RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy?

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master >> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy?

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/12/2015 8:22:58 PM

Posts: 2257
Joined: 3/6/2013
From: Dante's Inferno
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

Separate is not equal.

I was always amused how racism is really a classism thing. I think it's a lack of education unfortunately. Poor things.

_____________________________

Happy consent is the name of the game. You are my perfect Mistress. - my collared.

http://submissivemale.blogspot.com/

The Bird of Hermes is my name, eating my wings to make me tame.

(in reply to GotSteel)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 12:19:35 AM

Posts: 613
Joined: 9/18/2012
Status: offline

Sorry I haven't responded to everyone's comments; I've been crazy busy at work and haven't had time to give them the attention they deserve.

Just wanted to check in to make a few points; I noticed on some answers I was being referred to as 'he' - just wanted to point out that I'm she and not he!

And that's really the crux of the argument. People on here are comparing consensual male supremacy to racism, fascism and eugenics - well, I've never seen black people who support the KKK, and I've never seen Jews who support the Nazis, but I know plenty of women who enjoy consensual male supremacy, so if it's simple sexism, how can that be?

I think the difference is that racism is based on hate, prejudice and oppression, whereas consensual male supremacy deals with people's preferred gender relations, how they view the ideal balance between them. One can believe that the sexes have different roles to play, and that the male role is protection without ever crossing over into hatred or negativity. One can also work in a world where many women have leadership roles and fully accept that they do a good job, whilst still believing that a gender division of labour in the home is natural through much of the world, and to seek to recreate that gender division at home with those who are also looking for the same thing.

I would also like to comment on the view that keeps being touted that if consensual male supremacy is a philosophical belief (which I agree it is) then people who hold those views will automatically extend them to outside the relationship.

Firstly, I know several feminists who are also into consensual male supremacy, so they're obviously not going to be sexist to other men or women. It is entirely possible to 100% support the political, legal and social equality between men and women, whilst still believing that biology has set things up a little differently in the home. Secondly, there are plenty of people (billions in fact) who have philosophical beliefs that certain types of people are better than others, and yet we trust them not to oppress others in the workplace, to hire fairly, etc. For example, about 95% of the world's population is religious and every religion I know says 'people who do (x) or people who believe (x) are better than people who do not'. Yet I, as an atheist, have never been turned down for a job, been unable to make friends, get an education, etc. I have multiple Christian and Muslim friends who don't look down on me at all, and I don't look down on them at all. What people choose to believe and how they choose to treat others are not the same thing at all. People can believe many things, yet treat people fairly and equally in a general sense.

Another poster suggested that she was okay with 'role play' and that maybe I should term it that but, to me, roleplay is when you act out a role as a pretense. Since most male supremacists genuinely believe their views, it cannot be role play, however much others may prefer it. I would say that it may be role fulfillment, since the participants become free to inhabit the roles they see as natural and preferred with each other, when they know that such role fulfillment is not possible with others who have not consented to it.

Have particularly enjoyed reading Goddess Manko's posts, so thanks! :-)

(in reply to GoddessManko)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 5:10:06 AM

Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12
And that's really the crux of the argument. People on here are comparing consensual male supremacy to racism, fascism and eugenics - well, I've never seen black people who support the KKK, and I've never seen Jews who support the Nazis, but I know plenty of women who enjoy consensual male supremacy, so if it's simple sexism, how can that be?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_German_National_Jews

People can be taught to outright loath their own identities, it does exist. A modern example you might be aware of is gay Ted Haggard's antigay ministry.

quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12
I think the difference is that racism is based on hate, prejudice and oppression, whereas consensual male supremacy deals with people's preferred gender relations, how they view the ideal balance between them.

Sexism as it's played out in the last 60's years has had the hate, prejudice and oppression components. The prejudice is along the lines of believing that the sexes have different roles to play. Oppression is the natural product of holding that belief (as discussed earlier in the thread). The hate doesn't typically come up until women "don't know their place".

quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12
Another poster suggested that she was okay with 'role play' and that maybe I should term it that but, to me, roleplay is when you act out a role as a pretense. Since most male supremacists genuinely believe their views, it cannot be role play, however much others may prefer it. I would say that it may be role fulfillment, since the participants become free to inhabit the roles they see as natural and preferred with each other, when they know that such role fulfillment is not possible with others who have not consented to it.

