RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s?

RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 1:22:36 PM)
I agree. I would like to hear more of this.

TheLilSquaw -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 1:23:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TNDommeK ~FAST REPLY~ To get back on topic: The male slaves that I chose, are those that are usually in charge on a day to day basis. They are men who normally do not submit to others. They are far from weak, as it takes a strong person to submit completely to a TPE relationship. Most male slaves I encounter and take on, are the strongest caliber of men in every day society. Like I said before, I want to know I have conquered a champion, not a bench warmer. I agree. The personals I take, are anything but weak. Hell some of the strongest men I know are submissive within their personal relationship. But then I have always said and believed that submitting to someone else's will was hard work and showed great personal strength.

TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 1:33:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheLilSquaw quote: ORIGINAL: TNDommeK ~FAST REPLY~ To get back on topic: The male slaves that I chose, are those that are usually in charge on a day to day basis. They are men who normally do not submit to others. They are far from weak, as it takes a strong person to submit completely to a TPE relationship. Most male slaves I encounter and take on, are the strongest caliber of men in every day society. Like I said before, I want to know I have conquered a champion, not a bench warmer. I agree. The personals I take, are anything but weak. Hell some of the strongest men I know are submissive within their personal relationship. But then I have always said and believed that submitting to someone else's will was hard work and showed great personal strength. This. I am a very complex person when it comes to serving Me. And therefor I always feel personal strength is a must. This shows how strong our slaves actually are and what they actually give in order to belong. Thus also the reasons why I do not feel they are losers or pigs etc. Mine are very valuable.

NocturnalStalker -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 1:36:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheLilSquaw quote: ORIGINAL: NocturnalStalker But do you see how illogical this sounds? If he is fantastic at communicating with others, why would he need to dangle a carrot-on-a-stick for her? This is why I find it ultimately pointless to speak to you since I know you're going to just keep babbling on and modifying what is said to benefit your stance regardless of any authenticity your statements hold. The end result will be you running us in circles until one of the draconian mods come to intervene (likely on your behalf if history is any indication). Personally, I think the men involved in this are creepy curs that couldn't enchant a woman if they had Merlin's wand. You're right. I will continue to stand my ground on what I believe and think. Why? Well it's called being true to myself. There are many things in my life I will not compromise on. And here is a news flash I don't apologize for that. I am curious though... Why is this relationship not authentic? Because it doesn't meet YOUR definition of what a relationship is? Why the childish, grammar school insults? Does it make you feel good about yourself? I am sorry to break it to you. I don't expect the mods to protect me for the likes of you or those like you. That those childish insults at me or at other's for taking part in fetishes such as financial domination or even a sugar daddy/sugar baby relationship. You would know that if you actually READ and comprehended what I typed instead of just jumping up and down and throwing a tantrum like a child because other people don't live in a manner that YOU dictate for them. I'm going to huff, puff and blow your house down I'm so angry! But really, it warrants my disapproval because it is a pathetic relationship kept together only by the interest of money. Take away the money, you lose the bridge. It's weak and silly for both involved which brings my words to express utter derision. The very essence of your example is based on monetary gain. You see it as romantic, I see it as stupid.

blueocean12 -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 1:48:09 PM)
i think finding a good relationship is very difficult period. Doesn't matter much which lifestyle or dynamic is in play. More important is there honesty, trust and loyalty between the two individuals. i like my Owner micromanaging me, being strict, mean and lecturing me. It is what She wants and expects ..... and what i need to be happy. i understand that others may think its crazy, i really don't care what they think, only what She thinks.

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 2:12:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheLilSquaw I don't expect the mods to protect me from the likes of you or those like you. Well no. Wasn't that clearly decided on somewhere in the first few pages. I thought it was us male dominants who were circling to be your protectors (and I'm still waiting for all you fin dommes to sned me some gift cards in appreciation for all my efforts -- or just blow Ron which I'd see as a valuable charity cause LOL) Now... to expose my own biases further... Let me comment on this statement: TNDommeK: They are far from weak, as it takes a strong person to submit completely to a TPE relationship. Yup, that makes me wince. For me, you can't have anything like what I'd call "total" without cohabitation -- and not just cohabitation but over a significant period of time. It isn't a findomme thing... it's a question of what is included in the word "total". I tend to be pretty mathematical and so I need to see something that looks an awful lot like legal slavery before it starts looking total to me. So in me that statement runs up against "trueness violations" which I wrestle down intellectually. But it remains absolutely certain that I recognize that what "total" means in that sentence isn't even remotely what "total" means when I use it.

