RE: female Supremecy

RE: female Supremecy (Full Version)

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

Message

allthatjaz -> RE: female Supremecy (12/8/2009 4:29:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GYPSYMAMBO quote: all that jazz Most men could overpower a woman physically and most men are aware of this. Making a female supreme in their minds eye takes away the reality of man versus woman. This has nothing to do with supremacy of a being..other than for breeding purposes perhaps in cave days...wow In ancient times a Godessi was the higher archie, the untouchable for all but a few. She was a supreme being over men and nobody would of questioned it. THIS IS ABSOLUTLEY WRONG.... I am assuming your mean hierarchy??not archie and veronica>.?/ THE DIVINE was a FEMININE figure for 20,ooo years..ACCESSABLE..mothering ...caring nurturing..the giver of life..regenerative.. GODDESS figure/artifacts and drawings show this to be so until about 3000+ years ago. There was not a RANKING system of one over another...or rulers...or matriarchs.. but rather MATRI-FOCAL...MOTHER FOCUSED groups. Humans lives in partenership with no evidence of rape..warfare ........stealing etc. GODDESS WAS NOT UNTOUCHABLE..but accessable to all..a spirit within everything alive..and seen as benevolent... SHE WAS NOT SUPREME OVER MEN... SHE watched over all... She was supreme in the sense of exerting influence and quality of life. MALE/FEMALE PRINCIPLES WERE NOT POLARIZED BUT MANIFEST SIDE BY SIDE THE MALE PRINCIPLE WAS FULLY REAlized and not subordinate.. GODDESS archetypes/symbols or aspects of the inner self in early times were loving..caring...nurturing...UNTIL male rule took place starting with the waves of KURGANs on horse in the steppes of Russia.. As things progressed...MYTHS were re-written,words diabolized and women and earth suppressed,oppressed and raped to reflect a DOMINATOR RATHER THAN PARTNERSHIP ways... Earth Mother was replaced by an angry..vengeful sky god... and here we are... Civilizations of the GODDESS..GIMBUTUS WHEN GOD Was A WOMAN..STONE CATUL Hoyuk-Mellart THe Chalice and the BLADE/-EISLER Neolithic Society of the near east-Platt Quest for Mythic Mother..Orenstein Myth, religion and MOther rRte..MAnheim WOMAN SPIRIT RISING C.CHRIST THE WHITE GODDESS..GRAVES THE EARLY CIVILIZATIONS OF EUROPE- GIMBUTUS Supressed Her-story..Dashu GM note..excuse spelling as some of YOU know..I am 1/3 [8D] The whole point of the quote function on this board is to 'quote'. Highlighting my words is fine to help identify the part your interested in. But as a dyslexic your 'colorful' posts are impossible to read. And so as usual I am not able to read it.

azjojoba -> RE: female Supremecy (12/8/2009 5:04:00 PM)
I'm not sure why you need to consider females as superior -- just think of them as your boss and ruler. It can be argued that women are sexually superior, but of course physically us men are superior (at least in terms of strength).

GYPSYMAMBO -> RE: female Supremecy (12/8/2009 8:42:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: allthatjaz The whole point of the quote function on this board is to 'quote'. Highlighting my words is fine to help identify the part your interested in. But as a dyslexic your 'colorful' posts are impossible to read. And so as usual I am not able to read it. I shall consult your "godesi of higher archie" fr POST 14 for further guidance GM

