How can a woman truly be a domme when men look down on women and are stronger than them...

You're not physically stronger, but you can be psychologically stronger and abuse our minds, which in turn will lead to physical submission.

you can test it on me desu
I'm cute and have a nice body

The whole thing IS fake roleplay. Learn to enjoy it for what it is.

im 5'4 so many women will mog me no matter what and could dominate me probably
>tfw sub but no woman wants a 5'4 manlet like me
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA JUST FUCKING KILL ME

Couldn't you incorporate that into bondage? Restraining your boytoy so he can't stop you from causing him pain?

But, it IS just roleplay. If a man decides to rape you, he'll probably succeed. Hence, that sort of thing needs to be created in the context of has talked about. besides, if you're a sadist, shouldn't you enjoy causing men emotional and mental pain for being submissive? We're all pretty ashamed of it.

Attached: 1bea3a7c3e296b4e40d69db94645af42.jpg (600x800, 193K)

I dunno, isn't femdom or at least gfd all about humiliation, orgasm denial, degradation/verbal abuse ? If you want to go into full on femdom maybe you could use tools like handcuffs and some rope with some other toys.

If what you're talking about is satisfying your kink in the bedroom, then yes, it is mostly roleplay. But I can guarantee you there are countless guys who will do whatever you want, give you whatever you want, in exchange for that.

If you're talking about a more all-encompassing sort of domination, lifestyle or professional, well then, yes, most men are physically stronger and more intimidating than most women. This isn't an issue because most men are controlled, as said, emotionally and socially and, most importantly, sexually. We're social beings, every introduction, meeting, interaction, exchange, they're all negotiated socially. Which means the physical reality is secondary and mostly irrelevant, although requires some special considerations (mostly relating to your safety, never neglect this).

Real dominiation is always mental. And it doesn't mean violence or force (although it can mean that in addition to what it really is). It's about projecting confidence and superiority. It's about knowing that you're better, and projecting that out into the world, and people you encounter can take it or leave it. To even enter your world they have to already submit to the story your telling, your reality. Or else they don't even get in. Once that's taken place they're already yours. This doesn't mean there isn't a place for being nice, or polite, or kind. Just that in social, romantic, and sexual affairs you don't accept less than submission.

As with anything people have an interest in, they form communities around it. Find some other women who have more experience in this area and get some of their thoughts on the matter. I'm positive that there are experienced dommes willing to share their expertise with a woman exploring her superiority.

I actually wrote a lot more but I don't want to make too many assumptions. I come at this from the other side of the equation, but if you have other questions I can try and answer them.

Personally I see women as above men and think that our society should be reversed

The same way bodybuilders or professional fighters aren't actually more powerful than CEOs or politicians. It's all in the mental aspect. You have a point when you say it feels like roleplay but think about it, when women submit to men it's also willingly, because they feel like the male is superior and the male also feels that way. This guy isn't too far off to mark either. Essentially it boils down to feeling and knowing that you're superior, and projecting this onto others. The key here is actually building the inner confidence that allows you to do this geniunely. This may be the reason why you feel like it's all roleplay, you don't feel like you're actually dominant because you don't feel superior. Build geniune confidence and feeling of superiority and the rest will happen on it's own. A rule to always keep in mind is to you pick your targets, so don't try to dominate someone who isn't receptive to it. This is all you need for relationship dominance, if you want dominance in real life, so actual power over people that they cannot resist even if they want to, you're looking at a much harder task. But that's getting into the realm of politics and doesn't have much to do with relationship dominance.

>so actual power over people that they cannot resist even if they want to, you're looking at a much harder task

Shit user this is the only thing I'm interested in lately. But I disagree with it not having much to do with relationships. Politics is like advanced interpersonal relationship strategy, but there are more similarities than not. Office politics, court intrigue, all has the same root

where do you find easy, submissive men? i'd like to ruin one emotionally what tells are there that a man is this way, or can be shaped into it?