Keep mind that we're really into our roleplays around here, the term isn't meant to belittle a couples lifestyle, simply to make it clear that a couple could take on those roles for themselves while believing in equality for everyone else. The moment they hold beliefs in opposition to equality for everyone else, whether they put on the white hoods or not, I think there's a problem.

(in reply to orgasmdenial12)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 5:34:39 AM

Posts: 2837
Joined: 6/6/2013
From: The Shire
Status: offline

Everything GotSteel just said, but especially that last paragraph, I agree with, strongly.

(in reply to GotSteel)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 6:07:20 AM

Posts: 1720
Joined: 11/10/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12
Another poster suggested that she was okay with 'role play' and that maybe I should term it that but, to me, roleplay is when you act out a role as a pretense. Since most male supremacists genuinely believe their views, it cannot be role play, however much others may prefer it. I would say that it may be role fulfillment, since the participants become free to inhabit the roles they see as natural and preferred with each other, when they know that such role fulfillment is not possible with others who have not consented to it.

Keep mind that we're really into our roleplays around here, the term isn't meant to belittle a couples lifestyle, simply to make it clear that a couple could take on those roles for themselves while believing in equality for everyone else. The moment they hold beliefs in opposition to equality for everyone else, whether they put on the white hoods or not, I think there's a problem.

Yup. This.

quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw

Everything GotSteel just said, but especially that last paragraph, I agree with, strongly.

And that is a SUPER-HOT pic. *fans self*

_____________________________

Nookie
--
https://datingkinky.com

I Write! A few of my books on Amazon: http://amazon.com/author/msnnotes

(in reply to GotSteel)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 6:32:50 AM

Posts: 2837
Joined: 6/6/2013
From: The Shire
Status: offline

Ya'll are all going to go to my head! Thank you!

(in reply to NookieNotes)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 7:00:36 AM

Posts: 2257
Joined: 3/6/2013
From: Dante's Inferno
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12

Sorry I haven't responded to everyone's comments; I've been crazy busy at work and haven't had time to give them the attention they deserve.

Just wanted to check in to make a few points; I noticed on some answers I was being referred to as 'he' - just wanted to point out that I'm she and not he!

And that's really the crux of the argument. People on here are comparing consensual male supremacy to racism, fascism and eugenics - well, I've never seen black people who support the KKK, and I've never seen Jews who support the Nazis, but I know plenty of women who enjoy consensual male supremacy, so if it's simple sexism, how can that be?

I think the difference is that racism is based on hate, prejudice and oppression, whereas consensual male supremacy deals with people's preferred gender relations, how they view the ideal balance between them. One can believe that the sexes have different roles to play, and that the male role is protection without ever crossing over into hatred or negativity. One can also work in a world where many women have leadership roles and fully accept that they do a good job, whilst still believing that a gender division of labour in the home is natural through much of the world, and to seek to recreate that gender division at home with those who are also looking for the same thing.

I would also like to comment on the view that keeps being touted that if consensual male supremacy is a philosophical belief (which I agree it is) then people who hold those views will automatically extend them to outside the relationship.

Firstly, I know several feminists who are also into consensual male supremacy, so they're obviously not going to be sexist to other men or women. It is entirely possible to 100% support the political, legal and social equality between men and women, whilst still believing that biology has set things up a little differently in the home. Secondly, there are plenty of people (billions in fact) who have philosophical beliefs that certain types of people are better than others, and yet we trust them not to oppress others in the workplace, to hire fairly, etc. For example, about 95% of the world's population is religious and every religion I know says 'people who do (x) or people who believe (x) are better than people who do not'. Yet I, as an atheist, have never been turned down for a job, been unable to make friends, get an education, etc. I have multiple Christian and Muslim friends who don't look down on me at all, and I don't look down on them at all. What people choose to believe and how they choose to treat others are not the same thing at all. People can believe many things, yet treat people fairly and equally in a general sense.

Another poster suggested that she was okay with 'role play' and that maybe I should term it that but, to me, roleplay is when you act out a role as a pretense. Since most male supremacists genuinely believe their views, it cannot be role play, however much others may prefer it. I would say that it may be role fulfillment, since the participants become free to inhabit the roles they see as natural and preferred with each other, when they know that such role fulfillment is not possible with others who have not consented to it.

