Can we talk about "male sexuality"? Trigger warning: fetishes

[Elspyth]

Inspired by recent threads on Debbie Hayton and Andrew Doyle
Hayton describes their self confessed AGP fetish as "a beachball they can't keep under water" and numerous posters on here have said that Doyle/Janice Turner/anyone using preferred pronouns are unwittingly participating in their fetish.

I've seen other male commentators (I think it was Doyle but I am not sure) say that the "beach ball) metaphor resonated with them and women don't get it because they don't understand male sexuality.

It got me wondering about fetishes:

1. are fetishes part of normal male sexuality? I have known quite a few men with them (and there will be more I know that have them, but I don't know)

2. some fetishes are visible (AGP, and exhibitionists) but many aren't (high heel fetishes for example) or are secret (men who plant cameras in womens spaces, or upskirt them) Are heel fetishists who hang around professional settings because of women in heels also nonconsensually exploiting women? What about a man who upskirts a woman? Is it less of a problem if the woman is unaware? Are some fetishes "worse" than others? (Excluding the ones where people are raped or murdered, those ones are definitely worse)

3. Can we/should we try to stop men having fetishes? How do we do that? I think there is quite a lot of comorbidity e.g. men have multiple fetishes. If we crack down on one, will it cause a different one to pop up? Should we see AGP as just one of a range of fetishes or should we treat it differently?

I'm not sure where I sit on this. Personal view is talking about fetishes as male sexuality is centring penis needs and I don't like it. But pragmatically am aware lots of icky fetishists are out their exploiting women without their knowledge so maybe its not possible to expect to avoid them, depressingly.

?? Andrew Doyle AGP??!! How have I missed this? Titania?🤷🏻‍♂️

The argument that male sexuality is terribly hard to repress and thus must be allowed is somewhat at odds with the claim that crossdressing men (at all levels) are women.

If they were women, they’d have women’s sexuality, which presumably is less of a beach ball and more golf-ball adjacent.

It’s almost as if this is more male excuses for poor behaviour, which obviously extends even to men who claim they are laydees.

I don't think it necessarily follows that most men have fetishes. Just that most men have probably experienced strong sexual feelings that they have felt obliged to keep in check and even felt shame for. Teenage boys have a difficult time. Difficult in a different way to teenage girls but still difficult and potentially embarrassing. That's multiple times the case for gay men. Not only that but everyone (male and female) will at some point experience rejection. That means at some point almost all men will find themselves being denied something they really want by a woman (if they are straight) and even feel resentment at women for being "the gatekeepers" of sex. As a result I imagine men in general are going to find it easier to emphasize with someone like Hayton and the beachball metaphor.
And of course some men blame feminism/female prudery for the fact that men feel repressed sometimes or the fact that some aspects of male sexuality are seen as dangerous or shameful. I don't think that's true. You can find the same angst in the writings of Augustine of Hippo (not a feminist or a hippo) and pretty much all major religions (although often the solution=women keep out of sight). Sexuality needs boundaries and self control for society to function. But men as a rule really don't like to hear that from women.

Also you can't realistically police what's in someone's head. But there's a theme from parts of the left that anything harmful/not good should be made illegal. Anything that shouldn't be illegal is therefore good/to be celebrated. And I don't think that's true. There are loads of things (e.g. extra-marital affairs) that should never be illegal but which are also not good/to be celebrated.

There is a big difference between a fetish and a paraphilia disorder. A fetish is more like a kink, being aroused by something. Sometimes it's necessary to get aroused but usually it's not that big of an issue in someone's life.

A paraphilia, which what AGP is, takes over someone's entire life. It erodes boundaries and their capability to make logical decisions and brings harm not just to the person who has it but other people to. Often there is also a combination of a personality disorder or other paraphilia.

Some more common paraphilia are frotteurism, AGP/transvestitism, voyeurism, masochism, sadism, paedophilia, necrophilia, exhibitionism.

The terms fetish and paraphilia disorder are often used intertwined so sometimes it's hard to distinguish what someone is talking about.

To stop men from having fetishes honestly I think banning porn would help a lot. It rots mens brains.

