October 11, 2007...10:23 am
Why 95% of Dominant Women Agree With Everything I Say
Let’s play with statistics. It’s always fun and brings only truth.
Here’s a figure. The ratio of dominant women to submissive men is 1:20.
Is that figure true? I have no idea. Say it is. And if it is, it is a reflection of the numbers of submissive men and dominant women making themselves visible in kink places on and offline.
It is not a representation of real numbers.
I started this blog with a few “ideas” and one of them was this: In terms of sexuality, sexual response, how people really feel deep down inside, the numbers are equal. It’s 1:1. And the reason I believe this because, well, why the fuck not? Can you give me any reason why the numbers wouldn’t be equal?
And I can think of a million reasons why they might really be equal and it might look like they’re not.
(Yes, okay, look, for the purposes of todays “experiment” everyone is a heterosexual and there are no switches. Just for now. Just because otherwise it gets too noisy. I get bitten by this. I wish people would just let me talk about this stuff as if this were the case. It makes a lot of sense to do it that way. Because, you know, the next time you are at a kinky event or website which is decorated entirely with pics of tied up women it really isn’t so the gay and bisexual women have a good time.
This was the first ever good kicking I ever got. The first ever time on a kinky website I complained that all the pictures in the menus and icons were of women and I got told off for being a homophobe.
So let’s keep it simple. Can everyone speak slowly and use short words too – I’m feeling fragile/delicate/neurotic today as per.)
Since I started this blog I have received emails, real actual emails from other people not written and sent to myself to make myself feel special – that say stuff like, oh, I read your blog and now I get what my sexuality is – I always thought a man in his knees was super fucking hot but I didn’t get what was up with me and I never thought I was a dominant woman because I’m not entirely encased in PVC/the owner of a pussy that requires “worship”/into men dressed as women/an insane self-important money-and-consumer-items-obsessed greedy selfish self important self-aggrandising fucking asshat.
Working out this stuff is hard. I have no qualifications for this stupid job. I’ve not read much about gender politics or sexuality. Sometimes I feel like my brain is bleeding with all the conflicting messages about strap-on cocks being one of the the main signifier of female sexual dominance, frilly undies being a signifier of male submission and the fact that maybe complaining about this thing is all down to me being so steeped in trad binary gender roles and heteronormativity and a love of PIV sex and orgasms.
I don’t know.
This stuff is hard.
PIV sex is really fucking great though. And cock and cock sucking and having my body touched by other humans that I like. When Fem!Doms! say ‘male creatures may not touch me – none of them are worthy‘ I can only think they have some kind of phobia or disease. Touch goes two ways, asshat.
But, yeah, Anything gender is hard. Trying to unravel gender stuff is like capturing a woo-woo bird.
I wish I didn’t have to. Damn, I can see the seductiveness of saying, look, it’s all just fun. You have your fun Bitchy, I’ll have mine. Just calm down. Other people’s kinks are none of your business.
My life, truly, would be so much more interesting and enjoyable if I could do that.
If I could say everything is fine. Whee kinky sex. Whatever turns you on is fine. So long as it’s SSC, RACK, YKINMKBYKIO, legal and the right way up. Whatever. All our problems and prejudice were something that happened in the past and isn’t it whizzy that everything’s shiny now?
But I keep coming back to the stats.
If there are twenty submissive men for every dominant woman – where are the other 19 women?
19 out of every twenty dominant women aren’t happy or comfortable with femdom as an identity or a place to live. That’s a lot.
That’s 95%.
95% of dominant women aren’t comfortable in femdom. Are being shut out of there own sexual culture.
Maybe there’s more to this than individual acts between individuals?
And I can’t pretend it’s all okay. Something is very wrong here. I’m sorry if your kink got in my way but, really, what would you do it you were me?
And that’s why I have this sledgehammer.
68 Comments
October 11, 2007 at 10:40 am
My (intellectual, non-sexual) crush on you increases by the day: what you are doing on this blog, and the issues you explore, are fucking important.
*gushes*
(metaphorically)
October 11, 2007 at 1:43 pm
19 out of every twenty dominant women aren’t happy or comfortable with femdom as an identity or a place to live. That’s a lot.
And that’s fine - some women enjoy feeling submissive, despite the Gyno-Supremecists who insist that all women should be dommish because of their inherent superiorityness. Some of them will be switchy. Some will want to be dommish only at night, or only in bed, or will only want to top from the bottom - as it were - because that’s what they like.
I know I’m screwing with your numbers, Beej, but that’s because some years ago I stopped thinking about the numbers. I had to, because I needed to stop thinking about where my own fetishes came from, what caused them, and what to do about them. I no longer really believe in the numbers anymore; they were fine when I needed to justify some behavior or feelings or desires, but now I’m more accepting of myself. Not totally, but moreso than I used to be.
Stop worrying about the numbers. People will find partners; hopefully people will become more accepting of their own kinks and fetishes and then be able to be more accepting of the kinks and fetishes in others.
October 11, 2007 at 2:08 pm
I like your blog, and your ranty style is fantastic. I’ve got to say, though, your attempt in this post to remove dominant femininity from the PVC box succeeds in that, but it puts it in a cotton-blend box instead. That is, it substitutes a new archetype, which is no less confining than the old. Because I laugh at people who call themselves Princess Goddess Pussycat, *and* I’m not crazy about receiving sexual stimulation (PIV or otherwise) and I like some stereotypically femdom things, like strap-on blowjobs and foot attention. Touch doesn’t have to go two ways, and it seems as unwelcoming to dominantly inclined women to say that two-way touch needs to happen as to say that two-way touch must not happen.
