Sissy Obsession Overload...

[cubbyfire04]

I should start by saying I don't intend this thread to be offensive or marginalize anyone, and I'd prefer there be no comments doing so either. I'm just trying to understand...

I am an openly bisexual, and predominantly submissive man (or perhaps pansexual, in the parlance of our times). Despite that, I am quite masculine. I've been in LTR's with men and women, and dated a few non-binary people.

I've been on Lit for a very long time, under a different username years ago before taking a hiatus for 4 or 5 years. Upon my return, I've seen many old users from my early days but things have changed... Especially in this forum.

I just find the sheer number of of folks who are now posting about their sissy desires and identifying as such very fascinating. That's great, I'm happy those folks have an outlet, but I can't help but wonder...

Is the overabundance of these posts indicative of the typical life and desires of a non-straight man in society these days? Are these folks just becoming more outspoken as alternative sexualities have become more accepted in society? Were "otherwise masculine men" just repressing their sissy desires and now able to express them more clearly? It just doesn't seem to be reflective of the community as I've experienced it.

 

[starfish71]

I think it my have more to do with the user base here than society more broadly... when I have looked at non-straight hook-up sites the sissy/fem/cd/trans users seems to be a small minority... When I am here it is to explore the non-straight side of myself, so my interactions might be more to that flavor... I don't go to gun sites, truck sites, photography sites, or golf sites to discuss my sexuality, and I don't discuss guns/trucks/photography/golf here...

I will add, I think there are a lot of people reading threads and not necessarily responding to them publicly... I have received a number of PM's (some of them very hot and steamy) from users whom I've never seen a post from... the who is posting vs who is reading dynamic may play it to the disparity you are seeing...

 

[cubbyfire04]

I do not identify as a sissy. But, I am a historian of sexuality with some cultural anthropology background. I'll give this a shot.

Literotica forum-posting is a snapshot. There are other forums where you can see similar behavior. The word "sissy" can be found as a reclamation at least from the 1980s, definitely predating the use of these internet forums. The idea of "sissification" itself is much older, and I've looked at late-Victorian pornographic novels that deal with female domination as the vehicle for feminizing younger male main characters. As we moved into the twentieth-century, especially at mid-century, the fantasy of being forcibly "transformed" became way more popular and not so obscure. Not necessarily referred to as a "sissy," but very reminiscent of this fetish.

Without digging too deep right now, the different word usage probably comes from a historic combination of things... It is associated with its derogatory usage, and it maybe, purposely sounds separate from "transvestite" or "transsexual"* which would have already been used by the 1970s and 1980s (during which the British "cissy" and American "sissy" are being reclaimed by those who identify as such).

*"Transgender" has also been used, but it's not that popular.

"Sissy boys" are also defined in the 1970s in psych/sexological research. The concept of "sissyphobia" would then be defined as a combination of misogyny and homophobia by Gregory M. Herek. Whether you believe this is accurate, or that "sissyphobia" is actually an proto-theory for transmisogyny (which "sissies" experience?), I leave that up to you.

So this didn't come from nowhere. Victorian men have long obsessed over corsets and the way they are laced, over the height of women's heels, over women's stockings. We have a plethora of primary source evidence to show this. And, we can go back further than that, but I just gave that example to show you that this wasn't a sudden change. However, I don't think that "repression" is the answer to your question.

I will speak on the U.S. (where I live) & Britain. Never has America or the UK been "sexually repressed" in the way that people talk about. As a historian, I don't like that description of our history. Too simple, too reductive. From the colonial period here onward, and far before that in the UK, we have always talked about sex. What is correct about sex? What to do about it? What activities around sex are good for our community? Bad? Etc. To say that we used to be repressed and now we aren't, that implies that certain desires are absolutely innate and always existed, always presented the same way, always wanted to be manifest in the exact same way they do now. That's just not accurate. Culture evolves, politics evolve, and so on. The British never shut up about all the gender-fucked freaks in their neighborhood. There were colonial and revolutionary Americans who turned heads by not conforming to gender, and this provoked discourse. Both areas constantly wrote nasty poems and broadsides about how this one young lady messed up her life because she fucked this guy and now she's pregnant before marriage. And also she blew a donkey or something. Yes, they were graphic and intended to be comedic, while arguing social and moral lessons.

