quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Rather than "findomme acceptance" I advocate male sub acceptance, treating them like actual human beings instead of ignoring their words unless there's a tribute attached to the front. Short of getting more actual lifestyle females who are not lesbians into the community, the only way to remove these predators if the numbers can't be skewed by adding women is to take an abrasive stance against the practice itself.

First off, I'm a straight switch. Never been a BDSM provider or involved in the sex industry in any way, shape or form.

I'll cut quick to the chase. Do you go around picketing or protesting other forms of sexual gratification that are readily available and accessible at a price to legions upon legions of horny males just looking to get their freak on, and with nothing else of substance to offer a woman? The now archaic term for having "honorable intentions" toward us ladies.

Where else can a horny net geek, sometimes married and busy cybercheating on his wife or vanilla girlfriend(s), and/or a short, flabby, bald, usually middle-aged or older dude who's ED-challenged and severely deficient in social skills (i.e., doesn't know how to date single women, doesn't even begin to understand women, has commitment issues as in relationship-impaired) going to interest or attract your average available woman just so he can sexually objectify her at his convenience? You might live in la-la land, but by real world standards. . . it ain't happenin.'

Just telling it like it is, or how I see it.

DreamLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Rather than "findomme acceptance" I advocate male sub acceptance, treating them like actual human beings instead of ignoring their words unless there's a tribute attached to the front. Short of getting more actual lifestyle females who are not lesbians into the community, the only way to remove these predators if the numbers can't be skewed by adding women is to take an abrasive stance against the practice itself.

First off, I'm a straight switch. Never been a BDSM provider or involved in the sex industry in any way, shape or form.

I'll cut quick to the chase. Do you go around picketing or protesting other forms of sexual gratification that are readily available and accessible at a price to legions upon legions of horny males just looking to get their freak on, and with nothing else of substance to offer a woman? The now archaic term for having "honorable intentions" toward us ladies.

Where else can a horny net geek, sometimes married and busy cybercheating on his wife or vanilla girlfriend(s), and/or a short, flabby, bald, usually middle-aged or older dude who's ED-challenged and severely deficient in social skills (i.e., doesn't know how to date single women, doesn't even begin to understand women, has commitment issues as in relationship-impaired) going to interest or attract your average available woman just so he can sexually objectify her at his convenience? You might live in la-la land, but by real world standards. . . it ain't happenin.'

Just telling it like it is, or how I see it.

DreamLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

Years ago this discussion came up and Rochsub (sp) who is alas no longer on the site wrote an explanation of it which totally changed my opinion. He said that quite simply, money is power in this world, and therefore giving over your money was giving power. There's no power exchange in this, since the sub doesn't gain any.

When The Man and I play, I'm bound and helpless. But I gain power from it as much as he. I get to feel as though I am still young and beautiful. Because here's this powerful, competent man who is totally focused on me. Who gets sexual arousal because of me. And that's a hell of a power rush.

But in some ways giving power while not gaining any is a more pure form. There's no quid pro quo, just the pure giving over while expecting and getting nothing back.

And I can easily imagine a scene of this, but it isn't one I'd like to see. It would involve verbal degradation until the guy is just sobbing helplessly at which point she takes his wallet, removes the cash, drops it and walks off without looking back. And no aftercare, of course.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Rather than "findomme acceptance" I advocate male sub acceptance, treating them like actual human beings instead of ignoring their words unless there's a tribute attached to the front. Short of getting more actual lifestyle females who are not lesbians into the community, the only way to remove these predators if the numbers can't be skewed by adding women is to take an abrasive stance against the practice itself.

First off, I'm a straight switch. Never been a BDSM provider or involved in the sex industry in any way, shape or form.

I'll cut quick to the chase. Do you go around picketing or protesting other forms of sexual gratification that are readily available and accessible at a price to legions upon legions of horny males just looking to get their freak on, and with nothing else of substance to offer a woman? The now archaic term for having "honorable intentions" toward us ladies.