(Oh, and I’m bi, but that’s not too relevant to this.)
October 11, 2007 at 2:48 pm
Jones, I love your rants. Considering you are a dominant woman, I am surprised you give a fuck what anyone thinks anyway, but I do appreciate the way you allow almost all comments even if you do not agree with them. I find it bizarre when people invite comments but refuse to post them because they disagree with the response to their entries.
It is cool that you are trying to help all the women recognize their dominant side without resorting to the tired cliches that most web-porn tells us is fem-dom, (I must admit that prior to reading your blog my only experience of this subject was the type of website you deride, a late night drinking session with a dyke who was a pro-dom despite not really being dominant at all and a club in Bangkok which was, predictably set up by vanilla men to rook money from overpaid ex-pats and tourists).
Two questions though, the stats you quote is that of the population in general, if so it seems quite reasonable that only a few women out of the female population as a whole are dominant and there is a higher proportion of men who view themselves as submissive or is that number just from the people who identify themselves as alternative lifestyle?
Also, what the fuck is a woo-woo bird?
October 11, 2007 at 4:13 pm
I’m not quite sure what you’re saying, Tom. I know some women are submissive. I’m not saying 19 out of 20 are dominant. I’m saying that the disaprity in the numbers could mean 19 out of ev every 20 dominant women have rejected this culture.
Not really surprising.
And I like numbers. They don’t talk back - unlike hot male slaves
October 11, 2007 at 4:16 pm
Sorry Toni, I was being lazy and not looking it up. I meant, of course, the Oozalum bird.
October 11, 2007 at 4:35 pm
Bitchy, you’re cool. And this:
I’ve read your blog for quite a while, and I’ve read the blogs of equally cool people who do like strap-ons, or licking boots, or dressing up, or hot androgynous guys. I think sensible members of these categories can enjoy you despite how you rail against their kinks.
I don’t think the most harmful thing in femdom - the thing that drives away the most women - is that it’s portrayed as being all about certain kinks that more men than women seem to have. I think the most harmful thing is the idea that, to be a dominant woman, you have to actually be this thing that works in fantasy - this strong, tough object with superpowers and no chinks in your shiny shiny armor. If every woman who fantasizes about putting a man on his knees knew that it’s about being a regular person who just tries to get what she wants from a willing partner - and if the men knew this too - I think there would be a lot more participation.
But maybe I just think that because I’m more scared of trying to be tough and self-confident than I am of other people’s shiny shiny boots.
October 11, 2007 at 11:04 pm
There is a hole in our culture somewhere between what men secretly want from Nigella Lawson and what they would actually get from Bitchy. Personally I’ve been trying to stretch Helen Mirren across that gap but realistically what this situation needs - and you can talk statistics until you are blue in the face - is some kind of novel.
It needs to have some iconic everywoman character doing stuff that makes it into the film version. The film needs a song and a saucy video, maybe merchandise some pirate costumes and before you know it: Bitchyland, where you are never more than ten feet away from a toilet…
October 11, 2007 at 11:59 pm
Go on. Tell us what YKINMKBYKIO stands for. We know you want to.
October 12, 2007 at 1:10 am
I think you have hit the nail on the head.The arguement that there are 20 sub males to every dom female is spurious.Perhaps the reason is that men have had the power and the privelage to either follow convention in a patriarchal society and be all dominant and masculine or to chose to buck the trend and be what the culture says is wrong i.e submissive.It is harder for women to do this and show their dominant nature but easier for them to fulfill stereo types and be submissive.The number of strong self possessed women who say they are submissive and who top from the bottom seems to be growing.
October 12, 2007 at 1:34 am
Where did that number actually come from? I want to meet the personwho made that up.
Re: what Devestating said - you and I like lots of things differently, but we’re sensible enough to enjoy each other despite any railing that may occur.
Actually, although I agree that it’s bloody hard for dominant women inside femdom, I would argue that in vanilla culture it’s much easier to be a dominant woman than it is to be a submissive man. At least as a dominant women around vanilla or kink-friendly people I get respect - my sexuality is sexy. May just gets weird looks - his sexuality is alien.
October 12, 2007 at 4:24 am
t Thene: Your kink is not my kink but your kink is ok.
t Eileen: I think maybe gloria brame made it up? I seem to recall some early pro-dom writing a book about being dommy and it opening with that stat. I could be wrong.
t Bitchy: When I read that paragraph about 19/20 dominant women being uncomfortable with their sexuality, I got an image of Susan Sorandon pleading with the viewers to sponsor a dominant woman for only the price of a cup of coffee per day. Which made me giggle. Sad looking doms in the back ground constantly doing things that might accidentally result in bondage, like buying them chinese finger traps, or mittens that are tough to get off with the string keeping them together.
Great stuff. The more dominant women you bring out of the woodworks, the more there are for me, so I really appreciate how hard you’re working to get me laid.
October 12, 2007 at 8:19 am
I like to see submissive men happy. Really. Even you.
