Feminization of Submissive Men

Feminization of submissive men is a common theme in D/s and BDSM. It is heavily portrayed in femdomme and BDSM art, pornography and erotica. One of the recurring themes is the man who has his traditional male sexuality feminized out of him. In contrast the domme/woman, whether she is overtly interested in sex or not, maintains not only an image of virile sexuality, her sexuality contains the implication of dominance that the man lacks, which is traditionally masculine.


Male feminization often has a decidedly non-sexual suggestion to it. A common image is men dressed as maids, doing housework, and portrayed as being forced into a caricature of the traditional woman's role. Even within a sexual context, since the feminized man is seen as non-sexual in a male sense, this aspect of him has been marginalized or neutered away. He is systematically reduced to a eunuch, then the cuckold, forced to sit by and watch, often dressed in exaggerated "girl" costumes, commonly portrayed with a small penis which is controlled and negated in some chaste device, while well endowed, studly, masculine men have sex with the sub's domme, ironically with her often being dominated by her commanding male lover. The two (or more) of them flaunt their sexual activities, drawing painful contrast to the sub's impotence. The focus of humiliation and ridicule by a woman, groups of women, and often men is central in these scenes and fantasies. The sub's sexual participation is often reduced to her domme and lover's post coital "cleanup." The sub is often expected to take the passive or receiving female role in a homosexual encounter with the domme's lover - her "real" man. Attendant to these images are often masculine women and cruel vixens who the sub can now only covet without consummation with the ultimate message being that the domme disregards them sexually and dismisses them as men.

Personally I have never been attracted to feminization or any of the attendant scenes or roles, however I accept that they obviously have appeal to some, perhaps many. Normally I would be happy to view it as harmless fun between consenting adults, which within the context of fantasies and sexual play, it is.

The problem is that this image is so prolific in the D/s and BDSM world that it unfairly extends to many of us who want, or are open to, a submissive role with women but are not interested in, and in some cases flat out repulsed by, these characterizations. Outwardly and inwardly we become guilty by association. In the mainstream media, the vanilla world and even among many in the D/s and BDSM world, the feminization of men is arguably the most ridiculed and loathed image we have. Those among us who seek a S-D/s relationship clearly don't want to be associated with it. It can create guilt, confusion and self loathing for even having such desires that so many, often including those who fantasize about them, see as repulsive.

In the broader sense this image of feminization is a problem in society as a whole and a continued struggle in the post feminist age. In our still patriarchal society that which is feminine is still regarded as weak; that which is masculine is still regarded as strong. As long as these attributes stay within the confines of our collective expectations there isn't a problem, or an overt problem, but once they stray, there is a huge problem. As a side note I would suggest that it is especially timely right now as we are headed for presidential elections. The fact that Hillary Clinton is a woman is among the issues that challenge her. I won't turn this overtly political since that would take our attention elsewhere, but I'll sum it up by saying that as a society we pay token lip service to women. We put them on pedestals as long as they exhibit the attributes that we consider in line with our images of femininity. These include the ideals of physical beauty, virginity and loyalty, respect, obedience, nurturance, selflessness, and a certain feminine strength that is less physical and more focused on duty to home and family. Once women divert from this image, we have problems. We still have the age old tension and conflict between the admired mother and the reviled yet desired whore. We still have a sense of the wife/woman as possession.

Two deviations threaten the model. One shatters the illusion of the female image we have created and has been knocking women off that pedestal for years, sadly at times to devastating ends. The other deviation is even more threatening in a patriarchal society:

One is when the woman takes on the attributes of men; the other is when the attributes we have placed on women are present in men.

We hate weakness outside of its feminine context. Thus the most loathsome thing in our society in this regard is feminization of the masculine, of men. It speaks to the assumed weakness of the feminine and underlying fear we have as a collective consciousness.

