|
tamaka -> RE: Gender and Power - How It Affects Our Perceptions of Gender-Based Kinks (8/8/2017 11:45:35 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: gnathic
When speaking of biological sex, NOT individuals within it:
Male power = Physical strength, obtaining females, money, big penises, status. And not being feminine.
Female power = Seductive ability, aesthetics, the mate selectors. The ability to give life, nurturers.
Throughout history, numerous mechanisms have operated in order to reduce women’s propensity to indulge in their power. Women have long been shamed for expressing sexual desire and for seeking it out, and are slut-shamed for using it and recognising it. If she dresses too nice and shows off her aesthetics and assets, she is also criticised for that too. Also throughout history, women have been taken as property and forced into marriage - all of which remove her own sexual autonomy. These issues obviously still occur. In this way, male power can be gleaned from eradicating female power.
Male strengths have historically never faced such an attack. Even now, one commends males for being strong, for being sexually successful with women, or for any of these other strengths. We are far more used to seeing male strength as good, positive, and unchallenged by society. Women’s strengths however, are still admonished. I hypothesise that this remains so even within the kink world, and is the basis for the acceptance of kinks that form from gender-based power.
In my opinion, kink is all about fetishising power; either it's loss or its gain over another. Gender is one (big) way of experiencing this, and combinations include:
1. Male gain, female loss.
2. Male loss, female loss.
3. Female gain, male loss.
There are kinks for all of these ‘losses’ of power, ranging from CNC (physical strength, i.e. power of men over women), calling female subs “sluts” (diminishing women’s sexual power), sissification of male subs for humiliation (diminishing male power due to femininity), small penis humiliation, and so on. To refer again to the first paragraph, a gender can impair the power of the opposite sex to access more power themselves.
…Yet the only kink that seems to be criticised in kink world is financial domination.
It seems curious to me that the only kink which is combined with both a (Male power loss, Female power gain)– please refer back to the top paragraph) is the one which is heavily criticised.
To illustrate:
You don’t see this for CNC (male strength, female loss), sissification (male loss, female loss), small penis humiliation (male loss, female loss), verbal humiliation (“slut/whore”: male gain, female loss), etc.
It seems the only acceptable combinations are: (a) male strength, female loss, and (b) male loss, female loss.
The only other kink that is criticised based on these gender-specific powers is that of cuckolding; which is also (male loss, female gain). Even on FL you can regularly read commenters criticising men who defend women as being “cucks”.
(Please note that I am by no means suggesting that these gender-based powers are the only, nor the most important, powers each one of us possess. We are all obviously more than our gender. I am discussing merely gender-based power and our reactions to it in vanilla world and kink world, and how it may impact our prejudices against certain kinks.)
You missed the most important one:
Male masculine gain, female feminine gain.
|
|
|
|
