domestic discipline

[HiddenLacey]

On the one hand you want to be equal but on the other you want to be dominated/treated as 'less' by a man.

I'm not sure you understand. While I do not consider myself a sub there is something wonderful about being dominated by a man in the bedroom, it doesn't mean he is treating me as "less" it just means he is taking control, but he's not going to hurt me or really force me.

 

[dolfette]

Aren't you the one who wants women to be treated equally? Seems a bit hypocritical.

PS I have no problem with this, just pointing out the juxtaposition. Apparently women want to be equals outside the bedroom but in the bedroom they want the man to dominate them.

You can't have it both ways. Unless you DP

yes i can.

and a domme can too.

my kink that i choose to indulge, in the privacy of my bedroom, with the man of my choosing, does not effect my interractions with other men.

unless you also think that letting a guy put his dick up my cunt means that i approve of all men putting their dicks up all women irrespective of choice.

...actually, i get every bit as turned on by the fantasy of bending over and dry raping a guy with a strapon.

 

[petite]

I'm not saying women can't have their sexual needs met. All I am saying is that there are two situations where what women want (from men, relative to men) is diametrically opposed.

The context is irrelevant. The fact is that women's view of men is polarised in each situation. Only for some women though.

On the one hand you want to be equal but on the other you want to be dominated/treated as 'less' by a man.

I don't have a problem with people's sexual needs being met and in fact I would support that. If you read my post(s) in this thread, there is nothing I have said that could be construed to support the view that I am against feminists or dom/sub relations.

I was just commenting on the blatant hypocrisy of the viewpoint in this thread compared to the viewpoint expressed in other threads.

What? You have to be kidding.

The fact that you assumed that it would be the man on top in the relationship, and that you seem to think that it wouldn't be hypocritical for a feminist to be the dominant one in a dom/sub relationship is sexist.

I completely disagree with you that it's hypocritical. I don't understand why you don't see the difference that having a fair consensual relationship and desiring something makes upon a situation. This is like confusing consensual rape play with actual rape. Context is everything.

Context is irrelevant? Why on earth would you say that? Context is always relevant.

 

[Incocknito]

yes i can.

and a domme can too.

my kink that i choose to indulge, in the privacy of my bedroom, with the man of my choosing, does not effect my interractions with other men.

unless you also think that letting a guy put his dick up my cunt means that i approve of all men putting their dicks up all women irrespective of choice.

...actually, i get every bit as turned on by the fantasy of bending over and dry raping a guy with a strapon.

Know how I know you're a sub? You write in lowercase.

Anyway I am glad that you can be feminist/dom/sub when it suits. I'm only pointing out that being sub is (moralistically, regardless of the activity) the opposite of being feminist.

The submissive female is basically an advert against equal rights for women. The rights of the submissive female are subverted (to varying degrees) by the dominant male...or person.

Yet a feminist is the total opposite of a "sub". The feminist wants to be equal to a man. The sub wants to be in some ways the "slave" of the man.

I just think its funny that some of you are feminist, dominant subs.

 

[petite]

Know how I know you're a sub? You write in lowercase.

Anyway I am glad that you can be feminist/dom/sub when it suits. I'm only pointing out that being sub is (moralistically, regardless of the activity) the opposite of being feminist.

The submissive female is basically an advert against equal rights for women. The rights of the submissive female are subverted (to varying degrees) by the dominant male...or person. But the sexes are totally different so sexism is justified. Men and women are not the same.

Yet a feminist is the total opposite of a "sub". The feminist wants to be equal to a man. The sub wants to be in some ways the "slave" of the man.

I just think its funny that some of you are feminist, dominant subs.

You seem to believe that in order to be a feminist, one must be sexist. I believe the exact opposite.

I expect you also think it's hypocritical for a housewife to be a feminist, too. She has to choose to have a career, or else she's being hypocritical? I don't believe that any more than I believe that a person's sex games makes one a hypocrite.

Since when must every single woman be a "symbol" of all womankind, and that every single woman must "represent" all of us, with every individual choice she makes? Each woman is a human being, not a symbol, not a representative of all of us. That's incredibly sexist and narrow minded and not at all representative of providing equal rights to women. When you stop seeing each individual woman's choice as representing all of womankind, then you will stop seeing us in a sexist way.

And who are you to decide what she symbolizes anyway? This is just evidence that we don't have equal rights when you imperiously decide what one woman's choice means to all of womankind. How condescending, and how obtusely you've missed the point of the movement.

Feminism was supposed to provide women with a wide range of choices, to provide us with equal opportunities, not narrowly redefine us as narrowly as we were defined before. We haven't all gone from housewife to career woman. That's not more enlightened. That's just squeezing us into just as narrow a definition of womanhood as we had before.

 

[thetramp]

being a feminist does mean being oppose to many of societies institutions that are discriminating. You find them everywhere, in the legal system, in the business world and in the heads of other people. But it does not mean being the opposite in the meaning of downgrading men or hating them in general.

By your logic a women could be submissive sexually and a feminist without being hypocritical, if only she were a lesbian.
Do you realize that that is pretty sexist?

Personal preferences have nothing to do with being against institutionalized cut and dried opinion and assumed preferences.