Where else can a horny net geek, sometimes married and busy cybercheating on his wife or vanilla girlfriend(s), and/or a short, flabby, bald, usually middle-aged or older dude who's ED-challenged and severely deficient in social skills (i.e., doesn't know how to date single women, doesn't even begin to understand women, has commitment issues as in relationship-impaired) going to interest or attract your average available woman just so he can sexually objectify her at his convenience? You might live in la-la land, but by real world standards. . . it ain't happenin.'

Just telling it like it is, or how I see it.

DreamLady

Your very first sentence is entirely the issue. You are a straight female switch. You bring up la la land at the end, but I'm the one living in the real world. What can a straight female switch possibly understand about the political budgeting involved in this situation. It was brought up "it doesn't harm anyone" and it sure is easy as hell to say that from that straight female switch armchair.

La la land is shutting your eyes to the problem. And the reason this is a hot topic in the community is because it DOES affect other people unlike actual lifestyle kinks. By it's nature it is a budgeting issue, a lack of female dominants willing to understand (la la land) that males are not different than females, we are all people, and knowing you don't get to play except if entering a casino and gambling away money to offer a plea is not a healthy direction for the community to go. But part of la la land is being complacent in not understanding because you have no need to understand (straight female switch) so this issue doesn't affect your prospects or seem harmful.

It is NOT and never will be healthy for a community's supply/demand of participants to be so skewed that there is a veritable casino where you pay upfront for a chance to play the game and make your plea on a dating site. You can hide it behind saying its a kink, but the problem CAN be fixed and it's an easy fix. It comes down to a rejection of all that terrible bs and extrapolation about male whatever I just read in what I quoted (because males apparently are distinct from every other species the earth has spawned and female subs also aren't looking to get their needs met)

EVERYONE is looking to get their needs met, it's a matter of a deficit based on being born with a penis that is unjustified and can't get better until we all understand (and have need to understand because we aren't complacent or accepting of scams) that sub men are allowed to have interpersonal value beyond their wallet.

I want to do an exercise and imagine what it would be like to search for a female sub, what you would expect from that as a bisexual switch/domme. Now keep all of those expectations constant, and switch one variable, make that sub a male now, keeping every mental trait and appealing point of value at a constant. This is the problem and this is the need to understand, this is the interpersonal political budgeting issue, and this is why the problem will only get worse if it is swept under the rug.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Your very first sentence is entirely the issue. You are a straight female switch.

quote:



You bring up la la land at the end, but I'm the one living in the real world.

quote:



What can a straight female switch possibly understand about the political budgeting involved in this situation.

quote:



It was brought up "it doesn't harm anyone" and it sure is easy as hell to say that from that straight female switch armchair.

quote:



La la land is shutting your eyes to the problem.

quote:



And the reason this is a hot topic in the community is because it DOES affect other people unlike actual lifestyle kinks.

quote:



By it's nature it is a budgeting issue, a lack of female dominants willing to understand (la la land) that males are not different than females, we are all people, and knowing you don't get to play except if entering a casino and gambling away money to offer a plea is not a healthy direction for the community to go.

quote:



But part of la la land is being complacent in not understanding because you have no need to understand (straight female switch) so this issue doesn't affect your prospects or seem harmful.

quote:



It is NOT and never will be healthy for a community's supply/demand of participants to be so skewed that there is a veritable casino where you pay upfront for a chance to play the game and make your plea on a dating site.

quote:



You can hide it behind saying its a kink, but the problem CAN be fixed and it's an easy fix.

quote:



It comes down to a rejection of all that terrible bs and extrapolation about male whatever I just read in what I quoted (because males apparently are distinct from every other species the earth has spawned and female subs also aren't looking to get their needs met)

quote:



EVERYONE is looking to get their needs met, it's a matter of a deficit based on being born with a penis that is unjustified and can't get better until we all understand (and have need to understand because we aren't complacent or accepting of scams) that sub men are allowed to have interpersonal value beyond their wallet.

