Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress >> RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 7:49:29 PM   
gooddogbenji


Posts: 5094
Joined: 11/15/2005
From: Toronto
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

Then calling it "supremacy" is misleading, to say the least.  Normally, referring to the supremacy of a class or kind implies that other classes or kinds cannot attain the same heights.  What you've been talking about sounds more like "living the fullest life one can."

Edited to add: Shit, benji and I said essentially the same thing within 30 seconds of each other.



It was actually my original point.

Yours,


benji

_____________________________

Prevent global warming. Stop burning patchouli.

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 121
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 7:49:47 PM   
undergroundsea


Posts: 2400
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Austin, TX
Status: offline
In general I believe in synergy and diversity at an individual and collective level.

At an individual level, I think the most successful and effective people are those who have a good balance of traits traditionally considered masculine and feminine.

At a collective level, I believe that a society of men and women would be better than a society of men only or women only. And I think a society run by men and women would be better than a society run by men only or women only.

Cheers,

Sea

(in reply to DiannaVesta)
Profile   Post #: 122
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 7:53:16 PM   
gooddogbenji


Posts: 5094
Joined: 11/15/2005
From: Toronto
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Morrigel

A whole lot of people need to actually read Neitzsche, rather than the Cliff's Notes or Beyond Good and Evil For Dummies.

--M


Done.  Is there a comment you wanted to make on it?

I mean, Nietzsche said a lot about living to one's full potential, and about that making you superiour, but he was talking about individuals.  He said that someone who learns to live "beyond good and evil" will be a better person than his fellow people. 

This, however, has as much to with gender as it does race.  It just means that individuals can rise above the general masses and be better.

Yours,


benji

_____________________________

Prevent global warming. Stop burning patchouli.

(in reply to Morrigel)
Profile   Post #: 123
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 7:54:46 PM   
undergroundsea


Posts: 2400
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Austin, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Morrigel
I define female supremacy as the absolute and inalienable right of every woman to control her own body and destiny, to choose her own place in the scheme of things--in the various realms of work, family, intimate relationships, or worship of higher powers--and to do whatever is necessary to achieve happiness as she personally defines it.


Thank you for responding with your definition. I agree with the principle behind how you feel. I lean more towards the term female freedom and, more generally to address your subsequent post, individual freedom.

Cheers,

Sea

(in reply to Morrigel)
Profile   Post #: 124
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 7:56:48 PM   
sissifytoserve


Posts: 1016
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline
Like I said before...

BIG difference between FEMINISM..and "Female supremacy".

I am all for Feminism...and 100% opposed to female supremacy.





< Message edited by sissifytoserve -- 11/12/2006 7:58:08 PM >


_____________________________

A great mind must be androgynous
Samuel Coleridge

The uniting of the feminine and the masculine is the highest form of human development Carl Jung

(in reply to undergroundsea)
Profile   Post #: 125
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 7:59:37 PM   
Morrigel


Posts: 492
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: gooddogbenji

I mean, Nietzsche said a lot about living to one's full potential, and about that making you superiour, but he was talking about individuals. 


Did you happen to notice the gender of the individual to whom you were speaking?

--M

(in reply to gooddogbenji)
Profile   Post #: 126
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 8:01:03 PM   
gooddogbenji


Posts: 5094
Joined: 11/15/2005
From: Toronto
Status: offline
Yes, but female supremacy implies an entire gender, not an individual.

Morrigel  supremacy would mean just you.

Yours,


benji

_____________________________

Prevent global warming. Stop burning patchouli.

(in reply to Morrigel)
Profile   Post #: 127
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 8:10:32 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline
Yeah, whatever, but you call it "female supremacy," not "(my interpretation of) Nietzschean philosophy for women."  A benign observer is entitled to that kind of helpful warning, wouldn't you think?

Edited to add: Laughing...I just noticed...I guess they spell it "Neitzsche" in your edition?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Morrigel

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

Then calling it "supremacy" is misleading, to say the least. 


The word only seems misleading because it has been tainted by association with too many people in the last 100 years who were so weak and lacking in real identity that they could not achieve their own greatest good without casting others down and depriving them of their rights based on some arbitrary accident of birth. 

A whole lot of people need to actually read Neitzsche, rather than the Cliff's Notes or Beyond Good and Evil For Dummies.


< Message edited by Lordandmaster -- 11/12/2006 8:13:19 PM >

(in reply to Morrigel)
Profile   Post #: 128
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 8:28:34 PM   
Lashra


Posts: 4900
Joined: 2/9/2006
Status: offline
Go to the Gor boards thats what they believe in and that females are "beasts", animals to be used and in service to the males. If the Gorean female is a beast does that make the Masters into beastiality? Better yet, I'd rather not know. I am so thankful I live on the planet Earth.

~Lashra


_____________________________

“We can never judge the lives of others, because each person knows only their own pain and renunciation. It's one thing to feel that you are on the right path, but it's another to think that yours is the only path.”






(in reply to rick19)
Profile   Post #: 129
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 8:36:04 PM   
Sissypinky


Posts: 52
Joined: 10/10/2006
Status: offline
I dont know if women are superior morally and ethically but biolgically, intellectually, sexually and emotionally they are superior.

-More newborn males die than females
-sudden infant syndrome is one and halftimes common in boys than girls
-mental retardation affects more boys
-girls develop speech faster than boys
-more men are colorblind
-more men suffer from hairloss than women
-more men attempt and commit suicide
-more men go insane
-male hormone testoserone is linked to elevatations of the bad cholesterol LDL and declines in the good cholesterol HDL
-women have more infection fighting Tcell and stronger immune systems
-more men die from pneumnia and influenza than women
-women live longer
-have better communication skills
-more men die from cancer, stroke, diabetes, heart attacks and accidents than women
-by100 years old women outnumber men eight to one
-women have better sense of smell touch taste and sight
-women are more flexible and have greateer endurance
-girls mature faster from potty training to speech developemnt to emotional development
-women are less susceptible to certain diseases and liver longer
-women are multiorgasmic and have more intense orgasms
-women do better in memory test
-male brains are bigger but certain brain areas in women have more never cells and women have a bigger corpus collusm - a group of nerve fibers that connect left and right himishperes aka the thinking  part of the brain that allows them to think (gray matter)
-men listen with only one side women listen with both sides of brain
-women have better language skills and communication skills 

(in reply to Lashra)
Profile   Post #: 130
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 8:40:37 PM   
ineedotk


Posts: 109
Joined: 8/17/2006
Status: offline
I think I know what female supremacy entails; that's pretty self-explanitory.  But just what is feminism?

(in reply to sissifytoserve)
Profile   Post #: 131
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 8:44:08 PM   
Morrigel


Posts: 492
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: gooddogbenji
Morrigel  supremacy would mean just you.


True, but attaching solely my own name to the concept would imply that the supreme state was not attainable by others of my sex, which is not at all true.

Before you start nattering about how I need to worry about the fate of all the menfolk, I'll repeat an earlier observation--male supremacy is alive and well and considered the "norm", ergo the notion needs no help from me.  As a female, I choose to celebrate the potential to achieve supremacy in my own gender.  Men who want to achieve the same are just going to have to look after themselves. 

--M 

(in reply to gooddogbenji)
Profile   Post #: 132
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 8:52:59 PM   
sweetnsensual


Posts: 61
Joined: 9/9/2005
Status: offline
damn I'd hope women would get that since we do get saddled with a lot of bad stuff.  yes, here comes the stereotypical things a woman would bitch about being a woman--the periods and the pms.  But what about the sometimes lack of credibility?  I'm not talking this group because I tend to think people on collarme would be more accepting of such a thing but one thing that has always bothered me is how if a woman slept with a "large" number of men, she is considered a slut while a man could sleep with several more or even twice as many women and be considered a "god" or in some other favorable light.  in Puritan times, our sex was considered an evil and sinful thing, put on earth to tempt man from god's holy light and path. 

I did have a thought today, however, while watching Pride and Prejudice.  It is a great blessing and to our fortune that men have underestimated us through time.  It's also a pain in the ass but I am glad it makes it easier to surprise them. 

so...yeah, kinda got off the subject and especially from what the person I was replying to's point.  oh well. 

