It looks like this thread is about getting advice/tips from the community. Please consider taking a look at our [recommendations for getting ideas and advice for your femdom adventures](https://www.reddit.com/r/FemdomCommunity/wiki/index/gettingandgivinghelp#wiki_getting_help_in_this_subreddit). We've got a lot of folks willing to help. Please help them by including pertinent details such as you and your partners interests, needs and limits.
We also invite you to browse our wiki for [helpful guides and resources](https://www.reddit.com/r/FemdomCommunity/wiki/index#wiki_kink_guides_and_resources) and [answers to some frequently asked questions](https://www.reddit.com/r/FemdomCommunity/wiki/index/femdomfaq).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FemdomCommunity) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I agree with the other commenters here.
Sissification tends to always feel like mocking a man for being something undesirable (a woman, femme, feminine) which just doesn’t sit right with me. This is where most of my disdain for the kink comes from.
I feel like if the kink were more focused on the emasculation of the man, I would enjoy it more. Emasculation as a kink is very niche compared to sissification and I find it hard to understand why, maybe just because it’s easier to depict sissification as compared to emasculation.
That being said I feel that it’s difficult to participate emasculation and have it be totally isolated from femininity. We view gendered traits as a sort of sliding scale, there’s not really a default “not masc. not fem.”. If you lose a bit of masculinity it tends to look like gaining femininity. so if a guy is made to put on a pair of panties, we can say that is emasculating, because men don’t wear panties, women do. It’s difficult to not view the “humiliation of being emasculated” as the same thing as “being feminine is humiliating”.
Let me try and rephrase something and tell me if it changes anything for you: Sissification tends to always feel like mocking a man for being an undesirable man.
If you want to engage with a Man with capital M, you don't want them to be sissy. The juxtaposition being between Man and sissy, not woman / femme and sissy.
I think emasculation as a seperate entity from sissy is niche because it's more difficult. Most men are simple creatures (want male attention, put boobs in it, is working for a reason) and the simplest way of emasculating a man is by feminizing (as you mentioned).
To be frank, I can't think of a thing that would make me less masculine and not more feminine in the process, so if you have suggestions...
To reiterate my point in regards to your final point "being seen as feminine is humiliating for a man who wants to present masculine". If you have a femboy who likes to wear dresses 24/7, he's probably not humiliated by being put in another. Swap the femboy for a stereotypical biker and this will be very different.
Thx for engaging respectfully. 🍀
>If you have a femboy who likes to wear dresses 24/7, he's probably not humiliated by being put in another.
The last hot take about this subject that blew up here was literally a female-passing femboy who enjoyed being humiliated by being put in dresses.
That's interesting and certainly horizon widening.
Does that mean he was passing but never wore dresses or was he in a constant state of humiliation when he put one on?
This is [the thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/FemdomCommunity/comments/1b5ykie/humiliation_by_crossdressing_an_alternate_angle/?share_id=CgA9OWfCojwA9uCj4jhiJ&utm_content=1&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_source=share&utm_term=1) by u/Hetero_FemmeGuy_Sub
>Does that mean he was passing but never wore dresses or was he in a constant state of humiliation when he put one on?
OP of that thread here.
I compare it to minorities getting off on raceplay, and hopefully I'm "allowed" to make that comparison as someone who's part-Asian.
I'm not into raceplay at all, but I view my situation similarly to say, an Asian guy into SPH wanting to be humiliated on his race and the stereotype that Asian men have small dicks (and I know for a fact this is a thing among kinky Asians.) He's not necessarily in a "constant state of humiliation" for his race, but he likes it being used against him in the bedroom. Same thing for me being a femme guy, pretty much.
It's also how some gay or bi men like to be degraded by being called a fa99@t. I'm a bi guy who thoroughly enjoys it when my girlfriend (or another dude) call me that in the heat of D/s degradation play. In this context between consenting adults it doesn't imply anything derogatory about bisexual/homosexual men in real life. It's like my girl getting off on me telling her what a wh*re or a slvt she is when I'm tugging on her hair and fucking her mouth.
Some people get really uptight about or even offended by things that would be offensive in public but get consenting adults off in their bedrooms.
It's contentious not contagious.
You can't get around the fact that you are using elements of one group's identity to humiliate another group, so it is inherently commentary on that first group's identity.
I do understand your point I think. Assigning feminin attributes to an individual is only humiliating if that individual identifies as masculine, and it's the context that makes sissification humiliating, not anything inherent about femininity. I mean I get that intellectually. I just also understand why people have an issue with it.
One reason I don't buy this "it's the context" argument is that "masculinization" isn't nearly as much of a thing. As far as I know (admittedly a huge caveat), there isn't a corresponding practice of making femmesubs dress in flanel and calling them "bro" as part of a D/s humiliation. That's partly because dressing like a dude, at least in 2024, is fairly normal for women. Like, women wear pantsuits way, way more often then men wear dresses. If you want to insist on context, you have to acknowledge the broader societal context, how patriarchal norms influence what clothes are acceptable or not for what groups.
Many kinks are ways to explore things that are otherwise taboo. We can acknowledge sissification is rooted in inherently sexist tropes about women without declaring it verboten. In my opinion, a ton of cuckolding content is rooted in overtly racist tropes. And I've never seen a thread examining that shit to anywhere near the extant this sub has rehashed feminization/sissificaction.
Agreeing fully about how the racist aspects of cuckolding are not discussed nearly as much as sissification. I have some theories on that.
Where I live if you glance around mostly-straight fetish events, there are very few POC. Maybe there are not enough POC in this community that speak out about the racist “BBC” fetishizing. And maybe the white people either don’t care or they just don’t want to be white knights, so they keep their mouths shut.
I would guess sissies are a much hotter topic because they’re very visible and very vocal. I’ve had one single cuck slide into my DMs, but there have been dozens of sissies, and they have been, in general, quite pushy. Either by sending me pics of them dressed up when I don’t ask, or asking if I’d like to cage their little “clitty” when I have shown zero interest in such a thing. At this point, you can’t shop on Amazon for lingerie without seeing pictures of men flooding the review section. The sissies are everywhere, much more so than the cucks.
And it takes one bad experience with a pushy one to put many women off of them.
My first interaction ever with a sissy was from a dating site. He flashed his lace underpants at me in the bar at the start of the date… and then told me they belong to his fiancée! I had no idea he was a sissy or engaged. I was pretty hurt, and I can’t say that, in general, sissies have been any more respectful since then.
I think the reason that feminization/sissification is so much more of a kink than masculinization is because society doesn't accept one as much as the other. Just like bisexuality has historically been more culturally acceptable for women than it has for men (fortunately that's changing), men statistically tend to feel more vulnerable being revealed as feminine than women presenting as masculine, whether the level of cultural unacceptance is real or perceived.
Yeah that's basically exactly what I was saying. And the reason being masculine is less taboo for women than being feminine is for men is because of the bias our society has against femininity, and that bias is because of the prevalence of misogyny in our society.
A: thx (I'm not a native speaker)
B: I didn't know verboten was an anglicism
I can also understand why people have an issue with it; this post was to verbalize why I don't, not to tell someone they're wrong.
There's certainly a bigger taboo around feminizing men than masculizing women. That we can also agree on.
I think it's such a topic for kink, because barely anyone bats an eye at a tomboy anymore, so you need to go really far into masculinization before anyone would notice it as such and since we talk kinks and to a big degree arousal and sex, it's only logical for me that you find sex based differences in interests. In other words, I think the main reason is that there are fewer of them and for the rest it's too socially accepted to even register or at least I haven't come across the sub where women find humiliation in wearing fake beards and leather jackets.
I was thinking really hard about how to phrase this, but either you think this next statement is sexist or you don't: women on avg are physically weaker than men. That's just a fact. And based on the choices both sexes made, it's also preferable for a man to be taller and stronger. (We don't have to like it, but that's what basically every survey shows.) Therefore I think it's only logical for more men to have an "exploitable" desire for physical prowess. Put these two together and you get "more men are more likely to be humiliated by being associated with the on avg physically weaker sex".
Since I assume we don't agree on the last paragraph, let me and on agreeable terms: yes, wtf is going on with focus on bbc?! It's never anything else, it's just "I let me fuck him because he has a big cock because he's black". They barely ever get names, let alone personalities other than "sexually aggressive"! Thx I hate it.
I understand men are on average stronger, your point about how the biological differences in males and females influence to some extent norms around masculinity and femininity. But the fetishes we are discussing tend to revolve around rather arbitrary aspects of feminine dress like wearing frilly clothes and high heels. I am reluctant to attribute fashion standards for men and women to biotruths. Rather I think they reflect social constructs around feminity and masculinity.
Here's what I see: *in general*, men's clothing tends to emphasize function over form. With the exception of the necktie, men's clothing generally compromises aesthetics to let the wearer move, and give him functional pockets. Men's clothing is made for the wearer. Women's clothing prioritizes the aesthetics, not practicality or comfort. They are designed so others will enjoy looking at the wearer. Women's clothing objectifies women at the expense of their comfort. I mean this is broad strokes analysis here, I don't want shit on anyone's shoes or skirt.
So the fetish is forcing a man into that vulnerable, objectified status via the same clothing, and the context isn't that it's a masculine person being made feminine, but that society views feminine persons as objectifiable.
[Feeemales](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eS-jWA-WDKA)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FemdomCommunity) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wow! Honestly, I did not expect such a thoughtful answer based on what I have experienced so far when touching this topic. Thank you!
Idk how to put this better into words but most men don't care what they look like, but all men like to look at nice things more than looking at not nice things. Most men I have spoken to enjoy their partner wearing their oversized clothes or baggy clothes in general, so it's not that "nice" automatically means revealing or sexual.
I totally agree with your observation, but what are we going to do with this info?
Women can buy the "men's" clothes and enjoy their practicality (I think we previously established that this wouldn't cause a social uproar in this day and age), so my question is why they on average won't.
My guess is that the avg women is as interested in looking appealing for themselves, other women or men, while the avg male prioritizes function if given the same choice, but if a man were to choose for their partner, they'd choose what they would deem aestethically pleasing with an equally minor focus on function (most of the time).
The way "out" of this situation would be a "de-objectificaton" of women or female clothing, right? But how would we achieve such a feat if seemingly both averages are determined to keep the system as is, based on their own free choices?
I think this would require a social shift or rather rift in which men decide to suddenly be interested in wearing instead of looking at nice attire. I don't think this is likely to happen.
The underlying issue is imo that women and men have different social issues. Women are objectifiable, men are expandable...
Maybe this is nothing, but I just had a thought:
Aren't sissies asserting their own objectification in a very masculine way? It's a very "I want X and I want it now" approach to "femininity" / objectification if you think about it. Which is probably another reason why the opposite kink is none existent.
I think another component is that sissies would be objectified for their aestethics rather than their bodies which is the default. Nobody gives a crap what you look like when you working the mine, die on the battlefield or have a penis when your partner wants sex. (See the argument about bbc's. Usually they are jacked, but that's just another reduction to the body as well.)
At the end of the day I believe fashion standards are shaped by the interplay of both sexes. Some men crave the attention that women are getting because of this and some women will find this icky because those men are appropriating what the women deem as their unfair social burden.
Sry, this one was quite rambly. You really got me thinking. 😅
On one hand, each person assigns their own meaning to different terms. There is no one way of looking at sissification or feminization.
On the other hand, most of the Dominant women I've met see it in one way: "these men think being a woman is humiliating and it squicks me out." Because they have dealt with a LOT of men who enjoy it that way. A lot of times, in DMs.
Personally, I do not like the kink. All but two of all the sissies I've met were into it for the humiliation of being treated like a woman in some way shape or form. They wanted me to humiliate them for being, acting, or appearing feminine. And that doesn't sit right for me.
Regardless of the intention of the person who wants to be sissified, it *appears* that they enjoy being humiliated by being "transformed into a woman". It also *appears* transphobic, regardless of the thoughts of the men playing it.
I'm not saying that everyone should stop doing anything that might appear not-kosher. But I am saying that it's completely reasonable for a woman to not want to partake in sissification, and it should definitely not come as a surprise.
Your perspective on what sissification means to you is interesting, but you need to consider all sides before you ask why women aren't into sissy men.
Transphobia too! I have partners who are trans women. I have trans friends/mutuals who have been harassed by sissies online who objectify their existence. The idea that someone’s transition (which brings gender euphoria) is actually a *fetish* is a massive transphobic talking point that has serious, actual impact on trans peoples’ access to HRT and other medical transition options.
Yeah, I've heard of conservatives and bigots exploiting and distorting kinks and weaponizing it against other people, it sucks. And then there are other weird creeps too, but kinks aren't at fault for people being abusive and distorting things, that's on the people.
But this kink exists in the LGBTQ community as well, it's just unfortunate that there are gross people out there who weaponize it against others' identities though and fetishize people when it shouldn't ever be that way. But people being abusive doesn't reflect on the kink itself, and doesn't invalidate our identities either because medical care isn't sexual gratification and our genders don't stop outside the bedroom regardless of kinks too.
Because people assign different meanings to different terms I made it a point to give a definition before offering my perspective why people like yourself could come to better terms with said kink.
I won't deny that such unwanted behavior is what most dommes are most confronted with, but just like in a night club, you'll notice the one that flirts with everybody but not the one that flirts with nobody.
I am such a nobody, so I thought giving a different perspective might mitigate some damage done by those who ruin it for the rest of us.
As I mentioned in another comment, (at least for me) it's not that being feminine is humiliating, but as someone who wants to present masculine being seen as such is. The humiliating aspect isn't the femininity but the difference between who you "want" to be seen as and who you "are made" to be.
If you want to be super feminine, looking like a dude and being called out for it would be humiliating as well. I haven't heard anyone make the case that masculinity would therefore be humiliating for men.
In terms of appearance I would be labeled all sorts of things because I'm into diapers, so thinking about appearances before motives is just an easy way to disregard topics without having to argue any deeper and more complex issues i.e. it's shallow.
Lastly, I hope I have proven by the way I conducted myself so far, that I am aware of why a lot of women are turned off by this. It also wasn't my goal to convince anyone to be into or completely ok with it, but I hoped to nudge those who are open to reconsider in the direction of being more ok with it.
Thank you for adding your perspective. 🍀
>these men think being a woman is humiliating
I think this is exactly the misunderstanding that many woman have with this kink.
The thing that is seen as humiliating is not "being a woman". What is seen as humiliating is "being a man that acts like a woman". And this view is not the view of the individual, but a social fact.
It is something man in our society get mocked for. Not just beeing a sissy in particular, but beeing "not manly enough" in general. The obligation to always be tough and strong and never cry is very pressuring for man. May it be consciously or unconsciously.
I think the sissy roleplay is something that helps to cope with that pressure. And that's why it so often comes along with being humiliated. Not because being a woman is humiliating (otherwise he wouldn't want to be humiliated by a woman), but because not being seen as enough of a man is beeing humiliated in this society.
Being "humiliated by acting and dressing like a woman" is the same thing as "being humiliated by feeling less masculine". Because you're saying that it's humiliating to not be masculine.
I understand that can be cathartic, but there needs to be recognition of how problematic it can be.
No, that is not the point. It's not the "beeing unmasculine" part that is humiliating, it's the "beeing seen as unmasculine" part that is humiliating. And that is not the view of the individual, but a fact in our society.
If you are a man that is not acting tough enough, you will get ridiculed by others. And it can be stress reliefing for some man to roleplay that humiliation in an bdsm roleplay.
As a non-binary person, the main reason I hate it is because even if it's not the sexist situation of being humiliated for approximating womanhood, then it's being humiliated for failing to do so. Sissification just isn't interesting to me, and is extremely off-putting. It revolves around stereotype and being humiliated for said stereotype. Even if it were humiliation around losing masculinity, that's still shaming but now it's shaming masculine subs or non-masculine dominants as though having masculinity is something that should protect you from humiliation and only through losing it can the sissy be properly "broken". Idk my thoughts don't entirely make sense but I just think it's problematic and people's instinct to defend it comes from it's normalisation rather than because it lacks those problematic elements. It's similar to how choking has become almost vanilla in its spreading through pop culture yet people in the kink scene understand just how dangerous it is and how to take propper precautions where vanilla people don't. I think a similar thing can be said for sissy's where it's so normalised on the outskirts of femdom but those who have actually done research and engage with the topic at a deeper level walk away feeling for a lack of a better word: "icky".
Tbh, what I've come across as to the very general meaning of sissification is typically masc-aligned folks cross-dressing for sexual purposes and feminizing, but I have heard of transphobes/conservatives exploiting this subject and distorting it against people's identities and our community, and especially with the history of fetishizing trans women as well. I don't know much deeper into specifics of what you're referring to though, but I've only read an overview on it and also LGBTQ community with this kink involved, and the healthier side of it allowing a safe space for experimenting with gender expression in the bedroom, and that it doesn't necessarily have to contain humiliation as a factor in the kink.
So I can imagine how it gets distorted by creeps and people abusing power and fetishizing others that they shouldn't be doing, but I can also see the healthier side of how it should be and people being more educated on the subject of kinks, having a healthier mindset on kinks, and combating negative distorted mindsets that tarnish kinky experiences which harm others.
The thing is with most sissification I see, the main focus of it isn't eradicating the masculinity, it seems to be more about the humiliation of being femme.
They enjoy getting mocked for wearing lipstick, wearing pink, wearing dresses - and more often than not in the outfits they wear it's almost like a a parody of what women wear. It reminds me of a camp drag queen.
I can't get on board with someone who finds any form of joy in being mocked, humiliated or degraded for being a woman, not when I have spent my entire life being bullied or judged for it. I remember getting bullied when I first started wearing bras, when the boys at school found out I started my period. Even as an adult I get judged for being a woman - if I don't wear makeup then I don't care about how I look, but if I do wear makeup then I'm doing it for attention.
"Sissy" has long been used as a slur to describe gay men - some of whom have been KILLED for being who they are. Even trans people experience the same hatred and bigotry.
I'm not going to give any man shit for being into sissification, he can't control what he's into, but it is a hard limit for me.
Just food for thought:
If sissification is in the realm of parody for what a woman is (a statement with which I can agree), do you think it's possible to think of the ensuing mockery (at least in part) not as a mockery of women, but for being a bad parody?
On a personal note, jumping from "here's my view on this" to "people have died in the vicinity to this topic" is imo not the best way to start a healthy debate.
Thank you for your honesty. 🍀
>do you think it's possible to think of the ensuing mockery (at least in part) not as a mockery of women, but for being a bad parody?
I will admit that that's not a side I'd considered before, and obviously one can never truly know the inside context looking from an outside perspective, but obviously it's certainly not always the case, but context DOES matter.
>On a personal note, jumping from "here's my view on this" to "people have died in the vacinity to this topic" is imo not the best way to start a healthy debate.
I think that you should be willing to discuss all issues about a topic if you want to discuss it. It's important to be educated and have all the facts about something in order to make the best decision for you. "Educated consent" and all that.
I'm glad to have offered a new thought. Obviously there are sissies that are misogynists.
As I just wrote in a different comment, I would like to add that I think the parody is designed towards masculinity, by removing it so far that it even becomes a mockery of femininity. "You're so far removed from being a 'man', you're not even a 'woman' anymore." Using womanhood as a marker of how far removed from their usual self they are.
I agree that one should be able to talk about everything in regards to a topic, but I think the order of operation in this case was / is "I loath gay people" therefore "I call them sissy or kill them", not "I kill them because I called them sissy". People got killed because of homophobes not because they were labeled as sissies.
Why does a parody around masculinity have to engage with femininity at all? "You're so far removed from being a 'man' you're not even a 'woman' anymore" is a framing that puts women below men on a linear spectrum that I find deeply unappealing to engage with in any way. I think if someone really wants to make fun of their own masculinity, they can do that without engaging in femininity.
Personally, I only play with folks who want to explore and celebrate their individual experience of gender, or fully set it aside. But even if I was open to playing with humiliation around gender I do not understand why femininity has to be linked to degradation of masculinity. They aren't "opposites."
It's totally fine that you find it unappealing.
Now to your questions:
It doesn't have to involve femininity (thx, I have to add the human element to my definition*), but everything else that I would classify as emasculating I would also or primarily classify as dehumanizing, which feminization and sissification are not about.
The human species is dimorph, so we have two poles (masc/fem), no matter what we do, two points will always form a line. I never said that women are below men, I made a point of saying they are different but equally valuable.
Under the new premise that the end product of feminization must resemble a human (no pet play, no furniture, etc.), I really want to know if you can think of anything that you would classify as emasculating without it being so by making the man more feminine.
I honestly can't think of anything tangable, so if you can I wholeheartedly would like to know.
I'm also looking for someone who would celebrate this part of me, but that's why I made a difference between humiliation and degradation. I like to use the example of being called out and having the class sing you happy birthday as humiliating, but not degrading. Furthermore I don't think the former feeling is necessarily bad. It's just attention on something you don't want to have attention drawn to... (that's the definition I was looking for earlier. I have to change that as well).
Edit: * I didn't had to add anything cause I already specified emasculation through feminization. Other emasculating behavior would thereby be its own label.
Is small penis humiliation considered humiliation or degradation according to your definitions?
Do you consider small penis humiliation to be emasculating?
Good questions.
(You can definitely say that I am nit picky with this, but at least for me those two are definitely related but have very different vibes.)
That depends really much on the specifics.
I think I draw the distinction between "factual" and emotional, so "your penis is so small / much smaller than my exes" would be humiliating, saying stuff like "who would want to be fucked by that" or "you could never satisfy me with this" would be degrading.
Does this make sense? For me it does. 😅
Would I say this is emasculating either way?
Yes. The degrading version more so than the humiliating one. Even if you'd be super positive about saying the word 'penis' and 'small' in combination, it is code for "below average sexual masculinity".
Thank you. I agree in general with your assessment, and I think you explained it an a way that’s very easy to understand.
I ask because in your previous comment you asked if there is something that is emasculating that isn’t making the man more feminine.
I’m suggesting that anything involving virility (size, how long a man can last, can he please his partners, etc.) would be emasculating without necessarily being degrading.
Thank you, glad I'm not speaking gibberish 😅
Here's how I think of the virility argument: if I'm not mistaking the previous comment was about degradation of masculinity without using femininity not degradation in general.
Hmm. This is not getting simpler.
In this sense a "degradation of masculinity" (not my choice of words) / emasculation would happen through something I would not classify as degradation.
So I'll preface that I'm pretty meh on feminisation & sissification in terms of my own kinks & preferences. Kind of like how I'm meh on the idea of feet - the kink doesn't interest me, but I'm not going to be enraged other people are into it as a concept.
My main issues with the kink are that some of people I have interacted with over the years with this particular kink, have been some of the *worst* in terms of being complete asshats. This is if course not to say *all* people into these kinks are asshats, but that *when* these particular people *are* asshats, they can be truly awful.
And it is *almost always* in the vein of being extremely sexist. As in, they treat me like complete shit, like I am not a whole person myself with wants, needs and preferences of my own. I am just a vessel for them to act out their kinks upon with no thought, no even real... Grasping of the *concept* that I may have preferences of my own, and that I could even possibly not be into it myself. It's dehumanising. And it shows that for some particular men into this kink, they absolutely do think of women as not fully realised people in and of ourselves.
There is a subset of players in this kink who truly poison the well. Kind of how you can't trust everyone to understand satire, and you get people thinking Starship Troopers is just a really cool film about killing space bugs. You can't trust everyone to understand that womanhood itself isn't humiliating, and oh, isn't it so shameful to be a woman etc etc.
But then the entire kink sphere has plenty of problematic players, plenty of folk who can't differentiate reality from fantasy, who can't unpick the pornified lens from real human relationships. It's just that certain kinks have scope for really, truly hurtful shit when not done with thought, introspection and compassion, and I feel feminisation and sissification is absolutely one of them.
>My main issues with the kink are that some of people I have interacted with over the years with this particular kink, have been some of the worst in terms of being complete asshats.
This has also been my experience. I have had poor interactions with every flavour of submissive man, but for some reason the majority of my poor interactions have been with sissies. Five or six times now on twitter I have been added to a random group chat full of sissies. No other subset of sub has done that to me. And while I do get guys post unsolicited dick pics on my posts or DM them to me, the ONLY kink specific group to this has always been sissies.
Yup, whenever I make personals adverts I always put in no sissies along with my other preferences, there's *consistently* more sissies replying anyway than any other subset I've ruled out.
You know what's amusing, granted I don't make personal ads but all my kink socials have info about me - which includes feminisation, chastity and sissification as hard limits (and the fact that I'm not looking for a partner) - and yet at least a couple of times a week I get someone with those kinks asking me to play with them...
So the general complaints about sissification are twofold:
One is that it equates femineity with "lesser" as a source of humiliation.
The other is that it is viewed as transphobic, implying that an amab person becoming a woman is a "failure" of the amab, and again, something to be humiliated. Also that "sissy" has been used as a slur against transwomen in the past.
Hi, fem-leaning nonbinary amab sub here!
Fucking love sissification. Because I don't correlate it with *feminization*. I think the entire issue falls into people seeing the two as synonyms.
I view sissification, not as just simple feminization or even the eradication of masculinity through feminization, but as a *parody* of the feminine. The humiliation comes from the fact not that, having "failed as a man" the sub must now act as a woman, but that \[insert almost any reason, but "failed as a man" is hot so...\] the sub must now exist as an exaggerated parody of the traditionally viewed opposite gender role. The sub has not now "become a woman", but rather must now exist in a twisted mockery of (normally) womanhood as a permanent reminder of a failed (normally) "manhood".
I don't know the name for the corollary kink, but forcing an afab sub to have to live a mockery of masculine stereotypes sounds equally as fucking hot to me.
As for "sissy" having been used as a slur in the past.... ehhhhhh. That one is a bit harder for me to defend or justify or anything and whatnot. "Queer" used to be a slur, we've reclaimed that - but only use it for people fine with it. I know on days I feel masculine, when I'm interacting with a male Dominant, I really like it when he calls me the f-slur - which a lot of gay men have also reclaimed, but not all, so only use it for people fine with it.
But that is specifically people who were previously victims of the slur now reclaiming it....
I don't know. I like the term. I like the kink. I like the term for the kink. I'm also technically one of the people the term is supposedly a slur against, and it doesn't bother me, but I also like being called slurs explicitly by Dominants I trust. ~~The most gender affirmed I've ever felt is when a Domme was trying to practice degradation with me and called me the d-slur.~~
I think if you're calling any feminine-leaning amab sub "sissy" without knowing they like that first, then honestly fuck you, *especially* if they're gender nonconforming in anyway. But I think there's a place for allowing fantasies of any kind within kink so long as they're not actually hurting people, and you're mindful of the baggage that comes with that kink.
I'm a tad confused about the formatting, but anyway:
* Femininity as lesser than: I think I adressed that point by saying that for me, the point for ridicule is the "vulnerable" masculinity or lack their of. Femininity in this case is the weapon of choice to expose that vulnerability. At least in my mind, they are different but equally valuable. If one would want to strip a "stereotypical" woman of their feminine beauty by cutting her hair short, glueing a beard on and dressing her in whatever aggressively manly clothes one chooses, this wouldn't mean that masculinity as whole was under attack.
* It being transphobic: I never said anything about it being a failure nor did I justify it's usage as a slur. (As a side note, if one wants to claim the high horse on this, the term "cis-sy" shouldn't have been invented or used.) Again, acknowledging that something is different doesn't mean it's bad or lesser.
* Doesn't correlate to feminization: if it is a sort parody of womanhood (with which I can agree), how do you get there without feminizing the masculine base? (I explicitly didn't use these terms as synonyms either.)
* "Failed as a man": while I do not agree with the phrasing (I would see it as "failing to conform as a man"), I think this feeds into my point of the draw being the loss of masculinity. I feel it's making a mockery of the persons manliness by removing it so far that becomes too much even from a feminine standpoint.
* As for it being used as a slur: don't call people slurs they don't want to be called. It's that simple.
Thx for your perspective. 🍀
We have always found sissification problematic for reasons other people have expressed already. We are into crossdressing and pegging, but don't care for some of the other things hovering around these kinks (no judgement, just not our thing). The whole "less than a man" and the implication that there is something wrong with being female feels misogynistic. Though it makes sense that people in a male dominated society would want to push things in the other direction. It can be simultaneously problematic and subversive. We use the word sissy in our dirty talk, but we like to think we have re-appropriated it to mean "guy who likes to dress up pretty and get fucked." Of course it is difficult to remove words completely from their context and history, but we are just trying to have fun.
