Formal Dom Training

[catalina_francisco]

I don't get the argument that a Dom should experience the submissive part to make sure they are dominant. I've never heard that a submissive should be a Dominant for a certain amount of time to make sure they are really subs, or to understand where the Dominant comes from, what kind of responsibility they have, whatever.

Maybe it is not as popular an argument, but as I have said here and elsewhere, I am learning far more about D/s and in particular the role of being a slave, submissive, and Dominant while topping others, at times dominating those who want it, than I ever did as a slave doing only slave things. I am still a slave to the core, but unlike that one dimensional picture, I now have a more complete picture which includes some things I believe I could only learn this way. It was part of Francisco's intention, and as much as I thought he was bonkers and probably thought some nasty things, I can see once again he knew what e was talking about.

Catalina

 

[chris9]

Maybe it is not as popular an argument, but as I have said here and elsewhere, I am learning far more about D/s and in particular the role of being a slave, submissive, and Dominant while topping others, at times dominating those who want it, than I ever did as a slave doing only slave things. I am still a slave to the core, but unlike that one dimensional picture, I now have a more complete picture which includes some things I believe I could only learn this way. It was part of Francisco's intention, and as much as I thought he was bonkers and probably thought some nasty things, I can see once again he knew what e was talking about.

Catalina

I believe it, Catalina. It's just that from what I've seen about the 'typical', 'true' kind of D/s, it's mostly the Dominant part being submissive for a length of time as kind of training, rarely that the submissive must be Dominant to be ultimately submissive.
And then I wonder if it weren't more efficient to first gather some experiences in what you feel you are, and then try the other side, like you are doing at the moment.

I feel it's a bit similar to what Bridgeburner said on the wannabe thread

There are far too many people to quote at this point so please forgive me if I fail to mention others who fall into this categorey which I'm sure I will because right now I can only recall Rosco and Never.

I'm on board with the idea that what makes a Dominant is the desire to be so. Not the ability or the skill nor the willingness of others to submit to your wishes. Same thing for submissives.

While I understand what a lot of people are saying about someone being a "good Dom" versus a "bad Dom" or a "wannabe" I'm not sure that those terms are truly useful for me because there doesn't seem to be the same stringency for submissives.

Nobody ever (well hardly ever) says to a submissive "You're just a wannabe submissive." We talk about undisciplined and inexperienced and bratty and sammy and unhealthy and crazy and whatever else kinds but we never deny them their self-identification as submissives.

So what this says to me is that we have higher standards of behavior for Dominants because of what we feel they should represent.

But that's not what really defines a Dominant. I know plenty of people who are charismatic and wise and respectful and forceful and loyal and brave and nurturing and full of integrity and blah blah blah but that doesn't make them Dominants.

If someone gets a sexual charge out of telling other people what to do that person is a Dominant.

Now if he's socially inept or a beta personality he may just be shit out of luck, but somewhere he might catch a break and find some sub who thinks he's the bees knees. (Just curious, why do people accept that there are Alpha subs but not entertain the notion of Omega Doms?) The fact that you're a knuckle-dragging cretin doesn't affect your sexual preference one way or the other.

True Dominants can be total losers. They can be dog-faced, moronic, fuck-wads with the personalities of brine shrimp. Hell, they can be Adonis-like, moronic, fuck-wads with the personalities of brine shrimp. They can be totally inept and dangerous and everyone should be warned away from them. They should get no one's stamp of approval, but to deny that they are Dominants.....feh, that's just a sop to our egos.

-B

 

[Richard49]

I don't get the argument that a Dom should experience the submissive part to make sure they are dominant. I've never heard that a submissive should be a Dominant for a certain amount of time to make sure they are really subs, or to understand where the Dominant comes from, what kind of responsibility they have, whatever.

let's see
Did say that was the only reason?
nope
but if it were
it would fall under the "safe" part of
sane/safe/consensual

 

[bridgeburner]

I believe it, Catalina. It's just that from what I've seen about the 'typical', 'true' kind of D/s, it's mostly the Dominant part being submissive for a length of time as kind of training, rarely that the submissive must be Dominant to be ultimately submissive.
And then I wonder if it weren't more efficient to first gather some experiences in what you feel you are, and then try the other side, like you are doing at the moment.

