RE: forced masculinity (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress



Message

cloudboy -> RE: forced masculinity (3/11/2006 9:14:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TexasMaam

I've been pondering LA's original question for quite some time today.

It begs the question: How to force masculinize a fem sub.

Une Femme Bleu, alors?

More than merely butch, a truly masculinized female.

Perhaps she shaves in the morning, dresses in DKNY duds and heads for the office after a smoke and a cup of take along java, comes home, takes out the trash, mows the lawn, whips up a meal while she throws some laundry in the machine, then commands her partner to strip tantalizingly before her in candlelight....

No, wait, that's Me........

lololol

Texas Maam


Masculinized women exist on all sorts of levels in everyday life. One thing's forsue, there really aren't any fashion constraints for women --- its all just a matter of how the clothes fit. For women, the world is already unisex, but for men, that's not the case.

I suppose for "forcing" you could force a woman to cut her nails, cut her hair, wear a mustache, tie her breasts down, stick a large sock in her panties, sit with her legs spread, speak more deeply, and program the VCR.




DelightMachine -> RE: forced masculinity (3/11/2006 10:10:07 PM)

quote:

and program the VCR.


I think I just found a new hard limit.



MistressSassy66 -> RE: forced masculinity (3/11/2006 11:18:15 PM)

Many of the male submissives I see like to dress up at least once to try it out,a few have liked it and do it all the time,I enjoy dressing the ones who like it,I put their make-up on and a wig,help with their stockings,I think its quite fun actually.

slave bishop tends to dress on the 'manly' side,she opens all My doors(she even closes the car door after I get in) and holds My coat for Me to put on.I didnt have to train her to do this she already had learned from watching her parents.Being fem is not something I encourage with bishop,I like her 'manly' ways.

I'm sure to some this seems odd,but...I like My girl to be guyish and My guys to be girlish.







sissymaidlola -> RE: forced Greek Godliness (3/12/2006 3:22:53 AM)

quote:

Achilles was selfish, very selfish, he went to war because he had to and because he wanted booty ...

Not even his own army supported his sulking and thus his friend (or lover if you believe later versions) pretended to be him and went out to fight and died. He killed Hector out of pure anger and revenge -- Priam had to literally beg for his son's body back. My all social and religious rites the way that Achilles acted with Hector's body was horrible.

Achilles was celebrated for his might in fighting, because he was the son of a goddess, and because he "lived" through a great war NOT because he was a role model of what a good Greek man should strive toward. Greek heroes live beyond and above the rules of society, that is part of what made them heroes, and as such they were not role models for any living man. In fact, he was a good example of what to be wary of thus I think his entire selfish attitude is one of the reasons that he is killed in such a pathetic way with one arrow from love-enslaved Paris/Alexander.

Oh, boy, TammyJo, the way you lay it out, that Achilles geezer sounds like a real heel! [:)]

`·.,¸¸,.·´¯"§§ _ sissy maid lola _ §§"¯`·.,¸¸,.·´

To give real service you must add something which cannot be bought or measured with money, and that is sincerity and integrity. - Douglas Adams



sissymaidlola -> RE: forced masculinity (3/12/2006 3:32:45 AM)

quote:

I suppose for "forcing" you could force a woman to cut her nails, cut her hair, wear a mustache, tie her breasts down, stick a large sock in her panties, sit with her legs spread, speak more deeply, and program the VCR.

Unless she's of Italian heritage ... then all she'll probably need to do is trim it up a little ...

But you forgot the big REALLY BIG ONE, cloudboy ... make her think logically! [sm=lol.gif]

`·.,¸¸,.·´¯"§§ _ sissy maid lola _ §§"¯`·.,¸¸,.·´

To give real service you must add something which cannot be bought or measured with money, and that is sincerity and integrity. - Douglas Adams



sissymaidlola -> RE: forced masculinity (3/12/2006 4:33:53 AM)

quote:

... it's just that we don't want them to serve us.