quote:



I want to do an exercise and imagine what it would be like to search for a female sub, what you would expect from that as a bisexual switch/domme. Now keep all of those expectations constant, and switch one variable, make that sub a male now, keeping every mental trait and appealing point of value at a constant. This is the problem and this is the need to understand, this is the interpersonal political budgeting issue, and this is why the problem will only get worse if it is swept under the rug.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThePrincessKali

And this is exactly why finsubs don't chime in. Believe me there are plenty of men out there who want nothing more than to buy gifts or tribute women. It's what they get off on. I can say that 100% certainty. I have two that I see regularly. I am not predatory in any way. They approached me. And honestly both have told me they wished I dehumanize them more. But harsh, judgemental posts like this are exactly what scares finsubs away from discussions such as this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard
Your very first sentence is entirely the issue. You are a straight female switch. You bring up la la land at the end, but I'm the one living in the real world. What can a straight female switch possibly understand about the political budgeting involved in this situation. It was brought up "it doesn't harm anyone" and it sure is easy as hell to say that from that straight female switch armchair.

And you are somehow more qualified to weigh in on this matter, because you are. . . a lesbian slave. Who is young enough to be my daughter, I might add, since I have twice the timespan of nitty-gritty life experience than you do. You could argue that yours is more compressed than mine -- but we're not here for a member-measuring contest, now are we.

You took my 'la-la land' remark personally. Why? Are you actually a male sub seeking a Domme? Are there lesbian finDommes with whom you take issue? If so, nobody is "forcing" you to enter into a power exchange dynamic with them with the money-vending machine being the power vehicle of choice.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

La la land is shutting your eyes to the problem. And the reason this is a hot topic in the community is because it DOES affect other people unlike actual lifestyle kinks. By it's nature it is a budgeting issue, a lack of female dominants willing to understand (la la land) that males are not different than females, we are all people, and knowing you don't get to play except if entering a casino and gambling away money to offer a plea is not a healthy direction for the community to go. But part of la la land is being complacent in not understanding because you have no need to understand (straight female switch) so this issue doesn't affect your prospects or seem harmful.

In case you hadn't read my earlier posts on this thread, I have not been advocating or turning a blind eye to this controversial subject. I have actually presented arguments against findom/mery (by either Dommes or Doms) and BDSM Topping-for-hire as being bona fide expressions of D/s, as opposed to fantasy make-believe D/s. This is based on my personal opinion of a D/s ownership commitment being a critical component of this relationship dynamic. A customer or client is not "owned" by a Mistress and does not engage in more than a temporal authority exchange where he pretends to relinquish control when his Domme provider decides which items on his do-me list are featured on her BDSM Topping menu.

By [totally] 'straight' I was making it clear that I have a 100% vested romantic interest in males, whether they be submissive, switch or 'nilla. (I am Domme-leaning, so I haven't been with a Dom before.) I also have many male sub friends who are not into financial domination and are frustrated by not being able to find a lifestyle Domme to be their Mistress who either isn't already married or has a primary partner, and they don't want to settle for playing second fiddle. Do you take exception to the scarcity of available monogamous, heterosexual Dommes for them to date seriously in the hopes of becoming their sub husband, and what would be your "budgeting" solution to that state of affairs? A rallying cry of anti-heteroflexibility and anti-polyamory or consensual polysexuality, or anti-open relationship? Good luck with that.

Furthermore, you don't know my history, and it wasn't relevant to the discussion other than to point out that I have no dog in this fight and never have. I have been an FLR Domme for much, much longer than I have been a switch, if you really must know. In fact, I would like to boycott all non-FLR male subs who aren't marriage-minded. There, that should do it, on par with your own feeble protests.

Repeated for emphasis:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

males are not different than females

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

EVERYONE is looking to get their needs met, it's a matter of a deficit based on being born with a penis that is unjustified and can't get better until we all understand (and have need to understand because we aren't complacent or accepting of scams) that sub men are allowed to have interpersonal value beyond their wallet.

