RE: Naturally A Fem Domme

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Naturally A Fem Domme

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 9:00:21 AM

LillyoftheVally

Posts: 1826
Joined: 7/22/2009
Status: offline

See I do think that we have to acknowledge the difference between sex and gender here

_____________________________

'My doctor says that I have a malformed public-duty gland and a natural deficiency in moral fibre, and that I am therefore excused from saving Universes.'

Nah I am not happy to see you either

(in reply to DemonKia)

Post #: 21

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 9:18:58 AM

Apocalypso

Posts: 1104
Joined: 4/20/2009
Status: offline

Bullet points, yo.

You're missing that one of the major factors for the difference in gender roles in pre-historic tribes wasn't to do with natural dominance of males. It's a different biological issue. It's impossible, or at least very difficult, to hunt while pregnant. That's not the case with gathering.
You can't look at the history of patriarchal societies (at least in the West) without looking at the strong cultural influence of Christianity. That's a sociological issue, not a biological one.
What is and isn't considered a 'normal' gender role is heavily effected by cultural factors. Look at the way the acceptable career opportunities of women changed greatly in the Second World War in the UK, due to a large percentage of men being off fighting at the front.
This part of your argument-
quote:

In homosexual relationships there is still a partner who evolves into a dominant role, one which could traditionally described as male.
actually suggests strongly that it's not biological. Because if it's that one partner evolves into a role which could be traditionally described as male, if we take the biological argument as read, that means one partner is going directly against evolutionary instinct. It makes more sense to me to suggest that one partner evolves into what is culturally seen as a male role, due to sociological factors.

In conclusion, those things would lead me to suggest that dominance and submission are either a) innate regardless of gender or b) socially created roles. Currently I think I'd go for a combination of the two, with a polite nod to Butler's view that sexuality is something we perform, not something that we are.

_____________________________

If you're going to quote from the Book of Revelation,
Don't keep calling it the "Book of Revelations",
There's no "s", it's the Book of Revelation,
As revealed to Saint John the Divine.

(in reply to DemonKia)

Post #: 22

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 9:20:39 AM

DemonKia

Posts: 5521
Joined: 10/13/2007
From: Chico, Nor-Cali
Status: offline

From the note about usage in the New Oxford American Dictionary (the one that comes with my comp, lol):

Although the words gender and sex both have the sense ‘the state of being male or female,’ they are typically used in slightly different ways: sex tends to refer to biological differences, while gender tends to refer to cultural or social ones.

Now that I'm clear on the distinction, I'd lean towards saying that (as is usual in discussions of biological matters) it's a complicated interplay between sexual & gender factors that produces these social constructs of 'feminine' & 'masculine' . . . . . .

One example that keeps popping into my mind with reference to this particular thread, & this subject in general, is this:

One of the stress hormones is testosterone. Pregnant women who are stressed produce higher levels of testosterone than do non-stressed pregnant women. If the pregnant woman happens to be gestating a female fetus while experiencing stress & having the resultant higher blood levels of testosterone, the female offspring will tend to have a more masculinized mind than otherwise would have been so. The more stress, the longer lasting, the more so this effect . .. . . So, we have a biological process (blood testosterone levels during gestation) that is both strongly affected by the culture & environment the pregnant woman exists in, & in turn effects cultural outcomes as that offspring matures with a more-masculinized brain inside an ostensibly fem container . . . . .

Now, let's multiply that by the hundreds of different ways we can measure & describe traits 'masculine' & 'feminine', how differently they can be expressed from individual to individual, & how many different factors (biological, environmental, societal, etc) can impact on any given instance of 'masculine' or 'feminine' behavior or thought, & we've moved quite far afield from the OP's simple notion . . . . . .

(in reply to LillyoftheVally)

Post #: 23

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 9:23:36 AM

LillyoftheVally

Posts: 1826
Joined: 7/22/2009
Status: offline

I saw a baby in town today, he was wearing blue, 'oh how sweet your little boy is' I said.

