quote:

ORIGINAL: MikeRaven

I'm getting confused.

Is notaBULL and J0K3ER the same person?

quote:

ORIGINAL: notaBULL
I say this having years of experience in the field behind me Miss, strippers are much more attracted to Bulls

The way you latched onto strippers, when you said they hated male slaves.

quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

Most posters? Most means the majority with the exception of a few.
And much higher quality "posting standard". Not only higher , but much higher Is it all about posting OR it is about discussion?

That wasn't the compliment to the other posters you took it to be. It's more a matter of you setting the bar extremely low.

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

Would you then mind explaining to me what is a high posting standard, I'm serious.

Higher posting standard: posts that provoke interesting thoughts, new ideas, or contribute in some way to an intriguing debate.

As opposed to your posts mainly being: mindless drivel that serves no purpose, nor provokes thought, nor contributes new ideas, but seem to be primarily intended to annoy people, be confrontational without a reason, or to chatter mindlessly.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Surely you've read more than enough posts on CS where people have adamantly stated that setting up a /s for failure isn't being a responsive or responsible D??
Many a time I have seen posts that say the D should be responsible for the success of the /s.
Many insta-doms have been ridiculed for setting up a /s for failure.

It takes just as much cognitive responsibility on the /s as the D to realise that they are being setup for failure.
And I didn't say you should get out of your marriage - that would be your spin on it, not mine.
And generally speaking, being a top or bottom implies consensual play.
Again, your spin, not mine.

Any true punishment (as in, non-consensual) is considered abuse anywhere in the western world and carries a legal penalty if reported.
Now funishment is entirely different... it is consensual. Even in those cases, if the one being punished raises a complaint, the funishment, if not stopped instantly, becomes a non-consensual abuse.


Lastly, I wasn't replying to you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

because i mistakenly used the word "here" instead of "there" I meant to say you are always there to either kick or save my ass.

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

unfortunately you did not attempt any correction, and thought I meant you are always online. right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

this is why your reply came so defensive stating you are a house wife.

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

Ye,t your definition of high posting standard was based on 1st prejudice, 2nd your bias of opinion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

I'd hold that in higher esteem if you said that is your opinion

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

this user responded to my post, and lets say his posting standard is as low as mine, otherwise he would not respond if he thought he would lower his "posting standard" BTW I like this new term. and even though this user has clearly stated that he was not replying to you. malgré tout ça , Being the ultimate poster, you gave up your very high "posting standard" and accepted a lower one. you jumped into my low " posting standard" conversation with others knowing it is of lower quality.
you have one more move
mate in 1

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

quote:

ORIGINAL: MikeRaven

I'm getting confused.

Is notaBULL and J0K3ER the same person?

you can also put it this way, WE ARE NOT AMERICANS

quote:

ORIGINAL: MikeRaven

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

quote:

ORIGINAL: MikeRaven

I'm getting confused.

Is notaBULL and J0K3ER the same person?

you can also put it this way, WE ARE NOT AMERICANS

Why would you point out that you and the other poster ARE NOT AMERICAN? You did it in capital letters so is there some sort of hidden meaning? What exactly are you trying to say? It would be the same thing if I pointed out that YOU ARE CAUCASION

quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar

quote:

ORIGINAL: MikeRaven

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

quote:

ORIGINAL: MikeRaven

I'm getting confused.

Is notaBULL and J0K3ER the same person?

you can also put it this way, WE ARE NOT AMERICANS

Why would you point out that you and the other poster ARE NOT AMERICAN? You did it in capital letters so is there some sort of hidden meaning? What exactly are you trying to say? It would be the same thing if I pointed out that YOU ARE CAUCASION

Neither am I, BTW. And completely coincidental, I happen to be Caucasian as well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

check mate

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

you list your ethnicity as Caucasian but you are not.

quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

check mate

Sure cupcake. Whatever you say.

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

you list your ethnicity as Caucasian but you are not.

Fuck... I must have sent off a Caucasian chick posing as me to go meet all the people from this board who think they've met me.
Accidentally the same one as in all the pics on my profile, here and on Fet, over the years.

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

am I talking to a stone? I said you are not Caucasian, regardless what your Ethnicity is you are not a Caucasian. Caucasians are the people from South Europe and North Africa. the "Mediterraneans" Mediterranean sea is also called the white sea and you are not one of these people

quote:

Cau·ca·sian
kôˈkāZHən/
adjective
1.
NORTH AMERICAN
white-skinned; of European origin.

quote:

Cau·ca·sian (kô-kā′zhən, -kăzh′ən)
adj.
1.
a. Of or relating to a racial group having light-colored skin; white.
b. Of or being a human racial classification distinguished especially by very light to brown skin and straight to wavy or curly hair, and including peoples indigenous to Europe, northern Africa, western Asia, and parts of South Asia. No longer in scientific use.
2. Of or relating to the Caucasus region or its peoples, languages, or cultures.
3. Of or relating to a group of three language families spoken in the region of the Caucasus mountains, including Chechen, Abkhaz, and the Kartvelian languages.
n.
1.
a. A person having light-colored skin; a white person.
b. A member of the Caucasian racial classification. No longer in scientific use.
2. A native or inhabitant of the Caucasus.
3. The Caucasian language family.

quote:

Caucasian
[kaw-key-zhuh n, -shuh n, -kazh-uh n, -kash-]
Spell Syllables
Examples Word Origin
adjective, Also, Caucasic [kaw-kas-ik, -kaz-] (Show IPA)
1.
Anthropology. (no longer in technical use) of, relating to, or characteristic of one of the traditional racial divisions of humankind, marked by fair to dark skin, straight to tightly curled hair, and light to very dark eyes, and originally inhabiting Europe, parts of North Africa, western Asia, and India.
2.
white (def 3):
a brown-haired Caucasian female with a tattoo on her left shoulder.
3.
of or relating to the Caucasus mountain range.
4.
of or related to the non-Indo-European, non-Turkic languages of the Caucasus region.
noun
5.
Anthropology. (no longer in technical use) a member of the peoples traditionally classified as the Caucasian race, especially those peoples having light to fair skin.