[sm=banana.gif][sm=banana.gif][sm=banana.gif]YESSSS Virginia, there is a Santa Claus! [sm=banana.gif][sm=banana.gif][sm=banana.gif]

`·.,¸¸,.·´¯"§§ _ sissy maid lola _ §§"¯`·.,¸¸,.·´

To give real service you must add something which cannot be bought or measured with money, and that is sincerity and integrity. - Douglas Adams



TexasMaam -> RE: forced masculinity (3/12/2006 7:57:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DelightMachine

quote:

and program the VCR.


I think I just found a new hard limit.


<busts out laffing! Hear Hear! Moi, Aussi! Texas Maam



cloudboy -> RE: forced masculinity (3/12/2006 9:36:13 AM)



quote:

Achilles


“When Achilles demands that Agamemnon return the girl to her father in order to assuage Apollo, the god who is murderously angry about the circumstances surrounding her abduction, Agamemnon refuses; he’ll agree only if Achilles gives him **his** girl in exchange. Thus reigniting Achilles. Adrenal Achilles: the most highly flammable of explosive wildmen any writer has ever enjoyed portraying; especially where his prestige and his appetite are concerned, the most hyper sensitive killing machine in the history of warfare. Celebrated Achilles: alienated and estranged by a slight to his honor. Great heroic Achilles, who, through the strength of his rage at an insult—the insult of not getting the girl – isolates himself, positions himself defiantly outside the very society whose glorious protector he is and whose need of him is enormous. A quarrel then, a brutal quarrel over a young girl and her young body and the delights of sexual rapacity: there, for better or worse, in this offense against the phallic entitlement, the phallic dignity, of a powerhouse of a warrior prince, this how the great imaginative literature of Europe beings…”

--Phillip Roth
The Human Stain




thetammyjo -> RE: forced masculinity (3/12/2006 3:15:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy



quote:

Achilles


“When Achilles demands that Agamemnon return the girl to her father in order to assuage Apollo, the god who is murderously angry about the circumstances surrounding her abduction, Agamemnon refuses; he’ll agree only if Achilles gives him **his** girl in exchange. Thus reigniting Achilles. Adrenal Achilles: the most highly flammable of explosive wildmen any writer has ever enjoyed portraying; especially where his prestige and his appetite are concerned, the most hyper sensitive killing machine in the history of warfare. Celebrated Achilles: alienated and estranged by a slight to his honor. Great heroic Achilles, who, through the strength of his rage at an insult—the insult of not getting the girl – isolates himself, positions himself defiantly outside the very society whose glorious protector he is and whose need of him is enormous. A quarrel then, a brutal quarrel over a young girl and her young body and the delights of sexual rapacity: there, for better or worse, in this offense against the phallic entitlement, the phallic dignity, of a powerhouse of a warrior prince, this how the great imaginative literature of Europe beings…”

--Phillip Roth
The Human Stain




Sorry, I rely on the ancient texts themselves to form opinions about Greek heroes, not modern or secondary sources.



collegebeauty -> RE: forced masculinity (3/12/2006 3:51:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TallDarkAndWitty

I open the door for everyone. I stand up when a woman enters the room, or when I am greeting a man.


I'd fall over dead from a very, very pleasant shock if a man ever stood up when I entered the room! Even as a sub, my female side loves having a man help me into my coat, insist on opening the door for me. My Dom does these thigs and even after months I still feel like I could swoon every time. He says that as he expects me to act like a lady when I'm with him and in public, he should treat me like a lady. It's very, very pleasant to be around a man who can treat a woman like a lady.

quote:

All of these things I learned from my father, and I imagine his dissaproval were I to stop.


Why did fathers stop teaching their sons this in the first place? I mean, when did it die? To use Taggard's words again... "Hmmm... sounds like a project." I'll have to try to research it!



cloudboy -> RE: forced masculinity (3/12/2006 6:37:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thetammyjo

Sorry, I rely on the ancient texts themselves to form opinions about Greek heroes, not modern or secondary sources.


No need to be sorry, its just a joy to read a text, somewhat on point about Achilles, written by Phillip Roth. Roth's point is actually similar to your own, that "Greatness" really isn't all that lofty, when you look at it. For Roth, Greatness and morality are often traps, they are the demons of authoritarian subjugation of the human spirit, sexuality, and free speech ---- so Roth likes Achilles for his duality --- his "greatness" and "lowness" wrapped into one. For Roth, this is quite human, which in his universe is a good thing.



