I too had experiences, before getting married a few years ago, where women would insist that I hit them, choke them, or verbally abuse them. I hated it, and would never go as far with it as they demanded. I lost a few partners that way, but it was for the best. And of course it is women who read books about ritualised fetishistic violence, such as Fifty Shades of Grey: it isn’t men buying millions of copies of these books.
It was historically the case, however, that fetishised sexual violence was demanded by high-status men, not women. The traditional explanation was that it was a reflection of these men’s power in society. The idea is that fetishistic desires can be a way of balancing one’s external behaviour. In this case then, the submissive receipt of violence was a way of balancing the man’s unease at his obligation to exercise power in the workplace. That it is now women who are more and more demanding ritualistic, fetishised violence appears then to be a symptom, not of an anachronistic image of supposed male dominance, but of the female dominance that many have noted Western society has segued into.
This ties in to the significant and ongoing collapse in surveyed measurements of women’s happiness, as feminism has taken a tighter and tighter stranglehold (pun intended) over our culture. Feminism is succeeding in its aim of destroying domestic happiness, and tearing down the complementary gendered society that had evolved naturally over thousands of years. Now, we are all reaping the consequences of broken families and broken lives.
Lisa I
3 years ago
The authors piece about the Magdalene Launderies is inaccurate. That narrative is based on a film which was based on a book written by a woman who later turned out not to have been in a laundary. For example, there were no incarcerations and they were not places where pregnant women went.
It’s a case of a narrative being repeated so often that it’s almost universally taken as fact. The link to the independent report is below, for those who are interested. http://www.justice.ie/en/JE…
Examples like this are a bit unnerving because it makes me wonder how many of what we accept as historical facts may have been misrepresented.
david Murphy
2 years ago
One of the advantages of properly practiced BDSM is that consent is very explicit to the point of a contract for many partners, the idea is you define your boundaries explicitly – if you don’t want choking, breath play, punching etc you say so. Within the vanilla sex world, it is rare that any such explicitness happens.
Yes, that’s true, but what porn fails to show is this exact thing in what is considered to be the “vanilla” videos. When your average normie is watching this they view this as normal and don’t understand that consent is needed to perform this. Porn studios need to be held accountable for much of what they are doing to society and how much their content is twisting the minds of young men and women who don’t know any better. It’s honestly frightening.
I too had experiences, before getting married a few years ago, where women would insist that I hit them, choke them, or verbally abuse them. I hated it, and would never go as far with it as they demanded. I lost a few partners that way, but it was for the best. And of course it is women who read books about ritualised fetishistic violence, such as Fifty Shades of Grey: it isn’t men buying millions of copies of these books.
It was historically the case, however, that fetishised sexual violence was demanded by high-status men, not women. The traditional explanation was that it was a reflection of these men’s power in society. The idea is that fetishistic desires can be a way of balancing one’s external behaviour. In this case then, the submissive receipt of violence was a way of balancing the man’s unease at his obligation to exercise power in the workplace. That it is now women who are more and more demanding ritualistic, fetishised violence appears then to be a symptom, not of an anachronistic image of supposed male dominance, but of the female dominance that many have noted Western society has segued into.
This ties in to the significant and ongoing collapse in surveyed measurements of women’s happiness, as feminism has taken a tighter and tighter stranglehold (pun intended) over our culture. Feminism is succeeding in its aim of destroying domestic happiness, and tearing down the complementary gendered society that had evolved naturally over thousands of years. Now, we are all reaping the consequences of broken families and broken lives.
The authors piece about the Magdalene
Launderies is inaccurate. That narrative is based on a film which was based on a book written by a woman who later turned out not to have been in a laundary. For example, there were no incarcerations and they were not places where pregnant women went.
It’s a case of a narrative being repeated so often that it’s almost universally taken as fact. The link to the independent report is below, for those who are interested.
http://www.justice.ie/en/JE…
Examples like this are a bit unnerving because it makes me wonder how many of what we accept as historical facts may have been misrepresented.
One of the advantages of properly practiced BDSM is that consent is very explicit to the point of a contract for many partners, the idea is you define your boundaries explicitly – if you don’t want choking, breath play, punching etc you say so. Within the vanilla sex world, it is rare that any such explicitness happens.
Yes, that’s true, but what porn fails to show is this exact thing in what is considered to be the “vanilla” videos. When your average normie is watching this they view this as normal and don’t understand that consent is needed to perform this. Porn studios need to be held accountable for much of what they are doing to society and how much their content is twisting the minds of young men and women who don’t know any better. It’s honestly frightening.