|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Worldly, Intelligent and Unusually Educated, With Just A Whiff of Weariness...
I am not interested in one night stands or nsa sex. I want to know you well enough that what we choose to do with one another works. Aside from this, I'll avoid setting boundaries and expectations on the as-yet non-existent. Let's meet, if we both feel like it, and see.
There are not going to be many labels that I am comfortable with. Sadist? Extracting pain is not a primary source of satisfaction to me but, on the other hand, you may end up in tears from time to time. Soul-debasing ego killer? Nope, definitely not. But I may induce embarrassment. And it may be purely for my own pleasure. Protocol junkie? No, there are certainly rules that you will learn and respect with me, but willing, intelligent obedience is much more important to me than whether you call me Grand High Master of All Poobahs or Sir or whatever. I am not a joiner; I will not conform to this or that school of thought or practice, and I laugh at those who scold me about this. I want someone to join me, not some abstract concept.
In general, I am looking for someone with whom I experience that wonderful pleasure, the erotic tension between dominance and submission.
Specifically, please be at least height to weight proportionate and better yet slender, somewhat to considerably younger than I am, and deeply intrigued with or committed to pleasing.
Some basic information:
~ My limits include death, serious physical injury, serious psychological injury, children, lack of consent, and animals.
~ I am sane. I am financially secure (self-employed) and stable. I will not deny you access to your friends and/or family for prolonged periods. I am in reasonable physical and mental health. I have my baggage, but I carry it myself.
~ I value obedience, loyalty, integrity, and courage. I seek to instill obedience, physical grace, philosophical and intellectual depth, and social and erotic flexibility.
~ I am living in Miami for the moment. But I am footloose and fancy free -- nothing binds me here. This both complicates and simplifies things.
If interested, please get in touch.
|
|
|
|
|
On The CM Experience And Our Expectations ~
If you are the woman whom I am seeking, then you already have had the classic CM experience: an avalanche of email that started before you finished posting your profile and, to varying degrees, ramps back up each time you sign in. Most of this mail is either wildly inappropriate or obviously written by someone who did not read your profile at all. (See a prior journal entry for my ideas on how to deal with this.) This kind of experience has to be pretty wearing on anyone’s patience. ~
I guarantee you that there are some men, like me, on here who are actually real, actually sincere, and neither (even mildly) sociopathic nor looking to live off of you. Really, it’s true. ~
So why do you have such trouble finding us? Well, largely because, like you, we have learned to treat this site with great skepticism. ~
Take me, for example. I usually visit about once a day, but with very little expectation of any kind of success in finding a lover. I never send copy-and-paste form letters when I contact someone; if you have received something from me it is because I have thought about what I found in your profile, thought about myself and what I have to offer, and found an intersection I find interesting. This takes quite a bit of time, every time, and usually some effort. ~
But I know that, until you read it, my letter will just be another line in an exhaustingly long and largely irrelevant list of entries. Even if you eventually get around to reading it, you are likely to be in such a cynical frame of mind (after reading however many totally inappropriate missives right before it) that it is unlikely that you can receive what I have written with much open-heartedness. And then, finally, I am a particular fellow looking for a fairly particular type of thing, and the odds are high that you are simply looking for someone or something else. Which is fair enough, on all counts. That is how it is with CM, and that is how it is with human nature. I’m not complaining. But it does mean that I will expend that time and effort that goes into a letter very rarely. ~
So why do I come here every day? Well, to be honest, mostly for the dark humor of the thing: the psychological, anthropological, spiritual whirlwind of desires, needs and nonsense. I enjoy my observer role almost as much as I enjoy the rare flirtations I become engaged in. (In all my time on CM, I’ve only once met someone from the site; we are still friends.) ~
The larger point, gentle reader, is that you have my sympathies as you try to pick a sane path through this thicket of thorny, horny bogusness. I wish you every success.
|
|
|
|
|
Some Thoughts On One-Liners, Copy-And-Pasters, & Those Who Begin With Demeaning Language - And How To Deal With Them...
I've noticed a powerful theme among the profiles of the submissives and slaves that I read. Many of you make it very clear in the text of your profile that there are certain very common, very unpleasant tendencies among your respondents. Perhaps most particularly among your male respondents.
Some of these can be described as follows:
- The One-Liner: by definition unintelligent, uninformative, and unappealing, usually consists of the mindlessly mundane ("hi How are u") or the impotently insulting ("get on yuor knees and tell Me you will suck my cock.");
- The Copy-And-Paster: a carefully worked out screed that clearly is designed to be a one-size-fits-all approach for any woman that this man might write to, the telltale sign being that at no point is any reference made to anything in your profile nor anything else that would in any way make it difficult to send the exact same letter to the next chosen object of desire;
- And lastly The Insulters: the guys who can think of no finer way of approaching a beautiful, submissive woman than by calling her as many demeaning names as possible with as little originality or expenditure of intellectual effort as possible (and, as noted above, often combined with the One-Liner).
I do not mean this to be any kind of an exhaustive list, merely a solid sampling of some of the more common and less entertaining approach disasters. I have, for instance, completely ignored those approaches that make it abundantly clear that the sender has not read a word of the text in your profile, preferring to react purely to whatever imagery is available, or even just to age and weight.
These approaches clearly irritate the living hell out of many of you, perhaps most of you. I commonly find profiles that begin with a list of the approaches least appreciated with firm admonitions to avoid using them. All very fine and well, but, sadly, probably utterly useless.
I think that if one were to apply game theory to this situation the result would be that the most effective response would be to remain absolutely silent about these approaches but to use the information they provide ruthlessly and immediately. That means a lot of blocking. I know that some of you may feel badly about blocking 'too many' people but I strongly urge you to get past this internal objection.
Here's the thing: any response besides blocking -- and this includes all those well-intentioned rants at the top of your profiles -- will be perceived by many of the malefactors as engagement and will, thus, end up by provoking more objectionable behavior.
More importantly, however, is the point that it is actually in your interest to have these approaches used on you as often as possible. Does this seem counter-intuitive? Consider the following line of reasoning. One of the biggest challenges that you face on this or any similar site is to separate the wheat from the chaff, to find the promising possibilities among the fakes, flakes, wannabes and psychopaths. Inappropriate approaches are some of the quickest and clearest clues to identifying the latter groups. So it is in your interest for the numbnut to write you a single demeaning and misspelled sentence since it is this sentence that identifies him as a numbnut. Thus allowing you to economically hit the block button and move on.
By asking your respondents to avoid using certain approaches, you are denying yourself vital information.
Now game theory would also suggest that if enough of you employ this tactic that the slimy foe will catch on, abandon these tactics, and develop new, even less appetizing ways of trying to attract your attention. I don't think you have to worry about that for a long time. In the shallow but tenebrous thinking of the men whose best line consists of "come and fuck me now, bitch," there is little threat of a nimble response to an intelligent strategy.
May all of you find what you are looking for. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
