<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Mistress Roulette&#039;s Spin of the Wheel &#187; Kinky Quacks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mistressroulette.com/category/kinky-quacks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mistressroulette.com</link>
	<description>Mistress of the Mind // Kink That Makes You Think</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2011 11:17:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Elise Sutton: &#8216;Freudian&#8217; Femdom Fraud</title>
		<link>http://mistressroulette.com/2009/04/21/sutton/</link>
		<comments>http://mistressroulette.com/2009/04/21/sutton/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2009 23:14:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mistress Roulette</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bitchfest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Female Supremacist Bullshit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kinky Quacks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elise Sutton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Female Supremacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Healthy v. Unhealthy Kink]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mystressworld.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexual Psychology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mistressroulette.com/?p=626</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As if Mystressworld.com wasn't enough of a blight on the whole of femdom, (plenty more on the madness of Mystress to come), now I've discovered Elise Sutton -- who, evidently, has been around for a hell of a lot longer than a quack like her ever needed to be. Not to mention her 'Psychoanalysis of the Submissive Male' is inherently flawed on the basis alone of containing <em>absolutely no psychoanalysis whatsoever.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1430304642?ie=UTF8&#038;tag=missroulette-20&#038;linkCode=as2&#038;camp=1789&#038;creative=390957&#038;creativeASIN=1430304642"><img src="/images/Elise%20Sutton%20Cover.jpg" alt="Elise Sutton's Femdom Experience Cover"style="float: left; padding: 2px; border: 1px white solid; margin-right: 5px;"/></a>Jesus. This bitch can&#8217;t tell her id from her death instinct, and her website clearly needs to be put out of its misery. But let&#8217;s begin at the beginning, shall we?</p>
<p>So, here I am, wandering the web minding my own beeswax, when &#8212; lo and behold &#8212; I find yet another site on Female Supremacy. (Always in caps, mind. Forget proper sentence construction or grammatical correctness.) Fantastic. As if Mystressworld.com wasn&#8217;t enough of a blight on the whole of femdom, (plenty more on the madness of Mystress to come), now I&#8217;ve discovered Elise Sutton &#8212; who, evidently, has been around for a hell of a lot longer than a quack like her ever needed to be. Not to mention her &#8216;Psychoanalysis of the Submissive Male&#8217; is inherently flawed on the basis alone of containing <em>absolutely no psychoanalysis whatsoever. </em>Can you do that? Write a piece about violins and title it: &#8216;A Theory of Baseball&#8217;? I was under the impression that it was faulty &#8212; not to mention just flat dumb. Of course, anyone with an <strong>actual degree</strong> in Psychology, (yours truly) can tell after 5 agonising seconds on this wacko&#8217;s website that this woman wouldn&#8217;t know an unconditioned stimulus if it bit her in her female supremacist <em>ass</em>.</p>
<p>For those of you who have not studied in the field of Psychology, psychoanalysis is <em>very</em> specific to the theories and practises first introduced by Freud &#8212; who <em>very</em> heavily believed <em>in male supremacy </em>based off of biology alone. Oh, I&#8217;m all for turning a field on its head and flipping it about. But you first have to have <em>some idea </em>of what you&#8217;re seeking to <em>challenge</em>. You want to break psychodynamic theory? Okay, then first, you <em>need to</em> <em>learn</em> it. Which, <em>clearly</em>, this cuckoo hasn&#8217;t.</p>
<p>This is not a difficult concept to grasp.<span id="more-626"></span></p>
