#DISCUSSION: What's the appeal of female muscle domination fiction?

[GAP]

I enjoy light domination myself but I had seen some rather extreme and even gruesome domination fics where the female gets away with humiliating the target. I don't really such excessive violence done especially when they cannot really fight back and they get their stuff stolen but I also hate when there isn't anything they could do about it. What exactly is the appeal of such stories?

[totocom]

I like big boobs myself. What exactly is the appeal of such mammaries?

[GLKnight]

I like big boobs myself. What exactly is the appeal of such mammaries?

Like muscle, it's about aesthetic. Boobs are awesome in general, but the first reaction is always "contours, shape, weight, size". Also, not a good equivalent for this argument.

When it comes to extreme domination, it's the sense of helplessness, the absolute loss of power, and (if written with the focus on first person narrative) the sacrifice of every aspect of comfort and humanizing aspect for the reward of pleasure and acknowledgement.

[ydt81]

I dunno I'm not a fan of extreme fear at all, and even domination per se is not what I look for in stories. Just that I like power displays and a sort of 'bravado' or cockiness to muscular characters. Authors that do like domination tend to include these themes and happen to describe the body in the way I like.  But to answer your question more personally, it's like GLKnught said--the ultimate forced surrender to irresistible force; in a way, it's a physical metaphor for the command that desire can have over a person.

One but misconception I see fr people who dislike domination themes is that it's a 'one size fits all' fetish'. There is a very broad sspectrum to domination, such that when I hear people roll their eyes and attack domination themes in GENERAL, I can't help but immediately be bored with their taste. With muscular women in stories, the appeal is more than aesthetic for me, there's a degree of power involved and if that isn't addressed I'm usually not interested

[GAP]

Well, I don't like the extreme stuff and humiliation myself as in some stories I could sometimes feel the women crushing skulls.

[totocom]

Lol.

I like big boobs myself. What exactly is the appeal of such mammaries?

I was just joking.

Who cares what are the reasons we like something or not? Why do i like chocolate? Why do i prefer green color?
We like it, that's all.

However, the way we like something evolves, depending on the mood, the weather, the place, the friends... So why to try to understand?

I don't like stories where women are too cruel myself.
But sometimes, i don't know why, i enjoy to read one, or i write one myself.

[NinjaStar]

I don't get it either. I really hate it too. It's one thing to have somebody get their comeuppance or for the dominance to be justified in some way, but when victimization of innocent people is portrayed as acceptable or even sexy makes me ill. Why is it that any time a woman becomes strong in stories, she immediately becomes a bloodthirsty psychopath at worst or a bullying asshole at best? The men in these stories made the egregious mistake of being attracted to these women and are tortured, enslaved, raped and sometimes killed. It's really maddening.

It's almost like the authors of these kinds of stories feel guilty about being attracted to muscular women and want to be punished for it.

[totocom]

It's almost like the authors of these kinds of stories feel guilty about being attracted to muscular women and want to be punished for it.

Exactly

[ydt81]

Was thinking about this a bit more today and thought of another explanation.
First I also agree about some of the line-crossing, extreme violence: not judging those who are but like those who've spoken, I'm just not that into it. But then again I still don't like to draw a hard line in the sand, as some of the best writing ventures into areas i dont condone

Anyway, one other reason I err towards domination in most of the stories I read is that I don't see myself as perfect and in a way, having the object of  lust be a bully sort of evens the score by making that character  imperfect' in a certain way. Strange u know, but I really just can't stand muscle stories where the main character is a perfect vanilla  hero-type without any strange quirks --an obsession, an insecurity, a need (for power, etc)   

To comment on  the self-punishment argument, which could really  have some weight to it, I will say that having the muscular female be the dominant/controlling force in sexual situations isn't necessarily punishment for the male. On the other hand,  I can't speak on  about those outright punching bag-gore stories.clearly though not everyone pictures themselves in the dominator/dominated position, and theres always the option of spectator.

[DEA]

I think it´s just a deeper perversion, nothing else. Or a combination - muscles + sadism/masochism. Definately do not seek any logic there...

[NinjaStar]

Was thinking about this a bit more today and thought of another explanation.
First I also agree about some of the line-crossing, extreme violence: not judging those who are but like those who've spoken, I'm just not that into it. But then again I still don't like to draw a hard line in the sand, as some of the best writing ventures into areas i dont condone

Anyway, one other reason I err towards domination in most of the stories I read is that I don't see myself as perfect and in a way, having the object of  lust be a bully sort of evens the score by making that character  imperfect' in a certain way. Strange u know, but I really just can't stand muscle stories where the main character is a perfect vanilla  hero-type without any strange quirks --an obsession, an insecurity, a need (for power, etc)   

To comment on  the self-punishment argument, which could really  have some weight to it, I will say that having the muscular female be the dominant/controlling force in sexual situations isn't necessarily punishment for the male. On the other hand,  I can't speak on  about those outright punching bag-gore stories.clearly though not everyone pictures themselves in the dominator/dominated position, and theres always the option of spectator.