I think the simple answer to your question is that people are no less repressed than they were before. If you took the whole population of people here, you'd find they are talking about sex the same amount as they were 100 years ago. (Well, not counting the efficiency of the Information Age, obviously the internet makes it easier...) The biggest difference is not how much, but what is being talked about? Our current environment is now more conducive to certain conversations, in certain parts of the U.S. ... Some parts are differently aligned, so their sexual discourses are regimented in a way that emphasizes abstinence until marriage and things of that nature. For environments that are conducive to just being a "sissy" out in public or at the local BDSM dungeon or whatever, this is made possible with changes in sexual discourse over time. Lots of demands by activists, lots of professionals who push certain ideas, lots of other changes too numerous to go over in like... a several-hundred-year period.

And of course... if you have internet access? It doesn't matter if you can't be a sissy in real life. You can do it online now. I suppose, that's the magic of today's world that will now set us apart from the past. The rest of human history and of past discourses creating human sexuality. You can create yourself totally online now.

Thank you for this... Truly a fascinating read!

 

[Lily Peg]

I do not identify as a sissy. But, I am a historian of sexuality with some cultural anthropology background. I'll give this a shot.

Literotica forum-posting is a snapshot. There are other forums where you can see similar behavior. The word "sissy" can be found as a reclamation at least from the 1980s, definitely predating the use of these internet forums. The idea of "sissification" itself is much older, and I've looked at late-Victorian pornographic novels that deal with female domination as the vehicle for feminizing younger male main characters. As we moved into the twentieth-century, especially at mid-century, the fantasy of being forcibly "transformed" became way more popular and not so obscure. Not necessarily referred to as a "sissy," but very reminiscent of this fetish.

Without digging too deep right now, the different word usage probably comes from a historic combination of things... It is associated with its derogatory usage, and it maybe, purposely sounds separate from "transvestite" or "transsexual"* which would have already been used by the 1970s and 1980s (during which the British "cissy" and American "sissy" are being reclaimed by those who identify as such).

*"Transgender" has also been used, but it's not that popular.

"Sissy boys" are also defined in the 1970s in psych/sexological research. The concept of "sissyphobia" would then be defined as a combination of misogyny and homophobia by Gregory M. Herek. Whether you believe this is accurate, or that "sissyphobia" is actually an proto-theory for transmisogyny (which "sissies" experience?), I leave that up to you.

So this didn't come from nowhere. Victorian men have long obsessed over corsets and the way they are laced, over the height of women's heels, over women's stockings. We have a plethora of primary source evidence to show this. And, we can go back further than that, but I just gave that example to show you that this wasn't a sudden change. However, I don't think that "repression" is the answer to your question.

I will speak on the U.S. (where I live) & Britain. Never has America or the UK been "sexually repressed" in the way that people talk about. As a historian, I don't like that description of our history. Too simple, too reductive. From the colonial period here onward, and far before that in the UK, we have always talked about sex. What is correct about sex? What to do about it? What activities around sex are good for our community? Bad? Etc. To say that we used to be repressed and now we aren't, that implies that certain desires are absolutely innate and always existed, always presented the same way, always wanted to be manifest in the exact same way they do now. That's just not accurate. Culture evolves, politics evolve, and so on. The British never shut up about all the gender-fucked freaks in their neighborhood. There were colonial and revolutionary Americans who turned heads by not conforming to gender, and this provoked discourse. Both areas constantly wrote nasty poems and broadsides about how this one young lady messed up her life because she fucked this guy and now she's pregnant before marriage. And also she blew a donkey or something. Yes, they were graphic and intended to be comedic, while arguing social and moral lessons.

I think the simple answer to your question is that people are no less repressed than they were before. If you took the whole population of people here, you'd find they are talking about sex the same amount as they were 100 years ago. (Well, not counting the efficiency of the Information Age, obviously the internet makes it easier...) The biggest difference is not how much, but what is being talked about? Our current environment is now more conducive to certain conversations, in certain parts of the U.S. ... Some parts are differently aligned, so their sexual discourses are regimented in a way that emphasizes abstinence until marriage and things of that nature. For environments that are conducive to just being a "sissy" out in public or at the local BDSM dungeon or whatever, this is made possible with changes in sexual discourse over time. Lots of demands by activists, lots of professionals who push certain ideas, lots of other changes too numerous to go over in like... a several-hundred-year period.

And of course... if you have internet access? It doesn't matter if you can't be a sissy in real life. You can do it online now. I suppose, that's the magic of today's world that will now set us apart from the past. The rest of human history and of past discourses creating human sexuality. You can create yourself totally online now.

Thanks for your interesting insights into these current questions about male gender identity and the who and what is a "sissy".
From my perspective of being called a sissy by various males l enjoy fem wear and other aspects of gender fluidity.
True that for hundreds of years men and women would exchange roles especially during festivals onto public plays and pantomimes etc. Dandies in Victorian age was common amongst the upper middle classes etc. The 60s sexy revolution made unisex and camp more open as homosexuality was legalised and the pill was freely available.
The internet flooded us with porn of every kind of sexual activity and made us think and feel what we really wanted to express was an authentic and genuine sense of self.
But of course the reality is far more weirder than our fantasies and often scary to go beyond the virtual highway.
Societies especially amongst male dominance fears this explosion of gender fluidity and sissification. Men have to be men to maintain the status quo. David Bowie and the like tried to break these shackles and show men could be different and not rely on aggression to get their in own sexual way.
Being a sissy is just one aspect of being more open to change and not stuck in a mindset of masculinity and power.

 

[Whatmw]

Please forgive me if what I'm contributing isn't helpful.
I think it's simply the availability of every kind of porn in abundance. I really don't think there is much more than that to it. At least that's been my personal experience. And I think I'm pretty typical. You see a lot of big cocks, shooting big loads, and at some point it begins to register... Hey, that's pretty hot.

 

[AlexBailey]

I suspect there are lot more closet dressers and fetishists with the advent of easy online shopping.

 

[Lily Peg]

I suspect there are lot more closet dressers and fetishists with the advent of easy online shopping.

There's also so much more choice nowadays as well to buy specifically men's fem wear online and enjoy crossdressing and other kinky activities whether private or shared.

https://mens-fashion.lovetoknow.com/Dressing_a_Male_as_a_Female

 

[Crios]

There's also so much more choice nowadays as well to buy specifically men's fem wear online and enjoy crossdressing and other kinky activities whether private or shared.

https://mens-fashion.lovetoknow.com/Dressing_a_Male_as_a_Female

Thanks for sharing the article, Foxy! Very helpful

 

[muycurioso]

I do not identify as a sissy. But, I am a historian of sexuality with some cultural anthropology background. I'll give this a shot.

Literotica forum-posting is a snapshot. There are other forums where you can see similar behavior. The word "sissy" can be found as a reclamation at least from the 1980s, definitely predating the use of these internet forums. The idea of "sissification" itself is much older, and I've looked at late-Victorian pornographic novels that deal with female domination as the vehicle for feminizing younger male main characters. As we moved into the twentieth-century, especially at mid-century, the fantasy of being forcibly "transformed" became way more popular and not so obscure. Not necessarily referred to as a "sissy," but very reminiscent of this fetish.

Without digging too deep right now, the different word usage probably comes from a historic combination of things... It is associated with its derogatory usage, and it maybe, purposely sounds separate from "transvestite" or "transsexual"* which would have already been used by the 1970s and 1980s (during which the British "cissy" and American "sissy" are being reclaimed by those who identify as such).

*"Transgender" has also been used, but it's not that popular.

"Sissy boys" are also defined in the 1970s in psych/sexological research. The concept of "sissyphobia" would then be defined as a combination of misogyny and homophobia by Gregory M. Herek. Whether you believe this is accurate, or that "sissyphobia" is actually an proto-theory for transmisogyny (which "sissies" experience?), I leave that up to you.

So this didn't come from nowhere. Victorian men have long obsessed over corsets and the way they are laced, over the height of women's heels, over women's stockings. We have a plethora of primary source evidence to show this. And, we can go back further than that, but I just gave that example to show you that this wasn't a sudden change. However, I don't think that "repression" is the answer to your question.

