RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (Full Version)

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



Message

ResidentSadist -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/27/2015 7:28:47 AM)

I see replies trying to rule out, challenge or discredit the DSM. The DSM is a massive effort by groups of taskforces. It is a serious and valid reference tool. Saying it doesn't define fetishes is like saying the dictionary is an invalid source to define words. Nonetheless, both the DSM and the dictionary periodically update to keep up with changing times. So quite validly this challenge at some point prior to an update is true for a period of time.

OK, so let's look at a faster moving medium that doesn't require a taskforce to update it. Aspects of BDSM have are presented to the BDSM community in the form of workshops, lectures and demos. There is a workshop for most, if not everything under the BDSM umbrella. This includes other exclusively online activities like long distance M/s or D/s relationships. How to exert and monitor chastity control online or long distance punishment and reward methods. But I have yet to see a Finacial Domination demo or workshop and there are none scheduled in the 2015 convention line ups.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: MissWilt

Popping back in.

I made a post a while back (page 9 or so I think). I am a Findomme, but in the true sense of the term which is financial control. Shocker- No, I don't take the money from subs/slaves. I don't demand tributes. And I don't expect them to give me money. Controlling their finances is what gets me hot and bothered. (Note- no, they do not give me their account info. But, they are required to send regular screen captures of their transactions. Just enough to show the date, where, and how much was spent.)

Findom has been REALLY diluted by all the of money grubbing "cash princesses" who just claim to be Findoms to make a quick buck. And it pisses me off because they are what gives real Findommes a bad light.


I am a little confused. You say you don't take money but in your profile you say "Subs/slaves must be cash verified. If you're not when we begin conversing, you are required to be so before I will claim ownership of you."

so how do you cash verify them if you don't take their money and do they get to actually meet you before this happens?

Things like this give conflicting impressions, like your question to MissWilt about how she cash verifies someone first if she doesn't take their money? When the people that separate themselves from FinDucks give conflicting impressions or information, it doesn't make for a solid information reference. It's like TNDommeK's sincere advocacy that FD is a fetish, saying two of her fin subs commented on Roch's thread explained their fetish and turn-ons with the kink. But then the reader sees her signature saying "Professional con artist, swindler, trixster, extortionist". I don't know if readers will think that is sarcasm or just see those traits as obtaining money by fraudulent means. Which has nothing to do with BDSM and reinforces the negative impressions about FinDommes just being in it for the money.

Here is the link to Rochsubs2009's 93 page thread. Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? Anyone know what page TNDommeK's fin subs posted on or maybe she will copy paste their reply here if she remembers? I would truly like to read their replies.

So herein lays my conundrum with only FinDommes saying it is a fetish instead of some outside reference source like the DSM or an academic source. A psychological study will appear solid and unbiased. Whereas proclamations from those who present conflicting impressions, or could financially benefit from being under the BDSM umbrella, or are not well versed, may not appear to be a solid source of information.





RockaRolla -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/27/2015 8:35:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist

I see replies trying to rule out, challenge or discredit the DSM. The DSM is a massive effort by groups of taskforces. It is a serious and valid reference tool. Saying it doesn't define fetishes is like saying the dictionary is an invalid source to define words. Nonetheless, both the DSM and the dictionary periodically update to keep up with changing times. So quite validly this challenge at some point prior to an update is true for a period of time.


Just recently, the definition of "literally" changed to mean "figuratively, but with an emphasis."
This wasn't a case of the authority arbitrarily deciding to change the definitions of words, but accepting that people were no using the term in a different way and reflecting the change in the language.

I feel the same is true here, but the DSM has yet to update. Just like the DSM didn't just decide that homosexuality was no longer a mental disorder, it changed in accordance with newfound knowledge.



Spiritedsub2 -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/27/2015 9:31:08 AM)

I'd think if Rochsub2009's thread on financial domination ran for 93 pages, that would have exhausted the topic, but evidently not. I see the same general thing in this thread as in that one (and others): a small number of people, mostly vociferous fin dommes, think it is a legitimate fetish, other people think financial domination is just a type of prostitution, and a third group of people don't care enough to have an opinion.

I remember one poster some time back said approximately "I have nothing against hookers. I just don't care what they think about BDSM."



PeonForHer -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/27/2015 5:55:32 PM)

quote:


Just recently, the definition of "literally" changed to mean "figuratively, but with an emphasis."


Yep. Strewth does that irritate the holy tits off me.



RockaRolla -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/27/2015 6:16:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


Just recently, the definition of "literally" changed to mean "figuratively, but with an emphasis."


Yep. Strewth does that irritate the holy tits off me.

Same. I literally can't even.

(Sorry.)

My point there was that the dictionary, like the DSM, is reference material and subject to be changed according to society and newfound knowledge. The language, much like sexuality, evolves.

