CruelLadyScorpio's profile . CruelLadyScorpio's homepage
| CruelLadyScorpio |
I'm not prepared to pay for my jollies cos a Pro-Domme won't love me for what I am ... an adulterous bastard incapable of communicating with the person I love."
How often have I received this statement in an email? (That's called rhetoric, btw) However, that's the upshot of most of 'em. Awww ... wee shamey ::applies onion to eyes::
Now, I am guilty of perpetuating the conviction that if an attached man tries hard enough he'll find someone to whack him for nowt; having been in bookselling most of my life, a customer who comes up and says 'I saw a book in Bury St.Edmunds ten years ago with a yellow cover and it was something about a fish' will, not infrequently, encounter a bookseller who remembers the title, author and probably the publisher. Result - customer believes all booksellers can trace any title, and tells his mates.
Thus, until recently, the ever-benificent Cru nearly always had one married or seriously attached man in her 'stable', cos he 'forgot' to mention he was married until it was too late - never really bothered me, as I always spent more time with my 'No1' of the moment, and the married one was always a combination of cute/clever/erudite and could keep pace with me in conversation over lunch.
However, my landscape has changed and made me examine my morals and responsibilities more closely - stating on my profiles that I'm only available for chat/advice, and then primarily for local folk, has indeed reduced the quantity of single malesubs approaching me, but has *increased* the number of attached ones - do they think I'm as venal as them?! How flattering! I was forgetting The Sun tells us that as bdsm-ers, we're duty-bound to shag anything that moves.
A highly moral, intelligent and attractive switch I know becomes terrifyingly exercised by these men, mainly out of rage and frustration - 'They've made their life choice - they should pay for a tart and stop distracting real Dommes from the genuinely available blokes!' He has a point, does he not?
I reply to my missives from these chaps by saying they have two choices; pay for a Pro-Domme, or talk to the wife. They reply by saying a Pro-Domme isn't the same as a woman doing what *she* wants to you (valid point) and that the wife would sling them out on the street if they produced a strap on next Sat nite.
Which hits the nail on the head - men approach their women the wrong way - 'tie me up cos it makes me horny' won't wash - women have sexual egos too, and they're going to feel threatened, inadequate and upset, and give you the 'Aren't I good enough for you?' speech. Women on the whole are 'massaged' by upbringing into expecting the man to take the lead in the bedroom if nowhere else - 50% of them are potential Dommes, but you have to approach even this latter group from the 'emotional benefit/power' platform - the 'fuck me like a dog' attitude is gonna find you sleeping in the spare room while she makes outraged phonecalls to her mates. To these gentlemen I recommend learning how to talk to women from their POV, the meaning of the expression 'sexual power compromise' and leaving 'The Mistress Manual' lying around discreetly after a decent interval.
To those who've bagged a femsub - tough - pay a Pro- Domme, live with the guilt and shut the fuck up whining - your ego was, and probably is, too immature to cope with the demands of a non-pro Dominatrix anyway.
To those who don't want the wife to dom them cos she's
got stretch marks from bearing your kids and looks
kinda bulgy in a pvc catsuit - grow up and get over
yourself - just as men have many aspects to their
characters, so do women - strip off and look at
yourself in the mirror sometime soon honey. You want
young/nubile/fantasy, pay for it. But you won't be
loved for your submission, just for your money ![]()
And of course, it would be unkind - nay, sadistic - of me to mention as a postscript that Pro-Dommes always have a real submissive lover waiting for them at home at the end of a long day ... because they are women too. Scary, huh?
![]()
Edited Tue 3 Jun 03, 12:04 AM by CruelLadyScorpio