Have particularly enjoyed reading Goddess Manko's posts, so thanks! :-)

Thanks to you orgasmdenial12, I really enjoyed how this topic showed just how far some will go into other people's bedrooms and lives. The Tampa Bay Phoenix club's bdsm 102 is about "rape play" (another hot topic) and "STAY THE HELL OUT OF MY BEDROOM!"
I couldn't agree with them more. Hopefully the people who are against consensual gender supremacy aren't at odds with themselves for signing onto a site that offers it as a kink or maybe some people simply are more observant than others.

_____________________________

Happy consent is the name of the game. You are my perfect Mistress. - my collared.

http://submissivemale.blogspot.com/

The Bird of Hermes is my name, eating my wings to make me tame.

(in reply to orgasmdenial12)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 7:23:18 AM

Posts: 376
Status: offline

It is my personal belief that nature created men and women with certain "jobs" in mind. (Mind you, I do believe nature always has its quirks and deviations, not viewing it as flaws but refreshing differences. So, I'm only speaking generally and in terms of me, my relationships, and how I relate to them). As we have evolved, those potentially plotted out roles have become unnecessary. I can protect myself and my children, shelter and feed them, just fine on my own. Still, I want those roles in my relationship, they're natural to ME. Does not mean I believe all relationships should meet this. I just prefer to be in a relationship that reflects at least a little of what I consider nature's intention. I do prefer to be in a relationship where the man is the protector, leader, earns a better living, is quicker, and is a better problem solver. Although he may view the same as me, being somehow better, we have only mutual respect for each other and neither of us view ourselves or the other as being superior.

I do not believe in supremacy or any form of. Placing more importance on one job over the other, in my mind, is not possible. Without both roles, the other would be insignificant. (I view all people this way, regardless of class or skill or what-have-you).

Like some other threads, it is the word that is being used that seems to throw people off. Supremacy is the idea of thinking one is superior to ALL - not just one person. Since you threw in consensual, I get the difference but is still difficult to move past the ALL. Assuming "Consensual Male Supremacy" is really a thing, I will agree that there most likely will be overflow into non consensual territory and that's where I'd have a problem with it...but the spill-over may not necessarily happen. I believe it is possible for people to separate the two. I'm not automatically going to assume each man is, or is able to be, a protector. Nor would I assume a woman couldn't be a protector. Just the same, I would suspect that some that may fall under your "Consensual Male Supremacy" ideology would view a person outside of the relationship a possibility and not relying solely on automatic assumptions based on sex. (Conversely, I suspect that well-known supremacist groups have automatic assumptions first). For this reason, I'm still having difficulty with the relationship label used here and would almost say, at that point, it would be more "Consensual Partner Supremacy" since it applies to the person's partner only and not a whole sex. But, like all other labels, definitions and meanings will vary.

I do agree "role fulfilling" sounds like a better term here. Role playing suggests, to me, at some point it is shut off in the relationship (a slice of the pie) where role fulfilling suggests having a partner that meets ones criteria for an ideal partner and relationship (the whole pie). Both terms imply in the relationship, not outside, IMO. Not insulting role playing at all, just they imply differences to me in that it is an always vs sometimes.

(in reply to orgasmdenial12)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 7:25:53 AM

Posts: 2837
Joined: 6/6/2013
From: The Shire
Status: offline

Just cause it's an option doesn't mean I checked it off.
It lists plenty of things I don't do. Because I'm not oriented like that.

However I did assume it was talking about roleplay, not sexism in real life outside of a relationship between consenting people. Which, I consider an FLR.

eta- deleted a train of thought I thought better than going down..

< Message edited by shiftyw -- 3/13/2015 7:28:06 AM >

(in reply to GoddessManko)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 7:29:49 AM

Posts: 2257
Joined: 3/6/2013
From: Dante's Inferno
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw

Just cause it's an option doesn't mean I checked it off.
It lists plenty of things I don't do. Because I'm not oriented like that.

And no one asked you to, nor do they care whether or not you do so shouldn't you focus more on yourself and less on other people? I would. But then I like to prioritize and put my energies where they matter, ergo epic life. According to my sister I've done everything but skydiving and I've been all over the western hemisphere. There's a big wide world out there sweetie. Enjoy and good luck.

< Message edited by GoddessManko -- 3/13/2015 7:30:13 AM >

_____________________________

Happy consent is the name of the game. You are my perfect Mistress. - my collared.

http://submissivemale.blogspot.com/

The Bird of Hermes is my name, eating my wings to make me tame.

(in reply to shiftyw)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 7:51:32 AM

Posts: 2837
Joined: 6/6/2013
From: The Shire
Status: offline

You were insinuating people felt at odds. I was explaining why I did not.

(in reply to GoddessManko)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 7:58:40 AM

Posts: 2257
Joined: 3/6/2013
From: Dante's Inferno
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw

You were insinuating people felt at odds. I was explaining why I did not.

Awesome honey. I'm happy for ya.

_____________________________

Happy consent is the name of the game. You are my perfect Mistress. - my collared.

http://submissivemale.blogspot.com/

The Bird of Hermes is my name, eating my wings to make me tame.

(in reply to shiftyw)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 9:01:49 AM

Posts: 2837
Joined: 6/6/2013
From: The Shire
Status: offline

Have I not been very respectful of you in this thread? I have discussed my points and opinions passionately but not disrespecting you. Please give me an example of where I told you what to do in your relationship? NOT where I used you publicly stating your opinions as an example in something I was saying. Where have I questioned your experience or tried to discredit that? I'm merely debating a topic with you. All this apathy you're claiming is fine- but if you really don't care- please stop being so condescending and rude to me. I haven't told you how to live your life at all. I've told you my view of your opinions. I haven't been condescending or rude to you (as you have been to me in now several threads) I've even apologized on this thread for making you feel uncomfortable.

I'd much rather, if you're going to continue to behave like this towards me- you do it where you and I can both be free of TOS and where I can speak my mind. I think your taking way too much personal offense when it is unnecessary and while you claim to be apathetic, you seem incredibly defensive.

I really don't dislike you- but if you're gonna make it personal and be degrading and rude for expressing an opposing opinion then...i am going to start losing respect for you.

Nookie asked in another thread why it bothers you when folks use your public opinions and experience as examples, you didn't answer- but clearly it DOES make you very irked- considering it seems you and I can no longer consider each other with respect.

(in reply to GoddessManko)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 1:02:52 PM

Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko
Hopefully the people who are against consensual gender supremacy aren't at odds with themselves for signing onto a site that offers it as a kink or maybe some people simply are more observant than others.

Who's against consensual gender supremacy, I missed that? It's the nonconsensual gender supremacy that I'm worrying about.

(in reply to GoddessManko)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 1:16:39 PM

Posts: 613
Joined: 9/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko
Hopefully the people who are against consensual gender supremacy aren't at odds with themselves for signing onto a site that offers it as a kink or maybe some people simply are more observant than others.

Who's against consensual gender supremacy, I missed that? It's the nonconsensual gender supremacy that I'm worrying about.

Then why populate a thread about consensual male supremacy, with criticisms of non-consensual male supremacy? I've clearly used the word consensual over a dozen times, and in the title too.

*confused*

(in reply to GotSteel)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 2:03:54 PM

Posts: 2837
Joined: 6/6/2013
From: The Shire
Status: offline

Orgasmdenial- Im sorry this thread got so off track.

My question has been and I'm still unclear a great deal-

What would the difference be between consentual male supremacy and a male led relationship be?

How does one have consentual supremacy when supremacy involves a whole group of people who aren't in your relationship?

Is it like GS said earlier where you agree for a weekend at a Gor convention to do that?

I'm not trying to be snotty with these questions, but these are questions I've wanted the answers to this whole thread.

And I apologize for the bullshit and derailment- part of that is on me, and I'm sorry for my part in it.

(in reply to orgasmdenial12)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/13/2015 6:05:47 PM

Posts: 2837
Joined: 6/6/2013
From: The Shire
Status: offline

and to clarify- I'm mostly asking Orgasmdenial so that this thread can get drifted back "on track".

(in reply to shiftyw)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/14/2015 3:37:05 AM

Posts: 613
Joined: 9/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw
What would the difference be between consentual male supremacy and a male led relationship be?

I guess the difference would be the philosophy behind the actions. Any female submissive could have a male-led relationship, it doesn't say anything about their views on gender. Whereas a CMS (consensual male supremacy) relationship explicitly seeks to create a certain gender relation. So, for example, I've been into BDSM for 14 years now, and had many Doms, so all of them were male-led relationships, but none of them were CMS except for my current one.