_____________________________

'My doctor says that I have a malformed public-duty gland and a natural deficiency in moral fibre, and that I am therefore excused from saving Universes.'

Nah I am not happy to see you either

(in reply to DemonKia)

Post #: 24

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 9:50:27 AM

ResidentSadist

Posts: 12580
Joined: 2/11/2007
From: a mean old Daddy, but I like you - Joni Mitchell
Status: offline

I don’t believe that there are absolutely no role reversals. However, I believe there is a general predisposition based on whether or not you have a cock. Even the act of procreation requires a dominant male to penetrate the internal body space of a female. Further, it only requires the male’s will to create a pregnancy. The female will get pregnant whether she was willing or not.

Also, those roles cannot be reversed. A female would be hard pressed to get pregnant from an uninterested limp cocked male.

All this combined with all the stereotypical hunter vs gatherer roles, it seem their has to be some cock based predisposition towards a more dominant role.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On the other hand, many schools of psychology put biological influences aside saying that you are a product of your environment. In contrast to that, there are prenatal studies that show evidence of dominant behavior in the womb by many species with multipul birth.

_____________________________

-=BDSM Book List=- Reading is Fundamental !!!
I give good thread.

(in reply to LillyoftheVally)

Post #: 25

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 10:07:30 AM

LordDarkPleasure

Posts: 91
Joined: 4/26/2005
Status: offline

The problem with the OP's post is that he associates Dominant personnality with supremacy. The reality is, if you're a Dominant moron, you remain a moron and are far from being "supreme". In fact whatever makes a person better comes from that person's upbringing and personnal choices. Its not how you do it, its what you actually manage to do that counts.

Another reality is that nobody on these boards has either the education or the data needed to actually give a pertinent opinion on the subject. Everyone in here are normal people, with their very common human flaws influencing their opinions. ALL the supremists I discussed with were using statistics and historical facts in the same way a drunkard uses a lampost: for support rather than illumination. "This does not match my opinion? meh, its not really pertinent." "Oh WOW! this data or historical fact supports my preconceived opinion that I have no intention to change no matter what! ITS THE ULTIMATE TRUTH!" (yes, its an exageration but that is how the human mind works)

My point is, stop trying to make claims regarding levels of magnitude outside of your reach, focus on the groups you actually have and importance in, and let Nash's equilibrium work its magic. Nobody's gonna know who's supreme that way, but nobody needs to know anyway.

(in reply to LillyoftheVally)

Post #: 26

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 10:41:56 AM

LaTigresse

Posts: 26123
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist

I don’t believe that there are absolutely no role reversals. However, I believe there is a general predisposition based on whether or not you have a cock. Even the act of procreation requires a dominant male to penetrate the internal body space of a female. Further, it only requires the male’s will to create a pregnancy. The female will get pregnant whether she was willing or not.

Also, those roles cannot be reversed. A female would be hard pressed to get pregnant from an uninterested limp cocked male.

All this combined with all the stereotypical hunter vs gatherer roles, it seem their has to be some cock based predisposition towards a more dominant role.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On the other hand, many schools of psychology put biological influences aside saying that you are a product of your environment. In contrast to that, there are prenatal studies that show evidence of dominant behavior in the womb by many species with multipul birth.

Since when is an interested dick a dominant dick?

_____________________________

My twisted, self deprecating, sense of humour, finds alot to laugh about, in your lack of one!

Just because you are well educated, articulate, and can use big, fancy words, properly........does not mean you are right!

(in reply to ResidentSadist)

Post #: 27

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 10:52:24 AM

LadyNTrainer

Posts: 1584
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Esinn
My premise was, "Men are naturally dominant, this is how we evolved - "it is hard wired". I went on a brief rant in agreement about biology, patriarchal societies and nature.