I feel it's a bit similar to what Bridgeburner said on the wannabe thread

I'm happy if what I posted resonated with you, but make sure you read Catalina's response to me because she makes a very good point about "wannabe" subs that I overlooked because we don't tend to talk about them as often as we do wannabe Doms.

-B

 

[catalina_francisco]

I believe it, Catalina. It's just that from what I've seen about the 'typical', 'true' kind of D/s, it's mostly the Dominant part being submissive for a length of time as kind of training, rarely that the submissive must be Dominant to be ultimately submissive.
And then I wonder if it weren't more efficient to first gather some experiences in what you feel you are, and then try the other side, like you are doing at the moment.

I feel it's a bit similar to what Bridgeburner said on the wannabe thread

Well it wasn't my idea to try this out, and though I can do it because he asks it of me, I use a lot of my knowledge as a slave/submissive to feed that ability and get me through...it is an extension of my submission more so than an actuality of dominance. Though bb posted that opinion, it doesn't ring true for me. In some ways this part: "I'm on board with the idea that what makes a Dominant is the desire to be so. Not the ability or the skill nor the willingness of others to submit to your wishes. Same thing for submissives" in particular does not work for me because you can want to be Dominant or submissive until your blue in the face, but that desire is not necessarily going to make it so. If it were that easy, there would not be so many discussions here and elsewhere how to deal with the difficulties of both dominance and submission. It is also sometimes why I do not buy the stories of self proclaimed great Dominant's who do not and have not had a submissive in years and years despite their searching....it tends to tell me that unless there is something we do not know, and despite their wonderful execution of the spoken or written word, there is a problem with them finding subs willing to submit to them. It is similar about the sub who goes through one after another Dominant for years without ever feeling they fit the bioll...one has to wonder if the odds are that stacked against them or if for all their wanting to submit, they continue on some level to resist.

I also do not fully agree with the sexual aspect as not all Dominant's have that at the forefront of their dominance, some who do not include it all. F for one can dominate a male, without any sexual feeling at all, but it is still dominance. I also think an abuser can get a huge sexual charge out of controlling another, but that does not make them a Dominant. It is not so simplified, and I think it takes years to even begin to get to the heart of it as you are forever learning, forever discovering new visions and things you did not see before, and forever evolving.

Catalina

 

[Marquis]

I have never been a sub, but I can see how that would help. I don't see myself subbing anytime soon, although I have some interest in non-sexual bottoming.

I've never had any formal training, but there are many Dom's I can come to with questions and for guidance both online and locally, and one in particular who is very talented and has taken the time to show me some amazing things.

 

[graceanne]

I would take a dom with no training, and some humility, then a dom who's trained and thinks he knows it all. At least a dome with no training (and humility) knows that they need to learn, and that they don't know it all.

 

[Netzach]

I would take a dom with no training, and some humility, then a dom who's trained and thinks he knows it all. At least a dome with no training (and humility) knows that they need to learn, and that they don't know it all.

Yes, me too.

 

[RJMasters]

This is part of the whole picture though of taking responsibility for your actions whether you are a submissive, Dominant, switch, bottom, or Top. You enter into an agreement with someone (and I am assuming this was also online), you assume some of the reponsibility for that agreement. As you say, for some it might have been all their dreams and then some, but that would be because it was what tweaked their buttons. I know personally, even if it was in no way full on, just a situation of someone topping in any form, Francisco would have a fairly negative reaction to the whole scene. Would he then go on to judge all women (or whichever gender) on that one person and react accordingly? I doubt it seriously. I also went through some bad moments face to face with Dominants which could have been classed as abusive because they either crossed the line, or planned to if I had stuck around, but I just went on to the next with a bit more wisdom and a fresh attitude. I put myself in that position, no-one forced me to, so I accept my part in it. Similarly, now I am topping male subs, I have communicated with some who have had a different view of what they expect to what I am willing to give...no problem, if they can't accept my terms and adjust, we part friendly and seek those who better match each of our needs. Knowing what you want, keeping your wits about you, and being responsible for where you walk in this journey can make a lot of difference to your overall experience.

Catalina

Catalina,

I so agree with you on all that you said here. Part of accepting that responsibility that you mentioned, was a process for me which took many years afterwards. I think what made me so bitter...was a combination of many things....but mostly it was that no one took the time to really try to understand me. This was the first time I had been exposed to D/s/BDSM. There I stood without knowledge, and I was simply told that I was a submissive. I was like....oh...ummm ok....what does that mean?

