Both: What do you think causes people to develop sexual paraphilias?

submitted by worried19 from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (24 children)

checks hand ratio

Good question. To me the flat universal occurrence of the phenomena implies a natural cause. You can look at sexuality in Roman history and see sexual practices we recognise today but interpreted in different ways. There is an interaction between the environment and biology. Things that are universally found are highly likely to be natural even if they are dealt with differently.

Though the essentialist biological differences have to come down to few reasons rather than lots of reasons. That means lots of different apparent forms are triggered by a few elements rather than all having individual natural triggers. For instance linking the higher male numbers to a higher sex drive and/or a higher level of innate aggression.

In other words, sex drive fully accounted for the sex difference in paraphilic interests.

Paraphilic Interests: An Examination of Sex Differences in a Nonclinical Sample

Maybe.

Another aspect of the gender variation I wonder about is the active and passive element.

Sexual arousal by dominance and submission in relation to increased reproductive success in the general population

Results: Sexually dominant men aged 35-44 years had more biological male children. Both the sexually dominant men aged 35-44 years and sexually submissive women aged 35-44 years perceived themselves as being more attractive.

Conclusion: We suggest that sexual arousal by dominance is likely to be the means by which the mating strategy is accomplished.

Don't blame me for what this report says. I'm just looking things up.

I'm generally looking at popular erotic culture. Yes I agree that is culturally dependent. Again don't blame me for what is popular erotic work with women.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Best-Sellers-Kindle-Store-Erotic-Fiction/zgbs/digital-text/362277031

I think it contains what are often classed as paraphilias. I often think the clinical paraphilias are extreme versions of preferences found in common sexual activity. It isn't a binary thing. Saying but they shouldn't like it is something else.

[–]anxietyaccount8 9 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 4 fun -  (6 children)

You can look at sexuality in Roman history and see sexual practices we recognise today but interpreted in different ways.

The way that sexuality in ancient Rome was perceived is honestly not that different to how many men see it today in 2021. They still may think that giving pleasure to a woman is demeaning, and that being penetrated makes you "gayer" than the person doing the penetrating. I don't understand why people are so fascinated by sexuality in Ancient Rome/Greece. It's just sexist to me.

I'm generally looking at popular erotic culture. Yes I agree that is culturally dependent. Again don't blame me for what is popular erotic work with women.

See, I can only speak for my own self, but as a radfem and a straight woman, my own taste actually changed. All women are pretty much taught that men who are super dominant, rich, etc, are the most attractive. A lot of portrayals of these kinds of men are actually very unrealistic, for example books will show a man being sadistic and a literal rapist, but at the same time he will eventually love the woman protagonist. Sadistic men in real life don't tend to be so "perfect", obviously.

I guarantee you, the reason so many women like this sort of thing is simply because of societal influence.

Both the sexually dominant men aged 35-44 years and sexually submissive women aged 35-44 years perceived themselves as being more attractive.

This is just... isn't it SO obvious as to why that would be true?

[–]MarkTwainiac 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The way that sexuality in ancient Rome was perceived is honestly not that different to how many men see it today in 2021.

Which is why I have coined the term Caliguland for today's depraved, dick-centered culture. It's like today's world is made to order for the perverted proclivities of the sick misogynistic fuck Caligula. Or it's his wet dream.

They still may think that giving pleasure to a woman is demeaning, and that being penetrated makes you "gayer" than the person doing the penetrating. I don't understand why people are so fascinated by sexuality in Ancient Rome/Greece. It's just sexist to me.

I agree.

[–]worried19[S] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This is just... isn't it SO obvious as to why that would be true?

You'd think, and also them having more children. Seems obvious to me controlling men also control their female partners in terms of the number of children who are born. There are plenty of instances of abusive men sabotaging birth control.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (3 children)

See, I can only speak for my own self, but as a radfem and a straight woman, my own taste actually changed.

When you say you changed? What changed?

I guarantee you, the reason so many women like this sort of thing is simply because of societal influence.

That's the big question to me.

[–]anxietyaccount8 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

When you say you changed? What changed?

Mainly that I realized traits such as being compassionate were infinitely more important to making a good or attractive man, than what I was taught. People always said "a REAL man has to always take charge and be the perfect masculine example". But many men who are so hung up on their masculinity are misogynistic. So it changed my mind.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

That doesn't sound that radical though.

[–]anxietyaccount8 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Well in my perception it was radical because I held a more conservative viewpoint before.

