RE: The last BDSM taboo? (Full Version)

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



Message

Kree -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 9:10:38 AM)

Quote:
Now, what I have found is that there is a very small percentage of these men who feel guilt about their desires and unsavory activities and they seek someone to punish them for it.  This is where "money play" comes in for me, as I request they send me personal info and pics and thereby "coerce" them financially to be good boys so the wife does not find out. 
 
I know this is probably a question of semantics, but isnt this also known as blackmail?  Wait until you piss one off and the local authorities come to visit.
 
An earlier poster mentioned the idea of helping people control their spending habits and keeping the money saved for themself.  Where exactly does that help the person?  Let's see, they overspend their budget by $200 a month, so the "help" comes along and shows them how to be more frugal for $200 a month.  Help like that on a national scale would bankrupt an economic system.
 
Just a personal opinion, but I understand that there are people who want/need to give up control for limited periods of time for money, but I think the idea of trolling for people's money to meet them or demanding tributes and gifts to meet them is robbery.  Yes, I understand it is their kink and they are entitled to live it, but if a male dominant did this he would be attacked for taking advantage of the emotional aspects of submission.  Different strokes, I suppose. 



feastie -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 9:26:07 AM)

There are submissive males, (I've never met a female one), whose kink it is to give their Mistress their money.  I don't really understand it, although Benji's post made a LOT of sense (good doggie).  I don't have a problem with those guys, until they start wanting to give their money to me...lol.  The problem I have, is the vast numbers of women who've latched on to this particular kink and think it's their right to demand it from all.  The ones that are just looking to make an easy buck and sit back on their ass and laugh about it.  Those are the people that make me ill.

I wonder, if it is a form of humiliation?  Give Mistress all their money so that they can barely, if at all, meet their expenses?  I'm not really certain where the idea or the desire comes from.  A form of voyeurism, maybe?  Watching Mistress spend all their money on herself, maybe having other men over to enjoy whatever she's purchased with it?  I don't think it's a need to take care of Mistress.  I think it's more personal.  A self-imposed punishment?

Many questions, sadly, I really don't have the answers.



Kree -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 9:34:23 AM)

Feastie,
If that is all it will take, I am considering a new screen name...Mistress Kree.  I have never owned a Ferrari, but ................



feastie -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 9:37:54 AM)

Give it whirl, Kree

You may just be surprised...lol.



MasterCurios -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 10:13:21 AM)

in short cash play eliminates the emotional aspects usually found in other forms of play....there is a different dynamic involved when cash is on the table....



Kree -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 10:39:25 AM)

MC
Yes, I mentioned that above where the desire to release control on a temporary basis is a theraputic thing for some people with high stress type jobs.  They want release, not emotion.  Where I disagree with your statement is when the expectations of the person writing the check DO include an emotional aspect that isnt shared by the one cashing that check.  I think we have all seen threads and posts from very angry check writers when they realize that their desires and expectations were not shared.  I would guess that many times those desires and expectations were not encouraged, but rather just became an obsession that blinded them.  The problem for me is when tricking people into writing checks becomes an ever growing cottage industry.  It's their kink and if it is fed, cool, but when a kink runs into a business, there could be problems for some. 

Another thought about this situation struck me.  I have known some male submissives that had incredible strength and offered their services from that place of strength.  Sadly, I have also seen male submissives that were looked down on for their leanings.  It caused me to wonder if this pay and gift and tribute thing has created a situation where male submissives do not get the respect they deserve.     



NakedOnMyChain -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 10:47:25 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: WetHotGoddess

I find myself wondering why anyone wants to "control" what others do. 
If a "submissive" wants to give his "service" to a woman for money, and is an adult, why does it bother people that he chooses- freely- to do so? 

 
Honestly, I have no idea.  Like I said before, I don't see a problem with it between consenting adults.  The controls and rules I spoke of before should be between the two participants to make sure that abuse or mistreatment do not occur.

Also, I don't think professional domination is quite what the OP had in mind.  It covers that base, but I believe he was referring more to those who choose to participate in "cash play" as he put it without the professional overtone.  
 
quote:

Here is what I know, and this is not supposition, it is a fact.
There are men in the world who have a lot to offer a domme (service wise)and they are fantastic people.  
Others are MARRIED and since moral values are lacking these days, they make assumptions that dommes in general are going to let them provide oral services, and many dommes I know do this very thing.  I do not know who is serving whom in these situations but if he cannot commit to me or to his wife he is a loser in my opinion.


I agree with that completely.

quote:

Now, what I have found is that there is a very small percentage of these men who feel guilt about their desires and unsavory activities and they seek someone to punish them for it.  This is where "money play" comes in for me, as I request they send me personal info and pics and thereby "coerce" them financially to be good boys so the wife does not find out.  Perhaps it lends excitement to their lives.  If they enjoy it and they choose it, who cares if they do it?
 
