Forced masculinization?

[Dyslexicea]

I do think after reading your post Netzach, my bias was showing.

 

[Dyslexicea]

Short answer; Masculinisation might be humiliating to some women, but not many. It's not generally considered shameful to be a man.

Feminisation is humiliating to most men, although not to all. It is, in many ways, considered shameful to be a woman.

Also, this; how-i-discovered-gender-discrimination

Is it not also humiliating for a man who isn't trans to want to be a woman? I know men who'd like to experience sex as a woman because they see our sexual abilities as far superior to their own. Along with feeling we control who, when, where and how. In my mind it has to be humiliating knowing they'll never experience sex as we do.

 

[BrightlyGo]

As far as men being nurses, you seem to be behind the times, men are entering the nursing profession in far greater numbers every year.

An old friend of mine just did, in fact. Just an example of the kind of token noise made in 'favor' of letting men into roles they were traditionally excluded from.

As for men being primary care givers. The number of men staying home taking care of children and household is also increasing every year.

That's news to me (good news, mind you).

Divorce where both couples in a hetero marriage work is higher if the wife makes more than her husband but where the husband stays home the divorce rate is lower than households where the wife stays home.

That's fucking /awesome/! Where did you find that statistic?

feminism is not dead and we do not live in the post feminist era as some seem to think. Feminism has changed but it is a long way from dead.

When i hear 'post-feminist' i think 'feminism has been around a long time' not 'it's dead.' Feminism has already changed society. There's society as it was before feminism, and society as it is today, after decades of feminism.

(Post-modernism, post-feminism, and post-anything-else-that-isn't-really-over-yet, is all faintly ridiculous, though. i mean, what's going to follow "post-modernism?" Post-post-modernism?)

Over all I really do think of men, as a whole, as inferior, superior only in privilege, so dressing as a man any time should be humiliating.

I find it very easy to think of women as being superior, of course.

There are some facile logical arguments for them being more important, for instance to a species or a culture, because of the obvious role in maintaining population. If a culture puts its males in high-risk roles, and things go badly, the population can rebound, if they put their females out there, loss of too many of them could be disastrous. (And, ironically, being expendable leads to men being high-status and 'powerful.' High-risk often means high-reward. Similarly, violence is a high-risk activity, yet most social structures and laws ultimately rest on the threat of violence (however distant and civilized).)

It's not generally considered shameful to be a man. ... It is, in many ways, considered shameful to be a woman.

Considered by society at large? i mean, shame is a form of societal policing. Shame exists to push us towards "acceptable" behavior. It's contextual. It is not shameful to be a man or a woman. It is shameful to be male, and violate the expectations society has of man. It is shameful to be female, and violate the expectations that society has of a woman.

Society's expectations towards women have been challenged for a long time now, and they are not what they once were. There has been less of a shift in expectations towards men.

 

[Netzach]

Is it not also humiliating for a man who isn't trans to want to be a woman? I know men who'd like to experience sex as a woman because they see our sexual abilities as far superior to their own. Along with feeling we control who, when, where and how. In my mind it has to be humiliating knowing they'll never experience sex as we do.

I think it could be humiliating, but it could also just be frustrating/curious.

I've encountered a lot of crossdressing motivations in my career. Some are completely "what people do with sexism" kinks and sometimes it's just garden variety fantasizing and curiosity. The sexual equivalent of the person who likes ultralights because they always wanted to fly like a bird. It happens, just not very much, usually it's because we're scary magic and dressing as us is one way to control that.

In the "case of the chilled out crossdresser" - they know they're not a bird, but it's as close as, so the ultralight is great.

 

[Dyslexicea]

True, forcing someone to butch up isn't necessarily the same as forcing someone to pretend being a man. I can't really attest to the effectiveness of either, since a) I am not a lesbian, b) my butchness crosses over into genderqueer (some people call me 'he').

Some people call you 'he'. What is your pronoun?

Most of the time my pronoun is 'she', I'm comfortable being XX but at times I think I more relate to the genderless 'it'.

 

[KoPilot]

Is it not also humiliating for a man who isn't trans to want to be a woman? I know men who'd like to experience sex as a woman because they see our sexual abilities as far superior to their own. Along with feeling we control who, when, where and how. In my mind it has to be humiliating knowing they'll never experience sex as we do.

Back when I used to do RP of the rated R and X variety, I was always male. Always, always. I did it pretty religiously for 10 years and 8 of those I played huge, action hero characters with cocks. (aka, not me, but someone I'd like to bang/stare at while drooling)

For a long time it made me seriously consider if I didn't want a male body myself, and be a sadistic motherfucker. I guess I came to the conclusion that I didn't actually want to have sex as a man but rather that I couldn't trust anybody else to roleplay their male characters as mean and nasty as I liked. It was the scene I cared about, not the characters so much. I guess I could say that sometimes it got frustrating and embarrassing for me to have to dictate all my own scenarios because nobody else would get the hint or had the kink bug as bad as me. I know that taking control of situations IRL because of someone else's incompetency pisses me off. The s in me can't even be indifferent to it; I just get mad lol.

Like seriously though, I want to know where this meme of "women are sexy and sexual and men are eunuch blobs" came from, because I did not get the memo. Then again, I've always equated punching things and blowing shit up to sexyfuntiems rather than letting genitals and boobs flop around and the menfolk tend to do more of that. I was barely even aware that I had genitals of my own until I was old enough to smoke, lol. Genitals were always just this anatomical thing that everyone else had.

 

[BrightlyGo]

I guess I could say that sometimes it got frustrating and embarrassing for me to have to dictate all my own scenarios because nobody else would get the hint or had the kink bug as bad as me.

i want to express affirmation of and empathy with this statement ... i'm just not sure how

Like seriously though, I want to know where this meme of "women are sexy and sexual and men are eunuch blobs" came from, because I did not get the memo.

i don't know about 'eunuch blobs' (fat guys are maybe seen that way outside of the 'bear' fetish), but women's bodies being sexualized is pervasive in western culture. Art, advertising, entertainment - the personification of sexuality is female (and idealized). 'Sexy clothing' for a woman is something that shows off her body, enhances it, or hides a little of it in a suggestive way. If there is 'sexy clothing' for men in the mainstream/hetero-normative/traditional sides of western culture, it's a suit or tux - which suggest the ideal masculine form (the 'V' body type), but hides the body of the wearer.

Then again, I've always equated punching things and blowing shit up to sexyfuntiems

Those are certainly stereotypical masculine activities.

Oh, that reminds me, there is something associated with masculinity that suggests sexuality: phallic imagery. But it's generally only symbolic. You want to suggest sex, you put something long and hard out there. Maypoles, guns, rockets, swords, etc... there are even tons of everyday items that are vaguely phallic if you go looking for it. Buy, y'know, whip out the real thing and get arrested.

 

[Allyourbase]

Some people appreciate pantheons with very flawed asshole Gods in them. I think that the idea that the person you serve MUST be better than you is tied up in ego. Sometimes submission has nothing to do with that other person and it's more the agreement that you've made with yourself.

This, hm! New insights there. Also: isn't it just a tad more painful-in-an-interesting-way to submit to someone flawed? If the D is perfect, it's rather easy to be all 'omg i want to serve you'.

Also, this; how-i-discovered-gender-discrimination

Wow, thank you for that. That is going to come in handy.

Some people call you 'he'. What is your pronoun?

Most of the time my pronoun is 'she', I'm comfortable being XX but at times I think I more relate to the genderless 'it'.

Thanks for asking. I'm 'she' for many people, but I get that you like 'it' - I enjoy 'they' in English, but the word for 'they' in Dutch is the exact same word as 'she'. Defeats the point! My 'he'-spaces are amongst trans* and genderqueer people. There, I never asked for the pronoun, it just happened, and felt oddly comfortable instantly. By now, I'm so used to it, I'd be annoyed if someone there would insist on using 'she'. Context, it matters. Anyways: use whatever you think fits.

For a long time it made me seriously consider if I didn't want a male body myself, and be a sadistic motherfucker. I guess I came to the conclusion that I didn't actually want to have sex as a man but rather that I couldn't trust anybody else to roleplay their male characters as mean and nasty as I liked. It was the scene I cared about, not the characters so much. I guess I could say that sometimes it got frustrating and embarrassing for me to have to dictate all my own scenarios because nobody else would get the hint or had the kink bug as bad as me. I know that taking control of situations IRL because of someone else's incompetency pisses me off. The s in me can't even be indifferent to it; I just get mad lol.

