Free Will & Human Rights As A Submissive ✒

[Pe****]

9 minutes ago, PervyPenelope said:

Someone needs to to the lifestyle could come across this and it could help them out. It’s not a bad thing.

New to the lifestyle 🤦🏻‍♀️

[4R****]

29 minutes ago, PervyPenelope said:

Someone needs to to the lifestyle could come across this and it could help them out. It’s not a bad thing.

Seriously? You don’t think  toxic misinformation is a bad thing?

 

SMH!

[Pe****]

1 hour ago, 4RCH said:

Seriously? You don’t think  toxic misinformation is a bad thing?

 

SMH!

I think the amount of people that use BDSM to use and *** people is toxic. And in my experience when I was sub, most “dominants” lower case intentional, did have that attitude.

If I had read a post like this when I started out, I might not have been taken advantage of.
He can have an opinion on stuff and so can I.
This isn’t some exclusive club! SMH

[Os****]

"Facts Don't Care About Your Feelings"
(Ben Shapiro)

[Deleted Member]

2 hours ago, PervyPenelope said:

Someone needs to to the lifestyle could come across this and it could help them out. It’s not a bad thing.

Sure. Except that what he's said has been roundly criticised by everyone on the thread. If someone new to the lifestyle read it, I'd hope they'd have the sense to read all the comments as well as the OP. Did you?

[Deleted Member]

16 minutes ago, OsPando said:

"Facts Don't Care About Your Feelings"
(Ben Shapiro)

Which "facts"? You've cited none. Same approach as Shapiro to be fair.

[Pe****]

13 minutes ago, inconceivable said:

Sure. Except that what he's said has been roundly criticised by everyone on the thread. If someone new to the lifestyle read it, I'd hope they'd have the sense to read all the comments as well as the OP. Did you?

Ok, he could’ve worded it better and Ive read all of the comments. He could’ve said so called dominants.
.

I’ve read all of the comments, most people having a go, saying he’s speaking at people. Sure, but I have my reasons for saying what I said. I still have “dominants” inbox me telling me what they will do to me and that I should obey. Sounds to me like the people in the OPs thread. Maybe I’m wrong or toon it the wrong way.

[Pe****]

Took

[Pe****]

There’s plenty of people on here who think they are the authority when it comes to this lifestyle, but I don’t see them getting called out.

[Deleted Member]

11 minutes ago, PervyPenelope said:

Ok, he could’ve worded it better and Ive read all of the comments. He could’ve said so called dominants.
.

I’ve read all of the comments, most people having a go, saying he’s speaking at people. Sure, but I have my reasons for saying what I said. I still have “dominants” inbox me telling me what they will do to me and that I should obey. Sounds to me like the people in the OPs thread. Maybe I’m wrong or toon it the wrong way.

He is speaking at people. And I will be honest, the OP and the comments from him are very different in terms of language. So I have my doubts there.
I'm one of the people in the thread. I'm a sub. Other subs have contributed. You've described that as people "having a go". I'd describe that valid criticism from people on both sides of the slash.

[CopperKnob]

41 minutes ago, OsPando said:

"Facts Don't Care About Your Feelings"
(Ben Shapiro)

This is the most worrying thing within this whole thread.
It suggests that you either didn't write the original post, don't believe in what it says or really don't care which raises the question of, why post? Because if any of the above points were true you'd have had a response to the comments.
Your comment is also suggestive of the fact that your post wasn't aimed at discussion. In fact, rather than either ask a mod to close comments or add one which confirmed that you had no intention of discussion, you were flippant enough to type out a meaningless quote.
The reality is this, had you have made a factual post, your comment would have made sense. You didn't for the simple reason that only public bodies can breach human rights, not individuals.

[Pe****]

19 minutes ago, inconceivable said:

He is speaking at people. And I will be honest, the OP and the comments from him are very different in terms of language. So I have my doubts there.
I'm one of the people in the thread. I'm a sub. Other subs have contributed. You've described that as people "having a go". I'd describe that valid criticism from people on both sides of the slash.

Ok no worries

[gi****]

46 minutes ago, PervyPenelope said:

There’s plenty of people on here who think they are the authority when it comes to this lifestyle, but I don’t see them getting called out.