After they explained it to me I expressed I had some doubts, but those were just brushed aside and I was assured that this "all-wise" knowing Domme knew what was best for me and what I needed. I tired, I honestly did, even when everything inside me was screaming stop.

When I look back on it all I realize I didn't have the knowldege or confidence in myself in who I was, and people took advantage of me. I was just some vanilla guy who was seeking something to fill this hole I had inside me for a long time in my life. I basically allowed someone to tell me who I was and let them push me into somekind of role or mold that fit their own idea and served their own needs.

I spent the next few years....Learning, and unlearning....and as you say...accepting my own responsibility for who I am...and who I was at the time this happened.

I think one things that is often over look about why vanilla men seek out D/s, is because it is the only safe haven for them to express dominant masculinity and not only feel accepted, but desired and respected for being so. Dominant masculinity in the vanilla world has been equated with "male shovenist pig". In this era where femine extremists has successfully made masculinity a politically incorrect thing for men to be, has left many men in a constant state of denial.

Perhaps that is why in part that many vanilla men who are exposed to D/s through a readily accessible medium such as the Internet, have come in droves, and in doing so have brought all of their vanilla baggage with them. Perhaps the vaccum of real masculine men in today's society has also caused many vanilla women to also embrace D/s through exposure of it on the Intrnet.

In my mind...D/s philosphy is really the last bastion of sanity left in the world. It teaches you to discover who you are and have the confidence and peace of mind to live it.

 

[Netzach]

I think one things that is often over look about why vanilla men seek out D/s, is because it is the only safe haven for them to express dominant masculinity and not only feel accepted, but desired and respected for being so. Dominant masculinity in the vanilla world has been equated with "male shovenist pig". In this era where femine extremists has successfully made masculinity a politically incorrect thing for men to be, has left many men in a constant state of denial.

Perhaps that is why in part that many vanilla men who are exposed to D/s through a readily accessible medium such as the Internet, have come in droves, and in doing so have brought all of their vanilla baggage with them. Perhaps the vaccum of real masculine men in today's society has also caused many vanilla women to also embrace D/s through exposure of it on the Intrnet.

Do you seriously for a moment believe that it is more acceptable for a man to be sexually submissive than sexually dominant?

Do you seriously believe it is more acceptable for a woman to be sexually dominant in this society than sexually submissive?

I would love to move to that planet. Let me know when there is an opening.

 

[bridgeburner]

I would take a dom with no training, and some humility, then a dom who's trained and thinks he knows it all. At least a dome with no training (and humility) knows that they need to learn, and that they don't know it all.

Absolutely. No question about it.


-B

 

[RJMasters]

Do you seriously for a moment believe that it is more acceptable for a man to be sexually submissive than sexually dominant?

Do you seriously believe it is more acceptable for a woman to be sexually dominant in this society than sexually submissive?

I would love to move to that planet. Let me know when there is an opening.

Nope I don't. But the D/s answer is not just an answer for the dominating woman or the submissive man "anymore", it also is "an" answer for the masculine male and submissive woman.

Let a woman go out publicly and say she is a submissive woman with any conviction and sincerity in today's society and she will too will be ridiculed and mocked.

I think also here I would make a distinction between nature and sexuality. Sexually, as you put it....I think its none of anyone business and a person shouldn't be seeking acceptance from that level anyways. I think sexually a person need only to be accepting of themselves and the one they are with.

I do believe that society has infact embraced the dominant woman at the expense of the masculine man and in many cases the submissive woman too. Not on a sexual level, but on a natural level. I wish this whole business was not merited based on gender but by accpeting that both male and female can be dominant or submissive.

 

[Netzach]

I do believe that society has infact embraced the dominant woman at the expense of the masculine man and in many cases the submissive woman too. Not on a sexual level, but on a natural level. I wish this whole business was not merited based on gender but by accpeting that both male and female can be dominant or submissive.

I'm still not getting it.

I know a lot of Dominant women who are paired quite happily with your picture perfect examples of Dominant red-blooded butch masculine all around manly man. I actually think most women, Dominant and submissive are attracted to this kind of masculinity, whether that's foisted on us or natural beside the point.

not just an answer for the dominating woman or the submissive man "anymore"

When was it? Was it ever? What was the antecedent? Are you trying to tell me in some point in the last 50 years male Doms and female subs were not welcome in Leather?

