Forum
>
General / Nonfiction
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
@zark: """Funny now that you say that. I think the big difference is that the content of most porn sites is based on human procreative biology. You have bare genitals everywhere, doing things together and alone, going in and out, smashing and sloshing, dripping and spewing fluids, being fondled, massaged, mangled and so on."""
Yeah, maybe it is. I´ve never really enjoyed it tbh, seeing people fucking. There is just no play or fun in it. Close ups and what you describe so well. With a beautiful muscular woman (not the porn stars like Angie Salvagno), you can start fantasizing a story or something. There is no thinking in pornography, only a release. Maybe thats why the big dumb masses like it so much? (The people who watch the latest marvel films and always go to the same place on vacation you know.)
"""This is a bit special, because as a fetish this has something to do with threat, force, superiority and inferiority. This is more like the schoolyard stuff before sexual maturity, where you had secret crushes and were afraid of being bullied. Ordinary porn is about abusing things you use to make children. Part of this fetish has more to do with feelings people had when they actually were children. Don't believe me. Just think about all the testimonies posted here."""
I get you and I would not be surprised if sexual fantasies are partially molded in our childhood. But I think that instead of this being "more like the schoolyard stuff before sexual maturity", it is a being in contact with the female part of you. You know, we all have both to some degree. Few men are like Jocko Willink.
I think a common muscle girl/woman fantasy can be that you´re a bit trapped with her. She playfully, gladly but still with control, wraps her legs around your waist from behind and you have the thrill of feeling the power and what she might come up with. (Maybe traces back to when you were afraid of women as a scrawny teenager.) Now, from my own experience this exact scenario turns women on as fuck. One exapmple: I dated this woman and when we made out in my sofa I held her real tight (but of course not violent) and then rubbed her pussy outside her pants. She touched my body a lot and later she had an orgasm. Not exactly of the ordinary for me, since I usually suck when it comes to intercourse. I think this is related to muscular women, you get my point I hope. Sorry for perhaps oversharing here.
I’m more attracted to a beautiful muscular woman than I am to a naked one. A muscular female in tight fitting clothes that highlights her body is sexier than one in the nude, at least to me. It leaves more to the imagination than just watching a pornographic fuckfest. Something like this
Sorry for a late reply,
@zark: ""Without agreeing with or straight away objecting to the existence of such a female part in men, I'd first like to understand what it refers to."" Yes, valid point, I just mean that I can find attraction in not being the powerful and dominant, or at least have some tension or a power struggle.
"""I see undivided attention there. But in the long term women are not attracted to and neither do they respect men who they can control. In women, just like in everyone else, as self-control gets better, an irrational need to control others goes down. But to respect you as a partner they usually need to know you would be able to hold your own."""
I´m not sure if you misread what I wrote. I said that women get very turned on by similar things that guys here who are into muscular women gets turned on by. Hence its not such a bad fantasy, as it is more similar to a "female fantasy" and makes it easier to understand one another. But of course, there has to be a balance etc.
Now we have steered away from the subject a bit. Whats the pysological reason... maybe its just impossible to try to say anythin about this with any sort of certainty. I dont think guys should worry about being attracted to powerful women, as long as the fantasy is not about the destruction of oneself. Do you agree?
I suspect part of it is the muscular female ought to be a confident female. Perhaps also that she can be mamma bear, if you will.
Confident female that you can bring with you to hunt mammoth and wooly rhino, while the other females of the tribe stay at the cave to paint their hands on the wall.
To he honest, I do not remember when my "awakening" had started but I knew that I was attracted to muscle. There is just something about muscle and strength on a woman that makes me feel safe. I know some men and women may find muscle on a woman "disgusting" but I do not feel that way at all. It just feels it makes sense for a woman to build muscle yet still feel sensual and impressive.
I guess it ties back to seeing female muscle in magazines, websites and even television. It just awakened something in me that just wants to feel their strength. IT may intimidate some people but it just makes me even more aroused. There could be something deeper but that is how I see with me.
