Pimps, the original doms?

I was reading a thread about finding bdsm ideas and references in earlier times and cultures, and I got to thinking how people rarely see paralell roles in other cultures or groups.

I can't help but think of pimps. In the figurative and literal terms. I'll start with the figurative.

I am a senior in college, and the truth is there is no shortage of young impressionable girls to fuck. And Anyway, when I am presented with the opportunity to have sex with someone who I have no emotional attachment to (or even someone who I do have an emotional attachment to, but ESPECIALLY someone who I have no attachment to) I want to get it my way, and even try to get a girl to do some extra crazy shit if I can. Growing up, my friends and I talked about the best ways to dominate a woman, or get her to do what you want during sex or even just humiliate her to make you feel like the man. But we never called it BDSM, we called it being a pimp. Of course, not every girl is down with the program, but if you play it cool you can uncover a lot of incognito freaks that were just waiting for a guy like you to show them whats up.

Now for literal pimps. I am talking about actual whoremongers of the Iceberg Slim, Bishop Don Magic Juan ilk. They seem like the realest tops to me. They have women who literally do whatever they say, at any time, for any reason. These girls go out and fuck for money and give it ALL to the pimp, who abuses them but demands the utmost of obedience. And there are women out there who do this, who choose this lifestyle.

Basically, I think BDSM is all around us in many forms. But I'm curious, do you all consider it BDSM if the people doing it dont call it BDSM? What about if they dont even know BDSM exists? Does having a name for it make it less morally reprehensible?

YES, omg i have thought this for the longest time. i used to have a lot of friends who were hookers, and i knew some pimps..and now knowing the bdsm liefstyle, it is SO much the same.

girls are called "bitches"...never by their names. bitch is just such a common thing for the girls to be called and they all are used to it and some even enjoy it. the pimps hit their women to keep them in line or sometimes just because they enjoy it. they often humiliate them-my friend was going thru the burger king drive thru with her pimp, and the pimp made her flash her tits at the male cashier-just for the hell of it, because he wanted to. the girls, most of them anyways, look at their pimps pretty much as their god. lots of times they call him their "daddy". its what he says, goes, period. once i was hanging with some of them and this one girl ASKED her pimp to slap her face..so he was slapping her, over and over, and she was just giggling like a damn fool, it was obvious she was loving it and me being me i was just watching this in awe -i'd never seen anything like it before but all i knew was i wanted him to do that to ME-he looked over and must have seen the look of desire in my eyes because he said "you want some?" and i just nodded meekly-this was way back before i knew bdsm from a bmw, and he came over and told me to stand up and slapped me hard, twice-backhad forhand, backhand forehand. and i may not have known what it was but i knew it felt amazing and i couldnt keep the grin off my face the rest of the day.

but i digress

i totally agree. pimping is in a LOT Of ways, like bdsm.

Right now I am going through fantasies of becoming a pimp and using bdsm crowd bitches to get rich.

I could see it now, pimpin' Marquis, "Like I told you bitch, you get the leather when I get the paper, dont be putting your shiny black slave suit above my dirty green cream."

Have to say in the classic stereotypical pimp, where girls work for him out of some form of need, desperation, fear, but not because they want to, I don't see them as Dominants in the BDSM sense. I think once again it is a case of confusing action and mindset. Actions may resemble BDSM in some way, but the mindset is also a part of a BDSM relationship, not to mention free consent. Abuse on the other hand may mimic the actions, but not the mindset and as has been said many times before, shouls not be confused. Both have their place and advocates, but do not belong in the same freeze frame.

Might also be worth looking at pimps who handle their workers in a business arrangement which is just that, business not dominance. I know a few girls who would laugh to think that arrangement were being classed as D/s, and a few who have taken matters into their own hands if they found their pimp not acting honestly or respectfully toward them. The workers work and earn a living, the pimp handles the arrangements so they are free to concentrate on their work....similar to a receptionist/doctor I would think. I don't think a receptionist is a Dominant because they answer the phone, make appointments, check the doctor does not forget when they are due at the hospital, surgery, lecture theatre etc., and gets paid for it. They perform a service.

