Top-opolis

[Ebonyfire]

You know, I never thought of it, but there must be bratty, hard-to-control male "subs" just as there are female, though one never hears about them in polite company. I just sort of assumed that all male bottoms were always on their best behavior due to the economics of there being so many of them competeing for scarce "femme domme" attention. This can't be right though.

That actually sounds kind of fun. I can't abide the idea of always having to be on best behavior. That would suck, worrying that my mistress was going to dump me if I didn't toe the line, just because there were hundreds of others qeued up right behind me with armani suits and fat portfolios.

Twas the CBM's biting acidic wit who got me on this tangent. He has such a sharp tongue, almost befitting a shrewish woman or a gay man. It must take a rod of iron and a fist of steel to keep him in check; I cannot imagine him going down w/o a fight.

Well, since I have CBM on ignore, I have no idea what his so called biting wit imparted (nor do I care).

I do not think he is a submissive, and he is certainly not My kind of submissive.

I think that your observation about what being a submissive is all about is one that many people share. It has nothing to do with My world. I have submissives to make my life easier. How it all plays out depends on the person. It is a lot of work and a lot of fun, and the submissives I have are happy otherwise they would not be around. It is not for everyone.

 

[rosco rathbone]

Well, since I have CBM on ignore, I have no idea what his so called biting wit imparted (nor do I care).

I do not think he is a submissive, and he is certainly not My kind of submissive.

I think that your observation about what being a submissive is all about is one that many people share. It has nothing to do with My world. I have submissives to make my life easier. How it all plays out depends on the person. It is a lot of work and a lot of fun, and the submissives I have are happy otherwise they would not be around. It is not for everyone.

It's Very interesting to hear you say this, EF. This is the first time I have ever heard the "femme domme" version of "not a real submissive". The male "doms" out and about are always saying that thus and such a female is not a "real sub" because she is uppity, "tops from the bottom", and what have you. Then others step in to say "you are no real Dom if you can't handle an uppity sub, etc". I think they had a big blow out about all that in this forum during the lance castor cymbidia days, but I missed most of it.

 

[Pure]

Hi EF,

you said about cbw,

/I do not think he is a submissive, and he is certainly not My kind of submissive. /

Would you explain this remark, for the unenlightened?

Hi RR,

you said, to EF, about some issues related to cbw,

//I just sort of assumed that all male bottoms were always on their best behavior //

What makes you think cbw would not be on his best behavior?

Both of you seem to be extrapolating from cbw's conflicts and criticisms of others, incluing EF. Yet she is only one domme.

I cannot at all read cbw's mind or speak for him, but it's very conceivable to me that he be feisty and acidic with A,B, and C, and yet with 'his' mutually selected mistress, be polite and pliant.

In fact, there are a number of subs on this board who are quite combative here, and I believe that's NOT an index of their erotic behavior in a self chosen situation.

Best,
J.

 

[rosco rathbone]

I wasn't presuming to know much about cbms doings. He just got me thinking about pervy possibilities.

 

[P. B. Walker]

But, house-niggers, I simply will not suffer.

Does anyone else consider this hate speech? Is this type of speech in fact allowed and condoned by Literotica? I just wanted to be sure. I actually do not care to read this type of speech, but I find it popping up quite a bit whenever CBM is concerned.

 

[Ebonyfire]

Hi EF,

you said about cbw,

/I do not think he is a submissive, and he is certainly not My kind of submissive. /

Would you explain this remark, for the unenlightened?

I have no intention of enlightening the unenlightened. I have closed the book on mister name caller, who in my book is the biggest fraud I have ever seen post to this board.

BTW, CBM, it is not what you call Me, but what I answer to that matters. You are one sorry so-called black man IMHO. You have no power over Me so rant at your leisure.

 

[Cuckolded_BlK_Male]

I have been quite plain about the fact that I am not a "sub." I'm of the iconoclastic view that most of the posturing and theatrics that revolve around BDSM is so much silliness. I'm something of a gynosupremascist politically, but I'm quite capable of distinguishing between women who are worthy of respect and those who are dim-witted and contemptible.

As to all of this faux-orthodoxy about what constitutes a "real Dom" or a "true submissive," it's laughable nonsense. There is no governing body handing down arbitrary articles and credenda on d/s. Yet, in any internet forum that concerns this activity there is a core group of nit-wits who think that they are the regents of L'Académie du BDSM.

 

[Ebonyfire]

It's Very interesting to hear you say this, EF. This is the first time I have ever heard the "femme domme" version of "not a real submissive". The male "doms" out and about are always saying that thus and such a female is not a "real sub" because she is uppity, "tops from the bottom", and what have you. Then others step in to say "you are no real Dom if you can't handle an uppity sub, etc". I think they had a big blow out about all that in this forum during the lance castor cymbidia days, but I missed most of it.