<p>Maybe I get angry. I go back through all of the hours logged listening to professors I either wanted to model myself after, or with whom I vehemently disagreed &#8212; but listened anyway, weighing each against what I was continuing to learn, and forming my own paradigm eventually leading me to prefer the techniques of cognitive behavioural therapy, humanistic psychology, a little bit of psychoanalytic theory (since Freud started out on the right foot, just ended up falling on his ass later down the line when he let his own personal bullshit get in the way; it happens) and becoming largely Gestalt in the way I approach things. I&#8217;ve found it to be a combination which works for me as well as those I counsel. Then I see these obviously unsound individuals seeking to convert the masses over to some delusional idea which has <em>no</em> connection at all with reality, and they all have one thing they lack.</p>
<p>Credentials.</p>
<p>Oh, I searched. I Googled, I forum-crawled, I skimmed the reviews of her self-published books, (nothing against self-publishing, by the way, but sometimes there&#8217;s a reason it&#8217;s your only option) I scoured everything I could to find anything outside of <em>secondhand statements</em> declaring Sutton to be a practising psychologist. I admit, that I could locate nothing on her personal website which indicated as such, seeming to debunk the circulating misinformation that she actually <em>is</em>, was very relieving to me. First off, you really can&#8217;t get fully licensed and do what she (or I) claim to do. Not in this day and age; not yet. People are coming to accept alternative subcultures more readily, (yeah, I know about that, too, considering I have a background in studying Sociology with a concentration on social deviation &#8212; since &#8216;deviance&#8217; is no longer PC, of course) but they&#8217;re not ready to hand over professional licensing to a self-proclaimed dominatrix who&#8217;s willing to delve very deeply into the submissive psyches of her male clientele. They&#8217;re just not. Fortunately, they would be most prudent to <em>never</em> license a self-acknowledged &#8216;Female Supremacist&#8217; who will go forth and use the idea, prominence and, yes, power, of femdom to poison, misuse, and warp the minds of those submissive men. Real-or-Imagined-Diety, help them.</p>
<p>But first, a word on Femdom.</p>
<p>Femdom, in itself, is an idea. It&#8217;s a practise, and it&#8217;s also a paradigm. Religion, at its most basic and devoid of all ritualistic or spiritual trappings, is an idea. Ideas have power. It&#8217;s not difficult then to conceive why femdom has developed a power all its own, and those who can tap into that power, and use it for their own gain, should do so wisely; or they&#8217;re no better than hedge fund operators whose only real objective is to advise you to make risky investments, so before you know it, they will have Madoff with your money &#8212; or, my personal favourite, televangelists and Scientologists, perpetuating their own my-way-or-the-highway perspective, offering you solace and kinship should you embrace it, and hell on earth and social ostracisation should you defy them. They have a mob mentality in and of themselves. While his way of going about certain things was ill-conceived, Marx did have the right idea when he proclaimed &#8216;religion was the opiate of the masses&#8217;. For many, hundreds if not millions &#8212; as those statistics are always a bit funky given the variability of the samples taken &#8212; feel very similarly about female domination.</p>
<p>This gives actual female dominants tremendous power. And, in anything, I really, really, <em>really</em>, cannot stand the abuses of power &#8212; be it in government, or ideology. By definition, certain groups are leveraged above other ones. That they continually use this capacity for dominance to manipulate, control, and &#8212; yes, even brainwash &#8212; unwitting, or less informed and overly willing individuals time and time again brings out the socio-political activist in me like nothing else.</p>
<p>People who deeply need the acceptance of their ideas will go to almost ridiculous lengths bordering on sanity and feasibility to instill them in the minds and hearts of others. People are more willing to do something against their nature and good sense if you tug on their heartstrings hard enough. The frauds of femdom have discovered that the way to total control is by grabbing men by the balls. Literally. And female supremacists (fuck it; I&#8217;m not capitalising it as a direct boycott to their shell-game) <em>love</em> that shit. They latched onto it and refuse to let go. It&#8217;s also a deep affront to those of us genuine dominants who <em>aren&#8217;t</em> female supremacists, and know when we&#8217;re playing a role and what constitutes safety, sanity, and consensuality. Female supremacy operates, and gains more of its power, through blurring those lines and misdirecting the impressionable submissive male by convincing him he has no power due to biology alone, and taunting him with the carrot of submitting to sexual bliss with a loving, dominant woman.</p>