October 12, 2007 at 8:21 am
I’ve seen the 1 in 20 figure and a 1 in 10 figure. Of course they’re not true. How could they be. It would vary from place to place. But the point is if there is a disparity there are women missing. And that’s how we know there’s a problem
October 12, 2007 at 8:26 am
I would argue that in vanilla culture it’s much easier to be a dominant woman than it is to be a submissive man. At least as a dominant women around vanilla or kink-friendly people I get respect - my sexuality is sexy. May just gets weird looks - his sexuality is alien.
Yes. I completely agree. In the wider world dominant women mostly get to be sexy and exotic. Submissive men are subject to the most appaulling stereotyping. I think this si like the difference between the view of lesbians and gay men. (Or maybe lesbians and gay men twenty years ago - depending where you live.)
Lesbians are sexay and fun right up to the point where they are evil man haters (sound familair?).
Submissive men transgress boundaries of okay masculinity. That’s way more scary. Everyone knows how powerful male desire is. male desire gone wrong is one of the biggest bogeymen.
October 12, 2007 at 11:19 am
I agree with everything you say. Well, almost everything anyway.
October 12, 2007 at 11:57 am
Actually, I reckon that dodgy stat makes sense in the vanilla world. Beautiful girls get what they want because in most of the traditional places we go to meet each other there are probably around 20 guys who are falling over themselves to meet 1 girl. Although it is easy to blow this ratio if you are the type of guy that women actively pursue, (which I am or at least used to be), or by placing yourself in an environment where aspirational women go to find suitable men, (which requires wealth or status). A lot of feminists will feel compelled to argue that this situati0n no longer exists but really they are just fooling themselves.
October 12, 2007 at 3:14 pm
Toni:”Beautiful girls get what they want…”
Ooh, like pay equity? That’s all it takes? Neat!
October 12, 2007 at 3:46 pm
LAS, some rewards are just for the pretty girls.
I remember years ago, maybe 91, going to a meeting on the short-term debt trading desk of a major Swiss Bank in London. They had just hired this very beautiful woman and my boss asked the head of the desk, “what does she do”? the guy just shrugged and replied, “she keeps up team morale” - I guess she would have been on about £60-100,000 plus bonus. Not too shabby back in those days.
October 12, 2007 at 6:51 pm
Jones your blog is so quiet! I guess I am the only one who has to sit around computer screens on a Friday night, (well at least until the NYSE closes). Perhaps my vanilla condemnation has frightened off all your adoring fans, I do hope not, after all what is the point in being contrarian if there is nobody to argue with?
October 13, 2007 at 12:27 am
Great, great stuff, even for people who like strap-ons and frilly underpants.
October 13, 2007 at 2:29 am
Toni, I don’t agree with that at all.
October 13, 2007 at 7:23 am
Hello Beej,
Perhaps I’m the one out of ten or twenty who is the exception to your rule. I don’t agree with everything you say, or even most of it. Maybe half, if that. I feel quite comfortable in my dominance, and think that all that face-cracky makeup and stiletto thigh boot thing is just some other weirdness that’s nothing to do with me.
And no, I’m not a pro dom.
I agree that 19 out of twenty dominant women probably feel discomfort with their dominance. Actually, I think it’s more than likely that 99 out of 100 dominant women feel discomfort with their dominance. And the reason I think that, is because 99 out of 100 people seem to feel discomfort with their own identities, their own bodies, their own self image, which would undoubtedly, logically, and invariably extend to their feelings about their own dominance.
You may find that 95% of submissive men don’t feel comfortable with their submissiveness. That statistic is probably a lot higher, actually. But the reasons are most likely the same, discomfort with their own identity, body, self image.
Hell, I’m sure that more than 95% of women feel discomfort with themselves most of the time, and this is reinforced by the media culture which keeps saying things like use more of this makeup, lose this many more pounds, wear this new style, and all your problems will magically go away. Those face-cracky thigh-booty images have their equivalent in vanilla too, they’re called fashion models.
I agree that at least 95% of women are likely to feel discomfort with their dominance. But I disagree it’s for the reason you say, and I disagree that all those women agree with you.
Best regards,
Lubyanka.
ps: I actually don’t care that I don’t agree with you, I’m going to keep reading your blog anyhow, cos I enjoy it.
I don’t need to agree with it to enjoy it, so there. 
October 13, 2007 at 4:43 pm
And the reason I think that, is because 99 out of 100 people seem to feel discomfort with their own identities, their own bodies, their own self image, [...]
You may find that 95% of submissive men don’t feel comfortable with their submissiveness. That statistic is probably a lot higher, actually. But the reasons are most likely the same, discomfort with their own identity, body, self image.
Wow! I have to admit that this really sums up something that I’ve been thinking about for a long time now. I can’t speak to the actual ratio of dom to sub partners, but I have heard that it’s always unbalanced in the way that you’d prefer it not to be. IOW, it’s a lot like vanilla mate finding - there’s never enough men/women when you’re single and looking.
October 13, 2007 at 7:20 pm
Yes, I get wha tyou both are saying. Broadly some people are unhappy with who they are (maybe not 95% of people) and it can be hard to find a suitable partner sometimes (although I am highly smug about my current situation - oh bloody hell yes), but this isn’t what this post is about.
This post is about a specific problem with women a femdom. A problem that is widely noted. If you look around in kink there’s this thing… the domiant women are *missing*. There is this clear gap where they should be. Sometimes there are a few prodoms in that gap - clear them away and it becomes way more obvious.
No more excuses about the demographic issues. No more explainations. Women are missing.
We can make everything better. It’s worth doing this. Things are chainging slowly. They are changing everyday.
(Also, I have had way too much sex today and my brain is soaked with endorphins)
October 13, 2007 at 9:18 pm
Uh, any chance we can agree a definition of “dominant woman.” Dom in bed, dom in head, dom in all, dom [sometimes] as in fall, dom with one, dom with all? And without being totally dismissive, could we take a parallel stab at submissive?
October 14, 2007 at 12:07 am
Ugh. The labels that we apply to ourselves and to others aren’t already bad enough? You think that the problem can be fixed by more labeling?
October 14, 2007 at 4:22 am
“Yes, I get wha tyou both are saying. Broadly some people are unhappy with who they are (maybe not 95% of people) and it can be hard to find a suitable partner sometimes (although I am highly smug about my current situation - oh bloody hell yes), but this isn’t what this post is about.
This post is about a specific problem with women a femdom. A problem that is widely noted. If you look around in kink there’s this thing… the domiant women are *missing*.”
No, I am not at all saying here that it can be hard to find a partner sometimes, although it can. That wasn’t what I was saying, any more than you were.
I dispute that dominant women are “missing”. Just because they don’t identify themselves for the Bitchy Jones Dominant Woman Census, and just because they are not represented in mandom porn or elsewhere, does not mean they’re not there. I am not saying here that it’s hard to find a partner (although it is). I don’t know how you got that from my comment. What I was saying was that discomfort with the self may very well lead to people not identifying with their sexuality (be it dominance or submission or whatever), and therefore not declaring it for anybody (possibly including themselves) to notice.
I don’t think this is a problem limited to dominant women. I think this is a symptom of a problem which exists in the bulk of people in the global population as a whole. Furthermore, I don’t think this is new information. I think that people have been struggling with their sexuality and sensuality for longer than anybody knows about.
And another thing, if dominant women are indeed “missing”, perhaps it’s because they aren’t dominant, and therefore don’t identify as such? I mean, why bother trying to make women be dominant who aren’t? I don’t like this idea of “missing”. How can you say there are missing people when they were not categorically identified in the first place?
If you want to identify problems with people failing to identify with, and live according to their appropriate sexuality, then I don’t think you need look far to find them. I think these same problems are everywhere, in vanilla, in homosexuality, in heterosexuality, in bisexuality, in polyamoury, in kink, everywhere.
This is not news to me.
And I don’t think this is something which can be “fixed” by approaching the problem after the fact. I think this needs to be addressed early on, before it’s even a problem.
Nobody is born struggling with their sexuality. I think this struggle is created by lessons too well learnt about shame and guilt and the unacceptability of certain body parts, and the reinforcement of those lessons by people who fail to respect each other.
Sort all that out before it starts, and I think the problem will fail to develop.
I think there is no “fixing” a global problem like this, not by one person, not by many. I believe this is a “prevention” problem, not a “cure” problem.
Lubyanka.
ps: I’m delighted you’re getting so much sex, Beej.
October 14, 2007 at 5:59 am
I understand L, you’re talking about people who are uncomfortable with sex and sexuality in general. This is a thing - just not the thing I am talking about here. This is a different extra specific thing.
October 14, 2007 at 6:03 am
>>95% of dominant women aren’t comfortable in femdom. Are being shut out of there own sexual culture.
>>Maybe there’s more to this than individual acts between individuals?
Well, yes.
I’m not at all sure about the statistics. Maybe if we excluded the sizeable number of men, particularly online, who claim to be submissive as a brief experiment, or make an inroad into this culture of aggressively sexy, fetishly clad women; and the pro-dommes, the numbers might come closer to parity. Although I have my doubts.
Because although I’ve been turned on by male submission since my teens, most of my life has been spent with vanilla partners - because most of them were far more well-adjusted, respectful, and generally high-quality than the (4 or 5) submissive men I met. The impression I got, that I would have to reform my casual dress, playfulness, and actual sexual desires to be worthy of a submissive man’s attention, frankly put me off completely for several years. As you’ve mentioned in a previous post, femdom often seems more demeaning and depressing than the rest of the patriarchal dating world, and that’s saying something.
Like you still have to be a perfect sex object, but with more responsibility for everything. And of course dom women weren’t raised in the same world as all the other girls where hesitation, insecurity and deference to others’ wishes are gender-appropriate characteristics - oh, no. So of course we must be domineering figures to all casual observers, as well, or we’re not “really” dominant. Right.
Now as it happens, three years ago I discovered, happily, after months of dating someone, that he had a submissive side, and had a mostly delightful time exploring this. But this was based on the solid ground of an existing relationship where we knew each others’ personalities and hadn’t gotten together looking for fantasy-objects as partners.
I agree with you that women are probably missing, because I was. And I wouldn’t have been if I had come across any male submissives who viewed me primarily as a human like themselves, and only secondarily as an icon of kink.
October 14, 2007 at 6:12 am
I think you might be right in saying a lot of male submissives are just men with strange fetishes. But a lot of them really aren’t. A lot of them are just great really fucking sexy guys who have been as confused by this culture as us but are still out there. It doesn’t drive them away in the same way, just screws them up.
