RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy?

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (Full Version)

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

Message

shiftyw -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/10/2015 9:51:44 PM)
I got that idea from here: quote: ! Sorry, I'm trying to take this seriously but there are real causes out there in the world you can devote your time to if you're that concerned with injustice. I don't have to act like a human rights activist on a forum in order to get applause. There's talk vs action and well you know, reality and all. And if those guys didn't take me seriously at work- I would be mad. I would do everything to get them fired, and they can go whine and call me a feminazi all they want. I can't stand sexism- and I don't think its a "let sleeping dogs lie" matter. If I do a better job than a man, but a male supremacist passes me over and hires the man instead- that is oppression. I'm glad you've pulled yourself up by your bootstraps, but to me, everyone should have that chance and equal opportunity. Its injustice, based in sexism- and I'm allowed to feel strongly about it and view it that way, and you're allowed to not take it as seriously. I'm not going to do twice the work of a man and get half as far, because of my gender. That is, to me, unacceptable. It doesn't have to be to you, but I refuse to take that shit sitting down.

GoddessManko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/10/2015 10:02:09 PM)
You're young and passionate and I've been there but over time it pays off for yourself and just overall peace of mind to pick and choose your battles. With those men I'm describing they're not even alpha subs or typical alpha males, They are like alphas on roids, LOL. Even to where I know for a lot of them what drives them crazy is that they can't have me. I agree that women should be taken more seriously by these guys but we're talking about a mission of EXTREME difficulty. It's not even really their fault, it's just status quo. The one friend I mentioned who will be late for a meeting, is VERY close to his dad, mom not so much. His mom was a stay at home mom and that's how he was raised and expects his wife to be. He actually thinks it's abnormal for a woman to not want to have children. I mean you can't reason with that because everything in his life has made him who he is essentially. It's like why I am the way I am, it's really hard to do an about face unless compelled to and not by words alone, something huge would have to happen. It sucks because I have done venture capitalist meetings where it was all "oh, the woman is talking, hurr hurr" but you know, at the end of the day it's their loss. A lifetime investor who's also a friend told his friends "The last thing she told me was invest in Caterpillar" LOL. So baby steps here and there, but you have to really prove yourself in the business world not by words but by actions. By the way, I feel I have to add that I don't see anything necessarily wrong with their views except when it is a sweeping generalization and hinders me personally, LOL. But that's why I see them as "Male Supremacists" in a way and I'm OK with that. At least in lifestyle it's an extension of sexuality and personality. But I disagree with automatically assuming you can direct someone else's property or think every woman in your presence needs to shine your shoes, no, LOL. That's just being a jerk.

GotSteel -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/10/2015 10:20:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady I can't say one way or another whether Supremacists abandon their thinking at home. Philosophically, I would expect to see carryover - as with racists - but I could be mistaken. Our beliefs inform our actions, if someone who has a dynamic which involves "female inferiority" believes it to be true that will nessassarly spill over beyond that consensual dynamic (which I would consider nonconcesual). Alternatively if someone who has a dynamic which involves "female inferiority" believes it to be hot there's no reason to expect that it must effect people beyond the consensual dynamic.

GoddessManko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/10/2015 10:36:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel Our beliefs inform our actions, if someone who has a dynamic which involves "female inferiority" believes it to be true that will nessassarly spill over beyond that consensual dynamic (which I would consider nonconcesual). Alternatively if someone who has a dynamic which involves "female inferiority" believes it to be hot there's no reason to expect that it must effect people beyond the consensual dynamic. I don't know how you do things but it's going to spill over for me as long as it's 24/7 TPE. I'm not exactly sure where you guys are drawing the line then again. My sub isn't going to be kissing random women's feet if that's what that means. Will he always be respectful of women? I expect that, that will be his default. If I engage a female sub, it is different in a way but she would have more control of the scene than he would so the theme is pretty consistent.

dreamlady -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 3:20:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel Our beliefs inform our actions, if someone who has a dynamic which involves "female inferiority" believes it to be true that will nessassarly spill over beyond that consensual dynamic (which I would consider nonconcesual). Alternatively if someone who has a dynamic which involves "female inferiority" believes it to be hot there's no reason to expect that it must effect people beyond the consensual dynamic. I don't know how you do things but it's going to spill over for me as long as it's 24/7 TPE. I'm not exactly sure where you guys are drawing the line then again. My sub isn't going to be kissing random women's feet if that's what that means. Will he always be respectful of women? I expect that, that will be his default. If I engage a female sub, it is different in a way but she would have more control of the scene than he would so the theme is pretty consistent. I would expect any man I'm with to be respectful of women in the manner that a gentleman should be courteous to ladies. This does not make him "less" than or "lower" than. My man/partner/pet isn't going to be kissing anyone's ass, other than mine. [;)] What you do with your sub(s) and play partner(s) is a private matter amongst yourselves, and you are not saying that other Dommes must or should follow your example out of generic female superiority/male inferiority. Now, if you or any Dominant would require your submissive to always defer to every other Dominant and serve them also (such as at a FemDom event) just because they are male or female or an s-type, then this would be practicing a quasi-Supremacist belief system (meaning it may not be a consensual arrangement with each and every party in attendance). If you presumed that (male) submissives, uncollared by you, outside of your own D/s dynamic, or owned by another, were inferior to you by virtue of the fact that you are a Dominant woman, then this would be practicing a Supremacist belief system. If you regarded all members of any particular ingroup (men or women, ethnic origin/race, orientations, other religions, social status, educational or professional standing) inferior to yourself categorically, then this would be practicing a Supremacist belief system. This brings up a hot-button issue in BDSM where Dominants may feel superior to all submissives, all switches, all who are not Dominant like themselves. There are Dominants and submissives alike who feel they are superior to all others who are not like them, and while they are certainly entitled to their personal preferences of whom they would choose as a partner or even as a friend, other forms of discrimination based on this Superiority/inferiority axis (cliquishness, shunning) wouldn't be so kosher (no pun intended). Supremacist beliefs don't have to go to the extremes of oppressive persecution or acts of terrorism to be a destructive influence and have a negative impact on others' lives. Just my two cents. [X(]