I think you're going to need a rough definition of a fetish for this discussion. Everybody has preferences and things they particularly like - whether that be hair colour, body shape, a way of dressing, an accent that just does it for them... That's normal. I wouldn't say that various kinks are even necessarily fetishes. Most people have experimented with things like tying up or being tied up or dressing up in particular ways. What I'd say defines a fetish is when something moves from being a trigger to attraction to being a necessity or near necessity for attraction. If a guy thinks a woman has a nice ankle, that's a shrug, okay. If a guy needs to be playing with a woman's feet to get aroused and that's his overriding focus, you have a fetish.

>> What about a man who upskirts a woman? Is it less of a problem if the woman is unaware?

Never.

>> Can we/should we try to stop men having fetishes? How do we do that?

Only in a feedback way of telling someone they need help or offering feedback such as "that's horrifying". Not in any legal intervention approach. There's no right to control what turns people on. As to how, warn men about the dangers or porn. I think most fetish behaviour develops over time and in isolation until it suddenly goes public in a horrible way.

Hayton's beach ball analogy just sounds rapey to me, "couldn't help himself" kind of territory.

I don't care about your fucking "beach ball" mate, just behave yourself.

women don't get it because they don't understand male sexuality

This just sounds like another way to dismiss women's concerns on the basis they can't possibly know what transwomen go through, similar to how "cis" women aren't allowed a voice (unless they're agreeing, of course).

We exist in a culture that centres men's needs and desires and where women tend to be viewed as NPCs in men's lives, especially when it comes to sex. So it makes sense that men will say "you can't possibly understand" as a way to get what they want, as it's simply another way to claim victimhood and silence women.

I think male sexuality (as a class, not individual basis) is to some extent restrained by a civilised society including monogamy, and female sexuality. I think gay male culture tells us a bit about male sexuality unrestrained by women.

Fetishes by their nature dehumanise by focusing on one body part or reducing the body to a prop. Porn contributes to the development of fetishes but they must have existed before. I wonder if it muddies the waters to call things like "upskirting" a fetish for example. This is sexual harassment: at it's core it is a violation of privacy and dignity. Wanting your partner to wear high heels in bed is dehumanising and degrading in my opinion but I would be surprised if foot fetishists existed on the same slippery slope of "fetishes" which are actually violations and abuse. Men murder women for sexual gratification but it is not called a murder or power fetish. The criminal act is named and understood.

It seems to only really be men who develop fetishes, but I would view this in the same way that men are responsible for the majority of violent crimes i.e. something innate, as well as socialised, but absolutely antisocial, not universal to all men and not something to just accept.

There is also that. I think basically part of becoming an adult is learning self control (in all sorts of ways).

I think the point a man made (and I can't remember where, it might even have been a comment on here) was that mens sex drive feels like the beach ball analogy DH used

A really thoughtful post. Thanks.

It may be impossible to ever fully know what the other sex's sexual experience is but I think the idea it's some completely unknowable thing is oversold. I heard someone say that women go from 1 to 10 and men go from 5 to 10 and I think that's actually not a bad description in many ways.

But the fact that men are starting at a higher baseline doesn't excuse weird and messed up fetishes or frankly sexual harassment and criminal behaviour like upskirting which like a poster above I think is a little different than just a "fetish". And the existence of many (most!) men not doing things like this shows that it doesn't excuse it.

I think the higher baseline does lead to a greater risk of porn addiction though.

OK I'm going to attempt some definitions:
Kink - something that turns you on occasionally, outside basic sex. E.g. lingerie, hair pulling, BDSM etc
Fetish - when a kink becomes compulsive and the person with the fetish can't enjoy sex as much without it (for me this is when coercive behaviour starts)
Paraphilia - when it escalates to being criminal because of the harm it causes to others.

AGP would be in bracket 2 but maybe it should be in 3? But there are lots of men with fetishes that are sexually coercive (because the fetish has taken over their sex drive) but its not considered the same.

I'm not arguing to make AGP seem "harmless" BTW, just interested in the topic as a whole. Full disclosure: exH had a fetish that put significant pressure on our sex life (flipping tights, of all things). Pretty sure he was getting kicks out of seeing women in tights in public settings as well as being obsessed with it in the bedroom.

> " Full disclosure: exH had a fetish that put significant pressure on our sex life (flipping tights, of all things)."

In this day and age, if he gets off on you wearing tights rather than him wearing tights, you're probably one of the lucky ones.

(Sorry, not meaning to make light of anything!)

