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

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

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

Message

Arturas -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 2:48:43 PM)
This is a fetish. Fetish is sex. When one has a fetish with stripes it is a stimulation that triggers endorphins that also are used by the body to realize pleasure. Not pleasure in self-realization or the higher Maslow levels of need but the base one, sex. So even if the fin dom never even wears sexual footwear but whips the Sado Sub male she is performing a sexual act for money it is a real fetish to the subject and not fake just as a prostitute triggers a real not fake orgasm for pay.

Arturas -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 2:53:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV Although I think you may have sufficiently creeped me out enough that I'll be carrying Lysol spray with me when I go get my next Nike's I don't think I have anything to do with that personal need of yours. Is that a kink or a fake? Lysol, is that officially recognized as a kink?

Moderator10 -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 3:01:57 PM)
Per M3, this is getting ridiculous.

Arturas -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 3:07:15 PM)
These are opinions of posters who are from different cultures and parts of the world and so should be respected.

Moderator10 -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 3:08:19 PM)
I will tell her you said so.

ThePrincessKali -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 3:58:49 PM)
Fin Dommes are not prostitutes. A prostitute is someone who has sex for money. Not someone who gives a sexual thrill. Those are two extremely different things. Based on your logic would you consider a Hooters waitress a prostitute? She is making money by giving a sexual thrill to men. However she's not engaging in sex with them. What about attractive actresses or "sex symbols?" They provide a sexual thrill without having intercourse. quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas quote: ORIGINAL: FrankAr I went through all 18 pages and some I just skimmed through because it was a better thing to do, simple. A question RS. You mentioned about the diaper thing in the opening post and how it became a BDSM thing. Ok. How long did it take for it to become a BDSM thing ? Sometimes the changes do happen over a period of years or decades or even centuries, that is how I think nature and people tend to go about it. Because the BDSM thing has been going on for the presence of men, and women. Just asking . Frank Ar. Not nearly as long as the fin dom business I would suggest. Would you agree? I used to think fin doms were not prostitutes but I have realized we men are in it for base sexual drives. When I bind Star to a whipping horse, pull her panties down around her bent knees and make her wear high heels while I spank and whip her and then while I give her water and she licks my fingers, well guess what, I am a man who has dragged her to my cave and forced my will on her and she responds in a very sexual way and it is not a financial but a natural interchange, intercourse, rather than a paid one. So when all the smoke and mirrors are removed the fin dom is selling a sex act thereby fitting within then accepted definition of being a prostitute and there is nothing wrong with that you understand. I also think my posts are sexier than yours Frank. Wonder why that is?

ThePrincessKali -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 4:04:03 PM)
I got my first bartending job a few years ago based on my looks. My manager thought our bar needed more attractive women working there to drive up business. So he hired a handful of competent but inexperienced girls to train as bartenders. So getting a larger tip because you're an attractive woman makes you a prostitute? Because Artura's that's essentially what you're saying and that is false. Or maybe you just have a huge issue with women and consider them all prostitues. That's what it sounds like to me.

ytivarg -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 4:58:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThePrincessKali A prostitute is someone who has sex for money. Not someone who gives a sexual thrill. Depends a lot on what sex is defined as. In some domains, just touching buttocks is defined as sex. Egads. I googled "touching buttocks arrested" and was shocked at pages and pages and pages of people arrested just for that alone (and I didn't even get to the prostitution part yet). http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/florida-man-arrested-repeatedly-touching-women-butts-article-1.2138648 http://www.nhregister.com/general-news/20150414/man-84-charged-with-touching-milford-hotel-workers-buttocks http://www.wfmynews2.com/story/news/crime/2015/05/18/man-touched-womans-buttocks-while-at-store/27545795/ http://sunnysidepost.com/2015/05/24/sunnyside-police-arrest-man-who-allegedly-touched-womans-buttocks-tried-to-steal-her-iphone/ http://www.ktre.com/story/29609313/press-release-former-polk-co-jailer-arrested-for-touching-female-inmates-buttocks http://www.wyff4.com/news/upstate-city-officer-faces-charges-turns-himself-in-after-policy-violations/32650958 http://www.local10.com/news/miami-beach-rabbi-arrested-on-molestation-charges/33270566 http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/booty/illegal-booty-grab-785093 http://www.brooklynian.com/discussion/35881/phys-ed-teacher-esran-boothe-arrested-for-touching-buttocks-of-student-at-ch-hs/p1 http://www.centralfloridafuture.com/story/news/2015/06/03/ucf-student-arrested-for-touching-woman-in-library/28406653/ Amazing. It wasn't what I had expected. If any woman wants to touch "my" buttocks, she can have all she wants, so, it's interesting that these were all guys touching women's buns.

Moderator17 -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 5:04:55 PM)
Touching a stranger without consent is a different topic. You can start a new thread if you like.

pompeii -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 5:08:06 PM)
Moderator 17? Is there a moderator for every page? But, this is page 19! We need more moderators!