I think the concern that there are individuals who use BDSM as a cover for their abusive behavior is valid, and a necessary consideration for anyone entering the lifestyle.  And, I cannot deny that there are a plethora of messages that go to female subs on here that are inappropriate.  And, I think it is good that people call them out.  I'm certain I haven't always been the best, though I try.  As I said in my response to the OP, the premise that "most dominants" do something like require of a submissive to give up their free will is antithetical to those who are genuinely in the lifestyle.  But, I don't say this from a position as an "expert."  I was stating something from my experience.  And, I was trying to distinguish those who are abusive from dominants.  If I came off from a position of authority or expertise, I apologize to you and the rest of the thread, as well as the OP. That was not my intention.

[Pe****]

9 minutes ago, giraut said:

I think the concern that there are individuals who use BDSM as a cover for their abusive behavior is valid, and a necessary consideration for anyone entering the lifestyle.  And, I cannot deny that there are a plethora of messages that go to female subs on here that are inappropriate.  And, I think it is good that people call them out.  I'm certain I haven't always been the best, though I try.  As I said in my response to the OP, the premise that "most dominants" do something like require of a submissive to give up their free will is antithetical to those who are genuinely in the lifestyle.  But, I don't say this from a position as an "expert."  I was stating something from my experience.  And, I was trying to distinguish those who are abusive from dominants.  If I came off from a position of authority or expertise, I apologize to you and the rest of the thread, as well as the OP. That was not my intention.

I totally agree with you and you owe me no apology.

Absolutely they should be called out but I’m speaking in general to be honest.

[4R****]

The main issue I have here is that the word Dominant is being associated with abusive behaviour from people who are clearly not Dominants. That is causing misinformation and tarnishing the name and reputation of Dominants.

I agree there are those whose sole purpose is to coerce and manipulate for their own gain, but these people are NOT Dominants. Instead, let’s call them for what they are - ***rs. 

[gi****]

7 minutes ago, 4RCH said:

The main issue I have here is that the word Dominant is being associated with abusive behaviour from people who are clearly not Dominants. That is causing misinformation and tarnishing the name and reputation of Dominants.

I agree there are those whose sole purpose is to coerce and manipulate for their own gain, but these people are NOT Dominants. Instead, let’s call them for what they are - ***rs. 

I agree, that's the part I was responding to. 

[VexDA]

19 minutes ago, giraut said:

I agree, that's the part I was responding to. 

The problem isn't the title/word is being associated with Dominants, the problem is people with less than honorable intentions have ***d that title for as long as can be remembered.  It is the blow back that anyone claiming any title has to deal with.  Look at the seasoned Mistress that has to endure the porn trained Onlyfans mistress nonsense.

Before there was the internet, the underground was rampant with ***.  It's not hard to find the stories about how the community had no where to go because the lifestyle was a blight on the social standards.  Even worse, the Leatherman community was the (OMG) gay community... where the hell was anyone going to go back then for help... straight or gay if you were part of this lifestyle no one cared.  So *** was thriving.

When I jumped in, it was the dawn of the internet and the horrors of that *** were being broadcast in BDSM communities.  Thankfully, I feel with the advancements in the web and building a wider community among the lifestyle, the *** seemed to be less and less prevalent, but, it doesn't change that it still exists.  It also doesn't change that people with, less than honorable intentions are still tossing around the title like they earned it, because the internet has made it that easy to make the claims. 

Don't be insulted by the fact that it tarnishes the good name of Dominants everywhere who are serious about being responsible, nurturing and transparent.  If that was the case there are tons of us older players who should probably be crying in a pillow for the amount of suspicion we had to endure.  

Maybe the topic needs to be less of the insult and more how does the community change the perception once and for all?

[gi****]

52 minutes ago, VexDA said:

The problem isn't the title/word is being associated with Dominants, the problem is people with less than honorable intentions have ***d that title for as long as can be remembered.  It is the blow back that anyone claiming any title has to deal with.  Look at the seasoned Mistress that has to endure the porn trained Onlyfans mistress nonsense.

Before there was the internet, the underground was rampant with ***.  It's not hard to find the stories about how the community had no where to go because the lifestyle was a blight on the social standards.  Even worse, the Leatherman community was the (OMG) gay community... where the hell was anyone going to go back then for help... straight or gay if you were part of this lifestyle no one cared.  So *** was thriving.

When I jumped in, it was the dawn of the internet and the horrors of that *** were being broadcast in BDSM communities.  Thankfully, I feel with the advancements in the web and building a wider community among the lifestyle, the *** seemed to be less and less prevalent, but, it doesn't change that it still exists.  It also doesn't change that people with, less than honorable intentions are still tossing around the title like they earned it, because the internet has made it that easy to make the claims. 