6.a white person:
The majority of management positions in the company were filled by Caucasians.
7.
a native of Caucasia.

quote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_race

In his earlier racial typology, Meiners put forth that Caucasians had the "whitest, most blooming and most delicate skin".[9] Europeans with darker skin he considered "dirty whites", admixed with Mongolians.

quote:

ORIGINAL: J0K3ER

I will stop here until i get some thing to bring to the table. Bon Appétit

quote:

ORIGINAL: TieMeInKnottss

Honestly, this is not a "female Dom" only issue. I find that many male doms also lose interest fairly quickly. It is a little different as a female sub...male doms will pursue you..convince you that they are ready for all that is required...problem is...once they "win" and you capitulate, there is no challenge and they move to the next challenge. Also, many have a fantasy idea (not a sex fantasy ...)and real life intrudes (& sub needs guidance, leadership...) and being the Dom becomes just one more daily chore that they don't want to deal with.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: notaBULL
I say this having years of experience in the field behind me Miss, strippers are much more attracted to Bulls

The way you latched onto strippers, when you said they hated male slaves.

Which has nothing to do with the fact that you wish to project your "You're a Goddess" fantasy onto every woman....whether they want it or not.

The strippers were just an example of what you do. Another example is your view that my submissive friend that Pro-Dommes to pay for grad school, should just deal with the fact that guys like you behave like you when outside of that conext.

quote:

ORIGINAL: notaBULL



I think all Ladies belong on a pedestal and I really do not see why you are spending energy debating this.

quote:

As for your submissive friend playing the Domme, I only said she could have chosen any other of the million ways to make money, like 99% percent of the population, so obviously, she is unconsciously attracted to Domination. So she might be lying to herself.

quote:

Do you seriously think that if I met a submissive Lady in a coffee shop then tell her she is not a sub but a Goddess, that she would slap me in the face for making such a comment, and then we would both start a UFC match?

quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: notaBULL



I think all Ladies belong on a pedestal and I really do not see why you are spending energy debating this.

Because it's about boundaries. You don't care about the boundaries of the women. You only care about your fantasy.

quote:

As for your submissive friend playing the Domme, I only said she could have chosen any other of the million ways to make money, like 99% percent of the population, so obviously, she is unconsciously attracted to Domination. So she might be lying to herself.

Again, this has nothing to do with the fact that you would ignore her boundaries. In fact, it's you justifying ignoring her boundaries.

quote:

Do you seriously think that if I met a submissive Lady in a coffee shop then tell her she is not a sub but a Goddess, that she would slap me in the face for making such a comment, and then we would both start a UFC match?

No, but the reality is that you would be again ignoring her boundaries and making her uncomfortable because of your fantasies.

You either are incapable of seeing or purposefully ignoring the boundaries of others by projecting the dynamics of fantasy onto them. From every post you've made, it appears that this fantasy leads you into a method of interacting with women that is unhealthy. You appear to choose women that don't want you or your dynamic and a definition of slavery that limits any emotional involvement.

It's one thing to choose to be with someone and have that dynamic within your relationship. It's something entirely different to project that dynamic onto every woman.

I'm not trying to be mean, I'm just seeing some things here that indicate that it would probably be in your best interest to talk to a kink friendly therapist.

quote:

ORIGINAL: notaBULL

I do not see the fact that I wish to see all Females, whether Sub, Fat, Short, or Domme as Goddesses very damaging to the Future of the Female.

if I met a submissive Lady in a coffee shop then tell her she is not a sub but a Goddess

quote:

If you fail to respect what women say, you label yourself a problem.

There’s a man with whom I went out on a single date—afternoon coffee, for one hour by the clock—on July 25th. In the two days after the date, he sent me about fifteen e-mails, scolding me for non-responsiveness. I e-mailed him back, saying, “Look, this is a disproportionate response to a single date. You are making me uncomfortable. Do not contact me again.” It is now October 7th. Does he still e-mail?

Yeah. He does. About every two weeks.

This man scores higher on the threat level scale than Man with the Cockroach Tattoos. (Who, after all, is guilty of nothing more than terrifying bad taste.) You see, Mr. E-mail has made it clear that he ignores what I say when he wants something from me. Now, I don’t know if he is an actual rapist, and I sincerely hope he’s not. But he is certainly Schrödinger’s Rapist, and this particular Schrödinger’s Rapist has a probability ratio greater than one in sixty. Because a man who ignores a woman’s NO in a non-sexual setting is more likely to ignore NO in a sexual setting, as well.

http://kateharding.net/2009/10/08/guest-blogger-starling-schrodinger%E2%80%99s-rapist-or-a-guy%E2%80%99s-guide-to-approaching-strange-women-without-being-maced/