I want to do an exercise and imagine what it would be like to search for a female sub, what you would expect from that as a bisexual switch/domme. Now keep all of those expectations constant, and switch one variable, make that sub a male now, keeping every mental trait and appealing point of value at a constant. This is the problem and this is the need to understand, this is the interpersonal political budgeting issue, and this is why the problem will only get worse if it is swept under the rug.

I must have missed the part where guns were being held to these men's heads. Big heads. Or little heads, whichever one they do most of their thinking with, which is not limited to only submissives.

DreamLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard
Your very first sentence is entirely the issue. You are a straight female switch. You bring up la la land at the end, but I'm the one living in the real world. What can a straight female switch possibly understand about the political budgeting involved in this situation. It was brought up "it doesn't harm anyone" and it sure is easy as hell to say that from that straight female switch armchair.

And you are somehow more qualified to weigh in on this matter, because you are. . . a lesbian slave. Who is young enough to be my daughter, I might add, since I have twice the timespan of nitty-gritty life experience than you do. You could argue that yours is more compressed than mine -- but we're not here for a member-measuring contest, now are we.

You took my 'la-la land' remark personally. Why? Are you actually a male sub seeking a Domme? Are there lesbian finDommes with whom you take issue? If so, nobody is "forcing" you to enter into a power exchange dynamic with them with the money-vending machine being the power vehicle of choice.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

La la land is shutting your eyes to the problem. And the reason this is a hot topic in the community is because it DOES affect other people unlike actual lifestyle kinks. By it's nature it is a budgeting issue, a lack of female dominants willing to understand (la la land) that males are not different than females, we are all people, and knowing you don't get to play except if entering a casino and gambling away money to offer a plea is not a healthy direction for the community to go. But part of la la land is being complacent in not understanding because you have no need to understand (straight female switch) so this issue doesn't affect your prospects or seem harmful.

In case you hadn't read my earlier posts on this thread, I have not been advocating or turning a blind eye to this controversial subject. I have actually presented arguments against findom/mery (by either Dommes or Doms) and BDSM Topping-for-hire as being bona fide expressions of D/s, as opposed to fantasy make-believe D/s. This is based on my personal opinion of a D/s ownership commitment being a critical component of this relationship dynamic. A customer or client is not "owned" by a Mistress and does not engage in more than a temporal authority exchange where he pretends to relinquish control when his Domme provider decides which items on his do-me list are featured on her BDSM Topping menu.

By [totally] 'straight' I was making it clear that I have a 100% vested romantic interest in males, whether they be submissive, switch or 'nilla. (I am Domme-leaning, so I haven't been with a Dom before.) I also have many male sub friends who are not into financial domination and are frustrated by not being able to find a lifestyle Domme to be their Mistress who either isn't already married or has a primary partner, and they don't want to settle for playing second fiddle. Do you take exception to the scarcity of available monogamous, heterosexual Dommes for them to date seriously in the hopes of becoming their sub husband, and what would be your "budgeting" solution to that state of affairs? A rallying cry of anti-heteroflexibility and anti-polyamory or consensual polysexuality, or anti-open relationship? Good luck with that.

Furthermore, you don't know my history, and it wasn't relevant to the discussion other than to point out that I have no dog in this fight and never have. I have been an FLR Domme for much, much longer than I have been a switch, if you really must know. In fact, I would like to boycott all non-FLR male subs who aren't marriage-minded. There, that should do it, on par with your own feeble protests.

Repeated for emphasis:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

males are not different than females

Pardon my French, but are you fucking crazy? Let us know when your barge floating on the river de Nile disembarks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

EVERYONE is looking to get their needs met, it's a matter of a deficit based on being born with a penis that is unjustified and can't get better until we all understand (and have need to understand because we aren't complacent or accepting of scams) that sub men are allowed to have interpersonal value beyond their wallet.

