Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Editors' Picks
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Being a lady is generally, at least a little bit, terrifying in a very Male world. The negaative aspects of concepts like being "taken," "man-handled," and "objectified" are thrown about so much that some people's minds deal with them by turning scary patriarchal lemons into sexy, submissive lemonade. A dominant male also plays more into the hetero-normative desirability of male sexuality, so it serves as sort of a super-normative stimulus, for some.
You of course see men who are submissive, obviously, but their kinks (in general!) of shame, humiliation and insecurity, are wrapped up in fear of failing standards of cultural masculinity. Perhaps because these fears are less existentially terrifying (failing is less scary than say, rape) fewer men are prone to make those erotic leaps.
Then, on the side of the coin (or the multi-sided, non binary coin) there are people who don't fit this overriding trend and just eroticize pain or service or whatever for their unique own individual-ness. Individual differences are the ultimate scientific way of fudging for things that don't fit the theory, so of course it works *fantastically* for covering for this incredibly unscientific conjecture.
On the ball, Daniel. Though, sorry- but if this vanilla cupcake honey needs a boy with a bigger dick, she should go find one.
Sexuality always has been and always will be ok, if you just relax within your own erotic mind.
Consenting adults are consenting adults. And really,in advanced western capitalism, some loving is so necessary.
2 - well assessed by Mr Savage, but that's exactly why I think she should raise the subject directly
3 - hasn't Mr Savage (and Mr Miller too, for that matter, though in a different way) done enough already to increase the quantity of female climaxes? If they wanted to be seen in action, they'd probably be having MMFs. This request would be *really creepy* if made by a straight man to a lesbian couple. Perhaps some of the assembled company will maintain it's empowering for women to express their sexuality in this way, but there's still far too much appropriation in such a feeling of entitlement, even if framed as a compliment.
4 - after not guessing about it, for one thing
5 - recently on another site, a couple of feminists were discussing their fondness for hatereading Mr Savage. Now I almost wish I'd piped up and mentioned my theory that Mr Savage is likely among those most responsible for the widespread acceptance of the ideas that a) women can be on the *receiving* end of oral sex (which one would never have learned from, say, Tyra Banks) and b) women are entitled to reciprocity in that department. There's altruism for you, as Humpty Dumpty might have said.
6 - I can't decide whether I want to make a match for her with an MRA, a PUA or a MGTOW.
Back to 2 - His *feelers*? Oh, dear.
I don't know, but I've found that "you are so incredibly beautiful" and "i love you" can sometimes lead to "yeah, baby, that's it, show me what a naughty little fuck bunny you are."
I suggest going for a modest-sized dildo the first time around and possibly getting a glass dildo or one that didn't look too much like a real penis.
Honestly, regardless of size, I'm not sure why more men wouldn't take the lead on buying toys for his gal. Certainly it has paid me back many times.
It's the spirit of the request that matters here. And hey, did Dan take offence? I didn't read that he did..
I agree with vennominon: there is something creepy about all the straight women who keep saying things like this. If a man said it about/to a woman who is a public figure (whether lesbian or straight) it would be seen as really inappropriate and creepy. For people to expect Dan to feel complimented is like the argument that street harassment is just complimentary. And the constant objectifying Terry as some sort of prize Dan owns is really gross.
Ms Lava - I agree that asking a Generally Offensive Question of someone who is known not to take offence at that question is a lesser infraction or even no infraction at all in some circumstances. At least in this case LW was polite, which was why I gave the moderate response. Usually this request makes it much more clear that the woman asking feels entitled to sexual gratification from someone who is not attracted to her.
Certainly not! I was lying to get sex. I've no interest in wearing women's knickers.
And that is why in the heterosexual world of pay-for-play, there are very few men paying women to submit to them. Almost all of the action is men paying women to dominate them.
