Talk:Female submission

Untitled
Removed some obvious advertisments. -- 17:49, 25 January 2007 85.166.228.70

BDSM article?
Right now, this article discusses female submission in general, whether related to BDSM or not, while the other relevant articles (Male submission, Female dominance, and Male dominance (BDSM)) talk about BDSM submission only.

Shouldn't this article be restricted to BDSM as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tommyjb (talk • contribs) 19:57, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Its almost entirely about BDSM. I don't think that the current mere acknowledgement of it existing in a non-BDSM context is really all that tangential. Asarelah (talk) 03:03, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

seconded — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.248.212.2 (talk) 01:28, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Is the definition of patriarchy correct? I doubt it
The article states:

"When female subservience occurs as a consequence of a social system in which males, either as fathers or husbands, hold legal or de facto authority and power over related women, children, and household property, the arrangement is generally known as patriarchy."

Although this is certainly the case in many fundamentalist religious environments, where women support the role of procreation and through their subservience the expansion of the religion, that is not an accurate or even correct definition of patriarchy. Because when a women is only occasionally sexually subservient, to ease the female barriers to love making, in an otherwise equal relationship, it is just not the same a patriarchy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.14.141.127 (talk) 17:24, 5 September 2011 (UTC)


 * The quote you've given pretty clearly states that when a man has legal authority/power of women that it is called patriarchy. The article does not seem to claim that general sexual subservience is patriarchy.AerobicFox (talk) 18:44, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

"Partiarchy"
Why is it linked, and further why isn't it called the patriarchy hypothesis? there's no proof that it exists, therefore it's not a theory. In a few days I'll remove the link because it's irrelevant, misleading, and insulting. Bumblebritches57 (talk) 00:40, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Insulting and misleading
I'm not going to bother trying to actually fix this article since past experience leads me to believe that anything I fix will just get mindlessly changed back. But this article is insulting to practitioners of BDSM and just plain misleading. The article repeatedly equates being a sexual submissive with being an oppressed woman in a patriarchal society whose needs, interests, or perspectives are disregarded, both by herself and by others. But those aren't the same at all. The use of Frankenstein as an example is particularly ludicrous; the women in Frankenstein are women in a sexist patriarchal society, and it seems plausible to describe them as being objectified, and treated as though their perspectives are irrelevant, both by the characters and (peculiarly) by the author, but there's absolutely nothing in the book to suggest that they are sexual submissives or have ever acted as sexual submissives.

Frankly, this article probably shouldn't exist at all. Sexual submission is sexual submission; there's no intrinsic difference between female submission and male submission. So all you need is an article on sexual submission, and that already exists. If what you want to do is to talk about the fact that far more women identify as submissive, and far more men as dominant, and that this probably has something to do with screwed-up patriarchal gender norms, then make an article about the relationship between BDSM and patriarchy. That is a worthwhile topic and probably deserves an article. But currently this article is currently trying to slip a one-sided stance on the relationship between BDSM and patriarchy into something masquerading as an objective article about submission, and that's incredibly misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:37DA:6690:3DE7:DDC:6484:D993 (talk) 21:27, 11 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Some of your comments may be correct, but your assertion that "there's no intrinsic difference between female [sexual] submission and male [sexual] submission" is unfortunately quite wrong from most points of view... AnonMoos (talk) 10:30, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

This is something I'd like to touch on again. While I think there are differences, not just physically but also psychologically, I don't think the article adequately explains this. Particularly the points on why females are submissive and views on why they should be submissive and dominated. I'd add it but I'm afraid without adequate sources it will just get reverted as not fitting in with new generation SJW equality views. Biofase flame | stalk 05:07, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. Community Tech bot (talk) 21:51, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Human footstool.jpg

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:52, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Pet girl nude.jpg

Tone down the hardcore images?
The images in the article are arguably hardcore pornography, and WP:HARDCORE says, among other things,
 * It is not a good thing for young people to be viewing these images.
 * Many of these images are misogynistic and degrading to women.

What do y'all think about toning it down? 2601:281:CC80:5AE0:E82B:3F7C:4AC2:B3A7 (talk) 20:32, 23 November 2019 (UTC)


 * As I understand it, hardcore pornography depicts actual sex acts, or possibly close-ups of genitals in a state of arousal, and I don't think any of the images currently on the article qualifies. And the images appropriate to an article entitled "female submission" will necessarily include at least symbolic humiliation/degradation of a woman.
 * Nevertheless, the focus of the current images on the article on bondage/BDSM practices which leave marks on the skin is rather narrow and limiting (expressing only one small facet of female submission), so I'll reshuffle the images to restore File:Le Rêve d'un flagellant by George Topfer.jpg to lead position (which it held for years). AnonMoos (talk) 13:59, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Assumptions
The introductory sentence "Female submission or femsub is an activity or relationship in which a woman consents to submit to the direction of a sexual partner or allows her body to be used sexually by or for the sexual pleasure of her partner" assumes that submission is always voluntary on the part of the woman and that all activities are agreed to. There are cases like non-consensual blackmail where the woman isn't given the choice to consent freely. Most of the other articles don't mention consent in the introduction instead dealing with it elsewhere and the article on male submission doesn't even mention it at all. Further consent is already mentioned in "The expression is often associated with BDSM, when the woman voluntarily and consensually submits to such activity" making it redundant in any case.

There is also the assumption that all activities are sexual and that her body is always used for activities that are for sexual pleasure. If there are no objections I'll change or rearrange these statements.

The image of the woman assumes that she is in a stripping activity but from her shoes in the 3 poses and some other signs this is actually 3 images of her in different outfits. This might be because no suitable image exists so in that case I'll leave it till a suitable one can be found. Biofase flame | stalk 14:33, 30 April 2023 (UTC)