Also if you remove the bizarre fetishist not-submissive men, you will probably still get the numbers back in by adding in the men like your guy (and mine) who are driven away by the same stuff that shuts us out.
So the women are still missing. Plus some really cool submisive men are missing. Because our culture has been hijacked and we are stumbling around tring to find each other in the dark.
I’m rather fucking angry about that.
October 14, 2007 at 6:52 pm
“A lot of them are just great really fucking sexy guys”
You’re making me blush
October 14, 2007 at 7:02 pm
Ha. But surely it’s no surprise. You *know* what I think. I am the chair and founder of the submissive men fanclub.
Male submission, men who want to submit, men who get hard cocks when they get on their knees - that’s kind of my thing, you sexy fucking bastard
October 15, 2007 at 9:42 am
“I understand L, you’re talking about people who are uncomfortable with sex and sexuality in general. This is a thing - just not the thing I am talking about here. This is a different extra specific thing.”
Beej, I’d really appreciate it if you explain to me what you think the difference is between:
A. Somebody failing to be accounted for by you on your Dominant Woman Census (or being “missing”
B. Somebody neglecting to be represented and/or counted as a dominant woman for whatever reason (or not even existing at all)
As far as I understand it, you are talking about a situation in which dominant women (and submissive men tacked on by you as an afterthought) are not represented as well as you’d like, wherever you’d expect them to be better represented. I think you’re saying that there are fewer dominant women and submissive men where you can see them, because they’re being excluded by others, is that right?
So far, I’ve seen nothing from you describing why you might think previously unidentified people are now to be considered missing and excluded instead of unidentified and/or nonexistent. I’ve also been unable to find any logical description of how you you arrived at your conclusions, aside from the usual “mandom excludes dominant women (and submissive men tacked on as an afterthought), blah blah blah”.
(no offense intended with the “blah”s, I agree with the mandom porn thing, I just can’t remember everything you said)
You seemed to include submissive men in your problem situation as an afterthought, and I wasn’t clear on what was up with that. If this isn’t only a problem to do with dominant women, and can include submissive men, then how does that exclude my hypothesis that this is a problem which affects pretty much everybody?
If you’re saying what I think you are, then I’m disagreeing, and saying that your “missing” people are either hiding because of their own issues, or simply doing their own thing and not showing up every time you take a Dominant Woman Census, and/or a combination of both factors.
I am proposing a logically likely hypothesis for why this situation might be so, and also identifying this scenario as something which is a much more widespread and generally applicable situation than anything solely affecting dominant women alone (or submissive men as well, as an afterthought).
As I read it, you built your premise on this:
“I started this blog with a few “ideas” and one of them was this: In terms of sexuality, sexual response, how people really feel deep down inside, the numbers are equal. It’s 1:1. And the reason I believe this because, well, why the fuck not? Can you give me any reason why the numbers wouldn’t be equal?
And I can think of a million reasons why they might really be equal and it might look like they’re not.
(Yes, okay, look, for the purposes of todays “experiment” everyone is a heterosexual and there are no switches. Just for now. Just because otherwise it gets too noisy. I get bitten by this. I wish people would just let me talk about this stuff as if this were the case. It makes a lot of sense to do it that way. Because, you know, the next time you are at a kinky event or website which is decorated entirely with pics of tied up women it really isn’t so the gay and bisexual women have a good time.”
I cannot detect any logical connection between the assumption that the sexual numbers should be equal, and the reasons you go on to describe about why it makes sense to consider this problem (and I do agree it is a problem), as if everybody were heterosexual and there were no switches.
I don’t see any logical explanation (which I can detect) of why there should be equal numbers (of dominants and submissives) across all genders and all orientations, or why it makes sense to assume everybody’s heterosexual and there are no switches for the sake of your point. Of the million reasons why you think the numbers might be equal, I can’t say I was able to discern even one logical one from your post. People differ, and are diverse. Equal is only one state, whereas I find that unbalanced numbers are far more likely.
I am beginning to think that you’re really ranting about mandom porn again, just from a different angle this time. What do you think?
I’d find it really helpful if you could describe more clearly for me how this is specifically a problem for dominant women (and submissive men) and nobody else, and why the numbers of dominants and submissives should be equal?
Many thanks,
Lubyanka.
October 15, 2007 at 10:16 am
The premise is this: If there are 20 submissive men for every dominant women, where are the other 19 dominant women?
Those are the missing women - repulsed by the offensiveness of femdom. From the ideas that dominant women shouldn’t ever have PIV sex to the ideas that aroused femininity is a humilating state.
Of course the numbers should be equal. Why shouldn’t they be equal?
Blah blah blah
October 15, 2007 at 11:41 am
See Jones, you can please some of the people all of the time…
October 16, 2007 at 8:09 am
I’ve always assumed that the 20:1 ratio of submissive men to dominant women mythology was made up by the men who think being submissive is an extracurricular masturbatory experiment and can’t find women to talk to.
i.e. said horny subby man says, “I talked to 20 women about them indulging my fantasies while I play with myself, and only 1 agreed to play along.”
October 16, 2007 at 1:02 pm
I’ve always assumed that the 20:1 ratio of submissive men to dominant women mythology was made up by the men who think being submissive is an extracurricular masturbatory experiment and can’t find women to talk to.