I did not say he was not a "real" submissive. I said that I believed he is not really submissive, which means something altogether different. And He is not my type of submissive. Of course opinions are like assholes, everybody has one. That is just mine.

I personally am done with this subject, permanently.

 

[Cuckolded_BlK_Male]

I wonder why this thread lays dead in it's grave until I, like spring rain, return to give it life?

 

[Pure]

Hi CBW,


As to all of this faux-orthodoxy about what constitutes a "real Dom" or a "true submissive," it's laughable nonsense. There is no governing body handing down arbitrary articles and credenda on d/s.

I agree with that, and I would add the related point: to fulfill some arbitrary list of specs may mask and distract from what's really going on. It's my opinion that many self labeled 'subs' who might meet (supposed) criteria are entirely in charge in their encounters, indeed positively managerial in getting their sexual needs met.

 

[Marquis]

Hi CBW,

It's my opinion that many self labeled 'subs' who might meet criteria are entirely in charge in their encounters, indeed positively managerial in getting their sexual needs met.

Having met one recently, I can now completely agree with this.

 

[rosco rathbone]

I wonder why this thread lays dead in it's grave until I, like spring rain, return to give it life?

Where you doth go, trouble is sure to follow.

 

[rosco rathbone]

I thought we had established that it was called L'Academie du BDSMme, sounds more frenchified.

Tell the howtofors and the wherebys of your recent adventures, Marquis; for we salty old, pervy old mariners are sorely parched for a tale, becalmed as we are upon this sexual sargasso where the winds of Chance have abandoned our frajile bark be-doldrum'd.

 

[brnsuga]

Does anyone else consider this hate speech? Is this type of speech in fact allowed and condoned by Literotica? I just wanted to be sure. I actually do not care to read this type of speech, but I find it popping up quite a bit whenever CBM is concerned.

How dare you, PBW.

You, PBW, are the one who told a person of color posting on this board to get his "lazy" ass off the couch and advised him that he should get off welfare. And worse than your ignominious comments was your refusal to admit their true, and very racist, origin.

We as people of color hear these old chestnuts frequently (the "lazy" sterotype and the welfare stereotype) - TOO frequently for it to be some huge coincidence, just a convergence of well-meaning people who for some mysterious reason are all being misunderstood. And usually the offender, when called on it, does exactly what you did - claims that no one can prove that the insult was racist in nature. In fact, circumstantial evidence abounds in these situations. The offender can never prove (perhaps, in your case, through your other postings on Literotica?) that he in the heat of anger, also tells white people to get off welfare. And given the nature of the racist society in which we live, it is odd that the offender, who claims to be so egalitarian, never shows contrition for the injury (whether intended or unintended) that his or her comments may have caused. Pointing the finger while having made racially offensive statements yourself is far from the noble stance you pretend it to be.

In this case, the "N" word was used by a Black person speaking to another Black person. The power dynamic there bears no relationship to the the power dynamic at work when a white person uses this word towards a Black person. While a Black person may be communicating his or her lack of respect for another Black person, the word has major life and death implications when it's meaning is interpreted to people of color though the power of the white-controlled institutions which determine how, and if, Black people survive in this society (having the full force of the U.S. government behind your feelings of prejudice changes the picture significantly).

And FYI, among modern day racists it is de rigeur to eschew the use of the "N" word. Anything so easily pinpointed is rarely seen in polite society these days. Now, the norm is to hide behind stereotypical epithets like "lazy" and to cloak true feelings behind welfare-related references and other types of "codewords".

Maybe your newfound disgust with racially derogative language is feigned and represents a weak attempt at tongue-in-cheek humor. Or maybe it is your way of apologizing to those who were highly offended by your previous statements. I pray it is the latter.

-brnsuga

 

[Marquis]

QUOTE]Originally posted by rosco rathbone
I thought we had established that it was called L'Academie du BDSMme, sounds more frenchified.

Tell the howtofors and the wherebys of your recent adventures, Marquis; for we salty old, pervy old mariners are sorely parched for a tale, becalmed as we are upon this sexual sargasso where the winds of Chance have abandoned our frajile bark be-doldrum'd. [/QUOTE]

LOL, ok I have something I am sure you will like. I'm not terribly good at telling stories, but this is basically what went down.

I have been hooking up with a pseudo-sub (basically a girl who gets off on getting it rough, she wouldn't even get into L'Acadamie du BDSMme) recently and I had her in my room the other night.

