femsupremacy-digest Digest Volume 96 : Issue 64

Today's Topics:
Re: Dominance
Re: It's time. (Re: do the right thing)
Re: Raising children in our world
Re: _Femina post hominem_
Re: Raising children in our world
Re: Dominance
Re: Dominance
Re: Dominance
Re: Dominance
Re: Raising children in our world
RRR.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 7 May 1996 18:04:02 +0100
From: timberwolf@bahnhof.se
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Dominance
Message-Id: <199605071603.SAA05003@sunny.bahnhof.se
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Wrote Coyote:

(Social Darwinists and economic romantics, almost always male,
imagining themselves to be 'practical' and 'hard-headed' and
'rational,' might rush forward and say that the only possible
world is a dog-eat-dog jungle, and I have thrived acting out such
fantasies myself, but I am still not so sure, and have done just as
well lately by cooperating and sharing resources and information.
There is hope: we can learn.)


I agree with you in all real respects. But *please* let us keep Darwin out
of this, even if he's 'in it' only vicariously. Charles Darwin was no Social
Darwinist; in fact, he even denied being a Darwinist (just as Marx angrily
denied being a Marxist). 'Social' or 'Vulgar Darwinism' was invented by
Herbert Spencer (who, against Darwin's protests, coined the phrase
'survival of the fittest') and by Ernst Haeckel, German chauvinist and
anti-semite. Darwin had a highly developed social conscience. His family
had a long tradition os abolitionism, and on his voyage around the world,
wherever he saw slavery or racism or social oppression, his blood boiled.
The man who in his working notes admonished himself to 'never say
"higher" or "lower"' of non-human species, would clearly be incapable of
using these hoary terms (survivals of the even more hoary 'Great Chain
of Being') in referring to human races, of for that matter human genders.
'Vulgar' or 'Social Darwinism' should properly be denoted 'Spencerism'
or 'Haeckelism'; or at least, we should be aware that it would be the
proper thing to do, even if it is now impossible.

Pax vobiscum

TWolf
Charles and Laura--

You both make very good points. I feel there must be some type of middle
ground, but for the life of me, I am not sure where that middle ground
would be. Is there a 'peer' relationship that could be established here?

I disagree that the biological evidence points to women's innate niceness
in any meaningful sense. I am not a biologist, but my own sense is that
women are, if anything, genetically programmed to be "tougher" than men
because they tend to be adapted to care for children, which is the most
challenging job there is. Men have been socialized to play power games,
but my experience is that women pick them up fairly quickly.

There are many woman that are totally unsuited to raise children (my own
Mother, for one) and there are men totally unsuited to play the power games.
I know men who do very well at being househusbands and raising their
children and women that do very well in the world of business and politics.
I don't feel that we can generalize that woman or men are genetically
programmed or socially programmed to react and act the way they do... It
is so much more complex than that. Our world has become more complex
and we have to look at more than genetics and socialization to find the
answers we are looking for.

History is full of people who thought they would be kinder or gentler than
the oppressors they sought to replace -- such people usually end up being
surprisingly similar to those oppressors in the end.

This has happened so many times in history... We can look to our own history-
the Native Americans, for example- and it doesn't just happen in politics. The
oppressors can be anyone: If what happens after a take over is that someone
is forcing others to behave and react in a certain way, they do end up in the
same way. I look at groups like GreenPeace and other ecological types (of which
I am one) and when they destroy others lives because they cannot find common
ground or compromise...they become as much a part of the problem as the "other
side." These people are women and men.

There was an article in the NY Times last week about a UN worker (a woman),
who berated a man and his children to "go back to the country he came from"
because he was (I believe) hispanic. He was born in the US, as were his
children.
This was not nurturing behavior. Morals and ethics come into play, and just
plain good manners and tact, as well. Women in general are more concious of
these issues. Yet, this is breaking down as well.

A good example is the Afrikans settlers in South Africa, who were
horribly oppressed by the British. They were denied the use of their own
language, restricted to shanty towns, and generally treated as
second-class citizens. When they finally got out from under the yoke of
the British, though, these same oppressed people turned around and
insitituted, point for point, the same system in regard to black
Africans, which came to be known as apartheid.

Wonderful example...

As you may be able to tell, I am extremely skeptical about any female
supremacy movement, as I would be towards any group that felt it was more
suited to rule than the rest of the human race. If this makes me
unsuitable for inclusion on this list, I'll be willing to unsubscribe.

An analogy:

I was in Mexico City for a week in March. It was interesting for me as I had
never been to Mexico before. There are over 22 million people there and the
traffic was absolutely atrocious...every street was a traffic jam with more cars
than I have ever seen in one place. I thought Seattle traffic was bad.

There was a very large difference in the traffic. It didn't matter whether
the driver was a man or a woman in either country.

In Seattle, I am always confronting
issues: go the speed limit or go with the flow of traffic. If I go with
the flow of
traffic, I could get a ticket, or to not go with the flow, I get the finger,
a fist, or
some one chases me in traffic or cuts me off (or pulls a gun out) because
that's
the way drivers react here (or in most cities in the US).

In Mexico City, no one
gave me the finger, shook a fist, swore at me, threatened me, cut me off or
any
of the things that drivers are so fond of here. The drivers let one another
in,
helped each other out, had some semblance of manners and politeness. There
was a graciousness that I haven't found anywhere I've lived in the US.

If there is to be any ruling class in the world, there should be a graciousness
to them. There should be empathy, kindness, charity and caring for the ruling
class for the others they rule over.

I believe that females are superior in many ways to men. However, having a
balanced system is far more important and probably more suited to ruling the
human race, than any one gender, race, religion or political group could on its
own. We see this all the time, all over the world.

Utopia, anyone?




When I divorced my ex 10 years ago, I had to work for the establishment and
had to
put her into an 'establishment' day care. She was told she was wrong to want to
play with the boys and their trucks and their GI Joes and HAD to play in
the kitchen
with the ironing boards and stoves and refrigerators, etc. I was very angry
and basically
kept looking for another day care situation that let the boys and girls
interact with
each others toys. There was not a one to be found.

I'm curious as to whether the child care places are still like this.
I can't recall what I was allowed and not allowed to do in child care,
but I can't see that it effected me much. Before then, I lived on a
farm, and my mother tells stories about getting me a kitchen set for
christmas because I wanted it. Apparantly, my brother liked to play
in it too.

However, my daughter is very independent and is very well-adjusted as far as
her place
in society, but I still run into people who do n ot understand why I don't
encourage
her to wear dresses or to talk about boys and make-up and clothes and all
the things
that girls SHOULD talk about and do. I calmly explain that my daughter is
an independent
thinker and I give her the choice to talk about things and wear the things
that she
wants to wear (within reason--I don't want her dressing sexually
provocative, but that's
to protect her more than to limit her). She is a treasure for a daughter
and I love her
dearly.

My mother pointed out to me a few years ago that she has always
avoided referring to me as a "tomboy," because she felt that would
make me feel too different from other girls. She did well at letting
me be what I was, though she did insist on the occasional dress for
important events. :)

It's difficult to grow up "different," but IMO it's worth it. I
didn't go through eating disorders, didn't give in sexually to guys
because I felt I had to, etc. Sure, I had other depression problems
as a teenager (it's hard to avoid them at that age :) but they didn't
do nasty stuff to my body. As more and more girls are raised to be
themselves instead of to some feminine ideal, it will get a bit easier
to deal with for them.

I have nothing against "being feminine"...but I'm not going to obsess
over it, spend 3 hours on my hair and makeup on a regular basis, etc.
_However_, if that's a choice an individual woman makes, more power to
her if she does want to put that kind of effort in. Just isn't for
me.

I named her Alexandria because if she signs her letters with her nickname,
Alex, no one
that doesn't actually know her, can tell if she's a man or a woman. Also,
by her
handwriting, you'd swear she was a man.
couldn't help
myself

I have bad handwriting too. Some people have suggested to me that
it's because I use the computer so much. I point out in return that I
have had problems with handwriting since I first learned how to write,
which was before I'd ever touched a computer. :)

Dee-Ann




I feel Jesus would have denied being Christian, too. ;)
--

As many of you, (including Laura) know, I am most emphatically not a
Christian. But I did attend church as a lad, and I often find Jesus'
teachings to be enlightening from both a moral and philosophical
viewpoint. One very good way to piss off the "religious right" folks you
may be unfortunate enough to encounter is to have a good knowledge of the
New Testament. If you have never read the Bible a little research in
your local library will provide the information that will bring you
hours of enjoyment.

When they begin their tirades about how much we need a "Christian
Society", solemnly agree. Respond that you would like to have a
government based on Jesus' teachings because you are a Communist (or
liberal, secular humanist, or whatever the hate word is in your locale).
Explain that Jesus practiced total nonviolence (disband the military),
scorned material wealth, wealthy people and moneychangers (abolish
capitalism), provided free food and healing to the people (the welfare
state), and lived in a communal setting with his closest followers.
Watch 'em sputter!

Just got my Oregon Voters' Pamphlet yesterday and found that for the first
time in awhile the OCA (the primary "religious right" group in the state)
failed to get either an anti-choice or an anti-gay initiative on the
ballot. Also, I hope any sincere Christians out there realize that I am
not denigrating your beliefs. Of course, I think that was part of the
point Laura was making.

Peace,

Laura, I don't think Darwin, Marx or Christ knew the impact their ideas and
actions would have on the rest of the world for a hundred to several thousand
years after their deaths. You are right, of course-- many great people
typically aren't reconized until years later-- after their philosophies have
been discussed, studied, tried and proved or disproved.



Hello Dee-Ann:

I'm curious as to whether the child care places are still like this.
I can't recall what I was allowed and not allowed to do in child care,
but I can't see that it effected me much. Before then, I lived on a
farm, and my mother tells stories about getting me a kitchen set for
christmas because I wanted it. Apparantly, my brother liked to play
in it too.

About 3/4's are, but now my daughter doesn't need daycare. Mostly
the 'christian/religious' daycares are into the submissive female/dominat
male roles and continues to perpetuate that in the name of god. The
less traditional daycares tend to have more equality in chores, toys,
behavior, etc.

When I was a pre-teen (10-13), a whole group of neighborhood kids used
to come over to play in a huge weeping willow tree in our yard. We would
play "tarzan & jane." I was tarzan and one of the boys was jane and then
there was cheetah, etc. It never failed that I would always be tarzan... My
Mom raised us traditionally, so I'm not sure where that came from...cer-
tainly not culturally, nor genetically... a puzzle, to say the least. : )

I think it's nice that your brother like to play in the kitchen. What does he
do now?

My mother pointed out to me a few years ago that she has always
avoided referring to me as a "tomboy," because she felt that would
make me feel too different from other girls. She did well at letting
me be what I was, though she did insist on the occasional dress for
important events. :)

My Mom always called me a tomboy, and it was a put down. I didn't
care because I always had people to play with. In later years, high school
and college, being a tomboy had served me very well...when all the other
women were worried about dates and things like that, I always had
men hanging around because I knew how to talk to them. I was more
of a friend to them than a romantic interest, but the women would
never believe it.

It's difficult to grow up "different," but IMO it's worth it. I
didn't go through eating disorders, didn't give in sexually to guys
because I felt I had to, etc. Sure, I had other depression problems
as a teenager (it's hard to avoid them at that age :) but they didn't
do nasty stuff to my body. As more and more girls are raised to be
themselves instead of to some feminine ideal, it will get a bit easier
to deal with for them.

Hear, hear! It is better to be oneself, than to give in to societies ideals.
I didn't have problems with eating disorders either, but I never thought
to attribute it to being different. My daughter is just now starting to
develop and I'm hearing her talk about dieting. I asked her where she
heard about dieting, she said girls at school talk about it ALL THE TIME.
I encourage her to eat right and exercise if she is concerned about
body weight, but I also assure her that she looks fine just the way she
is. I told her that she should wait until she's out of puberty before she
makes a decision to diet because her body is changing and she won't
know what she will look like until her body is finished with it's task. It
is not something she can control. It seems to work for her...she's not
dieting and she is a very healthy 12 year old.

I have nothing against "being feminine"...but I'm not going to obsess
over it, spend 3 hours on my hair and makeup on a regular basis, etc.
_However_, if that's a choice an individual woman makes, more power to
her if she does want to put that kind of effort in. Just isn't for
me.

My daughter has just started the make-up thing when she began
the sixth grade this year. Before that, she could have cared less. There are
2/3's of the girls in her class that where make-up now. I'm amazed. BUT,
I am teaching her How to put it on, so she doesn't overdo and looks nice.
If she's going to do it, she might as well know the correct way to do it.

I have bad handwriting too. Some people have suggested to me that
it's because I use the computer so much. I point out in return that I
have had problems with handwriting since I first learned how to write,
which was before I'd ever touched a computer. :)

Same with my daughter. : ) She actually gets better grades right now
because she uses the computer.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. As far as I understand,
Barry has made quite clear that he doesn't believe in your god. Why
do you insist on insulting him for the choice he has made by asking
your god to bless him?

I cannot do "one night stands" either. The impersonal feeling about it does
little to encourage my arousal. I feel more like an object, as opposed to
feeling like a person.

[snip]

I've had several one-night
stands and always felt unclean and/or used...not at the time, but the next
morning,
for several reasons. The biggest being: the man never called back to even
say, " Thank
you, it was nice, but you're not my type.." or something like that.. Is
this a courage
problem or was is a lack of self-respect and guilt on their part? I've
always wondered.


most likely a lack of courage, also known as conflict avoidance

In my case, I hate making promises that I'm not sure I'll keep, even if
they are not explicit. Thus, I don't tend to be pushy about sex. This
lack of obvious pursuit is sometimes mistaken for lack of interest, even
when dating in a BDSM context where, if I'm interested, I try make it
clear I'll go as far as I'm led (within fairly broad limits). On vanilla
(non BDSM) dates, my lack of pushiness is usually just confusing. My most
delightful vanilla experiences have been ones in which she made a pass at
me. On those occasions, I did not feel like I had pressured anyone into
anything (guilt-free sex! yay!).

I feel than anything that can be done to shatter pre-defined sexual roles
is a step forward (Laura presented some nice ideas about this). Since new
ideas about sexual roles play off of the old roles (he is forced to wear
heels, she straps on a dildo...), I feel that the new ideas should also be
shattered now and then. A woman who wears leather and uncomfortable heels
because she enjoys the reaction she gets from her mate deserves respect.
A woman who has found a more pleasurable way to get the same reaction
deserves kudos.

Jonathan


Laura Goodwin

" Truth is the only safe ground to stand on."

(Elizabeth Cady Stanton)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 15:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Dominance
Message-Id: <199605062252.PAA06358@netcom4.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 3542

Please, everyone, read in full what Laura Goodwin just wrote with
awesome clarity about 'Dominance,' part of which reads:

Our humanity, our human instincts, are encoded into every cell of our
bodies. Homo Sapiens is the most rational, the most intelligent, the
most dominant, and the most dangerous human species that ever lived on
this world. We pass on those genes, to both our sons and daughters.

Humans have social instincts because we are a social creature. We have
an instinct for finding our place within a hierarchy, for dominance and
submission.

I have to ask: is hierarchy the only model to date? It
probably is as things have developed so far among primates
and smart mammals, but would love to be proven wrong. Are
there any eaxmples of a more circular way of living anywhere
among intelligent creatures, say, whales or dolphins or even
small human communities?

I know Ursula K LeGuin has created such communities in her
fiction, and made them believeable, but are there people actually
living without dominance and submission as necessary roles?

I have spent a lot of time in 12 step groups getting well and
accepting my soul, and these very effective communities really
do work for honest people. But they work precisely because they
eschew politics and replace power with powerlessness, and have no
formal leadership at all, simply rotated responsibilities.

I'm not proposing or opposing here, just asking, because
otherwise I agree with everything Laura wrote here.

(Social Darwinists and economic romantics, almost always male,
imagining themselves to be 'practical' and 'hard-headed' and
'rational,' might rush forward and say that the only possible
world is a dog-eat-dog jungle, and I have thrived acting out such
fantasies myself, but I am still not so sure, and have done just as
well lately by cooperating and sharing resources and information.
There is hope: we can learn.)


The reasons used to prevent females from participating to the fullest
extent in social leadership are false and the motives for clinging to
the patriarchal model are ignoble. Women are not taking it anymore,
they are standing up and standing together all over the world, and
plenty of right-minded men stand with them, and for all the right
reasons.

'ignoble' indeed. It demeans men, among other things, and demeans
even the genuine accomplishments of patriarchal culture, soon to
be under new and better stewardship, one hopes.

The 'right reasons' in my case at least being that, at a minimum
a) the planet I live on will actually remain habitable,
b) the freer women are, the freer you are, and the freer you are,
the freer I am. Equally so with power.
c) we may actually all discover each other as human beings-
surprise, surprise! :P

These women and men are the ones who will ultimately rule,
and the social forms that they institute will stand, gloriously, for a
long, long time.

Being more like forests than like buildings, we can hope.
coyote sings / man and sky / amfas@netcom.com

Show up. Lighten up. Pay attention. Feel awe. Make it count.
The rest is hidden.




Why are girls not told by their mothers (and their fathers): Do not serve
males.
Do not do what any male tells you to do. Do your own thing. That would be
the
first step towards gyno-whatever, or at least a more sensible world.

TWolf

When my daughter was born (she will be 12 this month), my family, my friends,
my now ex-husband and I gave her all assorted gifts: a big yellow Tonka dump
truck, dolls, clothes, assorted toys and music, books, etc. It was so fun
to see her pushing
this big truck around, loaded with Barbies, cabbage patch kids and other
stuffed animals
around the house to dump them in a corner. She'd load it up again with
blocks, books,
little plastic figurines, and dump them in another corner.

When I divorced my ex 10 years ago, I had to work for the establishment and
had to
put her into an 'establishment' day care. She was told she was wrong to want to
play with the boys and their trucks and their GI Joes and HAD to play in
the kitchen
with the ironing boards and stoves and refrigerators, etc. I was very angry
and basically
kept looking for another day care situation that let the boys and girls
interact with
each others toys. There was not a one to be found.

However, my daughter is very independent and is very well-adjusted as far as
her place
in society, but I still run into people who do n ot understand why I don't
encourage
her to wear dresses or to talk about boys and make-up and clothes and all
the things
that girls SHOULD talk about and do. I calmly explain that my daughter is
an independent
thinker and I give her the choice to talk about things and wear the things
that she
wants to wear (within reason--I don't want her dressing sexually
provocative, but that's
to protect her more than to limit her). She is a treasure for a daughter
and I love her
dearly.

I named her Alexandria because if she signs her letters with her nickname,
Alex, no one
that doesn't actually know her, can tell if she's a man or a woman. Also,
by her
handwriting, you'd swear she was a man.
couldn't help
myself

Agree.
And boys should be told to appreciate feminity.

I agree with this too. Boys should be given the option to play with dolls
and nurture
and express their feelings.

Jet

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
That's the risk you take if you change: that the people you've
been involved with won't like the new you. But other people
who do will come along. --Lisa Alther

Jet Tenley P.O. Box 25171
jet@nwlink.com Seattle, WA 98125-2071
Phone: (206)527-0492 FAX: (206)517-3038

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 19:58:14 -0500
From: kriv@interlog.com (peter)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Raising children in our world
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I agree with this too. Boys should be given the option to play with dolls
and nurture
and express their feelings.



Well put by Mistress Lady Jet, of whom I have nothing but the highest
admiration.

In my daughter's school, there is a course called design technology. Boys
and girls take it together. They learn how to build things and also how to
cook and mend things. My daughter was so proud when she brought home
something that she used a lathe, planer, sander and hammer to construct.
Also, I know of many friends who have had sons who loved playing with dolls.

I think the biggest problem is men not expressing their feelings. Once, my
youngest daughter asked me why she never saw me cry. I said, "I don't
know."

But the real reason is that I was taught from a very young age that real
men don't cry. Every man is like John Wayne and crying means he is a wimp.

I never saw my father cry. The only time I remember crying as an adult is
when he died.

Peter


the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 07 May 96 01:35:56 +0200
From: "Magnus Thelander"
To: "femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Subject: Re: And they wonder why women are angry
Message-Id: <199605062335.BAA14599@mailbox.swip.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, 6 May 1996 13:08:12 -0700 (PDT), Coyote Sings wrote:=0D=0A=0D=0A=
For another recent overview, please see this week's=0D=0A _Business W=
eek_ (dated May 13) cover story, titled=0D=0A _Abuse Of Power_. There h=
as also been extensive recent=0D=0A=0D=0A That story is about the subs=
idiary of a Swedish medical company=0D=0A(Astra). The CEO of the America=
n subsidiary was a Swede. Very little=0D=0Ais reported about this here. =
It's been mentioned on the TV news and=0D=0Athere have been a few smalle=
r articles about it in the press. One=0D=0Awould think that something li=
ke this would cause quite a lot of=0D=0Acommotion and bad will for Astra=
here in Sweden too. One reason might=0D=0Abe that the largest newspaper=
s are owned by just two to three owners,=0D=0Aand a small group of very =
powerful capitalists control a lot of the=0D=0Alarge Swedish corporation=
s. Getting on their bad side is not a wise=0D=0Acareer move, if you're a=
mbitious. A consequence(sp?) of Sweden being=0D=0Aa small country.=0D=0A=
=0D=0A One certainly isn't proud to belong to the same nationality as=0D=
=0Athat jerk they had for a CEO in the U.S.A. How can assholes like this=
=0D=0Ago this far? Something is severly screwed up among the people=0D=0A=
responsible for appointing this person.=0D=0A=0D=0A What puzzles me is =
that some men in management seem to be getting=0D=0A worse, not better,=
as public awareness increases. Wah!O=FEj=B2=B8 =0D=0A=0D=0A Perhaps t=
hey feel time is running up, and want to have as much=0D=0A"fun" as pos=
sible before it's too late :(.=0D=0A=0D=0A---=0D=0AMagnus Thelander=0D=0A=
Malmo, Sweden=0D=0A

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 07 May 96 02:26:31 +0200
From: "Magnus Thelander"
To: "femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Subject: Re: Raising children in our world
Message-Id: <199605070025.CAA20036@mailbox.swip.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Mon, 6 May 1996 19:58:14 -0500, peter wrote:

I think the biggest problem is men not expressing their feelings. Once, my
youngest daughter asked me why she never saw me cry. I said, "I don't
know."

But the real reason is that I was taught from a very young age that real
men don't cry. Every man is like John Wayne and crying means he is a wimp.

I never saw my father cry. The only time I remember crying as an adult is
when he died.

A problem I have with feelings is that I it's very hard to find
the words to express them. That part of my vocabulary is like a black
hole. When I do try, I usually come up with something that sounds
mindbogglingly corny and stupid.

---
Magnus Thelander
Malmo, Sweden


the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 17:43:21 -0700
From: olskool@ix.netcom.com (Antonio)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Dominance
Message-Id: <199605070043.RAA09496@dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com

You wrote:


Please, everyone, read in full what Laura Goodwin just wrote with
awesome clarity about 'Dominance,' part of which reads:

Our humanity, our human instincts, are encoded into every cell of our
bodies. Homo Sapiens is the most rational, the most intelligent, the
most dominant, and the most dangerous human species that ever lived on
this world. We pass on those genes, to both our sons and daughters.

Humans have social instincts because we are a social creature. We have
an instinct for finding our place within a hierarchy, for dominance and
submission.

I have to ask: is hierarchy the only model to date? It
probably is as things have developed so far among primates
and smart mammals, but would love to be proven wrong. Are
there any eaxmples of a more circular way of living anywhere
among intelligent creatures, say, whales or dolphins or even
small human communities?

I know Ursula K LeGuin has created such communities in her
fiction, and made them believeable, but are there people actually
living without dominance and submission as necessary roles?

I have spent a lot of time in 12 step groups getting well and
accepting my soul, and these very effective communities really
do work for honest people. But they work precisely because they
eschew politics and replace power with powerlessness, and have no
formal leadership at all, simply rotated responsibilities.

I'm not proposing or opposing here, just asking, because
otherwise I agree with everything Laura wrote here.

(Social Darwinists and economic romantics, almost always male,
imagining themselves to be 'practical' and 'hard-headed' and
'rational,' might rush forward and say that the only possible
world is a dog-eat-dog jungle, and I have thrived acting out such
fantasies myself, but I am still not so sure, and have done just as
well lately by cooperating and sharing resources and information.
There is hope: we can learn.)


The reasons used to prevent females from participating to the fullest
extent in social leadership are false and the motives for clinging to
the patriarchal model are ignoble. Women are not taking it anymore,
they are standing up and standing together all over the world, and
plenty of right-minded men stand with them, and for all the right
reasons.

'ignoble' indeed. It demeans men, among other things, and demeans
even the genuine accomplishments of patriarchal culture, soon to
be under new and better stewardship, one hopes.

The 'right reasons' in my case at least being that, at a minimum
a) the planet I live on will actually remain habitable,
b) the freer women are, the freer you are, and the freer you are,
the freer I am. Equally so with power.
c) we may actually all discover each other as human beings-
surprise, surprise! :P

These women and men are the ones who will ultimately rule,
and the social forms that they institute will stand, gloriously, for a
long, long time.

Being more like forests than like buildings, we can hope.

Another 'keeper,' Ms L. :)
--
coyote sings / man and sky / amfas@netcom.com

Show up. Lighten up. Pay attention. Feel awe. Make it count.
The rest is hidden.


___________________________________________________________________
Questions and comments should be sent to listmaster@renaissoft.com.
For a list and description of supported mailing list commands, send
mail to femsupremacy-request@renaissoft.com with the subject "help".



The use of the term "homo sapiens" should be regarded as highly sexist,
especially in THIS newsgroup. "Homo sapiens" = Man the Wise;
how about "Gyna Sapiens" = Woman the Wise?

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 18:25:50 -0700
From: dlbaker@well.com (Donald L. Baker)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: unsubscribe
Message-Id: <199605070125.SAA27460@mh1.well.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"



the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 19:38:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: _Femina post hominem_
Message-Id: <199605070238.TAA14825@netcom12.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 972

Antonio asked:

The use of the term "homo sapiens" should be regarded as highly sexist,
especially in THIS newsgroup. "Homo sapiens" = Man the Wise;
how about "Gyna Sapiens" = Woman the Wise?


_femina post hominem_ has been a term that I concocted
to mean 'Woman after (meaning succeeding) man.' Both
Femina's wilma (the essayist and fabulist) and Holly
(an early poster here) liked it.

wilma suggested _mulier post hominem_ and had earlier coined
'The Age of Muliebrity' as a term for the matriarchy to come.

I dunno what the difference might be. _femina_ is biological,
_mulier_ is more cultural, I suppose.

(wilma is now reposting her stories on Usenet, btw.)

c.s.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 19:14:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Sex and the sacred...
Message-Id: <199605070214.TAA12729@netcom12.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 2995

Laura Goodwin wrote:

I personally feel that Nature is the Goddess, and all Her
creation is holy.

Or She is (expressed) in Nature or any one of several ways
of expressing that connection, depending on how one experiences
it. The important thing is that the connection between the
sacred (or transcendent, or archetypal, whatever) and the
natural is very real and very necessary for either to make any
sense.

The second lesson from all this could be that eveything and
every one in Nature is connected with each other: you with me
and each of us with a third other, and so on. Where traditional
thought has failed is in assuming that distinctions equal barriers,
and that what we do does not necessarily have consequences: Because
I am not a snail darter (a small endangered fish) the snail darter
has no influence on my life, and I can safely ignore what I do
to the snail darter's habitat. 'Not my problem,' goes the traditional
view. In the next century we will discover just how much we have
already lost by thinking that way. And why that thinking has to
change. Everything is connected. Everything has consequences.
Everything.

Sex obviously has the Divine stamp of approval, or
else She could have made us all multiply asexually.

Gaaahhhhh! And there would proabably go all of human
creativity, and we would all do nothing but watch TV,
but never laugh at any of it, because none of it would be funny!
<<<<<<shudder

I also believe that BDSM sex is a profound form of sex, because what
makes us particularly human gets called into play. We don't simply
couple as beasts, we can devise very individualistic and dramatic rites
which give free rein to our imaginations and reasoning powers, which we
can use to liberate or channel our erotic power. We stack our human
selves on top of our animal selves, and stand on both to reach up and
embrace the divine.