That sort of ties into Beej’s theory. If most subby types are fantasizing about being feminized sissy cuckolds to a cruel vinyl-clad mistress with no interest in sex or romance, then obviously there is going to be a huge gap. If, as Beej claims, most dominant women have a completely different take on this D/s thing, then they will ignore, if not be completely squicked by those guys.
October 16, 2007 at 10:18 pm
Of course the numbers should be equal. Why shouldn’t they be equal?
But of course. If there are six straights to every gay, where are the other gays? If there are four married people to every single person, where are the other singles? If there are 437 million non-Australians to all Australians, where are the other Ozzies? Beej: What makes you think there is a lid for every pot, a left hand for every right, a dom for every sub? Do you have some sort of x-ray vision? If yes, can you tell us what other particular relationship in nature is precisely equal? Even a rant has to have some connection to verifiable reality. Or is this all a matter of … faith?
October 17, 2007 at 7:10 am
Nope, Les, you’re talking about something else. You’re talking about demongraphics in the population in general. I’m talking about a small section of society where the demographic breakdown does not reflect society in general.
The reason I think men:women should be equal in femdom is because men:women is equal in the world. (There’s the equality in nature you asked for.)
These kinds of disparities are often hightlighted to reflect something wrong with the system. For example when the media points out the number of women in the top strata of big business or the number of black people in prison.
Of course there are often people who posit theories for saying that there is something about *women* that makes them do less well in business or something about black people that make them more likely to be criminals. In the same way, people like to make up theories for why the femdom demographic is so warped.
But really, most sane people understand that these sorts of disparities are caused by unfair systems.
October 17, 2007 at 8:08 am
I dispute that the overall equal ratio of men:women on the planet logically leads to men:women being equal in femdom.
I have seen no evidence that the ratio of men:women is equal in mandom. If in fact the ratio of men:women is not equal in mandom, then it would logically follow, according to your argument, Beej, that the ratio of men:women couldn’t be equal in femdom, otherwise the overall ratio of men:women on the planet wouldn’t be equal.
Lubyanka.
October 17, 2007 at 9:33 am
This is the logical fallacy X is false because Y is true when there is no reason why X and Y are even related. Although they may be in this case.
What you are saying is rather like:
There is no reason why there ought to be similar numbers of male and female MPs because there are not similar numbers of male and female astronauts.
October 17, 2007 at 10:31 am
Um.
I disagree that your comparison is valid, because it does not logically follow that the ratio of men:women in astronautism is necessarily related to the of the ratio of men:women MP’s. You already made a point above about how women aren’t equally represented in all professions because of “unfair systems” as you put it.
If you consider the numbers of people in BDSM as a whole, then the numbers there I would expect to be roughly equal between the genders, although I could be mistaken about that. But it seems pretty clear to me that the numbers of people in BDSM as a whole must be divided up between the various categories of BDSM. Which means that the ratios of the genders in the categories of BDSM must add up to the numbers of people in BDSM as a whole. Which means that in this way, mandom is related to femdom in ways which astronauts and MP’s are not.
Equally, even if my point above is irrelevant, it still is a fact that the ratio of men:women in femdom needn’t necessarily reflect the ratio of men:women on the planet as a whole.
If as you say, the ratio of men:women in femdom must be representative of the ratio of men:women on the planet as a whole, then that supports the point I made above, which is that there can’t be equal numbers of men and women in femdom, since there are just as likely to be unequal numbers of men and women in mandom.
I’ve not met very many dominant men, although I have met many submissive women. I haven’t met a whole lot of dominant women, although I have met a whole lot of submissive men.
I don’t see any reason why the ratio of dominants:submissives should necessarily be equal, any more than I can see any reason way the ratio of men:women in femdom should be equal.
I really think this is more about the ratio of dominants:submissives as opposed to men:women (in no particular order).
You appear to have a lot to say about why the people who disagree with you must be mistaken, but I haven’t seen anything from you which gives any concrete reasoning as to how you reached your conclusions.
I’d really like to know more about the logical process you used to reach your conclusions.
Lubyanka.
October 17, 2007 at 10:49 am
Oh, sorry. I see. I thought you were being particularly confusing.
You don’t have a logical fallacy - you have a false premise
When you were talking about number disparities in mandom I assumed you meant lotsa mandoms, not so many femsubs. ‘Cause, you know, it’s not as pronounced as in femdom, but that’s kind of the way it falls. I’m not sure where you’ve been hanging out, but really, mandoms are beating off hoardes of femsubs? Really, no.
So you see my confusions.
There are heaps of mandoms. Heaps and heaps. I should know, they’re always trying to flog me/get me to test cages/help me see the error of my dommish ways.
October 17, 2007 at 11:02 am
No, I didn’t mean mandoms are beating off hordes of femsubs. My experience is that the submissive women are bitching about finding a proper mandom every bit as much as the dominant women are bitching about finding a proper submissive man.
October 17, 2007 at 11:06 am
Well, we all like bitching.
October 17, 2007 at 11:33 am
So, that will be a “no” on the logical thought processes? I really would like to know.
October 17, 2007 at 12:20 pm
I thought your confusion was all due to you thinking femsubs out number mandoms. I think I’ve explained myself pretty clearly.
