Male desire for humiliation as 'female'.

[BeMoreMagdalen]

I'd like to discuss this pertinent feminist issue. What is behind the common sexual narrative of 'sissification' among certain men that directly correlates to an attitude that being a woman is 'less' than a man, and derives pleasure from that sense of humiliation? What are the ways in which this harms women?

What's behind it probably varies.

Different men will collect their fetishes in a different order, so the underlying thought processes will vary. And I only have a sample size of one to draw on. But in his case it went 1) establish link between lingerie and arousal 2) develop humiliation kink 3) sissification fetish. There's probably a lot of psychoanalysing to do around number two (he has daddy issues, v much the beta male in his own eyes, etc etc), but I've always tended towards the view that, having developed the humiliation thing, society handed agp to him on a plate.

If you're thinking 'humiliation' and 'sexiness' and you look at our culture and society, you can't help but notice it is always women that these two concepts are attached to. We are reduced to sexual objects to be used and abused; a man who wishes to be treated in such a fashion finds himself wishing to be as we are portrayed because that's the framework he has available to understand his sexual urges within.

It harms women because it's born of a culture that routinely degrades and sexualises the both the feminine and the female, and because men indulging this are training themselves via orgasm to strengthen their mental associations between "woman" and "lesser / degraded / sex object".

Its also harmful when the oppressor group can opt into or out of the group they are oppressing, by adopting a stereotype or caricature.

What causes us to suffer and be seen as other and less than equal, they use for their own arousal. Can you imagine this being acceptable with any other group? It adds insult to injury.

I guess it's the default position that men are considered the more dominant sexual partner. But yes, it does reinforce unhelpful stereotypes. It isn't constrained to men, see for instance the increasing use of 'daddy'. Also, amongst gay men having 'tops' and 'bottoms' where the one using their penis on the other is regarded as the more dominant.

I've just read Sheila Jeffrey's book about Queer Theory. She believes the dominant/ submissive dynamic is even damaging to women in Lesbian Butch/Femme relationships because it mimics and perpetuates patriarchal hierarchy.

In gay male partnerships "bottoms" aren't always submissive as such, nor "tops" dominant, but it seems the subs and doms are extensions of that dynamics and you get some very submissive subs in some cases.
It's an interesting dynamic when taking the male/female out of the equation.

She also says that only equal relationships can assist with dismantling patriarchy.

I guess it's the default position that men are considered the more dominant sexual partner.

It's not just this - the idea that there must by default be a dominant partner is problematic. And then it's all eroticising power imbalances and dividing people into fuckers and fuckees and assigning stereotypes accordingly.

I'm not sure I've got the words to explain what I mean properly. But in agp ex's case, there is certainly an element of wanting to be dominated and this tying very neatly in with occupying the "woman" position in sexual fantasies.

Anyway. It's literally fetishising the shackles of our oppression, with a side order of gaslighting us into thinking we're the ones at fault if we're uncomfortable with the ramifications. So we can add "being really fucking insulting to an oppressed class" to the list of harms.

It's been discussed on the trans widows thread that the men who are claiming to want to be treated submissively are often not actually being submissive at all, as often they are coercing or guilt tripping the female partners into playing along with something that they get nothing out of- using them as a prop.

It's still very much the man who is in control, he just enjoys pretending not to be. So it's a giant con.

I'm on a FB group that laughs at nasty/dickhead men in the dating world.

Invariably most of them start their DMs or profiles by announcing to the world what a massive Dom they are and how they want obedient Subs to control.

Its just so insufferably dull on their part when its patently clear they have no real idea of how the BDSM community works and acts. They just have this idea that choking a woman whether she likes it or not constitutes great sex and therefore they are a Dom.

Back when I was properly woke I used to lurk on trans woman forums to try to understand what it was about (lingering doubts about how sexist it seemed) and ran across thread after thread of this stuff. Trans women talking about how they’ve always been submissive and this is part of why they know they are women. Absolutely identical to the kind of stuff redpillers/MRA would say. But somehow it became acceptable in the eyes of the left to say it’s “natural” for a “woman” to be degraded and humiliated during sex when a trans person says it.

Can you imagine this being acceptable with any other group? It adds insult to injury.

Well there are white men who want to be “dominated” and degraded specifically by black men and women as some sort of payback for slavery (US) or racism. So it does go to other groups as well.

Always seems to be the oppressor class getting orgasms from the oppressed rather than the other way around. Hmm...

Suddenly occurred to me - there's a big similarity between humiliation/agp fantasies in men and what we call rape fantasies in women, isn't there? Both hinge on 'abuse=sexy' and 'submission=sexy', and in both the fantasist is entirely in control and gets to choose the things they submit to, which means they're not really fantasising about something non-consensual at all.