Catalina

Catalina, ever read anything of Iceberg Slim? Or seen American Pimp or any other such documentary? Fuck it, have you ever seen a blaxploitation film like The Mack?

I think you'll find the relationship between a pimp and a ho is a whole lot less like a receptionist and doctor than you seem to be indicating.

Marquis said:

Catalina, ever read anything of Iceberg Slim? Or seen American Pimp or any other such documentary? Fuck it, have you ever seen a blaxploitation film like The Mack?

I think you'll find the relationship between a pimp and a ho is a whole lot less like a receptionist and doctor than you seem to be indicating.

Click to expand...

Nope, but have real lived experiences to go from.

Catalina

This is an interesting question! I have seen that documentary, and it has to be one of the best documentarys and it explores a facinating subject, so taboo for most of middle class America. I loved the pimp convention too! It seemed to me that there was some variance or range of the pimps relationships with their girls. I think you both are right to some exstent. I think that there is some functioning of the mechcanism of the dom in the pimp world. but its transmuted by the money and the drugs and the womens desperate stiuation. Some pimps also a real masocists, but the fact that the girls give ALL the money to the pimps is SO amazing to me! Also, some pimps have managed to train this women to worship them! wow. Somehow the girls must get their inner needs met in a deep way.
This is a subject that needs real exploration by experts. and it is facinating!
Also Catina is right, there are business reationships and other types of operations out there.
I alos agree that the best kind of dom sub reationship is not the same! But there is soemthing functioning the same there.
Just my opinion!

peace!

Catalina, while you have some good points about "the life" you're also looking at it from a more European point of view
Much of what Marquis is refering to is a US phenomena, and there are areas here where, especially in the black community, pimps are looked up to & revered and girls will be their "hos" just to be with "the man" and serve him
Some of the girls interviewed in the documentaries Marquis mentioned sound a lot more like 24/7 slaves that typical prostitutes

James G 5 said:

Catalina, while you have some good points about "the life" you're also looking at it from a more European point of view
Much of what Marquis is refering to is a US phenomena, and there are areas here where, especially in the black community, pimps are looked up to & revered and girls will be their "hos" just to be with "the man" and serve him
Some of the girls interviewed in the documentaries Marquis mentioned sound a lot more like 24/7 slaves that typical prostitutes

Click to expand...

Nah, Aussie POV, though they vary from good to tragic.

Catalina http://www.logtenberg.info/sex/18+17.gif

catalina_francisco said:

Nah, Aussie POV, though they vary from good to tragic.

Catalina http://www.logtenberg.info/sex/18+17.gif

Click to expand...

If you can find them there, you might find "American Pimp" and "Pimps Up, Hos Down" interesting for their perspective of SOME of that life here in the US
Albeit a very narrow segment
But reflective of what Marquis describes

Hi Marquis,

Of course you're right about pimps controlling their ho's etc.

But this argument, which circles round and round, needs to be understood.

This is what Catalina said in part.

Have to say in the classic stereotypical pimp, where girls work for him out of some form of need, desperation, fear, but not because they want to, I don't see them as Dominants in the BDSM sense. I think once again it is a case of confusing action and mindset. Actions may resemble BDSM in some way, but the mindset is also a part of a BDSM relationship, not to mention free consent.

Abuse on the other hand may mimic the actions, but not the mindset and as has been said many times before, should not be confused.



Let me rephrase the same point, in my own terms. "dominant" and 'dominate' as used in the conventional bdsm crowd are almost always very misleading terms. Essentially Catalina, Francisco and any number of others have created a new 'sense' or meaning of 'dominate'. Essentially an 'as if' or 'role enacted' meaning.

In the bdsm mainstream, A 'dominates' B, if B has indicated B wants to submit, and in particular is willing to lick the soles of A's shoes (i.e, the licking is within pre agreed limits), and then A 'orders' it (note the quote marks) and 'forces' (note the quote marks) B to do so.