For example, in spite of whatever progress has been made in pop culture and society, homophobia is still a big problem. Since as a society we pay token homage to the mother, as long as she fits the construct we have created, the underlying message is that as men, we can only go so far to affiliate ourselves with women in this context. From the "mamma's boy," to "the sissy," to the "henpecked, pussy whipped, husband," we have nothing but disdain for such men. We draw a straight line to the conclusion that men who don't take on the traditional role with women - that of boss, the physically stronger, the decision maker, bread winner, leader, provider, and ultimate authority - are weak, thus feminine, thus hated and ridiculed, possibly feared underneath it all.

The flip side of this is the attachment of masculine traits to dominance in women. Within the femdomme and BDSM culture the masculine woman is the antithesis of the feminized man. Why is it that a woman has to take on the attributes of men to convey her wisdom, power, command, and dominance? I would suggest that it does us all an equal disservice. Although the image to the vanilla world of such women may be less reviled than that of feminized men, it is none the less disliked, ridiculed and often hated. When isn't their a rumor mill about any powerful woman that she is either "a bitch," or "a lesbian," or she "hates men?" In many ways it is an even worse trap for them. The options are to become this kind of woman, or they remain or reveal themselves to be weak and unable to lead when the first signs of vulnerability arise. A recent online article, the source of which I apologize for having forgotten, told of survey results that show that within the public and political world, we are more accepting of powerful men who shed the occasional tear than we are with women making similar public displays. It is now finally seen as compassion when a man shows some kind of public emotion and we can empathize with him and admire him, yet when women do it it is either seen as weak or insincere manipulation. On the one hand this is good news for men (as long as their display is minimal and rare) but a step backwards for women.

The larger point is that we still think in base literal and symbolic terms of physical strength as the ultimate guiding principle of power. Of course it is intellectualized and displayed nationalistically in our strength as a nation in times of war; it can be synthesized into a symbolic strength represented by money, power and position, but they are all extensions of our fear, at times obfuscated as admiration and ultimately our submission to one more powerful than we...and we still expect it to be a masculine image. Does the threat of violence keep everyone in line? If so, how do we break this image and cycle so that we might emerge to create a society that isn't based on response to the ever present threat of violence, but one that is based in wisdom and compassion? Whenever our decisions are made and their subsequent actions taken based on greed, self interest, unbridled desire or fear, we run the risk of failure. Just look at our country and the current state of our political world as an example of this.


Both genders appear to be hopelessly stuck. How do we separate the idea that strength and dominance is masculine and that vulnerability and submission is feminine? Or, short of that, how do we let go of the stereotypes and negative meta messages that are attached to them. How do we get to a place where women can be commanding, dominant and in charge without always being seen as "masculine" or "trying to be like men," and men can be vulnerable and open to a world where they can be submissive without being weak, "like a woman" and assumed to be latently gay?

Once we can start to overcome this in a way that has something approaching societal acceptance and approval, more men will be willing and eager to follow their often ignored instincts and desires to be vulnerable, and open up the submissiveness within their nature. Women can begin to take the reigns more in relationships without feeling like their men are pathetic, weak, deserving of ridicule, or they themselves are going to be seen as masculine or bitches and experience their own sense of humiliation because they recognize their desire and ability to flourish in their leadership which is now still outside of mainstream acceptability.

I recognize that a lot of the images I have described are based on cliches and fantasies and that there are no doubt plenty of S-D/s relationships that don't have this dynamic. I aspire to one myself. But as long as the loathsome images of submissive men as emasculated, feminized sources of extreme ridicule and humiliation exist, there will be untold numbers of men who may well keep their longings for a non feminized submission to themselves because in the end, guilt by association is powerful. No one wants to risk unwanted humiliation and loss of self esteem because we are mistakenly placed in a category to which don't completely belong.

Control Through Loss - Loss Through Control

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Dominance Versus Control

A very skilled salesman once taught me that in every encounter there are two roles - the dominator and the controller. This may seem incorrect since we see domination as control. However in the sales environment, which is much more pervasive than most of us want to believe, especially when it comes to relationship interactions, they are separate and distinct. Romantic relationships often involve selling and negotiating so that we can get what we want. Of course it often isn't as clear cut as in a conscious sales encounter. We have to learn to ask for what we want and need and we usually have to negotiate to get all or most of those needs and wants met.

