Findom. Some people love it, some people hate it. Every kink has its target audience and its share of haters, but findom is particularly controversial. Why? Because money. Money is real. Too real. Life-or-death real. And that realness is why people love it, and why people hate it.
Findom gets at the root of slavery and power imbalance: the slave toils away day in and day out without seeing the fruit of his labor, while the master relaxes and profits from the slave's work. It gets eerily close to how actual, real-world anti-slavery organizations define actual, real-world slavery that's going on right now across the globe, and I hope we can all agree that actual, real-world slavery is bad and should end. While there's nothing wrong with slavery-as-a-kinky-fantasy, when things get this close, it's extra important to double check your mental line dividing fantasy from reality, and make sure the two don't mix.
Findom is a bit weird. Usually, if someone's paying someone else for something, the person paying has more power. Between an employer and an employee, the employer has more power. Between a customer and a vendor, usually the customer has more power. As long as the person with the money has a choice where (or whether) to spend that money, the payer is the "dom" and the payee is the "sub", so to speak. There are plenty of social media posts where a person posts a photo of themself and then asks for money, calling it findom. If you're willing to suspend your disbelief, that's your choice, but to me, this is really no different from selling selfies for money, as many do on sites like OnlyFans. Between a buyer and a seller, the buyer usually has more power. It entirely contradicts the underlying fantasy, which is why I can't take it seriously.
Many get around this pesky matter of choice by calling it a tax. And indeed, if the money is taken away without consent, the power dynamic shifts. Sure, the people as a whole elect the government and vote for tax laws, but between the government and an individual citizen, the government has more power, and not paying your taxes can land you in jail. The difference here is, calling it a "tax" doesn't make it mandatory, and the sub is still free to not pay. For me, at least, it's still too difficult to pretend the power has shifted hands.
Findom also has the potential to attract the wrong crowd. Money is real, and people want money. Some might join the findom scene without fully understanding the kink and the community. At best, they're loud and annoying; at worst, they take advantage of finsubs who are exploring the scene and finding their place. As much as findom is all about taking advantage of someone else, this is on the wrong level. It's the kind of thing that makes people go, what was I thinking, when looking back.
I get it. Subs want to sub, and there's nothing that hurts quite like seeing money leave your bank account. I see the appeal, and I relate to it. It's just one of those things that are tricky to get right, and not getting it right actually makes things worse. For me, an effective findom relationship must have the following elements:
- The dom must not rely on findom as a source of income. If he does, he might push the sub too far, or it might get messy when the sub wants to end the relationship.
- The dom must not leave the sub destitute. If the sub can't afford food or rent, it's gone too far. If the sub has other hard limits, the dom should respect them.
- The sub must not have a choice about giving up the money. Of course, in the end, the sub does have a choice (it's the paradox of submission), but the payments can't be on the sub's terms whenever he feels like paying. Options include regularly scheduled payments, or surprise expenses that the sub has to reimburse.
- The amount given up has to be meaningful. The sub has to suffer because of the money forfeited. Maybe he has to work extra hours; maybe he has to skip lunch. "Meaningful" means different amounts to different people, but it can't be chump change to the sub that he wouldn't care if he threw it away.
The first two points above deal with reality, and the last two points deal with the fantasy. Without the first two points, the relationship isn't healthy. Without the last two points, it's not a power exchange. It's an intricate balance.
Findom has two sides. There's the dom getting paid for doing "nothing", and there's the sub giving up his income for "nothing" in exchange. (I put "nothing" in quotes because the relationship takes effort and is also a reward.) These two things can be decoupled. Personally, I'm way more interested in seeing the sub suffer on a tight budget than enriching myself in the process. I've never done findom before, but this is how I imagine I would do it:
Instead of giving up a certain amount of money, the sub gets an allowance he's allowed to spend. The sub must create a budget where he accounts for all predictable expenses, and there must be a way for me to monitor his spendings. Maybe I have read-access to his bank accounts. Maybe he's only allowed to spend money from a single account which I periodically transfer just enough money to. Either way, if he spends more than he's supposed to, I'll know.
The budget will start from a relatively comfortable amount and gradually go down. Periodically, I'll review the budget and strike a line item off of it. If the sub still wants that thing, the money has to come from sacrificing something else. Eventually, the budget will be so tight that there's just enough for the essentials.
Extra allowance can be earned through good behavior. This ties into other parts of the master/slave relationship. If the slave hasn't broken any rules, or spends a certain amount of days in chastity, or provides some service particularly well, he gets to enjoy some extra spending. It was his money to begin with, and him having to earn it twice really does something for me.
The rest of the money is just sitting there, in his account, out of his touch. That he can't spend his own money is a particular type of frustration that I'd enjoy inflicting. And, if the relationship doesn't go well, it's still his money to reclaim. It's easier to build trust when the money doesn't legally change hands, and all the suffering comes from following orders voluntarily.
Does this satisfy the four requirements I listed above? I think so. I'm not taking any money, so I'm not relying on it. The budget makes sure he has enough. Having to stick to the budget means it's not on his terms. A tight budget makes the suffering meaningful. Plus, having a budget is just good practice for personal finance. A dom has to look out for his sub, right?