November 7, 2012

Why femdom doesn't sell. Or, the false dichotomy of 'normal' vs. femdom.

Romance is one of the best selling genres world over. There are countless genres - paranormal, historical, cowboy, contemporary american, religious, BDSM, medical - you get the idea. The BDSM is universally male dom, and there's one genre conspicuously missing. Femdom. It's not popular in the romance reading female population . But women who read romances (romance readers are predominantly women) are well educated (usually to degree level), relatively affluent and in happy relationships. That demographic sounds like women who run their own lives and the lives of others. So why on earth don't they want to read about women like them - women who control their lives, sex, and frequently, the men in their lives?

Research shows that people of both genders and all ages consistently rate women as being less competent than men, when they have identical qualifications. This is a professional context, but I think that there are social corollaries. In almost every scope of life, in almost every artistic genre, the sad fact is that almost by definition, strength, competence and dominance are male, and weakness, helplessness and submission are female.

I think that if I described a dom, and then said whether that person was a male or a female, that on average, people would judge the female dom as being less competent. Obviously, a woman who is dominant is equally strong, competent and sexy to her sticky-out-genitaled equivalent. And a relationship led by a woman is just as likely to be successful and happy as a relationship led by a man. But men are culturally seen as more competent and I think that this extends to guiding relationships too. I think that romances are full of alpha males who control the relationship and everything else because unconsciously people think that men are more competent than women at being in control.

Cultural norms are so strong, I imagine that most people don't even realize that they think that a relationship led by a dominant, strong man is more likely to work. And you know what - chances are you've thought it yourself. For instance, you hear that a woman colleague of yours is getting married. Wonderful news. Then you hear that she proposed to her boyfriend. Now, is there a little worm in your ear, saying that it won't last? She likes him more than he likes her, doesn't she? Because if he wanted to get married, he'd have asked, right?

Culturally, it's difficult for us to believe in a HEA that isn't male led and male instigated. Male dom in happy ever after is just what people think that they know: it's as 'natural' as being white, being straight and working in an office. For most people, male dom HEA just is. It's not that they can't articulate it, it's that they wouldn't even realize that they think it. Most books are written from the unconscious standpoint that everyone is better off with a man in charge. Most women are happy with that status quo, because they don't realize that the comforting normality of the alphahole male is a social construct not a reality.

There is a surfeit of data that shows that women are at least as good or better than men in all aspects of life except brute strength tests. I've talked about cultural norms, but even if unconsciously people like men to be in charge, many women like to believe in equality. So why is male dom almost universal in romances and erotica? Why are 'normal' romance books full of weak, submissive women and alphahole men when, if you asked them directly, most people say that they believe that men and women are equally competent? Surely there must be a market for books which competent, or even dominant women? I think that there are several answers to this question, but I'm going to propose this one: The alternatives are too extreme.

Anyone who looks for something different, perhaps a clever woman who isn't belittled by her partner, quickly discovers that this is difficult to find. Someone looking for a genuinely equal pairing of male and female might well fail to find it at all. Someone looking for something just the other side of equal, might start looking at femdom. At which point the first thing they will find is dommes who torture their male submissives, horrible women who will laugh as dogs rip men apart and cruel ladies who chop off men's dicks. That would send most people scurrying in haste back to the subtle male of dom of normality.

Male dominant normality vs. hard core femdom is a false dicotomy. But this is the choice that readers of erotica or romance are given if they want anything to the middle or female dom side of male dom. Faced with this, is it any wonder that vanilla women stick to their alpha males? Femdom books don't have to be all whips and chains. They can be subtle, featuring men who are brilliant followers to their caring, strong women.

So, in my opinion, there are two obstacles to femdom stories. One is the ingrained idea that men are better leaders than women and that we need a man in charge to have a successful HEA. The other is that currently, there is very little which caters for an audience of readers who would like a vanilla female led relationship.

How do we define what is a femdom book? This is practical as well as a philosophical question for me - you've seen the labels 'not really femdom', and 'subtle femdom' on this site. These are the kind of books that I like best and I think that other romance readers like them too (more on that in a subsequent post). This post is my attempt to suggest that there is a gap in the market for female led relationship books. Stories labelled as 'femdom' are tainted by the extreme kink which is never going to appeal to the mainstream. We need to get beyond femdom and normal as a dichotomy and look at combatting the biggest problem here: the incorrect idea that women are less competent than men. How do we do that? Like any ingrained cultural problem, half the battle is recognizing that there is a problem.

TL,DR: Many people unconsciously think that HEA is more reliable if a man is in charge. But romance readers take control of their real lives. It's the false dichotomy of normal vs. extremely kinky femdom with unsympathetic cruel dommes that puts readers off. If there were appealing vanilla options of novels featuring female led relationships, I think that romance readers would read them.