Not I.
 
quote:

I have been paid substantial sums to keep a slave in a cage and help him stop smoking.  He choose this and asked me to help him.  No one denies the value of real service of a real sub.  Yet no one "gets" the value of a service a Domme provides.
 

Don't be so sure about that.  I think we understand better than you think we do.

 
quote:

When it comes to personal slaves, all adults need to be responsible for themselves and beware of those who want their bank accounts, as well as those who isolate their slaves from family and friends. 
 
Ariel


Ok.  So this is where we get into sticky territory.  The last part is correct.  People do need to be wary of those who would isolate them from loved ones.  The first part is a bit off base.  Yes, it is good to beware of those who would want your bank account.  However, this is a valid type of play.  Why is it OK for you to ask for money and not a private domme with a private slave?  I believe this is the type of play the OP was referring to.  It's not for everyone, but it does work for some.  


Edited to add:  Sorry about the font changes.  It's not showing up like that when I type it, so it would be too difficult to correct. 



LadiesBladewing -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 11:52:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kree


I know this is probably a question of semantics, but isnt this also known as blackmail?  Wait until you piss one off and the local authorities come to visit.



Actually, I've heard of blackmail fetish before, on both sides. I think this can be added to my list on the thread about kinks one doesn't like (which is an understatement, actually), but I didn't think of it over there.

Anyway, there are some folks on both sides of the collar who truly get off on this concept.

ZWD



WetHotGoddess -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 1:18:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NakedOnMyChain

I suppose I do not think of being in a relationship, living with a person and having a household with a person as "play" 
 
Again, if someone is an adult, it is entirely UP TO THEM to do whatever it is that makes them happy, beit having their money controlled or their lives micromanaged.  Perhaps I make a distinction between play and RT that isn't there. 
 
But if something is play, and those involved are consenting and of legal age, it is their business, their kink, their life.  Why is it taboo or should it be taboo?  I will tell you why.. because it gripes "real" people that "fake" people can make money at it. 


 
quote:

When it comes to personal slaves, all adults need to be responsible for themselves and beware of those who want their bank accounts, as well as those who isolate their slaves from family and friends. 
 
Ariel


Ok.  So this is where we get into sticky territory.  The last part is correct.  People do need to be wary of those who would isolate them from loved ones.  The first part is a bit off base.  Yes, it is good to beware of those who would want your bank account.  However, this is a valid type of play.  Why is it OK for you to ask for money and not a private domme with a private slave?  I believe this is the type of play the OP was referring to.  It's not for everyone, but it does work for some.  


Edited to add:  Sorry about the font changes.  It's not showing up like that when I type it, so it would be too difficult to correct. 



Noah -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 1:51:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MstrTiger

In many ways I regard cash play as the last BDSM community taboo,


I can't recall seeing or hearing anyone relate to this notion as a taboo. People love it; have a love/hate realtionship with it; find it lame; find it squicky, take umbrage on some indiosyncratic principle. The range of reactions I've seen just doesn't cluster around anything like the idea of a taboo.

And as for it being the LAST taboo ...

Have you noticed, Tiger, the people who from time to time allude to their reluctance to post here about the things they really like? That's taboo territory as I understand the word.

In short, Tiger. Taboos are still plentiful. You can start with items from the nearly ubiquitous Big Three Hard Limits list of course. The word taboo applies there if anywhere, and rightly so in my view.

Someone's profile here says something like: "I want to be with people who know secret things, or else be alone." I apologize for the probability that I'm misquoting it but I think I've given the gist. Depending upon whom you hang out with you can stumble onto at least a few more taboos. Their being so may be regrettable or it may provide a nice frisson.





WetHotGoddess -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 3:31:57 PM)

To the OP: I overlooked your initial question.. 
 
Here is an example of mutually rewarding money play-
 
A Mistress takes her slave out shopping.  Before they arrive, she takes his wallet from him.
Perhaps he has a foot fetish and he helps her pick out and try on some shoes.  She asks him if he would like to buy them for her.  Of course he does.  He takes them to the cashier, then must ask his Mistress for his money.  She tells the cashier " I never allow him to carry money"..  This is very embarrassing,erotic, and gratingly humiliating to certain slaves.  Some men feel power through their wads of cash. To separate a man from his cash flow is taking a lot of his power from him.  For his trust to be strong enough to give it to her freely knowing she will undobtedly humiliate him, is quite a rush for her too. 
 
I am sure there are other ways to do money play and would be interested to hear of more myself. 
 