SweetDommes -> RE: forced masculinity (3/12/2006 7:00:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Katmistress

I agree with an earlier statement about a pair of jeans - 5 o'clock shadow - ruffled up hair standing at the sink doing dishes or folding the laundry or whatever.
I wonder if such a man really does exist?


Sure does ... unfortunately for you, he's doing my dishes and laundry [;)]



SweetDommes -> RE: forced masculinity (3/12/2006 7:02:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: SweetDommes

In my opinion, a "male trait" is having a penis ... most males have them and mose females do not (obvious exceptions being those who are transgendered) - very clear.


Boy, you've really been researching things. Anything else to add? This is the kind of X-Ray insight that's been sorely missing from the CMMB.

*rolls eyes* if this is all you can pick out of my post to comment on, then you missed the point entirely ... or you have figured out that it's right, so you have to make fun of my (intentionally) acting like "Mrs. Obvious" because you don't want it to be right.



sissymaidlola -> RE: forced masculinity (3/12/2006 10:58:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SweetDommes

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: SweetDommes

In my opinion, a "male trait" is having a penis ... most males have them and mose females do not (obvious exceptions being those who are transgendered) - very clear.


Boy, you've really been researching things. Anything else to add? This is the kind of X-Ray insight that's been sorely missing from the CMMB.

*rolls eyes* if this is all you can pick out of my post to comment on, then you missed the point entirely ... or you have figured out that it's right, so you have to make fun of my (intentionally) acting like "Mrs. Obvious" because you don't want it to be right.

Any discerning reader can see that cloudboy did NOT miss your point at all, Karen. sissy Thought it was extremely gracious of him not to point out that you clearly do NOT have the slightest understanding of the difference between the terms "transgendered" (TG) and "transssexual" (TS). But since you have now posted such a pompous response, sissy feels that he must address it accordingly.

The ONLY genetically born males that do not have penises are post-op M2F transsexuals that have completed their gender reassignment surgery (GRS). Many that identify as M2F TS are either pre-op TS or are "in transition" and in both cases still retain their birth given male genitalia. So your statement that "obvious exceptions being those who are transgendered" WRT males that do not have penises is just dead friggin' wrong and is typical of the transphobic piffle you insist on filling our screens with day in and day out. ALL transgendered males have their birth genitalia intact. Hopefully, that is now "VERY CLEAR."

The whole damn point about being TG is that you achieve your M2F (or vice versa) transition without the need for GRS because what one has dangling, or not, between one's legs does NOT determine one's gender. That's because gender is a SOCIAL CONSTRUCT.

FYI, the direction established by Christine Jorgensen after her 1952 transition via GRS as a model for other gender dysphoric males to follow for decades afterwards, was significantly reversed in the 1980s by Virginia Prince. Amongst many other achievements, Virginia Prince is probably best known because she totally repudiated GRS in favor of her own non-surgical status as a M2F transgendered woman. Accordingly, she is also the person usually credited with introducing the terms "transgender" and "transgenderist" to the social debate and understanding of human gender, these terms being assimilated into common usage sometime during the 1980s.

May I make a suggestion to you Karen. Before you post any more of your inane piffle on the CMMB try getting out and actually meeting someone that is transvestite, transgendered or transsexual and getting to know and understand them as people. Your repeated transphobic nincompoopery on threads such as this one are one of the reasons that many TV/TG/TS have left the CMMB, and others that are lurking have no intention of joining.

`·.,¸¸,.·´¯"§§ _ sissy maid lola _ §§"¯`·.,¸¸,.·´

To give real service you must add something which cannot be bought or measured with money, and that is sincerity and integrity. - Douglas Adams



thetammyjo -> RE: forced masculinity (3/13/2006 6:14:14 AM)

I don't think anyone is taking about trans persons of any type.



SimplyV -> RE: forced masculinity (3/13/2006 11:07:29 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sissymaidlola
because what one has dangling, or not, between one's legs does NOT determine one's gender. That's because gender is a SOCIAL CONSTRUCT.