So if a kink develops that isn't in the DSM, it's not unlike if a new word develops or changes meaning. It doesn't mean that word or kink doesn't exist. It means our reference material is out of date.

If dictionaries and the DSM were comprehensive there would be no need for updates, ever.



seekingreality -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/27/2015 6:21:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist

I see replies trying to rule out, challenge or discredit the DSM. The DSM is a massive effort by groups of taskforces. It is a serious and valid reference tool. Saying it doesn't define fetishes is like saying the dictionary is an invalid source to define words. Nonetheless, both the DSM and the dictionary periodically update to keep up with changing times. So quite validly this challenge at some point prior to an update is true for a period of time.



I think you're brushing aside the many legitimate criticisms of the DSM, many of which are coming from the psychiatric and medical communities themselves. For example:

-- Dr. Allen Frances, who chaired the task force that produced the earlier DSM, called the last edition of the DSM "deeply flawed" and said the American Psychiatric Association "quietly cancelled" some essential testing steps because they needed to rush the book out and get the huge publishing profits it generates to pay for the APA's operation.

-- The head of the U.S. National Institute of Mental Health complained that the book lacks scientific validity.

-- Some mental health experts have put out their own books saying the DSM has lost credibility.

I could go on and on. Certainly, there are defenders of the DSM. But its disingenuous to call the DSM " a serious and valid reference tool" without acknowledging or understanding the extent of the criticism it is receiving from respected medical figures.




ResidentSadist -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/27/2015 6:53:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: seekingreality

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist

I see replies trying to rule out, challenge or discredit the DSM. The DSM is a massive effort by groups of taskforces. It is a serious and valid reference tool. Saying it doesn't define fetishes is like saying the dictionary is an invalid source to define words. Nonetheless, both the DSM and the dictionary periodically update to keep up with changing times. So quite validly this challenge at some point prior to an update is true for a period of time.



I think you're brushing aside the many legitimate criticisms of the DSM, many of which are coming from the psychiatric and medical communities themselves. For example:

-- Dr. Allen Frances, who chaired the task force that produced the earlier DSM, called the last edition of the DSM "deeply flawed" and said the American Psychiatric Association "quietly cancelled" some essential testing steps because they needed to rush the book out and get the huge publishing profits it generates to pay for the APA's operation.

-- The head of the U.S. National Institute of Mental Health complained that the book lacks scientific validity.

-- Some mental health experts have put out their own books saying the DSM has lost credibility.

I could go on and on. Certainly, there are defenders of the DSM. But its disingenuous to call the DSM " a serious and valid reference tool" without acknowledging or understanding the extent of the criticism it is receiving from respected medical figures.



I agree it isn't flawless and pointed out my own observations about how it can sometimes be slow at keeping up with the times. Wikipedia has a good section outlining other Criticism (link). I do not defend its flaws but I don't write it off as whole.

I respect and understand its overall validity as a body of work, which is where it seems we disagree. And I have always appreciated its list of paraphilias and in my opinion, it correctly draws a distinction between paraphilias and paraphilic disorders. With this section of the book, I find no flaw. Thank you for your reply and know that I acknowledge and understand your point view although I disagree in regards to the section of the book that applies to this thread.



TNDommeK -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (4/27/2015 11:39:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist


Here is the link to Rochsubs2009's 93 page thread. Is financial domination a legitimate form of D/s? Anyone know what page TNDommeK's fin subs posted on or maybe she will copy paste their reply here if she remembers? I would truly like to read their replies.

So herein lays my conundrum with only FinDommes saying it is a fetish instead of some outside reference source like the DSM or an academic source. A psychological study will appear solid and unbiased. Whereas proclamations from those who present conflicting impressions, or could financially benefit from being under the BDSM umbrella, or are not well versed, may not appear to be a solid source of information.





Oh I have no idea where they are in all that. Lol
If I remember correct it was towards the end maybe?
I think there were only two that spoke up.
Well, two of Mine.



XAngeliciousX -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (5/15/2015 9:54:52 PM)

Well, I am new here but a very long time true Fin Domme .. and .. I just want to make an observation.

No true Fin Domme I have ever met or know of, as well as myself, would ever be in the slightest interested in men 'validating' the notion. They deal with men that already know what they yearn for, and what satisfies them and their Queen.

Naysayers on it being valid - especially males -- might not really meet with much interest. We already know what men are for :) Just my 2 cents.



Cell -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (5/15/2015 10:49:22 PM)

My two cents are, that any decent Findomme shouldn't need to advertise themselves. It just makes them sound poor and desperate.

Welcome.[;)]



xxblushesxx -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (5/16/2015 12:14:27 AM)

Advertising is important in all fields, Cell.

And I just wanted to pop my head in in astonishment that this convo is *still* going on. (it may not be the exact same convo, but close enough!)