However, from an outside viewpoint, I guess the answer is - there's no difference. It's unlikely that participants in a CMS relationship would go out of their way to share their views with you unless they were sure you wanted to hear them. The chances are, you probably know a whole bunch of CMS relationships, you just didn't realise it. This kind of backs up my point that CMS doesn't necessarily mean that you go round being a sexist twat to a load of people who are not in your relationship, any more than a sadist feels the need to inflict pain on people who haven't consented to it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw
...supremacy involves a whole group of people who aren't in your relationship?

This is your opinion and it's one I don't share. I'd venture to say it's the main point of disagreement on this thread. I believe it's perfectly possible (and very common) to have viewpoints about the human race that other people don't share. I'd say it's also very common for people to keep their opinions to themselves. So although a CMS may have a whole raft of opinions about life, humanity and how to be happy, there's no reason to believe they'd force them on anyone else.

What's more, there are different levels of CMS, and it's a real shame we haven't been able to explore those in this thread. For example, one can believe that everyone should have equal rights, yet simply believe that men will tend to rise to the top in politics, business, etc. Or one could believe that it's a question of personality and there will be dominant women and submissive men but, on the whole, men tend more towards leadership than women; or one could believe that men and women are completely the equals in politics and business and friendship and shopping and movies and everything else, but that human reproductive biology suits a male head of household.

Let's take the last idea - that one can accept equality yet think men are more suited to being head of the household. Honestly, look around your life, how many couples do you know that, at core, still display some old-fashioned gender roles? Where women do the cleaning, or the laundry whilst men fix the car or put up shelves? Because in my workplace I know many brilliant, successful women who still take time off to have a baby, return to work part time, still expect the husband to work full time *and are happiest that way*. How many men do you know who took a long time off after the birth of their baby? Because frankly, I don't know any. If I had a male friend who decided to do so, I would 100% support him, because a happy parent is a wonderful thing for any child. It's just that, honestly, most men don't do that, and in most settled relationships with kids, most mothers provide the majority of care and rely, to some extent, on the earnings of their partners. We all know women who kick ass in the workplace before and after having kids - but I still think that, on the whole, for all kinds of reasons, women still occupy the main nurturing roles and men still value themselves as leaders and protectors. And, as a CMS, I think there is nothing wrong with that. I am comfortable with men, consensually, having more power. I am comfortable with women, consensually, having less power. I am comfortable in situations where men, consensually, have power over women. Am I comfortable with denying women power? No, because it's not consensual. Am I comfortable with forcing men into positions of power when it doesn't suit their personality or capabilities? No, because it's not consensual. Am I comfortable with lecturing men or women on what their gender personalities or roles should be? No, because variety is the spice of life and everyone should get the chance to explore their own version of the ideal relationship. What if I woke up tomorrow and women had 50% of all power and control in the world? Great! But do I think it will happen? No, probably not. Am I comfortable with female leaders? Totally, I've had some fantastic female bosses (and I kind of like to think I've been one for other people as well!) but do I think that women naturally gravitate towards leadership positions in the same way that men do? No, I do not. And that's okay. Equal treatment does not mean equal outcome. Would I promote a female member of staff as readily as a male member of staff? Of course, and I have done so many times.

But none of this changes my belief in CMS.

I guess my key belief is this; if everyone in the world was allowed to rise or fall to the exact level of social, political, economical and other power that they preferred, it is my belief that more men would take power than women. It is my belief that if every woman could have the exact level of power in a relationship that she preferred, more women would choose to be submissive than dominant. And there's nothing wrong with that.

So how, exactly, do my views affect people not in my relationship? They don't. It's as simple as that. In fact I'm an ardent feminist, because equal rights is profoundly important to me. But do I think that equal rights will lead to equal outcome between the genders? Not at all.

I suppose to summarise, for me, CMS is not about what people *should* do, it is more about what people *probably will do*.

But I'd still love to hear from anyone else who has this dynamic and what their views are, because I'm new to it and curious, rather than an expert on the subject.