Alternative scenarios, such as you describe, are simply tossed into the all purpose 'abuse' category, as you see in the quote above.

This usage prevents any clear discussion of the matter. The only answer is to use a clear and neutral terminology. Yes, in a the legal sense, the pimp both forces(coerces) and controls his whores. Note there are no quotation marks. It's not 'as if' at all. A, above, does neither, to his shoe licking partner.

If I may make a small plug here. There are many whose sexual impulses can be acted out in 'as if' scenarios, and I have no quarrel with anyone in the conventional bdsm lifestyle as it actually suits them. The SMACK thread, like its ancestral Topopolis thread, was started in order to discuss sexual impulses that aren't satisfiable except in a self regarding way and/or at the expense of the 'other.' Which is to say, the 'other,' for instance, is genuinely forced to do something. In these threads, the word 'dominate'--having become hopelessly muddled-- tends not to be used. When it is, as you can see, it's like having a mortician and a theologian trying to discuss Christ's "body."

J.

Pure makes a good point...there are many who define Dominant, as it refers to the lifestyle, completely differently than dominant as in one with a dominant personality/character, and likewise with the word submissive. a "real" Dominant is not abusive, a "real" submissive does everything consciously and willingly, etc. these are adapted, newfangled, politically correct definitions that i believe came about in order to make the D/s and bdsm lifestyles more palatable, more "okay" sounding.

but newfangled adaptations aside, yes i do see Dominance and submission, in quite pure forms, within the pimp/prostitute lifestyle. and of course, the legalized and government controlled prostitution that occurs in parts of europe, in las vegas, etc., does NOT qualify. but that runaway young girl on the streets, watching the world around her, and seeing one lone figure of control, order, discipline and authority...not the police, but the pimps...it's not difficult for me to imagine how a certain type could be drawn to that, could grow to revere and worship someone who basically enslaves her...and love rarely has a thing to do with it. it's the power that one can be attracted to. and on the pimps part, it's often the extreme vulnerability, innocence, weakness of their soon to be "ho" that attracts them. imo, that is definitely D/s, and much moreso than those of us within the lifestyle who place attractive, friendly, qualifying factors on the terms before they consider it real.

But what Pure fails to do is see the whole picture by in his own restricted view which he accuses others of having, he sees all prostitutes/sex workers as being dominated by their pimps. What I would like to know is if this is pure conjecture on his part from what he sees and reads in docos, fantasy literature, and media, or does he base it from the viewpoint of actually being involved himself at some point in the sex industry and having first hand factual experiences it is the only way? As I said, my knowledge comes from first hand, not sitting in the comfort of my living room watching a documentary or movie and thinking that is the whole story, or the only way. Of course the stereotypical image is the one most fantasies and sensationalist media reports are spun from, but are not the 'only' lived reality. I actually think it as big a misconception to name pimps as the original Dominants as it is to do the same in the instance of traditional husbands of old, and abusers in DV......the concepts and lived realities differ substantially in the psychological aspects which is where most D/s emanates from and exists for most....but that is not as likely to sell newspapers as we well know.

Catalina

I think there may be some confusion due to semantics going on.

For that reason, I just want to clarify that when I say "ho" I am referring to a particular type of prostitute. I am referring to the prostitute involved in "The Game" subculture characterized in the books and movies I earlier mentioned and that James G also mentioned.

My whole point here is that hos arent just brainless morons. I'd be willing to bet quite a number of them have strong submissive/masochistic sexual desires and I'm sure many of them enjoy aspects of their role. I have always believed that there are but only so many personality characteristics a person can have, the differences between people often reflect their environment. Your average woman might not explore her submissive side until she finds out about lit, or starts fucking a dom. Then maybe she can go to BDSM conventions or whatever the next stage is.

But the girl who grew up poor in the middle of some city doesn't know about her local "BDSM Club" and doesn't subscribe to "BDSM weekly" or whatever. But she knows if she starts fucking with the flashy dressed dude in the Cadillac that always has a bitch on each arm, she's going to get dominated like hell. I don't think she's any less of a sub because she doesnt know the three rules of BDSM or the BDSM symbol or whatever other shit keeps getting added to some nebulous S&M canon (that in my opinion makes BDSM about as sexy as the catholic church).

