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

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?

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThePrincessKali
A prostitute is someone who has sex for money. Not someone who gives a sexual thrill.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pompeii

Moderator 17? Is there a moderator for every page?
But, this is page 19!
We need more moderators!

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.

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?

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.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moderator17

Touching a stranger without consent is a different topic. You can start a new thread if you like.

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.

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.

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.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist

some psychological study from someone that doesn't have a possible bias from vested financial interests.