Take a closer look at modern primatology research, specifically on baboons, but also in chimps and gorillas. The picture that is beginning to emerge is that male dominance has played a much smaller role in direct genetic transmission and in individual success and survival than was previously thought. In group living social mammals, aggressive/dominant males can play a crucial role in group survival, increasing their chances of lateral gene transmission, but the individual dominant males very often lose out in terms of direct reproductive success to males with greater social skills - eg, "people pleasers". There is poor or no correlation between how dominant and aggressive a male is and how successfully he sires offspring and how well those offspring survive to reproductive age. In fact there is negative correlation in many models, where the dominance/aggression traits appear to impede reproductive success.

Homosexuality is another excellent example of increased lateral gene transmission success in group-living social mammals. Non reproductive adults who hunt and/or gather and increase the group's resources result in a higher standard of living for that group's offspring.

Early scientists tended to have significant ethnocentric and religious biases coloring their work. Those glasses are starting to come off with modern standards of observation and recording, and one of the most crucial findings of the recent decade in animal behavioral research is that a good deal of the established literature needs serious re-thinking based on objective data from observational methods that are performed more strictly by the numbers to avoid personal and cultural bias tainting the results. Male dominance in primates is one of the old bastions that has pretty much fallen, despite its ubiquitous presence in the old textbooks.

_____________________________

Your dominant Personal Trainer for fitness and body shaping in the lifestyle. Let my fetish be your motivation.

(in reply to Esinn)

Post #: 28

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 11:05:55 AM

LadyNTrainer

Posts: 1584
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist
I don’t believe that there are absolutely no role reversals. However, I believe there is a general predisposition based on whether or not you have a cock. Even the act of procreation requires a dominant male to penetrate the internal body space of a female. Further, it only requires the male’s will to create a pregnancy. The female will get pregnant whether she was willing or not.

In some cultures, the act of intercourse is referred to in terms of the woman's vagina "taking" or "eating" the man's penis. The act of consumption is seen as a dominant act, and there is some fear and taboo related to this act among the males. They consider it a weakening, a surrender, to allow their penis to be "eaten" by the vagina, and this act is forbidden to males who must save their strength for other undertakings.

What seems like an obvious absolute of "penis enters vagina = penis is dominant" to you is basically a cultural artifact, I'm afraid. In other cultures the act is considered an inherently vulnerable surrender of the penis to the organ that "eats" it. In some of those cultures the vagina is referred to with slang terms like "cookpot". Some vestiges of this way of thinking can be seen in the fear of vagina dentata, the mythical vagina with teeth, and in the belief that an athlete should refrain from sex before an event so his energies are not "consumed" by a woman's sex, or given to her instead of kept for his own use.

quote:

Also, those roles cannot be reversed. A female would be hard pressed to get pregnant from an uninterested limp cocked male.

*snrk* Somebody has clearly not spent a lot of time reading about male milking. That's okay, it's not your fetish.

quote:

All this combined with all the stereotypical hunter vs gatherer roles, it seem their has to be some cock based predisposition towards a more dominant role.

Define dominance. If you mean it is the male's job to exert himself physically to defend the group and to obtain protein from animal sources, while women bear and raise children and gather (usually) from 75% to 95% of the group's total caloric intake, that's clear enough in our dimorphic physiology and neurology. What is emerging in the picture of early human life as we see it in primates is that social skills and relationships - an area females excel in - is probably the predominant factor in overall power, influence and resource acquisition as well as direct reproductive success. The actual evolutionary picture is significantly more complex than Fred Flintstone caveman cartoons, I'm afraid.

< Message edited by LadyNTrainer -- 8/21/2009 11:06:31 AM >

_____________________________

Your dominant Personal Trainer for fitness and body shaping in the lifestyle. Let my fetish be your motivation.

(in reply to ResidentSadist)

Post #: 29

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 11:07:26 AM

Lockit

Posts: 11292
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

Wow, I have been made aware of a number of things I didn't know today... but darn if it isn't my morning and some of it surely doesn't make sense. (very submissive... eeekkk!)

I did not know that dominant meant supreme.

I did not know that getting a woman pregnant meant the seed and deed were dominant and a dominant act.