As with all sex, but with much more -more depth, more color,
more caring, more possibility, more risk, especially that- than
in simple coupling. With more connection to all the rest of our
culture, and certainly to everything we think of as sacred.

And BDSM is also so _political_: I =love= that! :D
It's about =all= of the other issues we deal with in life.

Six months ago I wouldn't have seen that, and would have huffed
that BDSM was an interesting way to empower women and en-thrall
men (and many women), but was not so totally connected to the
rest of life. It's been fun learning otherwise. :)
--
coyote sings / man and sky / amfas@netcom.com

Show up. Lighten up. Pay attention. Feel awe. Make it count.
The rest is hidden.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 23:58:21 -0400
From: Lonely2001@aol.com
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Hope springs eternal (Was 'sex and love')
Message-ID: <960506235821_392402428@emout18.mail.aol.com

In a message dated 96-05-06 18:17:26 EDT, you write:

A woman who wears leather and uncomfortable heels
because she enjoys the reaction she gets from her mate deserves respect.
A woman who has found a more pleasurable way to get the same reaction
deserves kudos.

Maybe she also enjoys the way it makes her feel when she wears such things...
My last Mistress said as much. Such fetish wear made her feel sexy, powerful,
in control. That helped to excite her and turn her on.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 7 May 1996 08:44:02 CDT
From: bodie167@houston.email.net
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: post message
Message-Id: <9605070844.S576882333@houston.email.net

Bodie16@Houston.email.net wrote, in reply to Mistress C.S. and slave phil
posting:
My Wife and I have debated this issue (of tangible lifestyle and sexual
relation changes which would not only symbolize but solidify her rule and
authority. These include property ownership, . . evidence of crimes . . The
male marital partner must do everything he can to sacrifice every ounce of
freedom and possibility of self-rule and escape. ."
Very nice indeed. But it doesn't go nearly far enough. It can work
in a REAL life context very effectively, but only if the male subject
actively and seriously sets these measures up
How? By starting a "Male Manifesto for Female Rule." Such a document
would outline the legal, financial, social, educational ways in which
males could be subjugated. The males who would contribute most
effectively to such a document would earn a special place in the
hearts of Supreme Females all over. A male legal expert who, for
example, who could uncover loopholes in the law that would benefit
Women and subjugate men, would be ever appreciated. Financial
advisors as well. Male doctors who would come up with medical facts
and practical methods which a Supreme Female could use to medically
subjugate her male mate would earn the same accolades.
Men know men's weaknesses better than any woman could. Secrets should
be compiled by men for women's general use. Otherwise, these
"sympathetic" male voices paying lip service to "Female Supremacy"
should clam up and stick to jerking off to FETISH TIMES every
fortnight.
Real Female Supremacy can't be achieved through "equality." The
scales have to be tipped and the playing field must be more than
leveled. The male must be playing with a 100 lb. cement sack on his
back from a deep ditch.
Mesalina139@Newyork.email.net
(and don't reply to me directly unless you have something to
contribute to this Manifesto.)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 7 May 1996 18:04:07 +0100
From: timberwolf@bahnhof.se
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: _Femina post hominem_
Message-Id: <199605071603.SAA05005@sunny.bahnhof.se
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Antonio asked:

The use of the term "homo sapiens" should be regarded as highly sexist,
especially in THIS newsgroup. "Homo sapiens" = Man the Wise;
how about "Gyna Sapiens" = Woman the Wise?

Coyote replied:

_femina post hominem_ has been a term that I concocted
to mean 'Woman after (meaning succeeding) man.' Both
Femina's wilma (the essayist and fabulist) and Holly
(an early poster here) liked it.

Linnaeus coined the somewhat over-optimistic term Homo sapiens. In
Latin, 'homo' certainly means just was 'man' does in English. Now,
Linnaeus had to use Latin, because this was the international language of
learning in those days. But he was a Swede, and he thought in Swedish
(he wrote eminently readable travel reports). And in his own language,
'generic man' (maenniska) is neuter. It includes both (all?) sexes. Also,
'member of th male sex' ('man', as in English) has come in our time more
and more to be used as a short form of the generic expression. So there is
no need for, say, an ombudsman to be an 'ombudsperson'. What knots you
have to tie yourselves in!

TWolf


the subject "help".

--------------------------------
End of femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 Issue #63
***********************************************

From - Sat May 11 11:46:53 1996
Received: from aphex.direct.ca (root@aphex.direct.ca [199.60.229.6]) by badboy.iprolink.ch (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA19618 for
Received: from davinci.renaissoft.com ([199.60.103.1]) by aphex.direct.ca with ESMTP id <268215-6059; Fri, 10 May 1996 13:34:10 -0700
Received: (from list@localhost) by davinci.renaissoft.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA01941 for virtjack@iprolink.ch; Fri, 10 May 1996 13:38:51 -0700
Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 13:38:51 -0700
From: femsupremacy-digest-request@renaissoft.com
Message-Id: <199605102038.NAA01941@davinci.renaissoft.com
Subject: femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 #65
X-Loop: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-Mailing-List:
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------"
To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
Reply-To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-UIDL: 1be67547ba643341f0b553830867ea0e
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001

------------------------------

Content-Type: text/plain

femsupremacy-digest Digest Volume 96 : Issue 65

Today's Topics:
Re: Raising children in our world
Re: Dominance
RE: RRR
Re: Dominance
Re: Raising children in our world
An AMAZING Quote
Re: An AMAZING Quote
Our world. (Was: Re: Raising children in our world)
Re: Dominance
Re: Raising children in our world
Re: Raising children in our world
Mothers Day and Music
Re: Raising children in our world

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 21:22:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Raising children in our world
Message-Id: <199605090422.VAA09039@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 3180

Jet wrote:

I think it's nice that your brother like to play in the kitchen. What does he
do now?

My brother is a father and owns his own business. He's also rather
the dominant sort. I believe he generally avoids the kitchen now.

My Mom always called me a tomboy, and it was a put down. I didn't
care because I always had people to play with. In later years, high school
and college, being a tomboy had served me very well...when all the other
women were worried about dates and things like that, I always had
men hanging around because I knew how to talk to them. I was more
of a friend to them than a romantic interest, but the women would
never believe it.

I never dated until college. But there were guys in high school who
would drop by out of the blue. I remember a male friend in college
who once said to me that the reason guys didn't ask me out is I put
off a "Taken" field. I asked what that meant, and he replied that
something about the way I carried myself said, "I don't need you." I
think that's when I realised I needed to start asking men out instead
of waiting for them to ask me. ;)

Hear, hear! It is better to be oneself, than to give in to societies ideals.
I didn't have problems with eating disorders either, but I never thought
to attribute it to being different. My daughter is just now starting to
develop and I'm hearing her talk about dieting. I asked her where she
heard about dieting, she said girls at school talk about it ALL THE TIME.
I encourage her to eat right and exercise if she is concerned about
body weight, but I also assure her that she looks fine just the way she
is. I told her that she should wait until she's out of puberty before she
makes a decision to diet because her body is changing and she won't
know what she will look like until her body is finished with it's task. It
is not something she can control. It seems to work for her...she's not
dieting and she is a very healthy 12 year old.

Hopefully it sunk in. I hate to see adolescent girls freaking out
about their weight. I hate to see anyone freaking out about their
weight, but with young girls it can screw them up for life.

Of course, there's also the problem with young men on steroids, trying
to pump themselves up. Also can screw them up for life, not to
mention making them more aggressive.

My daughter has just started the make-up thing when she began
the sixth grade this year. Before that, she could have cared less. There are
2/3's of the girls in her class that where make-up now. I'm amazed. BUT,
I am teaching her How to put it on, so she doesn't overdo and looks nice.
If she's going to do it, she might as well know the correct way to do it.

I wore makeup in 9th grade. Purple eyeshadow, mostly. There was a
point in college where I wore it too. I seem to have survived. :)

Dee-Ann

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 21:33:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Dominance
Message-Id: <199605090433.VAA13279@netcom15.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 4192

Oh, Barry, I've been so quiet about this for what, 3, 6 months now?
I'll keep it brief this time, 'cause most of you have heard it before:

I am apparently this group's token Christian -none others have ever
surfaced- and am committed to getting along with everyone here and
not to try and convert anyone to anything (that being impossible except
by way of personal experience). I have only been born once, do not worship
any book, however interesting or uplifting its contents, and try to
remember that the core mysteries of my tradition are about awe and love.
I am uncomfortable with the verb 'believe' and try to stay close to folks
such as Matthew Fox, Hildegard of Bingen, St Teresa of Avila, Thomas
Merton, Margery Kempe, Archbishop Tutu, the Apostle Mary Magdalen and even
her lover Jesus. My last two priests have been women, the first a Wise
Woman in every sense who started me on this path. I support _anyone_ in
their spiritual path, even if that path is a hiking trail in Norrland.
I'm saying all this because all of me happens in the same place at the same
time. For the short version of how I connect with my Archetype, see my .sig,
below, and please know that _most_ of us are not fundamentalists at all.
whew!

On Wed, 8 May 1996, Laura Goodwin wrote:

I feel Jesus would have denied being Christian, too. ;)
--
I totally agree. :D

Barry wrote:

I often find Jesus'
teachings to be enlightening from both a moral and philosophical
viewpoint. One very good way to piss off the "religious right" folks you
may be unfortunate enough to encounter is to have a good knowledge of the
New Testament.

An even better way to piss off the Religious Reich is to
_understand_ the NT, i.e., to actually have an idea of what was
going on, and how most of it was composed from oral accounts
not written down until about 50 a.d., and not written in Aramaic,
but Greek. Not all of the accounts were included in the final cut,
and some versions, including all those told by women, were edited
out. Those were turbulent times, and a lot mystery cults contended.

When they begin their tirades about how much we need a "Christian
Society", solemnly agree. Respond that you would like to have a
government based on Jesus' teachings because you are a Communist (or
liberal, secular humanist, or whatever the hate word is in your locale).

How 'bout Feminist? :D
; ; ;
Watch 'em sputter!



My fave is to count how many times the word 'love' is used
in a tirade, and then point that out. (Usually the count is 0.)

My next fave is to refer to the Creator or the Holy Spirit as
'She.'

And for dessert I assert that the Rabbi Jesus proclaimed
an end to religion and ideology.



(I would ask people to be careful about Christian ethics, because
there aren't any. They are all derived from either Judaism or
more importantly, Stoicism. The real message -IMNSHO- is about
transformation by love and overcoming death. JC was only adequate
as a messenger, but first class as a _message_ whose crowning act
was one of love and submission. Tell =that= to Pat Buchanan! ;])

Also, I hope any sincere Christians out there realize that I am
not denigrating your beliefs. Of course, I think that was part of the
point Laura was making.

I think both of you are waaay cool, and help make this a safe
place to be Christian or worship Kali Ma or just tell about how
it felt on the first good day of summer. It would be much easier
to be Christian (or anything else) in a world where womens' values
prevailed.

See you all at the viewing of "The Last Temptation of Christ."

And now this:
--
coyote sings / man and sky / amfas@netcom.com

Show up. Lighten up. Pay attention. Feel awe. Make it count.
The rest is hidden.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 May 1996 05:42:19 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: RE: RRR
Message-Id: <199605091242.FAA25456@dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com

Magnus wrote:

God Bless You,

This is exactly what I'm talking about. As far as I understand,
Barry has made quite clear that he doesn't believe in your god. Why
do you insist on insulting him for the choice he has made by asking
your god to bless him?

I agree. A blessing isn't universally welcome. I have an atheist
friend who gets all irritated if I speak of metaphysics, and when he
starts in on how bogus all religion is, I get snotty, so we agree not
to talk about that at all. :)

--
Laura Goodwin

" Truth is the only safe ground to stand on."

(Elizabeth Cady Stanton)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 May 1996 06:09:30 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Dominance
Message-Id: <199605091309.GAA00622@dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com

coyote wrote:

I think both of you are waaay cool, and help make this a safe
place to be Christian or worship Kali Ma or just tell about how
it felt on the first good day of summer. It would be much easier
to be Christian (or anything else) in a world where womens'
values prevailed.

See you all at the viewing of "The Last Temptation of Christ."

They say that it's Biblical truth
That a woman let thin on the looth
But Jesus was meek
He said, *"Turn the cheek,
"Forget about tooth for a tooth!"*
--
Laura Goodwin

" Truth is the only safe ground to stand on."

(Elizabeth Cady Stanton)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 May 1996 05:58:35 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Raising children in our world
Message-Id: <199605091258.FAA14783@dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com

Dee-Ann wrote:

Hopefully it sunk in. I hate to see adolescent girls freaking out
about their weight. I hate to see anyone freaking out about their
weight, but with young girls it can screw them up for life.

My daughter is only 8, and already says she feels fat (she's tall for
her age and medium in build, not tiny and dainty). I keep telling her
she is beautiful and perfect, and encouraging her to eat and grow.

My baby sister had bulimia, and she ruined her teeth and general
health. She had to be hospitalized twice for it, and now finally seems
to be able to eat normally.

Jet wrote:

2/3's of the girls in her class that wear make-up now. I'm amazed.
BUT, I am teaching her How to put it on, so she doesn't overdo and
looks nice. If she's going to do it, she might as well know the
correct way to do it.

I wore makeup in 9th grade. Purple eyeshadow, mostly. There was a
point in college where I wore it too. I seem to have survived. :)

I agree. There is a point where a girl must wear make-up to school or
she'll be ostracized by the other girls. It's a peer thing.
It's also a sex signal, a way of saying to the world: "I'm not a little
girl any more." I think that's why it worries some parents.

I wish I lived in some wonderland where I knew my kids would get a
dignified and safe introduction to sexual activity. I'm very concerned
about the sexual predators who are waiting for them. All the concern
about weight and makeup comes down to what it takes to be attactive.
Girls get worried about that sooner than they used to. I can't help
but wonder, what's the rush?
--
Laura Goodwin

" Truth is the only safe ground to stand on."

(Elizabeth Cady Stanton)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 May 1996 09:02:25 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: An AMAZING Quote
Message-Id: <199605091602.JAA08417@dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com

Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate.
Our deepest fear is that we are powerful
beyond measure.
It is our light not our darkness that most
frightens us.
We ask ourselves, who am I to be brilliant,
gorgeous, talented and fabulous?
Actually, who are you not to be?

You are a child of God.
Your playing small doesn't serve the world.
There's nothing enlightened about shrinking
so that other people won't feel insecure
around you.
We were born to make manifest the glory of
God that is within us.
It's not just in some of us; it's in everyone.

And as we let our own light shine,
we give other people permission
to do the same.
As we are liberated from our own fear;
our presence can liberate others.

--Nelson Mandela



--
Laura Goodwin

" Truth is the only safe ground to stand on."

(Elizabeth Cady Stanton)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 May 1996 11:15:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: An AMAZING Quote
Message-Id: <199605091815.LAA21198@netcom6.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 503


Thank you: this gets passed on with discrete attribution this very
day, unless you object. It certainly is the last word (I hope) in
some recent threads. :]

I love that man: we are fortunate to live in his time.

c.s.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 09 May 96 21:01:52 +0200
From: "Magnus Thelander"
To: "femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Subject: Our world. (Was: Re: Raising children in our world)
Message-Id: <199605091901.VAA10853@mailbox.swip.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Thu, 9 May 1996 05:58:35 -0700, Laura Goodwin wrote:

but wonder, what's the rush?

One could ask the same question with regards to the entire western world.
Everybody behaves as if every day was the last.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Magnus Thelander | Fidonet: 2:200/422.21 | Everybody knows, that the
|Drottninggatan 4A | Tel.: +46-708-535155 | best nuts come from
|212 11 Malmo | Timezone= CET + 1 | California.
|Sweden | | -Sunkist
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 9 May 1996 17:13:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Barry Emerson Wright
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Cc: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Dominance
Message-Id:
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Friends,

This is certainly a very busy period for the List! It is good to
hear all the varied opinions out there and I'm going to take this time to
tie up a few loose ends.
Ralph, you seem like a decent sort and I did not mean to offend
you. Please read the text of my message more carefully, or to get a
clearer view refer to the followup by the estimable coyote sings. Your
mention of Martin Luther King should serve to remind everyone that
Christians have been in the forefront of many progressive causes.
c.s., thank you as usual for your insight. Theology is one of my
weak points, and I have been a nonreligious person for many years now.
It is obvious that you have studied your faith thoroughly and you have
my respect for that. One of my main problems with religion is that I was
exposed only to the authoritarian organized type, and naturally rebelled
against it. Laura has been a major help in my discovery of spirituality,
and now you are contributing also.
Has everyone noticed how the right wing invariably co-opts decent
ideas and proceeds to thoroughly pervert them? Religion becomes tyranny,
patriotism becomes murder, free enterprise becomes monopoly capitalism,
and most importantly to members of this List, family becomes patriarchy.
Why are they allowed to get away with it?
Thanks for the Quote, Laura. In times like these good people
need all the inspiration we can get, whether it comes from heretical
rabbis, ex-cons, or companion travelers on the road toward knowledge.

Peace,

Barry

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 03:41:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: Caitlin Chapman
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Raising children in our world
Message-ID:
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Wed, 8 May 1996, TashaStar wrote:

I hardly write by hand anymore at all. I think I only sign the kids
homework with a pen.

Funny, electronics used to be considered a *man* thing. <<harumph


Reminds me of something which happened to me, I guess it was 3 or 4
months ago. I play characters on a few MUD's and I'm really good at
building and pretty good at writing MPI code too. A lot of my VL
(virtual life) friends know that, I even built a room for 1 of them. Now
I don't like playing the role of "tech support" while I'm on a MUD but
I'm happy to lend a hand if someone's really having trouble.

Now I was helping out my VL mother (who I know is played by a real life
man). His system was slow and the sound card didn't work right. I just
told him to get new drivers and told him how to increase his swap file's
size. It all worked great afterwards. And what did he do? He asked me,
"You are a male user, right?" Geez, like only guys can be computer
literate or something.

Caitie!

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 05:18:24 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Raising children in our world
Message-Id: <199605101218.FAA17349@dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com

Caitie wrote:

He asked me,"You are a male user, right?" Geez, like only guys can be
computer literate or something.

I'm the only one in my family that really uses the computer, unless you
count playing games.

--
Laura Goodwin

" Truth is the only safe ground to stand on."

(Elizabeth Cady Stanton)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 15:11:50 -0500
From: rrlelnd@escape.ca (David Land)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Mothers Day and Music
Message-Id: <199605102011.PAA02822@wpg-01.escape.ca
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I recently listened to the song, I Want It All, by k. d. laing, and
I thought it communicated quite a dominant attitude. I wonder if others on
the list have noticed other tunes that impact on either the male or the
female role in a 24/7 domestic relationship of female supremacy.
Also, a propos of Mother's Day, are there suggestions about ways to
mark the day for a supreme mother, either one's own, or (in my case) someone
else's?

DL

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 11:18:39 -0700
From: jet@nwlink.com (Jet)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Raising children in our world
Message-Id: <199605101818.LAA25144@montana.nwlink.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Laura--

My daughter is only 8, and already says she feels fat (she's tall for
her age and medium in build, not tiny and dainty). I keep telling her
she is beautiful and perfect, and encouraging her to eat and grow.

It is scary raising children now...I waited until I was 29 to get pregnant
and when I had Alexandria, I realized that this would not be an easy
job at all. It was much easier before she started school than now, that
she is in school.

My baby sister had bulimia, and she ruined her teeth and general
health. She had to be hospitalized twice for it, and now finally seems
to be able to eat normally.

I am sorry for that. It makes me feel so much better when I hear of
someone finally eating normally.

My sister was bulimic, too. She finally died because
she couldn't get the support from my family in a way that was healthy
for her. I personally think it was suicide, though my family says that
she had a car accident. She was drunk, driving 80 mph on the freeway,
not wearing a seat belt, hit a telephone pole at that speed and was killed
instantly. When they did the autopsy, they found not only alcohol in her
blood, but speed/heroin as well. Just two weeks before, when she was at
work, her co-workers were telling me that she was crying all the time...
if someone looked at her, if she dropped something, if something went
wrong-she's start crying. It was devastating. She was 9 years younger than
I am.

I agree. There is a point where a girl must wear make-up to school or
she'll be ostracized by the other girls. It's a peer thing.
It's also a sex signal, a way of saying to the world: "I'm not a little
girl any more." I think that's why it worries some parents.

You're right about why they are wearing make-up. It is a sex signal
even though my daughter is more of a tomboy than anything, it is
worrisome. I've already had the "sex" talk with my daughter. I've told
her the many things men will say if they just want sex: If you loved
me, you'd do it. I'll get sick if you get me all turned on and then I can't
have sex. and many other little sayings. She knows that if she does decide
she really loves someone and that person really loves her, I will help her
by getting condoms, birth control, and anything else she needs to protect
herself. I only bring this stuff up when she asks me, but I feel greatful
that she does ask me.

I wish I lived in some wonderland where I knew my kids would get a
dignified and safe introduction to sexual activity. I'm very concerned
about the sexual predators who are waiting for them. All the concern
about weight and makeup comes down to what it takes to be attactive.
Girls get worried about that sooner than they used to. I can't help
but wonder, what's the rush?

I think we all do, Laura. We are all they have and if we don't do it, they
are at the mercy of their peers and sexual predators that either don't
know or know to much. It definitely is an issue of attractiveness. There
is no rush, except the rush society and the media seem to be putting
on our children. I monitor what she watches on television very closely
and then we talk about the hidden messages behind the programs or the
advertisements. I've been doing this since she saw her first television
program. It is very interesting how aware children are of what they see
there. Also, even billboards and ads in magazines, have those hidden
messages and we talk about that too. The only way to protect the children
is to teach them what to look for and what to watch out for and hope
they understand.

" Truth is the only safe ground to stand on."

(Elizabeth Cady Stanton)

Laura, I love this quote. It is one of my favorites.

Jet

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
That's the risk you take if you change: that the people you've
been involved with won't like the new you. But other people
who do will come along. --Lisa Alther

Jet Tenley P.O. Box 25171
jet@nwlink.com Seattle, WA 98125-2071
Phone: (206)527-0492 FAX: (206)517-3038

the subject "help".

--------------------------------
End of femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 Issue #65
***********************************************

From - Sat May 4 11:09:22 1996
Received: from orb.direct.ca (orb.direct.ca [199.60.229.5]) by badboy.iprolink.ch (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA08538 for
Received: from davinci.renaissoft.com ([199.60.103.1]) by orb.direct.ca with ESMTP id <28539-4630; Fri, 3 May 1996 23:08:22 -0700
Received: (from list@localhost) by davinci.renaissoft.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA15685 for virtjack@iprolink.ch; Fri, 3 May 1996 23:13:01 -0700
Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 23:13:01 -0700
From: femsupremacy-digest-request@renaissoft.com
Message-Id: <199605040613.XAA15685@davinci.renaissoft.com
Subject: femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 #61
X-Loop: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-Mailing-List:
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------"
To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
Reply-To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-UIDL: 009efe8605a691b696e2de82d8fa52fb
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001

------------------------------

Content-Type: text/plain

femsupremacy-digest Digest Volume 96 : Issue 61

Today's Topics:
Re: do the right thing
It's time. (Re: do the right thing)
Re: It's time. (Re: do the right thing)
Re: post message
Sex and the sacred...
A 3fer: FEARS, ESSENTIAL, EQUITY
Re: It's time. (Re: do the right thing)
Re: It's time.
Re: Sex and the sacred...
post message
Re: It's time.
Re: today's forwarded post #3
Re: BDSM support groups (was: Do the right thing)
Re: BDSM support groups (was: Do the right thing)
Re: Sex and Love :)

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 07:56:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Charles A. Kupperman - Personal Account"
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: do the right thing
Message-ID:
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Wed, 1 May 1996, Antonio wrote:

Women tend to need far less rules. Women are just nicer!

I think is called socialization. Women are socialized to be nicer and
less rule-centered. In practice, the more power a group gets, the more
aggressive and legalistic it becomes. And if you did try to rule the
world without a structured set of imperatives, you'd have rulers being
harsher to the people they didn't like than the people they did, which is
usually considered a bad thing.

Charles

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 06:08:32 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: It's time. (Re: do the right thing)
Message-Id: <199605021308.GAA13342@dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com

Charles wrote:
On Wed, 1 May 1996, Antonio wrote:

Women tend to need far less rules. Women are just nicer!

I think is called socialization. Women are socialized to be nicer and
less rule-centered. In practice, the more power a group gets, the
more aggressive and legalistic it becomes.

Much of the "niceness" of women has to do with biology. Women's
hormones effect the development of the body and brain, and also effects
moods on a daily basis. It's been well established scientifically what
the average person has been able to observe for themselves for
millenia: women (in general) *are* nicer than men (in general). Much
of what society expects of a person has to do with expected norms. Men
*are* more aggressive than women (in general). This is a readily
observeable, as well as a scientifically verifiable fact.

For this reason, many now feel that men can't be allowed to rule. The
game is too deadly, and women's special advantages must be called into
play to save the race and planet. Aggressive, bullying types can't
continue to rule if people no longer allow it. No matter how bad you
are, you can't rule alone, without support. I advocate the withdrawal
of support from the old boys, and a bloodless substitution of women and
men who think and behave responsibly, compassionately. It's time for
the nice guys and gals to win.

Heroism comes in many forms, and needs something to believe in. We
have to prepare the future for the men and women who will live there,
by thinking this business through and doing the homework, paving the
way. Every river is first a tiny trickle, but must one day become the
sea. Like water pouring into water, our generation will join with
those who follow us, and some of them will lead us. Watch for it.

Like the body has it's own timetable, human events have their own
scheduals to keep. Generation after generation, the patterns of major
social change repeat themselves. The train is at the station now, and
I for one am riding it.
--
Laura Goodwin

"The best things in life are corny." :)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 13:24:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Charles A. Kupperman - Personal Account"
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
cc: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: It's time. (Re: do the right thing)
Message-ID:
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

In response to Ms. Goodwin's very helpful and well thought out comments:

I disagree that the biological evidence points to women's innate niceness
in any meaningful sense. I am not a biologist, but my own sense is that
women are, if anything, genetically programmed to be "tougher" than men
because they tend to be adapted to care for children, which is the most
challenging job there is. Men have been socialized to play power games,
but my experience is that women pick them up fairly quickly.

History is full of people who thought they would be kinder or gentler than
the oppressors they sought to replace -- such people usually end up being
surprisingly similar to those oppressors in the end.

A good example is the Afrikans settlers in South Africa, who were
horribly oppressed by the British. They were denied the use of their own
language, restricted to shanty towns, and generally treated as
second-class citizens. When they finally got out from under the yoke of
the British, though, these same oppressed people turned around and
insitituted, point for point, the same system in regard to black
Africans, which came to be known as apartheid.

As you may be able to tell, I am extremely skeptical about any female
supremacy movement, as I would be towards any group that felt it was more
suited to rule than the rest of the human race. If this makes me
unsuitable for inclusion on this list, I'll be willing to unsubscribe.

Charles


the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 20:43:09 -0700
From: probe@ix.netcom.com (Maverick )
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: post message
Message-Id: <199605030343.UAA06947@dfw-ix12.ix.netcom.com

You wrote:

As far as femdom as a means to female supremacy. Any domination should
have as its
end result, mental and emotional domination. not phyisical. The
phyisical part
leads to the mental and emotional . This occurs when the male orgasm
has been
completely feminized. As it stands now the male erection and the
orgasm it produces
are nothing more than blatant aggression. It fills the male mind with
ideas of power
and control. This must be reversed. A means of doing this is to
reverse the conditions
under which the male is brought to orgasm. instead of man on top, man
on bottom
instead of man in control, man tied up and under control. instead of
man orgasming
when he wants to, man orgasming when female allows him to if she
allows him to at all.
eventually she does not allow him to at all and he accepts this as the
normal
reordering of things. once this is accomplished, mental and emotional
restructuring
of the male can begin and hopefully culminate in a progressive
supremicist mindset

you know what they say, when you've got them by the balls, their
hearts and their minds
will follow.



