X marks the Dominant

[intothewoods]

You seem it.

Strange. I was thinking the same thing about you. But now that I think about it, it's probably a natural high.

Oh, fuck.

I'm having that fantasy again.

Can I quote you on that? Oh, I just did.

 

[Betticus]

Let's keep presidential politics out of this, shall we?

I'm not talking about someone who got shot down, captured and spent years in a pow prison.

I'm talking about a soldier who was successful.

 

[Homburg]

I'm so surprised.

Hey now, he had a lot of very pertinent things to say. His greatest fault was in being misused to suit the ends of truly evil people. Machiavelli had the same problem, but his abusers weren't quite so fantastically mediagenic as Nietzche's.

Note: I am NOT commenting on the relevance or not of the quote in this context. Just commenting on Nietzche alone.

 

[Homburg]

I'm not talking about someone who got shot down, captured and spent years in a pow prison.

I'm talking about a soldier who was successful.

Ooooooooo.

 

[Netzach]

Hey now, he had a lot of very pertinent things to say. His greatest fault was in being misused to suit the ends of truly evil people. Machiavelli had the same problem, but his abusers weren't quite so fantastically mediagenic as Nietzche's.

Note: I am NOT commenting on the relevance or not of the quote in this context. Just commenting on Nietzche alone.

Uh huh. I don't see my point refuted, this isn't exactly a 201 level debate.

"zomgz dominance is like, totally biologically determined! Social Dominance = SM Dominance!"

"No and No."

"NEITZCHE, IDIOTS!"

 

[Betticus]

He who sticks his dick in the mashed potatoes is the dominant one!

 

[LilyBart]

the quote was fitting... not a reference to you, Mon friar.

it has nothing to do with you... I love when I have a reason to kiss your ass, as it doesnt happen often, but this is a coincidence... a friend pointed out how fitting the quote was for the thread...
...but way to make it about you...lol
its unfair to name yourself after someone so influential, and then try to make it about you when I quote the actual author of the quote...

He is one of the most famous philosophers of all time,

Wait...I thought Netzach was a Judaic word....the 7th sephriot?

I know who Nietzche was. But I don't think he was into Judaism. As I recall, anyway.

Am I confused?

~LB

 

[Homburg]

Uh huh. I don't see my point refuted, this isn't exactly a 201 level debate.

"zomgz dominance is like, totally biologically determined! Social Dominance = SM Dominance!"

"No and No."

"NEITZCHE, IDIOTS!"

*snort* Yeah, I'm with you. Just, y'know, defending some Nietzche. He gets a bad rap. It was largely his sister, and, wow, she was a cunt.

----

Wait...I thought Netzach was a Judaic word....the 7th sephriot?

I know who Nietzche was. But I don't think he was into Judaism. As I recall, anyway.

Am I confused?

~LB

Wait, the Nietzche quote was some confusion based on Netzach/Nietzche? Do what?!? I'm lost.

And see above. Nietzche's sister was the one that was associated with the Jew-haters. She was the one that got his works in the mix, and a lot of utterly non-Aryan writing on his part became very Aryan after the spinmeisters got ahold of it.

No, I'm not a Nietzche apologist, but I play one on TV.

 

[Netzach]

He who sticks his dick in the mashed potatoes is the dominant one!

NOW I have that song in my head, thanks.

 

[Netzach]

T still refuses to believe that he WAS NOT butt pals with Wagner, literally.

 

[Betticus]

Wait...I thought Netzach was a Judaic word....the 7th sephriot?

I know who Nietzche was. But I don't think he was into Judaism. As I recall, anyway.

Am I confused?

~LB

Nicely noticed..

Netzach is paired with Hod and comprises the third group of sephirot, the "tactical" sefirot, meaning that their purpose is not inherent in themselves, but rather as a means for something else.

Understanding the attributes of Netzach and Hod gives us a new perspective into understanding what is happening in the world. No longer do we merely look at an act at face value, and attempt to understand it as such, but we must look at it also in terms of "a means to an end."

These sephirot mark a turning point. Whereas the first two groups of sefirot deal with God's intrinsic will, and what it is that He desires to bestow upon man, these sephirot are focused on man: What is the most appropriate way for man to receive God's message? How can God's will be implemented most effectively?

Netzach refers to actions of God that are chesed, "kindness," in essence, but are presented through a prelude of harshness. Hod refers specifically to those events where the "wicked prosper." It is retribution —Gevurah, "strength/restraint," in essence, but presented by a prelude of pleasantness.

Netzach is "endurance," the fortitude, and patience to follow through on your passions. It is paired with Hod as the godly attributes related to group interactivity, with Netzach being leadership, the ability to rally others to a cause and motivate them to act; while Hod is community, the ability to do the footwork needed to follow through on ideas and make them happen. Netzach is identified with the right leg or foot when the Tree of Life is portrayed on the human form, while Hod is the left leg or foot.

Netzach is the sphere of Venus: the feminine aspect of God, which stands for receptivity and acceptance, also known as the Earth Mother in its fructifying aspect. Just as the mother goes through labor and pain to bring forth life, so does the earth mother endure and support every life-form. Netzach stands for Earthly love and acceptance (as opposed to the Heavenly love: judgemental and correcting —Chesed): the Great Mother's love.

 

[LilyBart]

*snort* Yeah, I'm with you. Just, y'know, defending some Nietzche. He gets a bad rap. It was largely his sister, and, wow, she was a cunt.