@Marcel3saillies
Confident female that you can bring with you to hunt mammoth and wooly rhino, while the other females of the tribe stay at the cave to paint their hands on the wall.
This has exactly nothing to do with the topic. This is as smart as saying that for me, three gallons per tit is the minimum size I'll settle for. It makes no practical sense. The success of humanity depends on average females and sometimes above average males.
I am totally sure you have never hunted a mammoth nor a woolly rhino. I also think you're far better off learning to get along with other males. Or what is this? A soulmate fantasy mixed with a prehistory fantasy mixed with female muscle fantasy? But why despise all the other women? For effect only?
@GLM55
There is just something about muscle and strength on a woman that makes me feel safe.
This is interesting. I'm more familiar with the opposite explanation, in which the attraction is based on the release of stress hormones, as in a repetition of a trauma. It is more logical that male children feel traumatized by their mothers and it creates a pattern which they then act out.
I know some men and women may find muscle on a woman "disgusting" but I do not feel that way at all.
I would be interested in knowing what exactly those men feel. I feel personally that maybe extreme virilization or overdone body modification would be disgusting. To me, disgust is a private feeling that's not an argument by itself for or against anything. It can be explained, but by itself it's not an explanation. Maybe they feel the same way about any muscle. To your average person, big muscles on a woman are a form of extreme virilization and body modification.
These women, even if their muscles and strength often measure below that of the average healthy man, are visually more muscular and therefore more "manly" than the average man.
I think it's good to learn about one's "enemy". Not because he's your enemy and you respect him, but because you respect the reality you both live in. Often people's dislike of muscular females is a knee-jerk reaction. But what is it like when it is for a reason?
There could be something deeper but that is how I see with me.
From what I know it actually sounds like the opposite. The traumas and delusions are in a way "deep". The idea that muscles are sensual and impressive is shallow. In a healthy way.
Looking at one picture of Levie Nacional Hamad I got the idea that I would like her the same way both with and without muscles. I don't feel her muscles are a minus, but more like optional.
@the_settler
I dont think guys should worry about being attracted to powerful women, as long as the fantasy is not about the destruction of oneself. Do you agree?
We may agree on self-destructive in the sense of "I wish she would demonstrate her strength by breaking my bones, ripping my arm out of its socket and beating me unconscious with it, like a real female gorilla could do".
Statistically, lesbian relationships are often very unsatisfying and there's more domestic violence in them than in heterosexual relationships. They're more unstable too. This is because women get into them to fulfill certain emotional cravings, which then practically always fails to work out. So in principle the man's "ability to assume the female role" sounds like fine words but with no real benefit.
I don't believe in a virtue of having an experience purely for the sake of having it. I would need to see some benefit in it.
I think there's something more to this, but I'll get back to it later.
@zark: what does lesbian relationships have to do with this?
@GLM55: I agree with that. A woman who is muscular to some degree but has kept her femininity is just so fucking hot. And it´s not weird. Again, see what women are attracted to. A guy who can be fun/charming AND has muscles to indicate power (you know what I mean, no need to look like the gym is your life but still can hold your own or how to say) blows them away in general.
But then again, maybe it´s not really that easy either? I was quite small and weak as a kid, up until my late teens, and I think there might be a part of me from that time who is afraid of being sub/weaker than a woman and that spurs the sexual fantazy.
@the_settler Zarklephaser4 has no point and that is his point. He's totally infatuated with himself and his endless bloviating is his way of demonstrating his perceived intellect. He feels he must give a treatise to all the proles who could never understand his unique thoughts. He also thinks he's the gatekeeper of this thread as evidenced by his arrogant scolding of those comments he feels are "off topic". Typical pompous know-it all who probably plagiarizes from the DSM-5-TR. A regular Sigmund FRAUD.
@zark: what does lesbian relationships have to do with this?
@GLM55: I agree with that. A woman who is muscular to some degree but has kept her femininity is just so fucking hot. And it´s not weird. Again, see what women are attracted to. A guy who can be fun/charming AND has muscles to indicate power (you know what I mean, no need to look like the gym is your life but still can hold your own or how to say) blows them away in general.
