How to Enslave Women

[Olivia_Yearns]

I'm back in case anyone has any more questions.

Hi there, Marquis. How is what you are doing 'enslavement'? Seems more like how to seduce women to me.

 

[stirbird]

That's an interesting question. I want to see how Marquis answers it, then I might add something.

 

[Marquis]

Hi there, Marquis. How is what you are doing 'enslavement'? Seems more like how to seduce women to me.

You are correct.

Seduction is basically "soft" coercion, which is a good overarching term for the methods I use.

In fact, this thread was largely motivated by some research I've been doing into the seduction community. There is a world of studied pick-up artists out there who use many of the same techniques I use, and face many of the same criticisms.

I basically sought to further their thoughts to what I consider to be their logical extreme. Rather than just focus on attracting women, I added the element of setting and reaching certain goals, and used my personal experience and background as a guide.

 

[stirbird]

Ok, I'll add my piece down. People deny this one to the hilt, too, but there is something to the idea that in ordinary sexual relationships, including fellatio, almost all hetero males feel dominant and agressive and imagine their female partners as submissive. As a woman, that's a weird idea to wrap you head around. I don't feel that most of my male partners were particularly agressive or dominant or that the act made them that way and I didn't seem myself as particularly submissive, but a recent article I read about the experiences of a woman who used a strap-on made me think...

http://www.salon.com/urge/feature/1999/01/28feature.html

Anyway, if the above is so, then Marquis, I could extend the analogy and say that your sexual scores with women are actually brief episodes of female enslavement (or at very least, domination of her), and seduction is the art of getting a woman to submit to your will to pleasure.

Shoot, I had a question for you too, but in the time it took to find that article it slipped my mind. Ok, here's a substitute question: what happens after a seduction? Is there a typical scenario? I mean, does she want to see you again; do you want to see her again; do you feel repulsed by her or she you? Are you both still attracted to each other? Were you both just looking for a one-nighter? Etc.

 

[Olivia_Yearns]

...People deny this one to the hilt, too, but there is something to the idea that in ordinary sexual relationships, including fellatio, almost all hetero males feel dominant and agressive and imagine their female partners as submissive....

Aggression is an aspect of sex in men and women. To me, that's obvious, and a non-issue.

I basically sought to further their thoughts to what I consider to be their logical extreme. Rather than just focus on attracting women, I added the element of setting and reaching certain goals, and used my personal experience and background as a guide.

You are fascinated with objectification. I think it is common for those of us who have experienced women as powerful and intimidating to want to take away their power and experience them as objects under our control. You're incredibly proud of your ability to do this. As you said, that's an understandable response to the feelings of loss and rejection.

 

[Marquis]

You are fascinated with objectification. I think it is common for those of us who have experienced women as powerful and intimidating to want to take away their power and experience them as objects under our control. You're incredibly proud of your ability to do this. As you said, that's an understandable response to the feelings of loss and rejection.

Yes, I think you're right. I do suppose that if certain things had been different in my life, I wouldn't have this need, but as it is I do have this need and I have adapted well.

 

[Olivia_Yearns]

Yes, I think you're right. I do suppose that if certain things had been different in my life, I wouldn't have this need, but as it is I do have this need and I have adapted well.

Yes you have, and you're not done adapting yet.

 

[Marquis]

Yes you have, and you're not done adapting yet.

I hope not.

It would be nice to attack my problem from both the supply and demand side, but we shall see.

 

[stirbird]

Aggression is an aspect of sex in men and women. To me, that's obvious, and a non-issue.

What wasn't so obvious to me--perhaps because I've never strapped one on--is that strong feelings of domination (not aggression--I am an extremely aggressive submissive, former slave, and I know the difference ) are connected with the act of of penetrating and strong feelings of submission with the act of receiving penetration. Women, in this day and age do not like to think of themselves as submissive for the most part, except when they choose so, so while the experience of accepting a cock into one's body might engender feelings of submission in them, they wouldn't necessarily notice that nor name it correctly. That's what I got from that article.

 

[Marquis]

I'm still reading your article Stirbs, I have a few things on my plate at the moment, but I'll return with comments ASAP.

 

[jujubee]

Well i didn't read all of it, and i am not a slave by any stretch of the imagination, and my Owner is a wonderful, loving man, and wouldn't be with anyone but me because He treasures me...but i love being Owned by Him

 

[poppy1963]

Le sigh...*tilts head and listens*

 

[Malachi]

What is it about the strategy that you find unappealing?

I think I stated quite clearly in my post that I wasn't offering any major life answers, just a mental framework which will maximize your sexual potential.

The strategy works. I have plenty of empirical evidence.

What is it that you find unappealing? I bet there are plenty of things you find unappealing, and they're probably not that different than what I find unappealing.