Crap.. They're going to have to do some serious revisions on the Sex Ed. books.. Maybe they have and I just was never updated. The phrasing on how to conceive probably reads: "The one with the dangly bits puts their thingy into the one without dangly bits..."

The thing is.. there is something called gender out there, and yeah it has to do with who has dangly bits and who doesn't. And yes there are ways to change your bits. Which exact terms mean which one you are at what point.. Hell if I know (and after reading your post I still don't know), and I'd hate to be ridiculed because I got the term wrong.

There are things about who has what dangly bits that are social constructions.. culturally related. Like wearing makeup, high heels, fishnet stockings, garter belts.. are generally considered feminine/female/non-dangly bit accessories.. and wearing a beard, chest hair, tool belt.. are generally considered masculine/male/dangly bit accessories. That is our society.

If you have dangly bits and you feel at home in high heels, make up and fishnets... by all means.. have at it. Be yourself and screw society. If you don't have dangly bits, and you want to grow chest hair, have a mustache, wear a toolbelt.. by all means .. have at it. Be yourself and screw society. I don't really care.

Now.. as to this thread.. I do not find dangly bits wrapped in a package of high heels and makeup attractive. It is not my thing. Nor would I find a non-dangly person in with masculine outfit attractive (though that could be I don't find non-dangly bits attractive).

This thread is my thing. Honestly, if a dangly-bitted sub wanted to be with me, he'd have to get used to the fact that I don't want him dressing up in high heels. So if he was into doing that, and liked it.. He would find himself being forced into "masculinization" in order for me to find him attractive sexually.

I like dangly bits. I like them in a certain package. It is what I find attractive.

Be who you are on the inside. Just let me be who I am on the inside.

V




SweetDommes -> RE: forced masculinity (3/13/2006 6:21:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sissymaidlola
because what one has dangling, or not, between one's legs does NOT determine one's gender. That's because gender is a SOCIAL CONSTRUCT.


Um, my point was that while not all males have penises, most do (because most people born into a genetically and/or physically male body are male in psychological gender) ... and most females do not. Thus making having a penis a male trait. I'd venture to guess that 90 to 95% of males have one, and 90 to 95% of females do not. To me, that makes having it a male trait. If say ... 40% of males or more didn't have one, or 40% of females or more did (meaning that transgenderism was far more prevalent than it is) then it would not be a "male trait."

I see no "transphobic" anything in my previous post, and other than you, I haven't seen anyone at all claim that anything I said, personally and solely as an individual, drove anyone off of these boards. I can't imagine being that important to anyone who hasn't met me.

I haven't said anything negative about transgenders or indicating fear of anyone in this thread, so I'm not sure where you came up with that. I was using them (and their relative rarity) to make a point - which you, also, apparently missed. Transgendered people are not common - this is a fact. Perhaps they are more common than I think; I'm sure they are more common than documented - but that does not make them common. This fact does not make me afraid of them, or prejudiced against them - that is your interpretation and only your interpretation of what I said ... and that does not make your interpretation correct. I don't expect you to believe me, but honestly, I don't care. I'm simply stating my case so that others can see it and judge for themselves which of us is correct about me and my beliefs.



cloudboy -> RE: forced masculinity (3/14/2006 5:45:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SweetDommes


quote:

ORIGINAL: sissymaidlola
because what one has dangling, or not, between one's legs does NOT determine one's gender. That's because gender is a SOCIAL CONSTRUCT.


Um, my point was that while not all males have penises, most do (because most people born into a genetically and/or physically male body are male in psychological gender) ... and most females do not. Thus making having a penis a male trait. I'd venture to guess that 90 to 95% of males have one, and 90 to 95% of females do not.



Lola's point was that physiology, although a sign of gender, is not determinitive of it. Hence lola's POV is that "gender is a SOCIAL CONSTRUCT."

When people read the signs or "traits" as you call them of gender as determinitive, they are fucking people who don't fit the mold. This whole threadline has been about molds and preferences. I'm personally not offended by anyone's viewpoint here, because I don't expect others to be sensitive to me or what I might want. But men with very strong TV urges or men who go a more serious transgender route (TS) have enough baggage as it is without GGs piling on about what "makes a real man."