GotSteel -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 8:50:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GoddessManko I don't know how you do things but it's going to spill over for me as long as it's 24/7 TPE. I'm not exactly sure where you guys are drawing the line then again. My sub isn't going to be kissing random women's feet if that's what that means. Will he always be respectful of women? I expect that, that will be his default. If I engage a female sub, it is different in a way but she would have more control of the scene than he would so the theme is pretty consistent. What I think we're talking about is whether or not you would always be disrespectful of men, akin to how the "Male Supremacists" that you've brought up treat you.

DominantWoman65 -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 10:22:05 AM)
I have been viewing this thread from its beginning and I asked myself if I could ever put myself in a position of "supremacy" even for just role play. My answer was no. I couldn't find myself in a relationship with someone who I felt and treated lesser than me based upon their gender, race, religion or by what side of the kneel they were on. In my opinion, it doesn't make me a dominant, just domineering. To me it nullifies the characteristics that I hold within myself that identify me as being dominant.

GotSteel -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 11:33:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady I would expect any man I'm with to be respectful of women in the manner that a gentleman should be courteous to ladies. That is sexist.

littleladybug -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 11:36:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady I would expect any man I'm with to be respectful of women in the manner that a gentleman should be courteous to ladies. This does not make him "less" than or "lower" than. Change "less" and "lower" to "greater" and "higher", and you've echoed my own views on the subject.

shiftyw -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 11:42:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady I would expect any man I'm with to be respectful of women in the manner that a gentleman should be courteous to ladies. That is sexist. I would expect any person to be respectful to other people in the sense that we are all people. ^^ Thats my stance.

NookieNotes -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 1:04:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shiftyw I would expect any person to be respectful to other people in the sense that we are all people. I agree with this, shifty. And to add on to my belief, when this was said: quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady I would expect any man I'm with to be respectful of women in the manner that a gentleman should be courteous to ladies. That is sexist. I agree with dreamlady. I also believe, as the flip side that I would expect any woman I'm with to be respectful of men in the manner that a lady should be courteous to gentlemen. In my view, there is nothing wrong with acknowledging there are differences in how women and men experience courtesy. While I have been known to open doors and hold them for men, I have yet to see a man react with the same (by my perception) pleasure as I do when a door is held open for me by a man. Same with giving flowers. Or buying gadgets. I give gadgets as gifts to men quite a lot. The ones I know tend to love gadgets FAR more than I ever would. Emotionally, I find the men in my life have responded FAR more to simple acceptance than to emotional support, while the women tend to respond better to support than acceptance. I am not claiming hard and fast rules, to be clear. I am saying that it has been my experience that men and women are different. Not more than. Not less than. Equal. But different. And I celebrate that. Sexist it may be.

NookieNotes -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 1:05:55 PM)
~FR~ I wonder how many consensual male supremacists actually hold as supreme (or inferior) ONLY those who consent, and how they get that consent. Perhaps this is the piece that is missing in the discussion.

GoddessManko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 1:37:48 PM)
It is something where there is a girls' club or boys' club and no one is obligated to join. Pretty simple.

GoddessManko -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 1:54:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel What I think we're talking about is whether or not you would always be disrespectful of men, akin to how the "Male Supremacists" that you've brought up treat you. I think I am respectful to my sub in my own way. My Male Supremacist friends absolutely respect and love me, in their own way, in fact in a way they wouldn't share even with those closest to them. By the way I define them as such but doesn't mean it is how they self identify. Like I said, it is open to translation but somehow that is bypassing the scope of many. In my "girl groups" they would understand my sentiments for the most part because we've all been there and it's why we support each other. Like I said I like that my life is compartmentalized and I am not trying to invite anyone here into any form of "crossover" outside of discussing kink and kinky relationships online and giving my scope as best I can based on years of personal experience and untainted opine. No part of me desires to share this part of my life with anyone. It is personal for me, My sub is my own, I would never put him on display, he is mine in every sense of the word. I need no validation either, when it comes to this in particular, my sexuality. I don't need anyone's permission to do as I wish with My property, I'm merely being courteous for now and trying to make people realize why their take on things is on the far side of ridiculous in some cases. Like dreamlady said, everyone is entitled to their opinions. They of course, still don't change my existence, at all. And whether or not I respect My property is none of your concern as well, for the record. smiles Read the tagline sweetie.

