quote:Originally posted by LeDaemon: I'm not fond of it either. Especially when they pose with a smug expression and giving the camera the finger. Feh...
pretty much sums up my feeling on the subject. i guess some guys really get off on a female controlling them like that and treating them like shit.
-------------------- A brotha with a serious love of feet. Posts: 1787 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
They think they are entitled to being put on a pedestal when in all actuality they need to be put in the ground
Posts: 34 | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by DeTrOiT: Interesting outlook...But the one thing that we are not understanding is that "IT'S" not for us. But, the guys that are into this type of behavior LIKE IT...They get off on it and we aren't supposed to understand it.
My only problem is, We sound just like women when they tell their girlfriends, "Girl, I wouldn't let him talk to me like that" or something similar. Everybody does what works for them in their universe. Dominant personalities require submissives to find balance so there has to be some available. There is something about giving up control that is kind of erotic to me but just not at the level at which these guys operate. That being said, I'm not one who judges(well I try not to).
I have had many girls say, "You said what to your wife" or "My man couldn't say that to me" then I say, "Well, that's good...WE JUST KNOW THAT I'M NOT THE ONE FOR YOU...I'm a Dictator, no negotiating here Baby"...I will listen to her angle on a situation...BUT THE DECISION IS ULTIMATELY MINE...
But then there's always gonna be the guy who wants to be told to lick the toilet..or dirty feet..lmao...To each it's own..right?..
And this should go without saying but: I DON'T MEAN ANYTHING OFFENSIVE OR DISRESPECTFUL TOWARDS ANY PERSON ON THIS SITE WITH THE STATEMENT..."WE SOUND JUST LIKE THE WOMEN WHO..."
This is exactly on point. Just remember how many people want to know why in the hell you'd like a girl's feet. To each their own. Sometimes I love being in control of a girl, but there are PLENTY of times I love when a girl owns me.
...And really, how different is it than a guy making a girl call him "daddy." How weird is that? LOL
quote:Originally posted by Peter, Peter: So as my topic says, What is it with some ladies putting "princess" before their name? Are they putting themselves on this pedestal by calling themselves "Princess"? I just don't get it, I am infavor of a woman sometimes taking control. But,can someone please tell me what is this all about.
quote:Originally posted by Peter, Peter: So as my topic says, What is it with some ladies putting "princess" before their name? Are they putting themselves on this pedestal by calling themselves "Princess"? I just don't get it, I am infavor of a woman sometimes taking control. But,can someone please tell me what is this all about.
It's all about domination - I read all other posts that "agree" with a condescending tone towards this type of video and photo content. Same people are probably react in an offended matter by movies, film and books.
Princess - Typically put in front of a Dom who practices direct or online financial domination without typical attributes of S&M like ropes, whips, chains - Hot Looking Girl Next Door who will talk snooty to you, practice key-holding and famously, ass, foot, shoe, oral, lipstick and sissy fetishes.
Goddess - This is put in front of someone who is Dominant - i.e/e.g. Dominates men, including verbal humiliation, jerk off instructions, interactive sessions etc, typically bypassing the major stamp of FINANCIAL DOM/CAM DOM. Entertaining all fetishes this Dom is comfortable with. Having some S&M equipment such as whip riding crop etc, handcuffs and rope.
Mistress - More standard S&M practitioner, typically having whips chains and a play dungeon, and more latex and rubber wardrobe that is loud and shiny and less girl next door look. There are specific rules to the wardrobe FYI. Mistress is typically heavily invested in elaborate latex, leather and other attire and gear. But as industry standard will entertain foot worshipers and boot or shoot aficionados, but with nipple clamps to go along.
If anyone has a problem with this type of "content" or material such as video or photos, then don't look!
Just like the extremely dainty and expensively overproduced DDF or Ed Fox or other tachen type books. It's all fantastically entertaining for some and may not be for others.
I simply don't understand the need to harp about it, if you're a Dominant male personality just pass them by, don't sit here in the open saying so and so needs to get fucked in the ass to set her right. That is not her gig. There are plenty of Submissive foot friendly women.