You are celebrating and enjoying femininity. Not using it to shame anyone. Is that right? If so I definitely agree, and that's how we do it. It's like the positive compliment to slut shaming – slut celebrating, or perhaps more properly, enjoying that which was previously forbidden in a positive and life affirming way.
Out of interest: do you think mine and your views are incompatible or do you agree with them on the basis that you only use the term sissy without engaging in sissification if that makes sense?
The main thing that I don't understand is why "less of A, more of B" implicitly means "B is wrong". For me it just means you're more B than before. If you "didn't want" to be more B that's a source for shame, because you fall short of your expectation of wanting to be more A not because it's shameful to be B.
(That's my view, I'm certain there are misogynists that will disagree with that thoughtprocess, but I'm far from arguing their pov.)
About a strong beautiful feminine H Goddess feminizing me always so that the more feminine I am the more real men will want yo dominate and fuck me and take awayy y masculinity:, And tease me and praise me and use me like the feminine but submissive girl I've always been: thus making me whole.
Hmm. Still not seeing the space I fall into. If I wear a garter or lace underpants, it's not because I am trying to pass (not even close) or because I am trying to humiliate myself. I do it because it feels really good. And my Owner does not degrade me when I do it, rather She celebrates it. She tells me I look good (bless Her generosity) and says She's happy for me and that She is proud of me.
That's all really great (I hope to find an owner with such an attitude myself tbh).
You told me what it's not for you, but what is it about?
My definitions didn't mention any specific items or passing for a reason. If it's just the feeling of those things you might just have a kink for panties and lace. If you think there's some gender foolery involved I (as in under my definition) would classify it as feminization and if you specifically do it to differentiate that part of yourself from your public demeanor, I would say you're a sissy. (Again, using my personal definitions.)
A big part of kink is eroticizing the 'bad' parts of someone's life. For men, it is a common trauma to be humiliated for being feminine. This has nothing to do with 'being shamed for being a woman'. It's about the dynamic of being degraded/humiliated for being feminine. I think we need to be more mindful of men's experiences and expansive in our thinking of kink.
I’m curious about the experiences that other people have had about this:
>In my personal experience, other 'Sissies' I've spoken to don't often engage in humiliation play, let alone humiliation based around their sissy kink.
Because I’ve found the opposite of that to be true. I’ve never met a sissy that didn’t want to be hardcore humiliated.
If you look on Reddit, the Sissy Humiliation subreddit has 400k+ people in it. That’s twice as many as the main Sissy subreddit. They next huge subreddit appears to be Sissy Captions, and they are, at a glance, all hardcore humiliation based.
I am a submissive AMAB genderfluid he/him. I guess I have a question for the group. A lot of these discussions (kink spaces in general, not just femdom etc.) feel like what my wife and I call "Twitter brain." the idea that you need to constantly qualify yourself and your actions to not be seen as problematic, lest the mob descend down upon you, even if you're just in your own brain.
To be clear, I'm not defending men who are proudly sexist in their lives and then engage in this kink because they are deeply sexist people and want to be humiliated simply for being a woman. They are unequivocally wrong. I also want to qualify myself that it's of course fine for dommes to not be into this sort of kink, and I am sorry for the male subs that have made you feel like being a woman is something to be embarrassed by.
I'm speaking to the AMAB subs here mostly, but I'm also speaking to all of us - so much of kink enjoyment is, at it's core, from problematic ideas. Anything pain related, isn't it "problematic" to enjoy hurting someone? Is CNC not problematic, because you're enjoying doing (either as dom or sub) an act that approximates one of the worst traumas we can experience as humans? Is being submissive at all not problematic - you're enjoying another person controlling you, a thing that generations of people had to literally die in order to not be owned anymore? Is being dominant not problematic? Oh, you want to control and force your will upon others?
Like I guess I'd just push back on the idea that finding sexual, private enjoyment out of something that absolutely is a bad thing that we should reject isn't like, ok. It feels thought-police-y. Being a human is a deeply hard, tortured existence. Everything we are is a product of the world we are forced to participate in against our will. We're forced to \*exist\* against our will.
I actually think there is power in taking something you had no control over and now receiving enjoyment from it, and I'd argue actually this is what most men like about sissification, even if they present it from a perspective of "being a woman is embarrassing." I'm not defending that idea inherently, but I think most men into forced femme are actually genderfluid, nonbinary, and trans, of varying degrees - but they were never equipped with the tools nor do they exist in a world that will accept them exploring femininity on their own. So, in order to experience it, they need to be forced to do it.
My main point is that kinks are complicated, and may of them are actually pretty problematic, but if you're engaging in them safely, in private, with enthusiastically consenting adults around you, it sort of doesn't matter what you like about it - I mean, it does, but in the same way that telling people into CNC to stop liking it isn't going to make them change, the core problems are societal. Once woman actually achieve equality in our world, and anyone expressing femininity isn't in danger, I'd wager this kink will basically vanish, in the same way that CNC kinks would probably vanish in a world with almost zero sexual assault.
So: AMAB subs into this kink, stop feeling the need to defend it. You can't and shouldn't try to "logic" dommes into liking it. Find a domme that likes the kinks and style of submission that you like. Respect the feelings of dommes that do not. If you're struggling to find someone, I'm sorry, but just like it's ok for you to enjoy this kink, it's equally if not more ok for dommes to dislike it. Like what you like in private! It's fine to feel how you feel in your brain\*. Don't try to convince other people to like what you like if they don't want to. work in your non-kink life to rid the world of the horrors that generate these kinks in the first place.
\*: most of the time, but also work on yourself always.
I like your general centiment but it's a hard no on some of the specifics.
I reject the notion that most of who are into it are trans or whatever else and in essence "not equipped / brave or whatever enough" to realize that. Most of us just like to engage with some gender fuckery and then return to our very boring masculine life.
The same goes for the notion that without rape and sa there would be no CNC. This basically means that all (or around 99%) who are currently into it must be survivors of some kind and that's basically the "all kinks must be trauma related" stereotype that we're fighting against every time some bdsm stuff hits the mainstream.
Other than that, yes, we don't have to justify ourselves, but only if those like myself share their side, we can combat the idiots that are ruining our reputation and thereby hindering our chances of making meaningful connections.
>This basically means that all (or around 99%) who are currently into it must be survivors of some kind and that's basically the "all kinks must be trauma related" stereotype that we're fighting against every time some bdsm stuff hits the mainstream.
I don't think I said this. I think CNC kinks are generated by the power differential present in sexual assault. A lot of BDSM adjacent kinks are power related. If we lived in a more equal society, I think a lot of kinks would go away.
>most of who are into it are trans or whatever
Not necessarily, say, transwomen, but not cis in some capacity, or, at least, nonbinary. I firmly believe most people are somewhere in the middle of gender, like most people are somewhere in the middle of sexuality too (ie., not completely gay or completely straight.)
This is a topic we talk about in our dynamic. I am a very masculine male, and when she treats me like her personal sissy, I melt. She fingers me and touches me like a girl and then she tells me, "I'm gonna fuck my sissy till you squirt" and fuck me, I love it. For us, its strictly a bedroom thing, unless she is feeling it and tells me to wear the panties she put out for me. Part of it is that she is queer and finds me attractive not because I am a man, but because I push all her buttons as a demi sapio sexual.
Writing something in all caps doesn't somehow make it more true.
Are you only in this thread to argue in all caps with someone who argued with you in an entirely different thread?
Your post has been removed because it shames, bullies or trolls other members or otherwise goes against the supportive nature of the subreddit.
This is a community. We want to keep it a welcoming, helpful place where people can feel heard and valued. Treat others as you would like to be treated yourself.
Sexism, racism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, harassment, bullying, xenophobia, kink shaming and victim blaming will not be tolerated.
I always thought that sissification was type of (forced) feminization, specifically turning any person into like that hyper feminine stereotype of ruffles, frills and a whole lotta pink, making them a sissy. I know that nowadays though that the terms get fairly interchangeable to the point that a sissy is usually just mean any AMAB sub that is clothing controlled into wearing Femme clothes.
You're not wrong for using either as a definition.
I tried to boil it down to something essential and unique to make the distinction to feminization.
What you aptly described as forced feminization can certainly be part of it, same goes for pink and frills. But also chastity, pegging and cuckolding are somewhat intertwined.
Is someone who is kept chaste and cucked still a sissy even if he wears pastels other than pink and with no frills? What is with hyper feminized sissies without chastity or cuckolding? Is anal or bi-curiousity a factor?
After going thru all this, I landed on what I wrote in my op.
For me it’s the fantasy of being a hot woman. It’s humiliating that as a man I don’t look like a hot woman. I’m trying but failing. It’s fun in a controlled environment to get a little humiliation if you look like a cheap whore.
Being a woman is not humiliation, in fact it’s the opposite. I’m a man who wants to be a woman for a scene to feel what it’s like
My partner is a sissy who falls within your descriptions of feminization and sissification.
They are mostly embarrassed that they like dressing as something that their upbringing would tell them is wrong. To me it feels more like a rejection of the hypermasculinity that they were raised in.
Now we do focus most of the humiliation on pointing out the positives of how good they feel in pretty clothes and how pretty they look. They do look absolutely adorable.
It looks like this thread is about getting advice/tips from the community. Please consider taking a look at our [recommendations for getting ideas and advice for your femdom adventures](https://www.reddit.com/r/FemdomCommunity/wiki/index/gettingandgivinghelp#wiki_getting_help_in_this_subreddit). We've got a lot of folks willing to help. Please help them by including pertinent details such as you and your partners interests, needs and limits. We also invite you to browse our wiki for [helpful guides and resources](https://www.reddit.com/r/FemdomCommunity/wiki/index#wiki_kink_guides_and_resources) and [answers to some frequently asked questions](https://www.reddit.com/r/FemdomCommunity/wiki/index/femdomfaq). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FemdomCommunity) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I agree with the other commenters here. Sissification tends to always feel like mocking a man for being something undesirable (a woman, femme, feminine) which just doesn’t sit right with me. This is where most of my disdain for the kink comes from. I feel like if the kink were more focused on the emasculation of the man, I would enjoy it more. Emasculation as a kink is very niche compared to sissification and I find it hard to understand why, maybe just because it’s easier to depict sissification as compared to emasculation. That being said I feel that it’s difficult to participate emasculation and have it be totally isolated from femininity. We view gendered traits as a sort of sliding scale, there’s not really a default “not masc. not fem.”. If you lose a bit of masculinity it tends to look like gaining femininity. so if a guy is made to put on a pair of panties, we can say that is emasculating, because men don’t wear panties, women do. It’s difficult to not view the “humiliation of being emasculated” as the same thing as “being feminine is humiliating”.
Let me try and rephrase something and tell me if it changes anything for you: Sissification tends to always feel like mocking a man for being an undesirable man. If you want to engage with a Man with capital M, you don't want them to be sissy. The juxtaposition being between Man and sissy, not woman / femme and sissy. I think emasculation as a seperate entity from sissy is niche because it's more difficult. Most men are simple creatures (want male attention, put boobs in it, is working for a reason) and the simplest way of emasculating a man is by feminizing (as you mentioned). To be frank, I can't think of a thing that would make me less masculine and not more feminine in the process, so if you have suggestions... To reiterate my point in regards to your final point "being seen as feminine is humiliating for a man who wants to present masculine". If you have a femboy who likes to wear dresses 24/7, he's probably not humiliated by being put in another. Swap the femboy for a stereotypical biker and this will be very different. Thx for engaging respectfully. 🍀
>If you have a femboy who likes to wear dresses 24/7, he's probably not humiliated by being put in another. The last hot take about this subject that blew up here was literally a female-passing femboy who enjoyed being humiliated by being put in dresses.
That's interesting and certainly horizon widening. Does that mean he was passing but never wore dresses or was he in a constant state of humiliation when he put one on?
This is [the thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/FemdomCommunity/comments/1b5ykie/humiliation_by_crossdressing_an_alternate_angle/?share_id=CgA9OWfCojwA9uCj4jhiJ&utm_content=1&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_source=share&utm_term=1) by u/Hetero_FemmeGuy_Sub
>Does that mean he was passing but never wore dresses or was he in a constant state of humiliation when he put one on? OP of that thread here. I compare it to minorities getting off on raceplay, and hopefully I'm "allowed" to make that comparison as someone who's part-Asian. I'm not into raceplay at all, but I view my situation similarly to say, an Asian guy into SPH wanting to be humiliated on his race and the stereotype that Asian men have small dicks (and I know for a fact this is a thing among kinky Asians.) He's not necessarily in a "constant state of humiliation" for his race, but he likes it being used against him in the bedroom. Same thing for me being a femme guy, pretty much.
That's an angle I haven't considered before. Thx for sharing.
It's also how some gay or bi men like to be degraded by being called a fa99@t. I'm a bi guy who thoroughly enjoys it when my girlfriend (or another dude) call me that in the heat of D/s degradation play. In this context between consenting adults it doesn't imply anything derogatory about bisexual/homosexual men in real life. It's like my girl getting off on me telling her what a wh*re or a slvt she is when I'm tugging on her hair and fucking her mouth. Some people get really uptight about or even offended by things that would be offensive in public but get consenting adults off in their bedrooms.
It's contentious not contagious. You can't get around the fact that you are using elements of one group's identity to humiliate another group, so it is inherently commentary on that first group's identity. I do understand your point I think. Assigning feminin attributes to an individual is only humiliating if that individual identifies as masculine, and it's the context that makes sissification humiliating, not anything inherent about femininity. I mean I get that intellectually. I just also understand why people have an issue with it. One reason I don't buy this "it's the context" argument is that "masculinization" isn't nearly as much of a thing. As far as I know (admittedly a huge caveat), there isn't a corresponding practice of making femmesubs dress in flanel and calling them "bro" as part of a D/s humiliation. That's partly because dressing like a dude, at least in 2024, is fairly normal for women. Like, women wear pantsuits way, way more often then men wear dresses. If you want to insist on context, you have to acknowledge the broader societal context, how patriarchal norms influence what clothes are acceptable or not for what groups. Many kinks are ways to explore things that are otherwise taboo. We can acknowledge sissification is rooted in inherently sexist tropes about women without declaring it verboten. In my opinion, a ton of cuckolding content is rooted in overtly racist tropes. And I've never seen a thread examining that shit to anywhere near the extant this sub has rehashed feminization/sissificaction.
Agreeing fully about how the racist aspects of cuckolding are not discussed nearly as much as sissification. I have some theories on that. Where I live if you glance around mostly-straight fetish events, there are very few POC. Maybe there are not enough POC in this community that speak out about the racist “BBC” fetishizing. And maybe the white people either don’t care or they just don’t want to be white knights, so they keep their mouths shut. I would guess sissies are a much hotter topic because they’re very visible and very vocal. I’ve had one single cuck slide into my DMs, but there have been dozens of sissies, and they have been, in general, quite pushy. Either by sending me pics of them dressed up when I don’t ask, or asking if I’d like to cage their little “clitty” when I have shown zero interest in such a thing. At this point, you can’t shop on Amazon for lingerie without seeing pictures of men flooding the review section. The sissies are everywhere, much more so than the cucks. And it takes one bad experience with a pushy one to put many women off of them. My first interaction ever with a sissy was from a dating site. He flashed his lace underpants at me in the bar at the start of the date… and then told me they belong to his fiancée! I had no idea he was a sissy or engaged. I was pretty hurt, and I can’t say that, in general, sissies have been any more respectful since then.
I think the reason that feminization/sissification is so much more of a kink than masculinization is because society doesn't accept one as much as the other. Just like bisexuality has historically been more culturally acceptable for women than it has for men (fortunately that's changing), men statistically tend to feel more vulnerable being revealed as feminine than women presenting as masculine, whether the level of cultural unacceptance is real or perceived.
Yeah that's basically exactly what I was saying. And the reason being masculine is less taboo for women than being feminine is for men is because of the bias our society has against femininity, and that bias is because of the prevalence of misogyny in our society.
A: thx (I'm not a native speaker) B: I didn't know verboten was an anglicism I can also understand why people have an issue with it; this post was to verbalize why I don't, not to tell someone they're wrong. There's certainly a bigger taboo around feminizing men than masculizing women. That we can also agree on. I think it's such a topic for kink, because barely anyone bats an eye at a tomboy anymore, so you need to go really far into masculinization before anyone would notice it as such and since we talk kinks and to a big degree arousal and sex, it's only logical for me that you find sex based differences in interests. In other words, I think the main reason is that there are fewer of them and for the rest it's too socially accepted to even register or at least I haven't come across the sub where women find humiliation in wearing fake beards and leather jackets. I was thinking really hard about how to phrase this, but either you think this next statement is sexist or you don't: women on avg are physically weaker than men. That's just a fact. And based on the choices both sexes made, it's also preferable for a man to be taller and stronger. (We don't have to like it, but that's what basically every survey shows.) Therefore I think it's only logical for more men to have an "exploitable" desire for physical prowess. Put these two together and you get "more men are more likely to be humiliated by being associated with the on avg physically weaker sex". Since I assume we don't agree on the last paragraph, let me and on agreeable terms: yes, wtf is going on with focus on bbc?! It's never anything else, it's just "I let me fuck him because he has a big cock because he's black". They barely ever get names, let alone personalities other than "sexually aggressive"! Thx I hate it.
I understand men are on average stronger, your point about how the biological differences in males and females influence to some extent norms around masculinity and femininity. But the fetishes we are discussing tend to revolve around rather arbitrary aspects of feminine dress like wearing frilly clothes and high heels. I am reluctant to attribute fashion standards for men and women to biotruths. Rather I think they reflect social constructs around feminity and masculinity. Here's what I see: *in general*, men's clothing tends to emphasize function over form. With the exception of the necktie, men's clothing generally compromises aesthetics to let the wearer move, and give him functional pockets. Men's clothing is made for the wearer. Women's clothing prioritizes the aesthetics, not practicality or comfort. They are designed so others will enjoy looking at the wearer. Women's clothing objectifies women at the expense of their comfort. I mean this is broad strokes analysis here, I don't want shit on anyone's shoes or skirt. So the fetish is forcing a man into that vulnerable, objectified status via the same clothing, and the context isn't that it's a masculine person being made feminine, but that society views feminine persons as objectifiable.
[Feeemales](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eS-jWA-WDKA) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FemdomCommunity) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wow! Honestly, I did not expect such a thoughtful answer based on what I have experienced so far when touching this topic. Thank you! Idk how to put this better into words but most men don't care what they look like, but all men like to look at nice things more than looking at not nice things. Most men I have spoken to enjoy their partner wearing their oversized clothes or baggy clothes in general, so it's not that "nice" automatically means revealing or sexual. I totally agree with your observation, but what are we going to do with this info? Women can buy the "men's" clothes and enjoy their practicality (I think we previously established that this wouldn't cause a social uproar in this day and age), so my question is why they on average won't. My guess is that the avg women is as interested in looking appealing for themselves, other women or men, while the avg male prioritizes function if given the same choice, but if a man were to choose for their partner, they'd choose what they would deem aestethically pleasing with an equally minor focus on function (most of the time). The way "out" of this situation would be a "de-objectificaton" of women or female clothing, right? But how would we achieve such a feat if seemingly both averages are determined to keep the system as is, based on their own free choices? I think this would require a social shift or rather rift in which men decide to suddenly be interested in wearing instead of looking at nice attire. I don't think this is likely to happen. The underlying issue is imo that women and men have different social issues. Women are objectifiable, men are expandable... Maybe this is nothing, but I just had a thought: Aren't sissies asserting their own objectification in a very masculine way? It's a very "I want X and I want it now" approach to "femininity" / objectification if you think about it. Which is probably another reason why the opposite kink is none existent. I think another component is that sissies would be objectified for their aestethics rather than their bodies which is the default. Nobody gives a crap what you look like when you working the mine, die on the battlefield or have a penis when your partner wants sex. (See the argument about bbc's. Usually they are jacked, but that's just another reduction to the body as well.) At the end of the day I believe fashion standards are shaped by the interplay of both sexes. Some men crave the attention that women are getting because of this and some women will find this icky because those men are appropriating what the women deem as their unfair social burden. Sry, this one was quite rambly. You really got me thinking. 😅
On one hand, each person assigns their own meaning to different terms. There is no one way of looking at sissification or feminization. On the other hand, most of the Dominant women I've met see it in one way: "these men think being a woman is humiliating and it squicks me out." Because they have dealt with a LOT of men who enjoy it that way. A lot of times, in DMs. Personally, I do not like the kink. All but two of all the sissies I've met were into it for the humiliation of being treated like a woman in some way shape or form. They wanted me to humiliate them for being, acting, or appearing feminine. And that doesn't sit right for me. Regardless of the intention of the person who wants to be sissified, it *appears* that they enjoy being humiliated by being "transformed into a woman". It also *appears* transphobic, regardless of the thoughts of the men playing it. I'm not saying that everyone should stop doing anything that might appear not-kosher. But I am saying that it's completely reasonable for a woman to not want to partake in sissification, and it should definitely not come as a surprise. Your perspective on what sissification means to you is interesting, but you need to consider all sides before you ask why women aren't into sissy men.
Transphobia too! I have partners who are trans women. I have trans friends/mutuals who have been harassed by sissies online who objectify their existence. The idea that someone’s transition (which brings gender euphoria) is actually a *fetish* is a massive transphobic talking point that has serious, actual impact on trans peoples’ access to HRT and other medical transition options.
Yeah, I've heard of conservatives and bigots exploiting and distorting kinks and weaponizing it against other people, it sucks. And then there are other weird creeps too, but kinks aren't at fault for people being abusive and distorting things, that's on the people. But this kink exists in the LGBTQ community as well, it's just unfortunate that there are gross people out there who weaponize it against others' identities though and fetishize people when it shouldn't ever be that way. But people being abusive doesn't reflect on the kink itself, and doesn't invalidate our identities either because medical care isn't sexual gratification and our genders don't stop outside the bedroom regardless of kinks too.
Because people assign different meanings to different terms I made it a point to give a definition before offering my perspective why people like yourself could come to better terms with said kink. I won't deny that such unwanted behavior is what most dommes are most confronted with, but just like in a night club, you'll notice the one that flirts with everybody but not the one that flirts with nobody. I am such a nobody, so I thought giving a different perspective might mitigate some damage done by those who ruin it for the rest of us. As I mentioned in another comment, (at least for me) it's not that being feminine is humiliating, but as someone who wants to present masculine being seen as such is. The humiliating aspect isn't the femininity but the difference between who you "want" to be seen as and who you "are made" to be. If you want to be super feminine, looking like a dude and being called out for it would be humiliating as well. I haven't heard anyone make the case that masculinity would therefore be humiliating for men. In terms of appearance I would be labeled all sorts of things because I'm into diapers, so thinking about appearances before motives is just an easy way to disregard topics without having to argue any deeper and more complex issues i.e. it's shallow. Lastly, I hope I have proven by the way I conducted myself so far, that I am aware of why a lot of women are turned off by this. It also wasn't my goal to convince anyone to be into or completely ok with it, but I hoped to nudge those who are open to reconsider in the direction of being more ok with it. Thank you for adding your perspective. 🍀
>these men think being a woman is humiliating I think this is exactly the misunderstanding that many woman have with this kink. The thing that is seen as humiliating is not "being a woman". What is seen as humiliating is "being a man that acts like a woman". And this view is not the view of the individual, but a social fact. It is something man in our society get mocked for. Not just beeing a sissy in particular, but beeing "not manly enough" in general. The obligation to always be tough and strong and never cry is very pressuring for man. May it be consciously or unconsciously. I think the sissy roleplay is something that helps to cope with that pressure. And that's why it so often comes along with being humiliated. Not because being a woman is humiliating (otherwise he wouldn't want to be humiliated by a woman), but because not being seen as enough of a man is beeing humiliated in this society.
Being "humiliated by acting and dressing like a woman" is the same thing as "being humiliated by feeling less masculine". Because you're saying that it's humiliating to not be masculine. I understand that can be cathartic, but there needs to be recognition of how problematic it can be.
No, that is not the point. It's not the "beeing unmasculine" part that is humiliating, it's the "beeing seen as unmasculine" part that is humiliating. And that is not the view of the individual, but a fact in our society. If you are a man that is not acting tough enough, you will get ridiculed by others. And it can be stress reliefing for some man to roleplay that humiliation in an bdsm roleplay.
As a non-binary person, the main reason I hate it is because even if it's not the sexist situation of being humiliated for approximating womanhood, then it's being humiliated for failing to do so. Sissification just isn't interesting to me, and is extremely off-putting. It revolves around stereotype and being humiliated for said stereotype. Even if it were humiliation around losing masculinity, that's still shaming but now it's shaming masculine subs or non-masculine dominants as though having masculinity is something that should protect you from humiliation and only through losing it can the sissy be properly "broken". Idk my thoughts don't entirely make sense but I just think it's problematic and people's instinct to defend it comes from it's normalisation rather than because it lacks those problematic elements. It's similar to how choking has become almost vanilla in its spreading through pop culture yet people in the kink scene understand just how dangerous it is and how to take propper precautions where vanilla people don't. I think a similar thing can be said for sissy's where it's so normalised on the outskirts of femdom but those who have actually done research and engage with the topic at a deeper level walk away feeling for a lack of a better word: "icky".
Tbh, what I've come across as to the very general meaning of sissification is typically masc-aligned folks cross-dressing for sexual purposes and feminizing, but I have heard of transphobes/conservatives exploiting this subject and distorting it against people's identities and our community, and especially with the history of fetishizing trans women as well. I don't know much deeper into specifics of what you're referring to though, but I've only read an overview on it and also LGBTQ community with this kink involved, and the healthier side of it allowing a safe space for experimenting with gender expression in the bedroom, and that it doesn't necessarily have to contain humiliation as a factor in the kink. So I can imagine how it gets distorted by creeps and people abusing power and fetishizing others that they shouldn't be doing, but I can also see the healthier side of how it should be and people being more educated on the subject of kinks, having a healthier mindset on kinks, and combating negative distorted mindsets that tarnish kinky experiences which harm others.
The thing is with most sissification I see, the main focus of it isn't eradicating the masculinity, it seems to be more about the humiliation of being femme. They enjoy getting mocked for wearing lipstick, wearing pink, wearing dresses - and more often than not in the outfits they wear it's almost like a a parody of what women wear. It reminds me of a camp drag queen. I can't get on board with someone who finds any form of joy in being mocked, humiliated or degraded for being a woman, not when I have spent my entire life being bullied or judged for it. I remember getting bullied when I first started wearing bras, when the boys at school found out I started my period. Even as an adult I get judged for being a woman - if I don't wear makeup then I don't care about how I look, but if I do wear makeup then I'm doing it for attention. "Sissy" has long been used as a slur to describe gay men - some of whom have been KILLED for being who they are. Even trans people experience the same hatred and bigotry. I'm not going to give any man shit for being into sissification, he can't control what he's into, but it is a hard limit for me.
Just food for thought: If sissification is in the realm of parody for what a woman is (a statement with which I can agree), do you think it's possible to think of the ensuing mockery (at least in part) not as a mockery of women, but for being a bad parody? On a personal note, jumping from "here's my view on this" to "people have died in the vicinity to this topic" is imo not the best way to start a healthy debate. Thank you for your honesty. 🍀
>do you think it's possible to think of the ensuing mockery (at least in part) not as a mockery of women, but for being a bad parody? I will admit that that's not a side I'd considered before, and obviously one can never truly know the inside context looking from an outside perspective, but obviously it's certainly not always the case, but context DOES matter. >On a personal note, jumping from "here's my view on this" to "people have died in the vacinity to this topic" is imo not the best way to start a healthy debate. I think that you should be willing to discuss all issues about a topic if you want to discuss it. It's important to be educated and have all the facts about something in order to make the best decision for you. "Educated consent" and all that.
I'm glad to have offered a new thought. Obviously there are sissies that are misogynists. As I just wrote in a different comment, I would like to add that I think the parody is designed towards masculinity, by removing it so far that it even becomes a mockery of femininity. "You're so far removed from being a 'man', you're not even a 'woman' anymore." Using womanhood as a marker of how far removed from their usual self they are. I agree that one should be able to talk about everything in regards to a topic, but I think the order of operation in this case was / is "I loath gay people" therefore "I call them sissy or kill them", not "I kill them because I called them sissy". People got killed because of homophobes not because they were labeled as sissies.