We had finished the evenings debaucheries and I decided to go get a glass of water. I had had her wrists tied together behind the bedpost with my belt, and I left them that way while I went downstairs.

By the time I came up however, one of the people who lives in the room next door to me had seen my door partially open, come in to say whats up to me and found a naked girl tied to my bed. Both he and my girl's mouths were agape in surprise, but I just calmly shut the door and gave my friend a little smile.

The next day at lunch was hilarious (names have been changed to protect the innocent).

Roommate 1: So {Marquis}, we here you got naked bitches tied up in your room at nights.

Me: I don't know about all that fellas...

Roommate 2: Well {Marquis}, {roommate 3} told us you did, is it true or not?

Me: Might be.

Roommate 1: So damn homie, you cant tell this bitch to put your boy down for a blowjob or something before she leaves?

Me: Ha Ha, I'll see what I can do guys.

 

[P. B. Walker]

brnsuga,

Thank you for twisting my words to serve your purposes. I've explained my words that you refer to in the past, where I might add, you previously twisted my words to serve your purpose. I also enjoy the neat little conclusions you have drawn, particularly to the one about me referring to one person as being lazy somehow makes me out to be the evil racist villian. If you want to spend your time analyzing all my words so you can twist and morph them in an effort to show me in such a light, then by all means, enjoy yourself. May your conspiracy theories abound.

To my knowledge, I've never called myself, or tried to portray myself as egalitarian, or noble. I am a simple human man, no more no less. I'm neither a leader nor a role model. I expressed a personal opinion about another board member that I felt strongly about. I am truely sorry you were hurt by that statement. But I am not sorry for making the statement nor for voicing my opinion. I truely do, in my heart, think he is a piece of shit lazy asshole. I am not about to apologize for having that opinion. People may disagree with my opinion and that is fine. I will say I find it slightly disturbing that you would pick out my words and go off on tear about me, when someone like CBM is saying the majority of our population are nazis being lead by the new Hilter himself, G. Bush. I would think being lumped in with the nazis would offend you more... or maybe you agree with him and think the majority of your fellow Americans are nazi.

So the past aside, I look at your explantion for why this should not be considered hate speech. According to you, it is ok for one black person to use the "N" word toward another, but that is the only situation. But since most people here do not use an AV with a picture of themselves, how am I supposed to know when I should be and when I should not be offended by the use of the "N" word when in fact, I can not always tell who is black and who is not? Whenever you see the "N" word used on here, do you first check to see who used it, and if it is indeed a black person then you are "ok" with it? So what are your feelings toward other racial slurs? Is it ok for whites to call other whites "honky"? Is it ok for Japanese to call other Japanese "japs"? By your logic these are all ok and condoned.

Personally, I have to disagree with you. I feel that furthering the use of these racial slurs just keeps the hate going, as seen in all your posts toward me. To me, it doesn't matter who uses the racial slur, it's the fact that a racial slur was used at all. But that is just my opinion.

I hope you enjoy your time here at Literotica and have a nice day.

PBW

 

[MissTaken]

Does anyone else consider this hate speech? Is this type of speech in fact allowed and condoned by Literotica? I just wanted to be sure. I actually do not care to read this type of speech, but I find it popping up quite a bit whenever CBM is concerned.

In terms of literotica, the post in question doesn't meet the criterion for editing or removal of any of the terms used.

Free speech is all inclusive, here, as many of you know.

That does mean that one poster can post whatever he or she wishes and any other poster may respond as he or she wishes.

Hope that helps to clarify lit's position

 

[brnsuga]

To my knowledge, I've never called myself, or tried to portray myself as egalitarian, ...

PBW

PBW,
No need for further debate on this. Your post did not even remotely resemble a response to any of the points I raised. As I had feared, the complexities of my argument were completely lost on you.

But finally WE AGREE ON SOMETHING! You said you have never tried to portray yourself as egalitarian. For your information, egalitarian means "characterized by belief in the equality of all people, especially in political, economic or social life". Given your comments about welfare and laziness (in the absence of you having ANY EVIDENCE that he is either of those things), YES!, we do agree - you could never portray yourself as being egalitarian.

-brnsuga

 

[Cuckolded_BlK_Male]

Where you doth go, trouble is sure to follow.

Such is the lot of a perceptive and righteous Black man amidst such swine as this coarse reactionary rabble.

 

[WriterDom]

Such is the lot of a perceptive and righteous Black man amidst such swine as this coarse reactionary rabble.

\

admit your homosexuality CockHold, it will set you free

 

[P. B. Walker]

In terms of literotica, the post in question doesn't meet the criterion for editing or removal of any of the terms used.