Outside of that, I am curious to what extent this is you taking what is probably an unsignaled generalization for an essentialist argument. In "American feminists are middle-class, white women", do you see the implied "typically" or "significantly", or do you start listing exceptions?
women and men are innately different.
their brains, their wants, their needs.
men want to take care of.
women want to feel secure. not because they are weak or helpless. but innately women want to fell safe and secure and want a man to help them feel that way.
our culture pushes the notion that women are just like men and should be breadwinners and heads of households (and maybe do a little parenting in their spare time...) and women certainly can pull it off. juggle job and housekeeping and dump the kids off at daycare and pick them up a 6pm. but at great cost. it makes them hard in ways they would not were they with a man who provided for them and allowed them to parent and nurture (the way they innately want to, at least until culture and circumstance beat them down)
men want to protect. when they do or are able to the feel like 'men'. (the masculine equivalent of "going weak in the knees". when they do not or are unable to something in them dies. the thing that makes them feel whole. a man who loses his job and can not provide for his family, it will eat his guts and literally hollow him out.
our culture pushes the notion that men can be the primary hands on nurturer parent, that it is no big deal if the wife makes most of the family income. men, if they are willing to admit it to themselves, know better.
please note that just because they are different neither is 'better', 'stronger'. they complement each other. together they fulfill each other. alone neither is whole.
no where are those complementary differences more evident (or critical) than in the "family".
read "Sexless but Equal" in Feb 9, 2014 'The New York Times Magazine'.
women married to the Liberal Ideal "Man" lose interest in him sexually. and those men lose their desire, their confidence, to love their wives.
women can become 'the men they want to marry', as gloria steinem said, and their husbands can become perfect supportive house husbands but soon she won't want to fuck him and he won't feel like he can fuck her.
http://www.mraverage.com/results.htm
For those 90% of men, most couples will be able to figure out positions that make both people happy. Some potential partners have a strong preference for a particular position which might incline them to a particular size (small dick for anal, large for cowgirl, perhaps).
But probably at least half of those 90% of men whose dick size is totally fine for most partners still obsess over it, worrying that they are too small. So that message you remember ("it's not the size of the ship, it's the motion of the ocean") is meant to provide general reassurance, not an iron-clad guarantee that any particular partner will love your dick.
It might be different for women who are significantly younger and grew up with a different cultural narrative pervading its stories, movies, etc, (though I don't know that the tropes have changed all that much) but I grew up through the late 1960s and the entire 1970s, a time when "women's lib" was making its mark on the culture and I was absorbing the idea that I could do or be anything I wanted to do or be and also a time in which all the old entertainment I was exposed to in the form of literature, movies, images, tv shows, songs, what-have-you (and a good deal of the current forms of entertainment, too) showed women either being ravished or being threatened with the possibility of ravishment.
From the time I was a little girl, I wanted to be something more than a wife and mommy when I grew up and never thought I couldn't or shouldn't or that anyone had the right to challenge that and all my favorite make believe games involved me being held captive and tied up. Later, I felt a sense of guilt that I got kind of tingly thinking of those moments in the movie right before the beautiful-maiden-in-peril-of-losing-her-viginity was saved by the non-sexualized hero. I knew who I was supposed to prefer, but damn, that "villain" was menacing and sexy. I loved the thrill of fear and titillation. Toshiro Mifune . . .
Perhaps our subbiness (for those of us who have it) is just hard-wired into our brains, as is our belief that we are fully equal to men, just as all sorts of conscious beliefs and subconscious arousal cues are hardwired into everybody and it's only our culture that says those particular two should be at odds with one another.
I think my self-definition and sense of real-life possibility was influenced by one set of ideas floating around and my erotic imagination was influenced by all those bodice-ripp-y narratives and images that constantly surrounded me. From Dudley Do Right having to rescue Nell from the train tracks she was tied to, to every pirate-type old movie or the plot of every novel in which the beautiful maiden was at risk of being ravished by the more powerful man who had her captive, to Gone With the Wind, in which Scarlett finally has good sex (and understands what married love is all about) when her husband essentially rapes her, to . . . well, you name it. I grew up with all that and it seared its way into my imagination. Sex with a least a dash--if not more--of menace, or with the idea that I'm not in control, or that I'm being dominated for someone else's pleasure or however you want to think of it, sex with some element of threat, is what gets me the hottest.
And then it's really just a question of why ask why?
Heh. There are a bunch of theories on this. This one is my favorite.
Women are attracted to socially dominant men. This is easily and commonly observed, and if you think about it for a few minutes it's not hard to figure out why. But that creates a problem: how do you know which are the socially dominant men? It sounds like it should be obvious, but it's not.
You could look for the men who are rich and powerful, but looks can be deceiving. Maybe the Ferrari is about to be repossessed. Maybe all those subordinates are just a bunch of toadies that he recruited so he could look powerful. Maybe there is money changing hands where you can't see it. Johnny Carson would appear to be top over Ed McMahon, but Ed was very well paid to play second banana.
You could look for the men who are big and strong, and can pound on everyone else. The problem here is that the further up the food chain you go, the less overt violence you see. Look at Barack Obama: *outstanding* social dominance skills. And yet--well, I don't sit in on his cabinet meetings, but I can guarantee you that he never hits his subs. You'd also like to know if a man is the kind of dom whose subs will die for him, like Obama, or the kind whose subs are trying to kill him, like Hitler.
Another problem is that it takes time for men to build their position in society. If you wait until a man has clearly achieved dominance, he may already be taken. That was Monica's problem. Hillary and Michelle did better for themselves: they somehow recognized potential before it was manifest.
So what can you do to identify a dom that doesn't rely on outward appearances, or the behavior of others? This is direct and immediate? That isn't you looking in from the outside, but allows you to find out for yourself, from the inside? Something simple. Something that you can do with your own resources.
You sub to them.
Remember, submission doesn't mean roll over and die. Submission is a specific emotional interaction between humans (some other animals do it too) and both parties have to play their parts correctly or it doesn't work. So you sub to him, and he doms you...or he doesn't. Either way, you'll know because submission is an emotional response. If he makes you feel submissive, then he's a dom (pretty much by definition). If he doesn't, then he's not.
The whole point of this is to select your mates, and the brain tends to be very simple and direct about these things. So the part of your brain that makes you feel submissive is (almost certainly) wired straight into the part of your brain that makes you want sex. Which is to say, submission makes you horny.
And the whole thing is enjoyable because that's how our brains make us do the things we need to do in order to reproduce.
Another straight woman here who loves gay porn but would not even consider watching Dan and Terry have sex (if such a video were available) because I feel like I know them in a way and thus it would be rude and creepy to "spy" on them during their private sexy time. Also, Dan already said "no," so that should be the end of it.
PS, I think Dan and Terry are both very attractive men, so I can see where this is coming from.
I don't necessarily agree with your theory. But this:
"Remember, submission doesn't mean roll over and die. Submission is a specific emotional interaction between humans (some other animals do it too) and both parties have to play their parts correctly or it doesn't work. So you sub to him, and he doms you...or he doesn't. Either way, you'll know because submission is an emotional response. If he makes you feel submissive, then he's a dom (pretty much by definition). If he doesn't, then he's not."
Thank you. This paragraph is one of the best descriptions of D/s I've read. It rings very true to me.
I'm not surprised. Rarely does a naughty little fuck bunny appreciate the seriousness of the trouble she's caused until someone holds her to account.
Interesting posts on D/s.
Of course, this may explain why certain men have thought it appropriate to smack my ass without asking. No one ever does that more than once.
This gets my vote too...it pretty much matches my experience. Not just freedom from sex-negative BS but from being gatekeepers. Sure, it's partially cultural, but it's also because the consequences for women are potentially greater in every encounter. Much easer to relax and let loose when you are no longer in control.
http://www.edukink.org/articles/visiting…
But men are willing to pay for two escorts in order to get their MFF fantasies fulfilled, so I still think the reason there are many more pro-dommes than pro-subs is because that's what the customers want.