It isn't as obvious from the documentaries mentioned, but if you read the book "Pimp" by legendary pimp Iceberg Slim, you get a feel for how submissive hos can be. There are parts in the book where he describes how a lot of his hos want to be tied down before he fucks them, and even has a scene where he is beating one of his hos and doubts whether or not she is getting the message because she is such a painslut she seems to be loving it.

I think this says a lot more about feitshes than D/s, a lot of it about the sexual fetishization that mainstream white America has with its notions of Black underclass sexuality...am I totally off the mark?

The blaxploitation fantasia seems to be gaining more and more momentum these days...I think tamed and aimless white boys need something to project themselves into, and why not the seemingly endlessly sexual invention of Black culture as they see it and dream it?

Like D/s vs. abuse sex work has more and less exploitative models that look similar. The one that a random 12 year old gets herself into is probably going to tend to work less in her favor. And that's not really what we are talking about here...I am certain.

If you think no prostitute likes her job and her life and if you think every prostiute likes her job and her life, I think you're equally as fucked in your opinion.

I will say this...I totally think that you've pointed to a huge thing about aesthetics and eroticism. I think mainstream SM is kind of a homogenization of sexual aesthetics...subs in lingerie and Doms in black T shirts and black jeans and leather vests, cowboy boots...girls line up on the right, boys on the left. It's becoming like a prom. Pimp/ho is a challenging sensibility from even an aesthetic viewpoint.

"Pimps-the original doms, question mark"

marquis is fuckin hilarious.

Marquis, read Gentleman of Leisure by Susan Hall, Signet Classics, 1972. (Which I borrowed from someone who knows my own pimply proclivities-- who has felt the heaviness of a pimp's hand, so to speak--and never gave back )

It's all interviews with the women working for one man in the early 70s, all of whom have different stories and attitudes. One woman in particular is very explicit about misbehaving in order to get herself checked. She also has the strongest emotional attachment to the titular gentleman and speaks of extremely rough sex with him.

One time he forced me to have sex. I didn't want to because I was mad at him. We were lying in bed and he holds out his arm and I put my head on it and pretended to go to sleep. He takes my hand and puts it on his dick. I looked at him. "Silky".

He says "What?"

"I don't want to have sex with you." Instead of asking why, he punches me. I don't know how he found me in the dark. I was just jumping all over the bed, for real. He just beat the hell out of me.

Then he said "What did you say?"

"Nothing."

"I don't like the way you said that."

"Nothing."

I was crying and he says "Put this big black motherfucker in your mouth and maybe that will stop some of the noise." I couldn't even breathe: I was choking. Then he just did it. Afterwards, I started laughing. He says; :"What's so goddamned funny?"

"That was about the best time we ever had."

He starts laughing too and says "I knew you was a freak."

"Yes and so are you--because you did it."

I like to be dominated. That's what stimulates me: to feel a man over me and in control.

I don't there's any possibility of denying that SOME people in the world of professional sex are getting their itches scratched in this way--on both sides of the equation. (Although this very idea was vehemently attacked in an argument I was in on Ms. com forums a long time ago.)

I think people like Iceberg Slim, who was notorious for kidnapping and terrorizing helpless women, are "doms" in the same sense that serial killers and lust murderers and rapists are "doms"---it comes from the same root; as I have always claimed, yet doesn't amount to the same thing in the end.

What interests me is that it DOES come from the same root. In every dom, an inner pimp, an inner rapist.

dixit

rosko

Netzach said:

I think this says a lot more about feitshes than D/s, a lot of it about the sexual fetishization that mainstream white America has with its notions of Black underclass sexuality...am I totally off the mark?

Click to expand...

(As an aside, why do you capitalize black but not white?)

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "this", so it's a little difficult for me to respond.

