I recently saw that comment from a feminist on another site, regarding bdsm and how it's portrayed. She was being sarcastic, because she didn't like male dominance, but I agree with that idea, and I do like male dominance.
So is there some universal truth to that idea?
It also may help explain why it is that depictions of "kinky" bdsm tend to portray dominant women (ugh) and submissive men (UGH) -- when the opposite is actually much more common. Most heterosexual women tend to be sexually submissive, while most heterosexual men tend to be sexually dominant. But because it's so natural and common, they can easily find their sexual preferences fulfilled in a normal "vanilla" relationship; while people who have the opposite preference can't find it so easily, so they're more likely to gravitate towards the kinky scene where people like to play at reversing gender roles.
I recently came across this question, which got me thinking about it:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ah.h_IfCJKiz5ZXG0coROEQjzKIX;_ylv=3?qid=20080311071208AAkrUyw
What do you think?
Is male sexual dominance natural and therefore romantic?
And is female sexual dominance unnatural and "kinky"?
_________________________________
ADD/S:
icevixen: I think you're confused. Tolerance does not require us to *like* someone else's preferences. Not at all. It only means that we leave them free to follow their preferences. I freely admit to being repulsed by femdommes and submissive men. But I would never dream of interfering with their right to engage in whatever activities they both agree to.
Contrast that with radical feminists, who are always trying to pass laws against male sexual domination - in erotica, in films, etc. - they scream bloody murder if a woman is portrayed as willfully and joyfully surrendering to a dominant male. They lobby to pass sexist legislation like VAWA, which can be used as a legal weapon against dominant men who get rough with their wives or girlfriends, even when it's totally consensual. Etc, etc.
I don't give a hoot what the feminists think of me and my romantic preferences. But to echo their own dogma: they should damn well keep their feminazi la
So is there some universal truth to that idea?
It also may help explain why it is that depictions of "kinky" bdsm tend to portray dominant women (ugh) and submissive men (UGH) -- when the opposite is actually much more common. Most heterosexual women tend to be sexually submissive, while most heterosexual men tend to be sexually dominant. But because it's so natural and common, they can easily find their sexual preferences fulfilled in a normal "vanilla" relationship; while people who have the opposite preference can't find it so easily, so they're more likely to gravitate towards the kinky scene where people like to play at reversing gender roles.
I recently came across this question, which got me thinking about it:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ah.h_IfCJKiz5ZXG0coROEQjzKIX;_ylv=3?qid=20080311071208AAkrUyw
What do you think?
Is male sexual dominance natural and therefore romantic?
And is female sexual dominance unnatural and "kinky"?
_________________________________
ADD/S:
icevixen: I think you're confused. Tolerance does not require us to *like* someone else's preferences. Not at all. It only means that we leave them free to follow their preferences. I freely admit to being repulsed by femdommes and submissive men. But I would never dream of interfering with their right to engage in whatever activities they both agree to.
Contrast that with radical feminists, who are always trying to pass laws against male sexual domination - in erotica, in films, etc. - they scream bloody murder if a woman is portrayed as willfully and joyfully surrendering to a dominant male. They lobby to pass sexist legislation like VAWA, which can be used as a legal weapon against dominant men who get rough with their wives or girlfriends, even when it's totally consensual. Etc, etc.
I don't give a hoot what the feminists think of me and my romantic preferences. But to echo their own dogma: they should damn well keep their feminazi la