I will speak on the U.S. (where I live) & Britain. Never has America or the UK been "sexually repressed" in the way that people talk about. As a historian, I don't like that description of our history. Too simple, too reductive. From the colonial period here onward, and far before that in the UK, we have always talked about sex. What is correct about sex? What to do about it? What activities around sex are good for our community? Bad? Etc. To say that we used to be repressed and now we aren't, that implies that certain desires are absolutely innate and always existed, always presented the same way, always wanted to be manifest in the exact same way they do now. That's just not accurate. Culture evolves, politics evolve, and so on. The British never shut up about all the gender-fucked freaks in their neighborhood. There were colonial and revolutionary Americans who turned heads by not conforming to gender, and this provoked discourse. Both areas constantly wrote nasty poems and broadsides about how this one young lady messed up her life because she fucked this guy and now she's pregnant before marriage. And also she blew a donkey or something. Yes, they were graphic and intended to be comedic, while arguing social and moral lessons.

I think the simple answer to your question is that people are no less repressed than they were before. If you took the whole population of people here, you'd find they are talking about sex the same amount as they were 100 years ago. (Well, not counting the efficiency of the Information Age, obviously the internet makes it easier...) The biggest difference is not how much, but what is being talked about? Our current environment is now more conducive to certain conversations, in certain parts of the U.S. ... Some parts are differently aligned, so their sexual discourses are regimented in a way that emphasizes abstinence until marriage and things of that nature. For environments that are conducive to just being a "sissy" out in public or at the local BDSM dungeon or whatever, this is made possible with changes in sexual discourse over time. Lots of demands by activists, lots of professionals who push certain ideas, lots of other changes too numerous to go over in like... a several-hundred-year period.

And of course... if you have internet access? It doesn't matter if you can't be a sissy in real life. You can do it online now. I suppose, that's the magic of today's world that will now set us apart from the past. The rest of human history and of past discourses creating human sexuality. You can create yourself totally online now.

well written

 

[muycurioso]

I think we will never be able to do a close, quantitative study over the years of how many there were in, say, the early Victorian age and how any there are now (over the course of all of those years). I would venture to guess you are right.

(I'm going to call this hypothetical person a "man" from now on as to not confuse anyone and to generalize, but some people in history have shown to defy this label.)

It would be easier to be caught back then because there was little privacy. The middle-class man either lives with his birth family or with his wife (and children), plus servants. If he wanted to hide anything from anyone in his house, he was going to have to jump through a lot of hoops. And what about the neighborhood? That's another story entirely. The Victorian English were pretty endogamous, too, so they had extra reason to be snoopy and care to tell his family what kind of suspicious activity the husband is getting up to that the wife didn't see... Because, well, it's better to stop it now because he goes too far and ruins the whole family, right?

Or, they gossip him to death and he hears about it in the worst way possible.

Even if you had a modicum of privacy, it's not as easy to get these clothes, like you say. They are not really mass-produced. They need to be made to size. Although, that assumes a man is going to be wearing the entire outfit, which I doubt. There were numerous men writing to women's magazines about the delight of the heels, the stockings, and the corsets individually, so it was likely that many were wearing specific articles of women's clothing and not putting together an entire ensemble. That was easier to hide.

None of this is impossible-- we literally have proof that it was done. I guess it's not so hard to imagine a man going out of his way to find somewhere else to make his purchases, but also to imagine him pretending to make purchases for his wife, depending on what the item was. Shoes, for example? I couldn't tell you anything about these men and what happened to them because we only have their letters to the magazines. Who knows if they actually had entire outfits and were only bothering to talk about specific articles of clothing, well, because those magazines were featuring them specifically?

As for the lower class, forget about it. He probably lives with more than one family. He probably lives in a tenement surrounded by several others, and he likely doesn't have much money to his name to make such "frivolous" purchases (sad...). It seems frivolous because where are you going to hide such a thing in a cramped, dirty living unit? When will you wear it? When you are working your long hours, or when you go drinking at night, or when you crawl into bed with your wife? Probably never. It's possible that some lower-class man has done this... but I think it would be exceedingly rare. The opportunity cost seems too enormous versus, say, a woman crossdressing. Let's say someone identified as what we would call today a "trans woman," then that would be different. But indulging in a somewhat expensive and potentially dangerous fetish as a poor and potentially busy man might be too costly.

