Taking the Sexy out of Femdom

I keep running across phrases like “application to serve” and “contract negotiations”.  While I understand what people mean when they say them, these words carry a distant, unemotional feel.  These people seem to forget one basic truth though: it’s a relationship, not a business transaction.

Femdom is sexy.  Femdom is fun.  It’s not about some emotionless interaction.  It’s not about mundane “tasks”.  It’s not about some unrealistic gorean expectation that the sub will magically derive pleasure from doing housework.

The sub stoically struggling against the pain he’s feeling, enduring more for the dom’s pleasure,  the dom laughing and enjoying the torment, sweat and blood dripping down, muscles tensing and straining against the bonds, the confident air about the dom, the smile on her face as the cane tears into the sub’s flesh, the look of fear and anticipation in the sub’s eyes………yeah.  That’s sexy.  That’s femdom.

There’s no need for S/strange C/capitalization or bland, repetitive protocol.  No need to forsake love just because d/s entered the equation.  No need for “service”; after all, in a relationship, both people serve each other, regardless of d/s.

Sure, it may feel like an interview when you first go out with someone, or when you’re trying to set up a scene.  But why turn it into a cold, soulless business meeting?  We’re not talking about expense ratios and profit margins.  We’re talking about real, tangible, intimate bonds.  Why not treat it as such rather than taking all the sexy out of it?  With some people, it’s like going to H&R Block……fill out this form, list your experiences here, provide references, fill out form 162b in triplicate, pay a processing fee, blah blah blah…

Lots of people are passionate about femdom.  That’s not a bad thing.  But all the talk of applications, service, and contracts tends to stifle that enthusiasm in many.

2 Responses to “Taking the Sexy out of Femdom”

  1. Tom Allen Says:

    I/i have the S/same complaints about so-called C/chastity contracts.
    Item 1: The Chastity device will be placed upon…
    Item 2: The Mistress will expect…
    Item 3: The slave will be expected to…
    Item 4: Blah blah blah…
    So freakin’ dull.

    H/however…
    The turn-on about C/contracts is that they represent an voluntary power E/exchange, in which one can see what one has G/given up (or is G/getting). A good, S/solid contract can have the cachet, if not the I/illusion of bondage.

    All T/too G/gorean for my tastes.

  2. Mistress160 Says:

    It goes both ways roo roo. The application to serve process is in part a response from dominants tired of constantly being treated like wank fodder, especially online. It gets rid of the fake subs. If an application form / questionnaire is filled in thoughtfully – if it is even filled in at all – the domme knows the sub is serious. She will take the time to read it and at that point the sub becomes something with personality and potential.

    Application to serve forms / questionnaires from genuine dominants are often a work of art, carefully constructed to reveal very precise information that will hopefully match the dominant’s interests and desires. It’s the cyber world’s version of the real time negotiation scene checklist: let’s hope we get enough matched interests between us that we can go play! So they have their uses.


Leave a reply... or squirrels will eat your face.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: