i read this essay and it didn’t sit well with me tbh… i think this entire argument starts from a premise i fundamentally reject, that receiving money from a man creates an obligation to care for him.
i’m a findomme. i don’t negotiate scenes, provide aftercare, screen grown men to determine what they can afford, or have any desire to become educated on bdsm. sometimes men send me money and receive literally nothing in return. that isn’t a failure to provide a service. that is the point of true findom.
of course there are findommes who practice within traditional bdsm frameworks. they negotiate limits, establish budgets, provide aftercare, and build long term power exchange dynamics. if that fulfills them, great. but that is a version of findom, not a moral prerequisite for every woman participating in it.
and somehow, even in a kink explicitly centered around female entitlement and male submission, we’ve managed to make men’s feelings the priority again.
women are conditioned our entire lives to make ourselves useful to men.. be beautiful, pleasant, nurturing, manage their emotions, protect their egos, make them feel wanted and safe. and apparently, even when a man gets off on handing us money, we’re still supposed to screen him, educate him, establish his budget, check on his feelings, reassure him, and provide aftercare.
why??
if a grown man sees me post “send,” gets turned on and voluntarily sends $500, why does his decision suddenly create an emotional responsibility on my end?
he can say no. he can scroll past. he can block me. he can keep every dollar he owns.
submissive men aren’t helpless creatures whose wallets women must protect from their own sexual desires.
and maybe the lack of reciprocity is the kink for a lot of them.
what if he likes knowing i bought something with his money and barely thought about him afterward? what if he likes that i have more money than him and still demand his? what if the fantasy is simply that i want something and he gives it to me? simple as that.
there doesn’t need to be a transaction. sometimes his submission is giving and my domination is taking.
there is obviously a difference between taking money and taking advantage. blackmail, doxxing, threats, deception, or lying about what you offer are separate issues with names of their own. i don’t need to defend coercion to defend findom.
remove coercion and deception and what are we left with?
a woman says “pay me.” a man voluntarily pays her. she promised him nothing. no agreement was violated.
men make terrible financial decisions every day. they gamble, sports bet, buy cars they can’t afford, spend thousands on bottle service, porn, crypto, and countless other things. women are not uniquely responsible for preventing men from making stupid decisions simply because that decision happens to benefit a woman.
there is something subversive about a woman saying “ i want your money and i’m not going to justify why i deserve it by explaining what i’ll do for you in return”.. it reverses one of the oldest expectations placed on women, that our value comes from what we provide to men.
if your definition of a “real domme” requires bdsm education, negotiation, aftercare, a mutual transaction, and a traditional power exchange, fine. maybe i’m not your definition of a “real domme.”
i genuinely do not care.
i didn’t enter this space for certification from other women, and i definitely didn’t enter it for another rulebook explaining how i should better care for men.
he is an adult. he has agency. he can say no.
and sometimes the entire fantasy really is that i get what i want, and i owe him absolutely nothing in return.
"subs" are like "i would do anything for you mistress... even this specific thing in a porn i jerked off to today which is the opposite of everything you're into. i would let you do that to me, for your pleasure, bc i am so devoted to you"