(in reply to Sissypinky)
Profile   Post #: 133
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 8:54:49 PM   
LotusSong


Posts: 6334
Joined: 7/2/2006
From: Domme Emeritus
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rick19

I do find the whole concept to be a complete joke, and I'm disapointed that so many people seem willing to accept it. I'm tired of hearing how inferior and how worthless I am because I was born with a cock. Any other supremacy isn't tolerated, so why should we tolerate this? We all know all of these "female supremacists" would be the first ones to be insulted if a male were to start a male supremacist site. Just my 2 cents.


I concur.

_____________________________

Life Lesson #1

I'm not your type.
I'm not inflatable.


(in reply to rick19)
Profile   Post #: 134
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 8:55:42 PM   
Morrigel


Posts: 492
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

Yeah, whatever, but you call it "female supremacy," not "(my interpretation of) Nietzschean philosophy for women."  A benign observer is entitled to that kind of helpful warning, wouldn't you think?


Nope.  If the observer is genuinely benign, he or she is welcome to get to know me and ask me what the term means from my point of view.  I will explain what "female supremacy" means to me if asked--as in this thread.  But I will not try to scribble that explanation in small enough letters to fit on a name tag.

The same problem applies to all "labels".  As you must know.

quote:

Edited to add: Laughing...I just noticed...I guess they spell it "Neitzsche" in your edition?


I always forget that spelling rule.  "I before E, especially after Kierkegaard"...

(Actually the transposition of those two letters is one of my most common spelling errors.  Given the constant vigilance of the forum's Spelling Police, I'm surprised you haven't caught it in some other post.)

--M

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 135
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 9:03:56 PM   
Morrigel


Posts: 492
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LotusSong

quote:

ORIGINAL: rick19

I do find the whole concept to be a complete joke, and I'm disapointed that so many people seem willing to accept it. I'm tired of hearing how inferior and how worthless I am because I was born with a cock. Any other supremacy isn't tolerated, so why should we tolerate this? We all know all of these "female supremacists" would be the first ones to be insulted if a male were to start a male supremacist site. Just my 2 cents.


I concur.


If you have a problem with supremacist rhetoric and ideology and find it offensive, you might want to take these complaints to the administrators of this site.  There's a whole section of this forum devoted to the "Gorean Lifestyle", proposed by an incredibly virulent male supremacist, John Norman.

Oh wait, I forgot.  Belief in, celebration of, or pleasure deriving from a supremacist sexual fantasy is only offensive if the WOMAN is the one lording it over the rest of the species!  Right.  Sorry.  Silly me.

--M


(in reply to LotusSong)
Profile   Post #: 136
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 9:12:44 PM   
razzberries


Posts: 19
Joined: 10/17/2006
Status: offline
Yikes.... seven pages of back and forth.  Can't we simply agree to disagree when faced with something that doesn't work for us?  Female supremacy doesn't work for me, but I thought the interview (remember the interview?) was interesting.

< Message edited by razzberries -- 11/12/2006 9:13:27 PM >

(in reply to DiannaVesta)
Profile   Post #: 137
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/12/2006 9:13:20 PM   
sissifytoserve


Posts: 1016
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Morrigel

Oh wait, I forgot. Belief in, celebration of, or pleasure deriving from a supremacist sexual fantasy is only offensive if the WOMAN is the one lording it over the rest of the species! Right. Sorry. Silly me.

--M




No...


If its sexual ..thats one thing...but when "supremacy" (Im better than you and you are scum) becomes an entire lifestyle (For either gender)

I think its wrong.

_____________________________

A great mind must be androgynous
Samuel Coleridge

The uniting of the feminine and the masculine is the highest form of human development Carl Jung

(in reply to Morrigel)
Profile   Post #: 138
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/13/2006 2:14:14 AM   
LadyEllen


Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline
Monday morning ramblings.... ignoring financial status!

We are social animals. In social animal groups there is a pack leader and a hierarchy. An animal becomes pack leader by asserting dominance over the others in the pack, usually by way of physical force.

We are also humans. As humans we do not rely solely on physical force in order to assert and enforce hierarchy and dominance. We also value words, ideas, emotions, spiritual understanding and a host of other elements related to our intellectual functions.

We live in a developed society, in which the use of physical force is by mutual consent illegal, in asserting dominance and hierarchy. Therefore we tend to use our intellectual and emotional skills more, in order to assert and maintain dominance and hierarchy. In this way, even the weakest physical specimens can become dominant, and the strongest physical specimens can occupy lower positions in the hierarchy. Our society has switched to this method of hierarchy formation, relatively recently. Indeed in some parts of our society, physical dominance is still in active use.