Hey! This reminds me of... argh what story was it again. I think it was in Macho Sluts but I can be mistaken (have to look it up). It's about this D/top/ PickYourLabel type person who hooks up with other PYLs. He does it by studying them in secret for a long time and perfecting himself in the things the PYL is good at himself. The PYL he wants is a master of flogging? He'll practice until he is as well. Etc. He always offers his hookup to top him, for a change, and then uses his awesome skills on them. The premise was that in every PYL there's a pyl who's frustrated as fuck that nobody can top them the way they want to, and in the end they turned themselves into the top they would've wanted to meet, but could never find.

 

[Stella_Omega]

The premise was that in every PYL there's a pyl who's frustrated as fuck that nobody can top them the way they want to, and in the end they turned themselves into the top they would've wanted to meet, but could never find.

This isn't true for every PYL, but it's certainly true for me.

Alternatively of course, a frustrated pyl could learn to communicate. That's made a difference!

 

[Allyourbase]

This isn't true for every PYL, but it's certainly true for me.

Alternatively of course, a frustrated pyl could learn to communicate. That's made a difference!

Honestly... it's true for me as well.

Both those things.

Except for knots, seriously, he can't tie rope to save his life! I've become very adept at tit bondage as a result.

 

[KoPilot]

This isn't true for every PYL, but it's certainly true for me.

Alternatively of course, a frustrated pyl could learn to communicate. That's made a difference!

Communi--wha??

 

[KoPilot]

i don't know about 'eunuch blobs' (fat guys are maybe seen that way outside of the 'bear' fetish), but women's bodies being sexualized is pervasive in western culture. Art, advertising, entertainment - the personification of sexuality is female (and idealized). 'Sexy clothing' for a woman is something that shows off her body, enhances it, or hides a little of it in a suggestive way. If there is 'sexy clothing' for men in the mainstream/hetero-normative/traditional sides of western culture, it's a suit or tux - which suggest the ideal masculine form (the 'V' body type), but hides the body of the wearer.

It was a rheotorical question. I did the art school thing for 8 years, I know exactly all the ways that the different genders have historically been portrayed. ;P

I'm also an amateur media critic and a hypervigilant pattern-seeking machine by design. (For better and definitely for worse.)

I guess my question was more along the lines of "how come I didn't internalize it".

Oh, that reminds me, there is something associated with masculinity that suggests sexuality: phallic imagery. But it's generally only symbolic. You want to suggest sex, you put something long and hard out there. Maypoles, guns, rockets, swords, etc... there are even tons of everyday items that are vaguely phallic if you go looking for it. Buy, y'know, whip out the real thing and get arrested.

This is probably a chicken and egg thing. I'm pretty sure the sharpened stick came before the emergence of Penis As Symbol. I mean, this is why people generally tend to murder each other with the cutlery and not the dinnerware. If an animal is going to kill and eat you, it's going to do it with its sharp bits, not by sitting on you and waiting for you to suffocate. And as far as I know, animals don't have much of a concept of "PENETRATION IS MASCULINE"

 

[BrightlyGo]

I guess my question was more along the lines of "how come I didn't internalize it".

A fascinating question. i'm sure it was meant as a rhetorical question, too, but i'm just compulsive about looking for answers, sometimes, ;( so i hope i don't offend or annoy in taking a guess...

Maybe this is too obvious, but: could it be because the imagery of sexuality we're bombarded with all our lives is by & for the allosexual? It just wasn't aimed at you, so it missed? Part of the reasons, perhaps?

 

[SkylarFalling]

A lot of this conversation makes me head swirl, but it is all interesting stuff.

Going right back to the original thing (you guys are on track, but further ahead in your thoughts than me) that maybe being made masculine would humiliate a sub who is used to being His favourite girl, all cute and feminine and sexy and little outfits and is ok to be emotional to him (I'm not describing this very well but I hope you understand the sort of role I mean) and as punishment is made into a kind of boy servant. No more revealing outfits, a simple men's uniform. No playing, no squealing, no cuddles or small rewards for being his best girl. No physical affirmation of the power of her body, even if he owns it.