I want to do an exercise and imagine what it would be like to search for a female sub, what you would expect from that as a bisexual switch/domme. Now keep all of those expectations constant, and switch one variable, make that sub a male now, keeping every mental trait and appealing point of value at a constant. This is the problem and this is the need to understand, this is the interpersonal political budgeting issue, and this is why the problem will only get worse if it is swept under the rug.

I must have missed the part where guns were being held to these men's heads. Big heads. Or little heads, whichever one they do most of their thinking with, which is not limited to only submissives.

DreamLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady

By [totally] 'straight' I was making it clear that I have a 100% vested romantic interest in males, whether they be submissive, switch or 'nilla. (I am Domme-leaning, so I haven't been with a Dom before.) I also have many male sub friends who are not into financial domination and are frustrated by not being able to find a lifestyle Domme to be their Mistress who either isn't already married or has a primary partner, and they don't want to settle for playing second fiddle. Do you take exception to the scarcity of available monogamous, heterosexual Dommes for them to date seriously in the hopes of becoming their sub husband, and what would be your "budgeting" solution to that state of affairs? A rallying cry of anti-heteroflexibility and anti-polyamory or consensual polysexuality, or anti-open relationship? Good luck with that.

Oh ok you are one of THOSE people who think men and women are different. Barring some asinine semantics like "well one has a penis" because that's not sound categorical logic, there's nothing we can debate.

. . . That goes back to the point of us two having nothing more to talk about because you are clearly one of those misandrist who somehow believe men and women are different.

So, you missed the part where I state in no uncertain terms that I am romantically, erotically, and sexually attracted to men. Just men. (Well, just one man, since I'm a one-man woman.) I am the furtherest woman from a misandrist that you will probably (not) ever meet.

Not to mention, almonds and cashews are not seamlessly interchangeable in a recipe and do not have the same flavor or properties. You are thinking of substitution, where ingredients may be alike in many ways, but are not the same. (Go mindlessly substituting peanuts for cashews and see what happens with somebody who has a peanut allergy. Not. the. same.)

I must have also missed the part where men and women are so alike that it shouldn't matter to you who you get with, then, should it? After all, we're interchangeably the same according to your philosophical outlook. Why do you even have a gender preference, in that case, dearie?

DreamLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady

By [totally] 'straight' I was making it clear that I have a 100% vested romantic interest in males, whether they be submissive, switch or 'nilla. (I am Domme-leaning, so I haven't been with a Dom before.) I also have many male sub friends who are not into financial domination and are frustrated by not being able to find a lifestyle Domme to be their Mistress who either isn't already married or has a primary partner, and they don't want to settle for playing second fiddle. Do you take exception to the scarcity of available monogamous, heterosexual Dommes for them to date seriously in the hopes of becoming their sub husband, and what would be your "budgeting" solution to that state of affairs? A rallying cry of anti-heteroflexibility and anti-polyamory or consensual polysexuality, or anti-open relationship? Good luck with that.

Oh ok you are one of THOSE people who think men and women are different. Barring some asinine semantics like "well one has a penis" because that's not sound categorical logic, there's nothing we can debate.

. . . That goes back to the point of us two having nothing more to talk about because you are clearly one of those misandrist who somehow believe men and women are different.

So, you missed the part where I state in no uncertain terms that I am romantically, erotically, and sexually attracted to men. Just men. (Well, just one man, since I'm a one-man woman.) I am the furtherest woman from a misandrist that you will probably (not) ever meet.

Not to mention, almonds and cashews are not seamlessly interchangeable in a recipe and do not have the same flavor or properties. You are thinking of substitution, where ingredients may be alike in many ways, but are not the same. (Go mindlessly substituting peanuts for cashews and see what happens with somebody who has a peanut allergy. Not. the. same.)