Don't be insulted by the fact that it tarnishes the good name of Dominants everywhere who are serious about being responsible, nurturing and transparent.  If that was the case there are tons of us older players who should probably be crying in a pillow for the amount of suspicion we had to endure.  

Maybe the topic needs to be less of the insult and more how does the community change the perception once and for all?

I was also a part of that community back then.  And, maybe my local community was different than yours, but I wouldn't have said that *** was rampant.  Did it exist, yes.  I agree with you that the discussion should be about ***rs. But, not making a distinction between *** and domination conflates the two.  Saying that "most dominants" want to take away free will conflates the two.  Making distinctions is important.  I agree that we should work to change the perception, but part of that is making a distinction between what is D/s and what is ***.  This discussion hasn't made that distinction.  That is the one that I have been highlighting in my responses.  

[Pe****]

7 hours ago, VexDA said:

The problem isn't the title/word is being associated with Dominants, the problem is people with less than honorable intentions have ***d that title for as long as can be remembered.  It is the blow back that anyone claiming any title has to deal with.  Look at the seasoned Mistress that has to endure the porn trained Onlyfans mistress nonsense.

Before there was the internet, the underground was rampant with ***.  It's not hard to find the stories about how the community had no where to go because the lifestyle was a blight on the social standards.  Even worse, the Leatherman community was the (OMG) gay community... where the hell was anyone going to go back then for help... straight or gay if you were part of this lifestyle no one cared.  So *** was thriving.

When I jumped in, it was the dawn of the internet and the horrors of that *** were being broadcast in BDSM communities.  Thankfully, I feel with the advancements in the web and building a wider community among the lifestyle, the *** seemed to be less and less prevalent, but, it doesn't change that it still exists.  It also doesn't change that people with, less than honorable intentions are still tossing around the title like they earned it, because the internet has made it that easy to make the claims. 

Don't be insulted by the fact that it tarnishes the good name of Dominants everywhere who are serious about being responsible, nurturing and transparent.  If that was the case there are tons of us older players who should probably be crying in a pillow for the amount of suspicion we had to endure.  

Maybe the topic needs to be less of the insult and more how does the community change the perception once and for all?

Excellent

[VexDA]

10 hours ago, giraut said:

I was also a part of that community back then.  And, maybe my local community was different than yours, but I wouldn't have said that *** was rampant.  Did it exist, yes.  I agree with you that the discussion should be about ***rs. But, not making a distinction between *** and domination conflates the two.  Saying that "most dominants" want to take away free will conflates the two.  Making distinctions is important.  I agree that we should work to change the perception, but part of that is making a distinction between what is D/s and what is ***.  This discussion hasn't made that distinction.  That is the one that I have been highlighting in my responses.  

You are not going to create a distinction.  Let's flip this.  How many 'Mistresses' are out there with no genuine experience as a Mistress?  They wear the clothes, have the whips, buy the toys and have a porn based education.  By all accounts they are sex workers with a self proclaimed title.  No offense intended to those that put in the time, effort, and understanding behind the lifestyle dynamics.  <<< That's all we can say.  

As long as all we have is personal vouching and direct vetting, there is no way to change when a "Wanna-Dom" wears an unearned title and commits dishonorable acts.  The only way is to create a resource where these people can be publicly reported to the community... but you can't do that, because that's libel.  That in itself would become a cesspool of vengeance and  mismanagement.

If you've been around for the last 30 years, you know that this is a fight that can't be fought.  Remember the rage days of the velcro collar?  Remember how diminishing it was to those that stood on tradition?  We didn't win that battle (some of us perpetuated it).  

I don't think the path to defining *** is through debate of the title used.  It's through continued mentorship.  Continued protection.  It's through continued vetting and house building, but it's not going to change the use of a label.  I also think it is rampant when you pull back and take the 30,000 foot view, it is just well hidden like as *** often is. 

As long as a title can be claimed by anyone with a fantasy and internet knowledge, then you can't make a true distinction other than the solution of using a lowercase d when in discussion in text or air quotes in conversation.

The OP is correct in there are those out there that try to deconstruct the rights of the submissive in order to gain control.  Maybe the OP should have also put up the warning signs of toxic victim behaviors as well.  Maybe the OP should have stood less on the concept of rights and posted the warning signs of how a so called dom can be a predator.  My only reason for getting involved in this thread is because no matter how poorly constructed the OP's writing, the message means more.

[Pe****]

2 hours ago, VexDA said:

You are not going to create a distinction.  Let's flip this.  How many 'Mistresses' are out there with no genuine experience as a Mistress?  They wear the clothes, have the whips, buy the toys and have a porn based education.  By all accounts they are sex workers with a self proclaimed title.  No offense intended to those that put in the time, effort, and understanding behind the lifestyle dynamics.  <<< That's all we can say.  

As long as all we have is personal vouching and direct vetting, there is no way to change when a "Wanna-Dom" wears an unearned title and commits dishonorable acts.  The only way is to create a resource where these people can be publicly reported to the community... but you can't do that, because that's libel.  That in itself would become a cesspool of vengeance and  mismanagement.

If you've been around for the last 30 years, you know that this is a fight that can't be fought.  Remember the rage days of the velcro collar?  Remember how diminishing it was to those that stood on tradition?  We didn't win that battle (some of us perpetuated it).  

I don't think the path to defining *** is through debate of the title used.  It's through continued mentorship.  Continued protection.  It's through continued vetting and house building, but it's not going to change the use of a label.  I also think it is rampant when you pull back and take the 30,000 foot view, it is just well hidden like as *** often is. 

As long as a title can be claimed by anyone with a fantasy and internet knowledge, then you can't make a true distinction other than the solution of using a lowercase d when in discussion in text or air quotes in conversation.

The OP is correct in there are those out there that try to deconstruct the rights of the submissive in order to gain control.  Maybe the OP should have also put up the warning signs of toxic victim behaviors as well.  Maybe the OP should have stood less on the concept of rights and posted the warning signs of how a so called dom can be a predator.  My only reason for getting involved in this thread is because no matter how poorly constructed the OP's writing, the message means more.

I agree.

[gi****]

5 hours ago, VexDA said:

You are not going to create a distinction.  Let's flip this.  How many 'Mistresses' are out there with no genuine experience as a Mistress?  They wear the clothes, have the whips, buy the toys and have a porn based education.  By all accounts they are sex workers with a self proclaimed title.  No offense intended to those that put in the time, effort, and understanding behind the lifestyle dynamics.  <<< That's all we can say.  

As long as all we have is personal vouching and direct vetting, there is no way to change when a "Wanna-Dom" wears an unearned title and commits dishonorable acts.  The only way is to create a resource where these people can be publicly reported to the community... but you can't do that, because that's libel.  That in itself would become a cesspool of vengeance and  mismanagement.

If you've been around for the last 30 years, you know that this is a fight that can't be fought.  Remember the rage days of the velcro collar?  Remember how diminishing it was to those that stood on tradition?  We didn't win that battle (some of us perpetuated it).  

I don't think the path to defining *** is through debate of the title used.  It's through continued mentorship.  Continued protection.  It's through continued vetting and house building, but it's not going to change the use of a label.  I also think it is rampant when you pull back and take the 30,000 foot view, it is just well hidden like as *** often is. 

As long as a title can be claimed by anyone with a fantasy and internet knowledge, then you can't make a true distinction other than the solution of using a lowercase d when in discussion in text or air quotes in conversation.

The OP is correct in there are those out there that try to deconstruct the rights of the submissive in order to gain control.  Maybe the OP should have also put up the warning signs of toxic victim behaviors as well.  Maybe the OP should have stood less on the concept of rights and posted the warning signs of how a so called dom can be a predator.  My only reason for getting involved in this thread is because no matter how poorly constructed the OP's writing, the message means more.

"The National Coalition for Sexual Freedom (NCSF) surveyed 4,598 individuals involved in BDSM and reported on several aspects of consent *** in a tech report available on the NCSF website. Of these participants, 1,307 (28.4%) endorsed being touched without permission. Examples from this subsample were varied, ranging from receiving an unwanted hug (6%; 1.7% of the entire sample) to unwanted sexual touch (38%; 11% of the entire sample). The prevalence of adult sexual *** has been found to represent approximately 22% of women and 3.8% of men in the general population (Elliot, Mok, & Briere, 2004). Twenty-four percent of the total NCSF sample reported that their pre-negotiated limits had been violated during a BDSM scene, and 13% reported an occasion in which their safeword was not respected. Among this subsample, 40% endorsed having a single experience of consent ***, while 27% reported two, and 33% reported three or more. One in four respondents of this subsample endorsed that the consent *** happened prior to being involved with the BDSM community. Women (31%), non-heterosexual individuals (31% pansexual,  26% gay/lesbian, 28% bisexual, 20% asexual, 38% other than those sexual orientations specified), and people of non-cisgender3 identities (36% gender queer, 34% transgender, 27% other than those gender identities specified) reported a higher frequency of such instances than men (13%) and heterosexually identifying individuals (18%). Among those individuals whose pre-negotiated limits or safeword was ignored, men (78%) and heterosexuals (65%) were most commonly reported to be the consent violators. When individuals from this subsample were asked the reason behind their consent ***, participants endorsed several reasons, including the following: 2% due to alcohol, 6% accidental, 7% reporting it was part of their partner dynamic, 11% due to a lack of skills or knowledge, and 15% miscommunication, while 26% endorsed being attacked by a predator, and 33% said they were manipulated or coerced. When asked what they thought about the *** when it happened, 81% reported that they wanted it to stop, while close to one in three endorsed that they were not sure if it counted as a consent ***.