Moderator17 -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 5:09:58 PM)
Not yet.

FrankAr -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 6:15:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pompeii Moderator 17? Is there a moderator for every page? But, this is page 19! We need more moderators! There are many moderators because the bottom line is that these people do have lives and have to sleep and can be sick and have holidays, so other moderators chime in and make sure everything runs smoothly. Simple in my eyes, or were you just joking and making some humour ? Frank Ar.

FrankAr -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 6:22:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist I never said that what consists of financial domination wasn't a turn on. I question whether it belongs categorized as BDSM. Now this is true to a sense, and then this brings up my thought to go along these lines of my mental bondage. I like to dominate the mind of the slave, so it then becomes easier to put her into that blossom state quickly. Now you see the mental domination then takes the same effect as FinDoms does it not, or am I right off the mark ? just asking. Frank Ar.

RemoteUser -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 8:25:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble quote: ORIGINAL: RemoteUser General rules are how stereotypes evolve and flourish. Okay.. If men aren't sluts why do you wake up sporting wood? I don't wake up with an erection most of the time. In fact recently I wake up from night terrors as residue from a long term relationship gone sour, so, thanks for reminding me of that. I don't have erectile dysfunction. I have what is probably considered a slightly larger than average penis based on what's tossed out there as statistical averages. None of this, however, has anything to do with what I actually do to conduct how my love life and my sex life work. I don't have many sexual partners. I don't have multiple partners. I only ever did poly once, and it ended horribly through a lack of effort on everyone's part to communicate. I don't attack or debase women out of habit, and I won't consider it at all unless I have had it made explicitly clear to me that the woman does, in fact, enjoy this. I'm old school, I go with this crazy thing called consent and conduct myself in an ethical manner because I prefer to be that way. What other men do is whatever other men do, and I don't assume about them or even think about it because why would I? I don't try to lump them into groups. I don't fire off judgments like I'm going to die if I don't manage to somehow slap a label on someone. I have recognized a rise in the trend of people to habitually judge, label and segregate and while I can't say why this is happening, it does seem to be generational, which infers an evolution of social patterns that are likely based on social engineering campaigns (mass media is one such example). I do not understand people that need to judge others, and I don't understand people who need to label others. If it's a matter of trying to understand something, then labels serve a very useful temporary purpose. Judging with sufficient information is also quite understandable, but that doesn't happen quite so much nowadays. Now, do me a favour, oh ye who thinks to know me so well, and tell me again why exactly you get to label me a slut for having testicles and a penis. If you can't justify it, squawk elsewhere, we need less flames on the innerwebs - not more.

ResidentSadist -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 8:30:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FrankAr quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist I never said that what consists of financial domination wasn't a turn on. I question whether it belongs categorized as BDSM. Now this is true to a sense, and then this brings up my thought to go along these lines of my mental bondage. I like to dominate the mind of the slave, so it then becomes easier to put her into that blossom state quickly. Now you see the mental domination then takes the same effect as FinDoms does it not, or am I right off the mark ? just asking. Frank Ar. Thank you for your question. Yes, you are on point to what some of the FinDommes have replied. Some say taking money makes them feel in control. Therefore, the control is domination which is a fetish. The thing is, that point stands on shaky ground because it has to be sexually stimulating to qualify as a fetish. A dictator gets off on control too and most all of us get off on receiving money, but that isn't BDSM. If FD is being done for profit, it's not a fetish... it's a business. Which brings us to the "elephant in the room." Money motivations vs honesty vs the claim that ATM machines have the same effect as a Hitachi vibrator on FinDomme women. Hence my continued request about the need for some outside reference, some psychological study from someone that doesn't have a possible bias from vested financial interests. Sadism has been studied by professionals who are non sadist and masochism by non masochists, the results of which are published. So have all the other fetishes we practice in BDSM. I just want to see the same thing for financial domination. Not financial control as an extension of domination over s-types, but financial domination and pay piggies that are money centric... the elements of which have been studied long ago but not described as a paraphilia. Further, as I mentioned earlier, when readers see an advocate of it being a fetish that has a signature saying "Professional con artist, swindler, trixster, extortionist", I don't know if they will think that is sarcasm or see those traits as obtaining money by fraudulent means. Which may only make that elephant seem bigger.

ResidentSadist -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 8:35:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moderator17 Touching a stranger without consent is a different topic. You can start a new thread if you like. At least that is a known paraphilia! "Frotteurism: sexual arousal from the recurrent urge or behavior of touching or rubbing against a nonconsenting person." Could be less volatile and easier to moderate than this thread.