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Best-Sellers-Kindle-Store-Erotic-Fiction/zgbs/digital-text/362277031

Amazon US list for comparison: https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Kindle-Store-Erotica/zgbs/digital-text/157057011/?tf=1

Note the slight uptick in urban fantasy, sci-fi/fantasy, and m/m features and the comparative downlisting of the Grey series. Just to say there's likely to be variation by reader population, location, and size.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (10 children)

I mean slight variations but your list still has plenty of kink tropes. But I am interested in the gender stereotypes in these.

What are your thoughts on these best sellers?

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

What are your thoughts on these best sellers?

They're the crisps of modern evocative lit, like The Pearl and penny dreadfuls. And they're probably popular to the degree that they're transgressive. (Who among us wants to consort with actual vampires? To be de Sade's Justine?)

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (8 children)

I think I met vampire women with sharpened incisors.

You think their popular because their transgressive? But a lot of the characters aren't transgressive, their actually traditional.

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

But a lot of the characters aren't transgressive, their actually traditional.

Of course. That sets up a contrast, which you need to build tension in any story.

Yes, I think they're popular because they're transgressive. Since novels became popular in the 17th/18th century, there've been expanding niches for stories that evoke dread (gothic, horror), suspense (thriller), and arousal (erotica). The repeal of blue laws in late 20th century UK/US just opened up the market and made erotica more widely available. But people don't keep reading (for instance) Mary Shelley because she describes their 9-to-5; it's the opposite. Ditto erotica.

Humans like to invent narratives that evoke intense feeling in the audience -- we've been doing that for millennia. There's a psychological dynamic involved. It doesn't follow that keen readers of a genre will model their actual daily lives according to that genre. Most won't, and never have.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (6 children)

But the archetypes in this fiction aren't transgressive. They are traditional archetypes of masculinity.

"Zeus is the alpha of alphas."

gay biker MC erotic romance “Living off the grid and being an outlaw brings a dangerous reality.”

Billionaire BOSS: Secret Baby (Oh Billionaires!) He’s the man I absolutely hate.

billionaire badass CEO Collin Stark. Did I mention he's an ex-Army interrogator?

Nothing particularly transgressive there in the characters. Apart from the gay figures. Of course there is criminality. But that's a bad guy male stereotype.

Sure a lot of feminism denounces them. But then women carry on enjoying them.

Is there horror and fantasy in that list too? sure. But often mixed with strong masculine and feminine types and iconography.

Horror and erotica is certainly a common mix.

I also presume there is an amount of gay male porn being enjoyed by a female audience here. Probably another debate.

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Transgressive narratives. And an archetype is not a character.

Looking forward to your thesis where you can define your terms and present a coherent argument for us, rather than just swapping words around and eliding meanings at will.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (4 children)

The characters aren't transgressive then?

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Depends on how they're written, who they are, what they do, their motivation for doing it, and how or whether they subvert reader expectations or challenge cultural norms.

[–]worried19[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

checks hand ratio

Ha, I can't tell with mine. They look like a heterosexual digit ratio? I'm right handed. But I'm also more physically masculine than a lot of women, which would lead me to believe I had an atypical prenatal environment. So maybe it's not foolproof. What's your hand ratio?

To me the flat universal occurrence of the phenomena implies a natural cause.

It's not universal, though. Autogynephilia does not appear to be found in all cultures.

In other words, sex drive fully accounted for the sex difference in paraphilic interests.

But what about women? Are women with higher sex drives likely to have more paraphilias? I have zero, but my libido is through the roof.

Also, what's up with all these "asexual" kinksters who go around committing BDSM acts while also claiming to have no sexual drive or sexual attraction?

Again don't blame me for what is popular erotic work with women.

Not blaming you for anything. I think the female population is collectively traumatized. I do not believe female infants are born to want to be abused and treated as inferior to men.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (3 children)

Ha, I can't tell with mine.

On your right hand if you stretch out your flat hand, which finger is longer?

Your index finger or your 4th, ginger, the ring finger?

I should say I'm not sure what to think of the idea.

If the evidence is good I would have to believe it.

It need only be a trend rather than one to one to be real.

They look like a heterosexual digit ratio? I'm right handed.

Isn't that heterosexuality among men?

But I'm also more physically masculine than a lot of women, which would lead me to believe I had an atypical prenatal environment. So maybe it's not foolproof. What's your hand ratio?

My right index finger is longer than my ring finger.

It's not universal, though. Autogynephilia does not appear to be found in all cultures.

Well I'm not a Blanchardian. Though it is very essentialist.

Perhaps a starting point is, are there straight crossdressers in all cultures? My guess is yes there are. But outside Western culture sexuality and gender are handled differently. But I still think crossdressers are linking into universal sexual frameworks.