Today's western lower class aren't as crammed together. They aren't all living with 3 families and aren't all concerned with one another's business as much as before. Urbanization was already moving us away from that trend. And, more than before, even though income inequality has increased since 1980 in the U.S., our overall standard of living has increased so many people in general can actually purchase different consumer goods (which are mass-produced), even many people under the poverty line. It's just a tighter squeeze (and some people cannot afford to do this; it just depends).

Now, the worst thing that can happen online is that you get ripped off or scammed. Or your package gets stolen, LOL. It may or may not be the great equalizer...

yes, being poor takes away many options of truly being yourself. You cannot risk losing what little you have. I took some risks (was not cheating in any way, but with honest fantasy). prob the last straw and now I am divorced.

 

[Escierto]

My sense is that the obsession with the term "sissy" is somehow misleading. The obsession makes me uncomfortable. It sounds derogatory. Just because a man is young and submissive doesn't mean they are "sissy". Men who need to dress and men who need to be submissive are more complicated than this term. To my ear, the word "sissy" is diminishing.

Yes, well said.

 

[muycurioso]

Yes, well said.

I have replied to this b4, but I agree. I like the idea of submitting to another man and sucking his cock. I am not gonna call him daddy, wear a cage, be degraded, ect. Wearing girls clohtes is fun and I do it once in awhile. IT IS A FREE COUNTRY and each to their own. I also dont understand all the humiliation and degration. Not for me I guess.

 

[muycurioso]

At my age (64), I remember as a boy being called a sissy because I was a musician and didn't rough house like all the other boys in the neighborhood. It didn't interest me, but I was far too young for the term to have anything remotely sexual associated with it. It was meant as an insult because the boys equated me with their sisters. It was intended as a slap in the face, and I took it as such. Maybe that's why I have such discomfort with the term now among adults.

In those days, sexuality in the public's mind was a fairly rigid thing. You were either heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual. All the new concepts and terminology of gender fluidity (which make my brain hurt) may turn a term like "sissy" into something else, but in my mind, "sissy" still lingers as an insult, although it's obvious that many do not consider it to be such.

All this to say that whatever people want to consider themselves to be, is their own business. Be who you want to be and more power to you. What puzzles me is the occasional comment that seems to indicate that all men who like sex with men should be sissies, whatever that may be. Most people on Lit are "live and let live" types, but now and then a more critical attitude pops up. People, just be yourselves and celebrate your sexuality in whatever way you please.

I like this -- all the new concepts and terminology of gender fluidity (which make my brain hurt)

 

[Samanthaphri]

There's also so much more choice nowadays as well to buy specifically men's fem wear online and enjoy crossdressing and other kinky activities whether private or shared.

https://mens-fashion.lovetoknow.com/Dressing_a_Male_as_a_Female

Oohhhh, that black one has me on my knees

 

[J1biboi]

I have replied to this b4, but I agree. I like the idea of submitting to another man and sucking his cock. I am not gonna call him daddy, wear a cage, be degraded, ect. Wearing girls clohtes is fun and I do it once in awhile. IT IS A FREE COUNTRY and each to their own. I also dont understand all the humiliation and degration. Not for me I guess.

That's me too. Exactly!

 

[Pureblood]

I should start by saying I don't intend this thread to be offensive or marginalize anyone, and I'd prefer there be no comments doing so either. I'm just trying to understand...

I am an openly bisexual, and predominantly submissive man (or perhaps pansexual, in the parlance of our times). Despite that, I am quite masculine. I've been in LTR's with men and women, and dated a few non-binary people.

I've been on Lit for a very long time, under a different username years ago before taking a hiatus for 4 or 5 years. Upon my return, I've seen many old users from my early days but things have changed... Especially in this forum.

I just find the sheer number of of folks who are now posting about their sissy desires and identifying as such very fascinating. That's great, I'm happy those folks have an outlet, but I can't help but wonder...