Are you OP? The reason why i said it's getting into the realm of politics is because it literally is. You're looking at strategies that politicians, governments and leaders use to attain power and hold on to it. I mean "true" power, that cannot be resisted without consequences. It's much harder to employ and requires actual skill in it. It also carries consequences for the person doing it. Though i see you already know more or less what it is. Why are you interested in this btw? If you just pick a submissive partner who likes you and put some pressure (but not abuse) on them the chance of them resisting it are close to zero.

You can start by not being a man

No, not OP. I'd be wary of distinguishing true power from actual effectiveness. I don't know why I care about it, over time it just became one of the most interesting things to look at. Understanding romantic relationships is interesting to me in the greater context of power and psychology in general.

>pressure (but not abuse)

What kind of pressure do you have so actual power over people that they cannot resist even if they want to, you're looking at a much harder task mind? Some basic emotional manipulation techniques?

>No, not OP. I'd be wary of distinguishing true power from actual effectiveness.
Not sure what you ment with this.

>I don't know why I care about it, over time it just became one of the most interesting things to look at. >Understanding romantic relationships is interesting to me in the greater context of power and psychology in general.
Ah, so just general interest? It seemed like you had some kind of a goal in mind, even if it's something general like attaining more power in real life.

>What kind of pressure do you have so actual power over people that they cannot resist even if they want to, you're looking at a much harder task mind? >Some basic emotional manipulation techniques?
Pretty much. But i wouldn't even call it emotional manipulation. It's as basic as putting your foot down and imposing your own will. Simple and straightforward. You could add emotional manipulation if you like but honestly it wouldn't even be necessary.

>Not sure what you ment with this.

I guess the relevance of persuasion. Think of someone like a trusted advisor. If his plan or advice isn't followed, nothing happens, no consequences for anybody, so he'd lack true power. But if he plays it right with persuasion, he can still get his plan carried out. Applies on both a small and big scale

>It seemed like you had some kind of a goal in mind, even if it's something general like attaining more power in real life.

Learning and applying it to real life, but no specific end point. Is there something you are trying to achieve?

>How can a woman truly be a domme when men look down on women and are stronger than them?

Be taller and older than the man.

There you go, no need to roleplay anything whatsoever. The dominance just comes naturally as a result of physical differences (which is why most men dominate most women)

Attached: 54070617.jpg (600x750, 45K)

Just torture animals or get a skinny small bf.

That makes sense, but i'm not sure how it relates to what you said earlier on. "I'd be wary of distinguishing true power from actual effectiveness" in relation to what i said. Are you saying the kind of power i referred to as "true power" isn't always actually effective?
>Learning and applying it to real life, but no specific end point.
I kinda guessed that
>Is there something you are trying to achieve?
You mean my own goals by learning about this? Same as yours.

Shy, quiet, introverted, uncertain, awkward, unconfident. Men you don't notice as much because they're trying to go unnoticed. Any of these. These are signals that someone doesn't know how to project confidence, domination, or self-assuredness into the world. Of course there might not be any outward signs. People who otherwise appear pretty normie can have some wild kinks.

I gotta think stay away from chad-like groups/communities/hobbies like sports. Also I have to think that dimmer people more likely to cling to traditional roles more (man must be in charge).

It's probably enough to be (more or less) honest about who you are and what you want online. They'll come to you. In real life it's probably a bit trickier.

You domme smaller men is how, amazon and giantess stuff is where true domme stuff lies.

holy hell, you got me, this image triggered me. I just want this.

i'm about to cry now

believe it or not there are submissive men who exist, however due to social standards they aren't capable of telling women that. Even after a few dates or in a relationship men feel compelled to keep this things secret due to the fear of being ridiculed, or dumped flat out.

It is roleplay you idiot, now step on me and punch my dick until I call you pretty

The problem with fake dommes is they don't like that. They still want bigger guys and then you get the OP girl, who doesn't even consider the possibility.
Every actual true natural femdom girl I've ever met prefers smaller men, they don't need to practice or pretend or anything like that. You gotta seek them out, we're all gonna make it user.

yeah that's why my life is a meme

but I remember early back wanting a girl who was more mature than me for an intimate relationship I had very lengthy fantasies about romance when I was a child but my imagination crumbled away later in life.

hbu?

