8. Be bruised by you π
9. Be made to feel small around you π
10. Have her open to sharing you π€΄πΈπ©
11. Wear more lingerie for you π
12. Taste you more often and in crazier ways π
13. Obey ALL of your commands π
50 Things Every Dominant Should Have Their Lover Do For Them! π
A check list π
1. A slow strip dance π
2. Crawl to you π
3. Kneel for you π§ββοΈ
4. Swallow everything π€€
5. Present her vulnerable areas for you like a gift βΊ
6. Swear for you (not at you) π
8. Be bruised by you π
9. Be made to feel small around you π
10. Have her open to sharing you π€΄πΈπ©
11. Wear more lingerie for you π
12. Taste you more often and in crazier ways π
13. Obey ALL of your commands π
15. Have her look up to you π
16. Ask you for permission to do things, in bed and out π
17. Beg you for your attention π₯°
18. Lick more of you π
19. Be super enthusiastic for you π€―
20. Talk super dirty when you allow her to π€¬
22. Accept you spitting on her (when it would add to the craziness) π
23. Accept you pulling her hair more π€ͺ
24. Leaving scratch marks down your back π―
25. Drool more over you π€€
26. Want to be choked by you more often π
27. Bend over for you eagerly
29. Clean up after you π§Ή
30. Ask you for oil massages π
31. Wear high heels to tease you π
32. Lean on your shoulder during good times and bad π€
33. Shake because you're so good at what you do π²
35. Squat on you ποΈββοΈ
36. Get super wet for you π§
37. Beg you for forgiveness π
38. Moan louder for you π€
39. Brag about you to her closest friends π₯° (You might never know we do this)
40. Lick different foods off you/her π
42. Allow you to slap her face (when it adds to things) β
43. Public sex π²
44. Accept having lots of sex toys tried out on her π
45. Dressing up fancier for you outside of the bedroom too π
47. Treat you super politely π
48. Looking to you as her only leader π
49. π Sex
50. Repeating crazy affirmations back to you π€ͺ
Will you try your best to tick all 50 of these off the list? π§
I hope so...
Then you should get going with Complete Submission π
Everything is broken down into super simple steps
But get it before 31st Jan because it will never be this price again!
https://t.co/J8i7tnKBaX
Then you'll want to enter my Mastermind π
You'll have your lover behaving for you like she has NEVER behaved for another man before...
And if you're a Gold or Silver program member, you get a big discount. (Only Β£249 for Gold users)
It looks lovely inside too π
Click the link to find out more β¬οΈ
https://t.co/68fK6U7PPS
More from Life
![Peter McCormack [Jan/3\u279e\u20bf \U0001f511\u220e]](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1524287442307723265/_59ITDbJ_normal.jpg)
You May Also Like
So the cryptocurrency industry has basically two products, one which is relatively benign and doesn't have product market fit, and one which is malignant and does. The industry has a weird superposition of understanding this fact and (strategically?) not understanding it.
The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.
This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.
The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."
This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.
If everyone was holding bitcoin on the old x86 in their parents basement, we would be finding a price bottom. The problem is the risk is all pooled at a few brokerages and a network of rotten exchanges with counter party risk that makes AIG circa 2008 look like a good credit.
— Greg Wester (@gwestr) November 25, 2018
The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.
This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.
The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."
This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.
The entire discussion around Facebookβs disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didnβt have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I canβt speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
The story doesn\u2019t say you were told not to... it says you did so without approval and they tried to obfuscate what you found. Is that true?
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) November 15, 2018
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didnβt have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I canβt speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