I don't remember the part where you downplayed the significance of what you had to say. Surely it's worth mentioning that it doesn't all come down to sex. Surely it's worth mentioning that "maximizing one's sexual potential" is not a matter of counting partners or their level of obedience. You ask a lot of questions: "Wouldn't you like [x]? Wouldn't you like [y]?" To answer yes is not to admit that those things are worth pursuing at all costs. What is the value of "respect" or admiration from those you consider worthless? Do you somehow imagine you are degrading yourself less than the women whose mouths you fuck--whose cunts you won't touch? Do you pretend it's possible to place yourself above the other creatures with whom you spend your time?

 

[Drinking Cap]

That seems like an awful lot of work when my buddy Pavel can just sell you women as slaves.

 

[KyleW]

I skimmed but I missed the enslavement part. It read like many other online rants about how to be the "alpha" male of a room and how to dom over a woman in order to get some pussy.

I'd reread it but fuck I just ate lunch and I'm lazy.

 

[sethp]

great concept

but who was the guy who wrote the books that kevin mitnick and his friends used to read about picking up the women with certain techniques. I forgot.

 

[Marquis]

What is it that you find unappealing? I bet there are plenty of things you find unappealing, and they're probably not that different than what I find unappealing.

I don't remember the part where you downplayed the significance of what you had to say. Surely it's worth mentioning that it doesn't all come down to sex. Surely it's worth mentioning that "maximizing one's sexual potential" is not a matter of counting partners or their level of obedience. You ask a lot of questions: "Wouldn't you like [x]? Wouldn't you like [y]?" To answer yes is not to admit that those things are worth pursuing at all costs. What is the value of "respect" or admiration from those you consider worthless? Do you somehow imagine you are degrading yourself less than the women whose mouths you fuck--whose cunts you won't touch? Do you pretend it's possible to place yourself above the other creatures with whom you spend your time?

None of the things I mentioned are worth pursuing at all costs.

Any of those things can be accomplished with enough money or with the use of force, neither of which I have any interest in.

I don't consider anyone worthless, I just assess value realistically. Every human is a worthwhile creature in the eyes of God, but in my limited reality I base the worth of people on what they can do for me. I think we all do this, why not see it for what it is?

What it really comes down to is economy. You only have so much energy in this world. You have a few thousand days of sexual viability if you're lucky.

Make the most of it.

 

[Leverage]

I don't consider anyone worthless, I just assess value realistically. Every human is a worthwhile creature in the eyes of God, but in my limited reality I base the worth of people on what they can do for me. I think we all do this, why not see it for what it is?

Real talk. Not necessarily what one might consider morally correct but real talk nonetheless.

 

[Marquis]

Real talk. Not necessarily what one might consider morally correct but real talk nonetheless.

Was it not Lucifer's cardinal sin to covet the role of God?

 

[Leverage]

Was it not Lucifer's cardinal sin to covet the role of God?

Ethical approach can be determined by situational circumstances...so says the "bearer of light."

 

[Marquis]

Ethical approach can be determined by situational circumstances...so says the "bearer of light."

I don't understand.

 

[Leverage]

I don't understand.

Yes you do. "Every human is a worthwhile creature in the eyes of God, but in my limited reality I base the worth of people on what they can do for me."

Your approach is/was determined by your circumstances. Morality is not an issue for you in your approach.

...be easy

 

[Hester]

Real talk. Not necessarily what one might consider morally correct but real talk nonetheless.

i'd disagree with your morality comment here. M's views often seem to fall well within the bounds of aristotelian morality (particularly aristotle's nichomachean ethics), rather than the kantian ethics that tend to be a more prevalent school of thought these days. that doesn't make him morally "incorrect" but simply a student of a different mode of thought.

 

[Marquis]

i'd disagree with your morality comment here. M's views often seem to fall well within the bounds of aristotelian morality (particularly aristotle's nichomachean ethics), rather than the kantian ethics that tend to be a more prevalent school of thought these days. that doesn't make him morally "incorrect" but simply a student of a different mode of thought.

Interesting you should say that, how do you mean?

I am familiar with both works.

 

[Hester]

Interesting you should say that, how do you mean?

I am familiar with both works.

fuck, i don't have the time to really write this up, but basically if you distill kantian ethics to what has almost become a kantian cliche (the categorical imperative; formulation the second)---actions must be ends in themselves and not means to ends---you'd have a hard time justifying many of your thoughts as "ethical" (although i'm sure you could do it if you wanted to).

my read of you, however, puts you more in an aristotelian light, particularly if you are familiar with goal centered ethics and eudaimonia (kind of diametrically opposed to kant's second formulation)

we on here would all fail aristotle's character qualifications (we not only promote, but celebrate, his "evils" on here) so i am ignoring those for the sake of this discussion because i'm intellectually lazy like that.