October 17, 2007 at 12:38 pm
You’ve certainly clearly explained what you think, I think I understand that part pretty well.
My problem is, I don’t understand why you think it. What you think makes no sense to me. I don’t see how the ratios of
BDSM submissive men:dominant women
World men:women
BDSM dominants:submissives
relate to each other so that they must all be equally 1:1?
The question is Why, not Whether, do you see?
Many thanks.
Lubyanka.
October 17, 2007 at 12:50 pm
Nah. I’m done with the Beej and Luby show.
October 17, 2007 at 10:11 pm
Now, now ladies. Without heating this up further, I wonder why no one is interested in [a] trying to get agreement on what is a dominant woman (surely it’s not limited to females who think about it, much less testify to same on the Internet); [b] trying to get same for the definition of male sub (surely it’s not limited to guys who show up at kink-fests or send dumb crush-me-Mistress notes to strangers). In other words, regardless of numbers, why is not possible –if not probable– that there exists a huge sub-culture of unadvertised PRIVATE doms and subs? Many if not most of the long-time marriages I know are run unquestionably by the wife: from decision-making [not mere hen-pecking] to fuck-me-this-way-or-not-at-all [not mere complaining]. Dominant women are all over the place, though most seem to think it’s too, too, too kinky or tacky to talk about. And not many, I reckon, need to resort to whips, chains and leather. Why should they, when they rule by fiat anyhow? Why you not see this? You no have eyes? Or maybe you no have straight [seemingly straight, anyway] friends? The great horde of dominant females are those who rule their households, their finances and their bedrooms –without benefit of blog, label or even [horrors!] self-awareness. The great secret is that there are not really three categories of mature people: vanilla, dom and sub. Few if any are vanilla. People either give orders or take them. Of course most such don’t get off on hitting or getting hit with stuff, or blood, or the ever-popular lick-my-piss-off-the-floor scenario. Does that make them any less dom or sub?
October 17, 2007 at 10:17 pm
I was going to moderate this comment, something I (clearly) hardly ever do.
But you mentioned the piss thing. I’ll let anything through if it mentions the piss thing.
October 17, 2007 at 10:40 pm
Ah, your well-known warm button. L’chaim.
October 17, 2007 at 10:59 pm
Good god. You don’t hit people with whips or tie them up and piss on them or even fuck them with a strap-on (sorry, Beej) in order to get control over the household finances or when you have sex. You do these things for their own sake.
You may have a dominant personality with or without doing these things, but that’s not the same thing (at all) as being kinkily dominant. I’m pretty sure you can be a doormat in the rest of your life and still be a kinky sadistic dom for fun.
October 19, 2007 at 3:08 am
Am I the only guy that sees lots of dominant females at kink parties?
Not as many as dominant men, but there’s not as many sub males as there are dominant males, so that’s no concern.
October 19, 2007 at 4:23 am
I’m not a guy, but I always see a fair number of dominant women too.
October 19, 2007 at 6:35 am
That’s good to hear. I do think the 1 in 20 is an over statement (although it is interesting to play with the idea that that is the case and there must be a reason why people say that) - there is definitely some kind of gap or prodoms would starve.
October 19, 2007 at 4:15 pm
Hypothesis #1: There are alot of people out there more comfortable getting their needs met without putting themselves out there as “vulnerable” (something you’ve mentioned before, how difficult it is to be “out” as a submissive man), therefore prodommes would exist no matter what.
Hypothesis #2: There is no ONE definition of what makes a woman a Dominant Woman, because… well… yanno… all those “each person is an individual that expresses themselves differently” kind of thingymabobs.
This scientific summary has been brought to you by Starbucks-overload.
October 19, 2007 at 5:25 pm
there is definitely some kind of gap or prodoms would starve.
There are 98 man-fancying women for every 94 woman-fancying men. And yet, prostitution.
October 19, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Prostitution does not occupy the same position in the vanilla world as prodom does in femdom.
The default *woman* is not a prostitute *every* *time* she is represented in the media. (Not quite.)
October 20, 2007 at 12:14 am
Um. (I think you have a point there. There’s just this block of male media creators who beg to differ.)
October 21, 2007 at 10:49 am
I think you have a point too, but there is a difference between the way pros represent vanilla women and the way prodoms represent dom women.
There is a whole thing - I don’t know if I have a space here I can take it on - about how the media uses whores to represent sexay women.
Germaine Greer said something on TV the other night about how the sexual revolution hadn’t liberated sex but the sex industry. I thought it was kind of interesting. I don’t really understand why women being sexually free seems to be more about them being free to make money off their sexualities than just have a good time with it.
Sex work ties me up in knots. And I am not good with knots.
October 21, 2007 at 9:40 pm
Greer: 50% absolute truth and 50% batshit crazy. I think she has a point, but it only goes so far - if there had been no sexual revolution, would there be a BJD? It could be partly generational, though - she’s twice your age.
I’m not even sure you can compare freedoms like that - more free to make money off sex than to have a good time? Is that like saying we’re more free to slave away at desk jobs than to run naked in the woods? Yeah, things are more prominent and have better marketing if they’re commercial - that’s what commerce is. Does it mean we’re not ‘liberated’? I don’t think it does - I just think that as with teh gay, the bits of female sexualities that happen in commercial spaces are going to be most talked about. S’a good think you’re speaking up, then.