Maybe the fetish world seemed more populated by F/m material before because M/f couples were capable of integrating into a world where you were told you were clearly an aberrant freak if you were a non-submissive woman or a non-Dominant male.

Therefore the gay men, lesbians, FemDoms, and very SM oriented and perverse M/f couples were forced into a subculture. More D/s oriented M/f couples were just considered good marriages and never thought twice about.

And that time period, my friend, has been considerably LONGER than any time period in which the world has admitted it might be ok for a woman to maybe NOT be submissive. I don't think the current climate is hospitable to submissive women. I don't think the current climate is hospitable to Dominant women either. I don't think any climate has been encouraging of actual REAL female sexuality and not some dude's fantasy of what it should be -- ever.

 

[RJMasters]

I'm still not getting it.

I know a lot of Dominant women who are paired quite happily with your picture perfect examples of Dominant red-blooded butch masculine all around manly man. I actually think most women, Dominant and submissive are attracted to this kind of masculinity, whether that's foisted on us or natural beside the point.



When was it? Was it ever? What was the antecedent? Are you trying to tell me in some point in the last 50 years male Doms and female subs were not welcome in Leather?

Maybe the fetish world seemed more populated by F/m material before because M/f couples were capable of integrating into a world where you were told you were clearly an aberrant freak if you were a non-submissive woman or a non-Dominant male.

Therefore the gay men, lesbians, FemDoms, and very SM oriented and perverse M/f couples were forced into a subculture. More D/s oriented M/f couples were just considered good marriages and never thought twice about.

And that time period, my friend, has been considerably LONGER than any time period in which the world has admitted it might be ok for a woman to maybe NOT be submissive. I don't think the current climate is hospitable to submissive women. I don't think the current climate is hospitable to Dominant women either. I don't think any climate has been encouraging of actual REAL female sexuality and not some dude's fantasy of what it should be -- ever.

********
Therefore the gay men, lesbians, FemDoms, and very SM oriented and perverse M/f couples were forced into a subculture.
********

Nods in agreement. What I am saying today is...you can start adding in D/s oriented M/f to that list more and more, because today they are also being forced into the subculture. The attachment of "male shovenist pig" to domiant masculinity and the attachment of "weak & pathetic" to the submissive woman in the attitude of most in today's society has generated so much negativism and shame. I merely suggesting that this is why D/s resonates with so many people. I am also suggesting that it may explain why there are so many seemingly vanilla types seeking to be part of the subculture, because they see a chance for acceptance and expression of who they are.

I am not suggesting that the persecution that forced gay men, lesbians, FemDoms, and very SM oriented and perverse M/f couples because of their sexuality is the same type of persecution that is forcing D/s oriented M/f.

But I can see a connection as to why so many are coming in droves. I can also see how this creates such a huge chasm mentally, as many of these (vanilla dominants/submissives) do not have alot in common with why others may have been forced into the subculture.

If you stop and think about it...it kinda of explains alot. Think of the ramifications and the consequences of vanilla men and women who have a desire to be masculine or submissive, but are considered outcast and look on in a negative light. They then get a wiff of D/s. Not a D/s which came out of a leather community, but a D/s that allows them to identify with their own dominant or submissive nature respectively.

What you get is a bunch of vanilla people, who have no understanding or "context" of how the subculture came to be. All they know is, they identify with the D/s and seek after it. Not for just acceptance, but because they finally see a chance being who they are and a chance to find their opposite like minded SO.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Nope I don't. But the D/s answer is not just an answer for the dominating woman or the submissive man "anymore", it also is "an" answer for the masculine male and submissive woman.

Let a woman go out publicly and say she is a submissive woman with any conviction and sincerity in today's society and she will too will be ridiculed and mocked.

I think also here I would make a distinction between nature and sexuality. Sexually, as you put it....I think its none of anyone business and a person shouldn't be seeking acceptance from that level anyways. I think sexually a person need only to be accepting of themselves and the one they are with.

I do believe that society has infact embraced the dominant woman at the expense of the masculine man and in many cases the submissive woman too. Not on a sexual level, but on a natural level. I wish this whole business was not merited based on gender but by accpeting that both male and female can be dominant or submissive.

Sorry RJ, and try not to take this personally, but this and the previous post just sound more like blaming women for how you feel in the vanilla world, and more precisely the feminist movement for wanting equal pay and rights for women to the male counterpart...and all this after we hear this week that in the UK (like Australia ( women still get paid 17% less than men for doing the same job, same hours, same conditions). Feminism is not about demasculinating the man, though like you many men feel it is because a certain percentage of women are no longer willing to accept abuse on various levels.