But then again, maybe it´s not really that easy either? I was quite small and weak as a kid, up until my late teens, and I think there might be a part of me from that time who is afraid of being sub/weaker than a woman and that spurs the sexual fantazy.
I am glad to see that I am not alone. I really like muscular, pretty women.
I’m more attracted to a beautiful muscular woman than I am to a naked one. A muscular female in tight fitting clothes that highlights her body is sexier than one in the nude, at least to me. It leaves more to the imagination than just watching a pornographic fuckfest. Something like this
I feel the same way. I can still find a normal beautiful woman really attractive but a muscular dominant woman, especially in clothes, will always be a turn on for me on any circumstances. The weirdest part is that i find muscular woman in clothes way more attractive than when they are naked.
I will explain the "something more" I mentioned. I have realized there are people in the world who see human relationships in terms of drama. This is a single phenomenon, but can mean many things. One of them is that there is always a strong emotion associated with people and events. This would not matter if it wasn't for that the emotions are always supposed to be expressed freely or be considered valuable or essential for their own sake.
At its most extreme this means that the purpose of life is to trigger and get triggered. But the one who triggers others and gets triggered when he himself wants it, wins. The one who gets triggered by others, loses. The opposite of emotions flying and everyone getting triggered is to focus on the facts of the matter. This does not mean the other extreme. Emotions exist for a reason and sometimes some people get triggered no matter how reasonable you wanted to be.
Thinking about this one day I realized that cluster B is in some places called the "dramatic personality disorders". It includes narcissistic, historionic, borderline and antisocial personalities.
A very long time ago I began wondering why my attraction to female muscle did not seem like the sexuality of an adult man. I did not want babies with them. I did not want penetrative sex with them. I did not fantasize of a long-term relationship with them, neither of being seen with them or befriending them. I did not want them to make or see me orgasm. I just wanted them to thrill me as much as they could.
I also thought that I was fooling myself and that I secretly wanted to bonk them anyway. Or that at least nobody would believe me because it might have sounded so pure, innocent and fake. Yes, I am a man, but believe me or not, I don't always think of sex. Just wanted them to hold me, thrill me, kiss me and kill me, in no particular order. Or do something between posing, cuddling and dominating, depending on which day it was.
The weirdest part is that i find muscular woman in clothes way more attractive than when they are naked.
This. And many other similar remarks I've seen here recently. What I am getting at is I believe this is what I'd call "dramatic sexuality". Or the sexuality of a dramatic person. A person becomes dramatic by being raised in a dramatic environment, by dramatic parents, in a dramatic culture, browsing the dramatic Internet and participating in endless dramatic fights with known and unknown people. Dramatic also rhymes with traumatic. These are not the same but there is a connection. Trauma happens when a person is overwhelmed by emotions he doesn't know how to process. More often than not this is related to a parent or some other person in position of power expressing their drama. Usually loudly, sometimes violently.
A person grows used to certail level of drama. Someone who is dramatic in his sexuality and mental makeup will find non-dramatic people uninteresting and hard to relate to, and non-dramatic tasks boring and tedious. He'll also find non-dramatic sexuality something between awkward and disgusting. This is because for dramatic people, no matter how much you involve the other person physically, whether it is penetrative sex or extreme masochism, in the end it's all about the self and its expression.
Drama and dramatic tendencies in one's personality can be given up. It begins with recognizing the phenomenon. It will eventually become apparent it's easier said than done, because a person is used to operating on a certain level of drama. If he can't get his daily dose of drama, he will feel depressed, restless and anxious. This can be helped by arguing on the Internet or choking your chicken or picking a fight with a family member or friend.
But once it is recognized, non-dramatic people, relationships and sexuality begin to appear in a new light. The disgust with the fleshly slit below her navel and the thought of putting yourself into it is not about the act itself or the anatomy down there, but the total absence of drama, a vast emotional emptiness that might swallow you alive, rip you apart and reduce you to nothing. Enjoyment of vanilla sex and emotional connection is mutually exclusive with drama. It is almost always not a choice but a deeply ingrained habit. I have also said here all you need to know about homosexuality, though that's beside the point.