I guess it was because I watched flcl and connected with the angst of the boy and the girl somehow understood and cared, I had a fantasy of getting run over by a car with a hot girl in it and she then took me back to her apartment, this was like a fantasy vision in my mind, the apartment was sort of like Evangelion rei's apartment, just simple with an air vent and bed and bathroom. I thought apartments were very grown up and edgy and I really wanted to leave home. Now I'm 25 and still here and no gf.

>Are you saying the kind of power i referred to as "true power" isn't always actually effective?

Somewhat, and that what you wouldn't consider "true power" (soft power, persuasion, charm, technique) can be influential and meaningful enough to have results just as good as true power, so it shouldn't be overlooked. Lately I started to realize just how important the soft aspects are in most situations, any scale, romantic, corporate, political etc., that now I think they're as important as true power.

You misunderstood me then. I do count that as a form of true power. What i ment with true power is anything that gives you actual control over things in real life, with or without agreement. If you manipulate someone into doing something, then you effectively fooled them into doing something they don't agree to. Which is different from relationship dominance, where one party willingly submits, or at least wants to submit, and the other just decides the specifics.

Though i'm not sure if soft power still counts as dominance though. Soft power is usually used when you can't overpower someone or take on them directly, which implies being in a position of weakness, at least compared to the other person..

Only in sjw countries

>Which is different from relationship dominance, where one party willingly submits, or at least wants to submit, and the other just decides the specifics.

I think the decision to submit isn't always conscious or as clear-cut. The power tactics that work in the real world work in relationships too. "Red pill" stuff is an example

>Though i'm not sure if soft power still counts as dominance though. Soft power is usually used when you can't overpower someone or take on them directly, which implies being in a position of weakness, at least compared to the other person..

Soft power doesn't come across as dominant, at least not unless it is in conjunction with generally dominant behavior imo (like corporate pleasantries). But in terms of relationships, ideally persuasion would be used to get the other person to like you or like you more to make them more willing to submit. Otherwise they won't care enough to stay

Dominance isn't just about physicality. Boys are usually afraid of their mothers long after they become physically stronger than them. Professional Athletes are afraid of their fatass bosses.

A woman can use sex denial to put a man in his place if he doesn't submit. If she's the breadwinner, she can cut off his money. If she's the cook, she can refuse to cook him food. Then when a guy does submit, she can get him off so hard that next time he will submit without arguing about it. You need to train the submissive into understanding that fighting you is bad, submitting is good, and you will punish them if they fight you.

If you're into the more physical rather than the mental aspects of dominance, than bondage is a great way to make the woman physically dominent in the bedroom. Doesn't matter how strong you are if you're tied down. Weapons can also be a great equaliser and make you scared that a weak woman is going to really hurt you.

Dominance and submission is a state of mind, it's not just about being physically larger and stronger than your partner.

It does however work better if the submissive guy is rather smol himself because you can just break him emotionally and target his insecurities. Telling a 5'4 guy that he's not a real man and that's why he lets a woman sit on his face comes off as more convincing than when you do it to a 6'4 man.

won't the 5'4 guy just say "fuck it, you're unpleasant, i'm leaving"?

Very possible, which is why it makes it extra sexy if he stays. What a little bitch you'd have to let somebody make fun of you over and over and stay with them for the sex! I'm just imagining it now, a little tiny 5'4 guy crying, emasculated, as a girl a half foot taller than him is riding on top of him up and down until he just creams inside her.

Then he comes back for more.