I actually know many feminists, myself included, who have no problem with men being and acting masculine, but do not see that we should sit in the corner with our mouths shut to let those men exercise their masculinity. If a man does not feel masculine or comfortable with his own masculinity anymore, he might need to look inside himself first to see why before blaming women and feminism which in itself never has come across to me as a strong masculine image of the male animal on this planet. So what do I see as masculine and strong in a vanilla sense? A man who is comfortable in his own skin; can hold his head up and walk tall (even if he is a not physically tall); can accept his gender does not give him the right to suppress people who do not share his gender, sexuality, race, age status; and can take responsibility for his choices and deal with them; and does not play the victim role. For me a Dom who has the attitude that women were wrong to ask for their rights and choices to be respected, and that wanting and winning some of those rights has harmed men, and that feminism is the root of all evil in the worlld is not a Dom I want to be with because he is just so missing the mark in so many areas and likely is not going to have my best interests in his heart.

Catalina

 

[RJMasters]

Sorry RJ, and try not to take this personally, but this and the previous post just sound more like blaming women for how you feel in the vanilla world, and more precisely the feminist movement for wanting equal pay and rights for women to the male counterpart...and all this after we hear this week that in the UK (like Australia ( women still get paid 17% less than men for doing the same job, same hours, same conditions). Feminism is not about demasculinating the man, though like you many men feel it is because a certain percentage of women are no longer willing to accept abuse on various levels.

I actually know many feminists, myself included, who have no problem with men being and acting masculine, but do not see that we should sit in the corner with our mouths shut to let those men exercise their masculinity. If a man does not feel masculine or comfortable with his own masculinity anymore, he might need to look inside himself first to see why before blaming women and feminism which in itself never has come across to me as a strong masculine image of the male animal on this planet. So what do I see as masculine and strong in a vanilla sense? A man who is comfortable in his own skin; can hold his head up and walk tall (even if he is a not physically tall); can accept his gender does not give him the right to suppress people who do not share his gender, sexuality, race, age status; and can take responsibility for his choices and deal with them; and does not play the victim role. For me a Dom who has the attitude that women were wrong to ask for their rights and choices to be respected, and that wanting and winning some of those rights has harmed men, and that feminism is the root of all evil in the worlld is not a Dom I want to be with because he is just so missing the mark in so many areas and likely is not going to have my best interests in his heart.

Catalina

I promise I won't take it personally

Infact I kinda chuckled at it really as once upon a time did just that. Blamed feminism for alot of things. One day I got so mad at it all I decided I would go out and find out what this feminine movemnet was all about.

Guess what I found. I found out that I am a damn feminist too! Imagine that. I know many feminists, myself included who do believe in the equal right and fair treatment for all. I beilive that with all my heart. I would fight and work hard to make that a reality.

But you see, I said EXTREME feminists. And they have stop representing the interests of many women long ago. To the point they even turn their backs on women who wish to be submissive. You don't see the extreme feminist fighting for their right to submit.

EXTREME feminists are not out for equal rights. They want their pound of flesh for the way men have treated are treating women for 1000s of years. They want to see the tables turned. Much of what motivates them is their hatred for men.

You want to defend feminism...then sure I will stand next to you. you want to defend extremism under the guise of feminsim...your on your own.

I didn't want to get off into a feminist debate and truthfully I don't care if you see or agree with what I am saying. If you don't want to believe that extreme feminism has done alot of negative damage towards male masculinity or female submissiveness...in mainstream society, then don't. I can point to some books thought if you wish to look at it more.

To me it is clear...and I also believe there is an undercurrent of a social backlash as to why many are seek out D/s from the vanilla world.

Anyways i will let you get in the last word....I have finished work for the evening and I am heading to bed. It sure burned my buns when I learned that by the strict definition of the word feminist...I had to honestly admit that I was one. That sure confused me though and made me look deeper at why there was so much anger toward feminism....it was then I learned that most of that anger was caused by extremists influencing the movement.

If you ask me....the true message of feminism has been lost, or more accurately...drowned out. If women would have shut the extremists up long ago, y'all would probably have had accomplished all of the goals and objectives by now and "all" women both submissive and dominant alike would be equally represented within the feminist movement, but that's just my opinion.