Great stuff, my wife and i are working towards this very same thing.
we would love to hear more of your ideas, email is welcome...

you really expressed the main idea and objective well, it seems we
have not gotten to that point in our FemDom lifestyle yet, but we
are beginning to hear more ideas like yours surface that seem to
really "hit the nail on the head" so to speak. To break down the
Femdom lifestyle to some common ground (or thread) that seems to
really empower the Female in the relationship so that it becomes a
real lifestyle of Femdom.

thanks again and write us sometime...

slave phil and Mistress C.S.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 02:26:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com (Female Supremacy List)
Subject: Sex and the sacred...
Message-Id: <199605030926.CAA24785@netcom6.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 2314

Last week, Laura Goodwin wrote:

Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 10:22:23 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
Subject: Do the right thing

...sex is sacred and must be respected and given it's proper due.

and

I believe that sex is sacred *now*.

Amen (choice of agreement word intentional).

There is a very necessary connection, without which neither
makes much sense. The connection is in the fact that both
the erotic and the holy engage the whole person, and both
call us to take part in the whole timeless cycle of
creation-destruction-re-creation. Both involve us in Awe.

When we mindfully partake of one, either the the erotic or the
holy, we partake of the other. We separate them at our loss.
If sex isn't transcendent and devotion erotic, something's missing.

That's why I am learning about both Kali and St Teresa and why
Tantra or its emerging western forms are so appealing.

(Perhaps women know all this at the cellular level, and men don't.
Elsewhere Laura wrote:

I hate to disillusion you, but women like
sex for sex's sake too. Women are more fitted by nature to entertain
many lovers, as opposed to just one. Women are more generous by
nature, and can juggle multiple relationships with finesse.

... and are perhaps not so addled by 'romance' as many men imagine
they are, the higher meaning of sex being already hard-wired in place,
written somewhere in her genes and not derived from anything some oaf
might have whispered. If she loves him, it's for other reasons, and if
he's a good lay, well, so be it. Perhaps 'romance' and the holy are not
the same thing at all, and sex by itself is much closer to the sacred.)

Laura's emphasis on *now* is bang on:
if the sacred can't happen right now, right this sweaty, moaning second
_in flagrante delicto_, then when ever can it happen?

Peace
--
coyote sings / man and sky / amfas@netcom.com

Show up. Lighten up. Pay attention. Feel awe. Make it count.
The rest is hidden.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 02:19:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com (Female Supremacy List)
Subject: A 3fer: FEARS, ESSENTIAL, EQUITY
Message-Id: <199605030919.CAA24490@netcom6.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 5156

18 months here, and still i have some nagging questions,
addressed in these three posts that go back over 3 weeks,
but worth dealing with. A 3fer to save bandwidth:

1. FEARS & IDEALS

On Sun, 7 Apr 1996 Caitlin Chapman

I can't figure out why these people, who don't like what the topic of
discusion is, just keep hanging around and bitching about it.

I'd say it's either a masochistic tendency they might not even be aware
of, or a desire to appear "normal" to others around them. Perhaps both.

[Illustration of two reactions to watching a Jerry Springer show]

Of course I can't speak for any 1 person and why they're here. But even
if you "shouldn't" be here, you had to seek out this mailing list and
send in your request to subscribe, so you had some reason to subscribe.

Perhaps there's a third (related) motive at work here, and it
finally hit me what it could be:

Horror of self-discovery.
All of the nasty shocks I've have had here in the
last 18 (?) months- there have been a few- have been
learning something new about myself, some new chink
in my armor, one less defense I can use or glib
argument I could hide behind. All of these are being
stripped away, and what's left is pretty, um, basic.

Perhaps that's what women are asking of men: "strip
to your shorts: show us who you really are, not the
drag you came in here wearing."

I hope men like myself (perhaps it is only me)
can get past these little fears -you (women here)
certainly make it easy and safe- and really contribute.

Personally, I don't feel it's worth my time to be here if I didn't agree
with the FS ideals. If I take the time to read opposing view points in
the paper, then I do it on my own. If I didn't believe in FS, I'd be
surrounded by those who do and that makes things uncomfortable if not
worse.

This was the first time I felt comfortable about dealing
with 'ideals,' because they historically have been
expressed by men, and with disastrous results. Invoked by
a woman, on behalf of women (and of humanity in general),
FS 'ideals' actually seem like something worth pursuing.

I think you've freed me from a lot of public introspection
to get on with discovering FS and its possibilities.

Thank you for that. :)

c.s

2. ESSENTIAL:

On Mon, 08 Apr 1996, Amy Ruth Baker

Subject: Re: feminism??

I think it's not necessary to limit "feminism" to one
narrow meaning. Not all feminists draw the line at equal
rights, and that doesn't mean they're not feminists.
Personally, I define feminism as living and looking at the
world (my life, other events) with a conscious awareness of
a woman's perspective and gender dynamics. It happens that
once you start looking at gender as an "essential" quality,
you can put together very reasonable position that women
are superior in many ways.

Wow. That last sentence says volumes.

If this means what I think it means, then the notion
that FS is a 'done deal' or inevitable is valid, and we move
from 'should' to 'is', from conditional to present and active,
when speaking of women or of the feminine.

I think. (Certainly not 'done' in the political or economic
sense. Not yet. But in human consciousness, soooooo close:
'A spectre is haunting [humanity]...')

Amy, would you care to say more about how this works?
I believe what you say about the 'reasonable position,'
but some illustrations would help me see it more clearly.
And would help me talk it up 'outside.'

I don't think that entails men-bashing, at least not necessarily,
and I for one would rather spend my energy on more constructive,
interesting endeavors than detailing mens' many failings.

Amen: Tedious pursuit and already well documented.
And it does neither you nor me any good to portray me
as a worm (even if I am one ;P ). Onward and upward.

c.s.

3. BEYOND EQUITY

Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 10:49:36 -0500
From: Amy Ruth Baker
Subject: Re: feminism??

And you still haven't made the very
important distinction between "feminist" and "femsupremacy" have you?

Still a problem for
we've got it. I can see it, but can't quite say it.

Would anyone here, especially women, care to say more about
this distinction? (I know there's no one 'correct' position.)

I thought, and then realized I haven't got a clue, except
the vague sense that Feminism is about equ(al)ity, whereas
Female Supremacy might be about equality and a _bit_ more
than that, being woman-centered and ... what?
--
coyote sings / man and sky / amfas@netcom.com

Show up. Lighten up. Pay attention. Feel awe. Make it count.
The rest is hidden.


the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 03:38:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: It's time. (Re: do the right thing)
Message-Id: <199605031038.DAA27576@netcom6.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1679

Charles wrote:

As you may be able to tell, I am extremely skeptical about any female
supremacy movement, as I would be towards any group that felt it was more
suited to rule than the rest of the human race. If this makes me
unsuitable for inclusion on this list, I'll be willing to unsubscribe.

It may be that many of us are really looking toward a time
(sooner rather than later) where 'feminine' qualities,
priorities, and values (however understood) prevail in culture
and in public life. This probbaly means a lot more than just
'nice' but something less than gender fascism.

It might also be said that women (for whatever reasons) are
_already_ doing more of what needs to be done to restore the
balance of nature and to teach us all a new way of getting along
based on something besides covetousness. Even if women aren't
more naturally disposed toward community, it seems (to some of us
at least) that women are using it in novel and hopeful ways.
Again, none of this necessarily means 'nice' or even 'gentle' and
certainly not 'fair.'

I'm not sure any of this is a 'movement' or an ideology
(Heaven forfend) so much as simply a new kind of awareness,
a new way of looking at things.

I for one am looking forward to finding and affirming the
Feminine with _myself_. I could really do with a little more
_glasnost'_ and being a lot more grounded.

c.s.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 05:19:04 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: It's time.
Message-Id: <199605031219.FAA15272@dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com

You wrote:

In response to Ms. Goodwin's very helpful and well thought out
comments:

my own sense is that women are, if anything, genetically programmed to
be "tougher" than men because they tend to be adapted to care for
children, which is the most challenging job there is.

It's been shown that women are best in the long haul, excelling in
areas that require sustained effort.
--
Laura Goodwin

" Truth is the only safe ground to stand on."

(Elizabeth Cady Stanton)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 05:40:44 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Sex and the sacred...
Message-Id: <199605031240.FAA19634@dfw-ix12.ix.netcom.com

coyote sings wrote:

If sex isn't transcendent and devotion erotic, something's missing.

Laura's emphasis on *now* is bang on: if the sacred can't happen right
now, right this sweaty, moaning second _in flagrante delicto_, then
when ever can it happen?

Agreed. I personally feel that Nature is the Goddess, and all Her
creation is holy. Sex obviously has the Divine stamp of approval, or
else She could have made us all multiply asexually.

I also believe that BDSM sex is a profound form of sex, because what
makes us particularly human gets called into play. We don't simply
couple as beasts, we can devise very individualistic and dramatic rites
which give free rein to our imaginations and reasoning powers, which we
can use to liberate or channel our erotic power. We stack our human
selves on top of our animal selves, and stand on both to reach up and
embrace the divine.
--
Laura Goodwin

" Truth is the only safe ground to stand on."

(Elizabeth Cady Stanton)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 09:43:35 CDT
From: bodie167@houston.email.net
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: post message
Message-Id: <9605030943.S556828474@houston.email.net

replying to slave phil and Mistress C.S.:
<<< Great stuff. My wife and i are working toward the very same thing. We
would love to hear more of your ideas. E-mail is welcome.
Without an E-mail address in the post, that would be difficult.
My Wife and I have debated this issue (of tangible lifestyle and
sexual relation changes which would not simply symbolize, but
solidify her rule and authority. They include property ownership,
and documents which the male would sign as evidence of crimes,
for example, which could be used as incriminating evidence by the
FemSupreme Wife should the husband ever step too far out of line.
While we have hotly debated these issues, and just how to institute
them into our marital reality, we both agree on one thing: The
male marital partner MUST do everything he can to sacrifice every
ounce of freedom and possibility of self-rule or escape. If he is
free to simply "kick the chess board over," and go back to being a
pig-husband, then the whole relationship loses its relevance.
You, -- slave phil, Mistress C.S., or the unnamed author of the
original article are wrlcome to correspond to me at
BODIE167@HOUSTON.EMAIL.NET

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 12:17:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: It's time.
Message-Id: <199605031918.MAA15858@netcom12.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1268

Laura Goodwin wrote:

It's been shown that women are best in the long haul, excelling in
areas that require sustained effort.

When I was a fairly new army lieutenant a thousand years ago, a very
senior old NCO -he had jumped in Normandy- put it to me this way in
a discussion about women in the Israeli army (this was just after
the 6-Day War):

"men make better warriors, but women make better soldiers:
they're good for the long haul."

Here's a book I've been reading: 'An Intimate History of Humanit,'
(by Theodore Zeldin, trade pub. Harper Collins, New York, 1994,
ISBN 0-06-017160). It narrates the history of relationships, and is
a sort of 'micro-anthropolgical' view of history. Very readable, it
makes almost the same point.

We look at a lawn, kept nice and green and mowed, and admire the
gardener. But the real work is being done by all the little bugs and
earthworms and microbes in the soil: they are the tillers. (Forgive
the unflattering comparison, if any.)

c.s.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 22:45:10 -0400
From: Lonely2001@aol.com
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: today's forwarded post #3
Message-ID: <960503224509_483989503@emout18.mail.aol.com

In a message dated 96-05-02 22:31:53 EDT, you write:

I feel the same way. Sex usually isn't good with a stranger, but
perhaps this is common trait shared by submissive men?

I've wondered that myself.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 22:45:07 -0400
From: Lonely2001@aol.com
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: BDSM support groups (was: Do the right thing)
Message-ID: <960503224506_483989490@emout15.mail.aol.com

In a message dated 96-05-02 22:31:35 EDT, you write:

I hope you will forgive my curiousity, but why are you reluctant to join
a BDSM support group? I have had many delightful experiences with this
crowd.


I suspect I may know some people who go to it and we don't get along at all.
I am also very reluctant to "come out of the closet" as it were and publicly
admit my submissive nature. Sorry, but that's how I feel.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 03 May 1996 23:35:05 -0700
From: hadley
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: BDSM support groups (was: Do the right thing)
Message-ID: <318AFA99.6144@tiac.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

No need to be sorry lone, safety and sense of safety comes first.
Mistress Patricia

Lonely2001@aol.com said:
I am also very reluctant to "come out of the closet" as it were and publicly
admit my submissive nature. Sorry, but that's how I feel.


the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 22:57:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Sex and Love :)
Message-Id: <199605040557.WAA04093@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1777

Laura Goodwin wrote:

True, and this misconception affects others in other ways: for example,
I know gay top men who are very defensive about liking to "be fucked",
because that is supposed to be something more proper for a bottom to
do. It's the whole idea that anything female-like is a sign of
weakness. In the gay/lesbian leather community, Fem tops are a
minority who must be constantly explaining themselves. "See, I'm a
fem, but I'm a top!" In the *hetero* femdom scene, a woman is
practially _required_ to be _excessively_ feminine, because just being
a woman is not enough. Men who are submissive to women are imagined to
be really sub-standard males who would be submissive to anybody, as if
a really admirable male would never so lower himself.

I'll just point out a few things that come to mind:

1. Look at the phrase "be f*cked". This is passive verb usage.
a. "Being f*cked" is generally considered to be a passive
activity.
b. To the general public, it's generally "the female partner" who
"is f*cked."
2. The person "being f*cked" is generally considered to be on the
bottom.
a. Being on the bottom is considered to be the passive position.
b. To the general public, it's generally "the female partner" who
is on the bottom.
3. The word "penetrate" often refers to an invasive act.
a. "Invasive" carries a somewhat non-consensual overtone.
b. Once again, to the general public, it's the woman being
"penetrated."

Dee-Ann

the subject "help".

--------------------------------
End of femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 Issue #61
***********************************************

From - Wed May 8 18:40:34 1996
Received: from orb.direct.ca (orb.direct.ca [199.60.229.5]) by badboy.iprolink.ch (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA15402 for
Received: from davinci.renaissoft.com ([199.60.103.1]) by orb.direct.ca with ESMTP id <28507-1017; Mon, 6 May 1996 15:12:49 -0700
Received: (from list@localhost) by davinci.renaissoft.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA11479 for virtjack@iprolink.ch; Mon, 6 May 1996 15:17:15 -0700
Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 15:17:15 -0700
From: femsupremacy-digest-request@renaissoft.com
Message-Id: <199605062217.PAA11479@davinci.renaissoft.com
Subject: femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 #62
X-Loop: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-Mailing-List:
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------"
To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
Reply-To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-UIDL: 3c322cd31cf493a35a52cea63bbb1f55
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001

------------------------------

Content-Type: text/plain

femsupremacy-digest Digest Volume 96 : Issue 62

Today's Topics:
Re: Womanly = substandard, weakness etc. (Was: Re: Sex and Love :))
Re: BDSM support groups (was: Do the right thing)
Re: Sex and Love :)
Re: Womanly = substandard, weakness etc. (Was: Re: Sex and
Love :))
Re: Sex & Love
Re: Womanly = substandard, weakness etc. (Was: Re: Sex and Love :))
Female superiority, Aha!
Re: Female superiority, Aha!
Re: Womanly = substandard, weakness etc. (Was: Re: Sex and Love :))
The Source
And they wonder why women are angry
Dominance
Re: Female superiority, Aha!
Re: And they wonder why women are angry
Hope springs eternal (Was 'sex and love')

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 23:09:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: magnus.thelander@mailbox.swipnet.se
Subject: Re: Womanly = substandard, weakness etc. (Was: Re: Sex and Love :))
Message-Id: <199605040610.XAA04120@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 2036

Magnus Thelander wrote:

Which women are expected to be excessively feminine? Tops, bottoms
or both?

Which group or groups harbour these expectations?

Submissive men who are fairly new to the world of BDSM often seem to
have this assumption going that dominant women run around in 5" heels,
have perfect bodies, wear perfect makeup, and have an extensive fetish
wardrobe. If a dominant woman dares to say she wears jeans, sneakers,
and a sweatshirt, she must not really be dominant. I'm not saying by
any means that all men interested in dominant women feel that way,
because I've met plenty who do. But, I run across it on a fairly
regular basis.

Newish dominant women often feel that they _have_ to be beautiful and
have that extensive fetish wardrobe to be a "real dominant woman"


There is a myth that aggressive women are sexual wildwomen...always
looking for someone to fool around with. Note that people also tend
to assume that gay and lesiban folk are always having sex with anyone
of the same gender, and don't know how to take no for an answer.
There seems to be something about people who are wired sexually
different from "normal" that makes some folks think these people have
the sex drive from hell.

I have to wonder if this makes some women afraid to be aggressive in
real life, because they're afraid it's going to make men assume that
they're "hot to trot."

Hmm ... perhaps this should've gone to a.s.fd. Sorry if I've
annoyed someone.

IMO, as long as we can try to keep these BDSM related topics somewhere
related as well to femsupremacy, I don't see a problem. Though, I'd
be disappointed if all of the discussion except for the BDSM
discussion died out.

Dee-Ann

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 4 May 1996 13:00:34 -0400
From: Lonely2001@aol.com
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: BDSM support groups (was: Do the right thing)
Message-ID: <960504130034_287073041@emout09.mail.aol.com

In a message dated 96-05-03 23:41:28 EDT, you write:

No need to be sorry lone, safety and sense of safety comes first.
Mistress Patricia

Lonely2001@aol.com said:
I am also very reluctant to "come out of the closet" as it were and
publicly
admit my submissive nature. Sorry, but that's how I feel.




Thanks for the kind words, Mistress! It makes me feel a bit better!

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 4 May 1996 15:07:37 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Sex and Love :)
Message-Id: <199605042207.PAA26056@dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com

1. Look at the phrase "be f*cked". This is passive verb usage.
a. "Being f*cked" is generally considered to be a passive
activity.
b. To the general public, it's generally "the female partner" who
"is f*cked."
2. The person "being f*cked" is generally considered to be on the
bottom.
a. Being on the bottom is considered to be the passive position.
b. To the general public, it's generally "the female partner" who
is on the bottom.
3. The word "penetrate" often refers to an invasive act.
a. "Invasive" carries a somewhat non-consensual overtone.
b. Once again, to the general public, it's the woman being
"penetrated."

Right, and there *are* other ways of looking at this. For example, a
woman could be receptive, not passive, she could be engulfing,
surrounding, or consuming the penis, surpassing or topping it, instead
of being invaded by it. The man could be said to be offering himself,
when he enters, and giving up or surrendering when he comes. A cock
need not be seen as a weapon, but as a bridge between bodies, or an
ambassador from one body to another. The way a vagina takes a strong,
hard cock and drains it, leaving it weak, could be seen as an act of
female power, not weakness. The semen can be seen as a kind of food
for the thirsty cunt, or mouth, which means men can be seen as playing
a nurturing role in the act of intercourse. He gives her "life" (the
semen is alive, and the beginning of human life), it could be said he
gives his life to her.


--
Laura Goodwin

" Truth is the only safe ground to stand on."

(Elizabeth Cady Stanton)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 5 May 1996 07:22:16 -0700
From: Jay Doubleyou
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Womanly = substandard, weakness etc. (Was: Re: Sex and
Love :))
Message-Id: <199605051422.HAA11463@netcom.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

On Fri, 3 May 1996, Dee-Ann LeBlanc
[Just couldn't bear to snip this... sorry.]
Submissive men who are fairly new to the world of BDSM often seem to
have this assumption going that dominant women run around in 5" heels,
have perfect bodies, wear perfect makeup, and have an extensive fetish
wardrobe. If a dominant woman dares to say she wears jeans, sneakers,
and a sweatshirt, she must not really be dominant. I'm not saying by
any means that all men interested in dominant women feel that way,
because I've met plenty who do. But, I run across it on a fairly
regular basis.

Newish dominant women often feel that they _have_ to be beautiful and
have that extensive fetish wardrobe to be a "real dominant woman"


There is a myth that aggressive women are sexual wildwomen...always
looking for someone to fool around with. Note that people also tend
to assume that gay and lesiban folk are always having sex with anyone
of the same gender, and don't know how to take no for an answer.
There seems to be something about people who are wired sexually
different from "normal" that makes some folks think these people have
the sex drive from hell.

I have to wonder if this makes some women afraid to be aggressive in
real life, because they're afraid it's going to make men assume that
they're "hot to trot."

Nicely said, Dee-Ann. I'd like to include an edited version of this in the
alt.sex.femdom FAQ List (which is currently going through a major revision.
That is, if you don't mind. And you will, of course, be credited.

-Thanks in advance,
JW

--
juu@netcom.com * juu on IRC (#femdom) * Exclusive property of Miladi N
"Thou art to me a delicious torment." -R. W. Emerson (on Miladi?)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 May 1996 09:42:05 -0500
From: Roland Foy
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Sex & Love
Message-ID: <318CBE3D.6665@pclink.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Laura Goodwin wrote:
Right, and there *are* other ways of looking at this. For example, a
woman could be receptive, not passive, she could be engulfing,
surrounding, or consuming the penis, surpassing or topping it, instead
of being invaded by it. The man could be said to be offering himself,
when he enters, and giving up or surrendering when he comes. A cock
need not be seen as a weapon, but as a bridge between bodies, or an
ambassador from one body to another. The way a vagina takes a strong,
hard cock and drains it, leaving it weak, could be seen as an act of
female power, not weakness. The semen can be seen as a kind of food
for the thirsty cunt, or mouth, which means men can be seen as playing
a nurturing role in the act of intercourse. He gives her "life" (the
semen is alive, and the beginning of human life), it could be said he
gives his life to her.

This illustrates the most blatant lie ever forced upon our society:
Male - the superior sex !
Sexually the male is far inferior to the female. The penis is good for
one brief session, once drained it is useless for an extended period.
The vagina can enjoy continuous sex for long periods, climaxing many
times. One woman (if she chooses) can sap a harem of males during any
given period while a man can service only one female. Following this
offering he is left limp, his testicles empty. Another misconception
that tickles me to no end is the "vunerable female" attitude. By design
the male is much more vunerable. With his balls dangling on the outside
of his body, mere targets, that if attacked leave him helpless. Most men
are physically stronger than most women but all SHE needs to do is reach
out and squeeze his sac and his strength is nutralized. I find no one
point in the female anatomy that makes her so vunerable. The tendancy
for the male to be more assertive/aggressive than the female is what
has kept men on top. When dealing with barnyard animals this aggression
is curbed thru castration (let's hope the ladies don't tire of our
attitudes once they take over - then again it would cure baldness) ;-)

Roland (confused as always)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 5 May 1996 12:02:20 -0400
From: Janice1223@aol.com
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Womanly = substandard, weakness etc. (Was: Re: Sex and Love :))
Message-ID: <960505120219_107020677@emout08.mail.aol.com

The only thing I can say is that when I wear my 4" stiletto heels, he grovels
at my feet. I am in complete control when this happens. Of course wearing
other footwear, he is still in my control....

Janice

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 5 May 1996 17:43:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: zbobz
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Female superiority, Aha!
Message-Id: <199605052143.RAA07695@sweden.it.earthlink.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

For a long time now I've been confused by the concept of Female
superiority, but I think I've finally got it straight. On a deep level I've
always felt that Women are superior to men. On another level I've always
thought it was a rationally indefensible position. The problem I had with
thinking about it was that superiority when used in a sentence such as
"Women are superior to men" doesn't seem to have any actual meaning.
Superior in what way is the next thing you have to ask. Once you actually
say specifically how She is superior then someone else says but what about
... (some other attribute in which men seem to excell)... and you end up
comparing not just apples and oranges but the whole fruit basket piece by
piece, and wondering just what you're actually talking about. (Someone
inevitably says that apples are more important than oranges, and then the
discussion turns to who's personal opinion is more enlightened.) You end up
wondering just why you do think the Women are superior to men, since it
doesn't seem susceptible to a rational defense.

I don't claim that the solution to this problem (that I'm about to tell
you about) is my personal invention, but it is at least the first time I've
grasp it well enough to present it so that it makes complete sense (to at
least me).

The answer is that when I say Women are superior to men, I mean the
Female gender is superior to the male gender with respect to reproductive
role. While both genders are required to achieve reproduction, She carries
the primary burden of responsibility and control. She is his equal or (in
most instances) his superior with respect to any aspect of the reproductive
function. It is not that the Female gender must acquire superiority via
association with other attributes, but rather that Femaleness is an
attribute in itself superior to the attribute to maleness. Woman is the
primary gender, and males the secondary gender with respect to the function
of reproduction. This is not a minor point, since the reproductive function
is the most vital and important function, and in that central position
shapes all other secondary functions. Woman's gender superiority shapes all
of human reality and experience.

Having grasp the foregoing, my feelings about submission, Female
superiority, Female domination, etc. make a whole lot more sense. These are
not the stuff of aberration, but rather the surfacing of a deep (perhaps
hardwired) understanding of the human biological reality, and the roles of
Women and men.

zbobz

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 May 1996 18:58:57 -0700
From: hadley
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Female superiority, Aha!
Message-ID: <318D5CE1.A01@tiac.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

zbobz:

I always put it this way, women who seek to be equal to men..lack
ambition.
Patricia

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 06 May 96 03:37:58 +0200
From: "Magnus Thelander"
To: "femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Subject: Re: Womanly = substandard, weakness etc. (Was: Re: Sex and Love :))
Message-Id: <199605060148.DAA28340@mailbox.swip.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Sun, 5 May 1996 12:02:20 -0400, Janice1223@aol.com wrote:

The only thing I can say is that when I wear my 4" stiletto heels, he grovels
at my feet. I am in complete control when this happens. Of course wearing

Are you sure that you are in control and not your 4" stilettos?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Magnus Thelander | Fidonet: 2:200/422.21 | Everybody knows, that the
|Drottninggatan 4A | Tel.: +46-708-535155 | best nuts come from
|212 11 Malmo | Timezone= CET + 1 | California.
|Sweden | | -Sunkist
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 01:52:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com (Female Supremacy List)
Subject: The Source
Message-Id: <199605060852.BAA03356@netcom3.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 2855

This post is captioned 'The Source' because I'm using it to play back
part of a post Laura Goodwin made over a week ago, in which she tells
us what the wellsprings of Female Supremacy might be.

(I think early humans also partook of great awe and wonder about things
in the sky and natural phenomena -storms, lightning, thunder, etc- that
led in time to the 'sky-god' religions and [patriarchal] outlook, but
none of that detracts from the power of Laura's vision here. A human
_response_ to invisible / intangible forces may well have been to identify
with life, the earth, fertility, blood, violent death and other related
images in the natural cycle. See how this contrasts with the 'sky-god'
vision of our being at war with / oppressed by terrible remote forces.
No religion has ever fully resolved these contradictions, although Hinduism
seems to have incorporated them all, and Buddhism seems to unify them.
But since we humans live in Nature, it might be best to connect with it
in some deep and conscious way, whatever our religion or lack thereof.)

Thanks also to Witchlvr and his(?) 3-part 'My Theory' thread, which
deserves more comment.

c.s.

This is a 'keeper' for me, and I hope Dee will put Laura's text in the
archives somewhere:

Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 07:24:53 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
Subject: Re: My theory (three)

Women ruled men from the beginning of humanity, when the use of animals
for food and clothing was celebrated in hunt rituals presided over by a
Priestess who represented the bloodthirsty Goddess of life and death.

It's very possible that the race memory in our DNA influences our
modern-day fetish behaviors.

There is a continuous tradition of women using make-up and symbolic
garments and tools to fascinate and bewitch men. Since before Homo
Sapiens, Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal women were painting black ash
around their eyes, and staining their lips and fingers with red
berries, henna, or ochre. They were trying to resemble the fearsome
and mysteriously beautiful Goddess of life and death. The red stain
symbolized blood, and certainly in many cases actual blood was used.

There's not really that great a difference between the Cro-Magnon
priest who dons an animal mask and dances, while dancing hunters pursue
him to his symbolic death at the feet of the naked Priestess adorned
with fur and ochre, and the modern-day man who abases himself for his
leather-clad mistress, becoming a dog on a leash.

lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 06:34:45 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: And they wonder why women are angry
Message-Id: <199605061334.GAA10300@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com

SEX HARASSMENT SUITS SOAR - Women at Chrysler's Fenton, Mo., minivan
plant say they've been subjected to men grabbing them from behind. At
RJR Nabisco's Oxnard, Calif., chile-processing plant, women say they
weren't allowed bathroom breaks and had to wear diapers. [USA TODAY]


--
Laura Goodwin

" Truth is the only safe ground to stand on."