Sadism, masochism and other kinks exist for drama. Affairs often live and die by the amount of drama generated, though sometimes they gain vanilla elements. Rape and other kinds of sexual violence are a symptom of an extreme need for drama. Any pleasure from causing or receiving pain logically implies drama, because there is a disconnect in what the act means to the participants.
So if a man gets turned on by his girlfriend biting and scratching him, to her it is a story about expressing anger or a need for control. To him it is a story about being undeserving of attention while receiving it and paying for it in pain and minor disfigurement. The girl does not think she's acting out the role of his mother who put extreme conditions on love and attention. Neither is he doing it to volunteer to be the target of her anger and control issues.
The word drama actually means a story with an arc, where an individual has some pressing need or inner conflict that he tries to solve through action. Dramatic sex and relationships happen when two separate stories coexist in the same space at the same time. People used to have entire marriages and families built on two separate but coexisting dramas, where both participants would act out or struggle to act out their individual drama through the other.
@zark: what does lesbian relationships have to do with this?
In both there are two female roles. The way I see it, no woman is interested in you acting out any female role. To be a tender and caring man is in no way feminine. To be weak and needy is effeminate, and I doubt any woman respects or knows how to appreciate that. Masculinity is not defined by masculine vices, such as anger or violence for their own sake, which would imply that everything less violent is somehow feminine.
It may seem like I don't get what you're saying, while I think you're missing an entire dimension. Finding a "balance" between masculine and feminine is not a solution, because rightly understood they are not opposing forces or mirror images of each other or on a simple continuum. An androgynous individual is not the best of both worlds, but usually the best of neither.
Then one final thing about porn. Any addiction to a fetish is usually driven by one's need to alleviate anxiety or boredom. I can't remember ever freely deciding to go look at pictures of female bodybuilders just for fun or because I'd find muscular female bodies somehow aesthetic or interesting. It's always been driven by a sense of boredom and thrill.
But once you realize there is sex and relationships free from drama, you are bound to naturally conclude that there are also fantasies not based on drama. This means clicking through this site while fantasizing not of thrilling muscle encounters but happy vanilla sex. It is less addictive because the raging thrill of drama is not there anymore. But it's more addictive because how easy and less draining it is.
Like I said long time ago, the strength of sexual emotions can derive either from need or pleasure, and those based on need are as a rule stronger than those based on pleasure. The craving is greater than the fulfillment and people often get addicted to the craving, not the fulfillment.
OK that was a nice little detour about drama and how we might need it at least a little bit in our lives. I do also get bored with people where there never is any drama or tension.
"""The way I see it, no woman is interested in you acting out any female role. To be a tender and caring man is in no way feminine. To be weak and needy is effeminate, and I doubt any woman respects or knows how to appreciate that. Masculinity is not defined by masculine vices, such as anger or violence for their own sake, which would imply that everything less violent is somehow feminine.""" Sure, I agree with that. It doesn´t have anything to do with anything I´ve said AFAIC but sure.
"""It may seem like I don't get what you're saying, while I think you're missing an entire dimension. Finding a "balance" between masculine and feminine is not a solution, because rightly understood they are not opposing forces or mirror images of each other or on a simple continuum. An androgynous individual is not the best of both worlds, but usually the best of neither""" OK, you are completely misunderstanding me. I´m not saying it is desirable to be androgynous. What would that even look like, a young David Bowie type of character or Judie Foster? But instead of having none of fem/masc, have both. That what I wrote in my reply to GLM55. And I still hold that opinion very strong, as it is not just something I´ve made up but also seen examples of thousands of times.
I do agree that a nice fantazy resembles something of a story. Story and drama is quite the same thing, isn´t it? Very much in life resembles stories. Just coming in a room and all of a sudden there is this hot fbb spreading your legs for you, come on lets fuck now, its not really that big of a turn-on with no context.
OK that was a nice little detour about drama and how we might need it at least a little bit in our lives.