Attached: 5a29ffab58fa1271161d4cdc82d566ec8659d47e_00.jpg (250x250, 23K)

>I think the decision to submit isn't always conscious or as clear-cut. The power tactics that work in the real world work in relationships too. "Red pill" stuff is an example
In a normal relationship, it's always mutual and agreed on by both parties. Even if the actual decision to submit to someone isn't as clear cut or conscious, the desire to want to submit usually is, and the attraction to that person is already present. If someone uses power tactics to establish dominance over someone for the purpose of getting into a relationship with them, that would border on rape(actually it would be rape but... can't rape if the other person doesn't know they don't want it). Or if you used power tactics to mold someone into a specific role against their will that would be abuse. Putting aside what you or i might think about it morally, to most people that is a big nono and is the reason why the original redpill guys were looked down on by everyone. This is also why i said it's not a good idea to involve this in a relationship, it quickly gets spooky.

>Soft power doesn't come across as dominant, at least not unless it is in conjunction with generally dominant behavior imo (like corporate pleasantries).
Yeah, you have to already be powerful for soft power to be seen as dominant. I feel like in that case it kind of defeats the purpose as soft power is ment for still having some control when you have no raw power
>But in terms of relationships, ideally persuasion would be used to get the other person to like you or like you more to make them more willing to submit. >Otherwise they won't care enough to stay
Can you give an example?

i'm imagining a similar scenario but i just take the guy's shit, call him pathetic and leave him blueballed. i hope there is hope for us, anom

> If someone uses power tactics to establish dominance over someone for the purpose of getting into a relationship with them, that would border on rape(actually it would be rape but... can't rape if the other person doesn't know they don't want it). Or if you used power tactics to mold someone into a specific role against their will that would be abuse. Putting aside what you or i might think about it morally, to most people that is a big nono and is the reason why the original redpill guys were looked down on by everyone. This is also why i said it's not a good idea to involve this in a relationship, it quickly gets spooky.

What is healthy, moral, reasonable, and prosocial sexual behavior, and what is really really fucking hot are two entirely different things. This is why 50 shades of grey is the fastest selling book of all time despite it depicting an abusive stalker control freak.

>Can you give an example

I'm thinking more generally of smaller principles that would add up. Mirroring body language, matching speech to some degree, asking for small favors, flattery, good eye contact, that kinda shit. Could be the difference between you telling me to piss off or complying when the time comes I ask for something. It's not dominance, not in the sense of causing a fear of consequence anyhow, but it plays a large part of interpersonal politics. I find it interesting too because it's basically the art of turning nothing into something.

>This is also why i said it's not a good idea to involve this in a relationship, it quickly gets spooky.

I think so too, but for one's own good it's good to at least be aware of these things to avoid getting played

You don't have to think in such extremes. It's not like you're given the choice to either have pure vanilla christian sex in the missionary position for sole purpose of procreation or act out /d/ in real life. Secondly, although it's true that people fantasize about stuff that would be looked down upon, very little people actually do it in real life. Even the ones who do place a lot of importance on consent. An actually abusive and coercive relationship like in 50 shades of gray is virtually nonexistant in real life, and when it is it usually ends badly.

You should also consider that you're on Jow Forums and this site is in no way representative for the majority of people.

Tl;dr it may be hot, but there is a good reason even fetishists don't engage in actual rape and coercion

Yeah, it's not dominance indeed. It's control. I get you though, it's very effective, especially for women. Why mirroring speech though? I haven't heard of that before. And what makes you say it's turning nothing into something? I don't disagree necessarily, i'd just like to hear why you call it that.

>I think so too, but for one's own good it's good to at least be aware of these things to avoid getting played
Can't argue with that

>Yeah, it's not dominance indeed. It's control.

Yeah, I guess that it's control I'm interested in after all, just that dominance (projecting, demonstrating) has enough overlap to keep me interested in even obliquely related threads like this one.

Anyway, the books I've read generally emphasized similarity, one noted it may be good to use similar phrases and words on top of mirroring body language. I don't care to take it too far, but it's something to be mindful of, at least if anyone else does it to you. Another something to increase similarity.