Jozifkova (2013) outlined guidelines that differentiate BDSM from ***, and how healthy BDSM relationships compare with abusive relationships. Healthy BDSM relationships can be distinguished from abusive relationships based on the following criteria: (a) whether the Bottom partner experiences legitimate ***, indicative of ***, versus feelings of safety, indicative of consensual BDSM; (b) all parties should feel comfortable using a safeword to rescind consent; (c) withdrawals of consent are respected by the cessation of BDSM activities; (d) in healthy BDSM relationships, partners are able to discriminate between BDSM activity and common everyday life; (e) in abusive relationships, it is not uncommon for the victim to be intentionally isolated from friends and family; this is not the case in healthy BDSM relationships; (f) emotional volatility marked by periods of *** and reconciliation are common in abusive relationships, while healthy BDSM relationships do not exhibit such drastic emotional highs and lows; (g) a clear disparity in social hierarchy between partners exists not only in abusive BDSM relationships, but also in some healthy BDSM relationships-the level of hierarchical disparity in day-to-day life is the distinguishing factor, such that everyday hierarchy disparity is mild in healthy BDSM relationships; (h) mutual respect for one another, irrespective of power dynamics, is present in healthy BDSM relationships; and (i) the ongoing negotiation and communication characteristic of healthy BDSM relationships are absent or disrespected in abusive relationships." (Dunkley & Brotto, 2019)

If your message is that the numbers of ***rs and people who are being ***d in the lifestyle is too high, I absolutely agree. As I've said in my responses, I believe we need to call out ***rs and they need to be dealt with appropriately.  If you are saying that we need to inform and mentor others, I'm also in agreement.  There was nothing in the original post that distinguished, or helped the New to BDSM reader distinguish between what is a healthy BDSM relationship and one that is unhealthy.  There was nothing that helped further a discussion of the signs of *** in any relationship or how to identify ***rs. What I've attached here is from a 2019 article on this subject.  It's clear that the number is too high and that consent ***s are also too high.  That absolutely needs to be worked on and addressed. A key thing that the article did was also identify what makes up a healthy BDSM relationship and what is an abusive one.  I think defining safety, consent, and how to engage in a healthy BDSM relationship would be very helpful.

[gi****]

3 hours ago, giraut said:

"The National Coalition for Sexual Freedom (NCSF) surveyed 4,598 individuals involved in BDSM and reported on several aspects of consent *** in a tech report available on the NCSF website. Of these participants, 1,307 (28.4%) endorsed being touched without permission. Examples from this subsample were varied, ranging from receiving an unwanted hug (6%; 1.7% of the entire sample) to unwanted sexual touch (38%; 11% of the entire sample). The prevalence of adult sexual *** has been found to represent approximately 22% of women and 3.8% of men in the general population (Elliot, Mok, & Briere, 2004). Twenty-four percent of the total NCSF sample reported that their pre-negotiated limits had been violated during a BDSM scene, and 13% reported an occasion in which their safeword was not respected. Among this subsample, 40% endorsed having a single experience of consent ***, while 27% reported two, and 33% reported three or more. One in four respondents of this subsample endorsed that the consent *** happened prior to being involved with the BDSM community. Women (31%), non-heterosexual individuals (31% pansexual,  26% gay/lesbian, 28% bisexual, 20% asexual, 38% other than those sexual orientations specified), and people of non-cisgender3 identities (36% gender queer, 34% transgender, 27% other than those gender identities specified) reported a higher frequency of such instances than men (13%) and heterosexually identifying individuals (18%). Among those individuals whose pre-negotiated limits or safeword was ignored, men (78%) and heterosexuals (65%) were most commonly reported to be the consent violators. When individuals from this subsample were asked the reason behind their consent ***, participants endorsed several reasons, including the following: 2% due to alcohol, 6% accidental, 7% reporting it was part of their partner dynamic, 11% due to a lack of skills or knowledge, and 15% miscommunication, while 26% endorsed being attacked by a predator, and 33% said they were manipulated or coerced. When asked what they thought about the *** when it happened, 81% reported that they wanted it to stop, while close to one in three endorsed that they were not sure if it counted as a consent ***.