 

[alice_underneath]

********
Therefore the gay men, lesbians, FemDoms, and very SM oriented and perverse M/f couples were forced into a subculture.
********

Nods in agreement. What I am saying today is...you can start adding in D/s oriented M/f to that list more and more, because today they are also being forced into the subculture. The attachment of "male shovenist pig" to domiant masculinity and the attachment of "weak & pathetic" to the submissive woman in the attitude of most in today's society has generated so much negativism and shame. I merely suggesting that this is why D/s resonates with so many people. I am also suggesting that it may explain why there are so many seemingly vanilla types seeking to be part of the subculture, because they see a chance for acceptance and expression of who they are.

I am not suggesting that the persecution that forced gay men, lesbians, FemDoms, and very SM oriented and perverse M/f couples because of their sexuality is the same type of persecution that is forcing D/s oriented M/f.

But I can see a connection as to why so many are coming in droves. I can also see how this creates such a huge chasm mentally, as many of these (vanilla dominants/submissives) do not have alot in common with why others may have been forced into the subculture.

If you stop and think about it...it kinda of explains alot. Think of the ramifications and the consequences of vanilla men and women who have a desire to be masculine or submissive, but are considered outcast and look on in a negative light. They then get a wiff of D/s. Not a D/s which came out of a leather community, but a D/s that allows them to identify with their own dominant or submissive nature respectively.

What you get is a bunch of vanilla people, who have no understanding or "context" of how the subculture came to be. All they know is, they identify with the D/s and seek after it. Not for just acceptance, but because they finally see a chance being who they are and a chance to find their opposite like minded SO.

Exactly. Dead-on.

You hit the ball out the park with that one, Mr. Masters.

Alice

 

[catalina_francisco]

I promise I won't take it personally

Infact I kinda chuckled at it really as once upon a time did just that. Blamed feminism for alot of things. One day I got so mad at it all I decided I would go out and find out what this feminine movemnet was all about.

Guess what I found. I found out that I am a damn feminist too! Imagine that. I know many feminists, myself included who do believe in the equal right and fair treatment for all. I beilive that with all my heart. I would fight and work hard to make that a reality.

But you see, I said EXTREME feminists. And they have stop representing the interests of many women long ago. To the point they even turn their backs on women who wish to be submissive. You don't see the extreme feminist fighting for their right to submit.

EXTREME feminists are not out for equal rights. They want their pound of flesh for the way men have treated are treating women for 1000s of years. They want to see the tables turned. Much of what motivates them is their hatred for men.

You want to defend feminism...then sure I will stand next to you. you want to defend extremism under the guise of feminsim...your on your own.

I didn't want to get off into a feminist debate and truthfully I don't care if you see or agree with what I am saying. If you don't want to believe that extreme feminism has done alot of negative damage towards male masculinity or female submissiveness...in mainstream society, then don't. I can point to some books thought if you wish to look at it more.

To me it is clear...and I also believe there is an undercurrent of a social backlash as to why many are seek out D/s from the vanilla world.

Anyways i will let you get in the last word....I have finished work for the evening and I am heading to bed. It sure burned my buns when I learned that by the strict definition of the word feminist...I had to honestly admit that I was one. That sure confused me though and made me look deeper at why there was so much anger toward feminism....it was then I learned that most of that anger was caused by extremists influencing the movement.

If you ask me....the true message of feminism has been lost, or more accurately...drowned out. If women would have shut the extremists up long ago, y'all would probably have had accomplished all of the goals and objectives by now and "all" women both submissive and dominant alike would be equally represented within the feminist movement, but that's just my opinion.

Umm, don't think I am wanting the book list as I studied Feminism at University under one I think you are referring to as 'extreme feminist' which is not a faction of feminism I have ever heard of but which may be more correctly referred to as 'radical feminism' which is and is often referred to as 'militant feminism' by those who want to detract from the authenticity of the branch. I actually topped the class for that year with a perfect score, despite my challenging (succesfully) some of her previous long held views and highlighting another POV she validated because I presented a rational and factual argument. She would have to be one of the humans I most admire on this planet for a number of reasons, and is respected in varous parts of the world for the work she does. Interestingly some of the radical feminisits I worked and studied with were into BDSM heavily from both sides of the whip and never had reason to feel shut out or judged because of their choice.