If you are suggesting that the paralell I'm trying to draw is motivated by some racially inspired fetish, I would have to disagree with you. I am very satisfied with my sex life which happens to be neither tame nor aimless, and just for the record I am black.

I guess what really motivated me to post this and call pimps the "original" (by the way, I was using the word in the slang sense as in most authentic, not originator) doms was because I find it funny how people in the BDSM crowd act like they own this psychological phenomenon.

I am trying to be sensitive because I don't want to offend people, but the truth is I find it hilarious how unsexy and simply uncool the approach that so many people seem to take to BDSM is. I like to get rough and bossy as much as the next dom on this board, but I feel like I have a lot more in common with a pimp than I'll ever have with a stereotypical internet dom.

Great post Rosco! I'm going to try and get a hold of that book.

Catalina said,
he sees all prostitutes/sex workers as being dominated by their pimps.

utterly baseless. catlina, if you mean I said this, quote me.

Many prostitutes are 'working' as any other worker. It is imo, not necessarily a demeaning 'job', esp. as compared with a number of others, like minimum wage clerk at Walmart. What the Marquis was discussing, afaik, was a particular rather harsh pimp/ho culture with a fair degree of coercion and control--and sadism.

{{Indeed, he later said, I just want to clarify that when I say "ho" I am referring to a particular type of prostitute. I am referring to the prostitute involved in "The Game" subculture characterized in the books and movies I earlier mentioned and that James G also mentioned. }}


Yes, I have seen/encountered both, first hand. Your(Catalina's) usual claims of superiority due to 'lived experience' --allegedly lacked by others whom you don't know-- is your usual oft-repeated bunkum. You're in the real world, others sit in front of the TV absorbing stereotypes; damn, that's impressive!

If you had any valid points, I'm sure you would not resort to the 'listen to me, I'm superior' routine, which is pretty tiresome, though a 'lived reality' for many of us reading your posts.

J.

Catalina at full gush:
But what Pure fails to do is see the whole picture by in his own restricted view which he accuses others of having, he sees all prostitutes/sex workers as being dominated by their pimps. What I would like to know is if this is pure conjecture on his part from what he sees and reads in docos, fantasy literature, and media, or does he base it from the viewpoint of actually being involved himself at some point in the sex industry and having first hand factual experiences it is the only way? As I said, my knowledge comes from first hand, not sitting in the comfort of my living room watching a documentary or movie and thinking that is the whole story, or the only way. Of course the stereotypical image is the one most fantasies and sensationalist media reports are spun from, but are not the 'only' lived reality. I actually think it as big a misconception to name pimps as the original Dominants as it is to do the same in the instance of traditional husbands of old, and abusers in DV......the concepts and lived realities differ substantially in the psychological aspects which is where most D/s emanates from and exists for most....but that is not as likely to sell newspapers as we well know.

Marquis said,

I feel like I have a lot more in common with a pimp than I'll ever have with a stereotypical internet dom.

as well you should feel.

I think romanticising and fantasizing is a healthy activity which in itself is quite harmless, but now and then it is also interesting to know some facts for the ones who have problems distinguishing between fantasy and reality.

The average age of entry into prostitution is 13 years (M.H. Silbert and A.M. Pines, 1982, "Victimization of street prostitutes, Victimology: An International Journal, 7: 122-133) or 14 years (D.Kelly Weisberg, 1985, Children of the Night: A Study of Adolescent Prostitution, Lexington, Mass, Toronto). IMHO I do not think that a child at that age can distinguish between what she wants or needs, a 13/14 year does not know if she wants to be a prostitute or not.

78% of 55 women who sought help from the Council for Prostitution Alternatives in 1991 reported being raped an average of 16 times a year by pimps, and were raped 33 times a year by johns. (Susan Kay Hunter, Council for Prostitution Alternatives Annual Report, 1991, Portland, Oregon) 85% of prostitutes are raped by pimps. (Council on Prostitution Alternatives, Portland, 1994). I am starting to wonder where the consent in this is.

