So, I study Femdom… academically. For the Arts, not Sciences (so don’t worry, I don’t data people.) I look at narratives and identify patterns, trace lineages and track deviations to identify emerging genre. What I consistently have to do when I write a paper, is describe Femdom because no one in academia knows what it is. I have to define what Femdom is, and to do that, I also have to define what it is not. So, I’m always trying to find the “root” of Femdom; what is Femdom at its core that distinguishes it from everything else. The reason why this is important is to demonstrate that Femdom does exist. When something exists in human consciousness, especially when it is a concept and not a tangible thing like a rock, it means we can talk about it. The easiest way to talk about it is to give it a name. And, Femdom (or Female Domination) is the name we have given female-led asymmetrical power-based dynamics.
This dynamic is seen as quite taboo because it conflicts with the current egalitarian flat-based relationship structures promoted by Feminism. I’ve mentioned this before but, hierarchal relationships, where the power is imbalanced, are seen as unethical… primarily because they are considered colonialised patriarchal structures. Thus, in order for Femdom to be understood as a healthy and viable relationship structure, I not only have to demonstrate that hierarchal relationships can be ethical, but also that female-led power-based dynamics are not just an inversion of male dominance, but a subversion of it. The reason why this is important is because it socially validates Femdom.
Now, you might be thinking “who cares if Femdom is validated in the vanilla world.” Those who just roleplay Femdom and use it for escapism or sex are not going to get this, but: validating Femdom means the recognition of new relational structures continuing on from the LGBTQ+ premise that “Love is Love”; it means the recognition of emerging identity and orientation – a queerness that has always existed but only now has been allowed to be seen; and the recognition that dominance is not just a male thing, that it is not just a masculinity thing, that there is female dominance, which is not a reversal of male dominance—it is not pathology, an anomaly, or a deviation of femininity—but of its own existence, which has only been allowed to emerge now. Why is this important? Simply put: politically – human rights; ethically – natural rights; scientifically – emergent evolution; medically – relational health; and socially – acceptance, diversity and inclusion.
So, when identifying Femdom through narratives, I have to track commonalities and consistencies to see what elements are essential to defining what Femdom is. Basically put, things that are not constantly associated, are not a part of it’s defining concept. So, we have come to the crux, the things I have discovered so far by investigating a few hundred narratives (that are considered “canonical literature”) – I use specific markers to identify a Femdom text, and then the narrative is analysed. This is what I am discovering:
Sex is not a defining factor of Femdom. In fact, sex is not a common part of it and when it is, it is rarely penetration. However, most texts have a sense of eroticism.
Bondage (as in physical) is not commonly associated with Femdom. Discipline (as in Impact) is often associated with it but not always—it is a subgenre. And, Sado-masochism is often associated but not always. Pegging is not common. Feminisation is a subgenre. Consensual slavery/CNC is a subgenre. In recent years, more non-hetero normative narratives are emerging.
This demonstrates that Femdom isn’t defined by sex. It also demonstrates that Femdom is not defined by other BDSM genres—bondage, discipline, and sado-masochism. What does this mean? Femdom exists on its own and is not reliant on any other kink, fetish or BDSM activity to be defined. Thus, thinking Femdom is pegging men, caning them and making them beg is a clichéd conflation (from male porn).
So what does define every single Femdom narrative? The woman is not only in the dominant position of the power-exchange dynamic, but she claims it. If she hasn’t already done so before the story starts, there is always a point in the story when she does… and that’s usually when the dynamic changes from just a fantasy to reality.
So, why do I think this is important for the scene? In order for Femdom to get out from under the male-centric porn tropes, we need to understand how Femdom actually exists. Femdom is not a specific collection of sexual practices performed by a stock character. Dominas start with their own power as their point of origin. That influences the type of power dynamic she desires and constructs, and then all the other activities of kink, fetishism and BDSM are not applied, but built on accordingly, often used as tools for domination but also practised for her pleasure. That means the activities practiced by a Femdom are not standardised (like in porn) but specifically and uniquely crafted according to her vision. For some, Femdom is an identity, for others it is a way to structure relationships. But there is also those where Femdom is not their origin, but a kink or fetish—they may practice Femdom, but they are not Femdom, usually identifying as another role such as a kinkster or swinger, etc. Thus, understanding how Femdom exists will enable it to break free of all the male-centric social tropes and be reclaimed by Dominant woman.
Now, I know people are scared of defining things, especially in the scene – ambiguity is part of the allure of the Taboo – but conflation and misrepresentation, as we are seeing in the world right now, destroy identities and rights. I think it is better to stand “unique and together”, but to do that, we need to define the uniqueness.