I did not know that brawn meant brain.

Although I didn't know these things... I did know... that I could lead a cock around simply because it was a cock and acted like a cock, but prefer to lead around a man who knows who he is and doesn't have to relate it to his cock. And did know that simply because I have a pussy, sometimes known as a symble of submission, that mine didn't make me submissive and led by a cock or anything else. Although I did have a vibrator I thought of fondly. And I did know that because men often spread their seed... they don't always stick around to watch that seedling grow... cause they were... scared and just couldn't handle the responsibilty. Guess the fun part was over. Another lie from the pit of hell, because they couldn't see how fun those lil seeds can grow up to be and they were too ignorant to see that the deed wasn't always that fun. But I guess that too was their cock lying to them.

Hehe... I couldn't help myself... but that must have been my pussy influencing me...

_____________________________

No matter how old a woman gets, some men will think she was born yesterday! ROFL... I love this place!

(in reply to LadyNTrainer)

Post #: 30

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 11:22:38 AM

Arpig

Posts: 9930
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: Increasingly further from reality
Status: offline

Men are not hard-wired to lead. They are hard-wired to solve. That's why when a woman tells a man about her lousy day instead of sympathizing, he will offer advice he thinks will help. This comes from the original role of men in hunter-gatherer societies. They were the hunters, and they had to solve problems quickly...their prey would escape if they took too long. This does not mean that men are necessarily any better at solving problems, only that they are biologically designed to determine a solution quickly and to act on it....it may be a stupid solution, and often it is, due to the lack of reflection in it. However given the biological role of the male, it was advantageous to decide and act quickly. If it got a bunch of them killed, that was OK from a biological point of view, as far fewer males are required to ensure the continuation of the species than females. And given the mobile nature of prey animals and the primitive tools available, the chances of over hunting a prey population were pretty slim, so if a solution was somewhat wasteful, that was OK as well (driving a herd of buffalo over a cliff in order to harvest a few of them is a good example of this).

Women, on the other hand had a far more long-term biological function. It takes careful planning to survive a pregnancy and raise a child to functional adulthood. As well, women/s traditional "prey" (the gatherer part of the hunter-gatherer equation) is stationary, but it must be carefully harvested to insure it will be there again next year. Therefore women are hard-wired to take a slower decision-making process, they are wired to plan ahead more than men are. They also tend to seek consensus more than men do, again this is because of their role in the tribe, both as the gatherers and the actual child-bearers.

Men are no more wired for dominance than women are, men are not more competitive than women (anybody who grew up with at least two sisters can attest to this), they are just more overtly physically competitive...again because the natural role of males favours physical prowess (hunting animals on foot with a spear is fucking hard work, and you bet your ass you want to be in damn good shape to do it). Women's natural role, on the other hand, favoured both mental and emotional strengths, and therefore that is the field where women usually compete. There have always been dominant men and dominant women (think back to your mother, she was one woman you didn't want to cross). The idea that there is some biological reason for one gender to be dominant is based on a misunderstanding of the primitive hunter-gatherer tribe as a unitary entity. It was in fact two separate societies working together to the common good. The male/hunter society favoured certain characteristics,while the female/gatherer society favoured others. The primeval tribe was ruled by the dominant male and the dominant female working together, much the same way a wolf pack has a dominant couple (not exactly the same, but its a convenient example of the principle at work in the natural world). Herein ends today's anthropology lesson.

_____________________________

Big man! Pig Man!
Ha Ha...Charade you are!

Why do they leave out the letter b on "Garage Sale" signs?

CM's #1 All-Time Also-Ran

(in reply to DemonKia)

Post #: 31

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 12:08:21 PM

lobodomslavery

Posts: 2477
Joined: 1/17/2008
Status: offline

I think patriarchy was a load of hokem. But so is Female Supremacy. Its bullshit
Kevin

(in reply to Arpig)

Post #: 32

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 2:14:10 PM

leadership527

Posts: 5026
Joined: 6/2/2008
Status: offline

quote:

My premise was, "Men are naturally dominant, this is how we evolved - "it is hard wired". I went on a brief rant in agreement about biology, patriarchal societies and nature.