And note, I'm not proposing that it's easy to find an amateur sub; I'm proposing that most men also prefer to sub, and take up the dominant role as a way to seduce women.
"It's natural" is a meaningless statement, but for me as my body has developed a more masculine look from working out I have felt more drive to dominate in the bedroom. Could just be confidence, could be placebo, all I know is it works for us.
As for kinksters being nice, I don't think I ever was as confident, happy and pleasant as I am after a good session. I can image others would pick up on that in other areas of life. Hard to be angry when you just got everything you wanted.
I would say most people would be switches in a vacuum-- but our society poses male dominance and female submission as correct, and most people enjoy as much without introspection.
pS: submissive men bring out my mean streak ;)
Is body hair relevant? Men with lots of nice sexy body hair, I can imagine a woman ( ie me), feeling more submissive with these visual clues and bulk.
I guess that that would explain why guys willingly fork over $200ish/hr to be dominated, but what exactly are the stats? With only one exception in my life, every guy who ever approached me about it wanted to be topped (though, again, I understand if the demographics are skewed that there would be a demand for that, but at the same time if the stats are that skewed it seems like there would also be an assumption that I'm a sub that would be reflected in the inquiries, too). Maybe it's just the vibe I put off that I'm nobody's bottom. Anyway, I'm pretty sure that there are some hard numbers out there, somewhere. Anyone?
Likely for the same reason that women prefer men who are superior to them in height, intelligence, strength, wealth, and status.
I went through the WHOLE registration process just to say that this is THE FUNNIEST sentence I've read in at least a week, possibly all month.
I would not personally have taken Penelope Pitstop as a role model from the show you saw, but fortunately I only saw her on the Wacky Races. Unfortunately, our admiration for her is shared by none other than Mr Limbaugh.
*****
Ms Lava - Would you kindly go check your privilege? (You are also playing right into the hands of the anti-feminists who have spun together a few bits of straw and created a Feminist Presumption of Perpetual Male Consent.) I have been on the receiving end of relentless pressure to provide women with with sexual satisfaction. However polite this LW's request was, it carried the clear implication that the highest purpose of male sexuality is to please women *whether or not Mr Savage took offence*.
Suppose Ms Cute and Ms Driasis (who has not been around much lately, but who is at least a professed non-feminist) were walking down the street and Ms Cute observed Ms Driasis' being catcalled outrageously by a male construction worker. Would you hold that Ms Driasis' taking the catcall as a compliment would completely invalidate Ms Cute's later telling a friend that she heard the most objectifying and disgustingly misogynistic comment? I'd hold that it might mitigate, but mitigation implies guilt (and hence was never a favourite pastime of Rumpole's).
Status? Wtf is that?
Mr Venn. I disagree. If Dan took no offense, then I take no offense. The request wasn't made to me or you.
Yeah right, I really assume " perpetual male consent". What a ridiculous statement. Lighten up, old chum.
The request, by sweet little vanilla cupcake honey, though in poor taste,
Really doesn't warrant you taking that heavy Feminist Bible down off the high shelf( a Bible, that you yourself wrote), and quoting crap.
@ nocutename - Your "street harassment" analogy is dead on.
So I'll pose a qu to you Venn. If , as nocute told us last week, she liked having pegs all over her, her breasts , her clit.. So that she had bruises days later and if I said wow, that sounds like she is really being physically abused. How would you respond?
If D felt it was a compliment, men calling her names even saying abusive things.. Who am I to be offended for her?
Are we talking specifically about kinksters or the general population?
In my experience with the general population, most women are either:
1) Ok with light explorations into either the dom or sub role
2) Ambivalent about d/s
3) Entirely averse to d/s
For them, sex is more of a cooperative thing, like dancing or a team sport. I suspect the same is true of most men.
Straight feminist BDSM switch here - when younger liked to sub, now prefer domming.