That's the opposite of what I really wanted to say. My point was that drama is the common factor in addictions and serious disorders of personality. Someone might argue that drama is somehow inevitable, or at least extremely hard to avoid, and I'd tend to agree with the latter.
I do also get bored with people where there never is any drama or tension.
Lack of drama does not imply lack of purpose or lack of goals. But it is also true that there are people who can't help but cause it. There's possibly some misunderstanding going on, because I'm not sure why anyone would matter-of-factly admit to it.
What would that even look like, a young David Bowie type of character or Judie Foster?
I think you're now misunderstanding both me and the concept of androgyny. It has little to nothing to do with looks. The whole point of it is in feelings and behaviors. Reading your reply to GLM55 I gather that if a guy is fun and charming then he's androgynous. Which I think is an interesting viewpoint, but not how androgyny is generally understood among those who came up with the concept.
The stereotypical androgynous guy is someone who is too emotional to have any luck with the ladies. And the stereotypical androgynous girl is someone who is boyish in ways that also fail to attract either gender.
I gather that by androgynous you don't mean metrosexual, but rather a player or Don Juan type, whose own vanity enables him to be sensitive to the vanity of others and get laid more easily.
I see one logic here. Guys who don't have the charisma of a Don Juan feel insecure with the ladies. If both parties are insecure, everything's dead in the water. So the insecure guy has a fantasy of being approached by a strong woman. In the Far East they have nicknamed these guys herbivores and the women who chase them are called carnivores.
Story and drama is quite the same thing, isn´t it?
No. The special meaning of drama is that you're trying to achieve a goal that's primarily concerned with your personality, often in a private, irrational or self-serving manner, instead of a social, material or financial one.
People understand it if you want to earn money or stuff or benefit some club you belong to. Not that much if your focus is solely in getting praised or getting pleasure at the expense of everyone or everything else.
Just coming in a room and all of a sudden there is this hot fbb spreading your legs for you, come on lets fuck now, its not really that big of a turn-on with no context.
Let's say for now that it's a story if you two are on the same page about what's happening and why. It's a drama if you're not, and you're trying to prove yourself something, for example.
Interestingly, some themes keep repeating themselves. I can now say that on this site there are users whose relationship with muscular females is a story, and then are those whose relationship or interest in them is a drama.
"What is the story of your interest in female muscle" means how did you meet and befriend or even date or marry them. "What is the psychological reason" could be rephrased as "what is the drama that causes your interest in" or "what is the thing in your personality you're trying to fix or deny or cover up or compensate for by being interested in female muscle".
I hope we have if not less then at least better and more interesting misunderstandings now.
That's the opposite of what I really wanted to say. My point was that drama is the common factor in addictions and serious disorders of personality.
OK, whatevs. But we should not say that liking girls with muscle is a sign of an addiction or a disorder of personality. That is important to anyone reading this.
I think you're now misunderstanding both me and the concept of androgyny. It has little to nothing to do with looks. The whole point of it is in feelings and behaviors. Reading your reply to GLM55 I gather that if a guy is fun and charming then he's androgynous. Which I think is an interesting viewpoint, but not how androgyny is generally understood among those who came up with the concept.
No! I´ve never said androgyny is just about looks. A young David Bowie is the staple example of androgyny. All I said was that a mixture of qualities are always the best. I do think you can understand what I mean with female qualities, I think everyone else does and you seem to perhaps be a smart guy, I dont know.
Interestingly, some themes keep repeating themselves. I can now say that on this site there are users whose relationship with muscular females is a story, and then are those whose relationship or interest in them is a drama.
That sounds interesting, give us some examples!
Healthiest mates, basically. Big, strong, beautiful women are likelier to produce big, strong, beautiful kids.
I'd turn the question on it's head - men who are attracted to petite, weak women are themselves mentally lacking. Yes I've found a fair few smaller women cute/attractive etc, but AABE a big strong beauty beats her smaller, weaker sister.
I like women and if a particular one just happens to be muscular, all the better.
Here is a psychological question if anyone is interested:
Does attraction have anything to do with logic?