8 comments:

  1. A very interesting post indeed. I agree that we are still living in a patriarchal society and that the cultural "norms" of that society often dictate what we find erotic and/or romantic. Our reactions to love and romance come from deep within our psyche. We often react unconsciously to stimuli based on learned responses planted deep within us when we were children. A little girl who is told stories in which a big strong knight sweeps a princess off her feet and rides off into the sunset with her is programmed to gravitate toward that archetype at an early age.


    It is also true that overt sometimes extreme depictions of BDSM found in most femdom erotica would be off putting to many vanilla female readers. Having been in several relationships that started out vanilla I can vouch for the fact that kinky ideas must be introduced slowly so as not to frighten off a prospective partner. In a typical story written for a submissive male audience, we get to the boot licking and whipping by page 3 and we have already lost our vanilla female audience.

    Luckily women are increasingly assuming positions of power and responsibility in our society which should change the balance over time. Will vanilla women ever find femdom erotic? Hard to say though I suspect they could if the material were presented in the right way; tender and sexy without reverting to hard core BDSM archetypes. This might not work for the typical submissive male reader however, who is looking for something quite a bit more literal, dramatic and extreme to turn him on. It would be lovely to find a middle ground that works for both audiences but I am not sure that is possible.

    I should mention that I have been writing some femdom erotica myself lately. The whippings start around page 5, way to early for most vanilla female readers I'm afraid. My writings are geared to what turns me on as a submissive male rather than what might turn on a woman who does not identify as kinky.

    Thanks for posting this. It was an interesting read and provided me with some food for thought.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi HMP

      Thanks for your comment. Great to hear that you're writing more - very exciting!

      I'm certainly not intending to dismiss or deride stories where the whipping starts on page 3 - I like that too sometimes. I don't think we need one sort of femdom for everyone - i.e. there is room for hardcore femdom and for subtle FLR type femdom, the latter of which we currently don't really have. I guess that my point (which is still developing in my head!) is that there is a lack of diversity of femdom lit - a problem that you don't have in male dom lit.

      I suppose that really this post is a response to the 'femdom doesn't sell' issue that I keep on seeing. I want to point out that the small sample size of what is categorized as femdom and the extreme nature of most of it, makes this a problematic concept. That's not to say that the extreme stuff is bad, just that there is room for other stuff as well.

      And I agree, hopefully as women in positions of power becomes more common, women taking control in the bedroom will become more socially acceptable too. One can hope anyhow!

      Thanks for dropping by. :)

      Delete
  2. I love this. Very well written and thoughtful! I can't tell you how much I appreciate seeing this carefully analyzed in socially conscious, feminist terms. I agree and I'm glad that you're talking about this and using your site to promote books that do different things. I've quoted this post extensively on my Tumblr and linked to it -- hope that's okay!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi mswyrr,

      Of course, linked quotes are always very welcome. :) I think that this paradox of femdom being unpopular is really interesting and I'm glad that you think so too.

      Sunnygirl

      Delete
  3. I think there's something else going on as well:

    Most *people* like to imagine being done to more than doing. Since most Romance readers are female, it follows that the males will take the more active role in most stories.

    And, yes, I agree that it is a pity. I have actually tinkered with writing a Femdom romance, but worry about writing sexual experiences from a female point of view.

    If I got that right, would anybody buy the result?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Most *people* like to imagine being done to more than doing."
      That is to say, most people are submissive?

      "If I got that right, would anybody buy the result?"
      Yes, of course - though I don't know if the issue is so much the female point of view as the quality of the writing and the attitudes embedded into the story.

      Delete
  4. I'm going to be frank, and probably attacked for it as a result, but listen, people aren't stupid - women included. The reason women don't have a demand for reading about alpha females dominating beta males is because women don't *want* to read about alpha females and beta males. Females are hardwired to seek out alpha males - it has nothing to do with an anti-woman conspiracy or simple incompetence on the part of women knowing what they want which is what the article seems to imply.

    Human arousal is not egalitarian. Nature isn't designed that way. While all humans are capable of being competent individuals, their abilities don't determine what they want - millions of years of evolutionary history do, and the fact is, alpha males are arousing to females. You can't socially re-engineer the basis of female arousal, no matter how desirable that would be to create an ideal society.

    Also note: as ~70% of divorces in the US are initiated by females, at least 50% of which are due to simple boredom on the part of the wife, the statement "female lead relationships can be just as successful" is misleading. Statistically, a female will dump a beta male to pursue an alpha as soon as she views herself as his superior. Less moral ones will cheat. This is natural and completely rational behavior - why would anyone's impulses drive them to invest *everything* into something when there are *significantly* greater opportunities available? Women don't "date down" unless they feel they have to. "Competence" and "ability" have no part in the equation - just human behavior patterns.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well Anonymous, I do wonder what brought you here.

      I'm sad that my post, which I hoped would provoke a nuanced discussion, has prompted you to go for derogatory comments based on unsubstantiated assertions. As well as not being substantiated, your comments contain many logical fallacies. There is an excellent resource available for you to understand your logical fallacies and hopefully sort out your argument so that it can be the basis for a proper discussion: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

      Delete