(Elizabeth Cady Stanton)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 06:34:11 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Dominance
Message-Id: <199605061334.GAA28674@dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com

Our humanity, our human instincts, are encoded into every cell of our
bodies. Homo Sapiens is the most rational, the most intelligent, the
most dominant, and the most dangerous human species that ever lived on
this world. We pass on those genes, to both our sons and daughters.
Parents carry and pass on genes for both dominance and submission, no
matter what they are in your life.

Humans have social instincts because we are a social creature. We have
an instinct for finding our place within a hierarchy, for dominance and
submission. Nobody is dominant at all times. A person is dominant in
those circumstances where they rise above. Everybody is submissive at
times, dominant at other times.

Some people are born more talented, more assertive, more intelligent.
Some people tend to rise to a dominant position in life, and they are
as likely to be women as men. Women and men do differ in how they
process experience, and they do have their separate gifts and
weaknesses.

Anybody can be put in a no-win situation, and be robbed of
opportunities. Anybody can be forced by circumstance to accept
humiliation and hardship as a fact of life. Anybody can be prevented
from reaching their full potential, if enough obstacles are placed
before them. Anyone can be stunted, even stopped short, and for any
number of reasons.

The reasons used to prevent females from participating to the fullest
extent in social leadership are false and the motives for clinging to
the patriarchal model are ignoble. Women are not taking it anymore,
they are standing up and standing together all over the world, and
plenty of right-minded men stand with them, and for all the right
reasons. These women and men are the ones who will ultimately rule,
and the social forms that they institute will stand, gloriously, for a
long, long time.
--
Laura Goodwin

" Truth is the only safe ground to stand on."

(Elizabeth Cady Stanton)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 06:09:27 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Female superiority, Aha!
Message-Id: <199605061309.GAA15888@dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com

Having grasped the foregoing, my feelings about submission, Female
superiority, Female domination, etc. make a whole lot more sense.
These are not the stuff of aberration, but rather the surfacing of a
deep (perhaps hardwired) understanding of the human biological
reality, and the roles of Women and men.

zbobz

Agreed. The real reason it's hard to explain our instincts for female
supremacy is because they spring from our guts, our sexuality, the seat
of human mystery. The experience of awe, of having become acquainted
with deep mystery, is always very difficult to explain or rationalize,
although that doesn't reduce it's power to influence us. The awareness
of deep reality is an animal awareness, and non-verbal, non-rational.

The rational part of our awareness is a fairly recent addition, and
it's needed for language and mathematical calculation. The more
important part of our human mind is more primitive.

Our sexuality is one of the most primitive aspects of our being. That
doesn't mean is out-of-date...DNA constantly upgrades itself with every
generation. It builds upon itself organically, not mechanically, in
ways we can sense, even appreciate, but not surpass.

We understand Nature through experience, through a relationship with
Her. Men have to experience female supremacy...women have to experience
male submissiveness, to know it. It's the like the difference between
talking about a hug you watched, and giving/getting one yourself.
Talking about a rainbow or earthquake is not like experiencing one. I
have experienced essential male submission, and female dominance, lots
of it, and I believe in it like I believe in air. Do you believe in
air? But try to *explain* air...

"Well, see, it's everywhere (well, not everywhere, but everywhere you
want to be), and it's invisible, but you can see it when it moves
(well, you can't really see it, but you can see what things do when
moved by it) and you can feel it when it moves around you and blows
your hat off...and sometimes it can be really fierce and destroy whole
towns and stuff. But basically you just need it to live."









--
Laura Goodwin

" Truth is the only safe ground to stand on."

(Elizabeth Cady Stanton)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 13:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: And they wonder why women are angry
Message-Id: <199605062008.NAA11452@netcom11.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1420

Laura Goodwin wrote:

SEX HARASSMENT SUITS SOAR - Women at Chrysler's Fenton, Mo., minivan
plant say they've been subjected to men grabbing them from behind. At
RJR Nabisco's Oxnard, Calif., chile-processing plant, women say they
weren't allowed bathroom breaks and had to wear diapers. [USA TODAY]

One more nail...

For another recent overview, please see this week's
_Business Week_ (dated May 13) cover story, titled
_Abuse Of Power_. There has also been extensive recent
reporting of the Mitsubishi situation...

I have three -that's three- close woman friends caught up
in similar situations, ranging from a hostile work environment
to monster class action lawsuits.

Yet more nails...

(BW is a pretty good US resource, btw, and is much more
pro-Woman and generally progressive than others of its
kind. It's also becoming more small business in content,
and has extensive reporting on social issues. The same issue
just cited cited has a special section on small business.)

What puzzles me is that some men in management seem to be getting
worse, not better, as public awareness increases. Wah!O˘j˝˜≥

c.s.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 13:04:07 -0700
From: jet@nwlink.com (Jet Tenley)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Hope springs eternal (Was 'sex and love')
Message-Id: <199605062004.NAA07187@montana.nwlink.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hello --

I don't. The more I know a woman, like her, lover her, the more she turns
me on. I cannot do "one night stands."

I cannot do "one night stands" either. The impersonal feeling about it does
little to encourage my arousal. I feel more like an object, as opposed to
feeling
like a person.

While I received some
enjoyment from the excitement, etc -- very little really, when balanced with
the guilt -- sexually it was a disaster. I was barely functional, while I am
NEVER disfunctional with my Wife.

This is wonderful to hear. I am amazed that more men do not feel this way, and
if they do feel this way, that they don't communicate it. I've had several
one-night
stands and always felt unclean and/or used...not at the time, but the next
morning,
for several reasons. The biggest being: the man never called back to even
say, " Thank
you, it was nice, but you're not my type.." or something like that.. Is
this a courage
problem or was is a lack of self-respect and guilt on their part? I've
always wondered.

Through my honesty with her about my bdsm
needs, we have since redefined our own relationship through bdsm and have had
marvelous results. I think that only through respect for and knowledge of a
woman can many men find fulfillment (corny as it may sound.)

It may be corny, but it is also very refreshing hearing this from a man. It
just
shows how important communication is between a loving couple.



femsupremacy-digest Digest Volume 96 : Issue 59

Today's Topics:
Forwarded post #16...last one!
Forwarded post #15
Re: Forwarded post #6
Sex and Love :)
length of posts
100 line 1-liners (Was Re: Forwarded post #6)
Re: 100 line 1-liners (Was Re: Forwarded post #6)
BDSM support groups (was: Do the right thing)
today's forwarded post #4
Re: Do the right thing

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 03:23:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: femsupremacy@catherine.renaissoft.com
Subject: Forwarded post #16...last one!
Message-Id: <199604301023.DAA00531@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1886

From emersonw@ohsu.EDU Mon Apr 29 17:41:58 1996
Received: from steele.ohsu.EDU (steele.ohsu.edu [137.53.1.40]) by davinci (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA30555 for
Received: by steele.ohsu.EDU (5.x/SMI-SVR4)
id AA29468; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 17:37:26 -0700
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 17:37:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Barry Emerson Wright
X-Sender: emersonw@steele
To:
Cc: "femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Subject: Re: Female supremacists in unexpected places.
In-Reply-To: <199604290622.IAA23667@mailbox.swip.net
Message-Id:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII



On Mon, 29 Apr 1996, wrote:

Would any of the members of this list, who do live in a female
supremacy relationship, be willing to share with the list how and
where they met. People meet in the most fascinating ways and places.

While my relationship is not a FemSupremacy one, my partner is definitely
a Feminist. We met at an environmental organizational meeting. Oregon
has some beautiful and ecologically necessary Old forest growth, and the
timber barons are trying to cut it down for the sake of short-term profit.

We have our kinks in the bedroom (and a few other places ;-) but the
real basis of our relationship is respect and understanding. I have
introduced her to the concept of FemSupremacy through this newslist but
her development is her decision to make.

Peace,

Barry

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 03:18:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: femsupremacy@catherine.renaissoft.com
Subject: Forwarded post #15
Message-Id: <199604301018.DAA00516@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 5510

From lawless@mail.eskimo.com Mon Apr 29 13:01:56 1996
Received: from mail.eskimo.com (root@mail.eskimo.com [204.122.16.4]) by davinci (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA19327 for
Received: from eskimo.com (lawless@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA05711 for
From: Chase Vogelsberg
Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id NAA15311; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 13:01:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199604292001.NAA15311@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: 'pure' service (Was Unidentified subject!)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 13:01:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <199604261804.OAA22520@anshar.shadow.net from "TashaStar" at Apr 26, 96 01:07:43 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


TashaStar wrote:
In my experience, a small percentage of submissive men seek out a
professional Domina with desires of "true" unselfish service.... [snip]
Please do not discount the reality that there are those who will
happily wash my car, clean my studio, or some other meanial task just
because I desire it, and I give them a different sort of appreciation
then they might recieve from someone who is not bdsm oriented.

Heh. A -very- small percentage, I suspect less than the two in fifty you
mention. And in my posts, I never said that there were absolutely no men
who would do the lawn, the dishes, wash the car, etc, simply for the sake
of their partner. Flame, I know some -vanilla- men who cook dinner and do
the dishes, because their wife is having a long hard day at work. What I
argued against was the statement that "true subs" do whatever they're told,
and submit, purely for the sake of service itself.

The ideal of "Service" is extremely out of favor in western civilization,
in so far as performing deeds purely for the sake of duty, of knowing that
the server has been of, well, service. In the case of the vanilla person,
he's probably not doing dishes purely for the sake of knowing the dishes
have been well washed, nor for the sake of the dishes themselves. Odds are,
it's because of a love for his partner, out of a desire for equity in the
relationship. As you yourself state - "I give them a different sort of
appreciation .... [that is possibly bdsm oriented]".

In particular, I've argued that those who go outside their marriage or
other primary relationship, surreptitiously, are not likely to be doing so
purely for the sake of being of service. Else they could stay home and
wash the wife's car, clean the wife's studio. For whatever reason, (most
often sexual) the sub wants something -other- than the knowledge that he's
been of service. It may be sexual, it may be that he wants criticism and
humiliation, it might simply be the pleasure of being able to spend time in
the company of a dominant woman, or other rewards - a flogging, the sight
of the woman in fetish attire, the thrill of kneeling and kissing her foot.

...If it was purely for the joys of serving, the sub wouldn't need to
go out of the primary relationship...

I wish this was true, but it is not,and (believe it or not, I really
don't care if you don't) I usually discuss ways for my clients to introduce
this into their existing relationship.

Heh. Regardless of whether or no you care, I do believe you. In my opinion,
ProDommes -can- be a profession - a vocation requiring specialized training,
and possessed of its own set of professional ethics. But. I suspect you
counsel them on how to introduce bdsm into their relationship, yes? Not
how to incorporate washing the car or doing housework into their marriage.
Yes, submissives can have altruistic sides to their submission - but it is
very doubtful that it's purely for the sake of serving. Else - what could
possibly be more masochistic, than a submissive living and serving within a
purely vanilla non-bdsm relationship? ;)

Point is, the submissive finds satisfaction in serving -you-, another sub-
missive finds content in pleasing her or his owner - a specific person, and
typically, there is some fair amount of pleasure and reward in knowing that
they've pleased you. Or, they eroticize the act - for instance, I know one
who is very happy, excited even, to be scrubbing his mistress' bathroom. I
will admit that it's partly for the sake of serving - but also because he
finds it erotic. (Now if only -I- could find a domme who found doing house-
work erotic....

And again - I'm not saying there's not people who serve without hope of
reward, although I -do- think they're getting something out of it. But if
it were purely for the sake of being of service, they could serve their
spouse, without there being any BDSM or D/s to it. *sigh* An' this topic
-really- probably had ought to be on asfd or somesuch 'stead of here... ;-(

-- \_awless is : Aliena's wolf, with no desire for a housework Domme ;-
-- Chase Vogelsberg (lawless@netcom.com / lawless@eskimo.com)
--
-- Is a housework domme like a clockwork one, only without the ticking?

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 21:04:20 +1000 (EST)
From: mike Lee
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Forwarded post #6
Message-Id: <199604301104.VAA20658@oznet02.ozemail.com.au
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

My apologys Dee-Ann.
OOooppss I've done it again.

MyKey

At 02:17 AM 30/4/96 -0700, you wrote:
Note from Dee-Ann:

MyKey: I've noticed that the first 6 items, out of the 16, were all
one word replies from you. Please, either send these kinds of replies
in private e-mail, or put a bunch of them in one post (e.g. putting
all 6 individual replies in 1 post). This will take some of the
burden off of my site.

From mykey@ozemail.com.au Mon Apr 29 02:04:42 1996
Received: from oznet16.ozemail.com.au (oznet16.ozemail.com.au
[203.2.192.109]) by davinci (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA08154 for

Received: from oznet02.ozemail.com.au (oznet02.ozemail.com.au
[203.2.192.124]) by oznet16.ozemail.com.au (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id
TAA13739 for
(EST)
Received: from slsyd5p46.ozemail.com.au (slsyd5p46.ozemail.com.au
[203.7.186.134]) by oznet02.ozemail.com.au (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id
TAA01145 for
(EST)
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 19:04:37 +1000 (EST)
Message-Id: <199604290904.TAA01145@oznet02.ozemail.com.au
X-Sender: mykey@ozemail.com.au (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
From: mike Lee
Subject: Re: Do the right thing

Great advise, thank you.

MyKey

At 04:17 PM 28/4/96 -0700, you wrote:
Lonely2001@aol.com wrote:

I realize my weekness in this regard. That is, a desire to be dominated.
I am
submissive to all women in general (I am regarded as "chivalrous" and a
"nice
guy"). But I know that if I was in a vanilla relationship I would be
dissatisfied after a while. I make sure to tell someone I am dating
before we
get too serious. I am sad to say, most, so far, think it is sick, depraved,
perverted, etc. I have been puzzled by this. They don't like the idea of a
man to do their bidding? Lost a lot of girlfriends... But I believe honesty
is important.

Because this is a Femsupremacy forum, and not a femdom forum, I'm
going to try to address this from a Femsuprem perspective.

A lot of women _don't_ like the idea of having a man to do their
bidding. Some can't get past the fact that their culture tells them
it should be the other way around. Some are simply anal retentive and
feel that no one can clean/cook/whatever as well as they can, and so
don't want someone else trying to do it for them. Some are simply not
naturally dominant, and not inclined to have to deal with being in
charge of someone else. Etc.

What's my point? There are many kinds of women out there. Not all of
them are going to want to be in charge of a relationship. Among
those, there are some who even if they could overcome the cultural
"men should be on top" brainwashing STILL wouldn't want to be in
charge. It's their choice, and their right to make that choice.

It's good to be honest. It's good that you are sure to tell them
fairly up front. It saves you both some pain in the end. It's one
thing to get into a vanilla relationship thinking it's all you want
and need, and finding out differently later (a horrifying thing,
though :/). Sabotaging yourself in the beginning by getting into a
serious vanilla relationship with someone who is not accepting of your
non-vanilla needs _and_ not willing to allow you an outside
owner/partner seems rather self-defeating to me.

How to make friends who are into Femsupremacy (I discuss making
friends instead of finding mates because the best way to find a mate
is to not desperately seek one, but instead to make friends with
similar interests)? Participate in forums, both online and real
life, where Femsupremacists share their views. You won't find a
bounty of places that are only Femsupremacists. You can also try
overlapping forums, such as Feminist, Female Domination, etc., where
Femsupremacists may spend their time. Getting a little more generic,
there are women's groups that accept aid from men, and there are
general BDSM groups.

Also, if you show respect to women in everything you do, you may find
Femsupremacists in places you didn't expect, like a cycling club or a
chess club.

The key is patience and attentiveness. Be attentive to your own
actions. If you consistantly show that you are respectful of women, a
woman who desires that quality may perhaps show an interest in you.

Dee-Ann

___________________________________________________________________
Questions and comments should be sent to listmaster@renaissoft.com.
For a list and description of supported mailing list commands, send
mail to femsupremacy-request@renaissoft.com with the subject "help".




___________________________________________________________________
Questions and comments should be sent to listmaster@renaissoft.com.
For a list and description of supported mailing list commands, send
mail to femsupremacy-request@renaissoft.com with the subject "help".




the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 05:51:40 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Sex and Love :)
Message-Id: <199604301251.FAA03102@dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com

In response to me Magnus wrote:

I feel that renting the
skills or body of someone to help you get off is a form of
prostitution. I feel paying with gifts is still payment.

If this reasoning is extrapolated a bit (OK, much :)), one could
argue that marriage is a from legalized prostitution, unless the
partners keep separate economies.

In a slightly longer stretch, anyone who does anything for money is a
kind of prostitute. :) Mind you, I don't personally feel that
prostitution is in itself wrong or bad...In the ancient matriarchies
prostitutes were sacred. The priestesses of the Goddess were
prostitutes, and sex was celebrated as a gift of the Goddess.

...men usually don't associate sex and love.

:::groan::: not that old chestnut again. Look, if women always have to
associate sex and love, then *explain prostitutes*. Do they *love*
every customer? Huh? Do they? In olden times, they did. The temple
priestesses dispensed charity in the form of sexual and spiritual love
combined in a single embrace.

Sex is sex, and love is love. At least that's what many say. To women
sex and love seem to be two sides of the same coin.

Then again, maybe that whole idea is simply false, and a product of the
Patriarchal P.R. machine. I hate to disillusion you, but women like
sex for sex's sake too. Women are more fitted by nature to entertain
many lovers, as opposed to just one. Women are more generous by
nature, and can juggle multiple relationships with finesse.

Throughout history it has been the goal of the male to impregnate
as many females as possible.

Nonsense. I disagree. Throughout "history" men have been virulently
anti-sex and anti-woman, to such an extent that you couldn't get a Xian
church blessing for your marriage until the late middle-ages. Still,
at this point in history the question becomes: how to avoid
impregnating women...the overpopulation of the world is reaching
emergency status. Enough with the endlessly rocking cradles! Women
contribute equally to the genetic heritage of every child. At the
moment of conception men and women are equal. At no point after that
are they equal. Woman's personal investment in children is
overwhelming, and her parental primacy is absolute. Women have a
greater personal stake in every single child, and should by rights have
total control over mating. This business of men having control and
running amok has got to stop.

This could be the reason why men so easily disassociate sex and love.

Men have been taught to disassociate themselves from women, and to deny
women except for the most basic necessary things. Sex and love
combined is women's knockout power, and men have been warned against it
for generations, because it's a great power, and the patriarchs don't
want to let women have power. If you don't want someone to have power,
or you want for yourself someone else's power, you do things, tell-tale
things. The anti-sex, anti-woman people have left a paper trail a
whole world wide, not to mention the stone monuments. Do your
homework! That's why the church was anti-marriage for so long. They
didn't bless marriage unless they could enforce male-dominant marriage.

If the male can also succeed in impregnating another woman,
with whom he is not about to form a family, he will have given his
set of genes a greater chance of living on, but another man and woman
will carry the burden of raising the child. I.e. he can have more
offspring than he himself can support together with the his partner.

Meanwhile, she also can be entertaining any number of men. His kids
might not be "his". :) If she mates and disposes of the man, then has
a lesbian lover help her raise the child, the child's chance for
successfully carrying on the mother's genes and values is also very
good (although naturally I wouldn't necessarily advocate such a course
of action). :)


--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 10:11:28 -0700
From: hadley
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: length of posts
Message-ID: <318649C0.1AF8@tiac.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Many time people are just responding to one or two sentences in the last
post...while it might take a little more of your time to do the
following it would certainly help our listmistress and my email load:

1. go through the message you want to respond too
2. delete everything except those one or two sentences
3. start post by writing in:

Mary said:

"one or two sentences"

To which I reply:
"your reply"

makes life easier and conversation clearer for everyone.

Second: re the quote "You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
It reminds me of the way i feel about myself, that is, "You don't have
to be evil to be dangerous."
Patricia

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 06:23:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chase Vogelsberg
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: 100 line 1-liners (Was Re: Forwarded post #6)
Message-Id: <199604301323.GAA07807@eskimo.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dee-Ann wrote:
MyKey: I've noticed that the first 6 items, out of the 16, were all
one word replies from you. Please, either send these kinds of replies
in private e-mail, or put a bunch of them in one post (e.g. putting
all 6 individual replies in 1 post). This will take some of the
burden off of my site.

MyKey replied, with a tremendous amount of needless quoting:
My apologys Dee-Ann.
OOooppss I've done it again.
MyKey

In MyKey's message, there's about 10 real lines, counting what Dee-Ann
said and his reply, complete with snide 'Ooooooppss I've done it again'.
Then, there's somewhat over -100- lines of useless quoting of original
messages, including a number of copies of the list's "Questions/comments"
trailers that serve absolutely no purpose in the message, save perhaps to
add space.

I've written a couple of people in private email about this before, asking
them to try using a little more editting when they reply, snipping non-
essential parts of messages before sending the reply back to the list, both
for the purpose of making the messages more readable, -and- to reduce the
load on Dee-Ann's computer. In general, I've received either no response
to my email, or snide responses, and then watched the people continue to
post two lines replies with 100 lines of headers and trailers and such to
the list.

To use MyKey's posts as an example, his replies contain header lines from
the original posts, which serve little or no useful purpose, as well as a
number of copies of trailer information such as this :
___________________________________________________________________
Questions and comments should be sent to listmaster@renaissoft.com.
For a list and description of supported mailing list commands, send
mail to femsupremacy-request@renaissoft.com with the subject "help".
[snip]
___________________________________________________________________
Questions and comments should be sent to listmaster@renaissoft.com.
For a list and description of supported mailing list commands, send
mail to femsupremacy-request@renaissoft.com with the subject "help".

Flood an' flame, people - how about DELETEing some of those lines from your
replies? I rather doubt that your computer or software is incapable of the
feat, therefore it would seem that either a bunch of you are too lazy, too
stupid, or just don't care enough to do so, and it's causing the list / list
computer to have problems. Is this really too complicated to understand?

Personally, if I were the administrator I'd be giving offenders warnings
about their inappropriate use of quoting, and then I'd be removing them from
the list. Being a member of the femsupremacy maillist is a -privilege-, not
a right, not something people are inalienably entitled to because they have
internet access. Dee-Ann runs the list on her personal computer, fixing it
on her personal time when the list crashes, or when there's problems with
the members / postings to the list, and guess what - she's a fairly busy
person, with lots of things she could be doing instead of babysitting the
list an' fixing problems that didn't need to have happened. At some point
it wouldn't be all that amazing if she decides it isn't worth it, at which
point this avenue of communication will disappear. It'd be nice if some
people would get a clue before that happens.

(Oh yes - I realize that I could've said this nicer, an' that a good number
of list administrators an' such would censure me and possibly remove me from
the list for my occasionally confrontational messages.)

-- \_awless is : A wolf, wild at heart, with a heart of darkness.
-- Chase Vogelsberg (lawless@netcom.com / lawless@eskimo.com)
--
-- Some angels didn't have that far to fall.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 96 22:40:44 +0200
From: "Magnus Thelander"
To: "femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Subject: Re: 100 line 1-liners (Was Re: Forwarded post #6)
Message-Id: <199604302040.WAA26161@mailbox.swip.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, 30 Apr 1996 06:23:34 -0700 (PDT), Chase Vogelsberg wrote:

them to try using a little more editting when they reply, snipping non-
essential parts of messages before sending the reply back to the list, both

load on Dee-Ann's computer. In general, I've received either no response
to my email, or snide responses, and then watched the people continue to
post two lines replies with 100 lines of headers and trailers and such to

Personally, if I were the administrator I'd be giving offenders warnings
about their inappropriate use of quoting, and then I'd be removing them from
the list. Being a member of the femsupremacy maillist is a -privilege-, not

I'm completely in agreement with Chase here. If people have been
adviced not to do this, and given the reasons why they should
refrain, and still persist, I see no reason not to exclude them from
the list, since they're actually sabotaging it.

---
Magnus Thelander
Malmo, Sweden


the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 23:33:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jonathan
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: BDSM support groups (was: Do the right thing)
Message-ID:
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Sat, 27 Apr 1996 Lonely2001@aol.com wrote:

After failing with the regular romance groups, I have
tried the BDSM ad groups. That has been a dissapointment also. I am very
reluctant to attend my local support group. I am very discouraged.


I hope you will forgive my curiousity, but why are you reluctant to join
a BDSM support group? I have had many delightful experiences with this
crowd.

Jonathan

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 21:07:29 -3100 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: femsupremacy@catherine.renaissoft.com
Subject: today's forwarded post #4
Message-Id: <199605010407.VAA01242@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1238

From lalaura@ix.netcom.com Tue Apr 30 16:26:30 1996
Received: from dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.9]) by davinci.renaissoft.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA18751 for
Received: from (lalaura@har-ct8-06.ix.netcom.com [205.184.160.70]) by dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA22712 for
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 16:24:25 -0700
Message-Id: <199604302324.QAA22712@dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
Subject: Dangerous saints
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com

patricia wrote:

re the quote "You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
It reminds me of the way i feel about myself, that is, "You don't have
to be evil to be dangerous."


Weeeeew! LOL! Right on sister! :):):)
--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 07:10:53 +0100
From: timberwolf@bahnhof.se
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Do the right thing
Message-Id: <199605010510.HAA23574@sunny.bahnhof.se
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Wrote Hadley:

in response to the below...and just who owns and controls the press that is
reporting
such stories...
Noble (Patricia)

Wrote Chase Vogelsberg



Recently, some bloodcurdling information has been coming out of Rwanda. It
seems that many women there (including schoolteachers and nuns) have been
the leaders of massacres, actively instigating them. There is one news story
of
nuns handing out cans of gasoline for burning people alive. And young males
(potential soldiers with the opposite side) have been especially singled out
as
targets. The female minister of education (!) is said to have been especially
active with her murder propaganda.

I am trained as a historian. The criticism of sources (in the spirit of
Ranke) was
drummed into me at an early stage. I also wrote my thesis on press history.
I am also generally a mass media sceptic. Unfortunately, this information seems
to be true, as it comes from several unaffiliated aid organizations. Those
who will
not believe in reality will never change it.

TWolf


the subject "help".

--------------------------------
End of femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 Issue #59
***********************************************

From - Thu May 2 16:14:35 1996
Received: from orb.direct.ca (orb.direct.ca [199.60.229.5]) by badboy.iprolink.ch (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA28040 for
Received: from davinci.renaissoft.com ([199.60.103.1]) by orb.direct.ca with ESMTP id <28513-19391; Thu, 2 May 1996 05:11:29 -0700
Received: (from list@localhost) by davinci.renaissoft.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id FAA05907 for virtjack@iprolink.ch; Thu, 2 May 1996 05:15:37 -0700
Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 05:15:37 -0700
From: femsupremacy-digest-request@renaissoft.com
Message-Id: <199605021215.FAA05907@davinci.renaissoft.com
Subject: femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 #60
X-Loop: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-Mailing-List:
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------"
To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
Reply-To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-UIDL: db5c01da554c4b04006a63c858bd1b2b
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001

------------------------------

Content-Type: text/plain

femsupremacy-digest Digest Volume 96 : Issue 60

Today's Topics:
today's forwarded post #2
today's forwarded post #3
Re: Sex and Love :)
today's forwarded post #1
to everyone re fowarded posts-
Re: to everyone re fowarded posts-
Sex and Love :)
Re: Sex and Love :)
Re: Sex and Love :)
Re: attitude
Re: Do the right thing
Womanly = substandard, weakness etc. (Was: Re: Sex and Love :))
Re: Do the right thing
Re: do the right thing

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 21:06:04 -3100 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: femsupremacy@catherine.renaissoft.com
Subject: today's forwarded post #2
Message-Id: <199605010406.VAA01226@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1514

From magnus.thelander@mailbox.swipnet.se Tue Apr 30 14:27:44 1996
Received: from mailbox.swip.net (mailbox.swip.net [193.12.122.1]) by davinci.renaissoft.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA14894 for
Received: from dialup105-1-4.swipnet.se (dialup105-1-4.swipnet.se [130.244.105.4])
by mailbox.swip.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP
id XAA04635 for
Tue, 30 Apr 1996 23:27:06 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199604302127.XAA04635@mailbox.swip.net
From: "Magnus Thelander"
To: "femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 96 23:27:43 +0200
Reply-To: "Magnus Thelander"
Priority: Normal
X-Mailer:'s Registered PMMail 1.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Forwarded post #6

On Tue, 30 Apr 1996 21:04:20 +1000 (EST), mike Lee wrote:

My apologys Dee-Ann.
OOooppss I've done it again.

What is your problem? Not only do you fail to follow directions.
You have a snide attitude too.

