08-08-2013, 12:18 PM
I am whole heartedly in support of removing the filter: "the man will reject women and their advances if the woman is only seeking to use the man for sex." Curious though as to why this made it in. Isn't this one of the reasons for SM? If a supermodel hot woman wants to use a male SM user for sex, why is this a problem? However Shannon probably realized this.
I do think the following filter should be deleted also: "Causes women you attract to want to give more sexual pleasure than they get, so it’s not just about them using you for sex." I get a lot of pleasure from giving a woman pleasure and especially if I am the cause.
With regards to the following description of SM2.0, Shannon, is the program supposed to make the user automatically reject such women, or is it supposed to allow us to detect such women yet allow us the choice whether to continue with the pursuit or not? "Those who are trying to trick you, trap you, control you, use you or manipulate you with sex will find it’s difficult to do if you won’t play their game." I am all for choice rather than automatic rejection otherwise it feels a bit paternalistic. Such as a girl coming to the door and the father yelling at his son, don't let that lying and manipulative sob come into this house even if you like her. Or, maybe I am misunderstanding how it is being used in the program which is very likely since I don't know the actual wording. On the other hand, I do get the std and pregnancy filter.
Again, don't get me wrong. Love the work Shannon. Great products. One other thing, I am hoping that you will allow those of us who gave a decent shot to SM2.0 but did not get the ultimate result to have a discount on SM3.0, in lieu of a refund. I wouldn't ask for a refund nonetheless but a discount would be nice. I was thinking of doing another rerun of SM2.0 but in light of its filter and the new SM3.0, I will likely scrap that.
I like what I read about SM3.0. All I ask is keep the shackles to a minimum. And get second and third opinions on the filters and it's wording and purpose in lieu of us seeing the actual wording. Keep up the good work Shannon. :-)
I do think the following filter should be deleted also: "Causes women you attract to want to give more sexual pleasure than they get, so it’s not just about them using you for sex." I get a lot of pleasure from giving a woman pleasure and especially if I am the cause.
With regards to the following description of SM2.0, Shannon, is the program supposed to make the user automatically reject such women, or is it supposed to allow us to detect such women yet allow us the choice whether to continue with the pursuit or not? "Those who are trying to trick you, trap you, control you, use you or manipulate you with sex will find it’s difficult to do if you won’t play their game." I am all for choice rather than automatic rejection otherwise it feels a bit paternalistic. Such as a girl coming to the door and the father yelling at his son, don't let that lying and manipulative sob come into this house even if you like her. Or, maybe I am misunderstanding how it is being used in the program which is very likely since I don't know the actual wording. On the other hand, I do get the std and pregnancy filter.
Again, don't get me wrong. Love the work Shannon. Great products. One other thing, I am hoping that you will allow those of us who gave a decent shot to SM2.0 but did not get the ultimate result to have a discount on SM3.0, in lieu of a refund. I wouldn't ask for a refund nonetheless but a discount would be nice. I was thinking of doing another rerun of SM2.0 but in light of its filter and the new SM3.0, I will likely scrap that.
I like what I read about SM3.0. All I ask is keep the shackles to a minimum. And get second and third opinions on the filters and it's wording and purpose in lieu of us seeing the actual wording. Keep up the good work Shannon. :-)