An interesting side note: I have come to realize that part of what appeals to me about a S-D/s relationship is something that was recently pointed out to me. In this kind of relationship, especially in the area of intimacy and sexuality, it is the complete opposite of the vanilla world. In S-D/s it is expected and vital that there is communication, instruction and feedback. In too many vanilla relationships there is little or none of this. Couples often say little or nothing to each other regarding their love making in or out of bed. Either because of embarrassment or discomfort or the assumption that both parties are just supposed to know how to please the other, these most vital links to fulfillment are often relegated to nearly literal attempts to read in the dark. We often have to try to gauge what pleases our lover through the few scant clues - the occasional moan, sigh, pant or even more rarely, the directed hand. Having always sought to please a lover and wanting to communicate with her as part of the process, it is highly unsatisfying to be with someone who isn't comfortable expressing themselves in all ways. I understand that everyone is different and that at times talk interrupts concentration, but I suspect that that is less the reason for limited or no communication than the other possibilities I've suggested. That said, it isn't as if I need or expect love making to be a talk show either; like most things a healthy balance is the goal. It makes me self conscious to express myself without getting anything back. At times it makes me feel vulnerable and exposed and not knowing how my words and actions are being received makes me pull back from giving myself to the process, losing myself, hopefully with her, to the passion. Often times when the chance is taken and words are spoken the response becomes evident through non verbal ques but it would be so much better to drive passion through the vulnerability of communication including being told what your lover wants and what they are experiencing emotionally and physically, and feeling free to do the same. S-D/s has the potential to practically eliminate this roadblock to unbridled passion since the expectation and desire is for the dynamic of direction and response, and communication in general. Of course the other grand dynamic is the ability to lose oneself and give oneself to another role, however formal or informal that may be. In a world stuck in the understanding that control and dominance are masculine and submission, service and acquiescence are feminine, this is at least a chance to break through those gender designations even as we are given permission to enjoy and experience them with those understandings, taboo as it may be to most of the world around us.

Getting back to the dominance versus control issue, in the S-D/s relationship there is dominance but there are two kinds of control. One of those forms of control is used by both. The domme and sub have equal control of the process of designing the relationship agreement. This control is based on the understanding that the underlying basis of the relationship is mutual love, need and desire for each other and thus equal. If you want to be in this relationship with me because of who I am in addition to, including and because of my willingness and desire to submit to you, then you need me as much as I need you since I want to be with you because of who you are, including your desire to dominate and be in charge of me and us. Otherwise it isn't going to work, because no matter what the agreement between us, if one of us isn't getting our needs met, especially if they have been discussed and agreed upon, one of us is leaving or going to make the relationship unworkable until the other person ends it. People can pretend that slavery is real or that D/s implies unqualified submission with no way out, but of course that's absurd. A healthy S-D/s relationship isn't going to resort to some insane entanglement like mind control, total possession and financial submission that would make leaving difficult, or God forbid physical restraint. The S-D/s relationship is in fact probably going to thrive in part because underlying all the dynamics, no matter how ironclad the agreement, unrelated to how serious or casual the roles and interplay, both parties will know that the other is free to end it and leave. No one can reign ultimate and supreme in a consensual arrangement.