The said content is explicitly produced for someone who likes it, not for someone who wishes the content would be different. The Model/Actor/Princess/Goddess/Mistress plays a role, in character to entertain a specific AUDIENCE, when in real life in person session typically the audience of ONE, ad-lib and dialogue is then custom tailored to that persons inner most fetishes, fantasies and desires.
I'm sure the ABSTRACTS did not list submissive foot job video by Jennifer. It said HUMILIATING JOI by Princess Jennifer. So I fail to see where the complaint is aside from someone wishing that said content producers and websites simply go out of business and the internet be rid of them. - Which will never happen as long as there is an audience. There is probably someone in right now declaring war on this very website, on foot jobs, and soles etc..
I don't think It's not anyones job to DISABUSE someone of their fantasies and explain them away as low self esteem - it actually takes BALLS to go into a session with a Dom - And if they agree with this type of thinking, then they should look no further that even Retifism and Podophilia are defined in DSM 3 as a AXIS 2 disorder listing a co-operating sex partner in helping "further" the disorder. Which I think is ridiculous of them to say. But there you have it.
All this content is editorialized in such a way as to create _suspension of disbelief_, i.e. / e.g. you're watching a film - it still has credit roll overlays in the opening, you're not reading them you're paying attention to what the actors are saying albeit you're looking at a projected two dimensional image in a dark theater or your home, shot with a camera, with sounds playing.
Real life has no backing music to it for tense or upsetting situations or montages.
As stated earlier (not to the OP), if you're harping about something someone said in their VIDEO CLIP with feet in it, you're probably offended by Lit Erotica Foot Slave stories, or things Hollywood Actors say in films as well and treat them not for the actual person they really in life - but as the character role they play on TV.
P.S. Sometimes "Princess" may mean Bratty Content which may not have anything to do with foot fetish at all.
Also. There are few and far between S&M players that are living the life 24/7.
So if you have to ask yourself a question whether or not Princess ..... etc go around being real assholes to men or women in real life everyday life 24/7 - no not really, typically they are extremely nice and polite people, it happens either in front of a camera or in front of a real and willing submissive.
Please also don't confuse it with Mistress-itus, in which the Dom did so many sessions etc.. that she completely forgets or ignores the needs or fetishes of the submissive and feels that she should just be honored for being.
P.P.S. Financial Domination that I referred to earlier, is an extremely dangerous sport, together with blackmail and etc..
Wives can and will sue the Dom, people DO spend money they don't have, criminal charges have been filed in certain cases. So I tend to avoid it, and salute the Princesses that know how to practice it correctly without dire consequences to players, but it's not something an average reader of the forum will understand as a fetish either.
quote:Originally posted by National: Women with high self-esteem are much less likely to put out than women with low self-esteem.
That statement is a complete fallacy.
quote: With that attitude, there's VERY little to zero chance that she'll have sex with
I don't believe the DIRECT INTENT of the operators of said blogs, clipstores, nightflirts and websites and dungeons and producers of said content is to offer sex/intercourse for money or otherwise to the audience.
quote: These women talking the way they do about these guys shows zero respect for them.
I believe that is indeed the desired effect of said writing, videos and photographs - tailored for an audience that wants to hear humiliating things.
quote: And no woman would have sex with a guy she has zero respect for.
If you put directly openly submissive women aside and Princess websites aside - if your opening line in a PUB is - as you put it - " ... you'll be amazed with what giving it to her in the ass real good will do for you." will earn you zero to no respect in a real world situation, hence no sex.
quote:]I don't believe the DIRECT INTENT of the operators of said blogs, clipstores, nightflirts and websites and dungeons and producers of said content is to offer sex/intercourse for money or otherwise to the audience.
You're right. However, I do believe that the more they preach it, the sooner they buy into that rhetoric, the sooner they adapt that mindset. It was said by Arch Analyst earlier in this thread that how much they believe in what they're saying is up for debate. That's true, and I believe that a number of them have become influenced by it.
quote:If you put directly openly submissive women aside and Princess websites aside - if your opening line in a PUB is - as you put it - " ... you'll be amazed with what giving it to her in the ass real good will do for you." will earn you zero to no respect in a real world situation, hence no sex.