LadyAngelika -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 2:30:27 AM)
quote: THE DIVINE was a FEMININE figure for 20,ooo years..ACCESSABLE..mothering ...caring nurturing..the giver of life..regenerative.. GODDESS figure/artifacts and drawings show this to be so until about 3000+ years ago. There was not a RANKING system of one over another...or rulers...or matriarchs.. but rather MATRI-FOCAL...MOTHER FOCUSED groups. Humans lives in partenership with no evidence of rape..warfare ........stealing etc. GODDESS WAS NOT UNTOUCHABLE..but accessable to all..a spirit within everything alive..and seen as benevolent... SHE WAS NOT SUPREME OVER MEN... SHE watched over all... She was supreme in the sense of exerting influence and quality of life. MALE/FEMALE PRINCIPLES WERE NOT POLARIZED BUT MANIFEST SIDE BY SIDE THE MALE PRINCIPLE WAS FULLY REAlized and not subordinate.. GODDESS archetypes/symbols or aspects of the inner self in early times were loving..caring...nurturing...UNTIL male rule took place starting with the waves of KURGANs on horse in the steppes of Russia.. As things progressed...MYTHS were re-written,words diabolized and women and earth suppressed,oppressed and raped to reflect a DOMINATOR RATHER THAN PARTNERSHIP ways... Earth Mother was replaced by an angry..vengeful sky god... and here we are... This is an interesting perspective. I won't claim to be an anthropological expert after a few courses during my undergrad, but I have to say I've never had this explained this way. And it makes sense! I always felt that in general, the way women lead is different than men. Sure, some great women leaders have adopted male approaches but that was, in my opinion, ways of integrating into the current system or cultural/political hegemony. But much as women have learned to adapt to a male ruled world, I believe that over time, men can change their ways and evolve towards a partnership model of leadership. It takes time, energy, education, evolution. - LA

beowulf1234 -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 5:59:08 AM)
At one point in my life I had served a Female Supremacist. She was big on the Cybelian way of life. Though not as extreme, she kept her superiority to herself and those circle of the same belief. Yes it can be difficult, but as a slave the Mistress' needs must come first. Even when sick, protocall and some chores must be done. I found it rewarding.

Underumam -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 8:45:08 AM)
Gypsy Mambo, I liked these words of yours."MALE/FEMALE PRINCIPLES WERE NOT POLARIZED BUT MANIFEST SIDE BY SIDE THE MALE PRINCIPLE WAS FULLY REAlized and not subordinate.. " Very well stated and truthful. Hopefully, we'll get back to that one day. (we'll die off as a species if we dont)

XYisInferior -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 10:44:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: walkonme10 Is it right that I want to give me, my soul to Female Supremecy? It sounds good to me. Then again, I'm clearly biased. [:D] Supremacy.

XYisInferior -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 11:14:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arrogance While the idea of Female Supremacy is somewhat ludicrous, I'm a tepid supporter of it for the simple fact that there is a lot of inequity in Western society that is beneficial to men. I support a movement elevating women because it works towards equity. That's called Feminism. Female Supremacy, while connected to Feminism, extends beyond interests in simple equality. Female Supremacy isn't about making things equal, and using it as a transient instrument to make things equal is what sounds ludicrous. Supremacy: Supreme power or authority.

undergroundsea -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 1:33:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: allthatjaz Making a woman supreme is to put ones head in an emotional state so that her dominance is realistic. When I dominate I need to feel superior. I can not for a moment believe that we are both equal because if I do it all starts to feel a bit silly. Otter... no matter how hard I work I will never earn supremacy over another...not in the real world. I may earn respect but not supremacy. Believing I am superior over men is ridiculous but believing I am superior over my sub is crucial... at least to me I agree with your points. I think that there is a greater tendency for such constructs in Fm, and that female supremacy serves as one such construct for some people. I often speak of constructs to make submission more believable and will see if I can pull up a writing on constructs that specifically discusses female superiority. While there are some for whom the concept of female superiority might also come from an intellectual belief, I expect for most it comes from an emotional or sexual place. Also, I think many who believe in female superiority in truth believe in dominant superiority. Because of their sex and sexual preference, they would submit to a woman (or they are women who wishes to be treated as a superior being). Wanting to give a superior status to a dominant (to whom one is appropriately attracted) who must be a woman leads to a notion of or is described as superiority of women in general. In other words, for some people a concept of dominant superiority is mixed up with or presented as a concept of female superiority. Cheers, Sea

Arrogance -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 5:45:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: XYisInferior quote: ORIGINAL: Arrogance While the idea of Female Supremacy is somewhat ludicrous, I'm a tepid supporter of it for the simple fact that there is a lot of inequity in Western society that is beneficial to men. I support a movement elevating women because it works towards equity. That's called Feminism. Female Supremacy, while connected to Feminism, extends beyond interests in simple equality. Female Supremacy isn't about making things equal, and using it as a transient instrument to make things equal is what sounds ludicrous. Supremacy: Supreme power or authority. That's cute if you want to look at female supremacy as any sort of reality. Sorry to burst your bubble your libido constructed, but it isn't. There's no basis for it.