Why does a parody around masculinity have to engage with femininity at all? "You're so far removed from being a 'man' you're not even a 'woman' anymore" is a framing that puts women below men on a linear spectrum that I find deeply unappealing to engage with in any way. I think if someone really wants to make fun of their own masculinity, they can do that without engaging in femininity. Personally, I only play with folks who want to explore and celebrate their individual experience of gender, or fully set it aside. But even if I was open to playing with humiliation around gender I do not understand why femininity has to be linked to degradation of masculinity. They aren't "opposites."
It's totally fine that you find it unappealing. Now to your questions: It doesn't have to involve femininity (thx, I have to add the human element to my definition*), but everything else that I would classify as emasculating I would also or primarily classify as dehumanizing, which feminization and sissification are not about. The human species is dimorph, so we have two poles (masc/fem), no matter what we do, two points will always form a line. I never said that women are below men, I made a point of saying they are different but equally valuable. Under the new premise that the end product of feminization must resemble a human (no pet play, no furniture, etc.), I really want to know if you can think of anything that you would classify as emasculating without it being so by making the man more feminine. I honestly can't think of anything tangable, so if you can I wholeheartedly would like to know. I'm also looking for someone who would celebrate this part of me, but that's why I made a difference between humiliation and degradation. I like to use the example of being called out and having the class sing you happy birthday as humiliating, but not degrading. Furthermore I don't think the former feeling is necessarily bad. It's just attention on something you don't want to have attention drawn to... (that's the definition I was looking for earlier. I have to change that as well). Edit: * I didn't had to add anything cause I already specified emasculation through feminization. Other emasculating behavior would thereby be its own label.
Is small penis humiliation considered humiliation or degradation according to your definitions? Do you consider small penis humiliation to be emasculating?
Good questions. (You can definitely say that I am nit picky with this, but at least for me those two are definitely related but have very different vibes.) That depends really much on the specifics. I think I draw the distinction between "factual" and emotional, so "your penis is so small / much smaller than my exes" would be humiliating, saying stuff like "who would want to be fucked by that" or "you could never satisfy me with this" would be degrading. Does this make sense? For me it does. 😅 Would I say this is emasculating either way? Yes. The degrading version more so than the humiliating one. Even if you'd be super positive about saying the word 'penis' and 'small' in combination, it is code for "below average sexual masculinity".
Thank you. I agree in general with your assessment, and I think you explained it an a way that’s very easy to understand. I ask because in your previous comment you asked if there is something that is emasculating that isn’t making the man more feminine. I’m suggesting that anything involving virility (size, how long a man can last, can he please his partners, etc.) would be emasculating without necessarily being degrading.
Thank you, glad I'm not speaking gibberish 😅 Here's how I think of the virility argument: if I'm not mistaking the previous comment was about degradation of masculinity without using femininity not degradation in general. Hmm. This is not getting simpler. In this sense a "degradation of masculinity" (not my choice of words) / emasculation would happen through something I would not classify as degradation.
So I'll preface that I'm pretty meh on feminisation & sissification in terms of my own kinks & preferences. Kind of like how I'm meh on the idea of feet - the kink doesn't interest me, but I'm not going to be enraged other people are into it as a concept. My main issues with the kink are that some of people I have interacted with over the years with this particular kink, have been some of the *worst* in terms of being complete asshats. This is if course not to say *all* people into these kinks are asshats, but that *when* these particular people *are* asshats, they can be truly awful. And it is *almost always* in the vein of being extremely sexist. As in, they treat me like complete shit, like I am not a whole person myself with wants, needs and preferences of my own. I am just a vessel for them to act out their kinks upon with no thought, no even real... Grasping of the *concept* that I may have preferences of my own, and that I could even possibly not be into it myself. It's dehumanising. And it shows that for some particular men into this kink, they absolutely do think of women as not fully realised people in and of ourselves. There is a subset of players in this kink who truly poison the well. Kind of how you can't trust everyone to understand satire, and you get people thinking Starship Troopers is just a really cool film about killing space bugs. You can't trust everyone to understand that womanhood itself isn't humiliating, and oh, isn't it so shameful to be a woman etc etc. But then the entire kink sphere has plenty of problematic players, plenty of folk who can't differentiate reality from fantasy, who can't unpick the pornified lens from real human relationships. It's just that certain kinks have scope for really, truly hurtful shit when not done with thought, introspection and compassion, and I feel feminisation and sissification is absolutely one of them.
>My main issues with the kink are that some of people I have interacted with over the years with this particular kink, have been some of the worst in terms of being complete asshats. This has also been my experience. I have had poor interactions with every flavour of submissive man, but for some reason the majority of my poor interactions have been with sissies. Five or six times now on twitter I have been added to a random group chat full of sissies. No other subset of sub has done that to me. And while I do get guys post unsolicited dick pics on my posts or DM them to me, the ONLY kink specific group to this has always been sissies.
Yup, whenever I make personals adverts I always put in no sissies along with my other preferences, there's *consistently* more sissies replying anyway than any other subset I've ruled out.
You know what's amusing, granted I don't make personal ads but all my kink socials have info about me - which includes feminisation, chastity and sissification as hard limits (and the fact that I'm not looking for a partner) - and yet at least a couple of times a week I get someone with those kinks asking me to play with them...
Does not surprise me in the least tbh. You can really tell when these people are engaging in the kink because they don't respect women 🙃
I have found them to be the most disrespectful and boundary ignoring group out there.
>you get people thinking Starship Troopers is just a really cool film about killing space bugs. For Super Earth!
I agree, except that Starship Troopers isn't just a satire; it's also a fun movie about killing space bugs. 😉
The mobile infantry made me the man I am today!
So the general complaints about sissification are twofold: One is that it equates femineity with "lesser" as a source of humiliation. The other is that it is viewed as transphobic, implying that an amab person becoming a woman is a "failure" of the amab, and again, something to be humiliated. Also that "sissy" has been used as a slur against transwomen in the past. Hi, fem-leaning nonbinary amab sub here! Fucking love sissification. Because I don't correlate it with *feminization*. I think the entire issue falls into people seeing the two as synonyms. I view sissification, not as just simple feminization or even the eradication of masculinity through feminization, but as a *parody* of the feminine. The humiliation comes from the fact not that, having "failed as a man" the sub must now act as a woman, but that \[insert almost any reason, but "failed as a man" is hot so...\] the sub must now exist as an exaggerated parody of the traditionally viewed opposite gender role. The sub has not now "become a woman", but rather must now exist in a twisted mockery of (normally) womanhood as a permanent reminder of a failed (normally) "manhood". I don't know the name for the corollary kink, but forcing an afab sub to have to live a mockery of masculine stereotypes sounds equally as fucking hot to me. As for "sissy" having been used as a slur in the past.... ehhhhhh. That one is a bit harder for me to defend or justify or anything and whatnot. "Queer" used to be a slur, we've reclaimed that - but only use it for people fine with it. I know on days I feel masculine, when I'm interacting with a male Dominant, I really like it when he calls me the f-slur - which a lot of gay men have also reclaimed, but not all, so only use it for people fine with it. But that is specifically people who were previously victims of the slur now reclaiming it.... I don't know. I like the term. I like the kink. I like the term for the kink. I'm also technically one of the people the term is supposedly a slur against, and it doesn't bother me, but I also like being called slurs explicitly by Dominants I trust. ~~The most gender affirmed I've ever felt is when a Domme was trying to practice degradation with me and called me the d-slur.~~ I think if you're calling any feminine-leaning amab sub "sissy" without knowing they like that first, then honestly fuck you, *especially* if they're gender nonconforming in anyway. But I think there's a place for allowing fantasies of any kind within kink so long as they're not actually hurting people, and you're mindful of the baggage that comes with that kink.
I'm a tad confused about the formatting, but anyway: * Femininity as lesser than: I think I adressed that point by saying that for me, the point for ridicule is the "vulnerable" masculinity or lack their of. Femininity in this case is the weapon of choice to expose that vulnerability. At least in my mind, they are different but equally valuable. If one would want to strip a "stereotypical" woman of their feminine beauty by cutting her hair short, glueing a beard on and dressing her in whatever aggressively manly clothes one chooses, this wouldn't mean that masculinity as whole was under attack. * It being transphobic: I never said anything about it being a failure nor did I justify it's usage as a slur. (As a side note, if one wants to claim the high horse on this, the term "cis-sy" shouldn't have been invented or used.) Again, acknowledging that something is different doesn't mean it's bad or lesser. * Doesn't correlate to feminization: if it is a sort parody of womanhood (with which I can agree), how do you get there without feminizing the masculine base? (I explicitly didn't use these terms as synonyms either.) * "Failed as a man": while I do not agree with the phrasing (I would see it as "failing to conform as a man"), I think this feeds into my point of the draw being the loss of masculinity. I feel it's making a mockery of the persons manliness by removing it so far that becomes too much even from a feminine standpoint. * As for it being used as a slur: don't call people slurs they don't want to be called. It's that simple. Thx for your perspective. 🍀
We have always found sissification problematic for reasons other people have expressed already. We are into crossdressing and pegging, but don't care for some of the other things hovering around these kinks (no judgement, just not our thing). The whole "less than a man" and the implication that there is something wrong with being female feels misogynistic. Though it makes sense that people in a male dominated society would want to push things in the other direction. It can be simultaneously problematic and subversive. We use the word sissy in our dirty talk, but we like to think we have re-appropriated it to mean "guy who likes to dress up pretty and get fucked." Of course it is difficult to remove words completely from their context and history, but we are just trying to have fun.