(in reply to shiftyw)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/14/2015 4:52:03 AM

Posts: 1720
Joined: 11/10/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12
Let's take the last idea - that one can accept equality yet think men are more suited to being head of the household. Honestly, look around your life, how many couples do you know that, at core, still display some old-fashioned gender roles? Where women do the cleaning, or the laundry whilst men fix the car or put up shelves? Because in my workplace I know many brilliant, successful women who still take time off to have a baby, return to work part time, still expect the husband to work full time *and are happiest that way*. How many men do you know who took a long time off after the birth of their baby? Because frankly, I don't know any. If I had a male friend who decided to do so, I would 100% support him, because a happy parent is a wonderful thing for any child. It's just that, honestly, most men don't do that, and in most settled relationships with kids, most mothers provide the majority of care and rely, to some extent, on the earnings of their partners. We all know women who kick ass in the workplace before and after having kids - but I still think that, on the whole, for all kinds of reasons, women still occupy the main nurturing roles and men still value themselves as leaders and protectors. And, as a CMS, I think there is nothing wrong with that. I am comfortable with men, consensually, having more power. I am comfortable with women, consensually, having less power. I am comfortable in situations where men, consensually, have power over women. Am I comfortable with denying women power? No, because it's not consensual. Am I comfortable with forcing men into positions of power when it doesn't suit their personality or capabilities? No, because it's not consensual. Am I comfortable with lecturing men or women on what their gender personalities or roles should be? No, because variety is the spice of life and everyone should get the chance to explore their own version of the ideal relationship. What if I woke up tomorrow and women had 50% of all power and control in the world? Great! But do I think it will happen? No, probably not. Am I comfortable with female leaders? Totally, I've had some fantastic female bosses (and I kind of like to think I've been one for other people as well!) but do I think that women naturally gravitate towards leadership positions in the same way that men do? No, I do not. And that's okay. Equal treatment does not mean equal outcome. Would I promote a female member of staff as readily as a male member of staff? Of course, and I have done so many times.

But none of this changes my belief in CMS.

I guess my key belief is this; if everyone in the world was allowed to rise or fall to the exact level of social, political, economical and other power that they preferred, it is my belief that more men would take power than women. It is my belief that if every woman could have the exact level of power in a relationship that she preferred, more women would choose to be submissive than dominant. And there's nothing wrong with that.

So, how is superiority? Power = superior?

What is the superiority difference? For example, I believe that I am the right one to lead in my relationships, and that in any relationship I am in, I will lead. However, I don't hold that that makes me superior, even if I am better in that particular skill.

_____________________________

Nookie
--
https://datingkinky.com

I Write! A few of my books on Amazon: http://amazon.com/author/msnnotes

(in reply to orgasmdenial12)

RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy? - 3/14/2015 4:58:24 AM

Posts: 2837
Joined: 6/6/2013
From: The Shire
Status: offline

I was having my guy read this thread last night because I wanted to know if I was being dense.

He asked when he was done "Shifty sweetie, haven't you always seen gender as pretty fluid? Don't you think you're views on gender sort of effect this? Do you feel a supremacist feels someone is Trans because they dislike their lot in life and thusly, reassign their gender based on that? Or do you think that they can be whatever gender they feel they should have been born as?" I kinda chewed on that for a while.

Then he brought up some other things "if two lesbians have a baby, are they not both great parents and able to provide for their child in our society? Or gay guys? Don't you feel sexuality is fluid and don't you feel homosexuality is something someone is born as? Is how you see a CMS viewing those relationships a part of the problem for you? Wouldn't you expect them to see those couples as unnatural? Flying in the face of mother nature? Don't you think if a CMS had a lesbian or bi sexual daughter they might shame them? Or teach them those feelings aren't right?"

The answers to those questions I don't really have yet.

I can tell you- whomever- can choose whatever consenting body they want to rule over them in a relationship.
I think most of your points are cultural for sure. So I'm not saying it's wrong to accept traditional gender roles- but I have said and long adovcated for maternity leave for both parents. In my experience it's that this country has gender problems and we don't offer paternity leave to the father. In many other countries they get paid paternity leave right alongside the mother. Equality to me, means equality of choice first and foremost- and you can believe the genders play different roles in your relationship- but I still feel applying those thoughts to society is still what I'm having issues with- because it still seems to me like segregation or "separate but equal" is the main drive behind it- even in today's society that is largely more and more accepting of gender being more than just male and female- and a society moving towards nationwide legalization of gay marriage.

I just don't see how those things can factor into a supremicist viewpoint. And I still have issues seeing this as anything but sexism and gender bias.

I don't want kids, I'm the main breadwinner, I'm bisexual. How do you support those choices of mine, but believe in supremacy? Rather than choosing a male led relationship just for you? Or do you not support those choices? (Again not snotty- actually curious)

I think my role should be viewed as more than my vagina- since genetics decided that, I didnt.

(in reply to orgasmdenial12)

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master >> RE: Bit Controversial - Consensual Male Supremacy?

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.164