Double Standard... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

NareenaAndSir -> Double Standard... (3/15/2008 9:54:27 PM)

I was just updating my profile when I spied under the rules: 'NO REFERENCE TO FINANCIAL SLAVERY'

Is financial slavery a slave who asks for cash, or giving cash to be a slave?

If it's the latter why can Dommes ask for 'tribute,' but any sort of financial slavery is out of bounds?

just curious...



SinergyNstrumpet -> RE: Double Standard... (3/15/2008 10:01:03 PM)

I believe it is in regard to relationships in which a slave gives all their assets to their master/mistress...

It can also be a reference to professional domination... in other words pay for play.

It refers usually to femdom/malesub relations


Hope that was helpful


julia



SteelofUtah -> RE: Double Standard... (3/15/2008 10:16:48 PM)

It is a double standard however without the demand there would be no supply.

It's a nice way of saying You Cannot List Prices.

Tribute technically is not prostitution and it has been won in court MANY times by pro's mostly due to the fact that most pros explain that just because you give me money does not mean I will be doing anything to you but it doesn't hurt your chances either.

One gets used to double standards after awhile in this lifestyle, you even stop calling them double standards, and you start calling them what they are. "Different Strokes for Different Folks"

As Always

Steel



Real_Trouble -> RE: Double Standard... (3/15/2008 11:24:52 PM)

In theory, there's a difference between voluntarily giving "gifts" or "tribute" and having your financial assets entirely controlled by your Dom / Domme.

The line is sometimes quite thin...



TheLookingGirl -> RE: Double Standard... (3/15/2008 11:29:10 PM)

This confuses me too, but I tend to disagree with the exchange of money in any of these situations. Paying/recieving money to do anything that gets another person or yourself off sexually seems absolutly insane to me.

But Steel put it best...Different Strokes for Different Folks.



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Double Standard... (3/16/2008 12:01:12 AM)

Specific gifts/tributes tend to toe the line towards escorting and prostitution.

Financial slavery is more having one person in charge of anothers ongoing financial affairs.



SteelofUtah -> RE: Double Standard... (3/16/2008 12:03:52 AM)

So why then is that an issue in the TOS. I know many Doms who are in complete Financial Control. I know many subs who end up being that too because thier doms are for shit with Finances.

Are you sure about that LA???

Curious Minds want to know.

As Always

Steel



DesFIP -> RE: Double Standard... (3/16/2008 7:38:50 AM)

A sub who is an accountant may well start making a budget for the dom but that's not the same as having him sign over his house or being given a second card on his credit card. And normally you don't agree to list someone as co-owner of your house before the first date. Financial slavery requires payment upfront and gets nothing in return. I'm assuming it's against the TOS because the site doesn't want to get named in a suit to recover funds.



HerLord -> RE: Double Standard... (3/16/2008 10:23:24 AM)

Any one wishing to give money to someone can surely look me up. They say money can't buy happiness. No, but it sure does buy alot of cool toys. LOL

It would appear that this disclaimer is to avoid the illegalities of "slave trade" within the context of US Law. However, leaving notice of where leaving donations are accepted, does not violate any laws.

*edited for spelling*



amayos -> RE: Double Standard... (3/16/2008 10:25:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NareenaAndSir

I was just updating my profile when I spied under the rules: 'NO REFERENCE TO FINANCIAL SLAVERY'

Is financial slavery a slave who asks for cash, or giving cash to be a slave?

If it's the latter why can Dommes ask for 'tribute,' but any sort of financial slavery is out of bounds?

just curious...



I have always seen "financial slavery" and "slavery" as one and the same, which is why it's amusing to me how those who enthusiastically drop the slave word so often balk at the notion of servitude being strictly financial.

To answer your questions, a "financial slave" is one who is used for monetary purposes. Any percentage of their disposable income beyond subsistence may be taken. With resident slaves, all of their income may be taken. From what I've seen, these are rare arrangements, and more often only fantasies in the minds of submissive males who claim a desire to be exploited and even "ruined," usually by a nefarious femme fatale.

I don't think the actual application of consensual "financial slavery" is so much the problem as much as it being twisted and refashioned into a model for prostitution, scams or criminal behavior is. One can certainly say the same of the concept of "tribute," however, but I believe the differences lie in the meaning and feel of the words. A tribute is a gift intended to show gratitude, admiration or respect, not unlike the roses or pretty sparklies males will give to females during courtship. Being "tributed" is wonderfully vague and less abrasive to popular sensibilities, whereas naked financial exploitation (slavery)—though consensual—is too abhorrent an idea for most of society, and permitting the common use of such a phrase on sites such as these skirts too closely to advocating abusive and criminal reinvention, or fostering an environment for it in the least.




Smythe -> RE: Double Standard... (3/16/2008 10:39:26 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: amayos


I have always seen "financial slavery" and "slavery" as one and the same, which is why it's amusing to me how those who enthusiastically drop the slave word so often balk at the notion of servitude being strictly financial.




I agree with this, however, such a pure arrangement is very rare. 95.32 % of the time financial slavery is some young woman wanting stuff from a frustrated middle aged submissive who lives too far away to ever really bother her. And even then, it is more often the stuff of fantasy which is not so attractive in the harsh light of reality.
Smythe




amayos -> RE: Double Standard... (3/16/2008 10:53:54 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Smythe


quote:

ORIGINAL: amayos


I have always seen "financial slavery" and "slavery" as one and the same, which is why it's amusing to me how those who enthusiastically drop the slave word so often balk at the notion of servitude being strictly financial.



[...] financial slavery is some young woman wanting stuff from a frustrated middle aged submissive who lives too far away to ever really bother her.


* Laughing

A jaundiced appraisal, and one that fits the bill for many.



ownedgirlie -> RE: Double Standard... (3/16/2008 11:03:16 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: amayos
A jaundiced appraisal, and one that fits the bill for many.


Was that an intended pun?  :)



Mercnbeth -> RE: Double Standard... (3/16/2008 11:20:23 AM)

the way this slave understands it, there are slaves who are used and objectified by their owner's in specific ways...one of those specific uses is by becoming a wallet, an ATM, a source of funds, for the owner.
 
where the $$$ comes from, by either working a legit job, under the table, trust fund, inheritance, lottery winnings--doesn't matter.  the Owner's BL is improved by the financial contributions of the slave.



ownedgirlie -> RE: Double Standard... (3/16/2008 11:25:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross
Financial slavery is more having one person in charge of anothers ongoing financial affairs.


On a more serious note, this is close to how I see it.  Then again, I rather not categorize my slavery.  In my situation, I am his slave, and that means I am his _____ (insert qualification here) slave.  He can use his money or mine as he sees fit, and he does.  He can also transfer money between himself and slave, or between slave and himself, as he sees fit, and he does.  His use of me is not limited to finances, however, but I suspect those who refer to "financial slaves" do so because that is their key purpose.



stella41b -> RE: Double Standard... (3/16/2008 11:28:58 AM)

I thought it had something to do with being employed in a fast food restaurant such as MacDonalds or KFC.



amayos -> RE: Double Standard... (3/16/2008 11:29:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie

quote:

ORIGINAL: amayos
A jaundiced appraisal, and one that fits the bill for many.


Was that an intended pun? :)


Strictly Freudian! [;)]



kittinSol -> RE: Double Standard... (3/16/2008 11:30:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: stella41b

I thought it had something to do with being employed in a fast food restaurant such as MacDonalds or KFC.



My first thought also [:D] .



ownedgirlie -> RE: Double Standard... (3/16/2008 11:30:33 AM)

Ha.  Even better.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125