I must have also missed the part where men and women are so alike that it shouldn't matter to you who you get with, then, should it? After all, we're interchangeably the same according to your philosophical outlook. Why do you even have a gender preference, in that case, dearie?

DreamLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

The reason I didn't respond to male dom guy is because in addition of him having nothing of value to contribute to dissecting the arguments other than going sentence for sentence so gives the illusion of some sort of dissertation

quote:



(no, or my brain hurts, or nuh uh, or politics seriously?) he's within a section of a culture that is as foreign and unimportant to this topic that the opinion has no value to me.

quote:



This is why I don't consult or ask an opinion or care what a baseball analyst thinks about interior car design. A straight male dom has no intersect, raising awareness of this dynamic to a male dom is about as useful to me as raising awareness of French syntax to Japanese schoolchildren.

quote:



Not only is it not constructive to the cause in any way, but in addition to it being a waste of energy, he's also clearly not ready to discuss the issue because it hurts his brain and he's still somewhere figuring out how to make sense of the world that he thinks politics is a word that applies to only governments.

quote:



Also waiting for those male finsubs to chime in. My bet is on they are glad this issue is being brought up. Them contacting you is not indicative of them wanting it.

quote:



It's indicative of them having no possible moves to meet a dominant other than paying more money for more attention. Of course they are going to contact you. It's not unreasonable to expect if someone signs up on a dating website, subculture or not, they are looking for someone. It's also not unreasonable to expect that because sub men, despite having societal characteristics of the submissive role that is often pursued in women, are not pursued by domme women. It is then not unreasonable to assume that on a dating website, if they get no messages and want to utilize the function of meeting people, and the only avenue is to pay for it, then they will do so. Remember they signed up to meet people, so they aren't going to take a half measure to sign up, then not talk to anyone and go play tennis. The part that makes you believe they want this is they've learned its the only way they get responses.

quote:



No one is going to contact them because they aren't gay male subs contacted by gay masters. They've learned the only way they will get any sort of response is to put money up front, and it becomes a self feeding cycle that invites more disingenuous scammers into the community, and perpetuates a belief that because so many men contact you offering to pay you money out of the blue, that men like this. The problem is if gay masters can find value in gay subs without demanding tribute to plea a case for a relationship, then this is a desire that exists across all humans, and a value that is sought and had in everyone. That's why the problem is also easy to fix, understanding to Female Dominants (not baseball statisticians in Montreal like this one guy up here) that the market for submissives is larger than they think it is, and that it's a better place for everyone when value is normalized and predators aren't given the chance to come in and profit off gender stereotypes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Misandry/misogyny is not mutually exclusive with being repelled or attracted to that sex.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Security is level 2 on the pyramid.
Physiology is level 1 on the pyramid.

I reduced it further so I win.

No, you didn't. You merely went from a food group to needs pyramid.
I proclaim Gauge the winner by a landslide!

DreamLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamlady

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Misandry/misogyny is not mutually exclusive with being repelled or attracted to that sex.

You of all people would know. A misogynist "lesbian." "Lesbian slave," no less. This makes you more knowledgeable than a straight Dom like Gauge, according to your logic.

Let's look at the commonalities. Gauge is a Dominant and can relate to other Dominants better than you can. He is a straight male and can relate to other straight males. You ostensibly aren't any of the three.
You claim to be a slave, so you can relate to finslaves? To lesbian finDommes? Nope. Gauge has you beat by 3 to 1.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

Security is level 2 on the pyramid.
Physiology is level 1 on the pyramid.

I reduced it further so I win.

No, you didn't. You merely went from a food group to needs pyramid.
I proclaim Gauge the winner by a landslide!

DreamLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gauge

One other point that I have yet to bring up is that financial domination appears to be a one way street, meaning simply that it appears that the dominants are exclusively female and the submissives are exclusively male. I find that to be oddly out of proportion respective to other parts of BDSM.