The other kind of the control is what the domme has based on their agreement. Whether limited to scenes, 24/7 or whatever is arranged, it is mutually understood that she calls the shots as long as it stays within the terms of the agreement. In this way she is dominating and controlling. The sub's control has already been established. That said, although he may have agreed to give up control, he still has power. The power to either respond or react to what is happening between them. This is more subtle and subject to the terms they've agreed upon. If for example he has agreed to do what he is told without question or resistance as long as it is within pre-agreed boundaries and he objects, he has breached the agreement. His domme obviously has the right to do as she sees fit, be it punishment or withdrawal from the situation at hand. In a highly conscious agreement they would have already had provisions for this in place as well as his rights in the event the reverse occurs and she is out of compliance. Sorry to use such pseudo-legalese or formal sounding language, but hopefully that won't obscure the reality that for a
S-D/s relationship to begin and thrive, these understandings are vital. The vanilla world would do well to consider them too, and I'm sure that some do. It doesn't require a domme or a sub to look at the kind of relationship you want and figure out how to express it in some manner that is understandable and agreeable to both. As with virtually all human interactions, communication is key.

S-D/s

I am going to use S-D/s to refer to the dynamic that I seek. The "S" stands for Sensual. I have described the kind of relationship I want in previous entries, and in the interest of clear communications, and my own need to refine and define my vision, I include it below.

Displayed it this way - S-D/s - may already be in common use and understanding, but I haven't seen it. Since I am not a sub in the conventional sense, nor looking for a conventional domme, this is a start until something better comes along. This will save me from having to write a standard, descriptive explanation/disclaimer for the term D/s when referencing the kind of relationship that I, and other like minded "subs," would like to create. Of course I am open to ideas and suggestions.

* All references in the definition below and in entries will be assumed S-D/s to mean a woman in the dominant position and a submissive man, but of course the term can apply to all gender configurations of this dynamic.

S-D/s

The S-D/s relationship is based on mutual recognition of equality and the rights, needs and desires of both parties, and exists primarily within the context of a genuine relationship.

The S-D/s relationship is entered into consensually. It is based in the intention of mutual love, admiration and respect. It is truly equal since each party needs the other to make it work, and these equal partners have come to recognize and agree upon their equal but complimentary opposite roles regarding the power dynamic between them. This implies the domme's understanding that her sub's needs, feeling and desires are as important as hers and must be considered when she makes decisions for him and the two of them. If she truly has the kind of command and leadership skills and qualities to make her worthy of a sub's trust based submission, she should have the self control, wisdom, insight, understanding and compassion to only make decisions, take actions, and make requests that are respectful of the entrustment he has given her. She may decide that getting her needs met first is her wish, but it is understood that his needs are equally important, and to the best of her ability she will do what is required to meet them. S-D/s implies a non professional, but rather relationship based arrangement. Since the sexual kinks, fetishes, desires and proclivities of humans may be considered unlimited I would never dream of suggesting what they can and cannot be, other than to say that when it comes to sex, again, whatever is mutually agreed upon and hopefully satisfying is the only rule.

Conversely, the sub in a S-D/s relationship is not seen as a non-entity to be used without consideration or acknowledgment of his individuality, unless this is his desire and choice, and it is of mutual agreement. Unless it is otherwise stated and agreed upon the dynamic will not include pain, humiliation, or degradation. The domme will not require money or tributes but of course the sub is free to offer to pay within whatever context is consensual and comfortable between the two.

I will not use the term S-D/s to refer to conventional professional or lifestyle dommes, or D/s arrangements and dynamics, but instead continue to use the accepted form D/s.

Hopefully this will be a starting point of identification. Using the form S-D/s and applying my definition to it may be useful for people considering where they fit outside the confines and constructs of convention. Too often it has been put to me as an "either or" choice. Either you are a sub in the conventional sense and you understand that role including all relinquishing of rights to have your needs met (which may be the sub's need) or you are not a submissive at all and you just want to play out some kinks within the context of an otherwise vanilla relationship. Since I don't see myself in either camp at this point it is nice to have another choice. Perhaps others will relate to it and accept it too.

BDSM Stew

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Some Things I've Learned - My M4W Post

Below is the M4W I posted on Craigslist along with this photo.

From this I received the responses described in my blog entry: My Craigslist Rant Which Lead Me To This.

I thought I should post this so all related content was disclosed and you could see to what my respondents were responding.