Is the overabundance of these posts indicative of the typical life and desires of a non-straight man in society these days? Are these folks just becoming more outspoken as alternative sexualities have become more accepted in society? Were "otherwise masculine men" just repressing their sissy desires and now able to express them more clearly? It just doesn't seem to be reflective of the community as I've experienced it.

I don't really have sissy desires but the thought of interacting with "sissies" are sexually provoking...

 

[SuperSissy]

I have been bi-sexual since the 70’s, and dressing in women’s clothing off and on since then. All of my sexuality with men has been with me as a submissive, and a good part of that dressed in feminine clothing. I think the current use of the word “sissy” is quite recent.

As robd63 mentions above, back in the day, a “sissy” was a boy who didn’t rough-house with the other boys. You earned the name by being perceived as weak and feminine, but it didn’t really have sexual connotations (yes, it’s awful that we would degrade other boys by equating them to women, as if there was something wrong with women).

I didn’t use the label “sissy” as a sexual term for my submissive gurly self until I discovered it being used on Lit. Prior to that, maybe 10 years ago, I never thought of it as a sexual term, or of myself as a sissy. I find it to be a fun label, depicting just what my avatar shows – a male who likes to get feminine and totally submit to a strong, virile man, and loves every minute of that submission. Does it describe all of my sexuality? No, of course not. So, I’m not obsessed with the term (despite my user name here (I’m so bad at picking user names, and you can’t change them)), but it certainly describes a part of my sexuality that I have enjoyed immensely.

To GoldenComplusion’s posts, we unfortunately mindlessly evolve the meaning of words in the English language. I think maybe what is a “sissy” has existed for a long, long time, but only recently has the term been used to describe that type of man.

But I could be wrong.

 

[xdresssissytoes]

I should start by saying I don't intend this thread to be offensive or marginalize anyone, and I'd prefer there be no comments doing so either. I'm just trying to understand...

I am an openly bisexual, and predominantly submissive man (or perhaps pansexual, in the parlance of our times). Despite that, I am quite masculine. I've been in LTR's with men and women, and dated a few non-binary people.

I've been on Lit for a very long time, under a different username years ago before taking a hiatus for 4 or 5 years. Upon my return, I've seen many old users from my early days but things have changed... Especially in this forum.

I just find the sheer number of of folks who are now posting about their sissy desires and identifying as such very fascinating. That's great, I'm happy those folks have an outlet, but I can't help but wonder...

Is the overabundance of these posts indicative of the typical life and desires of a non-straight man in society these days? Are these folks just becoming more outspoken as alternative sexualities have become more accepted in society? Were "otherwise masculine men" just repressing their sissy desires and now able to express them more clearly? It just doesn't seem to be reflective of the community as I've experienced it.

With much respect to you...let me add a perspective....Me included in this...Social media has blown the jambs off the doors.... However the doors were cracked open a bit in the recent past.... those doors are gone...There is a wide open treasure hold of information and livid images to keep us all clicking on the next image or the next response. This access was never open to us vets of porn in the past, so now, all that is out there is... AVAILABLE FOR ACCESS.

 

[drobert44]

I used to have a 14-part series on Literotica that was heavily based on standard sissy tropes: owned and used by powerful men, abused and mocked by women, transformed in body and mind, limits explored, boundaries pushed, race play, etc.

I say "used to," because I developed an aversion for this type of content. I do think some of the tropes are erotic, but I came to the realization that the idea of feminization was merely a means to explore my infatuation with humiliation, degradation, and control. I, like many authors, had fashioned in my protagonist a fictionalized version of myself, through whom I could vicariously experience my kinks and fixations. But I never experienced a desire to become feminine. I went through a period of questioning my motives and deleted the stories, much to the chagrin of certain close friends.

As it currently stands, while certain depictions of feminization make for good reading, it is not something that generally arouses me. Most instances of real-life sissification are more off-putting than titillating, save for a certain class of young men who have made an extensive commitment to presenting as fully-feminine. But even for them, while I admire their dedication, and their feminine qualities attract me in the same way that a female would, I do not look at these with a desire to be with nor become like them. I've accepted that I am comfortable being overtly masculine, and don't feel the urge to modify my appearance or personality in order to attract male interest.