~Ariel
 
Why some people view this kink differently, is they do not understand it.  I do not undrestand a lot of things, and wonder to myself 'what does that have to do with PE or BDSM?"   But I do not consider those things taboo.
 
 
 


quote:

ORIGINAL: MstrTiger


why do you think this difference in peoples thinking on the subject came about?
 


I am hoping for it to be a thread where people discuss the subject from the point of view of 2 informed people engaging in it in a mutually rewarding way.




bignipples2share -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 3:49:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: WetHotGoddess

To the OP: I overlooked your initial question.. 
 
Here is an example of mutually rewarding money play-
 
A Mistress takes her slave out shopping.  Before they arrive, she takes his wallet from him.
Perhaps he has a foot fetish and he helps her pick out and try on some shoes.  She asks him if he would like to buy them for her.  Of course he does.  He takes them to the cashier, then must ask his Mistress for his money.  She tells the cashier " I never allow him to carry money"..  This is very embarrassing,erotic, and gratingly humiliating to certain slaves.  Some men feel power through their wads of cash. To separate a man from his cash flow is taking a lot of his power from him.  For his trust to be strong enough to give it to her freely knowing she will undobtedly humiliate him, is quite a rush for her too. 
 
I am sure there are other ways to do money play and would be interested to hear of more myself. 
 
~Ariel



I just thought this was part of marriage LOL



ClassAct2006 -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 4:06:51 PM)

Beat me to it.... marriage at least in the UK, or rather the cost of divorce, puts any BDSM money kink into perspective. In a sense the marriage vows and consequences are much more fundamental effect.



Curiossdragnlily -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 4:34:16 PM)

Very interesting thread. Something that i personally have never heard of or thought of. Thank You for raising it.
with respect,
lily, collared and owned slave of Master Curios
srn 308-692-331



CrappyDom -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 6:04:13 PM)

So if I sit down with some old folks and manipulate them into giving me money its now okay?

There isn't a lick of difference.



MstrTiger -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/8/2006 6:38:10 PM)


You don’t see a difference between two consenting adults engaging in what they see as a mutually rewarding activity and someone conning old people out of their money, personally I don’t see how they relate to each other in the slightest other than for the fact that money is involved.



WetHotGoddess -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/9/2006 4:32:20 AM)

So what you are saying is submissives are stupid victims? 
I shudder to think what you have done to your poor victims.  This shows what the Moral Majority think of adult consentual encounters.  If submissives are such fools then it is a wonder they can live from day to day!
 
I smell the stench of hypocricy!
 
The OP must be correct- this is a taboo.  lol



quote:

ORIGINAL: CrappyDom

So if I sit down with some old folks and manipulate them into giving me money its now okay?

There isn't a lick of difference.



bignipples2share -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/9/2006 6:41:18 AM)

(Fast Reply to the post in general )
I never equated my marriage with this, but it probably was. Before we got married, as soon as he thought there was any type of relationship, he basically forced his paycheck on me, because I wanted some extravagance and he said just give him 5.00 for the week. I only took it with the intent of paying him back. We moved in shortly thereafter and his paychecks were handed over to pay the expenses and incendentals. I  chose to open a joint account, yet he never touched it unless he asked first. Basically the only time he ever touched it was to buy things for me. We always went shopping together and if he expressed interest in something, I either put it in the cart or said, something like, I don't think that would look good on you.
I never saw it as anything other than us just being married and that's how ours worked. I guess it could be considered to be I was actually controlling his money, how he dressed, etc. along with the other parts of our BDSM practices. I just never considered it before. That being said, I consider that I was more generous to him with the money than I allowed him to be with me. It did come down to that being my choice though. As said in another thread, by someone else. I had a Ken doll and gawd he looked great in just about ANYthing....and nothing at all <EG>
I don't think I could accept money from someone who I didn't have deep feelings for, if that makes any sense.

Now, where's that jelly.

~Big



ExSteelAgain -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/9/2006 6:43:25 AM)

I don’t have a problem at all with someone giving another a hundred bucks or so for their BDSM play, as Benji said. What I find a problem with is any Dom or sub manipulating anyone to get their money. Those after money in manipulative ways, even small ways, give me a bad feeling.

I know a Dom who has his sub give toy parties and puts pressure on other subs to buy things and even that small manipulation, I find distasteful. I can suggest you buy things, but when I suggest that you buy them for me or in a way where I receive money, my objectivity is loss. I think a slave chooses a Master because she/he knows the Master will have her/his welfare at heart and that includes financial welfare.



Caretakr -> RE: The last BDSM taboo? (7/9/2006 6:53:19 AM)

Fast reply.

Paying for a service top is simply an easy way to top from the bottom.
You'd have to pay me to put up with that crap too.



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

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875