There are women who want to be prostitutes, there are women who are lured towards it, and there are women who are not lured towards prostitution. I myself do not see any kind of similarities with the BDSM or D/s I practice. If you want to be associated with pimps who molest their whores and force minors to have sex I would say go ahead if that rocks your boat; if it means anything, my blessing you have.

Just to make sure I am not against prostitution, just against non consensual prostitution where the women/men are abused. I am in favour of legal prostitution, regularized and controlled by legal and medical institutions.

Francisco.
Some interesting links for people who want to know more about prostitution.
http://www.prostitutionresearch.com/giobbe.html
http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/e05021552.pdf

Marquis said:

(As an aside, why do you capitalize black but not white?)

Old reflexive typing from an Af-Am history class in which it was deemed problematic if I didn't in red pen. I'm ok if a prof has a preference, and I still find my fingers do it. No agenda.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "this", so it's a little difficult for me to respond.

That's what I get for writing without coffee. "This" would be the fact that pimp seems to be working its way into the mainstream of porn, into the wide vernacular of sexual imagery more and more. This is a totally sociologically unsubstantiated hunch, gathered by lurking on Adult Webmaster porn boards in an attempt to learn how to make traffic happen to my own ventures... and seeing how many self professed white boys are making sites with blaxploitation themes.

If you are suggesting that the paralell I'm trying to draw is motivated by some racially inspired fetish, I would have to disagree with you. I am very satisfied with my sex life which happens to be neither tame nor aimless, and just for the record I am black.

Not that your personal observation is motivated by racial fetishization, nor any assumptions that you are not black or not getting laid and well laid, only that there's an interesting degree of racial fetishization possible and maybe even likely when white leather and SM folk dream of pimps, don't you think?

Guess I was kind of free associating without warming anyone, sorry. You've seen me enough in Topopolis to know I do that.

I guess what really motivated me to post this and call pimps the "original" (by the way, I was using the word in the slang sense as in most authentic, not originator) doms was because I find it funny how people in the BDSM crowd act like they own this psychological phenomenon.

I am trying to be sensitive because I don't want to offend people, but the truth is I find it hilarious how unsexy and simply uncool the approach that so many people seem to take to BDSM is. I like to get rough and bossy as much as the next dom on this board, but I feel like I have a lot more in common with a pimp than I'll ever have with a stereotypical internet dom.

Click to expand...

And this is totally what I got, and where I guess I started free associating. Maybe I'm placing more emphasis on aesthetic than is really the point here, but I'm an artist, it's what we do.

Thanks Francisco,
The information posted does indeed suggest that at the street level 'pimping' in its harsh forms is generally a reality (most though not all of street prostitutes).

Pimping or 'procuring', in the legal sense, in the British and Canadian tradition is defined as several possible activities, but a key one is this:

[a person who] "for purposes of gain, exercises control, direction or influence over the movement of a person [thereby] aiding, abetting or competlling that person to engage in or carry on prostitution."

It can be seen that 'control' and 'direction' have precise legal senses.

Marquis, I believe this is the affinity you refer to. And, by contrast, the conventional 'dom' who 'forces' (in quotes) what's already agreed to, and desired by the other, is hardly exercizing control or direction.

Pure,

If I may quote david stein one of the three members of the August 1983 report of the famous GMSMA committee that has the 'honor' of the first recorded usage of SSC.

Originally posted by david stein Therefore, rather than saying, "This is what S/M is, and it’s okay, nothing to be worried about," the GMSMA statement of purpose said, in effect, "This is the kind of S/M we stand for and support. S/M can be damaging, crazy, or coercive, but it doesn’t have to be, and together we’re going to learn how to tell the difference." If someone was deliberately careless or irresponsible, or broke agreements about limits, we didn’t say, "He’s not doing S/M" but rather, "He’s not doing the kind of S/M we can support."

Click to expand...

And this is all we ever have claimed, not that we have all the answers but that we apply our answers and our philosophies to our life. If you agree with us fine, if you do not agree also fine, and if you are open to discussion and want to discuss things even better.

Francisco.