I've had the urge to rewrite my series with a character closer in appearance and presentation to myself - a bearded lumberjack type. The logic of my story, however, would not have stood for this. Sissy stories rely on the male characters passing for female or containing enough femininity to entice nominally heterosexual men. An early chapter, containing the seduction of office workers would seem almost comical with a man nearly twice their size. Perhaps it would be good for a laugh, but comedy does not arouse me.

I was quite macho until I began dating sissies...........then turned gay.

 

[richgo50]

I started viewing Literotica about 15 or more years ago. I only looked at pictures of women and especially lesbian photos as well as reading lesbian stories. As the years have gone by, I am 72, and the sex with my wife started to drop off I got interested in wearing panties. As time went on I have enjoyed dressing up with slips,stocking, garter belts and other sexy items. My wife somewhat put up with it. Sometimes she got into it and other times not so much. For the past 8 to 10 years I have had a desire to get together with a crossdresser. When I first started to look at Lit pic's and came across shemale pictures I thought they were all photoshopped. Duh! Now I know better and love looking at all the shemale and crossdressing pics. Still love pussy but that is not happening much with my wife. So I think for me the lack of sex and my desire to dress up has led to a desire to be submissive and be with another crossdresser. Hope that makes sense.

 

[simplelogic1]

I started viewing Literotica about 15 or more years ago. I only looked at pictures of women and especially lesbian photos as well as reading lesbian stories. As the years have gone by, I am 72, and the sex with my wife started to drop off I got interested in wearing panties. As time went on I have enjoyed dressing up with slips,stocking, garter belts and other sexy items. My wife somewhat put up with it. Sometimes she got into it and other times not so much. For the past 8 to 10 years I have had a desire to get together with a crossdresser. When I first started to look at Lit pic's and came across shemale pictures I thought they were all photoshopped. Duh! Now I know better and love looking at all the shemale and crossdressing pics. Still love pussy but that is not happening much with my wife. So I think for me the lack of sex and my desire to dress up has led to a desire to be submissive and be with another crossdresser. Hope that makes sense.

I think there are more of us like yourself than you ever realise. If you want to talk pm me

 

[2tallpaul]

I've grown up in a family of high pressure jobs. I attribute my submissiveness to this as much as who have I dated are high pressure jobs in the medical profession. My wearing panties or full shaving came from the desires of my partner. I knew I had some bi in me or liked the idea of three ways. As far as porn, the In the Wild or the Lesbian Forums have the most erotic art to me. Some of the photoshopping on pictures drives me nuts. I consider myself a sissy at this point by our sex acts. Not worried but the internet allows the openness of it all. I fully agree with all prior posts.

 

[Bisexguy70]

I think men have always been bisexual in retrospect. I noticed that there has been an increase of tranny/shemale porn more and more. Men see it and they start wanting cock more and more. Seeing a hot chic with a dick at an early age set my bisexual desires raging inside me. I think that putting these images out there and men seeing it more has brought out the internal sissies and gay desires in men more prevalent. Just my opinion.

 

[Bisexguy70]

I started viewing Literotica about 15 or more years ago. I only looked at pictures of women and especially lesbian photos as well as reading lesbian stories. As the years have gone by, I am 72, and the sex with my wife started to drop off I got interested in wearing panties. As time went on I have enjoyed dressing up with slips,stocking, garter belts and other sexy items. My wife somewhat put up with it. Sometimes she got into it and other times not so much. For the past 8 to 10 years I have had a desire to get together with a crossdresser. When I first started to look at Lit pic's and came across shemale pictures I thought they were all photoshopped. Duh! Now I know better and love looking at all the shemale and crossdressing pics. Still love pussy but that is not happening much with my wife. So I think for me the lack of sex and my desire to dress up has led to a desire to be submissive and be with another crossdresser. Hope that makes sense.

My God!! Im exactly like you. I feel your desires as well. Im in a very similiar situation. Sex with wife diminished after alot of her health issues. I started to try crossdressing. It turned me on so much. I started to experiment playing with other men. Now i find it incredibly erotic to dress up and submit to another man. I get a raging hard on dressed slutty and becoming a mans cocksucking whore.

 

[WhiskeyLvr]

I was quite macho until I began dating sissies...........then turned gay.

I like this lol.....