(In before ET declares himself the first male financial dominant)

Bingo. This is why this is one instance where it's not about kink acceptance, it's about protecting straight male subs and putting a foot down and pushing against this findomme stuff ever being accepted in the community.

quote:

It is a one way street, fin"subs" don't enjoy it.

quote:

They recognize patterns, that they only gain any response attention when there is a dollar sign attached to get their message through the door. How many female subs have to tribute female dommes to get an in? Didn't think so. It's a predatory practice based on horribly skewed and under-represented ratios of male slaves to female dominants.

quote:

This is why there are no male findoms. Because the practice itself is so farcical there has to be a completely unsustainable ratio in play for someone to give up money just for a chance to be acknowledged.

quote:

This is the problem and this is how it differentiates from kink acceptance. Rather than "findomme acceptance" I advocate male sub acceptance, treating them like actual human beings instead of ignoring their words unless there's a tribute attached to the front.

quote:

Short of getting more actual lifestyle females who are not lesbians into the community, the only way to remove these predators if the numbers can't be skewed by adding women is to take an abrasive stance against the practice itself.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elnard
Your very first sentence is entirely the issue. You are a straight female switch.

quote:

It was brought up "it doesn't harm anyone" and it sure is easy as hell to say that from that straight female switch armchair.

quote:

And the reason this is a hot topic in the community is because it DOES affect other people unlike actual lifestyle kinks.

quote:

By it's nature it is a budgeting issue, a lack of female dominants willing to understand (la la land) that males are not different than females,

quote:

we are all people,

quote:

It is NOT and never will be healthy for a community's supply/demand of participants to be so skewed that there is a veritable casino where you pay upfront for a chance to play the game and make your plea on a dating site.

quote:

EVERYONE is looking to get their needs met, it's a matter of a deficit based on being born with a penis that is unjustified and can't get better until we all understand (and have need to understand because we aren't complacent or accepting of scams) that sub men are allowed to have interpersonal value beyond their wallet.

quote:

I want to do an exercise and imagine what it would be like to search for a female sub, what you would expect from that as a bisexual switch/domme. Now keep all of those expectations constant, and switch one variable, make that sub a male now, keeping every mental trait and appealing point of value at a constant. This is the problem and this is the need to understand, this is the interpersonal political budgeting issue, and this is why the problem will only get worse if it is swept under the rug.

quote:

For the men:

I am open to the possibility of partnering with a dominant man for love and co-topping, but that would take a truly spectacular man and dominant to earn my heart and mind.

You are a driven, sometimes-aggressive submissive male/slave who enjoys your masculinity and surrendering to me.

You are also preferably heteroflexible or bi. It helps satisfy my greed, LOL! That said, a VERY suitable straight man could be considered.

For the women:

You enjoy courtship and being treated like a woman, being told you are a good girl, and beautiful, while sparring intellectually, and letting your hair down for fun.

You enjoy spending time with women and men, and feeling that rush of sexual energy running through you all day long.

You may be a lesbian or not interested in men sexually. That's possible for the right candidate. Although I would love a completely bisexual girl (who finds my Pet attractive as well), there need not be contact between he and you. However, there would need to be comfort in nakedness and side-by-side serving, with the understanding that no boundaries would ever be crossed.

For all ya'll (in the south, yannow):

You are submissive, and wanting to revel in the deep trust and affection that goes along with offering another your mind, heart, and body.

You get hot texting with your partner(s) to create the sexual tension leading to an intense evening together.

You realize that creating a red hot D/s relationship is often not simple, but it should feel easy, fun and sexy, and the rewards are beyond most people's wildest imaginations.

You realize that attraction does rely at least partially on looks.

Your looks are not all I am interested in, though. You must be smart, curious, interesting, and communicate well to catch my eye.

We will take it slow. I am not interested in collaring you within the week, or beating you black and blue on our first meeting (if ever). I am very into the mental aspects of D/s, and I am the primary leader. I will take your mind for a journey of sexual freedom, self-love, and finding yourself in trust and adoration for your domme.