This switch in the means of establishing dominance and hierarchy has favoured also women, who whilst generally less able to compete in physical terms, are generally just as able and sometimes more able to compete for dominance and position, in terms of their intellectual and emotional skills. This has naturally brought to the fore, those women so able to compete, in contradistinction to those males who formerly were the dominant factors because of their size and strength and alike with those males who whilst lacking in size and strength, are favoured with intellectual and emotional skills.

When it comes to reproduction, members of the human species will tend to seek out the best possible partner with whom to mate. When physical attributes were more important (and they remain so), these were the main factors governing a single human's possibilities for mating. However as intellectual and emotional factors becomes more important, the mating possibilities of the less physically favoured are increasing. This is because whereas formerly, humans were restricted to mates from a similar position in the physical hierarchy, now humans are able to move outside that physical hierarchy to mate with others with whom they may be at variance in terms of one of the two hierarchies; physical / intellectual-emotional.

Thus, the physically less favoured male, may now be chosen by the physically stronger female, because he is intellectually-emotionally strong. The physically favoured male may now seek out and be chosen by the intellectually-emotional strong female. And so on. (and it is the female who chooses, btw, in our modern society). However, it remains the fact that if one is physically stronger and intellectually-emotionally stronger, then one's chances of finding a mate, remain higher than if one were possessed of only one factor in this duality.

The partner chosen by the female in our modern system, will be one which appeals to her; if she finds physical strength more important, then that will govern her choice, whilst if she finds emotional-intellectual strength more important the same will apply. More usually, she will choose a combination of these two factors in a ratio personal to her.

Females are also people. There is a drive in all people to achieve the highest possible position in the hierarchy. In society, a person lower down the hierarchy can achieve higher status through partnering with another in a higher position in the social hierarchy. In such a situation, the person moving up in general society, will however always remain in an inferior position to their partner and will tend to boost them up, since they rely on their partner's higher social position for their own improved status. Equally, a person higher in the hierarchy might choose a partner from a lower position, in order to retain their superior position in the relationship as well as in general society.

Either male or female can now be the partner which is higher in the hierarchy in general society, and thus in the partnership. However, several other factors play into the notion of female supremacy;
1) Women choose their male partners (this has been studied, often), and so exercise dominance in that way in our modern society
2) Women, whilst unable to compete physically under the old rules, can now compete well in terms of the new intellectual-emotional rules - and often more effectively, and thus achieve dominance in that way
3) Intellectual-emotional factors are now as important as physical factors; males will seek out emotionally-intellectually strong females by whom they hope to be chosen, permitting the female dominance in that way.

Just ramblings.....

E








_____________________________

In a test against the leading brand, 9 out of 10 participants couldnt tell the difference. Dumbasses.

(in reply to sissifytoserve)
Profile   Post #: 139
RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy - 11/13/2006 4:34:37 AM   
Morrigel


Posts: 492
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sissifytoserve
No...


If its sexual ..thats one thing...


It's always sexual.  There is not a single documented case of which I am aware in which a female supremacist person or group has committed violence against an unconsenting individual, male OR female.  There is a lot of silly chest-beating and semi-satirical femme-supreme rhetoric out there, especially on the 'net--it is not "backed up" by a single rape, murder, beating or terrorist act.  So far as I can see, it exists entirely to inspire mutually pleasurable interaction between deeply submissive men and aggressively dominant women.

The same is true of Goreans, so far as I know.

Gee, can other so-called "supremacist" ideologies say the same?

quote:


but when "supremacy" (Im better than you and you are scum) becomes an entire lifestyle (For either gender)

I think its wrong.


Please, go explain this to John Norman.

And to his followers, the people who enjoy the Gorean Lifestyle.  You know where to find them, on this site and elsewhere.

Until you do this?  You and EVERYONE on this site who whinges on about the Evils of Female Supremacy can characterize yourselves as nothing more that sexist hypocrites.

--M

(in reply to sissifytoserve)
Profile   Post #: 140
Page:   <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress >> RE: Elise Sutton Interviews ME - Female Supremacy Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.336