Oh dear god Noreen! I have been raped and abused before... not one man, but let me tell you that group rape thing could have tainted me for life had I let it! I have fought for many changes in my life time to protect other women and I have fought for father's rights. There is no one who hasn't been hurt somewhere in life or some group that didn't do wrong somewhere in history. I know that LP has worked in some of the same area's as I have. Because one or both of us... which we both did, state that some males are treated differently than women around here for various reasons, does not mean that we are covering up, forgetting or making allowance for other atrosities. Your anger and unresolved issues in these area's are very clear. Could we agree on some things... oh yes... but we have very different solutions. I'm not sure of how many of us there are on the site that have worked/volunteered in shelters. Off of the top of My head, I know there is you, Stella, and Myself. I'm sure there are more out there, but the connections aren't coming to My head at the moment. I hope that anybody with that experience will please chime in. Of course, non-consensual abuse is wayyyyyyy off topic. Then again, maybe not. One difference between male Dominance and female Domination. Males aren't having females submit to them in their desire to 'get back' at the opposite gender. At least I don't see that. It may be true in some cases where it applies to women. Included in that, you have to account for those who seem to perpetuate the myth. ETA.... Three strikes on editing. I'm out for a bit.

LanceHughes -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 5:38:27 PM)
After total read thru.... (honest, total) ::: sigh ::: Girls, girls, girls. Please stop the cat fighting (which is being conducted in oh, so polite a way) or Daddy will come and spank you! Oh, yeah, Lance. Like that's going to make them behave. LOL! Mind you, I am NOT trying to thread-jack by inserting a M/m veiwpoint, but as an Old Guard Leatherman (read gay) with more than 25 years in the scene, I wanted to put my 2 cents in here. I'm finding some of the examples of male-led relationships right on and some way off point. Which? Well, I'm still thinking about the gender issues affecting how I respond to my slaves/subs. One point that I would like to make is that my scene name is Mr.G (Lance Hughes is my screen name and nom de plume.) I could have named myself Master Jim (or whatever) years ago, but I truly believe that when others (s-types and D-types included) call you "a Master," then and only then have you acheived some form of mastery of WIITWD. Please notice that I said "A Master." To me, there is only one group of people that should address me as "Master" and that is my slaves. I agree that newbies calling themselves "Master Xyz" or "Mistress Abc" is dangerous to other newbies that think "Ah.... JUST what I'm looking for - a Mistress." I consider it a form of false advertising. Of course, there is no World-Wide Agency for the Licensing of BDSM Practioneers." (That all said, I think the whole discussion about what newbies call themselves is contributing to string drift and I'd like it to be moot, but of course, it's not moot. However, I think we've beaten that dead horse enough and would like to get closer to the OPing of differences discussion.) So, for myself, I make my profile tell a little about myself and wait for the flys to enter my web....... er, I mean... and wait for people to suggest that they found what they read to be interesting. We go from there by me asking them what they have to offer to the relationship. If 'tis a porno-slave (or equally bad a do-me-bottom), they're lucky to get a reply. So, Lance..... what the HELL are you butting into the ladies room for? Just thought I'd say that I see little difference between between fem-led and male-led relationships in an idealized BDSM world. AND I see some larger (but still small) differences in RL, with, of course, what works for one probably doesn't work for another.

LanceHughes -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 5:44:40 PM)
<<----- P.S. I think some of those leathers shown to the left are where the fetish clothing people first got their ideas of what was hawt wrt BDSM. All of the leathers shown are from last century. LOL! (Motorcycle leathers/Army flight jackets and such were what leathermen wore right after WWII. Draw a straight line to the picture you see.) Straight??? You know what I mean.

NoreenSwan -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 6:00:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact One difference between male Dominance and female Domination. Males aren't having females submit to them in their desire to 'get back' at the opposite gender. At least I don't see that. It may be true in some cases where it applies to women. Included in that, you have to account for those who seem to perpetuate the myth. You're completely out of your mind if you think misogynist men don't slap the Dom veil on to abuse women in this lifesstyle. Jiminy Cricket, you're either in denial or just plain ignorant.

dcnovice -> RE: Principles of a Female Led Relationship (9/24/2009 6:09:50 PM)
quote: I'm not sure of how many of us there are on the site that have worked/volunteered in shelters. Off of the top of My head, I know there is you, Stella, and Myself. In college, I volunteered in homeless shelters. Not sure if that's germane here, though.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875