---
Magnus Thelander
Malmo, Sweden


the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 21:06:47 -3100 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: femsupremacy@catherine.renaissoft.com
Subject: today's forwarded post #3
Message-Id: <199605010406.VAA01234@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1856

From magnus.thelander@mailbox.swipnet.se Tue Apr 30 14:29:37 1996
Received: from mailbox.swip.net (mailbox.swip.net [193.12.122.1]) by davinci.renaissoft.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA15005 for
Received: from dialup105-1-4.swipnet.se (dialup105-1-4.swipnet.se [130.244.105.4])
by mailbox.swip.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP
id XAA05011 for
Tue, 30 Apr 1996 23:29:16 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199604302129.XAA05011@mailbox.swip.net
From: "Magnus Thelander"
To: "femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 96 23:29:53 +0200
Reply-To: "Magnus Thelander"
Priority: Normal
X-Mailer:'s Registered PMMail 1.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Sex and Love :)

On Tue, 30 Apr 1996 15:50:07 -0400, Lonely2001@aol.com wrote:

In a message dated 96-04-30 09:21:25 EDT, you write:

This could be the reason why men so easily disassociate sex and love.

I don't. The more I know a woman, like her, love her, the more she turns me
on. I cannot do "one night stands."

I feel the same way. Sex usually isn't good with a stranger, but
perhaps this is common trait shared by submissive men?

Perhaps the one night stands aren't about sex for more dominant
malen, but about power, as sex many times seem to be?

---
Magnus Thelander
Malmo, Sweden


the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 23:23:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jonathan
To:
cc: "femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Subject: Re: Sex and Love :)
Message-ID:
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Tue, 30 Apr 1996, wrote:

Perhaps the one night stands aren't about sex for more dominant
males, but about power, as sex many times seem to be?


My feeling is that sex is often about power, especially when the
participants do not know each other well (for example, a one night stand).
Dom men that I know rarely pass up an opportunity for sexual intercourse
(penetration) with a new sub if their scene allows it. As they view it,
power is exercised by using the submissive partner for sex, sometimes in
a very impersonal manner.

In my experience, many dom females exercise this power by witholding
intercourse and limiting the range of other sexual play. As a
relationship progresses, these limits tend to expand. When I have a new
play partner to whom I am genuinely attracted, I am usually up for going
wherever she wishes to take me. I've been in this situation perhaps 30
times since I've been active in BDSM (nine years) and only _once_ did my
partner choose to use me for sex the first night.

My feeling is that many of the "typical" SM players described above are
working within the social convention wherein sex on the first date is
considered a victory for the male and a surrender on the part of the
female. This particular convention may (emphasis on _may_) have served a
purpose before the advent of birth control, but I feel that it does much
more harm than good. Besides the most obvious and severe problem (it
encourages rape), I feel it defines some rather limiting roles which
continue to affect even my relatively-enlightened BDSM friends.

Yours, Jonathan

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 21:05:14 -3100 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: femsupremacy@catherine.renaissoft.com
Subject: today's forwarded post #1
Message-Id: <199605010405.VAA01217@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 4241

We think we've fixed the problem with the list. Let's hope so. There
were 4 posts today, I'm going to forward them all.

From magnus.thelander@mailbox.swipnet.se Tue Apr 30 14:21:29 1996
Received: from mailbox.swip.net (mailbox.swip.net [193.12.122.1]) by davinci.renaissoft.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA14636 for
Received: from dialup105-1-4.swipnet.se (dialup105-1-4.swipnet.se [130.244.105.4])
by mailbox.swip.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP
id XAA03703 for
Tue, 30 Apr 1996 23:20:54 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199604302120.XAA03703@mailbox.swip.net
From: "Magnus Thelander"
To: "femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 96 23:21:31 +0200
Reply-To: "Magnus Thelander"
Priority: Normal
X-Mailer:'s Registered PMMail 1.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Sex and Love :)

On Tue, 30 Apr 1996 05:51:40 -0700, Laura Goodwin wrote:

prostitution is in itself wrong or bad...In the ancient matriarchies
prostitutes were sacred. The priestesses of the Goddess were
prostitutes, and sex was celebrated as a gift of the Goddess.

Which matriarchies would this be?

...men usually don't associate sex and love.

:::groan::: not that old chestnut again. Look, if women always have to
associate sex and love, then *explain prostitutes*. Do they *love*
every customer? Huh? Do they? In olden times, they did. The temple

I'm not a woman, so I of course can't know. I can only listen to
what women say, but it wouldn't suprise me if this attitude is caused
by social conditioning and not genetically encoded.

AFA prostitues go, many seem to actually hate their patrons.
Personally, I don't think I could bring myself to patronize such a
woman. Not because I feel they are dirty because of their profession,
but because I'd feel that I would be taking advantage of the woman in
an unequal relation. A lot of this unequality seems to stem from the
way society views prostitution, and not from the actual relation
between the client and prostitute. There would be no enjoyment what
so ever for me in it. Sex is most enjoyable to me, when it's done
with someone I also have other feelings than just sexual desire for,
but perhaps that's the bio-clock in combination with my inherent
submissiveness speaking ;).

Throughout history it has been the goal of the male to impregnate
as many females as possible.

Nonsense. I disagree. Throughout "history" men have been virulently

This behavior can be seen among many other mammals. Why is it
there, if it's not beneficial to the survival of the species?

overwhelming, and her parental primacy is absolute. Women have a
greater personal stake in every single child, and should by rights have
total control over mating. This business of men having control and

Among other mammals this is often the case. The female *chooses*
her mate, and the males do what they can to be as appealing as
possible to the female. No?

running amok has got to stop.

No argument there.

If the male can also succeed in impregnating another woman,
with whom he is not about to form a family, he will have given his
set of genes a greater chance of living on, but another man and woman
will carry the burden of raising the child. I.e. he can have more
offspring than he himself can support together with the his partner.

Meanwhile, she also can be entertaining any number of men. His kids
might not be "his". :) If she mates and disposes of the man, then has

The male has no power over that. He can just hope that his sperms
win out, but to have a chance, they must be allowed to enter the race
:).

---
Magnus Thelander
Malmo, Sweden


the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 01 May 96 03:09:31 -0500
From: TashaStar
To: "femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Subject: to everyone re fowarded posts-
Message-Id: <199605010806.EAA25846@anshar.shadow.net

-- [ From: TashaStar * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --

Just my opnion,.......if everyone would change the titles of the posts
before
sending back out to the group, I think it would be nice.
I prefer to see the title of a post before I pull it up. It is much more
interesting to me.
I just didn't want all the headers to say "Re: Fowarded post #--" for an
endless time
back and forth.

It was very nice of Dee to go to all that work to forward posts to us all.
Thanks Dee :-)

Not a command, not a demand, just a suggestion.
Of course, anyone who is submissive just for the sake of being so, will
probably do this for me, right ? <<joke<<joke<<relax
Tasha
--
^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^
~Tasha Star~ Tasha@shadow.net
***NEW-NEW-NEW-WEBSITE***
see my *under construction site at:
http://www.shadow.net/~tasha
^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^
Ethereal Dominance
18524 N.W. 67 Avenue Suite# 325
Miami, FL. 33015 (305) 534-1555
^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 01:11:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: to everyone re fowarded posts-
Message-Id: <199605010811.BAA17924@netcom17.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1102


-- [ From: TashaStar * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --

Just my opnion,.......if everyone would change the titles of the posts
before
sending back out to the group, I think it would be nice.

agreed, it definitely would

Not a command, not a demand, just a suggestion.
Of course, anyone who is submissive just for the sake of being so, will
probably do this for me, right ? <<joke<<joke<<relax
happily, but it's Dee who has to sit there in Vancouver and
almost literally hand labeling these things. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm,

You just gave me an idea;;;;;;;;;;;;

;]

(Netcom is buggered tonight, or I would do it now...)

--
coyote sings / man and sky / amfas@netcom.com

Show up. Lighten up. Pay attention. Feel awe. Make it count.
The rest is hidden.
˜≥

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 07:46:07 CDT
From: bodie167@houston.email.net
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Sex and Love :)
Message-Id: <9605010746.S545689156@houston.email.net

Following the thread of the disassociation men allegedly feel about sex and
love, one anon. poster writes
I don't. The more I know a woman, like her, lover her, the more she turns
me on. I cannot do "one night stands."
Bravo!! My feelings exactly. I am married, about a decade ago, I had a string
of affairs -- both vanilla and as a bdsm switch. While I received some
enjoyment from the excitement, etc -- very little really, when balanced with
the guilt -- sexually it was a disaster. I was barely functional, while I am
NEVER disfunctional with my Wife. Through my honesty with her about my bdsm
needs, we have since redefined our own relationship through bdsm and have had
marvelous results. I think that only through respect for and knowledge of a
woman can many men find fulfillment (corny as it may sound.)
bodie167@houston.email.net

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 06:27:53 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Sex and Love :)
Message-Id: <199605011327.GAA29950@dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com

Jonathon wrote:

My feeling is that many of the "typical" SM players described above
are working within the social convention wherein sex on the first date
is considered a victory for the male and a surrender on the part of
the female. This particular convention may (emphasis on _may_) have
served a purpose before the advent of birth control, but I feel that
it does much more harm than good.

I feel it defines some rather limiting roles which
continue to affect even my relatively-enlightened BDSM friends.

True, and this misconception affects others in other ways: for example,
I know gay top men who are very defensive about liking to "be fucked",
because that is supposed to be something more proper for a bottom to
do. It's the whole idea that anything female-like is a sign of
weakness. In the gay/lesbian leather community, Fem tops are a
minority who must be constantly explaining themselves. "See, I'm a
fem, but I'm a top!" In the *hetero* femdom scene, a woman is
practially _required_ to be _excessively_ feminine, because just being
a woman is not enough. Men who are submissive to women are imagined to
be really sub-standard males who would be submissive to anybody, as if
a really admirable male would never so lower himself.

This is all the product of the patriarchal PR machine, which works
night and day to convince everyone that womanly things are substandard.
To give in on the first date, or on any date, and act like a woman
makes you a woman and a loser.

When people no longer see women as losers, anything womanly will seem
more positive. When women are on top in their lives, womanly things
will become fashionable again.

--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 06:29:55 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Sex and Love :)
Message-Id: <199605011329.GAA19752@dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com

I think that only through respect for and knowledge of a
woman can many men find fulfillment (corny as it may sound.)
bodie167@houston.email.net

I always say: "The best things in life are corny!" :) In fact, that's
going to be my new .sig

--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 22:09:48 +0200
From: Bernd Angerer
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: attitude
Message-Id: <199605012009.WAA11881@croco.atnet.at
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

There are many good publications out there, catering to many different
tastes,
fetish, and interest. Good luck finding what you want!!

Tasha

Thank you for that info
Bernd

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 22:09:49 +0200
From: Bernd Angerer
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Do the right thing
Message-Id: <199605012009.WAA11883@croco.atnet.at
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


I think that women can be just as bloodthirsty and evil, selfish and
shortsighted
as any male, given the right circumstances (and the right circumstances=

must
be present if males are to behave like that, too). I still do think tha=
t
a
female-run
society might be better than the =B4patriarchal=B4 one (I like the term=

phallocratic
a lot better--patriarchs seem benevolent somehow). But that would have =
to
do
with the socialization of the male, the Rwandan minister of education
notwith-
standing. It is true that females do have the power over male
socialization,
at
least potentially. But do they use it?

They do.
Maybe not much in the way you (and me ) want to see the world. The
patriarchal system is strongly supported by many women standing quietly, =

but NOT powerless *behind* their husbands, sometimes in charge, sometime=
s
not.Sometimes I think they are already on top.
I like the term *phallocratic*, this word always appears in my mind, when=
I
see a military parade in the TV. Those rockets.., I mean ..you know whom =

they look like...

To ruanda: I am unable to understand what there is going on. This massacr=
e
is too big for my brain.
But I think it is not very clever to still believe that women COULD not =
be
able to do such cruelty. They do have the same power to kill like every
other human being on this beautifuuuul blue planet. I mean, when you are =

fighting for your life, nowhere to run, no place around where you can
survive...stop..no I dont want to imagine this, I do not want to know wha=
t
I would do in such a situation.
And those nons may have been fanatic fundamentalists, who knows? Religio=
us
Fundamentalists are really able to do a lot of things I hardly can
understand, both men and women.
That shows me one more time, that political,economic and religious power =
is
not that much a question of the gender of the one or group who holds it. =

Although I believe that a society which empowers their women will be the =

richer one. Richer in arts, in ideas, richer in social systems and so mor=
e
peaceful and not that war and phallus-orientated like our, you named it, =

phallocracy .
But I do not believe that a women only government would be any better tha=
n
our current (nearly) men only governments.It is the system that rules.


Even in countries where females have a good position (I mean better tha=
n
in
the
U.S.) it is clear that different expectations and different limits are
operative in
the socialization of girls and of boys. Girls are shown that they are
expected to
be quiet and orderly and =B4nice'. Boys, on the other hand ... And it i=
s
*women*
who manage this differential training, perpetuating their own social
submission.
Why, in the name of God(dess)? Force of habit?


I think it will take some time to develop a feministic awareness.
And I dont think that it is "women" only who manage training, it was and =
is
still deeply based in our culture and (catholic) fundaments,our schools t=
o
educate this way. Our societies still build upon this.


Why are girls not told by their mothers (and their fathers): Do not ser=
ve
males.
Do not do what any male tells you to do. Do your own thing. That would =
be
the
first step towards gyno-whatever, or at least a more sensible world.

TWolf


Agree.
And boys should be told to appreciate feminity.

Bernd

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 02 May 96 02:05:12 +0200
From: "Magnus Thelander"
To: "femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Subject: Womanly = substandard, weakness etc. (Was: Re: Sex and Love :))
Message-Id: <199605020004.CAA24322@mailbox.swip.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Wed, 1 May 1996 06:27:53 -0700, Laura Goodwin wrote:

True, and this misconception affects others in other ways: for example,
I know gay top men who are very defensive about liking to "be fucked",
because that is supposed to be something more proper for a bottom to
do. It's the whole idea that anything female-like is a sign of
weakness. In the gay/lesbian leather community, Fem tops are a
minority who must be constantly explaining themselves. "See, I'm a
fem, but I'm a top!" In the *hetero* femdom scene, a woman is
practially _required_ to be _excessively_ feminine, because just being
a woman is not enough. Men who are submissive to women are imagined to

Which women are expected to be excessively feminine? Tops, bottoms
or both?

Which group or groups harbour these expectations?

a woman is not enough. Men who are submissive to women are imagined to
be really sub-standard males who would be submissive to anybody, as if
a really admirable male would never so lower himself.

I can definitely relate to that! My fantasies tend towards
different forms of humiliation, and although I know that I'm not the
only one to have such fantasies, it doesn't exactly do wonders for my
self esteem. Although I try not to, I very easily think of myself as
sick and depraved. Whether that is a result of my desire to be
humiliated by a woman or a just result my desire to be humiliated, I
can't quite figure out. It doesn't really help, if someone tells me,
that MKIOK, because I have to convince *myself* of that. How, I do
not know.

Hmm ... perhaps this should've gone to a.s.fd. Sorry if I've
annoyed someone.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Magnus Thelander | Fidonet: 2:200/422.21 | Everybody knows, that the
|Drottninggatan 4A | Tel.: +46-708-535155 | best nuts come from
|212 11 Malmo | Timezone= CET + 1 | California.
|Sweden | | -Sunkist
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 22:49:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Charles A. Kupperman - Personal Account"
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Do the right thing
Message-ID:
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Tue, 30 Apr 1996 timberwolf@bahnhof.se wrote:

I think that women can be just as bloodthirsty and evil, selfish and
shortsighted
as any male, given the right circumstances (and the right circumstances must
be present if males are to behave like that, too).


Anybody who really disagrees with the above statement should read an
essay by my hero, Katha Politt, entitled "Are Women Morally Superior to
Men?" It appears in her book _Reasonable Creatures_ (I've got a signed
copy!) and the whole book is worth getting -- or at least taking out of
the library.

Charles

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 22:06:21 -0700
From: olskool@ix.netcom.com (Antonio)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: do the right thing
Message-Id: <199605020506.WAA13035@dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com

Regarding Katha Pollitt's book, "Are Women Morally Superior To Men?" the answer
to that, in my humble opinion, is yes! However, there is a BIG caveat here.
Though women may be, in a general sense, morally superior to men, the distinction
is NOT necessarily a huge one. Moreover, there are many women who are equally as
morally depraved, or more so, than the average morally challenged male.

I think that in general, the female outlook on the world, especially as relates
to her interactions with others, is morally superior. The female 'paradigm' is
less centered on 'me' and more centered on compromising with the equally legitimate
needs and rights of others.

Interestingly, as with everything else, it is men however who have written all
the moral codes, created the religions (at least those practiced today), and
set up the legal and judicial institutions. Men have created all the constitutions
and have drafted virtually all of the laws. Males predominate as arbiters of
ethics, law, and morals: men are far more common as judges, moral philosophers,
and religious leaders (priests, ministers, rabbis, mullahs -- you name it!)

Why? Partly because (as I've said) males just tend to dominate things because
of their greater aggressive tendencies. Also, I think, because males, sensing
their own greater imperfection (as compared with women), have a stronger need
to control others (and thereby exert controls on their own behavior from the
outside). Hence the fondness of males for games with lots of rules: football,
etc. What is American football but a highly organized, highly ritualized
outlet for naked aggression? The guys who invented it decided FIRST they needed
an outlet for aggression and SECOND that in order to make it fair to all (and
thus popular) it would have to have a complex set of rules.

Women, on the other hand, tend to need far less rules. Women are just nicer!
I also think that were it not for all of the hatred and anger emanating from the
male of the species, women would be nicer STILL. Yes, women have egos, and yes,
they can be petty and self-centered and vindictive AND downright evil. But I think
the faults of the average woman pale in comparison with those of an Adolf Hitler,
a Jeffrey Dahmer, or for that matter the average narrow-minded "my way or the
highway" angry white male who worships Angry White Male gods such as Bob Grant
(the N.Y.C. talk show host who was fired recently for "hoping for" Ron Brown's
death when he heard of the plane crash). I hope y'all get my drift here....

Antonio

the subject "help".

--------------------------------
End of femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 Issue #60
***********************************************

From - Tue Apr 30 16:48:54 1996
Received: from aphex.direct.ca (root@aphex.direct.ca [199.60.229.6]) by badboy.iprolink.ch (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA25368 for
Received: from davinci.renaissoft.com ([199.60.103.1]) by aphex.direct.ca with ESMTP id <268206-279; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 03:24:35 -0700
Received: (from list@localhost) by davinci.renaissoft.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id DAA00943 for virtjack@iprolink.ch; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 03:29:04 -0700
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 03:29:04 -0700
From: femsupremacy-digest-request@renaissoft.com
Message-Id: <199604301029.DAA00943@davinci.renaissoft.com
Subject: femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 #58
X-Loop: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-Mailing-List:
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------"
To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
Reply-To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-UIDL: 9735215e259769a167749564da6574e3
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001

------------------------------

Content-Type: text/plain

femsupremacy-digest Digest Volume 96 : Issue 58

Today's Topics:
Forwarded post #6
Forwarded post #7
Forwarded post #8
Forwarded post #9
Forwarded post #10
Forwarded post #12
Forwarded post #13
Forwarded post #11
Forwarded post #14

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 02:17:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: femsupremacy@catherine.renaissoft.com
Subject: Forwarded post #6
Message-Id: <199604300917.CAA00347@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 5042

Note from Dee-Ann:

MyKey: I've noticed that the first 6 items, out of the 16, were all
one word replies from you. Please, either send these kinds of replies
in private e-mail, or put a bunch of them in one post (e.g. putting
all 6 individual replies in 1 post). This will take some of the
burden off of my site.

From mykey@ozemail.com.au Mon Apr 29 02:04:42 1996
Received: from oznet16.ozemail.com.au (oznet16.ozemail.com.au [203.2.192.109]) by davinci (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA08154 for
Received: from oznet02.ozemail.com.au (oznet02.ozemail.com.au [203.2.192.124]) by oznet16.ozemail.com.au (8.7.1/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA13739 for
Received: from slsyd5p46.ozemail.com.au (slsyd5p46.ozemail.com.au [203.7.186.134]) by oznet02.ozemail.com.au (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA01145 for
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 19:04:37 +1000 (EST)
Message-Id: <199604290904.TAA01145@oznet02.ozemail.com.au
X-Sender: mykey@ozemail.com.au (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
From: mike Lee
Subject: Re: Do the right thing

Great advise, thank you.

MyKey

At 04:17 PM 28/4/96 -0700, you wrote:
Lonely2001@aol.com wrote:

I realize my weekness in this regard. That is, a desire to be dominated. I am
submissive to all women in general (I am regarded as "chivalrous" and a "nice
guy"). But I know that if I was in a vanilla relationship I would be
dissatisfied after a while. I make sure to tell someone I am dating before we
get too serious. I am sad to say, most, so far, think it is sick, depraved,
perverted, etc. I have been puzzled by this. They don't like the idea of a
man to do their bidding? Lost a lot of girlfriends... But I believe honesty
is important.

Because this is a Femsupremacy forum, and not a femdom forum, I'm
going to try to address this from a Femsuprem perspective.

A lot of women _don't_ like the idea of having a man to do their
bidding. Some can't get past the fact that their culture tells them
it should be the other way around. Some are simply anal retentive and
feel that no one can clean/cook/whatever as well as they can, and so
don't want someone else trying to do it for them. Some are simply not
naturally dominant, and not inclined to have to deal with being in
charge of someone else. Etc.

What's my point? There are many kinds of women out there. Not all of
them are going to want to be in charge of a relationship. Among
those, there are some who even if they could overcome the cultural
"men should be on top" brainwashing STILL wouldn't want to be in
charge. It's their choice, and their right to make that choice.

It's good to be honest. It's good that you are sure to tell them
fairly up front. It saves you both some pain in the end. It's one
thing to get into a vanilla relationship thinking it's all you want
and need, and finding out differently later (a horrifying thing,
though :/). Sabotaging yourself in the beginning by getting into a
serious vanilla relationship with someone who is not accepting of your
non-vanilla needs _and_ not willing to allow you an outside
owner/partner seems rather self-defeating to me.

How to make friends who are into Femsupremacy (I discuss making
friends instead of finding mates because the best way to find a mate
is to not desperately seek one, but instead to make friends with
similar interests)? Participate in forums, both online and real
life, where Femsupremacists share their views. You won't find a
bounty of places that are only Femsupremacists. You can also try
overlapping forums, such as Feminist, Female Domination, etc., where
Femsupremacists may spend their time. Getting a little more generic,
there are women's groups that accept aid from men, and there are
general BDSM groups.

Also, if you show respect to women in everything you do, you may find
Femsupremacists in places you didn't expect, like a cycling club or a
chess club.

The key is patience and attentiveness. Be attentive to your own
actions. If you consistantly show that you are respectful of women, a
woman who desires that quality may perhaps show an interest in you.

Dee-Ann

___________________________________________________________________
Questions and comments should be sent to listmaster@renaissoft.com.
For a list and description of supported mailing list commands, send
mail to femsupremacy-request@renaissoft.com with the subject "help".




the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 02:27:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: femsupremacy@catherine.renaissoft.com
Subject: Forwarded post #7
Message-Id: <199604300927.CAA00373@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 2234

From hadley@tiac.net Mon Apr 29 05:34:17 1996
Received: from maildeliver1.tiac.net (maildeliver1.tiac.net [199.0.65.213]) by davinci (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA19271 for
Received: from mailserver1.tiac.net (mailserver1.tiac.net [199.0.65.232]) by maildeliver1.tiac.net (8.6.12/8.7.4) with ESMTP id IAA14603; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 08:36:46 -0400
Received: from hadley.tiac.net ([206.119.198.89]) by mailserver1.tiac.net (8.6.12/8.7.4) with SMTP id IAA26451; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 08:36:45 -0400
Message-ID: <3184E0A8.7645@tiac.net
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 08:30:48 -0700
From: hadley
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To:
CC: "femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Fwd: post message
References: <199604290617.IAA23083@mailbox.swip.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

sent an extra copy to Magnus, just getting use to this netscape mail,
but i said:

YEAP! You can't rape a 38!
patricia

Magnus Thelander wrote:

On Sun, 28 Apr 1996 18:43:00 -0700, Antonio wrote:

So, if you are a reductionist (as I am), you will realize that political power
grows out of the barrel of a gun; guns are coercive instruments which are built

A gun kills equally well when the trigger is pulled by a woman.

I don't believe you can keep a society oppressed forever through
the use of force. Sooner or later it will decay and crumble, if it
doesn't have the support of the majority.

---



___________________________________________________________________
Questions and comments should be sent to listmaster@renaissoft.com.
For a list and description of supported mailing list commands, send
mail to femsupremacy-request@renaissoft.com with the subject "help".

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 02:34:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: femsupremacy@catherine.renaissoft.com
Subject: Forwarded post #8
Message-Id: <199604300934.CAA00407@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1481

From lalaura@ix.netcom.com Mon Apr 29 07:02:34 1996
Received: from dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.8]) by davinci (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA23694 for
Received: from (lalaura@har-ct6-03.ix.netcom.com [199.183.203.195]) by dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA25946 for
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 07:00:54 -0700
Message-Id: <199604291400.HAA25946@dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
Subject: Re: Do the right thing
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com

zbobz wrote:

Laura,
I've often thought that my personal feelings about Female
dominance (not Female Domination) would be more accurately labeled
Female Centric, or Gynococentric

You mean gynocentric, gynocentrism, or gynocentricism. More useful
terms to add to the pot. :)

Actually, this might be a better term than "gynosupremacy", which
annoys some otherwise supportive people, due to the "_supremacy" part.
could be you are on to something, pal.
--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 02:40:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: femsupremacy@catherine.renaissoft.com
Subject: Forwarded post #9
Message-Id: <199604300940.CAA00427@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 3108

From lawless@mail.eskimo.com Mon Apr 29 07:10:43 1996
Received: from mail.eskimo.com (root@mail.eskimo.com [204.122.16.4]) by davinci (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA24913 for
Received: from eskimo.com (lawless@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA28263 for
From: Chase Vogelsberg
Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id HAA13945; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 07:10:09 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199604291410.HAA13945@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 07:10:08 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <199604290409.AAA04891@anshar.shadow.net from "TashaStar" at Apr 28, 96 11:13:40 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Tasha wrote, regarding defination of sex:
*I* define "sex" as sexual intercourse. (penetration)
*I* define a sexual act as anything that involves intimate/genital contact
and/or exchange of body fluids.

and:
But self masturbation while kneeling or groveling is not having sex with
the Mistress. Is it "sex" if a guy masturbates by himself in the
bathroom while reading magazines ?? Nope. Not in *my* book.

Thanks Tasha - I started to reply to this earlier, but held off to see if
anyone else already had. While "masturbating (someone in bondage), using
vibrators, dildos, etc" may well constitute sex, a domme dressing up in
fetish gear for her partner, or flogging the partner or whatnot certainly
doesn't.

There's a difference between something being 'sexual' (after all, according
to zbobz, any interaction between a woman and a man is sexual in nature)
and it being 'sex'. I suspect many professional dommes engage in activities
which are sexual, but unless the defination of sex is greatly expanded, it
isn't sex, which is a critical distinction to many people, not to mention to
the law. (And from a legal pov, masturbation isn't sex - else virtually all
'lingerie shops' would be shut down for prostitution)

On the other hand, what Laura says about forms of sex being quite available
for a price is quite likely - not with ProDommes, but with what I tend to
label "CommDommes", the ones who are in it purely for the money, often doing
doing 'dominance' as a sideline to the usual lingerie modeling, 'body scrubs'
and such. Imnsho, a Comm(ercial)Domme is in no way a ProDomme - doing it
for commercial sake only doesn't make someone a professional, nor does it
make them a Domme.