God, don't I wish Padriag was here to give the benefit of his eclectic knowledge. But to me, this premise pretty much flies in the face of everything I've ever observed anywhere. Women may be more prone to avoiding direct confrontation, but that is not even remotely the same thing as being submissive. And I've known lots and lots and lots of men that were not even remotely dominant... really lots.

_____________________________

~Jeff

I didn't so much "enslave" Carol as I did "enlove" her. - Me
I want a joyous, loving, respectful relationship where the male is in charge and deserves to be. - DavanKael

(in reply to Esinn)

Post #: 33

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 2:24:20 PM

OrionTheWolf

Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline

Actually patriarchy, or matriarchy, is a form of leadership within a social structure. What most people overlook is that for either to be successful, there must be a Duty of Care to those that you lead. Neither is bullshit, it is just a form of leadership and depending upon the individuals involved determines it success or failure.

Not directed at you, bust someone else wanted to lay the blame for patriarchy at the feet of Christianity. Well my question would then by, what of the Eastern civilizations.

One last thing, when everything else breaks down, force is a determinate in many things. This often makes those with a more aggressive nature the protectors of a society. What many forget though, this is only one part of the whole that is necessary for a good society to exist. As our society progresses, many place less emphasis on many traits that were at one time desirable to be a good provider or leader, and more emphasis is being placed on the social arena. This works well, until society breaks down, and someone must stand on a wall and say "you will not harm those under my protection.". Yes females can do this, but males are biologically built better for it.

Now taking all of this into account, both genders have their place within a society, and it is the whole that creates a continuation of the species. As has been pointed out, by my other post and follow ups from those that got what I was saying, is that having a more aggressive or dominant personality does not automatically make someone a good leader. There are general trait qualities from each gender that is often necessary in the operation of large social units. Egalitarian systems were not used very often in times past, but the gender roles portrayed during many of those times recognized the general trait qualities of each gender, and used them where best they fit. A meritocracy where each person is rewarded and recognized for the things they do that benefit the whole, is a better form of social governance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lobodomslavery

I think patriarchy was a load of hokem. But so is Female Supremacy. Its bullshit
Kevin

_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to lobodomslavery)

Post #: 34

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 2:31:12 PM

Lockit

Posts: 11292
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

Hey! I can handle a club just as good as anybody! Just ask the owner of that car I took out in one swing... and well a neighborhood of gangster's messin with my kid. I'm good at pulling hair too! hehe

_____________________________

No matter how old a woman gets, some men will think she was born yesterday! ROFL... I love this place!

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)

Post #: 35

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 2:52:59 PM

gentlemanprince

Posts: 127
Joined: 5/19/2008
Status: offline

To me it's not a black and white situations, dominant vs. submissives. Many men are dominant outside their personal relationships with women. I will go even further in my case. I am a leader in my profesional and personal life, except that I chose to submit to one particular assertive woman whom I dearly love.

(in reply to DemonKia)

Post #: 36

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 5:07:44 PM

Level

Posts: 25145
Joined: 3/3/2006
Status: offline

All I know is, that when Rickey started yelling "LoooooSEEEEE!!!", Lucy (sorry, lucy) got back into line. That speaks volumes.

_____________________________

Fake the heat and scratch the itch
Skinned up knees and salty lips
Let go it's harder holding on
One more trip and I'll be gone

~~ Stone Temple Pilots

(in reply to gentlemanprince)

Post #: 37

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 7:17:24 PM

DavanKael

Posts: 3072
Joined: 10/6/2007
Status: offline

I do not think that being able to be a good leader inherently has anything to do with whether you're genitally an innie or an outtie.
And, the observations that you make about biology are generalizations; nature creates variety. Not all males are 'made' to be Alpha or they'd have torn each other apart thousands of years ago and the species would not have moved forward.
Additionally, you're placing an inherently higher value on traditionally male skill-set as opposed to traditionally female skill-set and, again, the view is myopic.
As usual, an Esinn over-simplification in attempt to justify a personal dogma.
Davan