Yes I think so. A good personality adds a lot of beauty, and it's illogical to want to spend time with a psycho hose beast. Conversely, a rotten personality can make a beautiful woman quite ugly.
Here is a psychological question if anyone is interested:
Does attraction have anything to do with logic?
Yes, and ultimately with enough data one day we'll be able to prove it. What attracts us is the result of a vast combination of combinations of natural and unnatural biochemical processes that lead to an outcome of whether a person is attracted to blondes, not redheads, or to short men, not tall, or prefers a certain type of architecture over another. While it is extremely likely this is all true, proving it is beyond the capacity of current science, as we do not YET have enough data...but if we DID, as well as sufficient processing power to analyze that data and prove the paths and their outcomes (which in my profession I'm confident is available currently), predicting who is attracted to what will be as deterministic as simple mathematics.
Most of pornography has been historically made for men. One reason being that women are into relationship fantasies. So while a porn-addicted man may want to do with his girlfriend some stuff he's seen on video, a woman usually wants to bring trashy romantic novels into her dating life or marriage. You only need to be tall, dark and handsome, live in a mansion and have servants, not to mention you must have eyes for her only. Unless you can be a vampire who protects her and kills everyone else. Then you ought to be a vampire.
Historically men were supposed to get things done. You conquer a position in society and you conquer a woman and then you live with your conquests. You are what you have conquered. The same way getting things done applies to sex. You go in, you blow a load, you get out. Just like war.
The problem was when either your family's social standing, hard times, some birth defect, being the tenth kid or your father being an irresponsible man gave you nothing to start with. Also, if there was a danger of your conquest running away with someone else, then you and the wider society either forfeited the benefits of stability, or sought to enforce them somehow.
You either need stern laws and stern punishments. Or you need voluntary self-control. Both have been tried, both have worked, but to have a society you need something.
It would make logical sense that the less confident a man is and the less he is able to get things done, the more elaborate stories he needs. Men usually know what they want and act to get it. Women agree to it because they want to be wanted. Women want to prolong the sexual act because it prolongs the experience of being desired.
Few women who do any kind of female domination stuff actually enjoy the action itself. But they enjoy how it makes their male victims and onlookers desire them. Either it would seem that deep down all strong, independent women who could kick your ass are just attention whores. Though the source and quality of the attention does matter. Or desire for attention is part of being human. Or it is a luxury some women become addicted to.
In summary, for men it comes naturally to just get it done and not be the recipient of someone else's doing. For women it comes naturally to be desired and desirable, not be the one doing the desiring. The usual form of vanity for men is to conquer more than you can use, for women to revel in being the object of superfluous desire.
Incidentally, men who are unable to conquer what they need, admire this vanity in women. And women who are unable to secure any lasting desire, admire this vanity in men. It makes sense that once you are busy with the real thing, you don't have time for the fantasy.
It's not even a matter of what people want or what they can afford. It really seems to me that any solution based on elaborate fantasies or vanity on either side is suboptimal for at least one or usually both parties.
Without agreeing with or straight away objecting to the existence of such a female part in men, I'd first like to understand what it refers to. If any deviation from some random hypermasculine stereotype means you're partly feminine, then it does not mean anything. The idea presupposes that there exist feminine and masculine ideals, and every individual has a combination of these, for a total of 100 % always, with most average persons being 60 % their own and 40 % the opposite gender. I do not punch everyone in the face on sight, so guess I'm partly feminine.
It would make more sense that initially a human person has zero traits, neither masculine nor feminine. Then there are bad and good traits proper to women and bad and good traits proper to men, with some overlap, or some traits that are beneficial to both. This includes an ability to learn from experience or to act decisively or ask for guidance when necessary, or self-control or sense of duty. Insatiable hunger for attention and exaggerated passivity are bad feminine traits.
I see undivided attention there. But in the long term women are not attracted to and neither do they respect men who they can control. In women, just like in everyone else, as self-control gets better, an irrational need to control others goes down. But to respect you as a partner they usually need to know you would be able to hold your own.