It is true that simply having a female being dominant isn't necessarily a punishment wish fulfillment for the author. One of my favorite authors over at dtv, Submissive Romantic, champions the dominant female dynamic in a well-written, realistic way. His female characters are strong and dominant, but they aren't unnecessarily, disgustingly cruel, nor are his male characters especially pathetic or weak. Dominant doesn't have to mean tyrannical, and submissive doesn't have to mean effete. Everybody is portrayed in a realistic light and the stories are fun to read. But, he's a mere drop in the empty bucket of suck over at the dtv library. David Sullivan, on the other hand, is the complete opposite of this. He typifies the punishment-seeking author. Sandi Stone is not so much a character as much as she is a vehicle for David to thrust his fetish of being beaten and humiliated onto the reader. She is not developed as a character; she gets exactly what she wants, doesn't face any consequences for her actions, and doesn't grow at all. She is as she always was intended to be. His stories are as boring as they are abhorrent to me. Amy Hardstone is another character in this vein, but DTM's latest Amy's Conquest story is a half-hearted attempt at character growth. He doesn't stray to far from her roots as a fetish vehicle, but he at least tries to expand on her character a bit.

And that's something that I really can't stand; unrealistic characters. I get that these stories are just fetish material, but one way to turn me off completely is to write characters badly, i.e, lazily. Most stories written don't have deep emotional content beyond muscles/displays of strength and sex. After all, nobody holds any illusions that they are in line to win a Pulitzer.  But, it's rare indeed for me to come across a story where characters are actually developed. I will agree that a cookie-cutter perfect heroine is boring, but so are villains (or 'anti-heroes') that don't do much beyond rape/kill/destroy everything in their path with no explanation as to why beyond that they can, and who face no opposition or consequences for their actions. Just being bad isn't enough to qualify as 'imperfect' because they lust for power, or are obsessed with control. The 'imperfect' and therefore 'interesting' bully character is still perfect because she can do what she wants with no one able to stop her. That isn't to say that the non-violent stories automatically equal good either. They often times are just as stock and derivative as the snuff stories.

Equally boring are the male characters in stories who don't have any true personalities of their own. I'd say a good 75% (conservatively estimated) of all stories are told from the bog-standard 1st person narrative that don't offer much beyond a description of what's being done in the story/to him, or what her muscles look like. They tend not to have any thoughts beyond arousal or abject fear. Because of the type of narrative, the character is intended to be an author/audience surrogate which supports my punishment theory. The other kinds of male characters fall into the stock character realm; the jerkass, macho, football playing high school senior that needs to be taken down a peg, the older brother that for some reason lusts after his muscular younger sister and is enslaved, the hen-pecked husband who suffers at the hands of his abusive Amazon wife and his own daughters, the wimpy nerd that is claimed by an Amazon with absolutely no say in the matter who suffers from acute Stockholm Syndrome, and so on. Sometimes these stock characters are blended, but rarely deviate from these patterns. Bonus points for twin, or triplet brothers; they are essentially nameless, featureless clones and therefore less interesting for the author to develop.

[crimson_E_86]

Maybe that's an appeal for these stories. The characters are unrealistic that don't have to answer to anyone or give an explanation for their actions. Is it considered lazy if there were no intentions or goals to be a deep and complex story?

[GLKnight]

Maybe that's an appeal for these stories. The characters are unrealistic that don't have to answer to anyone or give an explanation for their actions. Is it considered lazy if there were no intentions or goals to be a deep and complex story?

It doesn't have to be deep or complex, yes. But it has to be a COMPLETE story. That's always been one of the biggest issues with this subgenre of a subgenre: the impetus of telling an outcome rather than the implications and dealings of that situation. It's understandable that pain and violence are one of the most fetishized aspects, but the entire focus being on only that robs any potential staying power or connection for the story. It's like the phrase "A hole's a hole. Long as you're getting laid, doesn't matter." And sadly, that's not how storytelling works. "Rushing to the good bits" almost always lets the story down.

[GAP]

I know these stories are good for fetish however some writers take a step too far add in some gore.

[NinjaStar]

It doesn't have to be deep or complex, yes. But it has to be a COMPLETE story. That's always been one of the biggest issues with this subgenre of a subgenre: the impetus of telling an outcome rather than the implications and dealings of that situation. It's understandable that pain and violence are one of the most fetishized aspects, but the entire focus being on only that robs any potential staying power or connection for the story. It's like the phrase "A hole's a hole. Long as you're getting laid, doesn't matter." And sadly, that's not how storytelling works. "Rushing to the good bits" almost always lets the story down.

YES! Another way to put it is; If you can't make me care about what you've written, why should I read it? A story is a sandwich, it needs to be comprised of layers to exist, how many layers is debatable, but a Dagwood is always more filling than a simple PBJ. If you just want the meat, it's not a sandwich.