Of course findom is a thing. Go to any phone sex site or cam site, and you will see them. You will also see that they get calls, tributes, gifts, etc. So how could it not be a thing?



crazyml -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (5/16/2015 12:46:59 AM)

kerching.

I agree.

It's definitely a thing.

It may not be a thing that people like, but it's a thing alright.



Cell -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (5/16/2015 2:58:58 AM)

Making money isn't kink it's business. Getting gifts I can deal with, or even having someone pay your rent for you. But just casting a net into the web and hopeing to pull out some cash... >_> errr...
It's too easily scamable.



xxblushesxx -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (5/16/2015 4:31:03 AM)

Well Cell, for some of us kink and sex is our business. (and a fun thing to do in real life as well!)

(you don't really believe that kinky sex workers don't exist do you?)



Cell -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (5/16/2015 4:45:57 AM)

Are you saying FinDommes are sex workers.



Lucylastic -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (5/16/2015 4:53:20 AM)

psssssst its only "NOT a kink", because men cant(or dont) make money from it. Unless, they "manage' women who are in to the "kink" ANd I know there are men doing kink for business, but it is predominantly women. (outside of the gay market)
Simple reason.
If the demand were there, men would do it.
Like porn and kink films, Take a look at kink.com....or prostitution, or ProDomme and Fin Domme, call girls, cam girls, phone sex girls.
where theres a niche...someone will fill it, wether it be producers, or the actors.
All the subsections of their site, deal with kink business.
but they are legitimate.




JstAnotherSub -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (5/16/2015 5:13:23 AM)

My 2 cents worth, and this is my thoughts, not being stated as facts.

How many of the men who use fin dommes would pay if they did not have to? If they could find a domme to meet their needs without requiring tributes?

Is it the money that is the kink? Or getting the kink met by using the money because there is no other way?

The very few that I know of would admit it is the latter, and they are ok with it.

Men will pay for sex, and men will pay for sexual satisfaction that may not include intercourse. I think prostitution should be legal, but I cannot separate the financial domination from prostitution. Money for services that satisfy a sexual need is a form of prostitution, imho.

I do not understand the uproar that fin dommes have with that comparison being made. Doesn't make what they do right or wrong, it just is what it is.



xxblushesxx -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (5/16/2015 5:25:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cell

Are you saying FinDommes are sex workers.


I think anyone who turns people on for a living could legitimately be called a sex worker, so yes.



xxblushesxx -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (5/16/2015 5:27:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub

My 2 cents worth, and this is my thoughts, not being stated as facts.

How many of the men who use fin dommes would pay if they did not have to? If they could find a domme to meet their needs without requiring tributes?

Is it the money that is the kink? Or getting the kink met by using the money because there is no other way?

The very few that I know of would admit it is the latter, and they are ok with it.

Men will pay for sex, and men will pay for sexual satisfaction that may not include intercourse. I think prostitution should be legal, but I cannot separate the financial domination from prostitution. Money for services that satisfy a sexual need is a form of prostitution, imho.

I do not understand the uproar that fin dommes have with that comparison being made. Doesn't make what they do right or wrong, it just is what it is.


I have people who call my Mistress lines, and different people who call my findom lines. The findom people are very different from the others, so it's my belief that they would still use findoms (at least as long as they could afford to)

BTW, Lucy, good points!



MariaB -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (5/16/2015 5:36:24 AM)

I just saw an Aston Martin with the number plate (which in the UK probably cost as much as the car) OO7 WEB. That car seriously turned me on [:)]
If a material thing of value can turn me on then that's proof enough for me that expensive material items can make some of us role over and purrr!!. We only have to look at the amount of young beautiful women proudly sitting next to some fat elderly blob who owns and drives such magnificent machines to know enough people are attracted and even feel sexual towards such flashy people. For this reason I do genuinely believe there are women, dominant or not getting some serious kicks from expensive gifts.

Gifts are a reward, they make us feel special and happy; gifts bring out that feel good emotion in us. Most of us would dread our birthdays if it wasn't for the fact we were going to get some surprise presents. Why not have a birthday everyday? I personally believe that as these gifts drop through the letter box on a regular basis, it doesn't make her feel more dominant but is confirmation that she's popular, desired and special.

I believe the majority of fin Domme interactions is about wank for the men seeking it. I would be interested to know if Fin Dommes have a sell by date? How many old fat fin Dommes do we see making a success out of touting their dominance? All the women on Fin Domme websites are young, sensuous and pretty. If its a fetish then why aren't we seeing women in their 40s-50s and even 60s doing this? I believe most Fin Dommes are using their assets whilst they can and wouldn't dream of doing this once they reach a certain age and until I see proof of much more mature Fin Dommes, it remains (mainly) an opportunist endeavour of 'do it whilst you can'.



Page: <<   < prev  12 13 [14] 15 16   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625