-- \_awless is : A wolf, wild at heart, with a heart of darkness.
-- Chase Vogelsberg (lawless@netcom.com / lawless@eskimo.com)
--
-- Some angels didn't have that far to fall.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 02:46:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: femsupremacy@catherine.renaissoft.com
Subject: Forwarded post #10
Message-Id: <199604300946.CAA00441@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 2696

From lawless@mail.eskimo.com Mon Apr 29 08:10:06 1996
Received: from mail.eskimo.com (root@mail.eskimo.com [204.122.16.4]) by davinci (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA32242 for
Received: from eskimo.com (lawless@eskimo.com [204.122.16.13]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA09644 for
From: Chase Vogelsberg
Received: by eskimo.com (8.7.5) id IAA20333; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 08:09:20 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199604291509.IAA20333@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: unsubscribe
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 08:09:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To:
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Peter wrote:
... Nowhere is it written that you can't be respectful to men, too.
There must have been a better way to to explain to Lloyd that he did
something wrong.

Actually, I am from time to time -polite- to men - just as I from time to
time am noticeably less than polite to or respectful of a particular woman.
I generally try to be reasonably polite, unless I find reason not to be.
Respect on the other hand is something earned. An' good old Lloyd most
certainly didn't earn respect. Personally, I think I wasn't nearly snide
or sarcastic enough in what I'd written - but maybe, just maybe, someone
else will take an extra five seconds (or minutes, or hours) to figure out
how to properly unsubscribe, because they remember how Lloyd was mocked for
not doing so correctly. Sometimes a carrot is useful, for instance, Dee-Ann
and her friendly, helpful post concerning how to unsubscribe. Other times a
stick gets better results.

Maybe you should try to take what you have learned from here and apply it
to everyone. You will be a better person.

Heh. This is presuming I'd want to be a better person, and that I've learned
the same lessons here as someone else. I'm content to be just what I am, full
of some of the typical male flaws, as well as numerous less common ones. ;-

-- \_awless is : Aliena's wolf, wild at heart, with a heart of darkness.
-- Chase Vogelsberg (lawless@netcom.com / lawless@eskimo.com)
--
-- For some of minds, even the gutter is a climb.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 02:57:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: femsupremacy@catherine.renaissoft.com
Subject: Forwarded post #12
Message-Id: <199604300957.CAA00479@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 2361

From lalaura@ix.netcom.com Mon Apr 29 09:13:38 1996
Received: from dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.5]) by davinci (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA05611 for
Received: from (lalaura@har-ct6-03.ix.netcom.com [199.183.203.195]) by dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA19173 for
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 08:39:27 -0700
Message-Id: <199604291539.IAA19173@dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
Subject: Re: Do the right thing
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com

Lawless wrote:

Hi Lawless, you pepper-pickin' wolf you. :) Thanks for your comments.

For some extreme moderates, it even seems to be more a concern for
creating equity between the genders, righting social and economic
imbalances that exist - certainly a worthy goal, but not really a
matter of 'femsupremacy' according to many.

Can "extreme moderates" exist? :) Isn't that an oxymoron, like "jumbo
shrimp", or "deafening silence"? ;)

Actually, the technical term for people who wish to institute equality
for the sexes is "Feminist".

Then there's those for whom disdain and/or hate seem to be at the
center of -their- views of femsupremacy, including some who've been
active members of this list in the past, who maintain that men should
be seen and not heard, that all men should be subservient to the will
of all women with no rights or freedoms save for those given them.

Yeah, I have daydreams like that myself. :) "All men, and honey I do
mean *all* men, are created equal, and should be treated equally. They
should *all* be KEPT IN CAGES! JUST THROW FOOD AT THEM THROUGH THE
BARS TWICE A DAY! IF THEY LIP OFF, POKE 'EM WITH A STICK! WHEN THEY
ARE FILTY, WASH 'EM WITH A FIREHOSE!" ROTFLMAO!

Of course, I don't believe in living that way full time. The
occasional weekend retreat is enough for me. ;)



--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 03:03:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dee-Ann LeBlanc
To: femsupremacy@catherine.renaissoft.com
Subject: Forwarded post #13
Message-Id: <199604301003.DAA00490@catherine.renaissoft.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 4200

From magnus.thelander@mailbox.swipnet.se Mon Apr 29 10:30:52 1996
Received: from mailbox.swip.net (mailbox.swip.net [193.12.122.1]) by davinci (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA11422 for
Received: from dialup112-1-3.swipnet.se (dialup112-1-3.swipnet.se [130.244.112.3])
by mailbox.swip.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP
id TAA29138 for
Mon, 29 Apr 1996 19:29:56 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199604291729.TAA29138@mailbox.swip.net
From: "Magnus Thelander"
To: "femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 96 19:30:30 +0200
Reply-To: "Magnus Thelander"
Priority: Normal
X-Mailer:'s Registered PMMail 1.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)

On Mon, 29 Apr 1996 07:48:31 -0700, Laura Goodwin wrote:

I mean, IMHO being human is essentially a sexual experience. We are
born sexual beings, and are sexy all our lives (I hope). But in my

Agreed. We are born to procreate. That's the prime genetic
directive. We like to think that we are so much more advanced than
the more advanced other mammals inhabiting this little grain of sand
in the vast vacuum, but we are still all very much slaves under
instincts and behaviors formed during thousands of years.

you are only helping somebody else get theirs. I feel that renting the
skills or body of someone to help you get off is a form of
prostitution. I feel paying with gifts is still payment.

If this reasoning is extrapolated a bit (OK, much :)), one could
argue that marriage is a from legalized prostitution, unless the
partners keep separate economies.

I think that if you are lying to your wife and hiding your activities
from SHE TO WHOM YOU ARE BOUND BY THE OATH OF MARRIAGE, that you are
not honoring or showing regard for her, but quite the opposite. How a
man can honor another woman with money, gifts, erections and other
stuff, while dishonoring THE MOST SACRED VOW HE PROBABLY EVER MADE is a
mystery to me. I mean, how can he be easy in his mind about this? The

Probably because often men usually don't associate sex and love.
Sex is sex, and love is love. At least that's what many say. To women
sex and love seem to be two sides of the same coin. I'm not condoning
the deceipt these men are engaging in towards their partners, but
this could be part of the explanation why they can justify it to
themselves.

Throughout history it has been the goal of the male to impregnate
as many females as possible. This could be the reason why men so
easily disassociate sex and love. They form a family with the woman
they love, and they raise children with her. This is necessary, since
human offspring take so long to reach independance from their
parents. If the male can also succeed in impregnating another woman,
with whome he is not about to form a family, he will have given his
set of genes a greater chance of living on, but another man and woman
will carry the burden of raising the child. I.e. he can have more
offspring than he himself can support together with the his partner.

woman he turns to to "worship"...she made no promise to any wife...is
she off the hook?

Unless the man has decieved her too, she's guilty of ethically
questionable behavior, but the man carries the by far largest
responsibility. In this situation he's responsible for actively
seeking out another woman.

You know what? If I walked in on my slave giving some other woman an
unauthorized foot massage, he'd be whipped. I think a good whipping is
more appropriate in a case like that. Depending on who it is, I might

More appropriate than what?





Any interaction between a Woman and man is inherently sexual
in nature, and patriarchal religions quite aside, payment for sex of
any kind seems like any other transaction, with both parties receiving
benefit for consideration.

There is some question about how to define "sex", the verb. I feel
that if you are doing something with orgasm as a goal that it's a form
of sex, even if it's just you alone masturbating. I respect those who
see it differently.

I mean, IMHO being human is essentially a sexual experience. We are
born sexual beings, and are sexy all our lives (I hope). But in my
mind sex the verb is to strive for someone's orgasmic relief, even if
you are only helping somebody else get theirs. I feel that renting the
skills or body of someone to help you get off is a form of
prostitution. I feel paying with gifts is still payment.

Certainly if orgasm is not the goal or the product of the experience
then it's just fantasy, a psychodrama, massage, or dance, or other form
of entertainment. Here is where the Pro doms walk their line. Often,
(and for some, always) they step over it.

All I know is that when your average man or woman who is into BDSM and
and the femdom life are lovers, they have sex! BDSM is sexual to the
vast majority of people who are into it, unless their S/M is so
fanatical that their ceremonies transcend sex completely. I know of a
few sadomasochists who cum from being whipped, but most cum the usual
way: from oral sex, intercourse (vaginal or anal), and masturbation,
solitary or shared.

Back to the question of worshipping women non-sexually. "I love my
wife, but she doesn't want to be worshipped, so I need some other woman
to worship, but I'll do it non-sexually, to be technically faithful to
my wife." Is this not in some way missing the mark way wide? Can
someone justify this practice (which is fairly common)? What does it
have to do with feminism, female supremacy, or *gynocentrism*?

I do feel very strongly that the world worship is being employed rather
loosely. FYI the dictionary sez: Worship: v. To express reverent honor,
as by prayers; to show admiration or regard for.

I think that if you are lying to your wife and hiding your activities
from SHE TO WHOM YOU ARE BOUND BY THE OATH OF MARRIAGE, that you are
not honoring or showing regard for her, but quite the opposite. How a
man can honor another woman with money, gifts, erections and other
stuff, while dishonoring THE MOST SACRED VOW HE PROBABLY EVER MADE is a
mystery to me. I mean, how can he be easy in his mind about this? The
woman he turns to to "worship"...she made no promise to any wife...is
she off the hook?

There is a wonderful bit of dialog in *Pulp Fiction*. Two gangsters
are talking about whether it was appropriate for their boss to throw
another guy they knew out a 4th story window for giving the boss's wife
a foot massage. Hmmmmm. Foot massage. They debate both sides, and in
the end agree that a food massage is an inappropriately intimate kind
of contact to lavish on the boss's wife.

You know what? If I walked in on my slave giving some other woman an
unauthorized foot massage, he'd be whipped. I think a good whipping is
more appropriate in a case like that. Depending on who it is, I might
whip her too.

--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)




I believe in female supremacy. But... Does that mean I should let
myself be used by women and I have no say in the matter?

NO! I am passionate about this. In a femsupremacy world, men would not
be used and exploited, but cherished. You *should* have a say! It's
just that women need men to respect them.

I hate to see the way sub guys are misused by some women. Still, you
should take care of yourself, and be selective about who you surrender
to.
--
Laura Goodwin

Ok. I'll try!




femsupremacy-digest Digest Volume 96 : Issue 49

Today's Topics:
What some guys do with their spare time (Vt. Men United Against Rape)
Re: some personal steps
Re: some personal steps
Re: unsubscribe
Re: some personal steps
Re: some personal steps
Re: some personal steps
No Sex (was 'Re: some personal steps')
No sex...NOT! ;)
Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
My hero, my hubby
Re: unsubscribe
Re: unsubscribe
Re: My hero, my hubby
unsubscribe
--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 15:30:12 -0500
From: kriv@interlog.com (peter)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: some personal steps
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Good day Ms Goodwin:

Thank you for the interesting comments:

I do know of many vanilla/kink couples who solved the problem by
deciding together to allow the kinky one to cultivate a sidecar BDSM
relationship. As long as this agreement is freely entered into, I
think it's a valid option. But such arrangements have their own
dangers, and not the least of them is the possibility of the sidecar
relationship becoming the primary one. Love and passion are not
governable by reason and a sense of fair-play. What looks good in
theory is in fact fraught with peril. It's not jolly fun for the
vanilla partner to sit home alone time after time...HAVE A HEART!

But if the kink partner of the relationship is totally committed to his
Wife, what he learns from his submissive relationship can't do anything but
help him in his relationship with his Wife. And if he is totally committed
to his Wife and family, there need not be any worry about leaving them.
Rather he would learn to provide better for them.

I personally feel that marriage should mean something, and what it
means is between the wife and husband. What they *agree to* is fine
with me. Few vanilla wives enjoy knowing that their husband is
dissatisfied with the marital sex to such an extent that he needs
outside amusement. That's a fact that husbands know very well, which
is why so many lie and sneak around...they know damn well that their
wives wouldn't like it, and would not approve. Me, with my female's
perspective: I'm on the side of the wives.

You are assuming that submissive men seek a relationship outside of their
marriage for sex. A true submissive serves his Mistress for the joy of
serving Her. Anything he receives is either a gift from Her; or She feels
so concerned about him that any corrective measures are given out to help
him become a better person.

Thank you, Ms Goodwin
peter


the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 15:17:13 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: some personal steps
Message-Id: <199604242217.PAA01654@dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com

Peter wrote:

You are assuming that submissive men seek a relationship outside of
their marriage for sex. A true submissive serves his Mistress for the
joy of serving Her. Anything he receives is either a gift from Her; or
She feels so concerned about him that any corrective measures are
given out to help him become a better person.

Yeah, well, I didn't just fall off the turnip truck, either. :)

--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 15:29:42 -0700
From: billtrcy@ix.netcom.com (William Trautmann )
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: unsubscribe
Message-Id: <199604242229.PAA02267@dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 19:28:35 -0500
From: kriv@interlog.com (peter)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: some personal steps
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Ms Goodwin replied:
Peter wrote:

You are assuming that submissive men seek a relationship outside of
their marriage for sex. A true submissive serves his Mistress for the
joy of serving Her. Anything he receives is either a gift from Her; or
She feels so concerned about him that any corrective measures are
given out to help him become a better person.

Yeah, well, I didn't just fall off the turnip truck, either. :)

--
Laura Goodwin

What about submissive men who seek out a pro domina who states that no sex
will be involved? They didn't fall off a turnip truck, either.

peter
"You shouldn't have to be a martyr to be submissive."
(peter)



On Wed, 24 Apr 1996, peter wrote:

Ms Goodwin replied:
Peter wrote:

Yeah, well, I didn't just fall off the turnip truck, either. :)
Laura Goodwin

What about submissive men who seek out a pro domina who states that no sex
will be involved? They didn't fall off a turnip truck, either.
peter

After a year or so I delurk...

I often don't agree with what Laura has to say. But I suspect that in her
copious free time

Peter: lighten up! The lady's got a clue...




At 06:52 AM 24/4/96 -0700, you wrote:
I was in an unhappy marriage with a husband who was incompatable:
obstructive and abusive. I decided I didn't want to live that way, so
I chose to endure uncertainly and trial, including poverty and other
privations, to hit the road with my 2 babies in search of a better
life.

I eventually got my feet under me, and I daresay it hasn't been easy
for me. Doing the right thing is often not easy. I advocate doing the
difficult thing, if that is what you must do to live as you think is
best.

I found a compatable husband, and we have been a happy couple for 11
years, married 9 years as of today. * Happy Anniversary, My Love *
We have forged a powerful bond with a white hot passion and a shared
vision of "how it should be". This passion sometimes includes others,
if we both agree.

Loneliness need not be our lot. There are millions of female
supremacists, male and female, and if one makes the effort one can find
oneself among them. That is what I have done, while maintaining
healthy ties with the rest of the world. I did it step by step, and
whenever possible I made choices that affirmed my desired way of life.
It does require a certain determination and clarity of vision. If you
lack these qualities, then work on developing them.

Speaking of love, I hope you know a decent person will not betray one's
loved ones. Dishonesty and double-dealing is a form of betrayal.

As for fun, it can be tremendous fun to finally feel like a winner in
the game of life. You can't beat the odds unless you try. If there is
something you want for yourself then you have to play for it, and keep
playing until you get good at playing, and keep getting good until you
win. Then keep winning until you can win with ease.

I do know of many vanilla/kink couples who solved the problem by
deciding together to allow the kinky one to cultivate a sidecar BDSM
relationship. As long as this agreement is freely entered into, I
think it's a valid option. But such arrangements have their own
dangers, and not the least of them is the possibility of the sidecar
relationship becoming the primary one. Love and passion are not
governable by reason and a sense of fair-play. What looks good in
theory is in fact fraught with peril. It's not jolly fun for the
vanilla partner to sit home alone time after time...HAVE A HEART!

I personally feel that marriage should mean something, and what it
means is between the wife and husband. What they *agree to* is fine
with me. Few vanilla wives enjoy knowing that their husband is
dissatisfied with the marital sex to such an extent that he needs
outside amusement. That's a fact that husbands know very well, which
is why so many lie and sneak around...they know damn well that their
wives wouldn't like it, and would not approve. Me, with my female's
perspective: I'm on the side of the wives.

I say if you want to act like a single guy, get a divorce. If you want
to act like a devoted married man, get with the program and rediscover
your love for your wife. In short, get on one ding-dong side or the
other.
--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

___________________________________________________________________
Questions and comments should be sent to listmaster@renaissoft.com.
For a list and description of supported mailing list commands, send
mail to femsupremacy-request@renaissoft.com with the subject "help".




the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 06:02:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chase Vogelsberg
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: No Sex (was 'Re: some personal steps')
Message-Id: <199604251302.GAA24860@eskimo.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Peter wrote:
What about submissive men who seek out a pro domina who states that no sex
will be involved? They didn't fall off a turnip truck, either.

An awful lot of them expect that the domina just states that for legal
reasons, and pester the dominatrix for things of a sexual nature, whether
begging to orally satisfy the woman or whatnot. Some 'pros' actually
allow it, but mostly those subs -did- fall of a turnip truck, so to speak.

You are assuming that submissive men seek a relationship outside of
their marriage for sex. A true submissive serves his Mistress for the
joy of serving Her. Anything he receives is either a gift from Her; or
She feels so concerned about him that any corrective measures are
given out to help him become a better person.

Nice fantasy. There's an lot of different kinds of 'real' submissives, but
I can't think of too many who serve purely for the joy of serving. Let a
domme simply tell her sub to come in and clean her residence, shovel the
snow from her walk and fix her car and then leave, there's not many a sub
who'd enjoy that, or who would return often. Let her dress up in fetish
gear and torment the sub, or tease, or whatnot, it's a totally different
story. But then it's not purely for the sake of service, is it?

If it was purely for the joys of serving, the sub wouldn't need to go out
of the primary relationship. He or she could find many ways to serve inside
it - after all, how many wives wouldn't love to come home and find the
house cleaned, dishes washed, and a nice dinner almost ready for the table?
This would most certainly be serving, and that 'joy of serving' should be
there, even if the vanilla sweetie just blinks in surprise and kisses her
husband on the cheek in pleased gratitude.

If that -isn't- enough, and the sub needs to seek something else.... I'm
not much of one for marriage, but even I think it should mean -something-.
It's one thing if the wife knows and approves of the husband going outside
the marriage for submission or bdsm - but mostly, that's not the case.

Guess I don't see how to reconcile some of the views here, that equate
being submissive to furthering womankind / female supremacy, with being
dishonest to or cheating on the woman, the wife, at home. Then again, I'm
just an unsophisticated male with a decidedly black and blue, er, white,
view on certain things. ;-

-- \_awless is : Aliena's wolf, wild at heart, with a heart of darkness.
-- Chase Vogelsberg (lawless@netcom.com / lawless@eskimo.com)
--
-- Virtue is its own punishemnt.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 06:32:16 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: No sex...NOT! ;)
Message-Id: <199604251332.GAA01841@dfw-ix1.ix.netcom.com

Mike wrote:

Peter wrote:

What about submissive men who seek out a pro domina who states that
no sex will be involved?

Peter: lighten up! The lady's got a clue...

Thanks Mike. :)

Hey Peter (and anybody else who's still tuning in), Pro dominants say
there will be no sex to get around anti-prostitution laws. BDSM is not
ideally non-sexual. Its magical allure has its roots sunk deep in the
sex drive and the social urge to connect.

Even with no blow-jobs nor hand jobs, no intercourse, no oral worship
nor "forced" masturbation, no occasion at all for the sub's sexual
relief, BDSM is still *supposed to be* an intense sensual and
psychosexual adventure. As a matter of fact, Pro doms *are* trafficing
in orgasms, as well as sexual fantasy enactments, and anyone who thinks
otherwise is naÔve.

Here's how it works: Gal runs an ad that says: Ms. Domina Payne - BDSM
fantasy - no sex - no straight. In/Out.

Guy calls and says "Hey Ms. Payne, is it true there is no sex
involved?" She says yes, because how does she know the guy is no cop?

Guy comes anyway, sincerely expecting no sex. If something about him
seems fishy, he won't get any. If she trusts him, or is so desperate
to build her business that she's reckless, or has Mafia protection, he
may get a vibrator applied to his balls within minutes. :)

There are a few very Èlite Pros who are so expert or so famous (or so
old) that they seem like royalty, and extreme patience and courtesy is
required, but they still can be had, if they like you. Or, if you show
enough cash. :)

Here's the scoop: "Pro" doms, in general, are in business to make
money, and they don't make mucho money by refusing to get guys off.
They are just trying to stay out of jail.

In my career as a BDSM activist I have run up against the idea that
*lovers*, that *husbands and wives* who are into S/M don't have regular
sex! That a sadomasochist _substitutes_ B/D games for intercourse,
etc., which I hope *everyone* will one day know is a totally false
idea! That's what makes people think we are freaks: we don't have
"normal" sex. Well, this insane notion is being promulgated by the pro
doms, who are only too glad to act as spokespeople for the BDSM
community. I actually have heard, more than once in recent memory,
some Pro or another saying that not even any real pain is involved!
WHHHAAAAT!? So save yer money and go to Disneyland instead, then! I
mean, PUH-LeeeeeZe! I have been known to throw things at the TV on
occasions like this, because such *LIES* make _my_ job harder to do,
and my job is hard enough as it is.

--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 16:48:17 -0300
From: yazand
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
Message-Id: <199604251948.QAA01178@sv6.batelco.com.bh
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

i agree with u laura
At 06:32 AM 25-04-96 -0700, you wrote:
Mike wrote:=20

Peter wrote:

What about submissive men who seek out a pro domina who states that=20
no sex will be involved?=20

Peter: lighten up! The lady's got a clue...

Thanks Mike. :)

Hey Peter (and anybody else who's still tuning in), Pro dominants say=20
there will be no sex to get around anti-prostitution laws. BDSM is not=20
ideally non-sexual. Its magical allure has its roots sunk deep in the=20
sex drive and the social urge to connect. =20

Even with no blow-jobs nor hand jobs, no intercourse, no oral worship=20
nor "forced" masturbation, no occasion at all for the sub's sexual=20
relief, BDSM is still *supposed to be* an intense sensual and=20
psychosexual adventure. As a matter of fact, Pro doms *are* trafficing=20
in orgasms, as well as sexual fantasy enactments, and anyone who thinks=20
otherwise is na=EFve. =20

Here's how it works: Gal runs an ad that says: Ms. Domina Payne - BDSM=20
fantasy - no sex - no straight. In/Out.

Guy calls and says "Hey Ms. Payne, is it true there is no sex=20
involved?" She says yes, because how does she know the guy is no cop?

Guy comes anyway, sincerely expecting no sex. If something about him=20
seems fishy, he won't get any. If she trusts him, or is so desperate=20
to build her business that she's reckless, or has Mafia protection, he=20
may get a vibrator applied to his balls within minutes. :)

There are a few very =E9lite Pros who are so expert or so famous (or so=20
old) that they seem like royalty, and extreme patience and courtesy is=20
required, but they still can be had, if they like you. Or, if you show=20
enough cash. :)

Here's the scoop: "Pro" doms, in general, are in business to make=20
money, and they don't make mucho money by refusing to get guys off. =20
They are just trying to stay out of jail.=20

In my career as a BDSM activist I have run up against the idea that=20
*lovers*, that *husbands and wives* who are into S/M don't have regular=20
sex! That a sadomasochist _substitutes_ B/D games for intercourse,=20
etc., which I hope *everyone* will one day know is a totally false=20
idea! That's what makes people think we are freaks: we don't have=20
"normal" sex. Well, this insane notion is being promulgated by the pro=20
doms, who are only too glad to act as spokespeople for the BDSM=20
community. I actually have heard, more than once in recent memory,=20
some Pro or another saying that not even any real pain is involved! =20
WHHHAAAAT!? So save yer money and go to Disneyland instead, then! I=20
mean, PUH-LeeeeeZe! I have been known to throw things at the TV on=20
occasions like this, because such *LIES* make _my_ job harder to do,=20
and my job is hard enough as it is.

--=20
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

___________________________________________________________________
Questions and comments should be sent to listmaster@renaissoft.com.
For a list and description of supported mailing list commands, send
mail to femsupremacy-request@renaissoft.com with the subject "help".



the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 07:04:53 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: My hero, my hubby
Message-Id: <199604251404.HAA14696@dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com

Happy Anniversary

MyKey

Thanks MyKey :)

A couple of you guys have said to me, "Does Bruce know how lucky he
is?" which is flattering to my vanity, for which I'm grateful :) But
it's not as if I'm showing charity to put up with him. Actually, luck
had little to do with it. Bruce is a wonderful guy!

He has many sterling qualities, not the least of which is his truly
supportive, steadfast devotion. He's a good looking fellow with a
cheerful demeanor and love of fun in all forms. He's sexy, a hot
love-slave, and in general is a very loving and tender husband (Cooks!
Does housework! Great father! *Cleans oven without being asked*!).

He's a man among men, a regular guy to the world at large, but
something about him tells you he is probably holding some wild cards.
Probably the nipple rings... ;)

He is at his best in a crisis. Bruce is a huge-hearted fellow with
tremendous courage, stubborness and a zest for victory. He will never
believe in the possibility of failure or defeat. There is a way around
any obstacle, that's his honest opinion. We have faced some terrifying
trials together, and when ever I was afraid, or unsure of which way to
turn, he would smile and say, "We're gonna beat this thing!" and we
would. He's always right about that.

He has some flaws, of course. He can get on my nerves at times,
because when things are going well and are peaceful, he's bored! I
have to tie him up and torture him just to keep him sane. ;)

--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 10:27:32 -0400
From: bcom
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: unsubscribe
Message-ID: <317F8BD4.731D@netrunner.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

William Trautmann wrote:

___________________________________________________________________
Questions and comments should be sent to listmaster@renaissoft.com.
For a list and description of supported mailing list commands, send
mail to femsupremacy-request@renaissoft.com with the subject "help".bcom wrote; unsubscribe

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 10:40:15 -0400
From: bcom
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: unsubscribe
Message-ID: <317F8ECF.29FC@netrunner.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

bcom wrote:

William Trautmann wrote:

___________________________________________________________________
Questions and comments should be sent to listmaster@renaissoft.com.
For a list and description of supported mailing list commands, send
mail to femsupremacy-request@renaissoft.com with the subject "help".bcom wrote; unsubscribe

___________________________________________________________________
Questions and comments should be sent to listmaster@renaissoft.com.
For a list and description of supported mailing list commands, send
mail to femsupremacy-request@renaissoft.com with the subject "help".

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 13:14:08 -0400
From: almg@soho.ios.com
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: My hero, my hubby
Message-Id: <199604251714.NAA14037@soho.ios.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Dear Ms Goodwin,
I just wanted to relay that I have enjoyed the topics discussed on
femsupremacy immensely, and intend to resubscribe after I complete my move
(moving to Maryland) I am unsubscribing because I don't want an overload of
e-mail when I finally get back on line. You or any of the fine people that
are associated with you are always more than welcome to drop by for some
coffee and snacks:) Thank you!
Bruce

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 13:16:13 -0400
From: almg@soho.ios.com
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: unsubscribe
Message-Id: <199604251716.NAA14357@soho.ios.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 12:14:11
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
From: almg@soho.ios.com
Subject: Re: My hero, my hubby

Dear Ms Goodwin,
I just wanted to relay that I have enjoyed the topics discussed on
femsupremacy immensely, and intend to resubscribe after I complete my move
(moving to Maryland) I am unsubscribing because I don't want an overload of
e-mail when I finally get back on line. You or any of the fine people that
are associated with you are always more than welcome to drop by for some
coffee and snacks:) Thank you!
Bruce
Whoops! I forgot the appropriate subject line on the last one:)

the subject "help".

--------------------------------
End of femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 Issue #49
***********************************************
From - Sun Apr 28 15:52:05 1996
Received: from aphex.direct.ca (root@aphex.direct.ca [199.60.229.6]) by badboy.iprolink.ch (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA37430 for
Received: from davinci.renaissoft.com ([199.60.103.1]) by aphex.direct.ca with ESMTP id <268139-253; Sat, 27 Apr 1996 09:01:38 -0700
Received: (from list@localhost) by davinci.renaissoft.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA03584 for virtjack@iprolink.ch; Sat, 27 Apr 1996 09:06:09 -0700
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 09:06:09 -0700
From: femsupremacy-digest-request@renaissoft.com
Message-Id: <199604271606.JAA03584@davinci.renaissoft.com
Subject: femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 #52
X-Loop: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-Mailing-List:
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------"
To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
Reply-To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-UIDL: 435e9a0a77cc62e90a79601745af0d05
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001

------------------------------

Content-Type: text/plain

femsupremacy-digest Digest Volume 96 : Issue 52

Today's Topics:
Advancing Women (resource, networking site)
STORY PRELUDE: TIFFANY FROM ATLANTA (fwd)
Re: The Marriage Thread
Re: Do the right thing
Re: MOTHERS OF LIBERIA
Re: unsubscribe
The Marriage Thread

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 18:48:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com (Female Supremacy List)
Subject: Advancing Women (resource, networking site)
Message-Id: <199604270148.SAA06916@netcom18.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 2855

From Usenet. If you don't use this resource yourself, please pass
it along to someone who might have an interest. Thank you.
c.s.
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

From: Gretchen Glasscock
Newsgroups: alt.women.supremacy
Subject: Invitation to Real Time Chat
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 15:22:35 -0500
Organization: Texas Networking, Inc.