BitaTruble -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 9:11:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RemoteUser quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble quote: ORIGINAL: RemoteUser General rules are how stereotypes evolve and flourish. Okay.. If men aren't sluts why do you wake up sporting wood? I don't wake up with an erection most of the time. In fact recently I wake up from night terrors as residue from a long term relationship gone sour, so, thanks for reminding me of that. I don't have erectile dysfunction. I have what is probably considered a slightly larger than average penis based on what's tossed out there as statistical averages. None of this, however, has anything to do with what I actually do to conduct how my love life and my sex life work. I don't have many sexual partners. I don't have multiple partners. I only ever did poly once, and it ended horribly through a lack of effort on everyone's part to communicate. I don't attack or debase women out of habit, and I won't consider it at all unless I have had it made explicitly clear to me that the woman does, in fact, enjoy this. I'm old school, I go with this crazy thing called consent and conduct myself in an ethical manner because I prefer to be that way. What other men do is whatever other men do, and I don't assume about them or even think about it because why would I? I don't try to lump them into groups. I don't fire off judgments like I'm going to die if I don't manage to somehow slap a label on someone. I have recognized a rise in the trend of people to habitually judge, label and segregate and while I can't say why this is happening, it does seem to be generational, which infers an evolution of social patterns that are likely based on social engineering campaigns (mass media is one such example). I do not understand people that need to judge others, and I don't understand people who need to label others. If it's a matter of trying to understand something, then labels serve a very useful temporary purpose. Judging with sufficient information is also quite understandable, but that doesn't happen quite so much nowadays. Now, do me a favour, oh ye who thinks to know me so well, and tell me again why exactly you get to label me a slut for having testicles and a penis. If you can't justify it, squawk elsewhere, we need less flames on the innerwebs - not more. I don't know you at all.. the fact that you took the comment out of context (the context being MOST with the segue being GENERAL) is your problem so don't get your panties in a twist over it. Oh, and just in case it isn't clear, 'most' was a qualifier so that those with ED, eunuchs and apparently you and others would not fall under the subsequent statement.

RemoteUser -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 9:20:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble I don't know you at all.. the fact that you took the comment out of context (the context being MOST with the segue being GENERAL) is your problem so don't get your panties in a twist over it. Nice deflection there. The point you made, while generalized, was directed towards me, so you earned the response you got. you don't have to agree with my response or even give a shit about it. Besides, you attacked my point about generalizing with a generalization, so who's really stirring the pot, and why, when you get a taste of what you brewed in said pot, do you deflect and say I'm the one with the issue...? If you think this is me with my panties in a twist, then you haven't seen me when I'm actually upset, and that is funny. This is me logically ripping down your generalization with a personal view to debunk your theory. I enjoy it because it's actual debate. If my sassy reply to your maudlin retort seems like an attack, and you have no actual reply to the statements I posted, then I suppose there's naught else to expound upon. That's a shame, I've seen you hand out better replies.

BitaTruble -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 9:24:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RemoteUser quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble I don't know you at all.. the fact that you took the comment out of context (the context being MOST with the segue being GENERAL) is your problem so don't get your panties in a twist over it. Nice deflection there. The point you made, while generalized, was directed towards me, so you earned the response you got. you don't have to agree with my response or even give a shit about it. Besides, you attacked my point about generalizing with a generalization, so who's really stirring the pot, and why, when you get a taste of what you brewed in said pot, do you deflect and say I'm the one with the issue...? If you think this is me with my panties in a twist, then you haven't seen me when I'm actually upset, and that is funny. This is me logically ripping down your generalization with a personal view to debunk your theory. I enjoy it because it's actual debate. If my sassy reply to your maudlin retort seems like an attack, and you have no actual reply to the statements I posted, then I suppose there's naught else to expound upon. That's a shame, I've seen you hand out better replies. No, it was not. That's your perception and there's nothing I can do about it. You don't like my humor or understand it, read someone else. I will never know.

FrankAr -> RE: -=Money Pigs/FinDomery - real fetish or fake? (soapbox)=- (8/1/2015 9:25:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist some psychological study from someone that doesn't have a possible bias from vested financial interests. Now this is where it might be flawed by the time syndrome. It also might be flawed by the person syndrome. With this I mean that people are not wanting to go to a social clinical study about their life and be questioned and prodded and examined to quite some extensive details about their personal life. It will take them time to get the courage to do this. Then you have to get a scientific person to do the study and have their time and experience show in the study. It will take a few years and then it might take another few years to get it published, and then every Tom, Dick or Harry will have their say on the matter. Further more we will still have the elephant in the room type of reasoning as the figures will be there, the research done, the results in, and still the person's opinion still might not be changed. That is how man is. You can tell someone to read an article, and this article has everything open and all the statistics will be there, yet the person will still not believe it. You will know that some things are so in wired into someone that they cannot change and will not change. I am just thinking of what pay scale the scientist will ask for and the questions that will be asked ? Frank Ar.

Page: << < prev 16 17 18 [19] 20 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625