While some who follow that strain (and others) of feminism are not overly inclined to feel sorry for men and apologise for highlighting the place they have put women in for centuries (and still do and would if they could...and as I noted are succeeding by still denying women the right to the same wage in professional areas for the same work, still experimenting on males with drugs designed for female ailments and bodies - how ridiculous is that?!!), the ones who have the dedication and knowledge have no issue with men, just will not acept that women were not oppressed by a patriarchial ruled society intent on increasing the rights and priviledges of men, nor will they cater to the complaints of men who feel to give women equal rights means men are oppressed and victimised. The reality still is that women are oppressed in various forms in the Western world through remaining male power and speaking out against that and asking for fairness across the genders does not translate into man hating....but it is an argument used to try and turn the tide of equality continuing to move forward. The reason they are still oppressed and not getting equal wages etc., is not because of women fighting for their rights, but because the bulk of power still lays in the hands of men.

Now to your last paragraph, I think it demonstrates perfectly what I am saying and what feminism is still fighting...a male once again telling women how they should behave, act, and be oppressed by men by turning on their own gender and 'shutting them up'. As to the message of feminism being lost...last I heard it was still about choice for women and equality of rights. You might be interested to know there are several books out there written by noted feminists who advocate for sex workers and submissive women who make a valid choice for themselves, not one prescribed by males who feel they know what women need.

Catalina

 

[alice_underneath]

As to the message of feminism being lost...last I heard it was still about choice for women and equality of rights.

That's the theory of the feminist message, but not the full reality of the way in which the feminist message has been embraced by American society.

No matter what the books say, Catalina, the fact is that certain "choices" will prompt pejorative reactions ranging from mild disapproval to outright condemnation and disgust.

In the mainstream U.S. community in which I live, a woman who openly admits that she wants to submit to the guidance or control of her SO will be mocked and scorned.

A guy who openly says that he wants to direct, guide, nurture and develop his mate will be criticized as a condescending jerk.

And a guy who openly says he wants his mate to defer to him, and submit to his authority, will be denounced as a Neanderthal bastard and a male chauvinist pig.

This has nothing to do with equal access to education or equal pay. It also has nothing to do with sadomasochism, fetish, kink, or even straight vanilla sex.

What RJ is talking about is mainstream America's expectations for the way in which two heterosexual people interact within a personal relationship. Not only do I understand what he is saying here - I agree with him, 100%.

Alice

 

[catalina_francisco]

That's the theory of the feminist message, but not the full reality of the way in which the feminist message has been embraced by American society.

No matter what the books say, Catalina, the fact is that certain "choices" will prompt pejorative reactions ranging from mild disapproval to outright condemnation and disgust.

In the mainstream U.S. community in which I live, a woman who openly admits that she wants to submit to the guidance or control of her SO will be mocked and scorned.

A guy who openly says that he wants to direct, guide, nurture and develop his mate will be criticized as a condescending jerk.

And a guy who openly says he wants his mate to defer to him, and submit to his authority, will be denounced as a Neanderthal bastard and a male chauvinist pig.

This has nothing to do with equal access to education or equal pay. It also has nothing to do with sadomasochism, fetish, kink, or even straight vanilla sex.

What RJ is talking about is mainstream America's expectations for the way in which two heterosexual people interact within a personal relationship. Not only do I understand what he is saying here - I agree with him, 100%.

Alice

What I object to is that he blames it on women when I do not believe this is where the blame lies. Like his experience of submission etc., it keeps coming back to victim male, abusive female messages which to me is related more on a personal perception and reality, than a societal norm. Playing victim does not get anyone anywhere, nor is it often appealing to others. If I listen to the message, it comes down to as he says, shutting women up....that to me is oppression and a person who has an issue with assertiveness in women who presumably have overstepped their place and need to be reminded to get back wherer they belong and speak only when spoken to.

Catalina

 

[Richard49]

maybe things are not about blame
but rather
about accoutablity

 

[catalina_francisco]

One question which comes to mind is if feminism is about allowing women choice, which it is and I gather is the argument for women shutting up other women so they can choose to be submissive without fear of a backlash, how is that any more right than allowing them the choice to have their opinion? Wouldn't it then be used to highlight the inadequacy of feminists by saying they do not practice what they preach, even with their own sisterhood?