----



Wait, the Nietzche quote was some confusion based on Netzach/Nietzche? Do what?!? I'm lost.

And see above. Nietzche's sister was the one that was associated with the Jew-haters. She was the one that got his works in the mix, and a lot of utterly non-Aryan writing on his part became very Aryan after the spinmeisters got ahold of it.

No, I'm not a Nietzche apologist, but I play one on TV.

I could have been confused. I read messages directed at other messages that weren't quoted so I may have inferred improperly. If so, I apologize. I wasn't intending harm.

~LB

 

[Homburg]

I could have been confused. I read messages directed at other messages that weren't quoted so I may have inferred improperly. If so, I apologize. I wasn't intending harm.

~LB

No, dude, I think you're right. I just didn't notice it before. Wow.

 

[BiBunny]

The...interesting...syntax makes it pretty hard to tell what the hell's going on here, anyway.

 

[intothewoods]

This thread is definitely making me high.

 

[Betticus]

The...interesting...syntax makes it pretty hard to tell what the hell's going on here, anyway.

Someone is about to punch someone else right in the pee hole! Some anger going on in here.

 

[Netzach]

The...interesting...syntax makes it pretty hard to tell what the hell's going on here, anyway.

Will you share this bottle of chartreuse and be MY butt pal?

 

[Betticus]

Will you share this bottle of chartreuse and be MY butt pal?

You mean that stuff that tastes like nasty black licorice mixed with cough syrup?

 

[BiBunny]

Will you share this bottle of chartreuse and be MY butt pal?

Absolutely.

 

[Netzach]

You mean that stuff that tastes like nasty black licorice mixed with cough syrup?

Like nothing else on earth. N. and Wagner were said to enjoy the stuff in tandem a lot till Ricard got too into God for N.

 

[unfoundiamond]

tomatoe tomato, potato.... asshole.

You people smother any chance of dialogue with your cliquey pointless blathering.

 

[unfoundiamond]

...Net-wha?

Sorry,

But, I can't imagine why I wouldn't have "Femimine Motherly Love" SCREAMING out when I think of you.

...confounding...

 

[intothewoods]

You people smother any chance of dialogue with your cliquey pointless blathering.

I am not in a clique with any of these pervs!

 

[unfoundiamond]

Well great

I am sure we will all sleep better at night knowing your stupid buisness.

And btw, you may not be cliquey, but....

Can you see where your comment would fit into the equasion?

 

[curiousalice]

It's long... sorry. I had to ask.

Wonderful, powerful statement - I wish I could have said it in those simple words. Sounds much like Ayn Rand. Ever read any of her inspiring novels ?

Castagnus quoted kinkyknickers, who said that s/he wants to love, but does not need it. I agree with this as a premis for the rest of what I have to say.

I think Ayn Rand nails the image of submission in her female heros. They are assertive, independent and complete, but with their respective men, they are subserviant and willing.

Before I go further, let me say first that I am new to this whole scene, hence the name I chose. I do not mean to offend, and I only ask that you be patient while I figure these things out. I apologize if I test your patience too far. If you feel the need to respond to something I say, PLEASE read my whole post before responding. Don't latch on to a mis-worded sentence and attack me from there without reading the rest of my post.

I have known I am submissive for about a month or two now. I have had the desires, characteristics, qualifications, whatever, since before I knew what sex was. I have yet to find a Dom that trips the triggers in me. I have always freely given anything asked of me (provided I could rationally give it), and it has opened me up to a lot of misuse. I am not sorry for being where I am, I am most definitly NOT sorry for what I am. I came to this site through an ex of mine, and I have found this thread in hopes that it would clarify some questions on what a Dom really is. Instead, I found a whole bunch of useless information about energy, electricity and whatnot. Don't get offended if you were talking about it, I just don't believe in anything more than personality and first impressions. If you do, then rock on, I don't really care.

The biggest thing I want to know is, how is Dominance ascribed? How do you recognize it? What is it in the Dom that makes me recognize him as such?

I want to be told how to please someone and the best way to do it. When I am in a relationship, I do the things I do because I know that it will make him happy. The thought of making him happy makes me happy. I want to know that if I falter, or I disappoint, that I am held accountable for it. Most of all, I want to know that I am taken care of because, when all is said and done, I don't care for myself the way I care for others. This is what submission is on the non-sexual level for me.

Is Dominance the opposite? Does it overlap? Is it the same, only with a little more agression? I think that if I could understand what a Dominant is, I would be better able to choose partners that are not abusive. I'm sick of being lied to, even if it IS through omission. How can I trust someone, when I am tied and immobile, if I know that they have not been fully honest with me? I don't mean to sound needy, but if I am going to place myself in a situation where I must depend on soemone else, I have to know that they didn't omit the part where they really don't care about me.

Where is the line between arrogance, ignorance and abusiveness and Dominance? Obviously, a Dom must be assertive, otherwise, how would he be confident in telling me what he wants? He must be able to listen, otherwise, how would he be able to understand my limits enough to push them? I'm not talking about primal instinct here, or energy, or charisma, or charm, I am talking about the skills to listen and assert. These things go beyond the bedroom, as all good relationships do.

This is really the first time I've actually written out my questions and thoughts, so I'm sorry if I inturrupted your discussion on credibility and mashed potatoes, it was a little off-topic anyway.