Talk:Male submission

We need more on this to explore the phenomenon of male submission itself, as opposed to the traditional Western social role of male dominance, or the phenomenon of female dominance. Also, compare "lifestyle" male subs to those who simply enjoy temporary sexual roleplaying. -- The Anome 12:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Can't anyone have any sort of sexual orientation without some twat getting offended? --96.251.1.126 (talk) 20:46, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Maybe the problem is that the article in its current state seems to discuss its subject mostly from a feminist perspective, rather than that there is any specific problem with the inclusion of the section about a feminist perspective on it? In other words, maybe you need to focus on finding, and adding, reliable sources for aspects other than the feminist perspective. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:41, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Revert

I'll go point by point: The existence of male subs is not a matter of debate, they exist in real life. The debate is about male subs in porn, not real ones. This was not made clear. "personally submit themselves to the authority of a woman" it says "personally", we do not critique what these men "personally" do, we critique femdom porn - which is public. "radical feminists, and hyper-masculine frat culture, as they both subscribe to the exact same patriarchal world view" WOW. radical feminists now love patriarchy... seems totally legit. "Sex positive feminism, meanwhile, has actually dominated a few submissive men" WUT? "and may have different opinions regarding binary sex roles." 1.i thought links to blogs were not ok? How is a link to "Pervocracy" more credible than a link to radical feminists' actual beliefs? 2.it implies that radfems hold different beliefs regarding sex roles i.e. that radfems like sex roles. Seeing as a group of sex roles=gender and how radfems want to abolish gender... im going to have to ask for an explanation on how that isnt slander. "it has been argued by anti-pornography feminists that male submission may be even more evidence of men's patriarchal oppression over women" complete and purposeful misunderstanding not only of radfem critiques, but what it is that radfems critique about femdom porn in general. "Even if it's mostly women earning up to triple dollar amounts per hour to degrade submissive men and women, and some of them seem really enthusiastic about it, especially when compared to minimum wage jobs in the service industry... does she need protection from that experience?" ok so this is what a non-biased POV looks like? Gotcha. "It's telling that many of those who claim male submissives don't exist, such as Robin Morgan" who never stated such. "thus alluding to the hypocritical, phallocentric sexism that radical feminism is often accused of" accusations and bias. "Although, to be fair, the kind of radical feminism Robin Morgan represents, really sets the bar low for what defines male oppression of women" that is a personal opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bridenh (talk • contribs) 02:06, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

I've removed the blog and some obviously non-POV language that you saw fit. I've removed the 'dominated men' remark as well as the link to Pervocracy. I do think the article has other problems, but since the format of your reply is off, could we address them one by one? I'm open to it, as I said before. Tutelary (talk) 02:15, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Clearly, most of it is problematic. It would be easier for you to explain why mine is. I recommend reading my previous message first if you haven't done so.

First, let me address what I was going to address before. Blogs. Blogs are not reliable per WP:SPS and therefore, I've removed the Pervocracy and that was one of the main contentions of me reverting your other edit, because it included a blog. Blogs by experts may be considered, but I don't believe the one that you mentioned was one. Even expert blogs are just that; blogs, not subject to editorial control. I also looked over most of your requests as they seem to be formatted right on the editing page and implemented most of them. Any others? I also contest your changing of the definition, as I believe that the definition stated in the WP:LEAD is encompassing enough. Tutelary (talk) 02:41, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

"it has been argued by anti-pornography feminists that male submission may be even more evidence of men's patriarchal oppression over women" "the buying of a fantasy from a professional dominatrix... inherently degrading to women" untrue. Actually that entire paragraph lacks any proof whatsoever. Being anti-porn i am sure we never make such claims, which perfectly explains the lack of a citation.

References

Image

Regarding the image File:Slave_in_Carrara.jpg, used in this article: there is currently an issue regarding cached thumbnails of this image being in the wrong orientation. This seems to be erratic, and might be a case of the thumbnail cache being out of sync with the image. Just twiddling the thumbnail syntax on this page won't solve the underlying issue, even if it seems to do so by luck. -- The Anome (talk) 13:48, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Update: I've now regenerated a couple of different sizes of thumbnail which seemed to be generating problems: I hope this should fix things. -- The Anome (talk) 13:58, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I cleaned up the page

I removed all unsourced / poorly sourced / pov content. Whoever originally wrote a lot of the content didn't have sources and had an agenda, what they did is they used vague sources, and often times no sources to justify their statements.

There is now no sociological component to this page. I added a list of confirm-able activities that fall under male submission. ShimonChai (talk) 03:24, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• ErosPyramide20091024 352.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:22, 11 June 2020 (UTC)