POSTED ON CRAIGSLIST M4W:

Some Things I've Learned

I've learned that there are a lot of different kinds of women that I can find appealing and sexy. I've learned that many times someone that might not have appealed to me initially often has, once they have revealed something of their head and heart that was beautiful. I've also found that even stunningly beautiful women can stop passion and desire dead in its tracks when they are their own favorite subject. I've learned that appeal is highly individual and subjective.

I have learned that there is no loss of masculinity in desiring to enter a world of soft feminine sanctuary. I have learned that it feels incredibly good to be vulnerable with you and surrender. I have accepted that is doesn't make me weak when I am laying next to you in bed and I pull the pillow down adjacent to your torso, and lay my head on your heart, drape my arm around your hips, feel your arm reach down and envelop my shoulders and your hand caress my head.

I've learned that according to how it is spoken or written, certain sexual acts that may seem unappealing, base, and taboo can be a transcendent connection between us when we are together in bed doing them and communicating to each other about their meaning, how they feel and how they are a way of displaying unimaginable intimacy, respect, devotion and love, drenched in unbridled, pulsating, throbbing, erotic passion and pleasure.

I've discovered that slowing down can be the most torturously delicious, passion-infused thing we can do. You have taught me that being underneath you, surrounded by you, looking up into your eyes, our bodies barely moving, our heartbeats clearly audible, our breathing deep, our porous skin, warm and moistening, is a place where I have never felt more alive or more desperately desirous of you to the point where I just can't get enough of you, can't get close enough to you, inside your entire being deep enough to convey everything you really mean to me, but it is a place I never want to leave and a longing that I never tire of trying to fulfill. I understand that there is a compact between us where I serve you as you wish for our mutual pleasure.

Yes, there has to be friendship and chemistry. Sexual/sensual chemistry is a part of it. If the potential of this kind of intimacy is appealing to you, please write. If you understand that getting it out in the open DOESN'T mean that I am just looking for a one night stand or a meaningless fling, please write. I'm a one-woman guy. It's just a matter of us finding each other.

The vitals, the worldly, the mundane: Early 50s, decent looking, in decent shape, liberal, possess integrity, educated, reasonably well traveled, emotionally available and appropriate, conscious, compassionate, passionate, creative, fun, funny, sensual, inspired by all kinds of art, people, and ideas, humbled by the everyday beauty in this cruel, crazy, beautiful world.

I'm looking for someone with similar sensibilities and character who wants an overall relationship of equals, but who would be turned on by leading sometimes and taking charge sexually and also outside of bed if you so desire. Taking charge can also mean choosing to switch and give up that control, all in a safe, positive, healthy, respectful, playful, emotionally close and deep, ultimately satisfying way.

(No, the picture is not me or anyone I know. I put it up because I found it erotic, beautiful and its intimacy spoke to me...and hopefully you.)

My Post on "Yes I'm A Submissive Man!" Blog

The content below was posted on John's blog and thus far got a couple encouraging replies from readers. This influenced my decision to start this, my own blog.

My comments reference a Craigslist rant that I posted here as my previous entry. That was the rant that John, the blog author of Yes I'm A Submissive Man, contacted me regarding. It has been the path that lead me here.

MY COMMENTS ON THE YES I'M A SUBMISSIVE MAN BLOG:

This comment is not about your latest entry specifically. I recently discovered your blog when you wrote to me regarding my rant on Craigslist about the unsatisfying results of a M4W I posted in which I mentioned that I had sensual, sexual submissive tendencies.

I have a feeling I am not a sub, but perhaps more of a top from the bottom type who is looking for a unique, confident woman interested in engaging in a sort of hybrid relationship. I seem to have a natural inclination to want to, at the very least, treat women fairly and equally. I am also open to do things for them that will be helpful and pleasing. I am sexually turned on by the idea of feminine sexual power and clearly desirous to go through certain rituals and acts which in a perfect world are within the context of a very emotionally and psychologically intimate, private interdependent connection between us that allows me to worship and serve, and in this way, get my own needs met while meeting hers. That seems to be the rub. Why is it so difficult to break through these established, and in my view limited, roles of the dominant woman and the submissive man? Or is it me and I am just barking up the wrong tree?