TheLilSquaw -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 2:15:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC or just blow Ron which I'd see as a valuable charity cause LOL) I am making my charity list for the coming year. Perhaps Ron should be on it right under Native American AID and the Red Cross. winks

TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 2:33:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: TheLilSquaw I don't expect the mods to protect me from the likes of you or those like you. Well no. Wasn't that clearly decided on somewhere in the first few pages. I thought it was us male dominants who were circling to be your protectors (and I'm still waiting for all you fin dommes to sned me some gift cards in appreciation for all my efforts -- or just blow Ron which I'd see as a valuable charity cause LOL) Now... to expose my own biases further... Let me comment on this statement: TNDommeK: They are far from weak, as it takes a strong person to submit completely to a TPE relationship. Yup, that makes me wince. For me, you can't have anything like what I'd call "total" without cohabitation -- and not just cohabitation but over a significant period of time. It isn't a findomme thing... it's a question of what is included in the word "total". I tend to be pretty mathematical and so I need to see something that looks an awful lot like legal slavery before it starts looking total to me. So in me that statement runs up against "trueness violations" which I wrestle down intellectually. But it remains absolutely certain that I recognize that what "total" means in that sentence isn't even remotely what "total" means when I use it. I think I understand what you mean. Are you meaning "total" as in takes a looooooooooot of time to accomplish. Not only that but as you say "total" meaning, total slavery. I might be wrong, correct if so. I don't think right now I use that word in the mathematical sense as you do. I probably was loosely saying it. But I do mean it in a total, as in whole. If that makes sense. :) I think I confused Myself,lol. My head hurts now,lol. Thank you Blueocean, you are right in everything you say. I think at this point we are taking Jeff's advice to hide anyone who likes to add childish remarks. Ron I think does a great job of marketing his goals,lol. Although it would be funny for Me to make a T shirt that says "blowjobs for Ron, or DIE!" lol

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 2:38:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TNDommeK I think I understand what you mean. Are you meaning "total" as in takes a looooooooooot of time to accomplish. Not only that but as you say "total" meaning, total slavery. I might be wrong, correct if so. I don't think right now I use that word in the mathematical sense as you do. I probably was loosely saying it. But I do mean it in a total, as in whole. If that makes sense. :) I think I confused Myself,lol. My head hurts now,lol. Well, I was a bit confused about your viewpoint but you got my viewpoint pretty accurately. I think I own Carol as I own a dog. Although, now that I think on it, I suppose I could be some rich guy who had 200 pure bred whatevers on some dog farm somewhere that I never visited and I "owned" them. In real life, I'd venture to guess that every single one of their daily trainers owns them more than I do if push came to shove in the dog's mind. For me owning Carol is exactly like the legal version... sans paperwork. In fact, the litmus test I gave to her some time ago was that if it suddenly became legal... lock stock & barrel... including progeny... including death... no outs... would she sign the papers? If she would without hesitation then her own mental state is where I want it to be. If not, then she and I are perceiving her differently.

NocturnalStalker -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 2:42:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: blueocean12 i think finding a good relationship is very difficult period. Doesn't matter much which lifestyle or dynamic is in play. More important is there honesty, trust and loyalty between the two individuals. i like my Owner micromanaging me, being strict, mean and lecturing me. It is what She wants and expects ..... and what i need to be happy. i understand that others may think its crazy, i really don't care what they think, only what She thinks. It really isn't. Want to know why it may be for you? I forewarn you won't like the answer.

SeekingTrinity -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 2:46:51 PM)
~FRing it~ I fail to see how a grown adult elects to spend their money is the business of anyone else. Let alone to cast judgment on them or hurl insults at them for what they choose to do with their own money. Its not, no matter how inflated the ego of the one passing the judgment might be. Just sayin' Back to the topic at hand...what two consenting adults choose to do as far as their dynamic goes is the business of only two people. The two who are engaged in said dynamic. Period. End of story. Financial domination is not my personal cup of tea kink-wise, but then again...there are probably things that are my cup of tea kink-wise that are not shared favorably by another. To each their own and we all just need to let each other live our lives without passing judgment.

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 2:49:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeekingTrinity Back to the topic at hand...what two consenting adults choose to do as far as their dynamic goes is the business of only two people. The two who are engaged in said dynamic. Period. End of story. Financial domination is not my personal cup of tea kink-wise, but then again...there are probably things that are my cup of tea kink-wise that are not shared favorably by another. To each their own and we all just need to let each other live our lives without passing judgment. I disagree... and happily so does larger society. No, "consent" is not the be all and end all of everything. Yes, you can have abusive relationships in which consent is given. In fact, you get that an awful lot. I just don't think it's automatically true that all findommes are abusive any more than I think all male masters are abusive. I think some of both probably are.

TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 2:55:57 PM)
I agree with that as well...But I also agree with what SeekingTrinity said about to each their own. Fin Domme is a definite legit form of D/s. I always say in this alternative lifestyle no ones kink is better or worse than others. I think the moment one criticizes another for a specific kink is the moment that person reveals that they really do not have any idea what the term "fetish" means. Also shows the extreme need of mentoring or educating. If you can't respect others fetishes, how can you consider yourself a member of the fetish lifestyle? That's like a butcher who doesn't agree with the killing of animals..WTH?

SeekingTrinity -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 3:01:24 PM)
I also didnt want to direct my comment directly to the one person I was directing it to, if you get my drift [:)] Dont need to get a gold letter in my inbox lol. Ive just watched men who give money to findommes be called idiots and those who are findommes called scammers and frauds. While it is true that some may very well be, it isnt up to me or anyone else (read between the lines) to make judgments about what two people elect to do in their dynamic as far as money subs and findommes are concerned.

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 3:04:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TNDommeK If you can't respect others fetishes, how can you consider yourself a member of the fetish lifestyle? My standard answer to that? If my neighbors fetishized the barbecuing of babies I wouldn't be respectful of them or their fetish. Nope, I reserve the right to exercise judgement. The question in my mind is what SORT Of judgement am I exercising and whether it's as open-minded as I'd like it to be?

SeekingTrinity -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 3:34:51 PM)
I was actually saying what I said above with sticking to the topic of conversation for this particular thread in mind (about whether financial domination is a legitimate form of D/s) and not the grilling of small human types [:)]

TNDommeK -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 4:37:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: TNDommeK If you can't respect others fetishes, how can you consider yourself a member of the fetish lifestyle? My standard answer to that? If my neighbors fetishized the barbecuing of babies I wouldn't be respectful of them or their fetish. Nope, I reserve the right to exercise judgement. The question in my mind is what SORT Of judgement am I exercising and whether it's as open-minded as I'd like it to be? I was meaning that within the guidelines of not cooking babies ;) But I think you caught My drift. Meaning if one is into scat, I am definitely not[:'(] but, who am I to judge them and their fetish. Now if they are cooking babies, yea I would have an issue as well. LOL Seeking Trinity.."small human types" lol

NocturnalStalker -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 4:44:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TNDommeK quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: TNDommeK If you can't respect others fetishes, how can you consider yourself a member of the fetish lifestyle? My standard answer to that? If my neighbors fetishized the barbecuing of babies I wouldn't be respectful of them or their fetish. Nope, I reserve the right to exercise judgement. The question in my mind is what SORT Of judgement am I exercising and whether it's as open-minded as I'd like it to be? I was meaning that within the guidelines of not cooking babies ;) But I think you caught My drift. Meaning if one is into scat, I am definitely not[:'(] but, who am I to judge them and their fetish. Now if they are cooking babies, yea I would have an issue as well. LOL Seeking Trinity.."small human types" lol >Does not judge >Leaves "sick face" after mentioning fetish they dislike Oh...

JeffBC -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 5:10:26 PM)
Actually, no... I don't get your drift. Let me explain. My point is that I personally DO exercise judgement. Granted, my example was well beyond the norm (LOL) but the point remains. Accordingly, I also expect other people to exercise judgement and I expect they're going to do so along whatever lines they choose. So all the "you're a prostitute" people and all the "it's not real d/s" or "it's not a real relationship" people... they're just doing exactly what I do. The only difference is what measures we're using to do our judgement. Obviously, based on the contentiousness of the issue, you fin d/s people are bringing something to the table that some, at least, consider outside the BDSM norm so I think it's perfectly appropriate that judgement occurs. Like you, I'd wish for a BDSM landscape that judged on issues other than "it seems weird to me".

TheLilSquaw -> RE: Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? (1/8/2013 5:19:35 PM)
I believe so many people attack and challenge financial domination and those that participate in it because they don't understand it and it's natural to fear or even hate that which you don't understand. If you don't understand it or can't grasp it it can often be seen as a threat to your way of life, to your definition of what d/s or power exchange is. I also think that as human beings we are hard wired to a degree to fear the unknown. Now what we do with that fear is up to us. Do you choose to act out of fear or to educate yourself.

Page: << < prev 30 31 [32] 33 34 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875