October 21, 2007 at 9:51 pm
Maybe. I am not sure.
Knots, you know
November 1, 2007 at 4:07 pm
It is not a deviation from the cultural norm, in this day and age, for a woman to control the sex lives of a committed heterosexual couple. It is an accepted social axiom that a man will do various favors for a woman in the hope that she might not “have a headache” tonight. Therefore I suggest that at least half of these theoretical 20 submissive men are just tired of working so hard. They are looking for a sure thing.
On the other hand, of the “submissive women” I have met in the “scene”, a significant number are looking for a dominant man who will give them exactly what they want, when they wanted it, in exactly the position they tell them to. I remember one woman telling me how she won’t let a man drive the car, handle the money, make decisions about the house, but she is submissive because she wants him to take her hard from behind.
Another significant number are just interested in more sex, but they feel less responsible for sex if their role in it is submissive. (i.e. I love to suck cock, but I do not want to be a “wanton woman” so as a submissive I can suck as much as I want, but its never my “fault”.)
For me being submissive means that I get enjoyment out of serving those I care about. Most of the time this is non-sexual enjoyment. The pleasure is in making them happy or from receiving praise or affection. This is seperate from, and in addition to, the sexual pleasure that we both get from vanilla sex and a wide variety of pervert sex. For me to pay a stranger to be mean to me would be completely stupid.
In my experience finding a suitable playmate has been quite easy. I remember being warned about this silly statistic by several submissive women when I first joined the scene. I was told there are so man disposable/interchangable submissive men that you have no hope of getting any attention.
By the time I had first heard this over a year ago I had already met my now fiance, who is as perfect a match for me as I can imagine. In the intervening time I met many wonderful dominant play partners several of which we still play with.
November 5, 2007 at 1:42 am
Men aren’t really comfortable with their dominance or submissiveness to tell you the truth. I think all the rants spoon-fed college boys give about ‘waaah nobody understands submissive men’ is just indirectly giving the dominant males more power. And that’s what they want, of course. Nothing really gets changed, until you explore the weaknesses in everything.
I don’t consider myself a ’switch’ but I easily have sexual fantasies of me dominating men (and women, occasionally) and me being submissive to women and men. Like you Bitchy, I want to dominate a man that looks like a man. None of this making him wear women panties bit or fucking them with a strap-on (though I already have a dick), although I still find that incredibly sexy from time to time.
Nothing turns me on more then rubbing a man’s ass-crack really hard when he’s in his business suit. Or throat fucking him and having his spit drool down on his tie or football jersey. And that really fucks up the men who say they’re dominant. Being *really* dominant with them instead of this sissy fake-dominant that you see on straight male porn sites.
Hard to say which is better it’s all what I’m in the mood for. Being dominant releases my pent-up anger and I love the rush, but then again I love the spaced-out more “Holy” look of being submissive as well.
And I don’t really see how anybody could be a straight guy and even enjoy heterosexual porn. In all reality, straight porn is much more gay than gay porn. Gay porn has a more female-friendly audience base, it’s less ‘rough’ usually. Mainstream gay porn is more for lesbians or heterosexual vanilla females. Gay men have a long, affectionate history with most women and we don’t ever want to offend them, even if that means sacrificing our own sexual desires. You guys mean *that* much to us for more or less accepting us. The real misogyny in the ‘gay community’ is almost just as prevalent, but more well hidden. The rougher gay sex is definitely becoming more popular, but again they have to use the ’straight’ banner to sell it. Ream his STRAIGHT throat. Because if you put that ’straight male’ thing in there, it’s sexy. If you don’t have it, it’s not hot and you can’t get turned on. That’s the message we constantly send to the world entire, and it has to do with our own self-hatred probably more than anything they’re actually doing to us.
The “woman” is a passive non-existent identity in most straight porn where the main focus has always been on the man. It’s a way for ’straight guys’ to get off on exploring their gayness without having to actually deal with yucky things like prejudice and the discrimination that comes from honestly labeling yourself a homosexual male.
Raping a woman (Actually raping her I mean) is the gayest thing you could do, believe it or not. (Not gay as in ‘that’s bad/inferior’ but gay as in actually a gay male thing.) I know it mindfucks people when I say that, but just think about it.
Just think about it.
I love your site. And Buffy/Angel rocks.
January 30, 2008 at 12:58 pm
The number of Dommes also varies depending on what part of the world you are in and its liberated or not attitudes towards sexuality.
January 31, 2008 at 9:23 pm
I recall some words by another Domme elsewhere on here site in which as a newcomer she describes that when looking in she was peterbed at the SPH and sissy stuff, seeing as these where not her original thoughts at all.
I think that could be because many peoples fantasies are originally an isolated perspective of their own, as opposed to a sort of masochistic eroticisation of patriarchy that she may have come across in which femeninity is mimmicked such as spoken of elsewhere on here. This phenomena might be more prevalent than we think. I can see where Dommes are coming from when Dommes say that F/m porn puts them off.
An environment that attracts and interests Dommes would be cool, a bit like this site thanks to Bitchy.
An environment which contains traits that are synonymous with a hypothetical external in which the interconnecting lines of sociology where cut as if the internal is indicative of a more enlightened external so that it bounces back and effects the external would be nice too, but we cant have everything.
Leave a Reply