Catalina

 

[alice_underneath]

What I object to is that he blames it on women when I do not believe this is where the blame lies. Like his experience of submission etc., it keeps coming back to victim male, abusive female messages which to me is related more on a personal perception and reality, than a societal norm. Playing victim does not get anyone anywhere, nor is it often appealing to others. If I listen to the message, it comes down to as he says, shutting women up....that to me is oppression and a person who has an issue with assertiveness in women who presumably have overstepped their place and need to be reminded to get back wherer they belong and speak only when spoken to.

Catalina

I understand why this is what you would be reading into his comments, and I do not blame you for bristling at his words.

You hear a man talking about how he feels victimized by the Woman's Movement and your reaction is to say: Puh-leeeeeease. Where's my freakin' violin?!

Add to this the misogynistic comments earlier on the thread, and you have every right to be incensed.

Fair enough.

But that doesn't change the fact that RJ's observations are correct. In mainstream American society today, if a dominant male openly expresses a desire for a mate who will defer to him and submit to his authority, it is not just his choice that will be criticized. He, himself - his fundamental nature - will be mocked and scorned.

The same thing holds true for submissive females.

That's RJ's point, as I understand it here. And again I say - I agree with him, 100%.

Alice

 

[bridgeburner]

One question which comes to mind is if feminism is about allowing women choice, which it is and I gather is the argument for women shutting up other women so they can choose to be submissive without fear of a backlash, how is that any more right than allowing them the choice to have their opinion? Wouldn't it then be used to highlight the inadequacy of feminists by saying they do not practice what they preach, even with their own sisterhood?

Catalina

Catalina,

That's the $64,000 question. I think the only way is to lead by example. You continue to speak up, continue to spread the truth and to fight oppression whether it be from those who mean you harm or from those who have your best interests at heart. Keep fighting the good fight and have faith that right will prevail. What else is there to do? You present your argument and have faith that people will be sensible enough to choose well.

I can't fault anyone for wishing other people would occasionally shut up, though. Just because I believe in the essential right of the KKK to speak their mind and march down Main Street doesn't mean I'm thrilled that they're doing it, you know?

Of course I fall into the eternally optimistic camp that truly believes eventually anyone can be reached if you find the right way to speak to them. Even in the face of immovable, belligerant idiocy I'll be the one looking for the next angle, the alternate analogy, the right twist on the message to slip the essential point through whatever microscopic wormhole can be found in the stone wall of "I won't! I won't! I won't!". (This flies in the face of reality and I know it but I can't seem to quit trying. I know it's not sane. I prefer the term "Quixotic" to "crazy", however.)



-B

 

[RJMasters]

Now to your last paragraph, I think it demonstrates perfectly what I am saying and what feminism is still fighting...a male once again telling women how they should behave, act, and be oppressed by men by turning on their own gender and 'shutting them up'. As to the message of feminism being lost...last I heard it was still about choice for women and equality of rights. You might be interested to know there are several books out there written by noted feminists who advocate for sex workers and submissive women who make a valid choice for themselves, not one prescribed by males who feel they know what women need.

Catalina

Actually I had to thank you for offering up this perfect example as well.

You see this is exactly why feminism will never win this fight. Because basically you just said that because I am a man I have no right to offer my opinion(good bad or otherwise).

In case you missed it...you just told me to shut up. The insenuation is clear. As a man I have no right to tell women what to think, believe, say or do....and so I should just keep quiet.

Radical feminists are not trying to reach equality at all, they have adopted a view that excludes men completely. And that is why it will fail. That is why men will continue to resist it.

The result will always be the same....men like me who "would" fight for fairness and equality will sit back and do nothing, because you all have decided that you don't want or need my help or any other man's help.

As a man, I am not afraid to admit I need help. Especially from women. Can I do it what I need to do on my own? Sure, but I will not be happy. I would much rather us help each other, respect each other, learn from each other.

The message of militant feminism is not fair and equal rights....its "We don't need you men". Thanks, message recieved loud and clear.

For all those women out there who would give their right arm for a husband or a man who "would" speak up, who would lead, who would offer opinions...sorry but for the last 30 years the message we have learned is that we don't have the right or the place to do that.

As exemplfied in Catillina's post above. What feminists are still fighting against.... is a man thinking he has the right to speak up or say anything where it concerns women.

Radical feminists condemn men for exclusionary practices against women yet then turn around a teach women they should adopt a view that they don't need men. Which is what? An exclusionary view. I know a double standard when I see it.