They're both about getting off on being the abused object rather than the abusing subject.

the idea that there must by default be a dominant partner is problematic

I don't think there must be a dominant and submissive partner at all.

It's not just this - the idea that there must by default be a dominant partner is problematic. And then it's all eroticising power imbalances and dividing people into fuckers and fuckees and assigning stereotypes accordingly.

Yes I agree. I read something by a domme woman where she said that she found sissy type submissivess a turn off, and for her the whole turn on is having power over a stereotypical 'alpha' type (I don't think she used alpha, and I don't like the term, but I can't really think of a better way to express it).

Yes, the caricaturisation of women is horrible to see. The idea that women are simpering idiots, waiting to accept any random cock. The narrative is grim - rape scenes, abusive name-calling, (slut, whore etc), pretending they are innocent little girls "asking for it". All women are fucking asking for it in their depressing view of us.

Even more enjoyable for the sub if is if he can co-erce the woman into "forcing" him, because then it isn't even his fault, the terrible woman made him wear these clothes and behave this way for her enjoyment. None of this is even of his doing.

It’s the essence of having cake and eating it privilege isn’t it? They can indulge their sub fantasies and identify into ‘oppression’ by coercing the actual oppressed class member into the role of oppressor. Meanwhile they are still directing and controlling the narrative safe in the knowledge that they can identify out of the oppressed class as and when it suits them.

And I guess all the humiliating stuff they're co-ercing the woman do to them is how they themselves would really and truly like to treat women if they had free reign.

Almost all sex-related stuff for sale is to facillitate mens fantasies, not womens.

They can indulge their sub fantasies and identify into ‘oppression’ by coercing the actual oppressed class member into the role of oppressor.

Another one to add to the pile of harms - this creates some serious cognitive dissonance for the coerced partner, and of course leads to her having a very unsatisfying sex life.

In terms of the gaslighting, it's the perfect guise.

Aligning themselves with #MeToo, the sexual harassment that women suffer from, catcalling, etc, and right up to rape and abuse.

If a man is secretly orgasming delightedly to self-imposed victimhood, by aligning with real victims, it's very difficult to call out.

Despite most people actually seeing it. Most people know that cross dressing is arousal through imitating a parody of a woman. They know it. But the spin has been so effective, they doubt their own eyes, ears and experience.

Yes my ex wanted to be "submissive" ie could only enjoy sex if I was on top so he could close his eyes and pretend he was being fucked. But actually he was secretly having affairs with multiple women and controlling us all - he then started pushing boundaries with one of the more sexually liberal women he had an affair with and started serious sissification including dressing up in "slutty" lingerie and asking her to peg him with a strap on.

He then became a transwoman and is now a new "better" version of woman - because those of us who wear flat shoes and plain clothes are letting the side down. Our version of woman isn't good enough.

This is the ultimate dominance and control - we are "cis women" not women and we will damned well move over and let the new super women shine.

This is the ultimate dominance and control - we are "cis women" not women and we will damned well move over and let the new super women shine.

Yes I think that's very true. Which is why the utter rage when we don't obediently do this.

And what is supposed to be brave and transgressive does nothing whatsoever to increase equality or transform society. Quite the contrary.

Yes equality is going downhill fast - for women who were born women anyway.

Even more enjoyable for the sub if is if he can co-erce the woman into "forcing" him, because then it isn't even his fault, the terrible woman made him wear these clothes and behave this way for her enjoyment. None of this is even of his doing.

I just want to comment on the above comment.

I cannot pretend to understand the motives or psychology of every man with AGP or who enjoys crossdressing. Obviously

It does seem to me that the sexual offenses act has no provision for people who are coerced into the "dominant" role and that this is a very serious ommission.

The comment I have quoted is I think highly accurate for some people some of the time and I think that a lack of imagination and a lack of understanding has contributed towards a situation where people (mostly but not exlcusively men) can coerce vulnerable people (mostly but not exclusively women) into sexual activity with impunity due to the contraints of current legislation.

It reminds me of this appalling case in Canada
www.buzzfeednews.com/article/davidmack/alaska-sexual-assault-loophole-masturbate-ejaculate-semen

If anyone is interested in the issue of women being coerced into non-consensual sexual activity as a "dominant" this video provides an intersting example in the case of a certain Adolf Hitler, whose proclivities resonated with those of the trans widows

(some explicit imagery - viewer discretion advised)

hooda one big problem with considering legislation in this area is, we know damned well legislators aren't going to ask themselves the most important question, which is: how would whatever legislation is suggested be perverted by abusive men? Because it always is, and they so rarely if ever account for this.

Which isn't to say there are no criminisable (fuck off spellcheck I know it's not a word) offences to be seen here; quite the opposite. But the general societal insistence on equality and not giving women "special treatment" means implementation is going to be fucked, because for every protection we'd get, they'd get another stick to beat us with.