...And, no idea if you'll be interested, but it's a big point in the NLP memeology. I don't buy into NLP personally, but what I've read of it in this case is that the types of metaphors you use represent your dominant senses you perceive the world with. So if you say "I can see your point, that looks good" / "Sounds right, I'll hear from you soon" / "Feels like you could touch it up" etc. I'm supposed to follow up with other metaphors that target your preferred sense. That felt like too much to me, but it was intriguing because it did accidentally get into the territory of general similarity, but from a completely different angle

>And what makes you say it's turning nothing into something? I don't disagree necessarily, i'd just like to hear why you call it that.

Words and gestures (body language, facial expression, eye contact, whatever) alone are worthless, yet there's been times they have resulted in massive losses or gains of
physical resources. Money, land, other human lives. Even with no physical or financial means to back up whatever they were trying to do, people have managed impressive things with this style over substance posturing. It's wild

I just want a fembot to call me dumb and stoopid and laugh at me. I dont care for the whole latex/whipping/feet-licking/ball-busting/giantess stuff.

Yeah, i personally think trying to attain straight up dominance in life is too tiring for it to be feasible for those who aren't phyically imposing or otherwise very capable/powerful (like rich for example). If you can control things without being overtly dominant and powerful then that's great. All that matters is that you achieved your goal and spent less effort on doing it.

So it's just an extension of the principle of similarity. That makes sense. I do sometimes see people doing it. I don't know wether they're doing it knowingly or on purpose or not, but they're usually not that good at it and it's fairly easy to see what they're trying to do. I never really thought too much of it though, until now. I guess it's a good sign that someone is trying to manipulate you. What books btw?

I actually had never heard of NLP until now. Not sure what to think of it but it sounds interesting. I don't believe that the type of metaphors you use represent how you view the world though. I do think it can be used to manipulate someone but i don't think it says much about how they see the world. It's a bit spooky to think about how if it is true someone can almost read your mind though.

Too much in the sense of it goes too far and is unecessary or too much as in too ridiculous of a claim to be taken seriously?

>Words and gestures (body language, facial expression, eye contact, whatever) alone are worthless, yet there's been times they have resulted in massive losses or gains of physical resources. Money, land, other human lives. Even with no physical or financial means to back up whatever they were trying to do, people have managed impressive things with this style over substance posturing. It's wild.
Ah so you mean doing a lot with a little. I always found that interesting too. Having a thousand times more resources can be worthless in the face off better tactics. You got any examples of that which you like?

I agree. You have to be really weak to be a sub male, honestly. My girlfriend was a 'power bottom' before we dated and now she begs for things from me. It's not that hard.

>What books btw?

Influence - Cialdini, The Charisma Myth, How to get anyone to do anything - Lieberman, Like Switch - Shafer, Power - Pfeffer. All sound kinda memey but the ideas are interesting. I think sales books also have that general theme. Maybe social engineering like Hadnagy too if you want.

There's also classic stuff like Le Bon's Crowd and Bernays' Propaganda or historic shit like the Book of the Courtier, The Prince, Art of War, The Art of Worldly Wisdom, but that's hit or miss.

Take what you like, disregard the rest or use it to find something else, idk. All of it should be on libgen or irc

>It's a bit spooky to think about how if it is true someone can almost read your mind though.

Yeah they claim to be able to do that through reading your physical cues (I remember what I read particularly stressed the direction where you look = what you are thinking about). I don't deny the cream of the crop may be good at reading people but most of the practitioners are self hyped hacks looking to cash in on vulnerable dorks. Similar to PUA. I take the info with a large grain of salt personally, though it does overlap with some interesting concepts and I'm neet so I got the time to spare.

>I don't believe that the type of metaphors you use represent how you view the world though.

Me neither, which is why I think it's a bad claim. But they mention using that information to build rapport which is ok. It's like miasma. Plague doctor covers himself to avoid the smells and has a good survival rate. Only it's got nothing to do with the smells but the fact that he's protected from the bacteria.

Nowadays NLP mixes in heavy with hypnosis too, so once in a while they'll get something right or go in an interesting direction, but I always assume even if their conclusions turn out to be right, the logic they took to get there is wonky