Hi ,

Netscape has provided Advancing Women, business and professional
women's networking site, with a real time chat room for any of us to
use networking or however we want. Since Netscape is watching our
volume to see if we get to maintain this, we really need to develop
some usage. I hope you will help out by using it. You can invite
any of your friends or organization members from all over to meet you
there to talk, hold meetings, discuss strategy, vote, whatever. It
would help all of us women who are trying to develop a presence on the
Net and advance women's goals to be able to have a permanent forum to
meet and discuss issues which concern us. Advancing Women would really
appreciate it, also. Here's how to access the "chat or conference" room.

You will need the software, Netscape Chat 2 which is free and takes
just a minute to automatically download to your computer. You can
either go directly to Netscape at
http://home.netscape.com/comprod/chat_install.html)
or, you can go to
http://advancingwomen.com/com.menu.html
and click on "Forums" which will take you directly to the Netscape
download, and click where they tell you.

A moment or two later, the download will be finished and on your
computer will be Netscape Chat 2. software which looks a little like
a blue swirly marble. When you click on it some dialog boxes appear
and ask a couple of questions which you know the answers to (like your
name).

Here's the info you need to fill in ( I think the top line is already
filled in, for host and port but I've included the info anyway:

Host: iapp.netscape.com Port: 6667

Real Name: (anything ) Nick Name: (anything )
User account login : (anything) Password: (leave it blank)

Once connected, join the room "AdvancingWomen" (in one word) with
the key : "gretchen".

That's it. You're connected. You just type whatever you want to say.
On the left is a list of who else is in the room just then. If no one's
there, you may want to leave a message and come back or send an email
and invite someone over.

Thanks
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
END of forwarded Usenet post.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 21:24:13 -0700
From: olskool@ix.netcom.com (Antonio)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Cc: femsuprem@renaissoft.com
Subject: STORY PRELUDE: TIFFANY FROM ATLANTA (fwd)
Message-Id: <199604270424.VAA19450@dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com

---- Begin Forwarded Message

220 23589 <4ls50d$p7t@dfw-ixnews1.ix.netcom.com article
Path: ix.netcom.com!news
From: olskool@ix.netcom.com (Antonio)
Newsgroups: alt.amazon-women.admirers
Subject: STORY PRELUDE: TIFFANY FROM ATLANTA (fwd)
Date: 27 Apr 1996 03:41:01 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 172
Message-ID: <4ls50d$p7t@dfw-ixnews1.ix.netcom.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: sdx-ca12-09.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri Apr 26 10:41:01 PM CDT 1996




boiker@TheRamp.net (TrEnT ReZnOr) writes:
C'mon people, post s'more stories of tall women. i'm sure there are
many more people who agree with me.


THE FOLLOWING STORY, "TIFFANY FROM ATLANTA", IS INTENDED FOR MATURE
READERS ONLY. MINORS SHOULD NOT READ THIS.



TIFFANY FROM ATLANTA: A MODERN LOVE STORY

(This is just a Teaser: This is not the whole text of this story.)


You ask me how did I meet Tiffany and my mind drifts back to that crowded nightclub
in Atlanta four years ago. Tiffany was just starting college then, and in fact her
school was not in Georgia at all, but in North Carolina. She was just "back home"
in Atlanta for the long weekend, hanging with her usual multiracial group of friends,
the kids she spent her high school years with, kids who were now scattered at a dozen
universities across Georgia and across the nation. All reunited in their favorite
Atlanta night spot for first evening of what they hoped would be a long, long weekend.

I was with my best friend Rudy from work. He fixed the computers at our publishing
firm. And a great troubleshooter he was. Only problem was, he couldn't get a date.
He wasn't a bad looking guy, it was just that he was somewhat misogynistic -- in
laymen's terms, he hated women. He also wore geeky clothes and talked too loudly,
on occasion. But he had certain advantages over me. Where I stood no taller than
5'7", Rudy was 6'1". In theory at least, he could date a wider range of women
than I could.

And now to Tiffany. Both Rudy and I noticed her, standing off near the bar surrounded
by a bevy of friends. Could be admirers, I thought. It was a group of guys and
girls. And except for one black guy who was quite tall, Tiffany (I didn't know her
name yet, so I just thought of her as "the big blonde") towered above all of them.
I couldn't estimate how tall she must have been -- she was too far away, the lights
were dim and multicolored, the smoke around the bar was thick, and I was juiced.

She was a very attractive girl. Her hair was really more flaxen than yellow-blonde,
and styled in a neo-retro flip, sort of like Mary Tyler Moore on her old show but
instead of stiff, it was gorgeously flowing -- liquid. A lot of the time, the flip
hung down on one side covering her eye or half her face, and sometimes she tossed it
back insouciantly, with a shake of her head, or with her hand. Her eyes were big
with nice, high, arching brows, and her mouth was big with full lips. She was wearing
what looked like a man's white dress shirt, only with fuller sleeves, and a smart black
vest that seemed a size or two too small. She talked and talked with her friends,
for what seemed like hours. Rudy drifted off. I stayed and watched, mesmerized.
Then I headed forward through the crowd, closer to the bar. By this point it must
have been 11:30, and that meant the night was still young, didn't it.

I ordered a Zima this time, to be different, and actually scored a seat near the corner
of the bar. I noticed the big blonde's crowd of acolytes had dispersed and rejoined
several times as the night wore on and the music changed from dance to funk to latin
back to dance and back to funk. Once, the blonde actually left the scene, but I knew
since her fans were still around in their little knot, that she'd be back. She came
back, carrying a drink. Her chief acolyte, the towering black guy, pulled out a
cigarette, lit up, and in due course, offered her a drag. She took it gingerly
between three fingers, tossed back her hair, and inhaled in one cool, sweeping motion
that could have won her an Academy Award for "Best Femme Fatale".

"Aaagh!" she choked, and gave it back to her stylishly dressed friend. Soon, a
tall white woman, a brunette, equally stylishly dressed, sidled up to the black guy.
She was very attractive, but I preferred the blonde. The couple embraced, whispered
in each other's ears, and walked away together. That was the last I saw of them that
night.

The blonde's group started to disperse -- again. She finally, empty glass and
napkin in hand, approached the only open spot at the bar -- right next to my stool!
The bartender was way at the other end, and it was a very long bar. I turned to get
a closer look at her, trying to look casual, and hoping with every fiber of my being
that geeky Rudy would not show up again.

I now saw that this young woman was far more gorgeous than I could have imagined,
through the cigarette smoke and garish lights. She now stood inches away, crammed
almost awkwardly in the corner close to a door from which whizzed, every few minutes,
a waitress adorned with trays and bottles of Molsen and Bud. She held out a $5
bill in a rather large, but well-manicured hand. She cocked her head down at me
and the hair dangled in front of her eye. They were blue. Large and clear and
blue as the Atlantic. And quite intelligent looking. Her facial features were
perfectly symmetrical and clearly defined. With high cheeks, her nose and chin were
particularly strong, complementing each other's definition and symmetry. The chin
was slightly dimpled, but there was not a touch of harshness to her face. It was
at once utterly impressive and somehow sweet as a little girl's.

But the most impressive thing about that face was the absolute perfection of her
complection. It was baby soft and flawless, and it glowed, setting off the blueness
of her dazzling eyes.

Actually, as she stood there, I did not know what to make of this girl, for she seemed
to have both the qualities of a fresh-faced, wide-eyed school girl and a strong,
confident woman. And she was so tall! By now, I was starting to recover from my
night's indulgence (I had made several quick trips to the men's room.) I still
clutched my Zima but looked more carefully at this girl, as she didn't seem to mind a
bit. We exchanged a few words and smiles, drunken platitudes about the bar being so
croweded.

Yes, she was a tall one. And well proportioned. I could see beneath the little
black vest that she was well-endowed. Her assets were full, well-formed, and proud
beneath the vest. They stood high and daunting on a slender, lanky frame. I say
lanky because her legs seemed to start so high on her body! It was almost unnatural
-- at least for what I was used to, in my family, where all the girls were under 5'4"
and had short little legs!

The black corduroy pants this goddess was wearing fit so well, I almost had to gasp.
Her hips were nicely curved, but not broad. The corduroy clung lovingly to every
inch and I could see there was not the slightest hint of a "tummy." This girl was in
shape, too! I wondered what she would look like with a lot less clothing on -- maybe
a tiny tank top to show off her assets, and a skimpy pair of shorts. In my fantasy,
the tank top didn't quite meet the shorts, and a large swath of the tightest,
firmest I ever saw was midriff was visible -- cut and dimpled and almost concave.

Suddenly, I was shaken from my reverie. She asked my where I was from! I told
her San Jose, California, originally. I had graduated from UC Davis, with a degree
in English. She was an Atlanta native, born and raised in the sprawling, wealthy
outer suburbs of the fastest growing city in the South. She spoke with a sweet
Georgia lilt, but her voice seemed to contain none of the quality of helpless deference
that traditional "Southern Belles" usually affected, especially when talking to men.
There was a distinct charm to her, but it was that of a jaded suburban princess,
raised amidst malls and football games and Volvos. Her name was Tiffany and she
attended a well-known private university in North Carolina, where she was an
Economics major. Impressive, I thought. She was a freshman. I was twenty-seven.

And I was getting a hard-on, I realized. Still no sign of the bartender, and indeed,
I was wishing he would never come. I stood up to allow more room for my slowly
growing member.

I stood up and looked into Tiffany's eyes as her hair hung down and her face took on
a serious look. She must have been six foot -- six one, six two? How could I know?
Quickly, I did some mental comparisons. Rudy, that poor geek, was 6'1". This girl
could actually be taller than Rudy! I looked down at her shoes and they seemed to be
flat-heeled Hush Puppies, two toned. Nice. Good taste. This girl was tall and
big -- her shoulders broad -- I could see that even under the vest. Her flaxen flip
almost touched my face. Our faces were close. Perfect, glistening teeth were
concealed then revealed by lips that were big and full, softly sculpted, and had their
own natural redness and moistness. It seemed that no model, no world-famous
supermodel, could hope to compare or compete this undeniable beauty, here on display
for everyone to see!

I felt so intimidated standing next to this girl. Her hair, I could tell, smelled
sweet and fresh, a powerful aphrodisiac, for those saucy flaxen locks were thick and
lustrous. The flippy 'do framed her high-angled cheeks, her wide, stunning eyes,
and gracefully shaped, kissable red lips. There was not a hint of makeup on this girl.
I could see it was an alien thing to her -- she never needed it.

I felt pushed close to her body as folks around me jostled for seats at the bar.
But I was oblivious to them and lost in this girl's looks. I was so mesmerized that
I forgot all about my hard-on -- the first time in my life I could remember that this
had happened to me. A forgotten erection! Not one that merely fizzled out, not one
that drooped and died, but one which became forgotten. If it was still hard and
stiff, I had no way of knowing because I couldn't take my eyes off this girl.

And something inside of me kept telling me that this was a dream, that the gorgeous
female in front of me was not real, or that she couln't possibly be so -- so tall!
Was she an athlete/model? Something produced in a genetic factory? She was so big,
she could have played football, I thought -- with the guys, and I mean the big guys.
But she wasn't stocky or clunky or thickset. She was big and had a lanky grace, I
could tell, even though she was wearing that little black vest and I couldn't quite
make out the silhouette, the true contours, of her obviously athletic form.

"You want to dance?" I asked, absentmindedly but longingly. I realized "Brick
House" by the Commodores was playing. She smiled a dazzling smile, and said,
"Sure, let's go!" She pulled me onto the dance floor with one hand about my wrist...


To Be Continued...






---- End Forwarded Message

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 09:50:46 -0500
From: rrlelnd@escape.ca (David Land)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: The Marriage Thread
Message-Id: <199604271450.JAA14220@wpg-01.escape.ca
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Some of the participants on the list will be married couples. I
wonder if any of them would like to comment on marrige customs and ritual.
Are there ideas for giving due reverence to the supreme female while tying
the marital knot?

DL

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 15:49:08 -0400
From: Lonely2001@aol.com
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Do the right thing
Message-ID: <960426154906_522680287@emout18.mail.aol.com

In a message dated 96-04-25 13:39:37 EDT, you write:


I have seen this bullshit at work up close and personal, and it is a
slimy, weaslely bullshit indeed. Why is some slut with a whip more
worthy of adoration than your ever- lovin' wife? It's gotta be the sex
factor, which in my mind is the only legitimate reason. IMNSHO, A guy
who "worships" some teen in a leather teddy and treats his own wife
with contempt is worshiping nothing but his own erection. Feminists
can plainly see that this sort of thing does not further the cause of
women very ding-dong much.

I realize my weekness in this regard. That is, a desire to be dominated. I am
submissive to all women in general (I am regarded as "chivalrous" and a "nice
guy"). But I know that if I was in a vanilla relationship I would be
dissatisfied after a while. I make sure to tell someone I am dating before we
get too serious. I am sad to say, most, so far, think it is sick, depraved,
perverted, etc. I have been puzzled by this. They don't like the idea of a
man to do their bidding? Lost a lot of girlfriends... But I believe honesty
is important.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 08:20:33 +0200
From: Bernd Angerer
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: MOTHERS OF LIBERIA
Message-Id: <199604270620.IAA19779@croco.atnet.at
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

THE FOLLOWING IS A POSTING FOR THE MOTHERS OF LIBERIA WHO ARE HOLDING
A DAILY VIGIL AT THE PARK OPPOSITE THE UNITED NATIONS AT 42ND STREET.
THEY ARE SEEKING OUR HELP....THEY ARE SEEKING OUR SUPPORT!
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO POST TO OTHER LISTS.

We the MOTHERS of Liberia appeal to all Grandmothers, Mothers and
concerned WOMEN, to join us and make the world know once and for all
that we will no longer tolerate the killing, mutilation and torturing
of our children.
snipped

Thank you Laura
I forwarded it to all newspapers in our area, hoping they jump on the train
to report about.

Bernd

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 17:08:19 -0500
From: kriv@interlog.com (peter)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: unsubscribe
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hey Chase:
It's obvious that you are very respectful to women.
Nowhere is it written that you can't be respectful to men, too.
There must have been a better way to to explain to Lloyd that he did
something wrong.
Maybe you should try to take what you have learned from here and apply it
to everyone. You will be a better person.
Peter

Yay Lloyd!!! You're the very first person, less than 24 hours after
DeeAnn posted how to unsubscribe, to demonstrate your know-how, your wit,
your incredible competence level, by unsubscribing at the wrong address!
Hey everone, let's give Lloyd a -big- round of applause here! Brrrrttt!

Now, as soon as you see this, try sending a note to femsupremacy-request
at renaissoft.com, with unsubscribe for the subject line just like you
had it, an' mebbe you won't see any more kind, comforting messages like
this one. ;- Everonyone else wanting to unsubscribe, send a message
just like Lloyd's to the usual address an' I'll try to make sure that
you too get a proper farewell. :)


-- \_awless is : A wolf, wild at heart, with a heart of darkness.
-- Chase Vogelsberg (lawless@netcom.com / lawless@eskimo.com)
--
-- Some angels didn't have that far to fall.

___________________________________________________________________
Questions and comments should be sent to listmaster@renaissoft.com.
For a list and description of supported mailing list commands, send
mail to femsupremacy-request@renaissoft.com with the subject "help".


the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 18:48:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: Barry Emerson Wright
To: femsupremacy
Subject: The Marriage Thread
Message-Id:
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Friends,

Many of the messages in the last several days have dealt with the
sanctity of marriage and different peoples' response to it. Here, as
always, are a few thoughts.
I have never been married, primarily because I have never wanted
children and most women I have been deeply attracted to have considered
kids to be a priority. During my life I have developed the custom of
forming very strong and completely monogamous relationships, only to find
them breaking apart after five or more years due to the childbearing
issue, geographic incompatibility concerning residence, or once
partner's infidelity. At present I have been involved for nearly a year
in my first D/s relationship and things are going well.
To me monogamy is very important, but that concept is not (and should
not be) universal. What matters is complete honesty between *all* those
involved. No lying, no skulking around, no "chasing" others who have
already given their commitment to another or others. If you make a
promise, honor it; if you can no longer do so admit it and allow your
partner the choice of accepting the "new you" or finding someone else.
This may seem cold, but I can't help but wonder how I would have
reacted had I discovered (or admitted) my D/s feelings while married to
a vanilla woman. It's a lot easier to make your "decisions" in theory,
but had I been faced with the actual situation I hope I would have "done the
right thing".......

Peace,

Barry



the subject "help".

--------------------------------
End of femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 Issue #52
***********************************************

From - Sun Apr 28 15:52:12 1996
Received: from aphex.direct.ca (root@aphex.direct.ca [199.60.229.6]) by badboy.iprolink.ch (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA24944 for
Received: from davinci.renaissoft.com ([199.60.103.1]) by aphex.direct.ca with ESMTP id <268116-286; Sat, 27 Apr 1996 11:36:30 -0700
Received: (from list@localhost) by davinci.renaissoft.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA09438 for virtjack@iprolink.ch; Sat, 27 Apr 1996 11:41:14 -0700
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 11:41:14 -0700
From: femsupremacy-digest-request@renaissoft.com
Message-Id: <199604271841.LAA09438@davinci.renaissoft.com
Subject: femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 #53
X-Loop: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-Mailing-List:
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------"
To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
Reply-To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-UIDL: 74b25decbb241e6996b040074e901d42
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001

------------------------------

Content-Type: text/plain

femsupremacy-digest Digest Volume 96 : Issue 53

Today's Topics:
STORY PRELUDE: TIFFANY FROM ATLANTA (fwd)
Re: Fwd: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
Re: Do the right thing
Re: The Marriage Thread
The New, Improved Marriage Thread
Re: Fwd: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
Re: Unidentified subject!
Re: Do the right thing
Re: The New, Improved Marriage Thread

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 21:28:03 -0700
From: olskool@ix.netcom.com (Antonio)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: STORY PRELUDE: TIFFANY FROM ATLANTA (fwd)
Message-Id: <199604270428.VAA12293@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com

---- Begin Forwarded Message






boiker@TheRamp.net (TrEnT ReZnOr) writes:
C'mon people, post s'more stories of tall women. i'm sure there are
many more people who agree with me.


THE FOLLOWING STORY, "TIFFANY FROM ATLANTA", IS INTENDED FOR MATURE
READERS ONLY. MINORS SHOULD NOT READ THIS.



TIFFANY FROM ATLANTA: A MODERN LOVE STORY

(This is just a Teaser: This is not the whole text of this story.)


You ask me how did I meet Tiffany and my mind drifts back to that crowded nightclub
in Atlanta four years ago. Tiffany was just starting college then, and in fact her
school was not in Georgia at all, but in North Carolina. She was just "back home"
in Atlanta for the long weekend, hanging with her usual multiracial group of friends,
the kids she spent her high school years with, kids who were now scattered at a dozen
universities across Georgia and across the nation. All reunited in their favorite
Atlanta night spot for first evening of what they hoped would be a long, long weekend.

I was with my best friend Rudy from work. He fixed the computers at our publishing
firm. And a great troubleshooter he was. Only problem was, he couldn't get a date.
He wasn't a bad looking guy, it was just that he was somewhat misogynistic -- in
laymen's terms, he hated women. He also wore geeky clothes and talked too loudly,
on occasion. But he had certain advantages over me. Where I stood no taller than
5'7", Rudy was 6'1". In theory at least, he could date a wider range of women
than I could.

And now to Tiffany. Both Rudy and I noticed her, standing off near the bar surrounded
by a bevy of friends. Could be admirers, I thought. It was a group of guys and
girls. And except for one black guy who was quite tall, Tiffany (I didn't know her
name yet, so I just thought of her as "the big blonde") towered above all of them.
I couldn't estimate how tall she must have been -- she was too far away, the lights
were dim and multicolored, the smoke around the bar was thick, and I was juiced.

She was a very attractive girl. Her hair was really more flaxen than yellow-blonde,
and styled in a neo-retro flip, sort of like Mary Tyler Moore on her old show but
instead of stiff, it was gorgeously flowing -- liquid. A lot of the time, the flip
hung down on one side covering her eye or half her face, and sometimes she tossed it
back insouciantly, with a shake of her head, or with her hand. Her eyes were big
with nice, high, arching brows, and her mouth was big with full lips. She was wearing
what looked like a man's white dress shirt, only with fuller sleeves, and a smart black
vest that seemed a size or two too small. She talked and talked with her friends,
for what seemed like hours. Rudy drifted off. I stayed and watched, mesmerized.
Then I headed forward through the crowd, closer to the bar. By this point it must
have been 11:30, and that meant the night was still young, didn't it.

I ordered a Zima this time, to be different, and actually scored a seat near the corner
of the bar. I noticed the big blonde's crowd of acolytes had dispersed and rejoined
several times as the night wore on and the music changed from dance to funk to latin
back to dance and back to funk. Once, the blonde actually left the scene, but I knew
since her fans were still around in their little knot, that she'd be back. She came
back, carrying a drink. Her chief acolyte, the towering black guy, pulled out a
cigarette, lit up, and in due course, offered her a drag. She took it gingerly
between three fingers, tossed back her hair, and inhaled in one cool, sweeping motion
that could have won her an Academy Award for "Best Femme Fatale".

"Aaagh!" she choked, and gave it back to her stylishly dressed friend. Soon, a
tall white woman, a brunette, equally stylishly dressed, sidled up to the black guy.
She was very attractive, but I preferred the blonde. The couple embraced, whispered
in each other's ears, and walked away together. That was the last I saw of them that
night.

The blonde's group started to disperse -- again. She finally, empty glass and
napkin in hand, approached the only open spot at the bar -- right next to my stool!
The bartender was way at the other end, and it was a very long bar. I turned to get
a closer look at her, trying to look casual, and hoping with every fiber of my being
that geeky Rudy would not show up again.

I now saw that this young woman was far more gorgeous than I could have imagined,
through the cigarette smoke and garish lights. She now stood inches away, crammed
almost awkwardly in the corner close to a door from which whizzed, every few minutes,
a waitress adorned with trays and bottles of Molsen and Bud. She held out a $5
bill in a rather large, but well-manicured hand. She cocked her head down at me
and the hair dangled in front of her eye. They were blue. Large and clear and
blue as the Atlantic. And quite intelligent looking. Her facial features were
perfectly symmetrical and clearly defined. With high cheeks, her nose and chin were
particularly strong, complementing each other's definition and symmetry. The chin
was slightly dimpled, but there was not a touch of harshness to her face. It was
at once utterly impressive and somehow sweet as a little girl's.

But the most impressive thing about that face was the absolute perfection of her
complection. It was baby soft and flawless, and it glowed, setting off the blueness
of her dazzling eyes.

Actually, as she stood there, I did not know what to make of this girl, for she seemed
to have both the qualities of a fresh-faced, wide-eyed school girl and a strong,
confident woman. And she was so tall! By now, I was starting to recover from my
night's indulgence (I had made several quick trips to the men's room.) I still
clutched my Zima but looked more carefully at this girl, as she didn't seem to mind a
bit. We exchanged a few words and smiles, drunken platitudes about the bar being so
croweded.

Yes, she was a tall one. And well proportioned. I could see beneath the little
black vest that she was well-endowed. Her assets were full, well-formed, and proud
beneath the vest. They stood high and daunting on a slender, lanky frame. I say
lanky because her legs seemed to start so high on her body! It was almost unnatural
-- at least for what I was used to, in my family, where all the girls were under 5'4"
and had short little legs!

The black corduroy pants this goddess was wearing fit so well, I almost had to gasp.
Her hips were nicely curved, but not broad. The corduroy clung lovingly to every
inch and I could see there was not the slightest hint of a "tummy." This girl was in
shape, too! I wondered what she would look like with a lot less clothing on -- maybe
a tiny tank top to show off her assets, and a skimpy pair of shorts. In my fantasy,
the tank top didn't quite meet the shorts, and a large swath of the tightest,
firmest I ever saw was midriff was visible -- cut and dimpled and almost concave.

Suddenly, I was shaken from my reverie. She asked my where I was from! I told
her San Jose, California, originally. I had graduated from UC Davis, with a degree
in English. She was an Atlanta native, born and raised in the sprawling, wealthy
outer suburbs of the fastest growing city in the South. She spoke with a sweet
Georgia lilt, but her voice seemed to contain none of the quality of helpless deference
that traditional "Southern Belles" usually affected, especially when talking to men.
There was a distinct charm to her, but it was that of a jaded suburban princess,
raised amidst malls and football games and Volvos. Her name was Tiffany and she
attended a well-known private university in North Carolina, where she was an
Economics major. Impressive, I thought. She was a freshman. I was twenty-seven.

And I was getting a hard-on, I realized. Still no sign of the bartender, and indeed,
I was wishing he would never come. I stood up to allow more room for my slowly
growing member.

I stood up and looked into Tiffany's eyes as her hair hung down and her face took on
a serious look. She must have been six foot -- six one, six two? How could I know?
Quickly, I did some mental comparisons. Rudy, that poor geek, was 6'1". This girl
could actually be taller than Rudy! I looked down at her shoes and they seemed to be
flat-heeled Hush Puppies, two toned. Nice. Good taste. This girl was tall and
big -- her shoulders broad -- I could see that even under the vest. Her flaxen flip
almost touched my face. Our faces were close. Perfect, glistening teeth were
concealed then revealed by lips that were big and full, softly sculpted, and had their
own natural redness and moistness. It seemed that no model, no world-famous
supermodel, could hope to compare or compete this undeniable beauty, here on display
for everyone to see!

I felt so intimidated standing next to this girl. Her hair, I could tell, smelled
sweet and fresh, a powerful aphrodisiac, for those saucy flaxen locks were thick and
lustrous. The flippy 'do framed her high-angled cheeks, her wide, stunning eyes,
and gracefully shaped, kissable red lips. There was not a hint of makeup on this girl.
I could see it was an alien thing to her -- she never needed it.

I felt pushed close to her body as folks around me jostled for seats at the bar.
But I was oblivious to them and lost in this girl's looks. I was so mesmerized that
I forgot all about my hard-on -- the first time in my life I could remember that this
had happened to me. A forgotten erection! Not one that merely fizzled out, not one
that drooped and died, but one which became forgotten. If it was still hard and
stiff, I had no way of knowing because I couldn't take my eyes off this girl.

And something inside of me kept telling me that this was a dream, that the gorgeous
female in front of me was not real, or that she couln't possibly be so -- so tall!
Was she an athlete/model? Something produced in a genetic factory? She was so big,
she could have played football, I thought -- with the guys, and I mean the big guys.
But she wasn't stocky or clunky or thickset. She was big and had a lanky grace, I
could tell, even though she was wearing that little black vest and I couldn't quite
make out the silhouette, the true contours, of her obviously athletic form.

"You want to dance?" I asked, absentmindedly but longingly. I realized "Brick
House" by the Commodores was playing. She smiled a dazzling smile, and said,
"Sure, let's go!" She pulled me onto the dance floor with one hand about my wrist...


To Be Continued...








---- End Forwarded Message

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 17:13:43 -0500
From: kriv@interlog.com (peter)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Ms TashaStar
Thank you for coming to my defense.
peter


-- [ From: TashaStar * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --

-------- REPLY, Original message follows --------
Hey Peter (and anybody else who's still tuning in), Pro dominants say
there
will be no sex to get around anti-prostitution laws. BDSM is not
ideally
non-sexual. Its magical allure has its roots sunk deep in the sex
drive and
the social urge to connect.

Ahem. Some Pro Dominants say there will be no sex, because there will be
no
sex.