Maybe that's true at the extreme varsity level of d/s kink, but otherwise there are plenty of pros who advertise submissive role play on their menus, they just don't pigeonhole themselves the way pro doms do.
As for danger, with the evolution of online communities, the profession has developed rigorous screening and referral methods that would keep them safer than, say, your average real estate agent or taxi driver who have to open their doors to random people.
As far as video of Dan and Terry ... it's okay to be honest, people: This is about the hottest gay male couple in history; Terry and his exquisite backside (and frontside - click on that first pic Dan links to - hell, click on 'em all) is constantly half naked on Instagram (praise be to Jesus); and Dan's entire 20+ year career has been about sex. There's nothing 'creepy' (isn't that being 'sex negative'?) about wondering what two-decades-plus worth of that level of accumulated knowledge would look like.
Also, who the hell says the joy and titillation in that would only be for straight girls? Apparently there is a (I'm guessing small) contingent of lesbians who enjoy gayboy porn, and how many guys - gay and otherwise (the latter out of sheer curiosity) - would tune in to that all day long?
Yes, it will never happen, but it's okay to admit you wouldn't look away.
LavaGirl, redirect your anger from vennominon to me, please. I was the one who made the analogy to street harassment @21.
Mr.Ven: I hate to think I have something in common with Rush Limbaugh, but then again Penelope Pitstop was something I watched as like a 7-year-old, so I'm going to let myself off that particular hook.
As far as the "lighten up, everybody, Dan's not making a big deal out of it," angle goes, asking to see two people have sex as if they and their sex life existed for others' pleasure, and continuing to ask even after they say they're not interested and it isn't going to happen is, at the very least, creepy, presumptuous, and rude, and smacks of entitlement and privilege. That Dan chooses to deflect through humor and by tossing a bone(r) in the form of some PG-13 pictures just makes him a bigger man. But it doesn't mean the requests were appropriate or okay, even if we would watch.
When the party tells you he isn't interested in a celebrity sex tape, angling for one is.
The idea of some lovely photos that have both of them in it, the way Terry poses, would be aesthetically pleasing. I say that as an artist & not a lust-bucket though. ;) Terry's photographs are gorgeous & every time I see them, I have one single thought.."I should join a gym."
Dan doesn't seem too offended & he's heard this request before..likely not just from straight women, either. Honest question to Mr. Venn (& others) would the same question be as presumptuous if it came from a gay man, or a couple of gay men?
Now..have I *politely* leered at a couple I know, when there seems to be a flirty vibe present? Oh yeah. Glad I did, too. But there's a time & place, etc, etc. In general a courteous "you two are a pretty pair" is a compliment with no strings. That's all good.
Here the woman(en? I read the first half of the thread yesterday) reiterating have a not unreasonable cultural expectation that their request will be seen as 'cute' and 'harmless'. I don't even know whether I'd put it down as 'privilege' exactly (it isn't exactly 'straight privilege', straight dudes wouldn't get that pass). It's snarled up both with dismissal of female sexuality as fake, performative, insignificant, weak; and with women not being considered 'scary' or threatening.
Whether it's privilege or not, it's bullshit. It's not cute to nag Dan this way. He's pretty good at protecting his boundaries and Terry's, even if they've moved a bit over time. It's not 'cute' to push against them.
Those persons assuming that a sex columnist would not want privacy for his own personal activities, come off it. Doesn't make him an exhibitionist. And being able to try and enable healthy sexual relationships/attitudes doesn't make him some sort of all-powerful sex god (let alone that GREAT sex most often doesn't give much for the cameras.) Just respect the guy's privacy. As others have stared before, some "compliments" are assumptive of a person and not as positive to receive as the givers may think they are. "Lighen up!" is a handwaving away of criticism, but not addressing it in the slightest.
If it's true, it suggests that the tendency to dominance or submission has a large cultural component; I like Erica's suggestions, personally.
The former I could imagine, the latter would be interesting to break down.
@81: "Dan's a treasure, not a curiosity."