Lots of non Western cultures are very traditional and very locked into a traditional gender roles. But also crossdressers are actually rare. It isn't common by percentage.

But what about women? Are women with higher sex drives likely to have more paraphilias? I have zero, but my libido is through the roof.

ha though isn't a high libido considered a perversion for a woman?

Though I do like the question. "Are women with higher libidos more perverse?" I'd like to know the scientific answer.

Also, what's up with all these "asexual" kinksters who go around committing BDSM acts while also claiming to have no sexual drive or sexual attraction?

Not sure. I think it's real. Although I would think sexuality and behaviour are linked, I think behaviour that is considered sexual might also serve non sexual purposes, like identity, so I think identity can be sexual. For instance people finding cultural forms attractive. So people feel attached to a cultural form even if it is not not sexual.

I also think some things are innately lend themselves to sexualization more than others because they are aesthetically or tactically pleasing. In that sense they can be pleasing without being sexual.

I also think some bdsm activities probably cause endorphin peaks. That might not be directly sexual.

[–]worried19[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

On your right hand if you stretch out your flat hand, which finger is longer? Your index finger or your 4th, ginger, the ring finger?

I literally can't tell. They're very close. If I put my right palm on the table, my ring finger seems longer. But if I put my palm to my face, my index finger seems longer. There's not a pronounced difference. And I can't tell any difference at all on my left hand. I believe not having a large difference is supposed to indicate heterosexuality in women.

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-45887691

My right index finger is longer than my ring finger.

That indicates less exposure to testosterone in the womb. But there are some people claiming this only predicts sexual orientation in women, while others say it can also predict orientation in men, as well as a host of other things too:

https://www.livescience.com/49883-finger-length-in-men.html

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161012095619.htm

I mean, who knows for sure? But there appears to be at least some biological stuff going on with regard to the prenatal environment. Although it's obviously not 100% either way. I always felt like nature intended for me to be a lesbian, but wires got crossed somewhere. But my digit ratio doesn't really support that.

Perhaps a starting point is, are there straight crossdressers in all cultures?

There don't appear to be. u/SnowAssMan may be more familiar with Blanchard's research on this topic.

ha though isn't a high libido considered a perversion for a woman?

Women used to be considered the more libidinous sex. Now society has flipped and decided it's men. But I don't believe high-libido women are considered perverted anymore. I don't see anyone shaming women who like to have sex multiple times a day. Hell, men are probably singing our praises. All women are now supposed to up for anything, even if it's not in our nature.

Though I do like the question. "Are women with higher libidos more perverse?" I'd like to know the scientific answer.

I'm curious as well. I would guess that higher libidos lead to more sexual experimentation, and more experimentation leads to perversity.

Not sure. I think it's real.

Eh, I think they're not true asexuals. I think they're primarily fetishists whose sexual pleasure comes from acting out their fetish. But that's different from having no sexual drive or sexual desires at all. I think maybe they label something as non-sexual when for them it is intensely sexual.

I also think some things are innately lend themselves to sexualization more than others because they are aesthetically or tactically pleasing. In that sense they can be pleasing without being sexual.

Like what? I'm coming up blank on that.

I also think some bdsm activities probably cause endorphin peaks. That might not be directly sexual.

Yeah, but there are more socially acceptable and mainstream ways to get an endorphin rush, if that is legitimately what they were after.

[–]anxietyaccount8 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I always felt like nature intended for me to be a lesbian, but wires got crossed somewhere. But my digit ratio doesn't really support that.

No offense but why say essentialist things like this? You can just appreciate your unique self.

There don't appear to be.

I highly doubt that men fetishizing women's clothing is something that Western men invented. Whether or not they actually crossdressed with them.

[–]worried19[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No offense but why say essentialist things like this? You can just appreciate your unique self.

I don't think it's essentialist. If sexual orientation is determined by prenatal androgens and I suspect I got stronger exposure to testosterone in the womb, then it would make sense for me to be a lesbian. Not like it was destiny or fate, but something was atypical in my development. It's just a weird feeling that I've always had. I used to wonder if I was intersex. And before I found GC feminism, I wondered if I was supposed to be transgender. I have since accepted I am fully female, but I still feel like there's something that must explain why I'm at the atypical end of things.

I highly doubt that men fetishizing women's clothing is something that Western men invented. Whether or not they actually crossdressed with them.

Oh, I'm sure lots of men worldwide have fetishized femininity and female clothing. But I don't know if that would have developed into autogynephilia in all cultures.