Free speech is all inclusive, here, as many of you know.

That does mean that one poster can post whatever he or she wishes and any other poster may respond as he or she wishes.

Hope that helps to clarify lit's position

Good to know. Guess you can't have your Lit without a healthy dose of hate speech.

PBW

 

[Cuckolded_BlK_Male]

YES!, we do agree - you could never portray yourself as being egalitarian.

-brnsuga

He really put his cloven hoof in his mouth with that one

 

[P. B. Walker]

PBW,
No need for further debate on this. Your post did not even remotely resemble a response to any of the points I raised. As I had feared, the complexities of my argument were completely lost on you.

But finally WE AGREE ON SOMETHING! You said you have never tried to portray yourself as egalitarian. For your information, egalitarian means "characterized by belief in the equality of all people, especially in political, economic or social life". Given your comments about welfare and laziness (in the absence of you having ANY EVIDENCE that he is either of those things), YES!, we do agree - you could never portray yourself as being egalitarian.

-brnsuga

I guess that is because you have no argument. Your entire post is an attack against me and does not in any way answer the question regarding the previous post about hate speech. I believe this is because you just hate to admit that someone you admire and applaud did in fact speak such hate. That's cool. Nothing I say will help you in your self delusion. And I have no doubt you will continue with your agenda to paint me as the big evil white male. So be it. I'll not apologize to you for being white.

And yet, once again, you have proven me correct. You've taken a simple statement by me, morphed and twisted it into something that furthers your agenda. My statement was:

Originally posted by P. B. Walker
To my knowledge, I've never called myself, or tried to portray myself as egalitarian, or noble.

That means exactly what I say, which if you've even read any of my posts, I say exactly what I mean and I don't pull my punches. I don't call myself anything. I let my actions do the talking. I treat people the way I feel I should be treated until they either wrong me or attack me. If I come off as egalitarian, cool. If I come off as a big prick, so be it. But at least I'm not some poser who announces to everyone how he should be seen. I'm sure there is a fair number of people here who think I'm the biggest ass on the planet.

BTW, thank you for the definition of egalitarian. Duh.

So, as for you raising points and actually having an argument, I would love to hear your argument for why CBM's hate speech is acceptable. But, I have the feeling I'll just be hearing you twisting my words more. Or maybe you'll surprise us all and actually come up with something coherent instead of attacking me.

Either way, I hope you keep enjoying your stay here at Literotica and have a nice day.

PBW

 

[Pure]

Hi PBW,

you said, to brnsuga

According to you, it is ok for one black person to use the "N" word toward another, but that is the only situation. But since most people here do not use an AV with a picture of themselves, how am I supposed to know when I should be and when I should not be offended by the use of the "N" word when in fact, I can not always tell who is black and who is not? Whenever you see the "N" word used on here, do you first check to see who used it, and if it is indeed a black person then you are "ok" with it? So what are your feelings toward other racial slurs? Is it ok for whites to call other whites "honky"? Is it ok for Japanese to call other Japanese "japs"? By your logic these are all ok and condoned.

The point is quite simple, PBW, and your puzzlement--perhaps feigned-- is puzzling. There a two simple rules, one raised by brunsuga, and one other to handle the situation you first describe:
1) When you don't know someone be polite; do not use insulting terms.

Notes: Among friends, seeming abusive labels become teasing or fun, as when I label Roscoe a sadistic pervert, to his face.
Surely you have seen this.

2) "Members" of any group may insult each other as they wish, whether seriously or in fun.

Note: The folks here often call each other pervs. As you yourself do. Yes we whites can call each other whatever we please: I notice a woman over on 'general' whose screenname is "A Cracker Slut". She and her friends can use this to their hearts content. And if you and I were friends, yes, we could call each other rednecks, whitetrash or whatever. And Italians can call each other 'wops', and so on.

These rules are so simple and so widely known it's really hard to believe you don't know them. Or that being ignorant of them, you would attempt to give Cuckolded or brnsuga a hard time for their following and espousing these rules.

So there, big honky.

Sincerely

pure honky.

 

[P. B. Walker]

He really put his cloven hoof in his mouth with that one

But, house-niggers, I simply will not suffer.

Mr. Hate Speech speaks. Hooo raaah. I must bow before this almighty specimen.

Keep that double standard going... fight fight fight! Yeah.

Hey Rosco... there's your match made in heaven, CBM and brnsuga, K-I-S-S-I-N-G (while they aren't coming up with new conspiracy theories) in a tree.

And just think, this country and it's people which you hate so much, is the same one which allows you to sprout this hate speech without even a slap on the wrist. Don't ya just love it.

PBW