It would be more straighforward of you to just inform this small forlorn group to crawl into a hole and die b/c no one wants them, least of all you.

So you see, its a subtle thing, not an overt thing here ---- which is smart on your part --- because "I love masculine men" leaves you the back door opening of plausible denyability that you look down on anything else. Its kind of like me going on and on about how I love and adore THIN women. If this is all I say, then its quite easy for me to deny hating fat women. Its a subtle thing.

Now, mind you, I'm not offended at all, because I'm always glad to know what others think, inclusive or dismissive of me. There's nothing better than one's own honesty, unsugar-coated. But lets not pretend to be blind to the reaction our words might cause, and please, let's not play innocent about it either.

Its a bit puzzling to me that TVs and TSs get so sensitive about rejection anyway, b/c you'd think with their whole lifetime of rejection, scorn, derision, and general lack of GG interest --- you'd think they'd be toughenup up like the Freemen wearing stillsuits out in DUNE's desert wastland. Tough, because self reliance is about all you've got.



SweetDommes -> RE: forced masculinity (3/14/2006 5:49:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

It would be more straighforward of you to just inform this small forlorn group to crawl into a hole and die b/c no one wants them, least of all you.


Ah, but NO ONE IN THIS THREAD EVER SAID THAT, except you. There are plenty of Dominants out there who do want to feminize their male submissives - this thread just isn't about that, and isn't for those Dominants. This thread is for those of us who like masculine males. And also, keep in mind that crossdressing males are not excluded from being masculine - they just aren't being at the time they are crossdressing (case in point, one of our two boys is VERY masculine, but likes to crossdress from time to time).

This is another one of those times where you have placed words into my and other people's mouths that we never said. There is a huge difference between "we don't have problems with them, we just don't want them to serve us" and "they should crawl into a hole and die because no one wants them" (paraphrased, of course). Certain submissives here have decided that I (and other Dominants on these boards) hate sissies - those submissives are wrong ... but of course, we can never convince them of that.

You and Lola have both apparently decided to pick apart something that was supposed to be an example ... a simple example of something that was being discussed. You have stated that gender is an entirely societal determination, but if you look back at creatures in nature ("wild animals") and at the history of humans, you will notice certain trends that follow lines of male and female. One of them being genitals, one of them being DNA - male DNA typically goes along with penises, female DNA typically goes along with not having a penis. While you may argue that traits and behaviors are societal creations (and admittedly, some are ... but again, this goes along with our ascertation that personality traits that both genders share are not "male traits" or "female traits") I am pretty sure that you can't deny the differences in DNA - or how about the fact that people who identify themselves as female have variations in their hypothalmus and other internal organs from those who identify themselves as male. I'd rather not do the research at this point, but if you insist, I'm pretty sure that I can find scans of X and Y chromosomes, as well as studies of the internal anatomical variations. Those are, indisputably, physiological differences ... if you'd rather that I use those instead of the ones that most non-scientific people are familiar with.



thetammyjo -> RE: forced masculinity (3/15/2006 6:48:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MistressSassy66

Many of the male submissives I see like to dress up at least once to try it out,a few have liked it and do it all the time,I enjoy dressing the ones who like it,I put their make-up on and a wig,help with their stockings,I think its quite fun actually.

slave bishop tends to dress on the 'manly' side,she opens all My doors(she even closes the car door after I get in) and holds My coat for Me to put on.I didnt have to train her to do this she already had learned from watching her parents.Being fem is not something I encourage with bishop,I like her 'manly' ways.

I'm sure to some this seems odd,but...I like My girl to be guyish and My guys to be girlish.



Sounds a bit like you prefer androgyny... do you think so?

When I have female subs then I want them to be less feminine than what I think society likes; when I have male subs I want them to be less masculine than what I think society likes. For me, I consider this to be androgyny.

I'm this way myself. On a multitude of personality tests I've taken that measure gender identity I almost always come up androgynous -- high ranks in both masculine and feminine personality traits.

So I think I like people who are similar to me on many levels they just happen to identify in the submissive or slave role in terms of BDSM.



Page: <<   < prev  13 14 [15] 16 17   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875