Is it hypocritical to call yourself a straight man, want to have sex with one women but not with another one because of personal preferences?

 

[petite]

I asked him and he says, "I wish you'd eat more of the desserts I try to feed you."

He's a feeder.

Does he spank you if you don't eat?

 

[dolfette]

Know how I know you're a sub? You write in lowercase.

this bit of your post was so stupid that i couldn't bring myself to read the rest.

good grief!

besides, no good subby could ever bring him/herself to type dom/me without using a capital D.

 

[petite]

this bit of your post was so stupid that i couldn't bring myself to read the rest.

good grief!

besides, no good subby could ever bring him/herself to type dom/me without using a capital D.

:lmao:

So true!

 

[dolfette]

being a feminist does mean being oppose to many of societies institutions that are discriminating.

being a feminist means believing every woman should be able to choose what to be, and not have her role foisted on her...whether it be foisted by a misogynistic society or a prat who thinks feminists have a duty to play man hating bullies 24/7.

 

[thetramp]

being a feminist means believing every woman should be able to choose what to be, and not have her role foisted on her...whether it be foisted by a misogynistic society or a prat who thinks feminists have a duty to play man hating bullies 24/7.

I don't see any dissent to my posting.

 

[dolfette]

I don't see any dissent to my posting.

that's because i was agreeing with you.

 

[Incocknito]

Sorry if there was some sort of confusion here.

In this thread I am mainly talking about the women in this thread who in other threads purport to be feminists.

I am not talking about ALL women. Although in my experience there are a lot of women who are feminist, dominant, subs.

I am rushing my posts because I want to watch darts

 

[Lex]

what do you think about it?

one partner being in charge, making the rules and giving damn good spankings if the other disobeys!

I think that two consenting adults can agree to any relationship parameters and that, as long as they are not hurting/abusing one another, it's rather none of my business.

FWIW, dolfette, what you describe is similar to some of the full-time Daddy-Boy/Master-Slave relationships that Bbucko has described (and we both have witnessed).

Not for me, and that makes it neither good nor bad. Just different (from my relationship parameters).

 

[dolfette]

FWIW, dolfette, what you describe is similar to some of the full-time Daddy-Boy/Master-Slave relationships that Bbucko has described (and we both have witnessed).

it happens in every direction.

lesbian spanking is the hottest :tongue:

 

[vince]

The dom/sub relationship has never worked for me with a women. Even as a role play in the bedroom, I get like "come on, push back for christ's sake!" I like to be with strong willed women, who when I "pin them to the furniture", will try to get away and make it a challenge. Sometimes it's you need to break some furniture before you get down to the loving.

But that's me. I disagree with he notion that your behavior in one place, the bedroom in this case (or the kitchen table), has to define the whole of your character. Is a man who "takes charge" in the sack expected to be opposed to equal rights for women? You expect all feminists to be some kind of dominatrix in the sack or they are not true to their beliefs? Hypocritical? Sorry man I think that is kind of a juvenile way of thinking.

 

[Incocknito]

My point was that in principle feminists and submissives are total opposites.

I never made any comment or suggestion as to what I "expect" a feminist or a man to be.

I never said that a person's behaviour in the bedroom should define their behaviour outside the bedroom or vice versa.

I was commenting on the observation of the polar principles of the woman who wants to have equal rights to men in one situation but in another she wants to have her rights effectively taken away by the man.

Although since your lack of comprehension is implicitly asking the question: I think women are and should be at least sexually submissive to men. it's a pattern you see in the vast majority of relationships in the animal kingdom.

The dominant male and the submissive female(s).

Either I need to learn to write or some of you need to learn to read. Since a few times now you've taken exception to things that I have never said.

I never stated what a feminist should or should not be. I merely commented on the ideals of feminism relative to the ideal of the submissive female.

Now, the concept of a feminist, submissive, dominant female may be confusing. But I don't think my posts are. Unless you try to read things that aren't actually written.

As has happened so many times before, I will bow out of this thread as it seems some of you are failing to understand what is a simple point of fact.

PS feminists and dominant types are similar in that they both want (more) rights. But that does not mean that they are or should be one and the same.

As is evident with the feminist who likes to be dominated, you can be a dominant woman and not be a feminist. I never said that the two things are or should be related.

 

[thetramp]

that's because i was agreeing with you.

My eyes turn bad i guess, thats two things i didn't see.

@Incoknito
You connected the behavior in the bedroom with the one outside by using the term hypocritical. Wanting one thing from one person in one situation and different things from others in other situations is not hypocritical.
And you have not taken into consideration that the question in the OP did leave it open which partner is submissive and that it is not all black and white.
Even if a women that in other situations does stand up for equal rights willingly has taken rights away from her( which i think is the wrong wording here) it still can be an achievement of equality as her needs are getting satisfied, which is something women for many many years in many societies did not have a right to.

 

[EllieP]

As much as I say I'm going to kick his ass, I could never lay a finger on my husband. And I think he would just as soon cut off his hand as raise it at me. We're very non-violent people and don't even watch slasher films.

And being dominant in the bedroom? He does try, and he's pretty good, but it soon dissolves into something not quite so dominating, which I love!

 

[dolfette]

are people still reading inwhatever's posts??

you guys are more patient than i.