dreamlady -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 6:40:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DominantWoman65 I have been viewing this thread from its beginning and I asked myself if I could ever put myself in a position of "supremacy" even for just role play. My answer was no. I couldn't find myself in a relationship with someone who I felt and treated lesser than me based upon their gender, race, religion or by what side of the kneel they were on. In my opinion, it doesn't make me a dominant, just domineering. To me it nullifies the characteristics that I hold within myself that identify me as being dominant. Admittedly, I share your viewpoint. Acting domineering over another is the same as bullying, in my mind. Being a bully is not being a mature, secure or responsible adult, and has nothing to do with dominance. Wanting to be bullied into submission. . . is like wanting to be forced to do things you can't own up to doing out of free will, and then making a scapegoat out of your Dominant in the process so that you can be absolved of taking personal responsibility for yourself. I also cannot see myself in an intimate relationship with someone who wants to be bullied or who finds this "hot." I would also have to question why anybody would tolerate a partner who has a need to bully others to make themselves feel better. If it pushes the erotic buttons in other people strictly as closed-loop mutually consensual play, then to each his or her own in working out their respective issues together. I cannot, however, condone using BDSM as a crutch or substitute for therapy by an accredited mental health professional.

dreamlady -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 6:59:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: dreamlady I would expect any man I'm with to be respectful of women in the manner that a gentleman should be courteous to ladies. That is sexist. It's only sexist if acting like a gentleman translates in your mind into being superior or inferior to women. You do know that I was replying to a specific situation, don't you? This was not to say that showing courtesy is restricted to this one particular scenario. Is giving up your seat to an elderly man or woman, . . ageist? Reverse ageism? Do you balk in doing so because your own moral belief system tells you that you would be practicing ageism? What about a pregnant woman? Is the fact that only women can get impregnated, make it somehow sexist in your mind? Or reverse discrimination? If you see somebody on crutches, would it violate your belief system in not treating a (temporarily/permanently) disabled person differently than an able-bodied one by lending this person a hand? I never said that a lady has the right to be discourteous to others of either gender. If I had said that men should only show courtesy to women but not to other men, then that would be a sexist statement. You are mixing up social mores that have nothing to do with an attitude of Superiority or inferiority.

sexyred1 -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 7:32:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shiftyw ^^ LLB is making the point I've been trying to make the whole time. Supremacy is a belief that ALL of x is better than ALL of y. Not that some people prefer a male led relationship or a female led relationship <---- I have zero issues with that. I have issues with someone who assumes they are better, superior to, or otherwise above some based on what's between their legs. I don't know why anyone is getting upset with shiftyw. She never put down anyone's individual dynamic. I believe that no gender is inherently superior to another. Some people may think their brain or abilities make them superior to others, but there is ALWAYS someone smarter, funnier, better looking, skilled, etc. than you. I believe in a consensual relationship, you can believe your male is superior to you, knock yourself out. I think this question has caused alot of confusion by the word consensual because how could you have non consensual male superiority? Someone wrote that they believe men are superior because they are best at providing for a family. I had to laugh as I know tons of women in happy marriages and partnerships where she is the main breadwinner. For me, even role playing about the word supremacy wouldn't work because I could not even fake it.

ResidentSadist -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 7:37:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 quote: ORIGINAL: shiftyw ^^ LLB is making the point I've been trying to make the whole time. Supremacy is a belief that ALL of x is better than ALL of y. Not that some people prefer a male led relationship or a female led relationship <---- I have zero issues with that. I have issues with someone who assumes they are better, superior to, or otherwise above some based on what's between their legs. I don't know why anyone is getting upset with shiftyw. She never put down anyone's individual dynamic. I believe that no gender is inherently superior to another. Some people may think their brain or abilities make them superior to others, but there is ALWAYS someone smarter, funnier, better looking, skilled, etc. than you. I believe in a consensual relationship, you can believe your male is superior to you, knock yourself out. I think this question has caused alot of confusion by the word consensual because how could you have non consensual male superiority? Someone wrote that they believe men are superior because they are best at providing for a family. I had to laugh as I know tons of women in happy marriages and partnerships where she is the main breadwinner. For me, even role playing about the word supremacy wouldn't work because I could not even fake it. What if you believe that nature intended all of X to be better than Y at being dominant but civilized man and society has corrupted the natural order . . . so only most of X is better than Y? Is that still supremacy is that just Gorean? LOL

sexyred1 -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 7:40:44 PM)
I don't believe that X or Y is better at being dominant because it is subjective.

GotSteel -> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? (3/11/2015 7:42:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 I think this question has caused alot of confusion by the word consensual because how could you have non consensual male superiority? Just ask the 50's.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.1171875