< Message edited by DavanKael -- 8/21/2009 7:26:26 PM >

_____________________________

May you live as long as you wish & love as long as you live
-Robert A Heinlein

It's about the person & the bond,not the bondage
-Me

Waiting is

170NZ (Aka:Sex God Du Jour) pts

Jesus,I've ALWAYS been a deviant
-Leadership527,Jeff

(in reply to DemonKia)

Post #: 38

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 7:38:07 PM

pyroaquatic

Posts: 1535
Joined: 12/4/2006
From: Pyroaquatica
Status: offline

I have two things to say what has been said thus far.

One. I have never been so turned on by all this brain-talk before in my life.

Two. How can one be a natural anything? You just are. Just be.

I am a Natural Pyroaquatic, you are a Natural Esinn,
Lookie there is a Natural Lookie!

A Natural DemonKia.... Yay! Arpig... glad to see he is Natural too!

Everyone is Natural. Of Nature. Glad to see this.

Regardless of whatever labels one decides to slap onto things.

....

slap jack... jack will slap back.

lol... what? Is it time for the sleeping now?

_____________________________

You are what your deep, driving desire is.
As your desire is, so is your will.
As your will is, so is your deed.
As your deed is, so is your destiny.
-Brihadaranyaka Upanishad IV.4.5

(in reply to DavanKael)

Post #: 39

RE: Naturally A Fem Domme - 8/21/2009 8:42:53 PM

LadyNTrainer

Posts: 1584
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apocalypso
You're missing that one of the major factors for the difference in gender roles in pre-historic tribes wasn't to do with natural dominance of males. It's a different biological issue. It's impossible, or at least very difficult, to hunt while pregnant. That's not the case with gathering.

Uh....wtf does hunting have to do with dominance? In most hunter/gatherer societies, hunted meat makes up a relatively small proportion of the total calories consumed by a group. It can be an important source of protein, but gathered food is far more essential to the group's survival. Og kills deer does not equal Og is dominant, not when 75% to 95% of the group's food is produced by the gatherers. It's a very rare group that has a higher hunting to gathering ratio than this, and you'll see that dynamic solely in the extreme Arctic climates.

Someone else said:

quote:

In homosexual relationships there is still a partner who evolves into a dominant role, one which could traditionally described as male.

This is an even bigger WTF, and it's insulting, stereotyping and not even generally true. Do you even KNOW very many gay people? Generally the twinks prefer to date other twinks, and hyper-masculine types prefer to date each other and don't like twinks at all, specifically requesting "masculine, straight acting" men to be with. There is nothing at all even vaguely resembling D/s or male/female relations between two big hairy bear buddies reveling in one another's masculinity, and THAT is much closer to the social norm in the gay community than some idiotic notion that gay people are trying to imitate heterosexual gender roles. They're not. They are not attracted to having a male-female heterosexual dynamic in their relationships. That's why they're gay, for fuck's sake. As a general rule, a man who likes men actually does want a man. Duuuh.

There are gay men into D/s of course, and gay men who like twinks or femme boys, but quite honestly that's a pretty small minority. A butch/femme pairing is a bit more common among lesbians, but it's still very far from the majority or the social norm. The whole butch/femme paradigm was very largely a function of social gender role rebellion, as well as encompassing some of the transgender or genderqueer folks, and it almost doesn't exist any more in the modern GLBT community. There are non gender traditional lesbians, to be sure, but other than the transmen among them, they aren't "being male" so much as they're forging their own gender roles that don't have a lot to do with how mainstream society views them.

_____________________________

Your dominant Personal Trainer for fitness and body shaping in the lifestyle. Let my fetish be your motivation.

(in reply to Apocalypso)

Post #: 40

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Naturally A Fem Domme

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.250