Lockit -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 6:02:19 PM)
Now you did it Arrogance! He could attempt to show you. The last time that was argued... it took lots of reading... and far too many pages! lol Ahhh the bravery of the young... as for me... I'm gettin the hell outta dodge city! lol

PeonForHer -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 6:23:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: undergroundsea While there are some for whom the concept of female superiority might also come from an intellectual belief, I expect for most it comes from an emotional or sexual place. Sea So, you're saying that most people only really subscribe to the idea of female supremacy because it makes them wet or gives them a stiffy. Is that a fair interpretation of your contention here, Sea?

XYisInferior -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 7:12:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arrogance quote: ORIGINAL: XYisInferior quote: ORIGINAL: Arrogance While the idea of Female Supremacy is somewhat ludicrous, I'm a tepid supporter of it for the simple fact that there is a lot of inequity in Western society that is beneficial to men. I support a movement elevating women because it works towards equity. That's called Feminism. Female Supremacy, while connected to Feminism, extends beyond interests in simple equality. Female Supremacy isn't about making things equal, and using it as a transient instrument to make things equal is what sounds ludicrous. Supremacy: Supreme power or authority. That's cute if you want to look at female supremacy as any sort of reality. Sorry to burst your bubble your libido constructed, but it isn't. There's no basis for it. So you've gone from tepid supporter of FS (out of a desire for social equality, of all things) to FS having no basis whatsoever. Got it. But getting back to the point, the word you're looking for is Feminism.

XYisInferior -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 7:24:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: undergroundsea I agree with your points. I think that there is a greater tendency for such constructs in Fm, and that female supremacy serves as one such construct for some people. I often speak of constructs to make submission more believable and will see if I can pull up a writing on constructs that specifically discusses female superiority. While there are some for whom the concept of female superiority might also come from an intellectual belief, I expect for most it comes from an emotional or sexual place. What about "some other people" who do not practice FS as a "construct to make submission more believable" or an overglorified way of simply getting off? What about those who incorporate such beliefs into a practical way of living M/s?

Arrogance -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 8:13:40 PM)
My self-esteem just isn't low enough for me to think that all women are superior to me. I mean... I've seen Sarah Palin on the telly.

Lockit -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 8:16:01 PM)
[:D][:D][:D][:D][:D] I'm sure I could use her glasses for a great playtime though!

SomethingCatchy -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 8:26:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GYPSYMAMBO quote: ORIGINAL: walkonme10 . It is not just about sex to me but the fullfilment that I get from making life more easy for someone who is Female, I can't help it and I don't know where it has come from wow..THIS is NOT unusual [image]http://www.collarchat.com/micons/m28.gif[/image]..it is called a man and a woman in a relationship based on mutual respect..warmth and caring. That's along the lines of what I thought when I first read that line. What kind of man doesn't take care of his partner? Not the kind of man I'd be involved with!

Arrogance -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 8:27:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lockit [:D][:D][:D][:D][:D] I'm sure I could use her glasses for a great playtime though! If you were feeling extra-kinky you could grab her camo and guns, too. I'm a little new, but I think some people might call that "edge-play"? =P

Lockit -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 8:30:05 PM)
ROFL!

AquaticSub -> RE: female Supremecy (12/9/2009 8:46:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GYPSYMAMBO quote: ORIGINAL: allthatjaz The whole point of the quote function on this board is to 'quote'. Highlighting my words is fine to help identify the part your interested in. But as a dyslexic your 'colorful' posts are impossible to read. And so as usual I am not able to read it. I shall consult your "godesi of higher archie" fr POST 14 for further guidance GM Someone says they can't read your colorful posts cause they are dyslexic and your reponse is make them even harder for said person to read? [:-] Hell I can barely read your posts.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875