Totally agree.
So anyway, yes, I think women being more submissive has a lot to do with general socialization and specifically depictions of romance in the media that haven't changed that much over time. As it is, I don't really obsess over it, I'm quite happy with my kinks, but I think @38 definitely has the right of it.
You offer a powerful insight:
"....which is that I consumed a lot of media that, for whatever reason, had imprinted me with this idea that...blah...blah...blah"
Culture and Media play a huge role in shaping sexual proclivities.
Danny pretends than pornography is harmless, even beneficial.
In the internet age kids (boys AND girls) are saturated with pornography from an early age. This heavy indoctrination in woman-degrading media distorts and corrupts the values of males and females in this society. Liberals protect, foster and mainstream pornography and then feign outrage when college campuses are havens for sexual brutality against women. (the UVa case in Rolling Stone demonstrates how women themselves accept and protect this society's rape culture)
Likewise, relentless cultural propaganda pushing homosexuality influences the number of kids who experiment with and identify as homosexual; younger demographic cohorts identify as homosexual at 3-4X the rate of older people. Which, of course, is the point.
In its heyday American Culture promoted abstinence, monogamy, Traditional Heterosexual Marriage and responsible parenting.
Current Humanist HomoLiberal Culture pushes pre- and extra-marital sex, out-of-wed childbirth and single parenting. With great success.
Those values ALWAYS increase poverty among those who engage in them. Traditional Heterosexual Marriage is the greatest correlator to staying out of poverty.
Libereals feign concern about Income Inequality but relentlessly push lifestyles and behaviors that GUARANTEE it.
no one is fooled.
@88: Your attitudes are more vile and harmful than most any porn. Fucking > hate.
we are profoundly sorry that The Truth makes you so hostile. It's bad for your digestion.
You're just another sad and unloved little Westboro hatemonger.
what in @88 is not factual?
and name calling? really? we're rubber, you're glue...
May you one day do something worthwhile and good with your life.
Obviously, I didn't think it through too much, and I am sincerely sorry if I offended Dan or anyone else! That was not my intent. I do think this situation is different than the example of the woman being harassed on the street video though. I am a young attractive woman who gets street-harassed all the time, and I think the point of that video was to alert men to how annoying and scary it is to walk down the street as a woman.
Dan is a public figure, but I don't think asking him about porn is the same as asking someone like Hillary Clinton... I mean, he writes a sex column, he runs a porn festival, and he is always asking readers for sexy pictures. It did not seem like a totally inappropriate thing to do, but nonetheless, all of your comments really did make me think, and I feel like of like a jerk for writing that.
I wasn't the least bit offended by Vanilla Cupcake's request for D&T porn. Terry wasn't offended either. It made Terry's day, in fact.
You are not a jerk, VC!
How's this week's Youth Pastor Watch coming?
Surely somewhere in West Virginia there is some creepy old volunteer fucking a 15 yr old boy?
The Fanboys are waiting……...
& @95, I'm doubly happy you wrote back. There is seldom a clean-cut "happy ending" resolution to debates like the one your letter caused. The only thing I'm cranky about now is, since this letter posted I've been jonesing for cupcakes.
;)
@99, I love clean-cut happy endings!
@3, Vanilla cupcake sex (or "making love") is actually pretty common... I like being tied up and called a slut as much as the next girl, but I also like to feel special and loved. Believe it or not, there are some people who get off on those feelings of love and tenderness. If the key to a good sex life is to be GGG, then I don't think it is too much to ask for, as part of the mix.
@51, @52, Thanks for this. In my reading (on the internet and wherever) it seems like women are more likely to be subs in hetero sex. But I think it might be possible that that a lot of men might have this preference too, but suppress it in order to please women.
I just want to have a deeper understanding of the whole dominance and submission question. I know that it is arousing, but I really want to know why. Is it a cultural thing? In my feminist mind, I think that an equal partnership of two switches seems like the ideal, but that is not what actually turns me on.