Jozifkova (2013) outlined guidelines that differentiate BDSM from ***, and how healthy BDSM relationships compare with abusive relationships. Healthy BDSM relationships can be distinguished from abusive relationships based on the following criteria: (a) whether the Bottom partner experiences legitimate ***, indicative of ***, versus feelings of safety, indicative of consensual BDSM; (b) all parties should feel comfortable using a safeword to rescind consent; (c) withdrawals of consent are respected by the cessation of BDSM activities; (d) in healthy BDSM relationships, partners are able to discriminate between BDSM activity and common everyday life; (e) in abusive relationships, it is not uncommon for the victim to be intentionally isolated from friends and family; this is not the case in healthy BDSM relationships; (f) emotional volatility marked by periods of *** and reconciliation are common in abusive relationships, while healthy BDSM relationships do not exhibit such drastic emotional highs and lows; (g) a clear disparity in social hierarchy between partners exists not only in abusive BDSM relationships, but also in some healthy BDSM relationships-the level of hierarchical disparity in day-to-day life is the distinguishing factor, such that everyday hierarchy disparity is mild in healthy BDSM relationships; (h) mutual respect for one another, irrespective of power dynamics, is present in healthy BDSM relationships; and (i) the ongoing negotiation and communication characteristic of healthy BDSM relationships are absent or disrespected in abusive relationships." (Dunkley & Brotto, 2019)

If your message is that the numbers of ***rs and people who are being ***d in the lifestyle is too high, I absolutely agree. As I've said in my responses, I believe we need to call out ***rs and they need to be dealt with appropriately.  If you are saying that we need to inform and mentor others, I'm also in agreement.  There was nothing in the original post that distinguished, or helped the New to BDSM reader distinguish between what is a healthy BDSM relationship and one that is unhealthy.  There was nothing that helped further a discussion of the signs of *** in any relationship or how to identify ***rs. What I've attached here is from a 2019 article on this subject.  It's clear that the number is too high and that consent ***s are also too high.  That absolutely needs to be worked on and addressed. A key thing that the article did was also identify what makes up a healthy BDSM relationship and what is an abusive one.  I think defining safety, consent, and how to engage in a healthy BDSM relationship would be very helpful.

I'm always into full disclosure and kinkd did just publish their findings:  "the creators of this kinky dating app published some stats from an independent survey among 3,033 female users. ... Here are some alarming findings: 68% of female respondents have had non-consensual kinky experience with people met online who claimed to be into BDSM (been subjected to a violent or degrading act that could be misconstrued as BDSM without giving prior consent). 33% of female respondents have been scammed—financially, sexually, romantically, or through false images and videos—by a fake Dom/Sub they met online."  (yahoofinance, 2023)These numbers support the OP, although I would again distinguish ***rs from those in healthy D/s relationships.  But, I always like to make certain I acknowledge all sides.

[VexDA]

7 hours ago, giraut said:

I'm always into full disclosure and kinkd did just publish their findings:  "the creators of this kinky dating app published some stats from an independent survey among 3,033 female users. ... Here are some alarming findings: 68% of female respondents have had non-consensual kinky experience with people met online who claimed to be into BDSM (been subjected to a violent or degrading act that could be misconstrued as BDSM without giving prior consent). 33% of female respondents have been scammed—financially, sexually, romantically, or through false images and videos—by a fake Dom/Sub they met online."  (yahoofinance, 2023)These numbers support the OP, although I would again distinguish ***rs from those in healthy D/s relationships.  But, I always like to make certain I acknowledge all sides.

I appreciate this.  Heartbreaking to say the least. 

[MasterDarcy1979]

I'm a sapiosexual so I like a sub who has brains. She must also be willful, have opinions about views and not be afraid to express them.

If I wanted a sub who had no free will, etc, I'd Dominate a sex doll.

For me it's all about mutuality. It has to a partnership in most aspects of the dynamic.