Too often the expectation and image is one of male subservience without regard to his feeling or needs whatsoever and too often it is involves women that seem to have an enjoyment and proclivity to cruelty and humiliation. Why is this? Why is it not possible to have a loving relationship on relative equal terms with a confident, passionate, compassionate woman with a strong personality who at times enjoys intimacy that plays out her dominance without cruelty and my submissiveness without sissification and lack of value? It could be more than just role play and greater than the stereotypes of domme/ sub relationships. But it seems that every time I try to find a woman to explore something like this with I end up in a predictable situation.

As I stated in my Craigslist rant, one respondent wrote to me with a single line of "How will I know you are worthy of Me?" Again, as I ranted, this whole thing about capitalization of all references to her and lower case of all references to me is downright silly and embarrassing to both of us...or it should be. In my reply to her absurd response I said, "You will know I am worthy of you the same way I know you are worthy of me...we will have to meet and get to know each other." To this she went ballistic and accused me of being some sort of fraud as a sub. I never stated that I was a lifestyle sub looking for a pro or lifestyle domme. It just seems laughably absurd to me to think that I (or anyone else with submissive tendencies or desires, both male or female) would just blindly respect someone sight unseen who would write such a question and somehow expect some kind of uncritical devotion. It's pathetic.

I don't have a problem meeting women. But I have accepted that based on a few fleeting experiences I have had, that I want something more along the lines of a submissve male role when it comes to intimacy. And that isn't necessarily all the time...some time, perhaps most of the time, but it involves all manner of sexual enjoyment between a man and a woman including some Tantric practices. The major problem is that unless somehow I put this all out there up front, most of the women I encounter are pretty vanilla, not overly communicative and don't seem receptive to this sort of thing. Maybe I need to find one who is teachable and figure out how to sense and tap into a vanilla woman's potential dominant side, even if it is just within the context of erotic play and intimacy.

What is possibly so wrong with a guy who respects women in general, clearly sees them as equal and wants to engage submissively with them sexually, to expect something resembling a normal, respectful, mutually enjoyable courtship? If all I wanted was to play out some fantasy unrelated to true love, respect, desire and devotion I could just pay some professional. In which case they just became my whore, being paid to play a part they know or think I desire. THAT is disrespectful to women in my view.

Perhaps all this is leading me to some kind of understanding that I am not really submissive at all and what I think is respect for women and a desire for a relationship with a strong confident playful woman is nothing more that a need to find a woman with similar sexual kinks. But somehow to me it is more than that. I really want to be connected to her. I really want to please her and her me. I want a full blown totally dimensional love with an open minded, sexually liberated woman who appreciates a man on his knees looking up into her eyes. A woman who is turned on by a guy will tenderly and devotedly adore her with his fingers, tongue, lips, body, and most of all words, heart and soul as we engage in the most intimate of acts, including the underlying meta messages of what they mean between us. A woman who knows that I know that when she takes me in her mouth, she is in total control. A woman who understands that I am not an interchangeable part and that in the delicious unbalance of power, intimacy and relationship there is mutual need, desire and dependence. I want her to want me for me as I want her for her, based on her heart, soul, personality and that all elusive thing called chemistry that flows between us like it does with no other.

I'm a masculine man. I'm not afraid of vulnerability. I am open to play and do lots of things that would please women. I don't want to be emasculated in the process. I do want to know that I can be vulnerable and let her explore that. I also would tenderly cherish any vulnerability that she cared to reveal and express. The pleasures of surrender cut both ways. She can top from the bottom too. If only I can find her.

Since you have lots of women reading this blog, perhaps some would be generous enough to offer observations and feedback. Maybe I should just start a different blog of my own to explore this and forge a whole new area of less easily classified romantic dynamic.

Anyway, thanks for your blog, thanks for letting me post this. Thanks in advance to any and all sincere and constructive comments.