|
FetishPrincess1 -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (10/14/2012 7:49:34 PM)
|
Thank you very much for this post!
As a domme It feels good to hear something positive on CM for a change regarding this particular issue. Very well written!
quote:
ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009
This isn't really a question that I'm asking. It's actually an answer that I posted to the above question in a thread that got deleted. Fortunately, the Admin was kind enough to send me a copy of my response after she deleted the thread. I know that there is a new financial domination thread on CM just about every week. But I took a bit of time writing the response, so I wanted to share it. I think it may provide new insight to some who have closed minds when it comes to financial domination.
We see many threads on CM that deride financial Dommes. They're often called everything from "fakes", to "prostitutes". And in the deleted thread that I referenced above, someone even stated that financial domination isn't even a legitimate arm of kink/BDSM, and that it doesn't belong on CM. I couldn't disagree with that sentiment more, so here is my response to that assertion.
Financial domination IS a legitimate form of kink/BDSM.
Many lifestyle Doms/Dommes also control the finances of their subs/slaves. Some may do this in a benevolent way, with the focus being on helping their sub to manage their money better. Others may require that their subs/slaves pay for dates and other things (but is this really different from the societal norm that says that the man should pay?). Others may require a tribute, tithe, or other regular payment from their subs/slaves.
From the submissives' standpoint, this can give them feelings of power exchange. The financial Domme is in charge of their money, and the financial sub has no control over her spending. Whether you like it or not, that IS a legitimate form of power exchange.
Other financial subs view it more as a form of humiliation. The financial Domme frivolously spends his money, and then laughs at him for allowing her to do so.
Some financial subs/slaves also enjoy the added component of being blackmailed for their money. This is an extreme form of humiliation that also incorporates fear of public exposure.
Then there are those who feel like their money is granting them access to a beautiful woman who they'd never have access to otherwise. To them, paying "tribute" is the normal path to gaining access to a Domme. Whether it's on-line or in real time, their expectation is that they have to pull out their wallet in order to be granted access. This mindset is most similar to the traditional "John" who visits prostitutes. But because he's not paying for sex, she isn't a prostitute (even though some people on here persist in calling pro Dommes and financial Dommes "prostitutes"). [8|]
And of course there are the pro Dommes, who I believe provide a needed and valuable service to the BDSM community. There are far too many male subs, and far too few Dommes. Were it not for the pro Dommes, most male subs would never get to realize their submission dreams. While pro Dommes and financial Dommes are different, some insist upon lumping them into the same category.
I think that the problems arise because so many scammers have realized that there is an opportunity to take advantage of people, and they've entered the fray. These individuals have no knowledge or experience with D/s or BDSM. All they know is that they can get total strangers to send them money simply by posting hot pictures on the internet. They usually never meet with anyone in "real life", and their BDSM persona exists exclusively on the internet. They provide little D/s interaction with their "clients" other than to demand more stuff. In most instances, the photos that they include in their profile to attract "customers" are not even of themselves. Instead, they typically steal pictures from modeling agency websites. In my opinion, it is THESE people who have given financial domination a bad name. They have no background or knowledge that they are bringing to the transaction. They have no skill at dominating. All they have is greed. So the "financial sub" is not likely to get their money's worth.
This group is clearly setting a bad example in the BDSM community. We'd probably be better off without them (IMHO). But that doesn't change the fact that financial domination IS a legitimate form of kink/BDSM, and many "twue" Doms/Dommes incorporate it into their dynamic.
Any thoughts or rebuttals?
|
|
|
|
