Stephen123456

Male Dominant, 31, LA, California

Male Dominant, 51, dublin

Male Dominant, 43, San Francisco, California

It has been a pleasure entering into discussions on various topics with some of the folk here, they've generally proven to be a stable, well-balanced, and knowledable group. HOWEVER,... I've recently dealt with the screaming exception to the above that proves the general rule. I had been invited by this particular woman from West Virginia to discuss matters psychological on Ya-hosed, and as this seemed a very doable thing, I entered into such. On about the 3rd day of our discussions, which seemed to last maybe about 15 -30 minutes at any time due to her having to go and take care of other activities, she announced that her birthday was upcoming, which I made note of, intending to wish her a happy one on that day. Yesterday I noted her logging onto ya-hosed, so sent her a hello and hopes that she was doing well. THIS is where the dangerous emotional instability manifested itself. Upon reading that she had a headache, I sugested a treatment to releive it, which she said had already failed, that she was "Stressed-out". I inquired what was the stressor, and she went on to state that tomorrow was her birthday, and she was looking at, as she explained it, having to delete and block a whole lot of subs, then went into a tirade about "Why are men so F****ing cheep?", and from there it devolved that she was expecting/demanding, from all the subs she had even the slightest contact with,  not merely HER subs,"Birthday presents". Her written tirade got increasingly vituperative, and it devolved from there. Her having developed a stress-headache over her expectations of "gifts" from anyone she had contact with, and her focusing of that stress into anger, as evinced by her words, can only lead to the conclusion that this individual is DANGEROUSLY EMOTIONALLY UNSTABLE. The strictures of this site prohibit my openly giving her name and a cautionary against contact, HOWEVER,  in a private mail I can do so. I would definitely advise any sub from making overtures towards this individual for their own safety, physical as well as emotional.

A tale of H1N1-A. Having had it now, (How I acquired it is unknown) I can say that, while it IS a nasty little bug, it isn't the terror it's being made out to be by the popular media frenzy. It is as bad as any other strain of flu, you feel run-down, you get the headache, malaise, fevers, productive cough, runny nose, and all the other exquisite little inconveniences associated with influenza, but unless you're  constitutionally compromised, you'll do just fine following standard care regimens. See your doc if you need to, stay away from folk, stay hydrated, rest, and keep comfortable.  The flu kills folk every year, and this one is currently no worse than any other strain, it's just a strain noone's ever seen before. A bit more infectious, being a new strain, but that's the sum-total of it. Take care of yourselves, and don't panic.

The topic of TODAY'S lesson, boys and girls, is VISIBILITY: I note with some degree of head-shaking, and some quiet, derisive chuckling, the profile and journal entries that are done color-on-color, PARTICULARLY those done on black. Yes, I know black may be "Your thing", but when you then use purple, blue, or red text on it, the contrast just isn't there, and it is damned hard, well-nigh impossible at times, to read! This particular sin is most common amongst the dominant types, those seeking to express their "Dark heart" and "Purple passions." "Pffffffffffftttttttttt!!!!!" If it can't be read easily, don't get upset that it ISN'T read. You submissives, particularly the female variant, don't get off free either. YOUR variant on the sin of lack of contrast is to use yellow, or some pale pastel font on white background. YOU'RE trying to express softness, gentility, femininity, and all that crap. To quote the wiseguys from Queens, "Fuggedaboudit". Please, folks, stick with plain, easily-legible black on white, or at least a dark text on a light background. If YOU have difficulty seeing it clearly, so will everybody else.

Just a caveat reador, for those that take the time TO read: In general conversations with those in this group, I address all herein, regardless of their being dominant or submisive, as my equals. Unless and until I enter into a relationship based on those differing statuses with someone, being D or S means nothing because they are based on a personal relationship. If this torques your sensibilities, then perhaps it is time to take a high colonic reality enema, and hope that it helps you remember that tho you may be "D" to someone, you aren't MY "D" and even tho you may be "S" to someone, you aren't MY "S". Now that the ROE have been established, let's engage in intellectual cross-fire!

I have no doubt that what I am about to say will likely result in my being "Nuked" in-print, but that will be as it will. I have noted in the countless profiles of the dominant women on this site (Yes, I read a lot of them) the requirement that submissives be honest, genuine, and original in our profiles. This is a proper requirement. I think this should apply in both directions, but evidently it is felt that submissive means weak-minded and unobservant, or that there is no requirement for genuineness and honesty from the dominant side of the population here. One of the things I used to do was proof-reading of theses and papers for college students, and I can recognoze cut-and-paste plagarism when I see it, particularly when I see the same phrases over and over. There's no requirement for a college-level expository paper in a profile, but at least it needs to be your own work, your own words, only that can convey the true "You". It is outright intellectual laziness to do otherwise, and if one is intellectually lazy, how can one rightfully expect the opposite from a submissive? We ALL have to be honest for this to work. Then there's the subject of pictures. One of my skills is photography, both from behind the camera, in the darkroom, and with computer photo-manipulation. Combine that with my ability to read faces, and an ability to spot differences in physiogamy, and it becomes real easy to spot the pictures that aren't of the person in the main profile-shot. Most of them look like they were copied from leg-art and fet-pulp publications. Not that the photo's are unatractive, but, getting back to honesty, if it isn't "all about sex" and pleasing the male eye, why all the shots that look like they were bondage pin-up art?  Consistency and honesty are the issues, and this throwing of the BS-flag was not directed at all the wonderful women here, those to whom it was intended will know themselves,  To those who are genuine, and give as much honesty as they expect in return, my apologies for any offense taken, and my thanks FOR that genuineness.

Male Dominant, 44

Male Dominant, 21, saginaw, Michigan

Male Dominant, 37, hickory, North Carolina

Male Dominant, 52, washington

Male Submissive, 49, Houston, Texas

Male Dominant, 60, cleveland, Ohio

Male Dominant, 45, Long Beach, California

Male Submissive, 37, Coventry, Rhode Island

Male Submissive, 46, Suffield, Connecticut

Male Submissive, 19, Longview, Washington

Male Submissive, 23, lompoc, California

Male Submissive, 48, e. long island, New York