I know that.
quote:Originally posted by Goddess Melanie: That statement is a complete fallacy.
Really?
I have scientific evidence that confirms what I said. In this case, I was talking about adults, but teenagers are little adults, really. This story is a few years old and it has something to do with teenagers, but I'm going to recite a couple of paragraphs from this and you'll see what I'm talking about.
Girls with low self esteem are much more likely to have sexual intercourse at an early age. But the opposite is true for the boys. Reports released by Statistics Canada found that self worth -- whether teen respondents liked the way they were -- felt that they had a lot to be proud of and considered them competent, played different roles into whether boys and girls had sex by age 15. 12- or 13 year-old girls who had low self esteem were almost twice as likely as their peers to have sexual intercourse by 15. But pre-teen boys who had high self worth were more likely to have sex by that age
So you see, a guy needs to have high self esteem. For a guy, trying to get sex is about how much rejection you can handle. You have to be cocky and women admire confidence. Men always knew this, women have confirmed that, but now I've presented to you statistical evidence from Canada that says girls with low self-esteem are more likely to put out. Guys with high self-esteem more likely to have gotten laid. So guys, you need high self esteem, high confidence level, an arrogance level. She, low self-esteem, feels badly about herself, sees all of her imperfections as major imperfections, and mole hills are being made in to mountains.
"That finding is important, particularly for parents and educators to be looking at and talking to youth about how issues of self-esteem may lead them into having intercourse earlier than they otherwise might," said Alex McKay, research co-ordinator of the Sex Information and Education Council of Canada.
And there are other findings in this study that are not relevant to what we're talking about, but the point is it's not just true for teenagers ... it's true for men and women. For a man, the higher his self-esteem, the higher his self worth, the higher his libido, a guy with a good job, good looks, confidence, money, is going to be getting more poon because he looks confident. He exudes confidence.
Women want security. They feel secure with a man who looks confident, a man who looks self-assured, a man who has high self-esteem, even when it's not warranted. For a man it's just important to look confident, to be arrogant, to be a jerk. For a woman, in order to get laid she has to have low self-esteem because women with high-self esteem say things like, "I ain't gonna sleep with YOU. Who you think I am, a slut?"
You don't want to meet chicks like that. You want to meet women who are willing to give it up just because they're insecure about their femininity, they're insecure as to whether they're attractive. You know those chicks, "You think I'm pretty? ... You think I look fat? ... You think I'm ... ?" They will do anything in bed. Women who tell you that they're large and in charge and who have a rump roast for a butt there, women who are confident about their fatness, confident about their homeliness ...
A. Won't give it up to you. B. You wouldn't want it anyway.
You want hot girls with low self-esteem. By the same token, guys, you need to have high self-esteem.
The last link has nothing to do with sex, but I will throw it in there anyway.
posted
Great topic just got better. There are many good points in this debate from both sides, but I must say that I think the scientific evidence behind National's argument has a higher percentage of being correct in teens. When you become an adult things kind of change. By this time, that girl with low self esteem has been used a little bit and made to feel even lower because she has learned at some point that "Sexual Attention" isn't enough to feel better about herself. In fact she's going to feel worse because shes going to feel like she was used.
That woman with high self esteem still wants to feel a man and that teen arrogance that many nice looking young girls has starts to change. She will begin to lower those standards and find a common ground that is more realistic. When we are just kids, It's all about looks. As we get a little older, we start to pay attention to the other things like clothes, intelligence, financial stability, sexual performance, class, etiquette etc. When your young, IT"S JUST THE LOOKS...
And just for the record, It's us men that give these ladies the power to be Goddess, Princess, etc. Some of them may enjoy the role playing aspect but at the end of it all they are women and and some point they want to feel protected and feminine and want a man that's stronger (physically and mentally) than they are. It's only natural (well for most women).
These ladies aren't running around all day acting bossy and bitchy...It's just fantasy...right?
I like Goddess Melanie...I want to see her feet...lol
[ April 18, 2012, 08:17 AM: Message edited by: DeTrOiT ]
-------------------- ...Flawless and Perfect in every way...When I grow up..I'M MOVING TO BRAZIL...lol Posts: 507 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
So what you're saying is that adult women with high self-esteem are more likely to put out while men with low self-esteem are more likely to have gotten laid? You're not going to find studies that back that up because this isn't true.
Let's make a few comparisons. For each match, I want you to tell me who's more likely to put out on a first date.
The answer to each question is the second choice because she has lower self-esteem than the woman who was the first choice of each question. Women like Oprah always encourage women to have high self-esteem. Why? Because they know that women are whoring it up already, so she wants to make sure that that stays in check. They want as many women with high self-esteem because that raises the price of pussy. They know that the more women there are with high self-esteem, the more hoops they will make men jump through to get pussy. The last thing you guys should be doing is encouraging these high self-esteemed hos. You're giving the opposition more of your bullets in combat.
The one with the higher self-esteem is the one who's more of the puppeteer of the two. If she has higher self-esteem than the guy she's dating, she'll hold out on the sex indefinitely and she'll more likely take advantage of him. It's war out there in the dating world and the bigger son of a bitch wins. To win the war, guys, you cannot place her higher on the pedestal than what she already is. When hot women get approached, immediately assume that you are of lower value than they are. To lower their guards, chip away at her self esteem. You're putting more chink in her armor and she'll give in to you eventually.
I'm willing to bet that women like Oprah have MUCH higher self-esteem than any girl who's a waitress at Hooters or any girl who has posed her feet for GoodGuyNeighbor. ANY girl on his site. Each of them has lower self-esteem than women who are confident about not fitting into the stereotype of how a hot woman should look like.
quote:Originally posted by DeTrOiT: When we are just kids, It's all about looks. As we get a little older, we start to pay attention to the other things like clothes, intelligence, financial stability, sexual performance, class, etiquette etc. When your young, IT"S JUST THE LOOKS...
For men, it's about looks first and foremost, regardless if he's twelve or sixty-five. Men do not care about the other stuff until after we have seen them naked. First, we want to know whether their nipples are pink or brown, or if her feet are up to our standards. Then, if you think this woman is cool enough, then will be the time to see if you like other things about her. But I think the intelligent part is irrelevant. Men don't care about how smart she is as long as she isn't mentally retarded. I'm willing to go as far as to say that the higher her I.Q., the less likely it is that she'll ever get married.
quote:Originally posted by DeTrOiT: These ladies aren't running around all day acting bossy and bitchy...It's just fantasy...right?
They're more likely to be bitches to men who have lower self-esteems than they have. It's been said that these women are not bitches in real life ... they're just bitches to you. Now when I say that, I don't mean YOU specifically, Detroit. I remember seeing a sign that said, I'm not really a bitch. I just play one in your life.
posted
Just my two cents worth. The title of "Princess" has been so overused, as to have lost most of its true meaning. If you have to award yourself a title, maybe you need to rethink the whole situation.
The word "Diva" is another offender, that word comes from the world of Italian Opera, and was only applied to a select few female superstars by their adoring public, so calling yourself a diva just doesn't cut it, it's something you have to earn, and only the public gets to decide whether you're worthy.
Same thing for the word "great" when referring to simply the very good. I could go on, but you get the picture...
posted
if u ask me, it sucks ass. don't call yourself any of these. we all are ORDINARY bitches. none of us was born a princess, a "real" doll or a diva. u are just a woman, PERIOD. but who asked me ? nobody. and im nobody, but i have the right to have an oppinion. that's just bullshit bought by men. whatthefuckever. it's girlie style and so sweet, lmfao
posted
there is no fucking chick I would ever bow down to fuck I am a grown ass man who is dominant in every way they call them selves a goddess or princess fuck them cause I will ...they couldn't handle a 10 inch cock in any one of their princess HOLES they do not know who the fuck we are and I am going to take ever princess that smugs their ugly face down one by one I will make them an offer they wont refuse MONEY TALKS AND THESE PRINCESSES WILL FUCKING WALK period
Posts: 34 | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