The suggestions/studies that show males tend to be more 'object' oriented than females ( even in very early childhood) could lie behind why males are so prone to focusing on and fetishising certain body parts or type of object.

It also seems the case that many men started cross dresssing in childhood - in a way that girls simply don't.

🤐

https://www.msdmanuals.com/en-gb/professional/psychiatric-disorders/paraphilias-and-paraphilic-disorders/fetishistic-disorder

Looked up a definition and this website suggests fetishism is arousal to objects or non-genital body parts. If it becomes all-consuming or distressing, or causes harm or has the potential to harm others then it's considered a paraphilic disorder. Some other paraphilic disorders are exhibitionism, voyeurism, paedophilia as previously mentioned.

Very interesting thread.

I don't like the idea of there being a 'normal' form of sexuality and everything outside that is considered abnormal or a problem, because historically women have been disadvantaged by that. It isn't a long time ago that popular Freudianism was all the rage and it was a given first that men were permanently enthusiastic about PIV sex in the missionary position with women, and secondly that women needed to have vaginal orgasms 3x a week provided by a man's penis, or else she was frigid or otherwise inadequate. And if she showed too much enthusiasm for this, or for masturbation, for sex outside the corral of potential legitimate childbearing, or God forbid with women, she was a nymphomaniac. I think it's easy to forget just how common and restrictive those ideas became, overlaid on a religious basis for considering women to be the fount of original sin and for homosexuality to be literally unspeakable.

The idea that DH expresses of his sexuality being this discrete thing that is abnormal, that should be controllable but isn't, sits uncomfortably with me. I don't think a kink or a fetish in itself is wrong - I believe i have a mild one myself, but that I never recognised it for decades because it doesn't fit the porn for men model. I believe that a kink or a fetish can be formed in a sexist society and can be expressed in a way that is oppressive to women, but that it is possible to have one without it oppressing women.

Where a massive photospread of someone expressing their fetish in the Times fits, is another matter.

Paraphilias like AGP are clinically defined problematic sexual behaviours, and the prevalence is far higher in men, for sure.
I think it's very hard for a normal non paraphiliac person to understand. The closest analogy I think is addiction. Paraphiliacs will go to great lengths to satisfy their desire, which can be very destructive and harmful to others as well as themselves, like gambling.

I'm not convinced that kinks, fetishes and paraphilias are really different things. It looks more like an example of a Russell conjugation:
I have a kink; you have a fetish; he has a paraphilia.

@hallouminatus I didn't know there was a name for it, I remember it from Yes Minister though. I don't disagree with you necessarily but paraphilias are a clinical diagnosis; kinks are not necessarily one

I'm not sure I agree. Take lingerie as an example. A lot of people aren't fussed at all. Then there is a spectrum something like: a man who likes to see his wife in lingerie vs one who likes to wear it himself vs one who actually transitions.

It does seem more like an addiction; the issue I have with that is a lot of men claim "sex addiction" when they get cheated on.

If it is an addiction, what would the right way to treat it? Could you treat e.g. a frotteur as an addict? Could they go to rehab?

Maybe it would open up different pathways for managing people who want to transition?

I object to anything that reduces people to objects of desire, whatever that process is called. So if Fred would prefer sex with a stranger in tights to that with his wife bare legged, I object. If Fred won’t have sex without tights, I object. If Fred starts paying or abducting women to have sex in tights it’s a problem. If Fred only wants sex with fat people, or people with missing limbs…

Sex is about whole people, not stuff or body parts.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK554425/

All of these terms are quite extensively researched and defined in literature such as the DSM. There's also the ICM, from memory, which the WHO bases much of its work on.

'Paraphilias, in general, are more common in men, with reasons unknown.[13] A recent study conducted looked specifically at the desire for and experience of paraphilic behaviors of a sample population demographically representative of the general population. The sample size contained a total of 1,040 persons classified according to gender, age, education, ethnicity, religion, and location of residency. Researchers found that almost half of the study population expressed interest in one or more paraphilic categories, with approximately one-third of this population actually acting on this interest at least once. Specifically, fetishism, frotteurism, voyeurism, and masochism held a prevalence of 15.9% (value considered to be statistically unusual), with interest in both males and females. Interest levels in fetishism and masochism revealed no statistically significant difference amongst males and females. The research found that the most common paraphilic interest amongst men is often voyeurism and fetishism