Even with no blow-jobs nor hand jobs, no intercourse, no oral worship
nor
"forced" masturbation, no occasion at all for the sub's sexual relief,
BDSM
is
still *supposed to be* an intense sensual and psychosexual adventure.
As a
matter of fact, Pro doms *are* trafficing in orgasms, as well as sexua=
l
fantasy enactments, and anyone who thinks otherwise is na=D4ve.

So, I am naive ?? (only about how to get the two dots over the i)

Here's how it works: Gal runs an ad that says: Ms. Domina Payne - BDSM
fantasy
- no sex - no straight. In/Out.
Guy calls and says "Hey Ms. Payne, is it true there is no sex involved=
?
"
She
says yes, because how does she know the guy is no cop?
Guy comes anyway, sincerely expecting no sex. If something about him
seems
fishy, he won't get any. If she trusts him, or is so desperate to
build her
business that she's reckless, or has Mafia protection, he may get a
vibrator
applied to his balls within minutes. :)

I am really amazed that you think you know *my* business practise so well.
You
were close till the last bits.

There are a few very =C8lite Pros who are so expert or so famous (or so
old)
that they seem like royalty, and extreme patience and courtesy is
required,
but they still can be had, if they like you. Or, if you show enough
cash.
:)

<<snort I realize I am taking this personally, but then again, I haven'=
t
seen another Pro defend this statement. Am I the only professional on the
list
?

I am not so famous, or so old (34) and though I consider myself elite,
there is
NO way in hell that I EVER have sex with a client. Even if I was offered =
a
scandalous amount of money.
This is not about sex for me. I make that plain to all potential clients.

This is about power and the chance to influence someones life.
IMO and experience, Male Dominants are driven by sex, and most female
Dominants
are driven by money or power. I am driven by the power rush.

In my career as a BDSM activist I have run up against the idea that
*lovers*, that *husbands and wives* who are into S/M don't have regular
sex! That a sadomasochist _substitutes_ B/D games for intercourse,
etc., which I hope *everyone* will one day know is a totally false
idea! That's what makes people think we are freaks: we don't have
"normal" sex. Well, this insane notion is being promulgated by the pro
doms, who are only too glad to act as spokespeople for the BDSM
community.

I can see I will probably not make too many friends on this list, but
scuze
me, I am a lifestyle Domme as well as a professional Domina, and was
recently
appointed to the board of directors of our local bdsm support
club because I am a "good spokesperson" for the bdsm community.

I am glad to do so, yes. I promulgate no fiction about the lifestyle. (
or
about my services)

I actually have heard, more than once in recent memory,
some Pro or another saying that not even any real pain is involved!
WHHHAAAAT!? So save yer money and go to Disneyland instead, then! I
mean, PUH-LeeeeeZe! I have been known to throw things at the TV on
occasions like this, because such *LIES* make _my_ job harder to do,
and my job is hard enough as it is.

Have fun at Disneyland, save money by not throwing things at the TV. There
is
no doubt Pain involved if S&M is to occur. Mild-moderate-or severe.

I don't travel in the same circles or hear the same thing you do since Pro
friends of mine are of the responsible type and I don't think any of the
ones
I network with or associate with, tell lies about what we do.
I do not discount that there are plenty "hookers with whips" that will fit
into
your mold but I am not one, and I know several others like me.
All I ask is that you refrain from grouping all Pro's in that stereotype.

You have to recognize something. The job of a Professional Domina,
is often role playing, acting of sorts. This is for the person who
requests
a non S&M scene. As a professional, my realm is more comphrehensive then
just
whipping clients into submission and sending them on their way...this
isn't
how I work.

I am frequently needed to be a supportive role to someone who cross dresse=
s
and
does not have S&M desires. Not a *forced* feminization, but a simple
acceptance of the fact that they enjoy CD'ing.
I am trained in counseling and use it often, sometimes insidiously to
assist
those who feel abnormal in their desires and seek approval and acceptance.
In
*these* cases, there would not be pain, but these are not classified as a
S&M
session.

So, guess what ?? A professional Domina isn't always wearing leather and
swinging floggers and balancing dildos from her hip.
I hope I didn't ruin too many peoples illusions.

Gosh, this thread is making me furious.

Tasha

--
^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^
~Tasha Star~ Tasha@shadow.net
***NEW-NEW-NEW-WEBSITE***
see my *under construction site at:
http://www.shadow.net/~tasha
^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^
Ethereal Dominance
18524 N.W. 67 Avenue Suite# 325
Miami, FL. 33015 (305) 534-1555
^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^

------- FORWARD, End of original message -------


--
^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^
~Tasha Star~ Tasha@shadow.net
***NEW-NEW-NEW-WEBSITE***
see my *under construction site at:
http://www.shadow.net/~tasha
^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^
Ethereal Dominance
18524 N.W. 67 Avenue Suite# 325
Miami, FL. 33015 (305) 534-1555
^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^

___________________________________________________________________
Questions and comments should be sent to listmaster@renaissoft.com.
For a list and description of supported mailing list commands, send
mail to femsupremacy-request@renaissoft.com with the subject "help".


the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 09:22:24 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Do the right thing
Message-Id: <199604271622.JAA10076@dfw-ix1.ix.netcom.com

Lonely wrote:

I know that if I was in a vanilla relationship I would be
dissatisfied after a while. I make sure to tell someone I am dating
before we get too serious. I am sad to say, most, so far, think it is
sick, depraved, perverted, etc. I have been puzzled by this. They
don't like the idea of a man to do their bidding? Lost a lot of
girlfriends... But I believe honesty is important.

You are on the right track, but you will have the best luck if you
search for a woman to love among those who already know they are kinky.
run/answer ads, and go to you local BDSM support group if you can.

I met my slave husband through a personal ad. :) We had both been
married before to vanilla partners, and had been miserable. Now that
we have each other, sex is one of the best parts about being married.

--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 09:31:35 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: The Marriage Thread
Message-Id: <199604271631.JAA21526@dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com

Barry wrote:

If you make a promise, honor it; if you can no longer do so admit it
and allow your partner the choice of accepting the "new you" or
finding someone else.

:::Nod::: Exactly. You have summed it all up rather neatly.

This may seem cold, but I can't help but wonder how I would have
reacted had I discovered (or admitted) my D/s feelings while married
to a vanilla woman. It's a lot easier to make your "decisions" in
theory, but had I been faced with the actual situation I hope I would
have "done the right thing"...

You probably would have done what lots of guys like my hubby Bruce did.
Start by saying, "Hey, hon, isn't this stuff a turn on?" :)
"No" she would reply.
"Well, I think it's a turn on..." you would sulk.
"It disgusts me," She would say, "...and I think you are crazy to
suggest it."
"Well, I need it anyway." you would assert.
"Well, go need it somewhere else!" she would reply.
Then she would cry, and instead of feeling sorry, you'd wish she'd cry
some more.

This whole process would take months or years to complete, with a whole
shitload of heartache, boredom, desperation, frustration and anger for
icing. Eventually, you would both lose (you would give up trying to
feel sexy in the marriage) or you would both win (you would assert your
right to enjoy sex with a compatable partner).

This stuff is not cold. It's red-hot human drama, complete with blood,
sweat and tears coming at you in 3-D and stereophonic sound. Been
there, done that, got the T-shirt, and use it for a rag.





--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 09:37:54 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: The New, Improved Marriage Thread
Message-Id: <199604271637.JAA28856@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com

DL wrote:

Some of the participants on the list will be married couples.
I wonder if any of them would like to comment on marrige customs and
ritual. Are there ideas for giving due reverence to the supreme female
while tying the marital knot?

Ohh...at last a happy topic! :)

When Bruce and I got engaged, we threw a big BDSM claiming party, and
40 of my closest and kinkiest friends witnessed while I pierced his
nipples and made him my slave. What a big production. It was a blast!

Our wedding ceremony was a small civil ceremony, and we went from that
to another big BDSM celebration. Bruce was naked and on his knees all
night, trying on his new status as owned property. :)


--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 10:12:06 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
Message-Id: <199604271712.KAA11649@dfw-ix1.ix.netcom.com

Tasha wrote:

Ahem. Some Pro Dominants say there will be no sex, because there
will be no sex.

Oh, sure, I knew that :::groan::: I never had "sex" with my clients. We
just happened to be sexy in the same room at the same time.

I can see I will probably not make too many friends on this list,
but scuze me, I am a lifestyle Domme as well as a professional
Domina, and was recently appointed to the board of directors of our
local bdsm support club because I am a "good spokesperson" for the
bdsm community.

Oh, yeah yeah, now every pro dom on the net is going to feel obligated
to flame me to ashes. Thanks Peter! What a dick you are. This is a
perfect example of a troublemaking guy trying to turn women against
each other. * Don't be a sucker for that tactic! * I'm not an enemy
to Tasha or to any other pro. I have been a pro, I know what goes on,
I've talked to tens of thousands of pro's customers, I know what goes
on. I don't feel the need to participate in the smokescreen, that's
all!

For the record: I think all forms of prostitution should be 100% legal.
But the Pro scene and the non-pro scene are not identical in feel or
intent, although there is a large cross-over population. I've met 'em
all, I know all about it...get off my neck right now.

What the pros don't seem to know is that Ms doms-her-husband middle
America doen't like being classed as an amateur. The pros are like
bulldogs about their dignity because their dignity is always under
attack, I know that. But *every* dom woman is fighting for respect,
and the non-pro women have distinctive and legitimate issues. I know
*all about* that too.


--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 10:24:49 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Unidentified subject!
Message-Id: <199604271724.KAA01639@dfw-ix7.ix.netcom.com

-- [ From: TashaStar * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --

Why is some slut with a whip more worthy of adoration than your
ever- lovin' wife?

Laura, I have read your posts on other NG's and was suprised at this
statement from you. I am not a slut.

I never said you were. I never said Pros were. A slut is a slut,
though. There *are* sluts with whips in existance, y'know.

If it is a fetish need that they can not fufill at home because the
"ever lovin wife" gets nauseous or mad at the prospect of the
ever-lovin-hubby's craving, or need, then what do you propose he do ??
Supress it ??

I propose he be honest with his wife and himself, and take his lumps,
like a real man.

I have expressed my feelings on this subject on other threads, but here
we go again: I feel that a marriage is an agreement between a wife and
husband. Whatever they agree to is fine with me. If that means
cultivating outside relationships, c0ol.

Here is another question for you. Are we really meant to be monogomus
beings ??

I don't think so. I'm happily married non-monogamously.

The sex industry dosen't go away because there is a need for it.

I agree. I have no problem with that.

Beware of believing that I am anti-pro or anti-sex-industry. I am a
big *active* supporter of the whole adult entertainment gestalt. I
also assert that there *is* sex going on at (OK, not all) pro-dom
sessions, and those whips and needles and huge dildos and stuff aren't
just for looks.

--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 14:13:49 -0400
From: Lonely2001@aol.com
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Do the right thing
Message-ID: <960427141349_479556331@emout08.mail.aol.com

In a message dated 96-04-27 12:24:19 EDT, you write:

You are on the right track, but you will have the best luck if you
search for a woman to love among those who already know they are kinky.
run/answer ads, and go to you local BDSM support group if you can.



Yes, I have tried this. After failing with the regular romance groups, I have
tried the BDSM ad groups. That has been a dissapointment also. I am very
reluctant to attend my local support group. I am very discouraged.

Thanks for the advice anyway.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 14:13:56 -0400
From: Lonely2001@aol.com
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: The New, Improved Marriage Thread
Message-ID: <960427141355_479556375@emout12.mail.aol.com

In a message dated 96-04-27 12:54:20 EDT, you write:

Ohh...at last a happy topic! :)

When Bruce and I got engaged, we threw a big BDSM claiming party, and
40 of my closest and kinkiest friends witnessed while I pierced his
nipples and made him my slave. What a big production. It was a blast!

Our wedding ceremony was a small civil ceremony, and we went from that
to another big BDSM celebration. Bruce was naked and on his knees all
night, trying on his new status as owned property. :)



That's a charming story!!

the subject "help".

--------------------------------
End of femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 Issue #53
***********************************************

From - Sun Apr 28 15:52:21 1996
Received: from aphex.direct.ca (root@aphex.direct.ca [199.60.229.6]) by badboy.iprolink.ch (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA28090 for
Received: from davinci ([199.60.103.1]) by aphex.direct.ca with ESMTP id <268103-249; Sun, 28 Apr 1996 00:34:29 -0700
Received: (from list@localhost) by davinci.renaissoft.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA24954 for virtjack@iprolink.ch; Sun, 28 Apr 1996 00:32:13 -0700
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 1996 00:32:13 -0700
From: femsupremacy-digest-request@renaissoft.com
Message-Id: <199604280732.AAA24954@davinci.renaissoft.com
Subject: femsupremacy-digest Digest V96 #54
X-Loop: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-Mailing-List:
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------"
To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
Reply-To: femsupremacy-digest@renaissoft.com
X-UIDL: 4a1f07ef90cc6771108250b8b5a5ee39
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001

------------------------------

Content-Type: text/plain

femsupremacy-digest Digest Volume 96 : Issue 54

Today's Topics:
Re: Fwd: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
Re: Do the right thing
Re: NOT! ;)
post message
Re: Fwd: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
Re: Fwd: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
Re: Fwd: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
Fwd: post message
Re: NOT! ;)
Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
Re: Unidentified subject!

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 14:30:31 -0500
From: kriv@interlog.com (peter)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Ms Goodwin wrote:

Oh, yeah yeah, now every pro dom on the net is going to feel obligated
to flame me to ashes. Thanks Peter! What a dick you are. This is a
perfect example of a troublemaking guy trying to turn women against
each other. * Don't be a sucker for that tactic! * I'm not an enemy
to Tasha or to any other pro. I have been a pro, I know what goes on,
I've talked to tens of thousands of pro's customers, I know what goes
on. I don't feel the need to participate in the smokescreen, that's
all!

When I first saw this, I was greatly offended. But then - after reading
previous postings from you - I chuckled and thought it was another example
of your sense of humor.

But then I became offended again.

After seeing the amount of commentary generated by my first posting, I
believe what I said was legitimate. You may not agree with me, but you
don't have to get personal. How would you like it if I referred to you as
"another cunt who passes on the blame because the entire world doesn't
agree with everything you say."

Which brings me to another point. How much respect should a woman give to
men when in a dominant-submissive relationship ... or a forum such as this?

Aren't we allowed to express our feelings? Aren't we allowed to have opinions?
What is the situation with your husband, Ms Goodwin? Do you dismiss him as
a troublemaking prick any time anything he says leads to a situation in
which you are uncomfortable?

I once was in a dialogue with a man who was in a submissive relationship. I
asked him about what would happen if he disagreed with his partner on a
subject. He said that if his partner asked him to get branded, he would
argue, protest and fight ... and then he would get branded. But at least he
was given an opportunity to comment.

I don't think you're a cunt, Ms Goodwin, but isn't it better to lead by example?

And, for what it is worth, I have known two professional dommes, such as
Tasha Star.

Both of them did their job without any sex. And both of them were looking
for lifelong submissive partners who would be (obviously) subservient to
them and provide them with exactly what THEY needed in a traditional
vanilla relationship.

peter



the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 14:03:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Do the right thing
Message-Id: <199604272103.OAA29256@netcom9.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1356

I realize my weekness in this regard. That is, a desire to be dominated. I am
submissive to all women in general (I am regarded as "chivalrous" and a "nice
guy"). But I know that if I was in a vanilla relationship I would be
dissatisfied after a while. I make sure to tell someone I am dating before we
get too serious. I am sad to say, most, so far, think it is sick, depraved,
perverted, etc. I have been puzzled by this. They don't like the idea of a
man to do their bidding? Lost a lot of girlfriends... But I believe honesty
is important.

Honesty is indispensable.
I can tell you after years of being (or trying to be) a
'nice guy' that it's worth it.
If you hang in there, cultivate patience, gentleness with
strength, and an open mind and heart, you won't regret it.
You really won't. You may not get what you want, but you'll
get what you need, with interest.

Peace,
--
coyote sings / man and sky / amfas@netcom.com

Show up. Lighten up. Pay attention. Feel awe. Make it count.
The rest is hidden.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 14:46:17 -0700
From: lalaura@ix.netcom.com (Laura Goodwin)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: NOT! ;)
Message-Id: <199604272146.OAA05524@dfw-ix12.ix.netcom.com

Peter wrote:

When I first saw this, I was greatly offended. But then - after
reading previous postings from you - I chuckled and thought it was
another example of your sense of humor.

But then I became offended again.

OK, well, maybe I did overreact. I thought, "What's he doing, trying
to get me and Tasha to be enemies?" I never had anything but cordial
relations with Tasha before, and why she would imagine that anything I
said should be taken as a personal affront is a mystery to me...

Aren't we allowed to express our feelings?

I might ask the same of you. :) I do have a point of veiw that is
rooted in a ton of experience, and I do know whereof I speak. My human
feelings were hurt to think you'd doubt my veracity, when I have never
given anyone any reason to doubt me. I am not making this up: I speak
from an unusually broad and deep base of experience.

I don't think you're a cunt, Ms Goodwin, but isn't it better to lead
by example?

Well, I might say the same to you. If you don't think "getting
personal" in that manner is right, then why do it? I know, I know, to
make a point...but in another sense you can say it *proves my point*.
:)

Anyway, *I'm* over it, but I have a feeling the shit's gotta slide
allll the way down the walls before we can get on with the next thing.


--
Laura Goodwin

"You don't have to be an angel to be a saint."
(Albert Schweitzer)

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 18:18:36 +0000
From: "MICHAEL J. CRETARO"
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: post message
Message-ID: <318264FC.6939@mailbox.dreamscape.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

As far as femdom as a means to female supremacy. Any domination should have as its
end result, mental and emotional domination. not phyisical. The phyisical part
leads to the mental and emotional . This occurs when the male orgasm has been
completely feminized. As it stands now the male erection and the orgasm it produces
are nothing more than blatant aggression. It fills the male mind with ideas of power
and control. This must be reversed. A means of doing this is to reverse the conditions
under which the male is brought to orgasm. instead of man on top, man on bottom
instead of man in control, man tied up and under control. instead of man orgasming
when he wants to, man orgasming when female allows him to if she allows him to at all.
eventually she does not allow him to at all and he accepts this as the normal
reordering of things. once this is accomplished, mental and emotional restructuring
of the male can begin and hopefully culminate in a progressive supremicist mindset

you know what they say, when you've got them by the balls, their hearts and their minds
will follow.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 16:14:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
Message-Id: <199604272314.QAA12613@netcom9.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1711

Tasha wrote:

Am I the only professional on the list?

No. Or not likely, if I remember some past postings.

This is not about sex for me.
This is about power and the chance to influence someones life.
I am driven by the power rush.

This is more in line with my experience --- friendship
with professional Dominas.
The real quest seems to have been about power.

That, and the search for _identity_, for a place in which
She can say, 'I am!' with great clarity and confidence.
(Another way of stating the power issue, or so it seems to me.)

None of the ones I have known personally had sex (as men
understand it) with any male client. Sex was more likely
something done with a 'steady' partner (of either gender).

That said, isn't it possible, likely even, that Dominas,
like the rest of us, fall into a broad array of motives and
tempraments? After having read a lot about Laura's experience and
a fair amount about Tasha's (plus all the posts today), it
seems that they are both reporting from the wide spectrum of
Real Life, which is where the Domina really lives in the checkout
line with the rest of us. I don't see so much disagreement here
here as a wideness of perspective, jarring perhaps, but inclusive.

I hope I didn't ruin too many peoples illusions.

Nah: confirmed, affirmed, illuminated is more like it.
Told more of the story, another side of the story.

Peace, for real. :)
c.s.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 16:54:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: amfas@netcom.com (Coyote Sings)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
Message-Id: <199604272354.QAA15294@netcom9.netcom.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1144

Laura wrote:

What the pros don't seem to know is that Ms doms-her-husband middle
America doen't like being classed as an amateur. The pros are like
bulldogs about their dignity because their dignity is always under
attack, I know that. But *every* dom woman is fighting for respect,
and the non-pro women have distinctive and legitimate issues. I know
*all about* that too.

What all this tells me that none of us males here deserves
a passing grade until he learns to quit defining women, any
women, any one woman. It's not our job any more, grateful to say.
I'm beginning to think that even our often clumsy attempts to
validate (such as this one) are invalid and uninformed.

And it seems that the more women start talking, really talking
to one another, and really listening to one another, the
stronger all of you will become.

c.s.

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 17:35:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Barry Emerson Wright
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Cc: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
Message-Id:
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Sat, 27 Apr 1996, Coyote Sings wrote:

I'm beginning to think that even our often clumsy attempts to
validate (such as this one) are invalid and uninformed.

Yeah, I know, but let's face it, c.s.: Mother Nature, the Goddess,
evolution, or whatever, placed us on this earth. So they're stuck with us,
and have to put up with us. The best we can do is become as enlightened
and supportive as possible. Your postings, as well as those of many
others on this List, are helping us do exactly that.

Peace,

Barry

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 23:07:17 -0700
From: olskool@ix.netcom.com (Antonio)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: Fwd: post message
Message-Id: <199604280607.XAA17880@dfw-ix4.ix.netcom.com

---- Begin Forwarded Message

+OK 2550 octets
Return-Path:
Received: from aphex.direct.ca by ixmail1.ix.netcom.com (8.7.5/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
id PAA10472; Sat, 27 Apr 1996 15:24:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from davinci ([199.60.103.1]) by aphex.direct.ca with ESMTP id <268015-273; Sat, 27 Apr 1996 15:18:54 -0700
Received: (from list@localhost) by davinci.renaissoft.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA13525; Sat, 27 Apr 1996 15:21:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 15:21:31 -0700
Message-ID: <318264FC.6939@mailbox.dreamscape.com
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 18:18:36 +0000
From: "MICHAEL J. CRETARO"
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Subject: post message
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"5sfvQD.A.xQD.K1pgx"@davinci.renaissoft.com
Resent-From: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Reply-To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
X-Mailing-List:
X-Loop: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: femsupremacy-request@renaissoft.com
Status: U

As far as femdom as a means to female supremacy. Any domination should have as its
end result, mental and emotional domination. not phyisical. The phyisical part
leads to the mental and emotional . This occurs when the male orgasm has been
completely feminized. As it stands now the male erection and the orgasm it produces
are nothing more than blatant aggression. It fills the male mind with ideas of power
and control. This must be reversed. A means of doing this is to reverse the conditions
under which the male is brought to orgasm. instead of man on top, man on bottom
instead of man in control, man tied up and under control. instead of man orgasming
when he wants to, man orgasming when female allows him to if she allows him to at all.
eventually she does not allow him to at all and he accepts this as the normal
reordering of things. once this is accomplished, mental and emotional restructuring
of the male can begin and hopefully culminate in a progressive supremicist mindset

you know what they say, when you've got them by the balls, their hearts and their minds
will follow.

the subject "help".




---- End Forwarded Message

I think this theory is fascinating, but I differ on some fundamental issues of
philosophy. I had expounded some of my philosophies of Female Supremacy
in an email to the group, but carelessly lost it before I could post the damn
thing. Thus, I will have to wait before all of that can re-crystallize in
my mind, before I can try to re-compose it all. In brief, it had to do with
my strong belief that there can be no REAL Female Supremacy where the female
is physically weaker (unless a gang of females jump one guy). By this I mean
that Female Supremacy cannot take place purely in the mind. It must be backed
up by actual physical force. A male may convince himself he wants his woman
to be "supreme" but when the proverbial shit hits the fan, he will not take
orders from her if the orders she is giving are not to his liking. Moreover,
I would dare anyone here to controvert this. The only ways physically smaller,
weaker women can truly dominate bigger, stronger men is by either:

1) Force of numbers -- two or more average women overpowering one
average man
2) Actual hypnosis
3) Mind-altering drugs
4) Where the female is actually bigger and stronger, which is very rare

In most situations, then, true "Female Supremacy" is impossible because it relies
purely on the WISHES and DESIRES of the parties; not on necessity. For such a
scenario to REALLY work requires the normal physical power equation to be reversed!

As for Michael's theory of the orgasm, this is interesting from a Behavioristic
point of view, for those who are familiar with the work of B.F. Skinner.
However, this behavioristic training, although plausible, would have to override
normal male physiology, which is to have an erection and desire penetration.
This, according to Michael, is an inherently "aggressive" act.

My answer to this is what if you kept the male orgasm the way it is, and as an
experiment paired a small, frail male (who is nonetheless sexually potent and
has a normal libido) with a taller, physically stronger woman? Let us say the
woman had sufficient strength to rebuff any and all sexual advances or acts
of physical aggression from that male. In short, she had the power to "whip his
ass". Then what? The male would be in much the same position -- no sexual
gratification without the woman's consent. Further, her domination would be
backed up with raw, intimidating physical power, which wouldn't only affect their
sex life, but EVERY aspect of their lives. It wouldn't much matter that his
orgasms (when he had them) were based on "blatant aggression."

This kind of scenario is unfortunately difficult to achieve for many men who
are built much bigger than the majority of women. For some men like myself
(I am 5'8" and 155 lbs.) it is at least possible because there are many women
out there who can indeed "whip my ass" (although the majority probably couldn't).
The only thing I am trying to say with all this is that I am a realist. I cannot
envision myself in a scenario where I "have" to take orders from a woman unless
she is bigger and stronger than me. Like I said, the only other ways are
a "gang bang thang," being drugged, or being hypnotized (or being an invalid!)
None of those alternatives, with the exception of the first, sounds like any
fun!!

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 28 Apr 96 01:35:15 -0500
From: TashaStar
To: "femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Subject: Re: NOT! ;)
Message-Id: <199604280631.CAA17360@anshar.shadow.net

-- [ From: TashaStar * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --

-------- REPLY, Original message follows --------
Peter wrote:
When I first saw this, I was greatly offended. But then - after
reading previous postings from you - I chuckled and thought it was
another example of your sense of humor.

But then I became offended again.

Laura wrote:
OK, well, maybe I did overreact. I thought, "What's he doing, trying to
get
me and Tasha to be enemies?" I never had anything but cordial relations
with
Tasha before, and why she would imagine that anything I said should be
taken
as a personal affront is a mystery to me...

This is what I said to you in personal e-mail Laura:
Well, it isn't that I misunderstood you, it was a generality that, comming
from one as well spoken and smart as yourself, shocked me. Maybe it was
that you didn't mean it to sound that way, but it did read that way. Hey, if
it makes you feel better, I do understand that sometimes people don't mean
something the way it is written and without the benifit of smiles, and
personal gstures that you have in RL communication, it is misunderstood.

no problem...no one can *make me* an enemy of someone.
And I'm not your enemy ! I'm not even mad at you. :-)

Everyone has their own opnion and since my experience is different then
yours,
everyones opnions are valid. I said this in a diff post as well.

Tasha

Tasha
--
^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^
~Tasha Star~ Tasha@shadow.net
***NEW-NEW-NEW-WEBSITE***
see my *under construction site at:
http://www.shadow.net/~tasha
^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^
Ethereal Dominance
18524 N.W. 67 Avenue Suite# 325
Miami, FL. 33015 (305) 534-1555
^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^"^

the subject "help".

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 28 Apr 96 01:47:01 -0500
From: TashaStar
To: "Dee-Ann at dee@renaissoft.com"
"femsupremacy@renaissoft.com"
Subject: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)
Message-Id: <199604280642.CAA17956@anshar.shadow.net

-- [ From: TashaStar * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --

Well said :-)
I don't even need to add anything !!

Tasha
-------- REPLY, Original message follows --------

Date: Friday, 26-Apr-96 01:07 PM

From: Dee-Ann at dee@renaissoft.com \ Internet: (dee@renaissoft.com)
To: femsupremacy@renaissoft.com \ Internet: (femsupremacy@renaissoft.
com)

Subject: Re: No sex...NOT! ;)

Laura Goodwin wrote:

Here's the scoop: "Pro" doms, in general, are in business to make
money, and they don't make mucho money by refusing to get guys off.
They are just trying to stay out of jail.

This doesn't apply to all pro dommes. I know a number of pros who will
not
have sex, give blow jobs, whatever...regardless of the money offered.
That
doesn't mean there are those who don't. These same pros who won't "put
out"
have a major problem with clients pushing and pushing for a blow job or
sex.
These clients refuse to believe that "no means no."

Let's try to remember that there are different kind of pro dommes out
there,
just like there are different kinds of dominant women, and women in
general.

Dee-Ann