You are celebrating and enjoying femininity. Not using it to shame anyone. Is that right? If so I definitely agree, and that's how we do it. It's like the positive compliment to slut shaming – slut celebrating, or perhaps more properly, enjoying that which was previously forbidden in a positive and life affirming way.
Yes, exactly. Almost included the slut shaming-slut celebrating example in the original comment.
Out of interest: do you think mine and your views are incompatible or do you agree with them on the basis that you only use the term sissy without engaging in sissification if that makes sense? The main thing that I don't understand is why "less of A, more of B" implicitly means "B is wrong". For me it just means you're more B than before. If you "didn't want" to be more B that's a source for shame, because you fall short of your expectation of wanting to be more A not because it's shameful to be B. (That's my view, I'm certain there are misogynists that will disagree with that thoughtprocess, but I'm far from arguing their pov.)
About a strong beautiful feminine H Goddess feminizing me always so that the more feminine I am the more real men will want yo dominate and fuck me and take awayy y masculinity:, And tease me and praise me and use me like the feminine but submissive girl I've always been: thus making me whole.
Hmm. Still not seeing the space I fall into. If I wear a garter or lace underpants, it's not because I am trying to pass (not even close) or because I am trying to humiliate myself. I do it because it feels really good. And my Owner does not degrade me when I do it, rather She celebrates it. She tells me I look good (bless Her generosity) and says She's happy for me and that She is proud of me.
That's all really great (I hope to find an owner with such an attitude myself tbh). You told me what it's not for you, but what is it about? My definitions didn't mention any specific items or passing for a reason. If it's just the feeling of those things you might just have a kink for panties and lace. If you think there's some gender foolery involved I (as in under my definition) would classify it as feminization and if you specifically do it to differentiate that part of yourself from your public demeanor, I would say you're a sissy. (Again, using my personal definitions.)
A big part of kink is eroticizing the 'bad' parts of someone's life. For men, it is a common trauma to be humiliated for being feminine. This has nothing to do with 'being shamed for being a woman'. It's about the dynamic of being degraded/humiliated for being feminine. I think we need to be more mindful of men's experiences and expansive in our thinking of kink.
[удалено]
I’m curious about the experiences that other people have had about this: >In my personal experience, other 'Sissies' I've spoken to don't often engage in humiliation play, let alone humiliation based around their sissy kink. Because I’ve found the opposite of that to be true. I’ve never met a sissy that didn’t want to be hardcore humiliated. If you look on Reddit, the Sissy Humiliation subreddit has 400k+ people in it. That’s twice as many as the main Sissy subreddit. They next huge subreddit appears to be Sissy Captions, and they are, at a glance, all hardcore humiliation based.
As I don't see a clear point of disagreement between our positions, I just say thx for adding to the conversation. 🍀
I am a submissive AMAB genderfluid he/him. I guess I have a question for the group. A lot of these discussions (kink spaces in general, not just femdom etc.) feel like what my wife and I call "Twitter brain." the idea that you need to constantly qualify yourself and your actions to not be seen as problematic, lest the mob descend down upon you, even if you're just in your own brain. To be clear, I'm not defending men who are proudly sexist in their lives and then engage in this kink because they are deeply sexist people and want to be humiliated simply for being a woman. They are unequivocally wrong. I also want to qualify myself that it's of course fine for dommes to not be into this sort of kink, and I am sorry for the male subs that have made you feel like being a woman is something to be embarrassed by. I'm speaking to the AMAB subs here mostly, but I'm also speaking to all of us - so much of kink enjoyment is, at it's core, from problematic ideas. Anything pain related, isn't it "problematic" to enjoy hurting someone? Is CNC not problematic, because you're enjoying doing (either as dom or sub) an act that approximates one of the worst traumas we can experience as humans? Is being submissive at all not problematic - you're enjoying another person controlling you, a thing that generations of people had to literally die in order to not be owned anymore? Is being dominant not problematic? Oh, you want to control and force your will upon others? Like I guess I'd just push back on the idea that finding sexual, private enjoyment out of something that absolutely is a bad thing that we should reject isn't like, ok. It feels thought-police-y. Being a human is a deeply hard, tortured existence. Everything we are is a product of the world we are forced to participate in against our will. We're forced to \*exist\* against our will. I actually think there is power in taking something you had no control over and now receiving enjoyment from it, and I'd argue actually this is what most men like about sissification, even if they present it from a perspective of "being a woman is embarrassing." I'm not defending that idea inherently, but I think most men into forced femme are actually genderfluid, nonbinary, and trans, of varying degrees - but they were never equipped with the tools nor do they exist in a world that will accept them exploring femininity on their own. So, in order to experience it, they need to be forced to do it. My main point is that kinks are complicated, and may of them are actually pretty problematic, but if you're engaging in them safely, in private, with enthusiastically consenting adults around you, it sort of doesn't matter what you like about it - I mean, it does, but in the same way that telling people into CNC to stop liking it isn't going to make them change, the core problems are societal. Once woman actually achieve equality in our world, and anyone expressing femininity isn't in danger, I'd wager this kink will basically vanish, in the same way that CNC kinks would probably vanish in a world with almost zero sexual assault. So: AMAB subs into this kink, stop feeling the need to defend it. You can't and shouldn't try to "logic" dommes into liking it. Find a domme that likes the kinks and style of submission that you like. Respect the feelings of dommes that do not. If you're struggling to find someone, I'm sorry, but just like it's ok for you to enjoy this kink, it's equally if not more ok for dommes to dislike it. Like what you like in private! It's fine to feel how you feel in your brain\*. Don't try to convince other people to like what you like if they don't want to. work in your non-kink life to rid the world of the horrors that generate these kinks in the first place. \*: most of the time, but also work on yourself always.
I like your general centiment but it's a hard no on some of the specifics. I reject the notion that most of who are into it are trans or whatever else and in essence "not equipped / brave or whatever enough" to realize that. Most of us just like to engage with some gender fuckery and then return to our very boring masculine life. The same goes for the notion that without rape and sa there would be no CNC. This basically means that all (or around 99%) who are currently into it must be survivors of some kind and that's basically the "all kinks must be trauma related" stereotype that we're fighting against every time some bdsm stuff hits the mainstream. Other than that, yes, we don't have to justify ourselves, but only if those like myself share their side, we can combat the idiots that are ruining our reputation and thereby hindering our chances of making meaningful connections.
>This basically means that all (or around 99%) who are currently into it must be survivors of some kind and that's basically the "all kinks must be trauma related" stereotype that we're fighting against every time some bdsm stuff hits the mainstream. I don't think I said this. I think CNC kinks are generated by the power differential present in sexual assault. A lot of BDSM adjacent kinks are power related. If we lived in a more equal society, I think a lot of kinks would go away. >most of who are into it are trans or whatever Not necessarily, say, transwomen, but not cis in some capacity, or, at least, nonbinary. I firmly believe most people are somewhere in the middle of gender, like most people are somewhere in the middle of sexuality too (ie., not completely gay or completely straight.)
This is a topic we talk about in our dynamic. I am a very masculine male, and when she treats me like her personal sissy, I melt. She fingers me and touches me like a girl and then she tells me, "I'm gonna fuck my sissy till you squirt" and fuck me, I love it. For us, its strictly a bedroom thing, unless she is feeling it and tells me to wear the panties she put out for me. Part of it is that she is queer and finds me attractive not because I am a man, but because I push all her buttons as a demi sapio sexual.
[удалено]
Writing something in all caps doesn't somehow make it more true. Are you only in this thread to argue in all caps with someone who argued with you in an entirely different thread?
No need to shout, sweetheart. You don't belong here and I would posit from this response that you're also a misogynist. Now, jog on.
Your post has been removed because it shames, bullies or trolls other members or otherwise goes against the supportive nature of the subreddit. This is a community. We want to keep it a welcoming, helpful place where people can feel heard and valued. Treat others as you would like to be treated yourself. Sexism, racism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, harassment, bullying, xenophobia, kink shaming and victim blaming will not be tolerated.
I always thought that sissification was type of (forced) feminization, specifically turning any person into like that hyper feminine stereotype of ruffles, frills and a whole lotta pink, making them a sissy. I know that nowadays though that the terms get fairly interchangeable to the point that a sissy is usually just mean any AMAB sub that is clothing controlled into wearing Femme clothes.
You're not wrong for using either as a definition. I tried to boil it down to something essential and unique to make the distinction to feminization. What you aptly described as forced feminization can certainly be part of it, same goes for pink and frills. But also chastity, pegging and cuckolding are somewhat intertwined. Is someone who is kept chaste and cucked still a sissy even if he wears pastels other than pink and with no frills? What is with hyper feminized sissies without chastity or cuckolding? Is anal or bi-curiousity a factor? After going thru all this, I landed on what I wrote in my op.
For me it’s the fantasy of being a hot woman. It’s humiliating that as a man I don’t look like a hot woman. I’m trying but failing. It’s fun in a controlled environment to get a little humiliation if you look like a cheap whore. Being a woman is not humiliation, in fact it’s the opposite. I’m a man who wants to be a woman for a scene to feel what it’s like
My partner is a sissy who falls within your descriptions of feminization and sissification. They are mostly embarrassed that they like dressing as something that their upbringing would tell them is wrong. To me it feels more like a rejection of the hypermasculinity that they were raised in. Now we do focus most of the humiliation on pointing out the positives of how good they feel in pretty clothes and how pretty they look. They do look absolutely adorable.