Kind of like when a boy is forced into manhood. A very rough sort of man up. No special treatment, no displays of weakness or much emotionality.

Does this make sense, in a way?

 

[KoPilot]

A fascinating question. i'm sure it was meant as a rhetorical question, too, but i'm just compulsive about looking for answers, sometimes, ;( so i hope i don't offend or annoy in taking a guess...

Maybe this is too obvious, but: could it be because the imagery of sexuality we're bombarded with all our lives is by & for the allosexual? It just wasn't aimed at you, so it missed? Part of the reasons, perhaps?

I dunno, lots of aces think in normative terms like that too, especially the ones who are romantically inclined or kinky. (There are lots of kinky aces, I was happy to discover.) Probably to a lesser degree though. If you're not wired to be interested in sex, you're going to be bombarded with a lot of messages about who's supposed to be doing and who's supposed to be done-to that are going to go right over your head. Or be things that you learn in a very clinical and intellectual way like me. There's no such thing as an ace that has NO concept whatsoever of what masculine and feminine sexuality are supposed to be. It's How To Not Be Raised By Wolves 101 ;P

Based on my personal experiences and anecdata, I'm inclined to believe in the "imprinting" theory of sexuality and ideas similar to John Money's "lovemaps". If you've got a paraphila, then that part of your sexuality is always going to be that of a prepubescent child: naive, awkward, selfish. Imprinting supposedly happens at a very early age, and that set of memories and feelings and desires winds up just getting frozen in carbonite for the rest of your life. Me, I probably saw a cartoon with a giant terrorizing a town at a very precise moment in my early childhood development, and the slow sprawl started from that point of impact.

 

[KoPilot]

A lot of this conversation makes me head swirl, but it is all interesting stuff.

Going right back to the original thing (you guys are on track, but further ahead in your thoughts than me) that maybe being made masculine would humiliate a sub who is used to being His favourite girl, all cute and feminine and sexy and little outfits and is ok to be emotional to him (I'm not describing this very well but I hope you understand the sort of role I mean) and as punishment is made into a kind of boy servant. No more revealing outfits, a simple men's uniform. No playing, no squealing, no cuddles or small rewards for being his best girl. No physical affirmation of the power of her body, even if he owns it.

Kind of like when a boy is forced into manhood. A very rough sort of man up. No special treatment, no displays of weakness or much emotionality.

Does this make sense, in a way?

You mean in a "take it like a man" sort of way?

No flinching, no squirming, no whimpering, no crying. You're not to make a sound, you're to sit up straight, you're to bite the bullet and bear it with dignity and stoicism.

That would be fun for a torture scene

 

[Stella_Omega]

A lot of this conversation makes me head swirl, but it is all interesting stuff.

Going right back to the original thing (you guys are on track, but further ahead in your thoughts than me) that maybe being made masculine would humiliate a sub who is used to being His favourite girl, all cute and feminine and sexy and little outfits and is ok to be emotional to him (I'm not describing this very well but I hope you understand the sort of role I mean) and as punishment is made into a kind of boy servant. No more revealing outfits, a simple men's uniform. No playing, no squealing, no cuddles or small rewards for being his best girl. No physical affirmation of the power of her body, even if he owns it.

Kind of like when a boy is forced into manhood. A very rough sort of man up. No special treatment, no displays of weakness or much emotionality.

Does this make sense, in a way?

it does, in a kind of horrifying way... To someone who kind of was never much good at squealing, and has had to be educated about the cuddles. I will endure them if my girl needs them. The idea of withholding kindness for a little princess type is unconscionable!

 

[stickygirl]

^^ Lots of crude projections of how we as women perceive the role of men: phallic, stabby things, penetration, animals eating prey ( and remember pythons are about as phallic as it goes but they do squeeze the prey to death ). That's not how I see men. I see the myriad little things that fire off triggers in my sexual mind: the veins on the back of good hand, the movement of muscles under the skin, the smell, the awkward smiles, eye contact... All things that a woman uses to interpret a man and necessarily far more complicated than how men see women: tits, legs, ass.

So if it's another woman than wants to masculinize her partner then it's going to be an impossible task; for a man, perhaps a more visually triggered role is sufficient?

Just an alternative angle...