<p>Loving?</p>
<p>&#8216;Hey, sweetheart. You&#8217;re a piece of shit, a worthless waste of space, and it&#8217;s all because you have a cock. There&#8217;s nothing you can do to correct this, so you might as well just accept the fact that my having a pussy means I&#8217;m superior to you and your natural place is with your face in my ass. Did I mention I love you?&#8217;</p>
<p>To quote the talented Miss Winehouse: <em>what</em> kind of fuckery <em>is this</em>?</p>
<p>Did these women miss part of their journey when we all learned what the difference was between role-playing and reality? How about practising safe, sane, consensual BDSM? How about the element of <em>play</em>? Role? Play? Get it? See, you <em>play</em> a <em>role</em>. It isn&#8217;t <em>you. </em>You don&#8217;t <em>really</em> believe all that stuff about cock-sporting members of society being in existence solely to please us. Remember that part? Oh, and I know you&#8217;ll recall where I said a few paragraphs ago that people will go to just about any length to see that their number grows. I&#8217;ve seen men so brainwashed (or so horny &#8212; probably both) into believing in female supremacy as to quote from nature in various ways: &#8216;See, bees are the perfect example of why men are inferior to women. And ants, too. See, they have a Queen, and, well, everyone else can just go fuck themselves. The male insects are only there for the pleasure of the female. That&#8217;s their whole purpose in life. Oh, and black widows? They practise sexual cannibalism. It&#8217;s totally hot. The female spider fucks the male spider, and then bites his head off and eats him. Yummy, yum, yum. Oh, after she&#8217;s satisfied, of course. And then, uh, well, she goes out and gets another one. That&#8217;s why she&#8217;s a black widow, you see &#8230; &#8216;</p>
<p>Oh, dear.</p>
<p>As if reminding these misguided, likely well-meaning fools (despite the rational thinking of which they may have once been capable) that bees, ants, and spiders are all <em>insects</em> &#8212; regardless of being cross-special &#8212; it hardly matters. They&#8217;re so engrossed with this being <em>the</em> answer they&#8217;ve sought for <em>so long</em> to convince them of what they <em>know</em> in their minds and hearts to be true &#8212; it doesn&#8217;t even matter. When I respond with: &#8216;That&#8217;s because you&#8217;re a submissive man, honey,&#8217; they counter me with how worthless they are, and inferior to women. Because why? Because they can&#8217;t have babies.</p>
<p>Huh.</p>
<p>Y&#8217;know what else you&#8217;re gonna need to make a baby? How about some <em>baby batter</em>? That sounds like it&#8217;s rather important in the equation, doesn&#8217;t it? Otherwise an egg is very conveniently removed from the body during the completion of a woman&#8217;s cycle. And, in modern society, nobody thinks much of it. What&#8217;s missing? What causes that egg to become a zygote and eventually a fetus? A man blowing his load in just the right way so that those strong little swimmers can make their way up the canal and forever change the lives of both involved. That &#8216;load&#8217; which was so worthless, so insignificant, that it was the one thing that changed an egg to eventually becoming one of us.</p>
<p>Give me a fucking break.</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re going to throw &#8216;nature&#8217; at me as proof-positive that female supremacy is the natural order of things, at least use your own species. That&#8217;s a good place to start.</p>
<p>This is evidently in the beginning of a larger, multi-part examination &#8212; and especially critique &#8212; of female supremacists and their bullshit. Except more streamlined, centred analyses in the future, as these are strictly broad introductory strokes.</p>
<p>Hope you&#8217;ve enjoyed it. I&#8217;m sure they haven&#8217;t. And if I become later accused of firing the first shot, I say:</p>
<p>Bring it, bitch.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m ready for you. And whatever I have to do as a <em>legitimately </em>educated professional counselor to keep darling &#8212; though, not helpless and hardly worthless, thankyouverymuch &#8212; submissive men like my clients from falling prey to their propoganda, I&#8217;ve got my gloves on.</p>
<p>Game on, broheme. Game fuckin&#8217; on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://mistressroulette.com/2009/04/21/sutton/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>26</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

